Gurlitt's will

DW: Dr. Hausner, was Cornelius Gurlitt capable of writing his will when he did so on January 9?

Helmut Hausner: Cornelius Gurlitt was certainly able to compose some kind of will. But my opinion is that he was not able to write this particular will on that day.

How did you come to that conclusion?

There are several factors that lead to incapacity to write a will. The best known ones are memory disturbance, dementia and severe psychosis. But there is a special group of factors that don't necessarily lead to overall incapacity but instead simply exclude particular provisions. These include delusional disorders. According to law, only those provisions that connected to the content of the person's delusions are invalid. And that is the case with Mr. Gurlitt.

How critical is it to Gurlitt's ability to make a will that he felt he was being hunted by Nazis who wanted to steal his art collection?

This idea of being pursued by Nazis, especially Nazis from Munich, and the point that came up again and again that [Nazi leader Heinrich] Himmler's daughter lived in Munich - this idea was central to his motivation to select a museum in Switzerland for his art collection.

Mr. Gurlitt was very distrustful of German society and of state institutions, especially in Munich - even to the extentthat he didn't want to be represented by German attorneys, but only accepted attorneys from Switzerland. With this in mind, it's understandable that he chose a Swiss museum, the Museum of Fine Arts Bern. He was convinced that only there would his works be well enough protected from the Nazis he believed were pursuing him.

And that has led you to believe that Mr. Gurlitt lacked decision-making power?

The power of decision-making can be measured in comparison to healthy individuals. Due to his delusional disorder, Mr. Gurlitt's convictions were influenced by his illness and not informed by reality. This false view of the world impacted his decision-making power, because we presume that we are only capable of freely deciding when we perceive our surroundings like most other people do.

Mr. Gurlitt was very ill. He feared having critical operations. He was in medical care. Why did the idea of reviewing the validity of his will only come up now?

The idea did come up earlier. When we take a look at the examination that was conducted in early January 2014, we find that reservations of consent were discussed. That is, the legal stipulation that the individual many no longer conduct business without requesting permission from his caregiver. This question was reviewed with the result that an overall proviso was deemed unnecessary.

Mr. Gurlitt was capable, for example, of dealing with his day-to-day business. Only the special provision, concerning his fear of Nazi persecution in conjunction with his art collection - this one fear made it impossible for him to make a free decision. And that's what my report refers to.

As a physician, you are likely bound to the oath of privacy regarding your patients, but probably less restricted when it comes to the legal medical report, correct?

That's right. In this case, the family has released me from the oath of confidentiality. Mr. Gurlitt wasn't my patient. Here, it's about finding out - in his interest - whether his wishes were expressed in a legal way or not. It's in the personal interest of every testator to determine after the fact whether his intention was free and valid, or influenced by illness.

Gurlitt's cousins Uta Werner and Dietrich Gurlitt commissioned your psychiatric report. Do you know why they did this?

Due to an astonishing reason. It was by far the most astonishing reason I've ever come across in my career as a psychiatrist. Normally I'm called to court. When examinations are commissioned by private individuals who are in conflict, I distrust them and turn them down.

But the Gurlitt family was different from the beginning. They want to know the truth. And it was clear from the beginning that, no matter what my findings were, they would accept the result. My impression is that they are not interested in contesting the will. They are interested in understanding why Cornelius Gurlitt made the decisions he made, and what that means for the family.

The family does not plan to apply for a certificate of inheritance or have the will legally reviewed. Why not?

I presume that the family wants to avoid a public dispute and a conflict over money. Now they have the answer they wanted - why Cornelius Gurlitt acted as he did. I can imagine that the Gurlitts will let things rest now. But I can also imagine that this question may come up again in the future.

Society has also received its answer. What should be done with your report?

My report is an objective basis for discussion. But no reasonable medical examiner would presume to have a claim on the truth. I think it would be a good idea for the inheritance court to order a legal examiner so that we have a broad collection of reports and an informed decision can be made about the arguments. How does Cornelius Gurlitt's ability to make a will appear so that a decision can be made that is just for him and for this historical case - and for Germany.

Dr. Helmut Hausner, chief physician at the psychiatric clinic at the University Hospital Regensburg, was commissioned by Cornelius Gurlitt's cousins, Dietrich Gurlitt and Uta Werner, to examine the collector's ability to make a will. Hausner based his report on letters and documents from the deceased Gurlitt.

Stefan Dege conducted the interview.