一场文物事件如何推动制度“打补丁”？

Core Viewpoint - The dispute over the authenticity and management of the Ming Dynasty painting "Jiangnan Spring" by Qiu Ying, donated to the Nanjing Museum, has led to a lawsuit initiated by the descendants of the donor, highlighting issues in art authentication and museum management practices [1][5]. Group 1: Authenticity and Authentication Issues - The authenticity of the painting "Jiangnan Spring" is central to the dispute, with the Nanjing Museum claiming it was deemed a forgery by experts in 1961 and 1964, while the descendants contest this conclusion, citing evidence of its historical significance and previous ownership [1][2]. - The lack of a reliable scientific method for art authentication means that conclusions are often based on subjective assessments by experts, leading to varying opinions on the same artwork [2][3]. Group 2: Museum Management Practices - The Nanjing Museum's decision to remove the painting from its collection and transfer it to another institution raises questions about its authority to do so, especially without returning it to the original donor's family [5][6]. - The museum's actions appear to comply with the 1986 regulations regarding the management of museum collections, but the ambiguity in the term "proper handling" has led to operational flaws [6][7]. Group 3: Regulatory and Institutional Challenges - The existing regulations have created loopholes that have allowed for mismanagement of cultural assets, prompting the National Cultural Heritage Administration to address these issues in recent years [6][7]. - The National Cultural Heritage Administration has recognized the need for a more robust authentication system, as the current committee responsible for art authentication has not been active since 2014, leading to concerns about its effectiveness [8][9].