Prosecutor blames Van Gogh theft on lax security

None of the alarms and only seven of 43 surveillance cameras were working at a Cairo museum where a Vincent van Gogh painting…

None of the alarms and only seven of 43 surveillance cameras were working at a Cairo museum where a Vincent van Gogh painting was stolen, Egypt’s top prosecutor said yesterday.

Thieves took the canvas, known by the titles Poppy Flowers and Vase with Flowers, from the Mahmoud Khalil Museum in the Egyptian capital on Saturday.

Prosecutor general Abdel-Meguid Mahmoud told Egypt’s state news agency yesterday that the thieves used a box cutter to remove the painting from its frame. He blamed the theft on the museum’s lax security measures, calling them “for the most part feeble and superficial”.

He said the museum guards’ daily rounds at closing time were inadequate and did not meet minimum security requirements to protect internationally renowned works of art.

READ MORE

Mr Mahmoud also said his office had warned Egypt’s museums to implement stricter security controls after nine paintings were stolen last year from another Cairo institute, the Mohammed Ali Museum. Similar security lapses were also blamed following that theft.

Fifteen Egyptian officials, including the director of the Khalil museum, Reem Bahir, and the head of the fine arts department at the Ministry of Culture, have been barred from leaving Egypt until the investigation into the painting’s theft is complete, Mr Mahmoud said.

Mr Bahir refused to comment on the prosecutor general’s statements, saying only that the investigation was still under way.

Yesterday, Egypt’s minister of culture, Farouk Hosni, said police had confiscated the painting from an Italian couple at Cairo airport hours after it was stolen. This development was widely reported.

But Mr Hosni later backtracked, saying his announcement was based on “false and incorrect” information. He said authorities were still searching for the painting, which he said is worth an estimated $50 million (€39.4 million). It was not clear what caused the confusion over the artwork’s fate.