The picture was not going to give the owner

[Veronic]

By the way, the law in this situation is absolutely not on the side of the Belgian collector. Generally, in this case we obtain two paintings. One (who moved) by an unknown author, and the second (which is exported) Bryullov, and here the law prohibits the export of cultural goods, or am I mistaken? In this situation it would be difficult to prove that it is not, even pictures will not help. I remember back in Soviet times it was possible to bring through customs one product, but under the Declaration to introduce similar.

In this situation we can assume malice. If the picture was not Bryullov, so there could be skipped, as well .... Hardly.

Eugene, keep abreast of the process. I wonder what it would be.

[ВЯЧЕСЛАВ]

Сообщение от Veronic

or I am wrong?

Sadly mistaken.
He imported n.h for examination and brought to n.h.
Her're not signed in process ... That is, nobody here is not fault of word.
 All the prosecution was trying to sell. But attribution is, as a pretext for sale.
Violation of the rules of movement of cultural property not even mentioned.

[Маруся]

Сообщение от VYACHESLAV

He imported n.h for examination and brought to n.h.
Her're not signed in process ... That is, nobody here is not fault of word.
All the prosecution was trying to sell. But attribution is, as a pretext for sale.
Violation of the rules of movement of cultural property not even mentioned.

It is difficult to judge about the detective story to media reports, which often differ "inaccurate".

Slava, you're right, imported work n /x, and take out, according to the examination, had Bryullov museum value.

The Law on the import or export is an interesting article, whereby Rosokhrankultura right to make citizen, exporting cultural value proposal for its redemption, which is "hard to refuse ... But this usually refers to citizens of Russia. Refused a Belgian collector from Russia's citizenship or is a citizen of Russia with dual citizenship? Also the role ...

In this case, everything is difficult, because the circumstances of the case, in fact, nobody knows. (Example of import-export activities at the exhibition will not work - another mechanism).

Added after 17 minutes

Сообщение от Eriksson

experts "write" is extremely difficult. Everyone says: "Vezite now in Russia." Oh how I lured one eskperta that just did not bode well - not go, even crack. Although in principle not refuse ...

Eriksson, looking for another expert.
A. Sarabyanov, for example, travels abroad and the invitation does not stop. And can you imagine what it means to evaluate "a collection of Russian avant-garde", and even tell the owner that up to 80%of work - wrong ...

[Евгений]

The story ..
-------------------------------------------
April 28 The State Russian Museum showed reporters a previously unknown painting by Karl Bryullova "Christ in the tomb, which the FSB gave the museum at the time the criminal case of smuggling, Interfax reported.
Head of Department of Art XVIII - early XIX century the Russian Museum Gregory Goldovsky told that the picture was written Bryullov in 1840 for the chapel graphs Adlerberg. This work was atypical for the artist's technique - paint with the properties of transparency in a very thin cloth. The painting was supposed to be installed in the window of the church, as stained glass.

After the revolution, the picture was taken in Europe in 1930 Adlerberg bequeathed canvas Orthodox parish in Brussels. Those already in the 2000's decided to sell the "Christ in the tomb." The acquirer was a native of Russia, a citizen of Russia and Germany collector Alexander Pevzner. He wrote to the Russian Museum of the desire to return Bryullova in Russia, sold a painting to the museum.
The representative of the FSB in St. Petersburg, Valery Kuznetsov said that Pevzner imported picture in Russia from Belgium in March 2003, stating in the customs declaration knowingly false information about her. In St. Petersburg collector temporarily placed in storage Bryullova work of the Russian Museum, and to legalize its agreement with the parents of his wife, who have drawn up the documents required for the acquisition of Russian museum for 400 thousand dollars. "
In April, it was a criminal case on smuggling of cultural property. In August 2003, Pevsner decided to draw as a defendant, but two days later a preliminary investigation was suspended because the collector resides in Germany and Russia did not come.

In May 2009, counsel for Anna Stavitskaya, talking about the situation with the picture Bryullova on "Echo of Moscow, said that criminal proceedings were instituted, not because the person has committed a crime, and to deprive this person of this picture."

[ABC]

arrested picture Bryullova was denied the right to restoration

Painting of Charles Bryullova "Christ in the tomb, which became the subject of dispute between the collector Alexander Pevzner and the State Russian Museum, was denied the right to the restoration, according to Kommersant. This happened after the 2003 picture painted in the technique of transparency (canvas should look at the lumen), was arrested by the FSB. Meanwhile, the layer of paint has already started "vyporashivatsya.

According to the newspaper, August 27 owner masterpiece citizen of Germany, Alexander Pevzner filed a complaint with the City Court of St. Petersburg Dzerzhinsky district court's refusal to return the painting to him.

Previously unknown painting of Russian artist "surfaced in 2002 in Germany when Pevzner offered to sell the Russian Museum" of Christ in the tomb "for 400 thousand dollars. In 2003 the work was sent to Russia for examination and restoration, and then arrested by the FSB. Pevsner was accused of transporting incorrectly declared by cultural values, but the delay did not.

Subsequently, the collector has admitted that selling a unique picture would not, and took her to Russia, as Russian Museum has restored to its significantly cheaper than it would have made the German experts.

Kommersant wrote that since his arrest patterns, the law was amended to deny law enforcement the chance to confiscate the product. Thus, if the complaint is not satisfied Pevsner, the picture will remain in custody until the expiration of the 10-year statute of limitations, or sentencing of its owner.

According to Pevsner, the investigators suggested that he close the deal if he agrees to sell or give away now the Russian Museum.

It should be noted that on 20 August the media reported that the Dzerzhinsky Court invalidated refusal to terminate a criminal case against Pevsner. However, the text "Kommersant" that the criminal prosecution of the collector is still ongoing.

http://lenta.ru/news/2010/08/31/painting/

[Евгений]

In St. Petersburg, broke judicial scandal paintings Karl Bryullova "Christ in the tomb" (1840). The painting, executed in a rare technique of "transparency" (implying a canvas view to the light), is stored in the State Russian Museum as evidence in the case of smuggling, which the FSB has suspended seven years ago. On Friday, accused of violating the customs regulations, its owner, Alexander Pevzner appealed against the refusal to return his masterpiece. Meanwhile, the canvas in need of restoration already in 2002, the rights to it deprived. O conflict - CYRUS Dolinina and Anna Cannoneers.

Читать дальше... 

In coming to the City Court of St. Petersburg complaints Alexander Pevzner and his lawyers demanded to cancel the decision issued on August 20 Dzerzhinsky district court, refused to recognize the illegal decision of the Federal Security Service investigators on criminal cases and bringing Mr. Pevsner as an accused in the smuggling. The plaintiffs also challenge the court's refusal to dismiss the case and the investigation and return the seized picture.

Chronology of events as presented by the accused himself and interviewed Kommersant staff of the Russian Museum looks like. Pictures of large-painting "Christ in the tomb, went hand collectors since the late 1990's. Most experts were willing to admit it works by Bryullova and try on a purchase. Someone knew her whereabouts and sellers, others do not. Have you seen the photo and the Russian Museum and the Museum as expected, began to dream of painting. Dreams were not entirely fruitless: sketches, notes and certificates of provenance, which are in the Tretyakov Gallery, the very timing and other open sources, were investigated. Supposedly, the picture was painted for the chapel of Count Adlerberg and enrolled in 1935 in the Russian Orthodox church in Brussels. However, no specific attempts to contact the seller before the museum in autumn 2002 Germanic collector of Russian origin Alexander Pevzner museum did not take.

Making in the museum already familiar photograph, Pevzner and offered to show the very picture of two of the employees timing during their trip to Europe. 5 December 2002 in Brussels, linen, latched on both sides of the glass, removed from the wall of the temple and looked around. Verdict on authorship Bryullova uttered was not, but also a museum, and a collector interested in continuing work. Collector on the same day the first decorated the notarial contract with the seller, and the Russian Museum, as it turned out, yet held a meeting on November 19 the stock-purchasing commission, which decided to request the Ministry of Culture about buying this painting. January 3 Pevzner paid to the seller € 100 thousand on the condition that in case of a negative assessment timing money will be refunded. In March, the picture was imported into Russia and placed in temporary storage in the timing. Where is passed authenticity and authorship Bryullova expertise and where a strange coincidence, two weeks after she was arrested by the FSB.

Versions of how the owner of acquired masterpiece was going to use them, were a cause for his prosecution. In order instituting proceedings (copies of the materials is a "b") refers to "operational investigations" on which the failure to detect cross-border movements undeclared cultural value to its selling for RM $ 400 thousand during the search Pevzner proved that has drawn at customs "temporary admission" (such a regime, as opposed to "permanent", not only freed the owner of the painting from duty, but also be exported back), insisting that he intended to spend in the museum expertise and restore the painting. The intrigue lies in the fact that, having caught the physical evidence, investigators did not hold in Russia itself, "the smuggler, who faces up to seven years in prison, and charged him in absentia, has downgraded the offense as a" false declaration ". Shortly after the investigation because of the absence from the country of the accused (that does not interfere with the investigators to communicate with him on the phone) has been suspended. However, the picture layer of paint which had already begun "vyporashivatsya, what GRM wrote the FSB even in 2005, denied the right to restoration and now in its eighth year of serving time.

Lawyers for Mr. Pevsner argued that the charges against him is absurd: in case of sale of paintings of the defendant under the law had the opportunity to change the regime of temporary import for a permanent, paying a fee. From a pragmatic point of view this is obvious: since the export executed as a "permanent importation of" cultural value "in 2003, was banned, what a normal person before the conclusion of the transaction would bring his painting in an irreversible mode? However, immediately begs another question: why do it to pull a masterpiece from Europe to Russia?

The collector, in his words, he thought to save: the restoration in Germany would have cost him much more than timing. So he did not want to spoil relations with the museum staff and, as often happens with private collectors, drove them by the nose, talking about a possible sale. As a result, Pevsner came under investigation, and museum curators have become guards: if the court does not satisfy the complaint, the picture will have to wait until the expiration of ten years ago (in 2013) or the conviction of its owner. But even in the latter case, the right to confiscate law enforcement agencies have not. This opportunity, for which a masterpiece, perhaps, was "arrested", the legislator expelled a year after the initiation of a case. Even more harshly corrected in 2008, the right of prosecution for violation of customs control of the Constitutional Court, which ordered the possible use of alternative methods of studying the material evidence (eg photographs), and also forbade the owners refuse to return the property without "informed and reasoned decision" .

However, the FSB refused Mr. Pevsner without explanation, without revealing his motives, even in the courtroom. Judge Angelica Morozov partially satisfy the complaint, admitting persistence investigation "unfounded." The fate of the painting and its owner does not change anything, but the FSB would have to address the violation. Investigator Vladimir Krajewski told Kommersant that he would do it "immediately". Privately, in his office, promised that the refusal will be retried. Press Service of the FSB in St. Petersburg and Leningrad region to a request "b" at the time of typesetting rates did not respond.

Nevertheless, we can expect that for the extension of the criminal case and the arrest of paintings department at least will open the motives of their actions, which until now could only guess. Who brought the FSB at the picture Bryullova - the museum or any competitor Pevsner - and whether it is interested in obtaining fabric some of the senior public assemblies except the timing is still unknown. Sam defendant contends that the investigators suggested that he close the deal if he agrees to sell or leave the picture timing. But his lawyer, Anna Stavitskaya in an interview with Echo Moskvy compare the behavior of government agencies with "corporate raiding". So far, recognized the historical and cultural sensation painting Bryullova remains hostage, hidden in the storerooms of the museum and from the probable owner, and from the audience.
http://www.kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=1495621
 

[SergeiSK]

[Konstantin]

[Евгений]

[uriart]