[Explanation] There is new news about the case of the much-watched Fujian "Zhanggong Patriarch" who is sitting on the Buddha statue in the flesh.
On the morning of July 19, the Higher People's Court of Fujian Province ruled against appellant Oscar Van Overeem and appellee Yangchun Village Committee of Wushan Township, Datian County, Fujian Province, and Dongpu, Wushan Township, Datian County. The village committee, the defendants in the original trial, Design & Consultancy BV (transliteration: Design & Consultancy Pte. Ltd.), Design & Consultancy Oscarvan Overeem BV (transliteration: Design & Consultancy Oscar van Overeem Pte. A public judgment was made, and the judgment upheld the judgment of the first instance of the Sanming Intermediate People's Court that Oscar should return the Buddha statue of Zhanggong Patriarch.
[Concurrent] Lin Kai'an, a villager in Yangchun Village, Wushan Township, Datian County
After several years of court trials, our lawyers and our villagers have worked hard over the past few years, and today we finally got a result. Thank you very much. I went back and explained to our villagers. After years of hard work, now we have a summary That is, Patriarch Zhang Gong can return to our Puzhao Church as soon as possible.
[Explanation] After trial, the court of second instance found out that the "Seated Buddha Statue of Patriarch Zhanggong" in which the eminent monk Zhanggong of the Song Dynasty was sitting was originally enshrined in Puzhaotang, Yangchun Village, Wushan Township, Datian County, Sanming City, Fujian Province.
On December 14, 1995, the Buddha statue was stolen.
Oscar claimed that he bought the Buddha statue involved in the case in Amsterdam, the Netherlands in 1996, but did not provide the corresponding transaction certificate of the source of the Buddha statue.
In March 2015, the Buddha statue was put on public display at the Hungarian Museum of Natural Sciences with permission from Oscar nearly 20 years after it was stolen.
[Explanation] The court of second instance held that the Zhanggong Patriarch statue in dispute was a stolen cultural relic that was illegally exported. It has multiple attributes such as human remains, historical relics, and worship objects. It reflects the traditional customs and historical imprints in southern Fujian, and is a long-term The token of worship and worship has a special relationship with the local villagers, and it should be returned according to law, reason and emotion, so the above judgment is made.
[Explanation] Ding Zhaozeng, associate professor and master tutor at Fujian Normal University Law School, said in a telephone interview with reporters that this case is a benchmark and will provide a lot of reference for the subsequent pursuit of overseas cultural relics.
[Concurrent] Ding Zhaozeng, associate professor and master tutor of Fujian Normal University Law School
This case is of great significance. This case is the first benchmark case in our country to use judicial litigation to recover overseas cultural relics. Previously, we recovered lost cultural relics overseas, usually through diplomatic channels, or through private or negotiation methods. However, this case is pursued in the form of formal judicial proceedings. It should be said that it will provide a lot of reference for us to pursue overseas cultural relics in the future. In this case, the judicial judgment has confirmed the ownership of our folk cultural relics. A very authoritative and statutory judicial judgment is used to confirm rights, which reflects the background and significance of our country's rule of law and a legal society.
[Explanation] Zhanggong Patriarch, commonly known as Zhang Qisan, with the Dharma name Puzhao, was cast into a golden Buddha statue after his death and enshrined in the Puzhao Hall jointly owned by Yangchun Village and Dongpu Village, Wushan Township, Datian County.
Because of his real body, limbs and head, he is also known as "Zhanggong Liuquan Patriarch".
[Concurrent] Ding Zhaozeng, associate professor and master tutor of Fujian Normal University Law School
The main problem in this case now is that China and the Netherlands have not signed a mutual assistance treaty for judicial assistance, and that international organizations jointly participate in judicial assistance. Indeed, a problem that is now brought to us is the problem of enforcement. At present, it seems that the final judgment may only take effect. After that, through diplomatic means, or through the deterrent force of our effective judgment, it will have a certain influence on the Dutch collector, so that he can voluntarily fulfill it.
Reported by reporter Wu Shengwei, Fujian Sanming
Responsible editor: [Sun Jingbo]