Keywords
restitution; looted art reclamation; international comparative law; cultural art and objects
Abstract
The Nazi regime systematically stripped Jews and other persecuted groups of property through a framework of laws that gave their spoliation a veneer of legality. Postwar restitution programs, though groundbreaking in their efforts to provide individual victims with either compensation or the return of their property, were hampered by strict legal limitations, inconsistent procedures, and the slow pace of resolution. Contemporary restitution efforts increasingly recognize that legal avenues alone cannot fully redress these injustices. This Essay examines the work of the Holocaust Claims Processing Office (HCPO) of the New York State Department of Financial Services, which has developed a model for pursuing restitution claims rooted in equity, transparency, and cooperation. Rather than litigating claims, the HCPO facilitates dialogue between claimants and current possessors of objects lost as a result of Nazi persecution and brokers resolutions by emphasizing moral responsibility. This Essay champions a model of extrajudicial claims resolution that demonstrates how principles of fairness and flexibility can prevail over historical inequity.
Recommended Citation
Anna Rubin,
The HCPO Way: Resolving Claims Through Cooperation,
94 Fordham L. Rev. 485
(2025).
Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol94/iss2/7
Included in
Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Cultural Heritage Law Commons, Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, International Law Commons, Law and Society Commons, Property Law and Real Estate Commons