Mystery of missing RI paintings puzzles art world

Mystery of missing RI paintings puzzles art world

By Amir Sidharta

JAKARTA (JP): The Indonesian art world was shocked by the news
of the alleged theft of six paintings from Jakarta's National
Museum. Even more shocking was the fact that at least two of the
allegedly stolen paintings, A Nude (Metamorphosis) by Basoeki
Abdullah and Portrait of a Dutch Governor Wearing the Willems
Order by Raden Saleh, may have been included in the catalog of
the upcoming Christie's auction in early October 1996.

A cartoon by GM Sudarta published in last Friday's Kompas
showed a Christie's employee auctioning the Bronze elephant which
symbolizes the National Museum, also popularly known as Gedung
Gajah or "Elephant Building". It clearly implied that the 230-
year-old auction house was in the business of auctioning off
Indonesia's national treasures.

In fact, the alleged theft would have probably not been
revealed if it were not for the publication of the auction
catalog. Members of the Basoeki Abdullah estate recognized lot
319 in the catalog, A Nude, as Metamorphosis, one of the
paintings that was in the custody of the National Museum.
Meanwhile, lot 363 bore great resemblance to a painting
reproduced in a catalog published by the Directorate of Culture
of the Ministry of Education and Culture, in preparation for the
National Art Gallery in 1988. The pictures in the catalog were
almost identical. There was a green stain on the figure's
trousers, and damage was seen in the same location on both
reproductions. The only difference was that in the later
publication (the Christie's catalog), to the right of the
figure's face, the painting had been torn and poorly restored.

Although auction houses mainly facilitate the sale of
artworks at the highest possible prices according to the market
condition in a certain region, they also become centers of
documentation. "That is why we need Christie's. It records much
of the changing of hands in the world of art," said Sudarmadji
Damais, head of the Jakarta History Museum at Taman Fatahilah
after hearing about the alleged theft last week.

"Christie's often helps locate stolen art," someone in the
field of art auctions explained. Perhaps it has in other parts of
the world. But in this case, we can only hope that the paintings
will be returned.

The reappearance of allegedly stolen Indonesian paintings in
Christie's auction of Southeast Asian paintings has happened
previously. One of Ida Bagus Made's 14 paintings, which was
stolen a while ago, and a Basoeki Abdullah's from the collection
of former president Sukarno were offered at the Christie's
auction in March 1995. However, because of insufficient evidence,
no investigation was pursued. Neither Ida Bagus Made nor Guruh
Soekarnoputra, the youngest son of the late president Sukarno,
filed police reports when the paintings were stolen or found
missing. The inclusion of the painting in the album entitled
Paintings in the Collection of President Sukarno, compiled by
Dullah, apparently was not sufficient proof of theft.
"It is Christie's policy not to reveal the identity of either the
seller or the buyer of the artworks in their auctions," explained
art writer Agus Dermawan, who is an avid observer of Indonesian
auction trends. Therefore, the alleged theft could not be traced.

Whether or not Christie's can be required by law to reveal
the identity of the seller in the case of the two paintings
allegedly stolen from Indonesia's National Museum will depend on
the laws in Singapore. Laws concerning stolen goods differ from
country to country. According to a prominent Japanese art dealer,
in Japan, when a stolen painting has been sold, it becomes the
legal right of the buyer, and the original owners have to buy the
painting back from the new owner. In other countries, legal
ownership depends on whether the purchase was made before or
after the official report of theft was reported to the police.

Time

At this point, we can only predict the time of the alleged
theft and the characteristics of the alleged thief. It might be
helpful to try to analyze the mystery. Considering that it takes
at least three months before artworks can be included of artworks
in a Christie's auction, Art observer Agus Dermawan T. estimates
that the paintings were allegedly stolen before June.

Taking into account the fact that the estimated prices of the
paintings were still quite reasonable, it seems that the
paintings were probably stolen before the sale of Raden Saleh's
Deer Hunt in late March of this year. If the alleged theft took
place after the news of this landmark sale, the alleged thieves
would certainly expect rather high prices, at least for the Raden
Saleh, and therefore would have increased the expected reserve
price in the auction.

Unfortunately, the reserves for the pieces remain
confidential. However, it seems that the price of portrait still
within reasonable limits and is therefore considered suitable for
auction.

It seems that the theft also may have occurred after the
publication of the Christie's catalog of the March auction. The
catalog revealed the high estimate of the piece to parties
interested in Indonesian art. High prices for Indonesian art may
have seduced the alleged culprits to steal the Raden Saleh which
they knew was in the neglected possession of the National Museum.
It is also possible that the pieces were stolen even earlier,
perhaps after the announcement of the auction of the Deer Hunt
late last year or earlier this year.
Profile

In terms of the profile of the alleged thief/thieves, we can
almost be sure that the seller of the paintings was not involved
in the alleged theft, unless he/she were completely naive. As
this case has proven, the inclusion of stolen items in auctions
tends to reveal cases of alleged theft.

It seems safe to say that the paintings have changed hands
at least twice before the paintings reach the seller. We can
assume that the alleged theft was masterminded by someone who had
reasonable knowledge of art, and even knew that there was a Raden
Saleh in the National Museum's collection placed in its storage
area.

If there had been any indication of forced entry into the
museum's storage space, the theft would have been revealed
immediately. It is almost certain that no sign of forced entry to
the storage facility was traced, because the theft which, based
on reliable sources, happened at least three months ago, was only
revealed two weeks ago. This suggests the involvement of
insiders.

Worth

Basoeki Abudllah's A Nude has been estimated as being worth
between S$8,000 to S$12,000. Was it worth stealing? If the piece
was expected to sell at around Rp 20 million, then, minus
commissions and other expenses, the seller would have bought it
for Rp 12 million at most. Therefore, we can assume that the
persons behind the alleged theft paid less than Rp 2.5 million
for the job.

Then we can almost be sure that the six paintings were stolen
as a lot, and later sold to the seller as a lot as well. The
Raden Saleh is estimated between S$100,000 to S$150,000. If the
painting were to be sold (which I doubt, because of its poor
condition), I think it would only reach the low end of the
estimate. At Rp 165 million, minus commissions and expenses, the
seller would have bought it for around Rp 100 million. For this
painting, the alleged culprits behind the theft may have paid Rp
20 million for the job. Coupled with the other paintings in the
lot, the value of the job may have reached Rp 30 million. This
amount would presumably be divided among two to three persons.
Although the sum, averaging Rp 10 million, might not seem large,
it is actually still quite substantial, considering the wages of
government employees in this country.

If the involvement of insiders is revealed, then punishment
is of course necessary. However, we should not treat the involved
insiders as having sold national treasures, even though they are
in the National Museum's collection. It should be taken into
account that the paintings most likely had been neglected in the
museum's storage space and treated as insignificant pieces.

Of more crucial importance is to reveal the masterminds of
this alleged theft. It should be stressed that the masterminds
have significant knowledge about art, including Indonesian art,
and the existence of important paintings in certain collections
in the government. They also seem to know that some key paintings
are kept in storage spaces of certain museums, although
cooperation with insiders may lead them to this kind of
information. Certainly, there is possibility that it is the work
of a syndicate, which may also be involved in other art crimes,
including art forgery, which is also rapidly developing in the
country.