The court in St. Petersburg

[Konstantin]

I've been careless something commented on the phone and hit the "story".
But the case is interesting, what everyone thinks?

Today, July 14, Dzerzhinsky district court of St. Petersburg would consider whether to return the collector Alexander Pevzner picture of Karl Briullov "Christ in the tomb. The invaluable work of the great Russian painter, was arrested a few years ago by the Office of the FSB in St. Petersburg and Leningrad region in the case brought against the collector under smuggling.

According to Pevsner BFM.ru lawyer Anna Stavitskaya, the defense filed in court, challenging the refusal of the investigating authorities to close the case against Pevsner. "We also asked the investigators to return Pevzner now, but our request rejected", - said Stavitskaya.

Читать дальше... 

The criminal case against a citizen of Russia and Germany Alexander Pevzner was brought under Part 2 of Article 188 of the Criminal Code ("contraband" - up to 7 years imprisonment) March 18, 2003. This occurred soon after as a collector bought one of the Orthodox parishes in Belgium now unknown artist canvas and brought to St. Petersburg.

In order to attract Pevsner as the defendant stated that the collector was going to sell the painting Bryullova State Russian Museum. However, he "with intent to evade payment of customs duties," said customs officials and declare it knowingly false information about the purpose of import pictures, customs regime and its value. So, Pevzner blamed that he does not give the author's name and the value of the painting, and declare it apocryphal canvas in preferential mode of temporary import.

After the expert picture is not returned to the owner

Pevsner himself guilty of smuggling denies. According to him, when he bought the picture, there was no credible evidence to suggest that it was written by Art Masterpieces. «Under a contract with the seller, I returned to work if it turns out that the picture did not brush Bryullova ", - says the collector. He noted that the work constitutes a sheet 1,5 to 2 meters, was not traditional for Briullov. It was written in a very thin canvas, viewable at the light as a slide.

To identify the author of the work, Pevzner and brought the canvas to Russia for the examination in the State Russian Museum in St. Petersburg. "In Germany, these specialists Brullov no. In addition, the German certificate would have no force ", - told BFM.ru Pevzner. He added that the choice fell on the Russian Museum is not accidental: this facility is the largest owner of the works of the great artist, one picture is there, there are more than 70.

According to the agreement concluded, the Russian Museum took the painting "Christ in the tomb" a temporary storage. "If so, they should be restored at my expense, because the church was leaking, and experts have stated that the picture is seriously ill, but it can still be saved," - continued his story Pevzner.

According to him, representatives of the Russian Museum no secret that they are very interested in buying the painting, and asked the collector "yield" museum canvas. But it was not planned by Pevsner.

"When it became clear that this picture Brullov, it simply decided to take away. It was a criminal case "- has joined the conversation, Anna Stavitskaya.

Collector assures us that he acted under the law

Within four months of the collector was in the status of a witness, and when he left, he was charged in absentia in the "smuggling" by the fact of non-declaration pattern. Later, the wording changed. "The fact is that, processing the temporary import pictures in Russia, I have a detailed description of the canvas and presented to customs at once, two photo picture - the overall look and fragments of fine detail", - says Alexander Pevzner.

His lawyer claims that the investigation does not have any data that Pevzner wanted to sell the painting Briullov. "In fact there is only a statement of the Russian Museum that they are interested in the painting came to him in the museum for permanent storage", - said the lawyer.

According Stavitskaya, representatives of the Russian Museum requested investigation as quickly as possible to determine the legal status of the picture that the museum was ready to buy for 400 thousand dollars. Himself a collector said that now the canvas is already ten times more.

Currently, a criminal case against Alexander Pevzner suspended due to the fact that he is outside Russia. What would happen is difficult to predict. The statute of limitations on the case expires in 2013. However, this does not mean that Pevzner back now. The businessman said that the seizure pattern in favor of the state has no legal grounds - the property can be seized only after conviction by a court. "But I am sure that the picture must be confiscated and returned only after the decision, which in our favor, take the Strasbourg Court", - said the collector.

How can cost Masterpieces

According to the commercial director of portal artinvestment.ru (Internet project dedicated to Russian art market), Konstantin Babulina, estimate the cost of painting by Karl Bryullova now quite difficult. His works are not sold at international auctions ago. According to experts, in 2005, a sketch of one of the works Bryullova sizes 60 to 70 cm was sold for 750,000 dollars. And in 2009 at Christie's auction design Bryullova purchased for 400 thousand dollars As such large paintings as "Christ in the tomb, in the opinion of Babulina, if the work they want to sell, the starting price may be 2 million dollars. "To leave the same picture can be for any number", - said the expert.

The painting "Christ in the tomb" was written Bryullov in 40-ies to the 19 th century located in St. Petersburg chapel Count Adlerberg, later governor-general of Finland. In 1881 Earl and his family emigrated to Germany, where, most likely, and took a picture. In the 30's the 20 th century painting was bequeathed to the Orthodox parish in Brussels. Presumably, the will was drafted descendants Adlerbega.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

According to the commercial director of portal artinvestment.ru (Internet project dedicated to Russian art market), Konstantin Babulina, estimate the cost of painting by Karl Bryullova now quite difficult. His works are not sold at international auctions ago. According to experts, in 2005, a sketch of one of the works Bryullova sizes 60 to 70 cm was sold for 750,000 dollars. And in 2009 at Christie's auction design Bryullova purchased for 400 thousand dollars As such large paintings as "Christ in the tomb, in the opinion of Babulina, if the work they want to sell, the starting price may be 2 million dollars. "To leave the same picture can be for any number", - said the expert.

Well, all right.
As part of assessing the commercial director Artinvestment.ru not undermined.

[Konstantin]

«Leaving the same picture can be for any number»

To be completely accurate, I said that the withdrawal may take up to 5, and $ 10 million.
But I'm not about that, I'm interested in the substance of litigation. That someone is lucky for us in Russia now for examination, that he should write the declaration at customs? And if it says "temporary import for examination, then what have the custom?
Or have any details?

[Konstantin]

So he had to write it Bryullov?

[artcol]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzranskiy

Customs of the amended Article 9. Law of the Russian Federation of April 15, 1993 N 4804-I "On export and import of cultural property" shall now to release all that imported after August 2, 2009

And then, in 2003, could produce only what was imported.

In the sense that all? There is a temporary import and export, and is:

are prohibited to be exported
    * Cultural property created by more than 100 years ago

If you did not apply for a temporary import, then all - only to agree formally customs are right.

Added after 1 min

Сообщение от Cyril Syzranskiy

Removed to when leaving examination in the pocket is the same only the opinion of some sort of expert and filled to the documents on the basis of temporary admission, where he wrote and "n /x".

From the Russian Museum would call, they said trafficked Briullov. This article of the Criminal Code.

Added after 3 minutes

Сообщение от Konstantin

That is, he had to write it Bryullov? Or presumably Bryullov?
Or on any anything serious import here was impossible, even for the examination? Agree there is a contradiction.

You can not bring a n /x, and take as Briullov.

[artcol]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzranskiy

I mean this:
http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showpo...1&postcount=23
If purchased outside of Russia, has imported and declare the import, then export the objects can then be at least thousands of years.

Interestingly, will observe closely. But the thing that has long stretches, a change does not fall.
Shl way, now TC TC accept, there will also be (already) on the changes of the import export (not CC).

[Allena]

01.05.2009 Interview on "Echo Moscow" with the lawyer Pevzner Anna Stavitskaya
 
Subject: What is the smuggling of cultural property or business of an unknown painting by Karl Bryullova
Moderators: Irina Merkulova, Eugene Buntman
Guests: Anna Stavitskaya

I. Merkulova - Our guest lawyer Anna Stavitskaya. Hello

A. Stavitsky - Hello.

I. Merkulova - Let's talk about the smuggling of cultural property. For example, the case of an unknown painting by Karl Briullov.

E. BUNTMAN - Extremely curious case.

Alexander Stavitsky - Yes, indeed something very curious. When I got acquainted with the materials of the case, then I came to this view, that a criminal case on the alleged smuggling of this picture, it was brought up with a definite purpose. And it is not because the person committed a crime, and to deprive this person of this picture. And the whole chronology of the case, unfortunately, just convinces us that this was indeed so.

Читать дальше... 

I. Merkulov - Let us explain to our listeners what it was about.

E. BUNTMAN - From the very beginning. What's the story in brief.

A. Stavitsky - History is very interesting. Suffice it renowned collector Alexander Pevzner in Brussels in 2002, learned that one of the churches is an interesting picture, possibly Karl Briullov. He came to look at her, and at first she did not make him the slightest impression, she can even say it has made a painful impression. But as he was a collector with a very large experience, he realized that just such an impression she made on him, because he was wrong on her looks. This painting is unique precisely because it was written. Unfortunately, I had not seen it, but I can tell you about how I described it himself Pevzner. It is a huge canvas of 2 meters by 2 meters, the arch shape. And the unique technology lies in the fact that this picture was painted on the thinnest canvas, which was filled with starch. And it turned out that seemed to such a large frosted glass. Then the picture is written very finest paint. So it turns out that if the latter is viewed in transmission, because the picture must look solely to the light that the light source was behind the huge optical effects as if you look at the huge slide. Of course, this can not fail to impress. And when he saw it, then for a normal person could understand that this is something very interesting. But he did not know whether this next picture. Or the painting could be very expensive and could cost as little as 2,000 dollars. And to understand it, he decided now to bring to the State Russian Museum in order to attend ...

I. Merkulova - he bought it?

A. Stavitsky - He just signed a preliminary agreement, which implied that if a genuine Brullov, respectively, then he will pay an amount determined by the contract. In that case, if there is no genuine picture, then the seller returns the money. And he took this picture in the State Russian Museum.

E. BUNTMAN - That is simply brought a picture in Russia for examination.

Stavitsky A. - Yes. Moreover, he had a tentative agreement with representatives of the Russian Museum is to check the authenticity of the painting. He drove it quite calmly. In other words, customs officials made good. He is her declare it a regime of temporary importation. This is not a permanent regime, and he was under a implies that a person, when imports anything on the territory of another state, he can not alienate it. Then the State Russian Museum has examined and found that it is a masterpiece. Unknown painting Bryullova and find this picture at all historical and cultural sensation. Further develop the event very interesting. Immediately after the examination was conducted, was initiated just after 10 days of a criminal case against Pevsner on the fact of trafficking in cultural property. Allegedly, he illegally transferred through the customs border of the picture. Not declare the name of the picture, the cost of it. And most importantly, that he was going to sell it to the Russian Museum.

E. BUNTMAN - And how you can declare the value without evaluation specialists.

A. Stavitsky - See, you immediately ask exactly the right question, which arises from each person who is simply guided by reason. But somehow the people who initiate a criminal case, they were guided to her own thoughts and concepts. I sometimes think, I have long worked as a lawyer, I have the Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure a completely different than the law enforcers and the courts. Well it was a criminal case. Most interestingly, Pevzner anyone not particularly interested. Because it was a criminal case, have been made questioning, and after a while he went to Germany because he is a citizen of Germany. No he did not interfere. And almost immediately suspended the criminal case on the basis that all sort of understand everything, know where Pevzner. But since he can not participate in the proceedings, then the case will be suspended. But the most interesting in this case that this picture is now as it is written by the investigators, kept in a criminal case. In the case of a document, this letter of the State Russian Museum ...

I. Merkulova - sorry, it is stored in the Investigation Committee?

A. Stavitsky - How to write an investigator. In general, it is of course impossible, because such a pattern can not be stored ...

E. BUNTMAN - And how, in that Daddy Does the criminal case.

A. Stavitsky - Yes, two-meter painting. Clearly, this can not be. And it is quite clear that this picture is not stored in the FSB of the Leningrad region. And stored in the Russian Museum. And the Russian Museum and sent a letter to the FSB in 2005, which explicitly written that this picture is simply a masterpiece, but it is deposited in these conditions could lead to the fact that it will be completely lost. And so the Russian Museum requests quickly to determine the legal status of the picture and said that they confirm their interest in entering this picture in the Foundation of the State Russian Museum for permanent storage. That is, Russian Museum, and makes no secret that he wants to get this picture. And I'm sure that the institution of criminal proceedings against Pevzner is a way to put pressure on him so that he either gave a picture just like that, or has it just taken away, or he somehow sold it. So far, already in 2009, the picture was in the Russian Museum, nobody restores, it gradually destroyed. And it turns out that, despite the fact that was discovered a masterpiece, but since you can not get it, you just lost a cultural masterpiece. Despite the fact that lawyers are doing this in St. Petersburg, are well-known lawyer Chinokaev and Heifetz, they fight, they write a variety of complaints, petitions, where possible, and the FSB, and the courts and the Public Chamber. And the citizen Lukin. But the WHO and now there. Since the picture does not give Pevzner, but, strictly speaking, it is destroyed. That is a dog in the manger.

E. BUNTMAN - I can not understand a few things. From the perspective of elementary logic

I. Merkulova - Eugene, you're ridiculous.

E. BUNTMAN - I understand where from here take out some kind of cultural values. Of course, this is a loss for the country. When the auction takes an art that should belong to the people. But I do not understand what a tragedy when it is brought here a picture of the Russian artist, found in Europe.

I. Merkulova - What smuggling?

A. Stavitsky - you yourself answered your own question. Speaking of that tragedy may be that when cultural values are exported to the territory of a foreign state. But here the State Russian Museum considered it so that it is very good, they have found a masterpiece in a foreign country, but I would very much like to see it is not on foreign soil and have some private collector, but to the State Russian Museum. And it is not necessary that a person committed a crime. Can this be a crime to create an artificial way. Institute criminal proceedings and influence people so that he gave this work.

I. Merkulova - you yourself said that now the process has been suspended in connection with the fact that Pevzner abroad. After all, what are the prospects? This can not last forever.

A. Stavitsky - He can not have a timetable, which may investigate the matter. In this case, the statute of limitations for 10 years. And apparently, the goal wait for the expiry of that period, and then somehow take away from this picture Pevsner, that is, it was confiscated.

E. BUNTMAN - rewritten in Russian Museum.

A. Stavitsky - Yes, although from the standpoint of Russian legislation is impossible. But since on the one hand in terms of legislation, we could not and excitement of this case, because I do not see the offense, but it stirred. Therefore, I believe that, despite the absence of legal grounds, will be something invented in order to confiscate this painting. But since I was writing complaints to the European court, respectively, after the appeal of certain actions in court, remains the only one to secure the return of this painting its rightful owner - is writing a complaint to the European Court. What I do not like, because I really do not like the fact that almost every business needs to appeal to the European Court, so that we have within the State did not violate the law. And what if it breaks down.

I. Merkulova - In Russia, all instances have already passed?

A. Stavitsky - Did the court. Were written motions to dismiss the case and return Pevzner paintings. But this petition was denied and, accordingly, the refusal will now be challenged in court. And when the court will also bring his refusal, which is likely to be grounds for appeal to the European Court.

I. Merkulova - But still the story impressed some uncivilized behavior. A Belgian side something to say about this?

A. Stavitsky - No, what she say about this?

I. Merkulov - some money still unpaid.

A. Stavitsky - Yes, but just the money left and all. For further appears that is not interesting.

I. Merkulova - So there is clearly the aggrieved party is himself a collector, and he and his party, that is, he just prefers to sit quietly and wait?

A. Stavitsky - None. It just took a very proactive stance and with the help of lawyers trying to get the truth. He just was in Russia, while it was happening, and when the case was opened and there were interrogations. And he saw for himself that particular truth here nothing would happen. But more than that, no opposition to his departure to Germany. And I think that even very happy after he waved a handkerchief, because it is not absolutely necessary. Looking for his picture, and not Pevzner.

E. BUNTMAN - to my earlier question. If it was a Russian citizen. I, for example, find some sort of picture, the value of which, I imagine, but rather approximately. Europe. Buy it, I cite here, pay the assessment. And the same situation. If it was a Russian citizen, who could hardly take the picture back over the border. That would be the same situation?

A. Stavitsky - If a Russian citizen, who would have bought something in a foreign country, then there would have already entered into force the laws of a foreign state, who either was allowed to take cultural value, or not allowed. I find it difficult to argue, because everywhere the law differently. But in that case, if he did it somehow brought, and then showed their intention to give the cultural value in a museum, I think that the museum only joy and clapped his hands. But the criminal cases in Russia in respect of such person is unlikely to have been brought.

E. BUNTMAN - The listener writes us: I think, this is a normal desire of a normal museum want to get a good exhibit.

I. Merkulova - And yet he understood that masterpiece discovered in Russia. The examination was here.

A. Stavitsky - Examination of been here. But the examination only found that it is a masterpiece. Rather confirmed that this is a picture of Charles Briullov. But even without examination, in general, it in itself was a masterpiece. Because simply no one knew that this next picture. But I was very strange argument that human ...

E. BUNTMAN - not all the same price to get.

A. Stavitsky - If him someone came home, and something like it and he would have this thing taken away.

E. BUNTMAN - Or say: lend to the museum.

A. Stavitsky - Because the museum is really like. I think that this person is unlikely to care for this state of affairs.

I. Merkulova - More from our listeners ask this same question, as I have: why he brought a picture here? He could have done expertise abroad or, in the end, cause the expert there.

A. Stavitsky - Just because he is engaged in activities for a long time, he has repeatedly import cultural property in the territory of Russia is for the production of expertise is in State Russian Museum. He was there all know very well and just because he has repeatedly done it. That is, it was convenient and clear, and the more Russian Museum you know what the status is. His expertise means a lot. For this reason alone I think he did exactly as made. Moreover, he did everything perfectly true. Because he could not declare a picture as any for temporary importation. Because he could not specify either the authorship or value, if it did, it would be contraband, because in that case, if not verified, or he wrote some other value, then to him would have been claim.

E. BUNTMAN - It's quite strange to write in the declaration: I think that is a masterpiece. Man, do not judge the museum said that it seems to me that this picture is worth hundreds of millions of dollars. I have a little idea how it might appear in the declaration.

A. Stavitsky - He argued just as logically and therefore did so, as I did. With full compliance with the law. He now has not sold, no one has established that it was sold, and therefore no violation of the regime of temporary importation, he did not commit. But despite this, the investigation believe that his mind the need arose and the idea to sell the picture. But you can not judge someone for what he probably was born in the head. Especially since no one understand that a person's head can not. Therefore, it is an utterly incomprehensible reasoning of lawyers.

I. Merkulova - you talked about that picture is stored in the Russian Museum, but nonetheless, not in very good condition. What happens if the picture will perish?

A. Stavitsky - It's hard to say, firstly, people will be deprived of this masterpiece, because nobody will see it and, secondly, in case the same European Court found a violation of property rights Pevsner, then Russia will have to reimburse him Damage to the cost of the painting.

E. BUNTMAN - A lot of it.

I. Merkulova - What do a masterpiece. We talked about the fact that a person trained, who have repeatedly brought the works of art in Russia, in such a situation was unclear. What other people may not be as well known to collectors, who bring in Russia works of art ...

E. BUNTMAN - If they at least suggest that this may represent at least some value.

I. Merkulova - From the viewpoint of the law.

A. Stavitsky - I advise them to just consult before doing anything ...

I. Merkulova - At the site, or here.

A. Stavitsky - And here and there to read the legislation, because otherwise anyone can get into a situation where he would think that he takes out a thing that is not a cultural value, and then suddenly at the customs office revealed that it is cultural value represents. And can be very large problems. So, before anything is done, it is better to read at least a law on import and export of cultural values in Russia.

E. BUNTMAN - Because that statement, which usually hangs in the airport, rather vaguely, that are subject to declaration antique value and so on. But it is difficult to understand what antique value, and what is not. For example, many are stories of collecting coins, it is sold on the collapse of, say, a silver coin, a sort of Bavarian late 19 th century. Not very great value, just even his modest collection of numismatic lead. And the border is that this cultural value.

A. Stavitsky - It is better to match its actions with the law. But in principle, even if the person will match its actions with the law, he could still get into trouble. If someone wants a fuck what he bought. But it is better to consult.

I. Merkulova - By law, a serious prison sentence, in my opinion ...

A. Stavitsky - Smuggling of cultural values from 3 to 7 years imprisonment.

I. Merkulova - And something similar happened in our country with works of art which were confiscated and turned out in museums. Or is unprecedented.

A. Stavitsky - I can not say for sure because I do not know, I have the first such case, so I will not be able to answer this question. But, on the basis of our system, I would not rule out that such incidents occurred. But simply to call them can not.

E. BUNTMAN - Because it's really strange. The last thing I remember, when Germany exported only whole collection after the war, and then they had to fight or not to return. Russian museum occupies raider attacks - that non-signing as a citizen of this whole thing has identified.

A. Stavitsky - Speaking in simple terms, yes. In fact, it is happening.

E. BUNTMAN - But it's difficult to imagine that the museum workers specifically and knowingly done so. Maybe it's the stereotype of museum workers and others, but I understand it, when it engaged in customs, some police agencies, the FSB and so on and then get some recoil from the museum or the amount. But to the museum in such a way at all costs to earn a painting, I submit hard. This is an initiative of the museum was or not?

A. Stavitsky - For me it is simply unthinkable, the more I like a man who loves art, I understand that those people who work in museums, they should think about something else entirely, namely that now to save. All the more so. But I read the documents from which it follows that the State Russian Museum is interested in this picture, and he can not hide. They are initiated or is it the FSB Leningrad region, with the filing of the State Russian Museum, it's difficult to say. But the fact remains that if there is a legitimate reason for the return of this painting to its rightful owner without the painting, he is already 6 years old and quite sure that he would ever see her in the form in which she had inherited. Because it is destroyed.

E. BUNTMAN - And anyone ever see her. If we are talking about the interests of the museum ...

A. Stavitsky - The worst thing that perhaps no one will see. But I would like to see a picture, because what I heard about it and read it really seems to be very big impression can have on people.

I. Merkulova - Helen writes us: I would like to know the views of the Russian Museum for objectivity. This, of course.

A. Stavitsky - Of course, I just can only read the letter sent to the FSB. "I regret to say that the current state of this painting, representing only the artistic value, cause watching her preservation of grave concern. Long-term storage of such a unique artistic monument without a regular preventive restoration activities may lead to irreparable loss original painting. The State Russian Museum is the profile of scientific-restoration facilities and artists-restorers of qualifications for the restoration of the painting "Christ in the tomb. But without a formal definition of its legal status is not possible. Also confirm that they were interested in entering the picture of Karl Briullov "Christ in the tomb" in the funds of the State Russian Museum for permanent preservation and ask you to expedite the investigation of the possible criminal case. "

E. BUNTMAN - Very interesting.

A. Stavitsky - I read something that says the Acting Director of Charles II.

I. Merkulova - And he says to whom?

A. Stavitsky - Deputy. Head of the St. Petersburg and Leningrad Region, Major General Milushkinu.

EA BUNTMAN - That kind of history. Think, because it is very curious and I, for one, can not recall such cases and it is indeed a very important thing for law and for art.

I. Merkulova - Attorney Anna Stavitskaya was with us in the air. We thank you, goodbye.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Allena

Interview 01.05.2009 on" Echo Moscow "with the lawyer Pevzner Anna Stavitskaya

And listened, and read, but the lawyer just does not say and that is understandable.
Position it, one feels, not very. Hence, her statements in the media, public opinion "drag" on the accused and his defense.

As soon as the examination was conducted, was initiated just 10 days later criminal case against Pevsner on the fact of smuggling of cultural property.

What seized a painting? Where? It is not clear.
We see only that:

Because it was a criminal case, have been made questioning, and after a while he went to Germany because he is a citizen of Germany. No he did not interfere.

I think that all happened exactly at the border, at the moment trying vvyvoza. Hence, the composition and the article itself.

Supposedly he illegally transferred through the customs border of the picture. Not declare the name of the picture, its cost.

[artcol]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzranskiy

, and listened to and read, but the lawyer just does not say and that is understandable.
Position it, one feels, not very. Hence, her statements in the media, public opinion, "drag" on the side of the accused and his defense.

What seized the painting? Where? It is not clear.
We see only that:

I think that all happened exactly at the border, at the moment trying vvyvoza. Hence, the composition and the article itself.

Everyone should deal with the pros, and export too

[Konstantin]

Well, as always.

on July 14. Interfax-Russia.ru - Meeting Dzerzhinsky Court of St. Petersburg on charges of smuggling rare painting by Karl Bryullova "Christ in the tomb", plan on Wednesday, postponed.

"The court rescheduled. When will the next meeting, I do not know," - reported "Interfax" the lawyer defendant in the criminal case, Anna Stavitskaya.

The reasons for delay of the trial and his new lawyer did not specify a date.