Banksy is said to have paid for the theft one of his works.

The “rat with a cutter” stencil near the Center Pompidou was stolen in September. A man, indicted on February 7, claims to have been commissioned by the anonymous artist himself.

An artistic puzzle

An artistic puzzle. In September 2019, the Rat’s work with Banksy’s cutter had detached from its location near the Center Pompidou with a circular saw. After an investigation that had placed three people in police custody, one of the suspects indicted on February 7 for ” theft of cultural property in the free public domain. “

The case took on another dimension when, according to Le Parisien, the suspect confessed to having been commissioned by the anonymous artist himself. The 34-year-old man would know Banksy and would not have been paid for this work. An order that would have taken shape after the theft of another work by the artist, this time located on the back door of the Bataclan.

Case highlights

This case highlights the issue of theft from oneself in the public domain. According to article 311-1 of the Criminal Code: theft is the fraudulent theft of the property of others. However, if Banksy ordered this saw cutting (which is still to be proven), then justice cannot qualify this operation of theft.

This is, in any case, the defense taken up by the suspect’s lawyer: “the qualification used at this stage of the indictment of my client is not founded, because the owner of a property cannot steal himself- even. However, he intervened at the artist’s request. There is nothing criminal. I will challenge this qualification”.

Investigation continues

To whom it May concern?

The suspect has since been released after being placed under judicial supervision. The investigation continues but with difficulty since the mysterious Banksy did not file a complaint about the “theft” of his work. The Center Pompidou, not being the author of the Rat with the cutter, could only file a claim for the degradation of the panel. ” Work or not, we would have complained if only to cover repairs to the panel, ” defended management.

Another difficulty is the phrase ” Copyright is for losers ” (The property rights are for losers) of the Banksy. The street artist has never claimed an exclusive right on his creations, which can then be at the mercy of all. Theft, degradation, or even destruction of the work that is part of the game of freedom of collective expression. So why Banksy would have wanted to recover the work? Is it an artistic performance or a pure desire to preserve his work? But above all, can this degradation be described as theft? Investigators and the justice system have not finished with this affair. The puzzle has only just begun.