Question of knowledge of what happened. Today we are seeing something remarkable. I wish this legislation would have happened 10 or 20 years ago, but the fact is its happened, its going to have a major effect on the future. And many, many works of art that i use the expression the last prisoners of world war ii will finally find the Rightful Owners. I thank the senate and congress for what they are doing. Thank you, ambassador. Let me ask you do you believe the United States has lived up to our commitment as set forth in the declaration to make certain that claims to nazilooted art are resolved expeditiously and based on the facts and merits of the claim . The answer is yes and no. Yes, we have in many cases, no we havent in certain cases. There have been organizations and art thats been returned correctly, and theres been other art thats been, lets say, found a way to make either the statute of limitations or other factors stopping it. Very often its very difficult for a museum when theyre told one of their best pieces of art is a piece stolen, they try to find ways to stop it. The other question is provenance research. Many paintings, theres a question of what happened to them between 19, lets say 39 and 1945, and sometimes the germans kept very good records. Other times the records were destroyed. Its a question of trying to put together things, but in the will, the United States has tried to live up to the washington declaration and the other declarations, but at sometimes topped by necessary las vegas, and this is what i think this act does. Dame mir ren, you testified a that lot of people were like their mothers story or the grandmothers stories. Are any of those conversations particularly memorable or compelling you would be able to share with the committee . I think that it wasnt so much specifically one story, but the fact that there were so many of them. As i said every night outside the stage door someone would approach me with great emotion and say how much this film had meant to them. I think it was finally to see the telling of their story revealed to the world that they found so deeply moving, exciting t. And utterly meaning much just the fact their stories that would been secret and suppressed or even if they tried to tell people, nobody wanted to listen. The fact that finally somebody was listening. I think thats what was so very important for them. Thank you. Let me finally mention, in your testimony you said that it would be that the act would not if it eliminates one time of procedural obstacle to replace another. I certainly can say thats not my intention and certainly not the intention of any of the authors of this legislation, so let me invite you, indeed every member of this panel to work with hour staff, and if theres specific revisions that you believe would improve this legislation, in particular prevent the vent legislation to remove the earp proposal barriers and allow an adjudication on the mirts so that justice may be served. I would invite everyone on the panel to work with our team to make sure there are not any inadvertent barriers put in he place. Thank you, senator cruz. I want to thank every one of you for powerful and eloquent testimony. Ambassador lauder, i know that your work on this issue began long before this movie. In fact, i think we discussed this issue long before the movie and actually held meetings publicly in rooms a fraction of the size of this one, because at the time there was little or no public attention to it so the great work of dame mirren and the movie has been to greatly elevate the visibilitiened profile to give us the support we need for this profoundly important cause, and dame mirren, you used the word modest to describe this proposal. It is indeed exceedingly modest. All it does is unlock the courthouse door to thousands of people who are seeking their day to present their case. Again, some of the most powerful institutions in this country, and in fact, as i listen to you and to mr. Goodman, what i really felt was anger and outrage at the nazis, but also at the museums and other very reputable institutions that have repeatedly invoked these technical legal obstacles. Lets not be too polite about it, in case after case after case around the country im not going to name the museums, but they are among the leading institutions in our nation, and in some sense they have been complicit in this injustice. They have indirectly aided and abetted the thug ary of the nazis who were completely immoral, in fact amoral, but these institutions had made a pretense of observing the rules of morality. So let me ask you, ambassador lauder, do you think we can enlist the museums in this cause and other institutions that perhaps ought to be on the right side here . The right side of justice and the right side of history . Yes, we can and we should. The question is, no museum wants to be looked on as keeping nazilooted art. I think that the more we can expos the various museums who are holding it, i think we win the battle. I think this question of having the claimant ask about the merits, is the right thing. Too many times the museums have hid behind the statute of limitations, but more importantly, they have made it so expensive for so many claimants to do the work. Through our committee weve had dozens of claimants say please help us. The museum is costing us huge amounts of money we cant afford to get the piece back. Very often weve had to speak to the museums that unless and truly they stop doing this, they would then have the publicity of nazistolen art in their museum. Thats worked in many cases, but each case is a fight, and this changes the whole this makes it a level play iing field for e first time. Mr. Goodman, you had your hand up. I would be happy to yield to you. I think one of the problems today that when a claim is presented to the museum, they take it to their Legal Department. As long as the Legal Department will give the advice that this is not a claim that could be successful in court, then the museum feels that their main duty is to the collection, to preserve their collection, and since there is no viable legal claim, they feel already hesitant to even review the claim. So i think if this act would remove that obstacle and allow the leaders of the museum to hear legal a advice, that yes, this is a valid claim, they would be much more willing to sit down and reach a fair and reasonable resolution. Mr. Chairman, i have one more quick question. Hearing your story and having being very familiar with the story thats told in the movie, i take it that in neither of these cases was there any kind of delay, which is the purpose of the statute of limitations to prevent, in other words, delay in making claims or taking advantage of the passage of time. A both of the stories, the one depicted in your movie, dame mirren, and yours in your own life, indicates to me there was just no way that there was delay or postponing of claims. Am i correct in that observation . Yes, thats absolutely true. In every day my family acts just as soon as we can. The problem is whats been gathering sufficient evidence to get a case to court or if not a settlement. Its been an uphill battle to gather the information, most of which didnt become available until the end of the last century. I have to add that despite all this, its extremely expensive what families like mine do. So i do this despite the obvious financial obstacles. Its a point of honor that i have to resolve what is outstanding of my familys. And dame mirren, in the story that you depict, there was hardly delay. In fact its a story of determination and incredible courage. Yes. I mean the minute that maria understood, as far as i understand it she read a newspaper article talking about restitution. She was not aware in her loupe to that point that ever was going to be a possibility. Suddenly it was revealed i guess a law was changed and she realized now there was a possibility to do that. The minute she understood that, i any it was ten or more users that it took her to get to the point of the art coming back to her. It was a very long and difficult battle. Again, this woman had a little boutique in los angeles, she wasnt a rich woman, but she had the advantage of a young lawyer, we tell the story in the movie, randy horneberg who came on board. Thats how she managed. And she lit a fire under him. My god, she did. Absolutely. She was an extraordinary woman. Unfortunately i never met her, but i saw film of her. She was we owe her a great deal, all of us sitting here dealing with this issue. It was 12 years, almost 4 million worth of travel that she did. I met her at the beginning. She was the most determined human being ive ever met, and dame helen portrayed it perfectly. It was 12 years of her work, huge amounts of money that was involved before this was done. The last things the austrians said before you can bring a claim in austria, you have to something something down like 5 million or some huge number before you can bring a claim. Thats why the claim came to the United States instead of in austria. Thank you. I would note that you explained or legislation as modest. That may be the first time that modest has been used for the United States senate. Senator lee. Thank you very much. Thank you for holding this hearing and thank to each of you are for your testimony. Tell us would you say at the doctri doctri doctrine of laches should be applied. I think we heard that when Holocaust Survivors came to the United States were not ordinary citizens in terms of going after their rightful property. I think it would be unjust to put the burden on the court to have a different level of Due Diligence assigned to Holocaust Survivors because of all the of the horrors theyve been through. Laches is there to take care of injustices. Ironically in this case the application of that doctrine would be manifestly inequitable . Yes, i would say that illustrates talk to us about the federal hook in this. Of course when we are looking at theft, most of the time, theft is an issue of state law. Its not in the ordinary circumstance a matter of federal law. Federal law can on you cover theft of federal property. Certain types of intellectual property. Standard gardenvariety theft, including theft of artwork typically would be a matter for state law as to substance and procedural issues like statute of limitations. Tell us would you this is an probably use of federal law and what it is that gives Congress Jurisdiction to do this. Well, the state of california tried to address this issue and enacted a statute of limitation law that covered holocaust appropriation. That law was struck down by the ninth circuit. In that decision it was held that addressing this issue is a federal issue and the state had no power to carve out that exception. That exception could only be carved out on a federal level. The reasoning that the ninth circuit used was what . That by creating this special designation . The United States has a consistent Foreign Policy and policy about rest attituding artwork since 1943, so this was more a commitment and the obligation of the United States in general to address these issues and therefore its a federal rights to carve out that exception. So given that consistent Foreign Policy it would be impossible for any one state to req nigsz a special rule relative to this type of dispute involving this type of article without engaging in Foreign Policy . Yes, i would say that. That makes sense. One question that might be raised by some, this applies with respect to art taken in connection with one particular type of genocide, with you particular episode in our history. There are other general ocrisis around the world, mass confills indications of life and property that might have been occurred, so why focus on this one rather than others. Do you want to address that question . Sure. I fully agree there orem grievances that maybe addressed in this sittings, on the other hand, the United States has a consistent policy regarding the restitution of nazi eralooted art, and the United States taking on the washington principles and declaration that it will enable claims to come forward and affirm in the declaration that the claim should be heard on the merits. So those something that would be a next logical step in that policy. Okay. This one certainly wouldnt preclude us from doing that with respect to other atrocities . Not at all. In fact it gets back to this consistent policies, consistent Foreign Policy approach that the United States has taken with respect to this genocide, these atrocities that dictates or necessitates or action here, and certainly doesnt preclude us from doing so elsewhere, or the need to do so based on a need for a consistent Foreign Policy might arise. Yes, i agree. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, ive been delegated to act as chairman while senator cruz is out of the room, and were going to proceed in order of appearance of, senator kunz. I would like to thank the panel for your testimony and remarkable work. To ambassador, just the very idea that the work you are doing is to set free the last prisoners of the Second World War is such a powerful visual and emotional symbol, and dame mirren, it is such an hannor to be with you. Your Work Together and the whole testimony of the panel, is the power of art and film to move, and a paint been to inspire, to inspire years and work, millions of investment making sure its restored to its Rightful Owner. Im grateful for the work of the senators who have convened this hearing. Mr. Goodman, let me start with you if i could. How would the act made a difference. How could it support your efforts to recover your familys art. In the first instance my family found themselves in u. S. Court in chicago. We won the first motion to dismiss. However, my family felt obliged to settle out of court, because we had no guarantee we would win or that the judge would not throw the case out based on our case have been expired the statute of limitations. So we had to accept second best, because we were on strong moral ground, but very weak legal ground. Also its my belief that if the senate here can further our cause, law aside, the mood that would be set by the senate would be sending a message to museums and the art business in general that a settlement is welcome and long overdue. So yes next time i end up in court no doubt it would help. There are a few bainings im still trying to track. There are at least 20 good paintings missing from my familys collection, several gold renaissance sculptures, and at least 300 important antiques. So the search goes on. Were talking about statute of limitations. Ive been working on this for 20 years and ive uncovered a lot, but theres still a lot more to find. So i dont know where ill be next year. If it passes this certainly would be a huge help for my family and it establishes a moral record as well that we should follow. Thank you. Ms. Per zigy, what do you think that plaintiffs would have to offer that would be different in future actions . Well, in some of these cases, the actions of previous family members, the ancestors were questioned, whether they were diligent, whether they did the right thing, did the right research . Whether they negotiated too long or too short . So a lot of issues came up that i think was open to interpretation, and what i think this act will bring is certainty. The best way to resolve these claims if both sides know where the law stands, because you can sit down and reach a resolution. Do you think the art world would respond in a constructive and positive way . Or might there be other vehicles found to delay . Are there real concerns about this legislation . I can only speak to with regards to christies i believe we see ourselves ashrined with the spirit of the bill, but from an art market perspective, we need to be able to convey good title. So therefore we need to look at the facts of the case and make sure there isnt any taint on the artwork. Again without commenting specifically on the bill, what gaskly the bill is appropriation is basically ma business template that we already have instituted at christies which is negotiated settlements and making sure that were looking at the facts case by case and achieving sort of that fair and just solution as passed by the washington conference principles. Dame mirren if i might, the comment has been made that, you know, the looting of art was in some ways a piece of their larger horrific campaign to destroy an entire people and their culture. Today were engaged in a conflict with isis, which is doing very similar things, looting and destroying cultural artifacts of an entire region. How do you see the impact not just on those who are the victims of actions and have been dedicating, as people have so much of their time and live of undoing the injustices, what impacts do you think this may have on the appreciation in the world of the value of Cultural Treasures . I think its i mean i absolutely agree with you. When i was engaged in the film and having to imagine living in that world that maria had to live in and her memories, i thought my god, this is happening to people as we speak. This is happening to people. People are banging on doors and walking in and taking lives, but also trying to take peoples history away from them. As the sort of horrors of what happened in the Second World War as i grew up and began to learn about them and began to understand more and more, the thing that affected me the most and does to this day is the idea of losing all trace of your existence on this planet. All trace. Even if you personally survived, to live in a world with absolutely no family, no history, no memories, no photograph albums, no one to talk to, what was grandma like . No picture of grandma . Just the simple human things. This is why i feel strongly that this has nothing to do with money. It so happens that some of these works of art are wort a lot of money, but its so much more to reclaim your place in history. I was thinking it was like people going into the beautiful cave paintings in france, thats all we know about those people, and then going with a knife and scratching them out, we dont want to remember you, youre gone, youre finished. So, yes, its happening as we