Filed under: Active Decency | Tags: Auschwitz, Dina Babbitt, ethics, Gypsy Portraits, ICOM, U.N.
The 4th Geneva Convention
Among the arguments not yet considered concerning Dina Babbitt’s Auschwitz paintings, are the articles of the 4th Geneva Convention which include the following:
“Art. 46. In so far as they have not been previously withdrawn, restrictive measures taken regarding protected persons shall be cancelled as soon as possible after the close of hostilities.
Restrictive measures affecting their property shall be cancelled, in accordance with the law of the Detaining Power, as soon as possible after the close of hostilities.”
(Article 97)
“…Articles which have above all a personal or sentimental value may not be taken away….”
Please see Dina Babbitt’s video presentation, and decide for yourself whether the portraits in question have any “personal or sentimental value”.
Further on, in article 97, the following admonition appears:
“…On release or repatriation, internees shall be given all articles, monies or other valuables taken from them during internment…”
Unless there is a valid reason to exempt the current Auschwitz establishment from International Humanitarian Law, they are morally and ethically obliged to return Dina Babbitt’s original paintings to her now.
Filed under: Active Decency | Tags: Auschwitz, Dina Babbitt, Human Rights, ICOM
In fewer than 12 hours, the director of ICOM’s Ethics Committee has responded to our last letter with an acknowledgment that can be taken as a reassurance that Dina’s concerns have not been brushed aside.
Although this is taking far more time than I like, it is important to know that when ICOM does make an official statement, we can trust that it will not have been a hastily crafted brush-off such as we have seen from the Museum itself.
While I feel a little “assertive” in pressing ICOM on this issue, time is becoming increasingly important here. I am confident that Dina’s patience over 36 years more than justifies my own impatience on her behalf.
The text of the director’s response follows:
Dear Mr Thibeault,
I thank you for, and acknowledge, your message today.
I am again re-checking my discussion and correspondence with various colleagues (within ICOM) about the latest state of our various museum colleagues’ thought on this very sensitive case, and the various actions ICOM has undertaken to consider thoroughly Mrs Dina Gottliebová-Babbitt’s personal historical narrative and current concerns more broadly, as well as her sadly declining health.
I will endeavour to respond to your queries as soon as I can gain reports and an overview on this case anew from my colleagues.
Best wishes,
Bernice Murphy
Filed under: Active Decency | Tags: Auschwitz, Dina Babbitt, Gypsy Portraits, Human Rights, ICOM, U.N.
Date: 21 June 2009 (10:20 pm 21/6/09-Canada)
To: Chair, ICOM Ethics Committee (Bernice Murphy)
From: Mr Tim Thibeault (Canada)
Re: Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum Vs claim of Mrs Dinah Gottliebová–Babbitt
Dear Ms Murphy,
It has now been eleven weeks since your most recent, and much appreciated, actions (of March 27, 2009) aimed at resolving the question of the Auschwitz Museum’s violation of Dina Gottliebova-Babbitt’s Human Rights as defined by the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 17.2.
During that time, Mrs Babbitt’s health has not improved. She is currently being treated with morphine in response to her declining health. As one of her supporters has presciently observed in a recent web forum, “Dina is on a timer. They [i.e. the officials involved] are not.”
I would like to ask most respectfully in light of these facts, what, if anything, ICOM’s involvement has accomplished during that same time. May those who support Mrs Babitt’s Human Rights expect any further action or official statement from ICOM?
It would be sincerely appreciated if we could have an official statement of ICOM’s stance in this matter while Mrs Babbitt, who has been waiting patiently for thirty-six years for some sign of respect for her human rights, is still living.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Tim Thibeault
cc: programmes3.icom@unesco.org
cc: secretariat@icom.museum
cc: karinbabbitt@[redacted].com
cc: www.FreeDinasArt.wordpress.com
Filed under: Active Decency | Tags: Activism, art, Auschwitz, decency, Dina Babbitt, Ed Cherniga, ethics, Gypsy Portraits
While the good people at ICOM are once again investigating the moral and ethical aspects of who should be in possession of the 7 Gypsy Portraits created by Dina Babbitt at the Auschwitz-Birkenau Death Camp, we are all awaiting their findings.
While we wait, we could just twiddle our thumbs and let someone else make decisions concerning Dina Babbitt, her humanity, and her rights as a human being. And some people will do just that. But not all.
Ed Cherniga, another of the hundreds who stand beside Dina Babbitt, has started a new blog and a new enterprise to restore Dina’s Property and Human Rights as defined by article 17.2 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (”No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.”)
Ed’s brilliant undertaking will put some contemporary artists’ art to work on one common goal - to free Dina’s art.
The site is here:
http://ArtForDina.wordpress.com
Please visit this site, spread the word, share the ideas with your friends, and make some art that expresses YOUR point of view. Dina painted her original art to defend and protect her mother’s life.
Your original art will help restore Dina Babbitt’s Human Rights while defending and protecting your own.
Filed under: Active Decency | Tags: Active Decency, art, Auschwitz, Dina Babbitt, ethics, Gypsy Portraits, holocaust, Human Dignity, Human Rights, ICOM, Poland, President Lech Kaczynski, restitution
The fifth of May 2009 marked another anniversary for Dina Babbitt. It has now been 64 years since her physical freedom from the grip of the Third Reich was achieved. It remains an ongoing tragedy that her emotional imprisonment has not yet ended despite the relative ease with which this could be accomplished.
That of course, would be recognition of, and respect for her Human Rights demonstrated by the immediate return of her property from the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum.
Her property, as a growing number of people already knows, consists of 7 watercolour portraits of Gypsy prisoners in the Auschwitz-Birkenau Death Camp in Poland. It is worth noting here, that although Polish President Lech Kaczynski protests loudly when an American broadcaster refers to Auschwitz as a ‘Polish’ camp, insisting vociferously that it was a ‘German’ camp, he has no problem at all with the Polish Government’s continuation of the Nazi Party’s weakness for failing to recognize Human Rights when it benefits him. We must never confuse the Polish political system with Nazism even when they shamelessly use Nazi logic to forward their own goals. This state-sanctioned hypocrisy says a great deal more about 21st Century Poland than does a minor slip of the pen elsewhere in the world.
* * * * * * * * *
Dina’s daughter Karin Babbitt, has posted an update on her Mom to members of the Facebook group Return Dina Babbitt’s Paintings. (This is an open group, which means that anyone on Facebook can join.) Part of that message is quoted here:
“Yesterday was the 64th anniversary of her liberation from Auschwitz. She asked for Chinese food. She ate a few mouthfuls of soup and a few bites of other things. It was the only food she has been able to eat all day.
In my classrooms, we tell her story and eat black bread and margarine to represent her first meal after the camps were abandoned.
On 5/5/45, they cautiously emerged from a bunker to find the camp deserted. While others ate, Dina climbed through a hole in the fence, found a blue bicycle and went for her first ride in years. She was 21.
Shortly after, an Italian immigrant rode up on a white farm horse and gave her a ride. She was so weak that she slipped to the underside of the belly. In true form, though, she didn’t let go.
Dina made her way back through the hole in the fence and found her mom, who was eating bread and margarine, getting sick from the shock of food, and trying to eat all over again. My grandmother screamed because she thought my mother had been shot. Dina had scratched her head on the cut wires of the fence and hadn’t realized it!
Today — take a bike ride, hop on a horse, savor some delicious bread. Paint a painting of someone you love and hang it wherever you chose. Enjoy your freedom.
We love you and are so grateful for your continued efforts on behalf of one little lady and artists everywhere!
– Karin Babbitt “
I’m sure Dina Babbitt has the very best wishes of the hundreds who stand beside her, as we continue to agitate for the return of her Rights, her Dignity, and her property.
If you would care to speak out on this important issue, there is an online petition in the link at the upper left.
Filed under: Active Decency | Tags: Active Decency, art, Auschwitz and Ethics, Dina Babbitt, Gypsy Portraits, holocaust, Human Rights, ICOM, Yom Ha Shoah
A day set aside to remember the Holocaust? I think this would be an even more special day if it were possible for one survivor to forget the Holocaust.
Unfortunately, as long has her Human Rights are denied by the arbitrary decisions of the government of Poland and the administrators of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Concentration Camp, Dina Babbitt will live with the knowledge that the Holocaust is proceeding successfully and uninterrupted, in spite of the UN’s stated intention to protect her Human Rights.
I would like to remind Dr Piotr M. A. Cywinski of Auschwitz, and President Lech Kaczynski of Poland that their determined refusal to end the tragic practice of Human Rights Denial, contributes to the ongoing success of Hitler’s Final Solution.
They must be very proud of their efforts on this special day. He may have been slowed to a crawl, but with his practices continued and protected by these two men and their followers, Hitler has not been stopped.
These hard-working gentlemen can be reached at the following addresses:
ICOM can be made aware of your concern at this address:
Filed under: Active Decency | Tags: Active Decency, Auschwitz, holocaust, Human Rights, ICOM, Mengele, Morality, Museums, Petition, U.N.
Very shortly after my latest note to ICOM (April 11/09), I have received a frank and transparent reply that relieves many doubts for me.
I was (understandably, I hope) beginning to wonder if I wasn’t just being loaded onto another P-R merry-go-round and invited to listen to the nice music while spinning in circles and going nowhere. Such a doubtful outlook is the predictable result of having endured more than one complimentary corporate carousel ride in the past.
It is important to realize that each of us can make a difference in getting Dina Babbitt’s possessions returned to her, and in having her Human Rights respected once and for all, after 36 years. It is equally important to remember that as pretty as circles may be, circles aren’t progress.
At this point, it appears that the most constructive thing I can do, is to continue making the facts of this matter known as widely as possible across thinking human society. I am counting on the humanity of ordinary people to trump the arbitrary decisions of the highly respected doctors of this world.
I have trouble trusting those who would save us from their own definitions of our human frailty, (from Josef Mengele right up to the present day), by taking charge of our Human Rights for us, by keeping our Human Rights safely out of our hands, and perhaps displaying them in a museum somewhere to demonstrate how evil the denial of Human Rights actually is.
In that cynical mindset, I fear that Dina Babbitt could end up having not merely “fallen through the cracks ” in someone’s arbitrary logic, but having been willfully stuffed through those cracks. And that would be bad.
With this jaundiced view of the whole procedure, I was inspired to ask for further assurance in hopes of learning that ICOM was doing something active and specific.
The following reply was quickly dispatched. I am reproducing it in full to avoid misinterpretation. It satisfies me on every level and leaves me leery on only one, perhaps unavoidable, point – the question of time.
More on that later. What follows, is the most recent letter I have received from the lady who works for ICOM. I emphasize that this lady works for ICOM because this letter (and presumably our previous correspondence) is not an official statement of anything from the International Council of Museums.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: 14 April 2009 (23:00 pm 14/4/09-Aust)
To: Mr Tim Thibeault (Canada)
From: Chair, ICOM Ethics Committee (Bernice Murphy)
Re: Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum Vs claim of Mrs Dinah Gottliebová–Babbitt
Dear Mr Thibeault,
I write to acknowledge your email message received last Saturday (11 April 2009).
The situation at this moment remains as I reported in my last response (of 1 April):
I have raised queries as to whether there is any new action or further significant information to be added to our knowledge of this case. I will report back to my colleagues on the Ethics Committee when I gain a response, so that they may be informed as to whether they believe there is cause for any further consideration or action on ICOM’s behalf.
On 27 March I took two actions:
(a) I wrote (anew) to a respected museum colleague within our ICOM networks in Europe, who previously gathered reports for the Ethics Committee on this case, and coordinated a careful sifting of many details gained from various sources as to what seemed to be the most significant factual issues concerning this saddening dispute arising from such tragic circumstances of history.
(b) I informed my colleagues on ICOM’s Ethics Committee that I was again raising an inquiry about this case – as to whether any circumstances had changed since my earlier inquiries of 2007.
I now await news from museum colleagues in Europe (which could take some weeks to receive). I will then report back to the Ethics Committee as to what emerges, and seek their views at that point.
Only after that time would I be in a position to provide some further comment from the Ethics Committee on behalf of ICOM.
Sincerely,
Bernice Murphy
cc. Secretariat of ICOM
_______________________________________________________________________________
This letter suggests action and specificity enough to encourage me to wait a few weeks more.
The scariest part of this letter though, is the phrase “…which could take some weeks.” I worry a bit about the time factor here and would have been more reassured by a specific time frame. However, past experience with the ICOM Ethics Committee reassures me that the time requirement here is valid. When I first contacted them, it took less than a day for this site’s statistics to show hits from around the globe, one for each country represented on the Ethics Committee.
I further believe that ICOM is not about to rush into anything based on my opinion. (We are best educated when we educate ourselves.) In that sense, I am gratified that the committee is indeed educating itself and will, I trust, look at this issue from a Human Rights standpoint as well.
Finally, I would like to stress that nothing in the ICOM correspondence I have reproduced here, should be construed to be an official statement from ICOM itself. I have some doubts about the fairness of publishing these letters and do so only so that interested readers will not be subjected to my personal bias in interpreting them. When the ICOM Ethics Committee has gathered, and looked at, the facts, I’m sure they will do what is right.
Until then, this whole line of correspondence has been for me, just one disgruntled villager asking someone who works in the castle, at which castle door the assembled mob should gather with it’s torches and pitchforks.
For a while at least, I can be patient.
Filed under: Active Decency | Tags: art, Auschwitz, decency, Dina Babbitt, Gypsy Portraits, Human Rights, ICOM, Morality, Museums, U.N.
The International Council of Museums’ Ethics Committee has now had a chance to respond to my most recent letter. Their reply was thorough and frankly, unparaphraseable without great danger of misinterpretation.
I don’t know if it is proper of me to share it with the world but it is certainly preferable that I show it to you, than that I merely translate it for you, according to my reading of it. We are always best served when we educate ourselves.
So, here is what I got from ICOM, followed by my response. The letter that catalyzed this exchange appears two posts below this.
From ICOM:
Date: 1 April 2009 (01:15 am 2/4/09-Aust)
To: Mr Tim Thibeault (Canada)
From: Chair, ICOM Ethics Committee (Bernice Murphy)
Re: *Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum Vs claim of Mrs Dinah Gottliebová–Babbitt*
Dear Mr Thibeault,
I am writing in response to your email message of 25 March (last week).
I provide you (below) with a short report as to what efforts have been made to assist the Ethics Committee of ICOM to gain information about this case.
First, I should stress that ICOM (the International Council of Museums) has been without question supportive of the principle of proactive investigation and return of works held in museums that can be linked to holocaust-related events of persecution and dispossession of rightful owners of their property. Indeed some members of ICOM have been leaders within the profession (for decades) in raising awareness of holocaust-related holdings in many museum collections, and of the moral and ethical obligation of museums to divest themselves of such works when wrongfully acquired, and to take all steps possible to trace owners or their descendants and to achieve effective return of such items.
Turning now to the case you have raised: I can report that the ICOM Ethics Committee has been aware of this case for quite some time. As a result of rising media coverage, I began to take some initiatives in 2007 (as Ethics Committee Chair) to make inquiries among our own museum networks internationally into the background of this dispute involving an important museum in Europe. My concern was that my colleagues on the Ethics Committee should be briefed as to the issues that seemed to be involved in this case, and what actions might have been taken (by various parties) to respond to the claims of Mrs Dinah Gottliebová–Babbitt for return of artworks made by her many decades ago in lamentable circumstances of internment – works today in the possession of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum in Poland.
Our inquiries, and the very carefully composed information we were able to receive, suggested that this case is very complex. It transpires that there are more issues, perspectives and rights involved in this very sensitive dispute (including the rights of the Roma people who are depicted in the portrait-sketches claimed for return by Mrs Gottliebová–Babbitt) than are apparent, perhaps, at first encounter.
Our highest responsibility, as the ICOM Ethics Committee upholding the principles of the _ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums_ – and therefore acting to ensure best-possible understanding and observance of the ethical standards and codes of conduct governing our profession internationally – is as follows: We seek to be aware and assured that our colleagues in museums are making all reasonable efforts to explore and act in accordance with our mutually binding standards as a profession, especially when any matter of doubt or dispute, with strong ethical implications, arises in the conduct of museums’ work.
There is no doubt that the claims of Mrs Dinah Gottliebová–Babbitt for return of artworks of which she is the author _do_ indeed have strong ethical implications. These issues call upon museums to exert intense moral effort to understand what has occurred historically behind such a dispute, and to do everything possible to resolve how best to act today according to clearly enunciated principles that guide our profession. In this case, such principles touch profoundly on questions of historical understanding and justice in the present world.
The Ethics Committee’s inquiries two years ago eventually yielded a detailed and comprehensive account of the efforts that had conscientiously been made to recognise Mrs Gottliebová–Babbitt as the author of the artworks held in the Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum (indeed the museum had sought her out to establish this authorship correctly), and to act thoughtfully and respectfully towards her history in relation to how those works came to be made, and how they should be interpreted today to assist in conveying to later generations the tragic historical events that constituted the holocaust in the twentieth century.
The Ethics Committee of ICOM had meanwhile not been approached directly by any party involved in this dispute. In view of the greater understanding provided by expert colleagues (beyond our Committee members) who had investigated the background to the case, and the many conscientious actions taken by museum colleagues in seeking to resolve complex ethical issues justly, it did not seem that there were grounds for ICOM to intervene.
I can report finally that, following your approach recently, I have again drawn the ICOM Ethics Committee’s attention to this case, and sought consultation with colleagues among our wider networks internationally, who previously gained expert information for us and assisted our understanding. I have raised queries as to whether there is any new action or further significant information to be added to our knowledge of this case. I will report back to my colleagues on the Ethics Committee when I gain a response, so that they may be informed as to whether they believe there is cause for any further consideration or action on ICOM’s behalf.
I trust that this report assists you to understand the actions taken by the ICOM Ethics Committee with respect to this case, to ensure that we understand as fully as possible all aspects of the issues you have raised on behalf of Mrs Dinah Gottliebová–Babbitt.
Sincerely,
Bernice Murphy
cc. Members of ICOM Ethics Committee; Secretariat of ICOM
That was the official response from the ICOM Ethics Committee. Here is my reply:
Date: 11 April 2009 (12:09 am/Canada)
From: Tim Thibeault
To: Chair, ICOM Ethics Committee (Bernice Murphy)
Re: *Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum and the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights*
Dear Ms Murphy,
I am writing to thank you for your prompt and thorough response to my request for an update on ICOM’s awareness of the matter of Dina Gottliebova’s Gypsy portraits currently being held by the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum in violation of Mrs Babbitt’s human rights as defined by article 17.2 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
May I ask a question to clarify an issue of some importance to the hundreds of people anxious to see Mrs Babbitt’s human rights respected? I am impelled to ask by your phrase, “…our mutually binding standards as a profession…”.
It is this:
It has been 36 years since the portraits were first identified as Dina Babbitt’s work.
Does the ICOM Ethics Committee believe that article 17.2 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights /*is*/ being respected by the administrators of the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum in their withholding of Mrs Babbitt’s work?
If so, no further action is required.
Again Ms Murphy, I commiserate with any discomfort arising from my questioning of this issue, however it is Mrs Babbitt who is most discomforted of all, and I would like to bring an end to her anguish in an honourable and respectful way. I believe that ICOM can be of some assistance in this effort, if the committee members can demonstrate unobfuscatory clarity of vision and honest political will.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Tim Thibeault
cc: FreeDinasArt.wordpress.com
Filed under: Active Decency | Tags: Active Decency, art, Auschwitz, Dina Babbitt, Gypsy Portraits, holocaust, Human Rights, Museums, Petition, wordpress
Dina’s friend Ed Cherniga has started an online petition to inspire the return of Dina’s art and restore her Human Rights. While things may seem to be moving slowly, they are moving and every signature applied to this effort will bring the Gypsy Portraits one inch closer to where they truly belong.
The petition is here:
Free Dina’s Art Petition
Please sign it and tell your friends about it too.
Ed Cherniga’s blog is also on WordPress, right here.
Filed under: Active Decency | Tags: Auschwitz, decency, Dina Babbitt, ethics, Gypsy Portraits, Human Rights, ICOM, Mengele, Morality, Nazi, Poland, Roma Portraits, U.N.
It has been a month now, since I received an acknowledgment from the Chairperson of the ICOM Ethics Committee, Bernice Murphy of Australia, concerning the Auschwitz Museum and Dina Babbitt’s Gypsy portraits.
The Auschwitz Museum has been designated a World Heritage Site. But does it deserve that status while it is in violation of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
Is it possible for a site to have its World Heritage Status revoked? Yes, it is.
This has already been done in Oman when the government unilaterally decided to reduce the area set aside for wild goats to breed. UNESCO clearly respects an endangered species’ right to a robust sex life. I believe that Human Rights are of a degree of importance right up there with the love life of endangered goats. Frankly, I think human rights are even more important than wild goats’ rights.
I have brought this matter to the attention of the ICOM Ethics Committee once again, with the following letter:
Date: 25 March 2009 (11:43 pm/Canada)
From: Tim Thibeault
To: Chair, ICOM Ethics Committee (Bernice Murphy)
Re: Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Dear Ms Murphy,
I am writing to request any update you might be able to provide concerning the Auschwitz Museum’s refusal to comply with the articles of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights as they apply to the artworks of Auschwitz prisoner #61016, Dina Gottliebova-Babbitt, and the ICOM Ethics Committee’s opinions of, and possible responses to, that institutionalized intransigence.
While I am a little dismayed at having to press this issue so unrelentingly, I would offer Mrs Babbitt’s declining health and her ongoing battle with cancer as reasons to suggest that timeliness is of the utmost importance in dealing with this matter.
I think a reasonable person might agree that the return of these artworks to Mrs Babbitt’s heirs, or to her grave site, would constitute one last and mighty victory for Dr Josef Mengele and his administrative successors at the Auschwitz Concentration Camp over Mrs Babbitt herself and her simple request that someone show some modicum of respect for her Human Rights while she is still alive.
In such an event, Mrs Babbitt would have lived and died a powerless victim of Auschwitz’s Nazi Heritage and of all those who refused to act or speak out against its arbitrarily defined mandate. I believe this would constitute a pitiable miscarriage of justice, a sickening corruption of morality, and would fly in the face of any ethical goals proclaimed by ICOM and by UNESCO.
I further believe that it is now time to reconsider Auschwitz-Birkenau’s claim to World Heritage Site Status, at least until that Museum and the Government of Poland respect the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
If UNESCO was willing to revoke the WHS Status of Oman’s Arabian Oryx Sanctuary (June 2008), it seems not at all improper to suggest that similar consequences might accrue to an organization in continuing hypocritical defiance of Human Rights.
Is there anyone at ICOM who would argue that the breeding rights of an endangered desert goat should be offered a greater and more forceful defense than the rights and dignity of an endangered human being who has suffered, for more than 35 years, the spiritually debilitating effects of self-serving institutional cruelty and societal disinterest? I truly hope not.
Sincerely yours,
Tim Thibeault
