According to multiple news reports and his attorneys, Cornelius Gurlitt has filed a complaint for the return of the paintings seized in 2012 by the Augsburg prosecutor. Copies are not yet available, but the Gurlitt PR website www.Gurlitt.info" has a release that states as follows (thus far only in German). Stay tuned for developments if and when the document becomes available.
Professor Dr. Tido Park and Derek Setz, defense lawyers for Cornelius Gurlitt, filed a complaint on February 14, 2014 with the municipal court in Augsburg, pursuant to Paragraph 304 of the Strafprozessordnung (StPO) against the serach and seizure order of the court of September 23, 2011.
The complaint is intended to repeal the order on whose authority the seizure took place.
"Mr. Gurlitt and his defense are well aware of the moral dimensions of this case. However, criminal process is not the right place for moral categories," said Tido Park. His colleague Derek Setz continued: “in light of the immense public interest, we have a concern for the rule of law of this process."
The seizure order was grounded on suspicion of import sales tax ,which is not proper in the view of the defense.
The fully reasoned, 45-page complaint relies, inter alia, on the formal deficiencies of the court order and the lack of basis for suspicion. It is also a concern that the evidentiary relevance of the confiscated works is not apparent to the charge of import tax evasion, and the seizure of the entire collection violates the principle of proportionality. This is particularly serious, in the defense's view.
Cornelius Gurlitt is still open to dialogue, and aware of his moral responsibility.
Although Cornelius Gurlitt was not involved himself in any questionable acquisitions, he feels a strong moral responsibility. He therefore seeks solutions with private claimants for works of art whose ownership is potentially problematic, voluntarily and of his own responsibility.
"Nevertheless, the the judicial determination of the legality of the seizure of the Schwabing part of his collection for Cornelius Gurlitt is of particular importance because criminal law and morality must be strictly separated, and a criminal process must also not be misused to clarify restitution claims," Tido Park explained.
