Repatriation of Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Property: Could Alternative Dispute Resolution Be a Solution? Lessons Learned from the G’psgolox Totem Pole and the Maaso Kova Case
cytuj
pobierz pliki
RIS BIB ENDNOTEWybierz format
RIS BIB ENDNOTERepatriation of Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Property: Could Alternative Dispute Resolution Be a Solution? Lessons Learned from the G’psgolox Totem Pole and the Maaso Kova Case
Data publikacji: 12.2022
Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2022, 2/2022 (8), s. 135 - 158
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSNR.22.015.17028Autorzy
Repatriation of Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Property: Could Alternative Dispute Resolution Be a Solution? Lessons Learned from the G’psgolox Totem Pole and the Maaso Kova Case
Considering that the vast majority of the objects constituting Indigenous Peoples’ cultural heritage are now located outside their source communities, the restitution of cultural property has become a pressing issue among Indigenous Peoples worldwide and should be understood as part of Indigenous Peoples’ historical (as well as current) encounter with colonization and its consequences. As such, this article investigates whether international cultural heritage law offers any possibilities for successful repatriation and to what extent the shortcomings of the framework in place could be complemented by alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms and the new mandate of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Expert Mechanism). First, crucial concepts in the repatriation debates are explained. Next the factual background of the case studies of the G’psgolox Totem Pole and Maaso Kova are presented. This is followed by a discussion of the most pertinent mechanisms of international cultural heritage law and the place of Indigenous Peoples’ rights within such a framework. Subsequently, the concept of ADR is introduced, and the details of the negotiation processes between the Haisla First Nation (Canada) and the Yaqui People (Mexico, the United States) – both with the Museum of Ethnography in Stockholm (Sweden) – are presented. Finally, the article evaluates to what extent ADR could be an appropriate mechanism for the settlement of disputes concerningIndigenous Peoples’ cultural property, andwhether the Expert Mechanism is a well-suited body for facilitating the process of repatriating Indigenous Peoples’ cultural heritage.
Allen S., The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Limits of the International Legal Project, in: S. Allen, A. Xanthaki (eds.), Reflections on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Hart Publishing, Oxford–Portland 2011.
Baird J.R., Solanki A., Askren M. (eds.), Returning the Past: Repatriation of First Nations Cultural Property. Four Case Studies of First Nations Repatriation, UBC Museum of Anthropology, Vancouver 2008.
Barnabas S.G., The Legal Status of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) in Contemporary International Human Rights Law, “International Human Rights Law Review” 2017, Vol. 6(2).
Bell C., Restructuring the Relationship: Domestic Repatriation and Canadian Law Reform, in: C. Bell, R.K. Paterson, Protection of First Nations Cultural Heritage: Laws, Policy, and Reform, UBC Press, Vancouver–Toronto 2008.
Bell C., Statt G., Mookakin Cultural Society, Repatriation and Heritage Protection: Reflections on the Kainai Experience, in: C. Bell, V. Napoleon (eds.), First Nations Cultural Heritage and Law: Case Studies, Voices, and Perspectives, UBC Press, Vancouver 2008.
Bienkowski P., A Critique of Museum Restitution and Repatriation Practices, in: S. Macdonald, H. Rees Leahy (eds.), The International Handbooks of Museum Studies: Museum Practice, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken 2015.
Blake J., International Cultural Heritage Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2015.
Blake J., On Defining the Cultural Heritage, “The International and Comparative Law Quarterly” 2000, Vol. 49(1).
Borelli S., Lenzerini F. (eds.), Cultural Heritage, Cultural Rights, Cultural Diversity: New Developments in International Law, Brill, Leiden 2012.
Campfens E., Cross-Border Title Claims to Cultural Objects: Property or Heritage?, Eleven International Publishing, Leiden 2021.
Carpenter K., Tsykarev A., Indigenous Peoples and Diplomacy on the World Stage, “American Journal of International Law. Unbound” 2021, Vol. 115.
Commission on Human Rights, Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Study on Treaties, Agreements and Other Constructive Arrangements between States and Indigenous Populations. Final Report by Miguel Alfonso Martínez, Special Rapporteur, 22 June 1999, UN Doc. E/ CN.4/Sub.2/1999/20.
Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, 16 November 1972, 1037 UNTS 151.
Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, 17 October 2003, 2368 UNTS 3.
Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, 14 November 1970, 823 UNTS 231.
Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, 20 October 2005, 2440 UNTS 311.
Cornu M., Renold M.-A., New Developments in the Restitution of Cultural Property: Alternative Means of Dispute Resolution, “International Journal of Cultural Property” 2010, Vol. 57(4).
Dhamai B.M., The Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (EMRIP), in: D. Mamo (ed.), The Indigenous World 2022, The International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs, Copenhagen 2022.
Edwards H.T., Alternative Dispute Resolution: Panacea or Anathema?, “Harvard Law Review” 1986, Vol. 99(3).
Ehrnrooth A., Museum Extension Allows Indigenous Sámi People to Welcome Home More than 2,000 Artefacts Held in Finland, “The Art Newspaper”, 23 April 2021, https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2021/04/23/museum-extension-allows-indigenous-sami-people-to-welcome-home-more-than-2000-artefacts-held-in-finland [accessed: 18.08.2022].
Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous People, Technical Advisory Note – Repatriation Request for the Yaqui Maaso Kova, 16 June 2020, https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/IPeoples/EMRIP/Session12/MaasoKova.pdf [accessed: 31.08.2022].
Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Purpose of the Mandate, https:// www.ohchr.org/en/hrc-subsidiaries/expert-mechanism-on-indigenous-peoples [accessed: 18.08.2022].
Falkoff S., Mutually-Beneficial Repatriation Agreements: Returning Cultural Patrimony, Perpetuating the Illicit Antiquities Market, “Journal of Law and Policy” 2008, Vol. 16(1).
Francioni F., Vrdoljak A.F. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Cultural Heritage Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2020.
Greenfield J., The Return of Cultural Treasures, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1996.
Haisla Nation, A Reminder of the Haisla Nuyem – Do Not Move Fallen Pieces of Totem Pole, https://haisla.ca/reminder-haisla-nuyem-not-move-fallen-pieces-totem-pole/ [accessed: 04.05.2022].
Haisla Nation, About the Haisla, https://haisla.ca/community-2/about-the-haisla/ [accessed: 04.05.2022].
Human Rights Council, Repatriation of Ceremonial Objects, Human Remains and Intangible Cultural Heritage under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 21 July 2020, UN Doc. A/HRC/45/35.
Human Rights Council, Resolution 42/19: Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples, 26 September 2019, UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/42/19.
International Indian Treaty Council, An Historic Day in Stockholm, Sweden for the Yaqui Nation and the Cultural Rights of All Indigenous Peoples, “Cultural Survival”, 7 June 2022, https://www.culturalsurvival.org/news/historic-day-stockholm-sweden-yaqui-nation-and-cultural-rights-all-indigenous-peoples [accessed: 18.08.2022].
Irwin R., Indian Agents in Canada, in: The Canadian Encyclopedia, 25 October 2018, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/indian-agents-in-canada [accessed: 04.05.2022].
Jardfelt A., Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (EMRIP), Statement on Country Engagement, 7 July 2022, https://www.swedenabroad.se/sv/utlandsmyndigheter/fn-gen%C3%A8ve/aktuellt/statements/EMRIP_Sweden / [accessed: 18.08.2022].
Jessiman S.R., The Repatriation of the G’psgolox Totem Pole: A Study of its Context, Process, and Outcome, “International Journal of Cultural Property” 2011, Vol. 18(3).
Keeler H., Indigenous International Repatriation, “Arizona State Law Journal” 2012, Vol. 44(2).
Kowalski W., Types of Claims for Recovery of Lost Cultural Property, “Museum International” 2005, Vol. 57(1).
Kramer J., Figurative Repatriation. First Nations ‘Artist-Warriors’ Recover, Reclaim, and Return Cultural Property through Self-Definition, “Journal of Material Culture” 2004, Vol. 9(2).
Kuprecht K., Human Rights Aspects of Indigenous Cultural Property Repatriation, “NCCR Trade Working Paper” No 2009/34.
Kuprecht K., Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Property Claims: Repatriation and Beyond, Springer, Lucerne 2013.
Lenzerini F., Cultural Identity, Human Rights, and Repatriation of Cultural Heritage of Indigenous Peoples, “Brown Journal of World Affairs” 2016, Vol. 23(1).
Lenzerini F., Reparations for Wrongs against Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Heritage, in: A. Xanthaki (ed.), Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Heritage: Rights, Debates, Challenges, Brill, Leiden–Boston 2017.
Markowitz S., A Meteorite and a Lost City: Mutually Beneficial Solutions through Alternative Dispute Resolution, “Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution” 2012, Vol. 14(1).
Menkel-Meadow C.J., Alternative Dispute Resolution, in: Max Planck Encyclopedias of International Law, 2018.
Merryman J.H., Two Ways of Thinking About Cultural Property, “The American Journal of International Law” 1986, Vol. 80(4).
Nahlik S.E., Grabież dzieł sztuki. Rodowód zbrodni międzynarodowej [The Looting of Works of Art. The Origins of International Crime], Ossolineum, Wrocław–Kraków 1958.
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, Pub. L. 101-601, 25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq., 104 Stat. 3048.
Pastrana G., The Yaqui Tribe: An Indigenous Nation in Resistance, “Cultural Survival”, 2 December 2021, https://www.culturalsurvival.org/news/yaqui-tribe-indigenous-nation-resistance [accessed: 18.08.2022].
Pedersen A.-M., Pritchard J., Haisla (Kitamaat), in: The Canadian Encyclopedia, 16 October 2011 (last edited 8 June 2020), https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/haisla-kitamaat [accessed: 04.05.2022].
Prott L.V., UNESCO and UNIDROIT: A Partnership against Trafficking in Cultural Objects, “Uniform Law Review” 1996, Vol. 1(1).
Shaw M.N., International Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2017.
Shields S., T’xwelatse Comes Home, “The Seattle Times”, 28 January 2007, https://www.seattletimes.com/pacific-nw-magazine/txwelatse-comes-home/ [accessed: 18.08.2022].
Smith L., Uses of Heritage, Routledge, Oxon–New York 2006.
Stamatopoulou E., Taking Cultural Rights Seriously: The Vision of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, in: S. Allen, A. Xanthaki (eds.), Reflections on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Hart Publishing, Oxford–Portland 2011.
Totem Pole in Hawaii Returned to Alaska, “Archaeology”, 23 October 2015, https://www.archaeology.org/news/3825-151023-alaska-totem-repatriated [accessed: 18.08.2022].
Tünsmeyer V., Repatriation of Sacred Indigenous Cultural Heritage and the Law. Lessons from the United States and Canada, Springer, Cham 2022.
UN General Assembly, United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 2 October 2007, UN Doc. A/RES/61/295.
UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects, 24 June 1995, 2421 UNTS 457.
UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects: Explanatory Report, “Uniform Law Review” 2001, Vol. 6(3).
Van Broekhoven L., Yesterday’s Knowledge, Tomorrow’s Future. Setting up Community Consultations at the NME, Leiden, in: L. Van Broekhoven, C. Buijs, P. Hovens (eds.), Sharing Knowledge and Cultural Heritage: First Nations of the Americas. Studies in Collaboration with Indigenous Peoples from Greenland, North and South America, Sidestone Press, Leiden 2010.
Världskulturmuseerna, Our Vision & Mission, https://www.varldskulturmuseerna.se/en/about-us/our-vision--mission/ [accessed: 18.08.2022].
Vrdoljak A.F., International Law, Museums and the Return of Cultural Objects, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2006.
Wikipedia, Pueblo Yaqui, https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pueblo_yaqui [accessed: 18.08.2022].
Xanthaki A., Indigenous Rights in International Law over the Last 10 Years and Future Developments, “Melbourne Journal of International Law” 2009, Vol. 10(1).
Informacje: Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2022, 2/2022 (8), s. 135 - 158
Typ artykułu: Oryginalny artykuł naukowy
Tytuły:
Repatriation of Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Property: Could Alternative Dispute Resolution Be a Solution? Lessons Learned from the G’psgolox Totem Pole and the Maaso Kova Case
Repatriation of Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Property: Could Alternative Dispute Resolution Be a Solution? Lessons Learned from the G’psgolox Totem Pole and the Maaso Kova Case
Faculty of Law and Administration, University of Silesia, Katowice,
University of Silesia in Katowice
Polska
Publikacja: 12.2022
Status artykułu: Otwarte
Licencja: CC BY
Udział procentowy autorów:
Korekty artykułu:
-Języki publikacji:
Angielski