Data publikacji: 08.02.2016
Licencja: Żadna
Redakcja
Redakcja numeru Andrzej Jakubowski, Alicja Jagielska-Burduk
Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 13-26
Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 27-62
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.012.4510Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 63-82
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.013.4511Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 83-100
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.014.4512Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 101-116
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.015.4513Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 117-146
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.016.4514Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 147-174
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.017.4515Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 175-198
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.018.4516Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 199-220
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.019.4517Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 221-244
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.020.4518Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 245-258
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.021.4519Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 259-274
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.022.4520Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 275-290
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.023.4521Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 291-302
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.024.4522Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 303-310
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.025.4523Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 311-313
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.026.4524Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 314-319
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.027.4525Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 320-322
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSR.15.028.4526Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 323-325
Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 326-327
Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2/2015 (1), 2015, s. 328-330
Słowa kluczowe: cultural heritage vandalism, terrorism, collectors, museums, cultural objects, Syria, USA, archaeological heritage, illicit traffic, looting, art trade, illicit trade, cultural heritage, terrorism, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), Switzerland, refuge (safe haven), cultural heritage, intentional destruction, humanitarian intervention, responsibility to protect, non-state actors, armed groups, cultural heritage, cultural property, armed conflict, Hague Convention, State responsibility, cultural heritage, armed conflict, reparation, restitution, compensation, State succession, human rights, international law, cultural heritage, nationalism, cultural identity, cultural genocide, Tibet, indigenous peoples, colonialism, cultural rights, Transitional Justice, cultural heritage, UNESCO, Famagusta, Cyprus, establishment of the independent and sovereign Republic of Croatia (1990-1995; the origin of Croatian politics in culture; legal sources of Croatian Law related to culture; Croatian cultural policy, the concept of art, artistic freedom, art exhibition, criminal law, borders, balancing of interests, symbol of scales, justice, Last Judgment, Netherlandish painting, international law, 1954 Hague Convention, cultural property, armed conflict, military necessity, ownership, museum, estate, inalienability, culture, public administration, crime, cultural heritage, robbery, destruction