The court in the Netherlands decided to return the “Scythian gold” to Ukraine. Russia promises to react

The Supreme Court of the Netherlands put an end to the case of “Scythian gold” – although it originates from Crimea, it is “part of the cultural heritage of Ukraine” and should return to Ukraine, Western publications report. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia said that the decision of the highest court of the Netherlands “creates another dangerous precedent” and promised an “adequate reaction”. The Russian senator read the decision of the court in the Netherlands as “recognition” of Crimea as Russian.

What happened?

The Supreme Court of the Netherlands ordered the return to Ukraine of a valuable collection of the so-called “Scythian gold” and other treasures from the Crimea, which are now kept in a museum in Amsterdam.

This case has been going on since the collection – about 300 works of art and historical works that were on loan from four museums in Crimea as part of an exhibition called “Crimea: Gold and Mysteries of the Black Sea” – ended up on display in the Netherlands at a time when Russia seized the Ukrainian peninsula in 2014.

The litigation dragged on for years, until the Supreme Court upheld the 2021 Court of Appeal decision, which recognized the artifacts as part of Ukrainian cultural heritage, and cleared the way for the Allard Pearson Museum, which housed the collection at the time, to return the exhibits to Ukraine, not Crimea , which was annexed by Russia.

“Although the museum exhibits originate from Crimea and therefore can also be considered as Crimean property, they are part of the cultural heritage of Ukraine,” says the court’s decision, quoted by Western media.

What arguments did the parties present?

Crimean museums, backed by Russia, sought to return bronze swords, golden helmets, precious stones and other artifacts, demanding the items be returned as part of their collections.

The government in Kyiv demanded the return of the collection on the grounds that they belong to Ukraine and not to specific museums in a specific territory. Some exhibits in this collection are over 2000 years old.

The Amsterdam Museum decided to keep the exhibits until the court decides their fate.

In 2016, the District Court of Amsterdam supported this view and referred to the UNESCO convention from 1970, which establishes that objects are the property of a sovereign state and must be returned to it, and the question of ownership must be decided by a Ukrainian court.

The Supreme Court in The Hague decided to return the collection to Ukraine, because the Netherlands did not recognize the Russian annexation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.

What is Russia’s reaction?

After the announcement of the decision of the Supreme Court in The Hague, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement that this court decision “cannot be left without an adequate response from our side.”

“Scythian gold” is part of the cultural heritage of Crimea, and no decisions of the involved courts can cancel this indisputable fact. Historical justice will be restored,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova was quoted as saying in the statement.

The Russian Foreign Ministry compares the case of “Scythian gold” with the case of the downing of a Malaysian Boeing in the sky over Donbas in 2014, and the decisions in both cases are considered unfair to Russia.

“We saw this, in particular, on the example of the Hague District Court’s decision in a criminal case against citizens accused of involvement in the crash of a Malaysian Boeing in the sky over Donbas,” Zakharova said in a statement.

She adds that the Dutch judicial system “has long ceased to meet the standards of impartial and fair justice” and is only engaged in “serving political orders of its own, and now Kyiv, authorities.”

Meanwhile, the vice-speaker of the Federation Council, the upper house of the Russian parliament, Konstantin Kosachov stated that as part of its decision, the court in The Hague “recognized Crimea as part of Russia”. He announced this on Friday in his Telegram channel.

“In justifying its decision, the Supreme Court of the Netherlands recognized the fact that Crimea is part of Russia! Legally, it was this circumstance that became decisive in this case,” Kosachev writes in his Telegram channel.

He emphasizes that the court’s decision says that Crimea “agreed” to separate from Ukraine and joined Russia “as a result of a referendum.” Kosachev says that in the future Russia will rely on this wording of the court in the Netherlands.

In fact, the court’s decision only stated the fact of the annexation of Crimea, without mentioning in any way either its “voluntariness” or the referendum. Instead, the court emphasizes that “the Netherlands did not recognize the separation and affiliation with Russia.”

“In March 2014, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea left Ukraine and joined the Russian Federation. The UN, the EU and the Netherlands did not recognize the separation and affiliation with Russia,” the court’s decision says.

The Dutch media note that it remains unclear when the museum exhibits can be returned, given the current situation in Ukraine.

They also note that the court case cost the museum in Amsterdam dearly. According to court documents, court fees and storage costs have cost the museum more than 500,000 euros.

The material uses reports from Reuters, AP, DutschNews.