France: The Law of 9 May 2026

Published in Art Law Magazine #22

‍

Law No. 2026-351 of 9 May 2026 on the “Restitution of Cultural Property that has been the Subject of Unlawful Appropriation”^[1] forms part of French public policy on the restitution of cultural property and marks a turning point: the restitution of goods from French public collections that were unlawfully acquired is no longer an exceptional measure but has become a structured system based on a permanent administrative procedure. This system constitutes a third category of derogation from the principle of inalienability of goods belonging to the public domain. The provisions of this law thus add to Chapter V of Title I of Book I of the French Heritage Code, entitled “Removal of Cultural Property from Public Collections”, a Section 4, “Cultural Property Subject to Illicit Appropriation (Articles L. 115-10 to L. 115-16).”^[2]

The Origins of the Law

The groundwork was laid by President Emmanuel Macron in his 2017 speech in Ouagadougou, followed by a report written by Bénédicte Savoy and Felwine Sarr, calling for a “new relational ethic.” Like the first two “framework laws” on restitution – the law of 22 July 2023^[3] on the restitution of cultural property looted in the context of antisemitic persecution carried out between 1933 and 1945, and the law of 26 December 2023^[4] on the restitution of human remains held in public collections – the present law draws on the report by Jean-Luc Martinez, an archaeologist and art historian specialising in ancient Greek sculpture and former President-Director of the Louvre from 2013 to 2021, entitled “Shared Heritage: Universality, Restitution and the Circulation of Works of Art – Towards French Legislation and Doctrine on Criteria for the Restitution of Cultural Property.” Finally, it follows the ad hoc laws that made possible, in December 2020^[5], the restitution to Benin of objects originating from the palace of King Behanzin and, in July 2025^[6], the restitution to Côte d’Ivoire of the Djidji Ayökwé Talking Drum, which had until then been kept at the Musée du Quai Branly–Jacques Chirac.

The Legislative Process

Consulted by the government regarding the derogation from the principle of inalienability^[7], the Conseil d’État, in its opinion dated 23 July 2023, considered that “the objective of enabling a people to reclaim property constituting fundamental elements of its heritage and which has been unlawfully appropriated constitutes a sufficient ground of public interest such that (…) the restitution of such property to a State requesting it does not constitute a disproportionate infringement of public property.”

There was therefore no longer any obstacle to the law being submitted to Parliament on 30 July 2025. Finally adopted unanimously on 7 May 2026, the law was promulgated on 9 May and published in the Official Journal on 10 May 2026.

The Conditions Imposed by the Law for the Removal of Cultural Property from Public Collections

The law allows the removal of cultural property that has entered public collections, provided that unlawful appropriation can be established, whether by theft, looting, a transfer or gift obtained through coercion or violence, or from a person who lacked the authority to dispose of the property.

Only cultural property that entered public collections between 20 November 1815, the date of the signing of the Second Treaty of Paris, which brought the Hundred Days to an end following the defeat at Waterloo and Napoleon’s abdication, and which led to the restitution of cultural property seized by Napoleon during his conquests^[8], and 23 April 1972, the date on which the 1970 UNESCO Convention “on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of CulturalProperty” entered into force in France, is covered. The Convention establishes a judicial remedy for the illicit appropriation of cultural property^[9].

The request must be made by a foreign State, possibly on behalf of a human group that remains present within its territory. The purpose of the restitution must be to enable its people to reclaim fundamental elements of their heritage. The legislation nevertheless specifies that, regardless of who the original owner was, the property will be restituted to the requesting State.

 Article L. 115-11 of the French Heritage Code further specifies that the cultural property in question must originate from the current territory of the State making the request. This provision may appear surprising, but it in fact highlights what is conspicuously absent from the law: colonisation is never mentioned, even though the cultural property in question undoubtedly includes objects collected in a colonial context.

The law’s lengthy development process revealed the persistence of deep tensions within French society whenever the consequences of colonisation are raised, as President Macron did in his Ouagadougou speech when explaining his intention to organise the return of cultural heritage to the African continent. The wording of the law was therefore the result of a compromise, which explains the absence of the term “colonisation.” The provisions of Article L. 115-11 can nevertheless be explained, among other things, by territorial changes and shifting borders resulting from the history of Colonisation and Independence.

Provenance Research

Restitution is also subject to proof of the illicit appropriation of the claimed property between 20 November 1815 and 23 April 1972.

The rules of evidence constitute one of the major challenges posed by restitution legislation, given the passage of time and the difficulties involved in gathering evidence across different legal traditions.

The legislation therefore provides that proof shall be established on the basis of serious, precise and consistent evidence, and entrusts the examination of restitution requests to a scientific committee established in consultation with the requesting State, so that the two States are represented in a balanced manner, thereby fostering constructive dialogue.

The investigative work required to assemble serious, precise and consistent evidence will undoubtedly require the development of provenance research, entailing substantial investment, particularly in terms of training and funding for research missions^[10].

On the basis of the report prepared by this scientific committee, and upon referral by the Ministry of Culture, a National Commission for the Restitution of Cultural Property will issue a public and reasoned opinion on the restitution request. The removal of the property from the public domain is additionally subject to a decree of the Conseil d’État.

Finally, requesting States must provide evidence of formal commitments regarding conservation, security and accessibility, a requirement that appears to echo a certain form of postcolonial paternalism.

The Scope of the Law

The derogation from the principle of the inalienability of public collections therefore appears more asa controlled easing than as a true abolition of the principle.

Nevertheless, the message conveyed by this law has clearly been heard: on 1 June 2026, the city of Bordeaux announced that it would refuse a bequest of 53 African cultural objects in order to facilitate their return to their countries of origin^[11]. Finally, it should be noted that the provisions of the law apply to restitution requests that were under examination on the date of its publication. The claims currently being pursued by Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger could therefore be the first to benefit from these new provisions.