MORAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THE ART-RESTITUTION LAWSUIT BETWEEN THE ARMENIAN CHURCH AND THE GETTY MUSEUM
By Michael Toumayan
Tue, Nov 29 2011
On Nov. 4, a Los Angeles Times article, written by Mike Boehm, reported
that in an effort to get back the Canon Tables of the 13th-century
Zeyt’un Gospels from the Getty Museum, the Armenian Diaspora has
inaudibly put its weight behind the Armenian Orthodox Church’s quest
to repatriate the allegedly stolen illuminated manuscripts back to
Armenia, where the rest is housed at the Mesrop Mashtots Institute
of Ancient Manuscripts.
Getty Museum In 1915, as Armenians were subjected to a genocidal
campaign by the Ottoman Empire, the intact codex changed hands for
safekeeping. The eight pages that were torn from the larger codex
during the Armenian Genocide ultimately resurfaced with an Armenian
American immigrant family in Massachusetts, which sold them to the
Getty in 1994.
Church attorneys were initially asked by the Getty to come up with
solutions, and no less than 16 were put forth, only to be rejected
by the Getty. Clearly the content of a proposal for a solution is
a critical component to any successful resolution of conflict, but
equally necessary is the timing of the efforts. Resolution can only
be achieved if the parties are sincere in negotiating.
One wonders whether the Getty was ready and sincere when it asked
church attorneys to come up with solutions. However, for the sake
of being aware of our cognitive biases, we should also question
whether both parties were engaging in positional bargaining, a
negotiation strategy that involves holding on to a position, rather
than interest-based bargaining in which parties collaborate to find a
“win-win” solution to their dispute.
Nevertheless, on Nov. 3, 2011 a Los Angeles Superior Court judge
denied the museum’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s claim that the
Canon Tables are “wrongfully in the possession, custody and control”
of the J. Paul Getty Trust, in the Getty Museum. Instead, the judge
ordered the parties to four months of mediation, scheduling a March 2
resumption if the case isn’t settled. Citing that it was “not clear”
whether the case would fall within statute-of-limitations law, perhaps
the judge’s ruling may create the necessary conditions for the dispute
to be ripe, and both will perceive that there is a suitable way out.
With a murky history and 90 years later, one cannot rule out
the Getty’s possible legal possession and title to the disputed
manuscripts. Simultaneously, the Getty’s concern in the preservation of
world artistic heritage should not confine itself to considering just
the legal entitlement. In mediation, where context is pivotal, there
is an ethical obligation that rests on the museum taking into account
the moral strength of the church’s case based on the circumstances
during times of turmoil. Now is the time for the museum to exhibit
consistency with its own core ethical values while also demonstrating
sensitivity to the sacred values of the Armenian nation in its quest
for restorative justice.
For the mediation to be successful, both must enter into it willingly
and away from a zero-sum mindset, through a cooperative approach. The
potential benefits of mediation will outweigh the steep cost of
litigation, but more importantly, the long-term outcome will be
a healed and expanded relationship between the two. This may open
the path for a joint restoration project where both can take part
in repairing the lost gleam of the larger Zeyt’un Gospels and have
them showcased with other extraordinary works of Armenian art from
the vaults of the church.
Michael Toumayan is an independent political commentator on the
Caucasus and Middle East affairs. He holds a master’s degree in
conflict resolution and mediation from Tel Aviv University in Tel
Aviv, Israel.