What are Some of the Main Challenges When Seeking Restitution of Nazi-Confiscated Artworks?

The framework applicable to restitution claims for Nazi-looted artworks is not a straightforward one.Some of its complexities include (i) the scale and context of the looting that occurred in the relevant period; (ii) the passage of time that has passed since then; (iii) the cross-jurisdictional nature of the problem; (iv) the limits and limitations of applicable legal solutions; (v) the relative vagueness of the "moral claims" framework that has developed to deal with claims to Nazi-looted art; and (vi) the fact that (regardless of all general observations), hardly any two cases are the same.A case-by-case analysis is generally required for each claim to objects looted, stolen, sold under duress or dispossessed in consequence of persecution by the Nazis.The Washington Principles of 1998, endorsed by over forty nation-states globally, require that claimant and current holder/collector find "just and fair solutions" 1 to resolve any issues in relation to a red-flag artwork that was "confiscated" by the Nazis in the context of persecution.To do so, it is necessary first to have regard to legal and moral arguments within the framework that has developed over the past 25 years.This is not an easy task, because many cases tend to settle confidentially, rather than before a court of law or a national 'ad-hoc' panel 2 (another element of the Washington Principles).Ironically, on the face of it, the starting position for analysing a claim to a Naziconfiscated object appears to be a lot less complex than that for other categories of