The applications for restitution were submitted following the findings of research by the Origins Unknown Agency (hereafter referred to as: ‘the BHG’), which concluded that, during the Second World War, NK 1042 was confiscated from either Samuel van den Bergh or Daniel Wolf.
Applicants I submitted their application for the restitution of NK 1042 to the Minister on 14 November 2007 as part of an application for the restitution of three works of art from the Dutch National Art Collection. The Committee issued its recommendation regarding the other two works involved in this claim, namely NK 2227 and NK 3071 (see recommendation regarding Wolf, RC 1.101), on 9 November 2009. Applicants II submitted their application for the restitution of NK 1042 to the Minister on 7 December 2007. The Minister submitted both applications to the Committee on 29 October 2008, and active handling of the case started in September 2009.
Given the connection between the claims from applicants I and II regarding NK 1042, the Committee decided to combine them in file number RC 1.104.
The Committee instigated a fact-finding investigation, the results of which were included in a draft investigatory report of 14 September 2009. The draft report was sent to applicants I and II for comments on 30 September 2009, to which applicants I responded in a letter dated 29 October 2009 and applicants II in a letter dated 25 October 2009. Both parties agreed with the findings of the Committee, with the exception of several factual additions. On 1 October 2009, the Committee also sent the draft report to the Minister with a request for more factual information, who informed the Committee on 15 October that he had no additional information to provide. The investigatory report was then adopted on 29 March 2010.
On 26 January 2010, in the course of the procedure, the chairman of the Committee viewed the carpet in the depot of the Rijksmuseum in Lelystad under the supervision of the acting curator of textiles for the Rijksmuseum, Ms M. Albers. During this visit, aspects such as the condition of the carpet were recorded and photographs taken, copies of which were sent to the applicants. On 1 February 2010, a meeting took place between the representative of applicants I, applicants II and the chairman of the Committee, the aim of which was to agree on a solution regarding the carpet. Following this meeting, the applicants and the Committee agreed to combine the applications and focus on finding a museum or other potential location for the carpet in the best interests of the common good. Contact was sought with the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam about a possible joint donation to the museum by the applicants.
For the facts in this case, the Committee refers to its investigatory report.