You're reading: Court in Hague denies Ukraine to change judge in ‘Scythian gold’ case

The Court of Appeal in The Hague has refused to recuse the judge in the ‘Scythian gold’ case.

According to the court’s website, there is no reason to change the judge.

“Based on the submitted documents and the consideration of the case at the hearing, the court considers that there were no circumstances that would convincingly testify to the presence of bias,” the court decision said.

As reported, in September 2019, Ukraine’s Justice Ministry said that in connection with a number of circumstances, the judge of the Amsterdam Court of Appeal considering the case may be biased. The judge for several years represented the interests of the Russian company Promneftstroy in the case against OAO NK Yukos, defending the interests of Russia in resolving the case in favor of Promneftstroy. In addition, the Justice Ministry said “[the judge] carried out in close collaboration with lawyers who represent the interests of Crimean museums.”

The case involves artifacts from the exhibit ‘Crimea – the Golden Island in the Black Sea’ from the collections of four Crimean museums in Amsterdam’s Allard Pierson Museum. Since the Netherlands did not recognize the Russian annexation of Crimea, which occurred after the opening of the exhibition, the question arose of who should return the collection – 565 museum items with a total insurance value of 10 million euros.

After the occupation, Russia declared its rights to the part of the collection belonging to the Crimean museums. Ukraine, in turn, stated that “the exhibits cannot be returned to the occupied territory, which is temporarily not under Ukrainian control, they must be transferred directly to the state of Ukraine.”

In December 2016, the Amsterdam District Administrative Court recognized the rights of Ukraine to the collection and decided to transfer it to Kyiv. In March 2019, a new round of the case began – in the Court of Appeal of Amsterdam.

On July 16, the Court of Appeals issued a preliminary decision and requested additional information on the dispute from Ukraine and the museums of Crimea.