The Swiss Federation of Jewish Communities (SIG/FCSI) has condemned the “partly irritating and partly frightening” stance of the Kunsthaus Zürich and the E.G. Bührle Collection Foundation regarding the Nazi-era origins of one of Europe’s most prestigious private art collections.
E.G. Bührle, a German-born industrialist (1890-1956) amassed a fortune selling weapons to both the Nazis and the Allies during World War II, wealth that helped buy around 600 artworks by the end of his life.
The Bührle Foundation itself confirms that 13 paintings bought by Bührle, who later acquired Swiss citizenship, had been stolen by the Nazis from Jewish owners in France.
Following a series of court cases after the war, Bührle returned all 13 pieces to their rightful owners then repurchased nine of them, the foundation said.
But long-simmering suspicions around the provenance of other pieces in the collection, which includes famous works by the likes of Manet, Degas, Cezanne, Monet, Renoir, Gauguin and Picasso, have been raised in recent years.
Earlier this week, the Kunsthaus Zurich and the E.G. Bührle Collection Foundation organised a press conference to comment on the criticism of its controversial collection. According to a statement by the SIG/FCSI, the conference showed a rigid defence of their previous position and a dubious awareness of history.
“The representatives of the Kunsthaus and the Bührle Foundation defended their previous position with regard to the documentation room and the provenance research of the collection, which in their own opinion is sufficient”, read the statement.
“Particularly difficult to understand is the insistence on a view of history that takes no account whatsoever of the findings of the Independent Commission of Experts Switzerland-Second World War, the so-called “Bergier Commission.”
“This includes statements that relativise Switzerland’s role as an important hub for looted art and refugee property. It is generally known and has since been historically reappraised that the Swiss state offered too little security and protection to Jews and other minorities, including in Switzerland, during World War II and was often unable to save them from death in countries occupied by Nazi Germany,” the statement continued.
“In addition, there were thousands of people who were turned away at the Swiss borders and often sent to certain death. All the more reason, therefore, for the refugee property in Switzerland to be so important and for each individual case to be investigated for its provenance, just as is done with looted art.”
“Nor are the representatives of the Kunsthaus Zürich and the Bührle Foundation aware of the responsibility they indirectly assumed when Switzerland co-signed the Washington Declaration in 1998 and the Terezín Declaration in 2009. These state precisely that the provenance of each individual case must be clarified so that fair and just solutions can be found with regard to the restitution or compensation of works of art. Here it is essential that the Kunsthaus Zürich follows the example of the Bern Art Museum and recognises “fugitive property” as “cultural property seized as a result of Nazi persecution”.
The SIG/FCSI also welcomed that the Zürcher Kunstgesellschaft, as the sponsor of the Kunsthaus, and the Bührle Foundation have finally complied with a widely voiced demand for an independent panel of experts, to verify the origin of the paintings in the collection.
However, this can only succeed if the representatives of the Kunsthaus Zurich and the Bührle Foundation are prepared to move away from their current rigid standpoint and their very own perception of history.
“The SIG is currently strongly committed to the implementation of a parliamentary motion calling for an independent national commission for cultural property seized as a result of Nazi persecution. The debate about the Bührle collection shows that the establishment of such a commission is absolutely necessary.
“In the future, each individual case must be examined and, in the case of justified claims, restitution must be made accordingly. Just as the international agreements provide for,” the statement concluded.
The collection was long displayed at a discrete private museum on the outskirts of Zurich, but it was determined it should be moved following a spectacular 2008 heist of four 19th century masterpieces.
