The museum don't need defending. This woman simply has no claim. She was commissioned and paid (in form of saving life of her family). Case closed. That's in real world. Not in your PC world though.
So you consider not being shot in the head to be payment for something. Fine, in that case I'm flying to Canada, buying a gun, pointing it at your head and telling you "If you sign over all your worldly possessions to me, I won't shoot you in the head." As far as you are concerned that will be a perfectly acceptable transaction for you: you get paid for your property.
In the real world telling somebody to do something if they want to stay alive is illegal and a criminal has no claim to any benefits resulting from their crime. But in your world I guess it is perfectly acceptable to do anything one wants to Jews, they're just untermenschen, right?
From a reading of that link, I think the museum's position is that anything that was left at the site and/or which came into the museum's possession is seen as historical evidence and not subject to return to anyone. They could phrase it better certainly.
Their position is that the paintings have never been the property of the painter. That has always been their position.
The pictures were not actually left at the site, six of the seven were purchased by the museum in 1963 and the remaining one in 1977 (i.e. after the museum knew that the painter wanted her paintings back, which means they can not claim to be a good-faith purchaser).
If the link is to be believed Roma survivors and Roma organizations are siding with the museum (and their wishes are probably stronger than her claim for me).
Some Roma organisations are on the side of the museum and some are on the side of the painter, just as some Jews are on the side of the museum and some are on the side of the painter.
You might disagree with the museum's current position but it's very different from what some commie official said over thirty years ago and your refusal to state it in any other way is disingenuous at best.
Their position is that the painter has no claim to the paintings because the paintings were never her property. Which is identical to the position they had over thirty years ago.
It's nothing plastic about me. Nationality-wise or body-parts-wise. I know it annoys you to no end.
You live in Canada as a Canadian and have sworn an oath of allegiance to the Queen of Canada. You are not Polish, you are Canadian and a Plastic Pole. While that fact doesn't annoy me at all, I know it really burns you.