国产丝袜在线精品丝袜|在线A毛片免费视频观|日韩精品久久久一区二区|亚洲成在人网站天堂直播|99在线精品66视频无码|亚洲欧美不卡视频在线播放|国产精品久久久久久免费一级|久久精品国产亚洲AV香蕉软件

        1. <i id="avp7g"><ins id="avp7g"></ins></i>
          <td id="avp7g"><tr id="avp7g"></tr></td>
        2. <small id="avp7g"><dl id="avp7g"><small id="avp7g"></small></dl></small>
        3. <track id="avp7g"><dl id="avp7g"><delect id="avp7g"></delect></dl></track>

          <source id="avp7g"><ins id="avp7g"></ins></source>
        4. <p id="avp7g"><pre id="avp7g"></pre></p>
          <td id="avp7g"><tr id="avp7g"></tr></td>
        5. Dutch court rejects Chinese mummy Buddha repatriation case

          Source: Xinhua| 2018-12-13 15:23:48|Editor: xuxin
          Video PlayerClose

          AMSTERDAM, The Netherlands, Dec. 12 (Xinhua) -- An Amsterdam court ruled on Wednesday that the mummy Buddha repatriation case filed by two Chinese villages against a Dutch collector is "inadmissible."

          According to the court, it is unclear whether the Chinese village committees have the right to bring legal claims, while the villagers argued that a village committee in China is a "special legal person" under the Chinese civil law.

          According to the court, the Chinese law that was invoked by the Chinese villagers had not come into force until Oct. 1, 2017, but "the summons has been issued before that date."

          "Legal opinions submitted to the court are not unequivocal," said the court. "For instance whether the village committees are actively functioning, and established according to the rules, and since when."

          "Basically, the claim is rejected as it is according to the court not proven that the committees have the right to bring the claim according to Chinese law," said Jan Holthuis, a Dutch lawyer representing the villagers.

          "I find this decision hard to digest," said Holthuis. "Because the village committees did bring a claim before the Chinese courts before October 1, 2017, which proves they have legal standing."

          "Very disappointing. The court also did not ask anything in this respect during the last hearing," he added. "So we will advise the villagers to appeal this judgement."

          Yushen Liu, a Beijing-based lawyer who assists in this case, told Xinhua that a village committee is fully entitled to bring legal claims in China.

          "We submitted opinions from legal experts especially addressing the legal status of village committees to explain the situation in detail," he said. "It might be difficult for judges in other countries to have a clear understanding of this. This problem can and must be solved through appeal."

          In May 2016, two villages in China's southeastern province of Fujian filed this repatriation case of religious, cultural and ethical significance against Amsterdam inhabitant Oscar van Overeem,

          They believe that the statue Van Overeem lent for an exhibition in March 2015 was the one that their villages had worshipped for over 1,000 years before it was stolen from the village temple in December 1995.

          Van Overeem agrees that the statue comes from the province of Fujian, but insists that it is not the "Zhanggong Monk Master" as claimed by the villagers. He said that he had exchanged the statue for another artwork with a third party who prefers to remain anonymous. Two public hearings were held in July 2017 and last October.

          TOP STORIES
          EDITOR’S CHOICE
          MOST VIEWED
          EXPLORE XINHUANET
          010020070750000000000000011100001376715221
          金堂县| 临洮县| 丹巴县| 西宁市| 华阴市| 确山县| 岢岚县| 米脂县| 林西县| 自治县| 安西县| 武宁县| 馆陶县| 乐昌市| 皮山县| 客服| 罗定市| 抚顺市| 荆门市| 贵德县| 灵寿县| 农安县| 潢川县| 叙永县| 柏乡县| 旬邑县| 定远县| 同仁县| 阿勒泰市| 宿松县| 合作市| 恩平市| 安多县| 静乐县| 宁蒗| 镇巴县| 石阡县| 西城区| 哈密市| 大埔县| 天峨县|