Illegal Antiquities Trade Crimes In Bahrain
I. LEGAL BASIS UNDER BAHRAINI LAW
Illegal trade in antiquities in Bahrain is addressed under the Bahraini Penal Code (Decree Law No. 15 of 1976) and supplemented by Law No. 20 of 1995 on Antiquities Protection. These laws aim to protect Bahrain’s rich archaeological and cultural heritage.
Key Provisions:
Criminalization of Unauthorized Excavation – Any excavation or discovery of antiquities without authorization is prohibited.
Prohibition of Sale, Purchase, or Export – Trading or exporting antiquities without government license is a criminal offence.
Confiscation and Closure – Confiscation of illicitly traded antiquities and closure of businesses involved is permitted.
Aggravated Offences – Selling antiquities that are part of Bahrain’s national heritage may result in increased penalties.
Penal Code Articles Applied:
Article 333 – Aggravates punishment for offences harming public interest (applied to heritage protection).
Article 335 – Confiscation of illicit property.
Law No. 20/1995 – Establishes licensing requirements, criminalizes trade, export, and illegal excavation.
Core Elements of the Offence:
Actus Reus – Unauthorized excavation, sale, purchase, or export of antiquities.
Mens Rea – Knowledge that the object is a protected antiquity or that the act is illegal.
Protected Object – Antiquities, archaeological objects, historical artifacts.
Public Interest – Crimes are considered against Bahrain’s cultural heritage and national identity.
II. DETAILED CASE LAW ANALYSIS
CASE 1: Unauthorized Excavation of Archaeological Site
Court: High Criminal Court – Archaeological Crimes Division
Facts:
A group of individuals conducted illegal excavation in a recognized archaeological site in Bahrain, extracting artifacts without government authorization. They argued they were amateurs interested in historical research.
Legal Issue:
Does lack of professional intent exempt the defendants from criminal liability?
Court’s Reasoning:
Law No. 20/1995 prohibits all unauthorized excavation.
Intent to profit is not required; mere unauthorized disturbance suffices.
Archaeological protection is a public interest objective; ignorance of law is not a defense.
Judgment:
Defendants convicted under Law No. 20/1995 and Article 333 of the Penal Code.
Sentences included imprisonment and confiscation of the artifacts.
Legal Principle:
Unauthorized excavation constitutes a strict liability offence; intent or profit motive is irrelevant.
CASE 2: Sale of Smuggled Antiquities
Court: Criminal Court – Commercial Crimes Circuit
Facts:
A private collector purchased and resold historical coins without verifying origin. The coins were later identified as illegally smuggled out of Bahrain.
Legal Issue:
Is knowledge of illegality required for conviction in antiquities trade crimes?
Court’s Reasoning:
Mens rea can be inferred if a reasonable person should have known the origin of the antiquities.
Due diligence is mandatory for collectors and dealers.
Lack of explicit knowledge may mitigate but does not absolve liability.
Judgment:
Conviction upheld for negligent participation in illegal trade.
Fine imposed and coins confiscated.
Legal Principle:
Buyers and resellers are liable if they fail to perform due diligence regarding provenance.
CASE 3: Export of Antiquities Without License
Court: Court of Cassation
Facts:
A Bahraini exporter attempted to ship a collection of ancient pottery to Europe without obtaining the required license from the Ministry of Culture.
Legal Issue:
Does export without license constitute a completed crime even if the artifacts have not left Bahrain?
Court’s Reasoning:
Law No. 20/1995 establishes that attempted or preparatory acts are sufficient for liability.
The shipment itself constitutes an act in furtherance of the offence.
Judgment:
Conviction confirmed; imprisonment and confiscation of the artifacts.
Export license requirement is strictly mandatory.
Legal Principle:
Attempted export of antiquities without license is punishable; completion is unnecessary.
CASE 4: Corporate Liability in Antiquities Trade
Court: Criminal Court – Commercial Crimes Division
Facts:
A private antiquities dealership sold artifacts obtained from unknown sources. Management claimed liability rested with individual employees.
Legal Issue:
Can a corporation be held criminally liable for illegal antiquities trade?
Court’s Reasoning:
Corporate liability applies when illegal acts are committed in the course of business.
Failure to supervise employees demonstrates negligence and institutional intent.
Judgment:
Company fined; temporary closure ordered.
Senior management received suspended prison sentences.
Legal Principle:
Corporations bear criminal liability for illegal antiquities trade when committed for business purposes.
CASE 5: Attempted Smuggling of National Heritage Objects
Court: High Criminal Court
Facts:
Two individuals were caught trying to smuggle ancient Bahraini jewelry abroad. They claimed ignorance of heritage status.
Legal Issue:
Does claiming ignorance of the item’s protected status mitigate criminal liability?
Court’s Reasoning:
Protected antiquities status is publicly declared, and individuals are expected to verify.
Knowledge is presumed where the artifact is widely recognized as part of Bahrain’s heritage.
Article 335 allows confiscation regardless of claimed ignorance.
Judgment:
Conviction upheld; imprisonment and artifact confiscation.
Legal Principle:
Ignorance is rarely a valid defense for trafficking in nationally protected antiquities.
CASE 6: Theft and Sale of Antiquities from Museums
Court: Criminal Court – High Security Division
Facts:
An individual stole artifacts from a local museum and sold them to a collector abroad.
Legal Issue:
Are theft and illegal trade treated cumulatively under Bahraini law?
Court’s Reasoning:
Theft of protected antiquities constitutes two separate offences: theft and illegal trade.
Aggravated sentences apply because the crime affects public cultural heritage.
Judgment:
Conviction on both counts; imprisonment imposed.
Confiscation and permanent ban from participating in archaeological activities.
Legal Principle:
Theft and trade of antiquities are separate offences; punishment is cumulative and may be aggravated.
III. SUMMARY OF JUDICIAL PRINCIPLES
| Principle | Established Rule |
|---|---|
| Strict Liability | Unauthorized excavation/trade is punishable regardless of intent |
| Mens Rea | Negligence or lack of due diligence sufficient in many cases |
| Attempt | Preparatory acts like attempted export are criminalized |
| Corporate Liability | Companies are liable if trade occurs in course of business |
| Aggravated Punishment | Theft, export, or sale of national heritage items increases penalties |
| Confiscation | Illicit antiquities are always seized |
IV. CONCLUSION
Illegal antiquities trade in Bahrain is treated as a serious public interest crime, reflecting the nation’s commitment to protecting cultural heritage. Bahraini courts have consistently emphasized:
Strict liability for unauthorized excavation or trade.
Responsibility of both individuals and corporations.
Aggravation for attempts, export, theft, or damage to national heritage.
Confiscation and closure as preventive measures.
The jurisprudence demonstrates a preventive and protective approach rather than purely punitive, emphasizing public cultural heritage over mere private property rights.
RELATED Blog
comments