The notions of cultural heritage and authenticity have evolved greatly since their very first emergence. This dual paradigm shift within the law of the protection of the cultural heritage not only reveals the need for the protection and conservation of a wide variety of cultural objects, but its reference to the cultural rights provides the opportunity to claim the legal change for historically disadvantaged groups and the persons. The objective of this paper is to demonstrate the lack of legitimacy within the public administration of cultural policies and the cultural heritage law. In our opinion, that deficit is tending to be filled through a strong human rights discourse nowadays. In the past, this deficit was concealed in two ways. First, at a national level, cultural heritage is used to excite a feeling of belonging to a nation and its cultural identity. At the international level, where cultural heritage is linked to the cosmopolitan values, including the authenticity of a work of art and universal aesthetic values defined by a cultural elite. But today the individuals as well as the disgruntled minority groups tend to develop different affiliations and multiple and flexible cultural identities. In the end, these persons and groups need some sort of legal autonomy in order to make choices. In this context a new form of legitimacy spreads out through a right to cultural heritage.