The Sasson Collection, which preserves the history of the famous Sasson family with its roots in Baghdad, will remain in the possession of the state and will not be in the hands of the family's descendants - this is what the Supreme Court ruled this week (Monday) on its Saturday as the High Court of Justice. "In the competition between ordinary property laws and cultural property laws, the hand of The last one is on top," stated Judge Yitzhak Amit. This is
a discussion of a petition submitted to the High Court by two descendants of the famous Sassoon family, which originated in Iraq.
Over the years, the branches of the family spread across the globe and it became a thriving business empire throughout the British Empire.
The family members documented their origins and plots and over the years kept diaries, books, certificates, manuscripts, newspapers, various objects and more.
The Sasson collection is of great archival importance;
It sheds light on Jewish life throughout Asia and the Far East beginning in the 18th century.
This is a collection in which the family and the personal were mixed with the national, the religious and the cultural, and it is of research and national-historical importance.
David Sassoon, one of the first of the Shasho dynasty (photo: official website, according to Section 27 A of the Copyright Law)
19 years ago the members of the Sassoon family transferred the collection to the National and University Library of the Hebrew University, so that it would take care of maintaining the integrity of the collection and so that it would take care of sorting and cataloging the collection.
Among the clauses of the agreement it is written that "the collectors of the collection will retain the right to sue the collection if the collection violates one or more of the terms of the agreement".
Four years ago, two descendants of the Sassoon family made a claim that the National Schools and the University violated their obligations and, among other things, the collection suffered from neglect and neglect and "raised dust" in a remote warehouse;
There was no proper sorting and cataloging of the various items in the collection;
Materials from the collection were transferred for publication purposes to third parties without any permission from the petitioners;
The items were stamped with the National Library's stamp and were transferred to the National Library.
Albert Sassoon, also one of the first of the dynasty (photo: official website, according to Article 27 A of the Copyright Law)
The National Library claimed in court that "this is not a case of 'nationalization' of private property and that the collection came into the hands of the National Library following an informed and conscious decision by the petitioners to remove it from their possession and deposit it in an 'institution that will take care of maintaining the integrity of the collection and the integrity and integrity of the documents.'"
The representatives of the library stated that the case is no different from thousands of archives, whether in the National Library or in other recognized archives.
The National Library expressed concern that "acceptance of the petition could result in fatal damage to the public archives, as any depositor or his heirs would be entitled to demand the return of the materials entrusted to him, which could lead to the collapse of the protection of archival materials."
In his decision to reject the petition, Judge Yitzhak Amit stated that there is indeed a provision in the agreement depositing the collection that recognizes the possibility of the petitioners to claim the return of the collection.
However, regarding the claim of the petitioners that the collection was transferred to the National Library, it was stated that this step was taken by virtue of the National Library Law, which by virtue of this law, it entered into the shoes of the National Libraries.
Judge Amit also stated that the agreement according to which the collection was transferred is an agreement of voluntary delivery of the collection, in what was envisioned as "permanent borrowing".
Judges Anat Baron and Ruth Ronen joined Amit's ruling.
Attorney Meir Heller who represented the National Library said that "the ruling is a significant milestone in the field of cultural property and in establishing this branch of Israeli law.
The court recognized the importance of the public interest in cultural assets and the importance of protecting this interest."
news
News in Israel
Events in Israel
Tags
The National Library
High Court