'They're supposed to be art specialists, and they're totally clueless'

A Maltese family has been prevented from taking two paintings with them to their new home in Ireland on grounds the works are of cultural heritage value, which the family disputes.

The Agius family told Times of Malta they were stopped from taking two paintings by well-known artists Giorgio Preca and George Fenech with them when they moved to Ireland last September.

They said that following an inspection lasting only “minutes”, the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage (SCH) declared the paintings to be of national significance and ruled they would not be allowed to leave the country.

The family disputes the decision, however, with Joe Agius – an avid art collector for decades and a sub-editor and art writer for Times of Malta – calling the works of “no cultural value whatsoever”.

Excerpts of an unsigned Giorgio Preca (left), a student work of George Fenech (centre)... and a painting of the Agius family cat, Renoir.

Agius said he had sold all paintings of value in his collection in auctions over 2022 and 2023 ahead of the move to Ireland.

“The things of cultural value were sold, so the things we had left were just of importance to us or were works of minor artists,” he said.

'Why didnt SCH purchase paintings like it bought others?'

Agius noted the two paintings had been available for sale in the same auctions that saw SCH purchase three other works.

“If these two paintings were of cultural value, they would have exercised their right of preference during the auction, which they didn’t,” he said.

The ‘right of preference’ gives the heritage agency the right to purchase cultural works ahead of private buyers.

Agius stressed the two works prevented from leaving the country were of sentimental value only, with the Preca unsigned and the Fenech “the work of a student”.

He said, “unless it’s a Picasso or Hockney, a student work can never be of cultural heritage”.

Agius questioned the expertise of SCH: “They’re supposed to be art specialists, and they’re totally clueless”.

He said the agency had not supplied the family with a report detailing the findings and conclusions of its inspection. 

‘Key details downplayed’

A spokesperson for SCH disputed Agius’ claim that the works are of no heritage value but refused to provide information about the conclusions of the inspections or the criteria used to determine whether the works are of cultural significance.

Asked for copies of reports from the inspection, the spokesperson said the documents “contain sensitive information... and it is neither procedurally nor ethically appropriate to make them publicly available”.

She said, “key details” had been “misrepresented or downplayed”.

“One example is the reference to a portrait of a family member, which is, in fact, a painting by one of Malta’s eminent artists – an artwork of national significance that falls under the category of those prohibited from leaving the country.”

Claiming the “heritage and monetary value” of the paintings had been “widely publicised” by the family in Times of Malta articles and auction catalogues, the spokesperson said it was “only prudent for SCH to exercise caution in accepting the applicant’s sudden claims of diminished value”.

In November 2022, Times of Malta reported how Agius’s collection of modernist Maltese art had sold for record-breaking figures at an auction.

They’re meant to be art specialists, and they’re totally clueless

Responding to the authority’s comment about the monetary value of the two pieces, however, Agius stressed the selling price was not necessarily an indication of cultural value.

“They [SCH] equate monetary value with cultural heritage value, which further proves they are clueless,” he said.

‘They should get a reply’

One source within the cultural sector questioned why the family had not been provided with more information.

“It is strange that SCH has not replied formally... they cannot say no and not give a reason; they must clearly state the grounds for the refusal – partly in case the family wishes to appeal.”

The Agius family’s troubles began in September, when they left Malta to start a new life in Ireland.

Before leaving, they packed all their belongings – including furniture, clothes and paintings – into a shipping container, filling out SCH declarations for two works more than 50 years old, and three others.

While the forms specify declarations should be filled out for all cultural works, with a checkbox indicating if items are more than 50 years old, the family said Express Trailers had told them they only needed to fill out forms for older works.

A spokesperson for the company said it had supplied the family with the SCH form stating that all works should be declared, adding the subsequent inspection by heritage officials was “normal procedure”.

But delays in negotiations over the terms of the inspection led to the family being left without their belongings for weeks, which dragged into months.

The delays also cost the family an extra €5,000 in container fees, which they are asking heritage authorities to reimburse.

And when authorities finally opened the container and discovered other artworks, they insisted on inspecting all the paintings inside.

“They saw a worthless print and suddenly went into panic mode, and said they had to inspect the whole container for fear of us hiding more ‘cultural treasures’,” said Michelle Agius.

“Some of the paintings are portraits of us or our cat; they’re of no cultural importance.”

She said that while she had pleaded with cultural authorities to “have a heart” and release the family’s personal belongings sooner – stressing she had been left without her wheelchairs and walker for months – her pleas went unanswered.

Eventually, the family agreed with SCH for the container to leave Malta without any artworks inside so as not to incur any additional costs, leaving more than 60 paintings in the country. The family will now have to have them sent to Ireland.

The spokesperson for SCH said the “core issue” was that the family had arranged for artworks to be taken out of Malta “without adhering to the proper procedures” and had failed to take “corrective action”.