Law, museums & the return of cultural objects

This dissertation considers the processes of removal and return of the cultural objects of occupied communities during colonisation. These processes ore located within the brooder contexts of the development of international low. the growth of museums, and the altering relations between European and non-European peoples from the nineteenth to the twenty-first centuries. The work uses o critical historical framework, with particular reference to cultural objects from the Asia Pacific region, to examine Anglo-American colonialism. This analysis is undertaken through a series of three case studies: First, Britain is considered during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries as the embodiment of the imperialist collecting zeal on display at the International Exhibitions and the South Kensington Museum; Second, the relations between the US government and museums, particularly the Museum of Modern Art, and Native Americans are examined during the first half of the twentieth century and the opposition between the protection of indigenous cultural identities, and their material manifestations, and free trade in art and artefacts; and Third, Australia and the Australian Museum in the late twentieth century is scrutinised in light of decolonisation and challenges visited by indigenous peoples upon the established narratives surrounding the restitution debate. There is an examination of various international initiatives touching on the restitution of cultural objects throughout these successive periods. It is suggested that the debate concerning the restitution of cultural objects to formerly colonised and indigenous peoples is informed and stifled by principles and practices developed to facilitate European colonial and commercial expansion from the nineteenth century onwards. This dissertation delineates three rationales for the restitution of cultural objects in international law: First. the restoration of link between people, land and cultural objects; Second, the reversal or amelioration of discriminatory and genocidal practices; and Third, the amalgamation of the preceding rationales to enable self-determination and reconciliation. It is concluded that the question of restitution of cultural objects transcends the physical act of return. Instead. it is shown that this is a significant component of the processes of self-determination. cultural development and the renegotiation of relations between the occupier and occupied. Furthermore, this scheme of rationales highlights the importance of restitution of cultural objects in ensuring the continuing contribution of all peoples to the cultural heritage of humankind

Cultural Rights: The Potential Impact of Private Military and Security Companies

Culture and its protection has been present in the earliest codifications of the laws of war and international humanitarian law, both in its physical manifestations as cultural heritage and its practice and enjoyment as cultural rights. However, the engagement of private military and security companies (PMSCs) in recent conflicts has again raised the vexed issue of the role of ‘culture’ and heritage professionals in armed conflicts and belligerent occupation. This debate has in turn exposed the limitations of existing IHL and human rights instruments. To complement the PRIV-WAR project’s current and projected work, this report is divided into four parts. First, there is an examination of the current debate amongst heritage professionals, particularly archaeologists and anthropologists, about their professional engagement with PMSCs in recent conflicts and belligerent occupation. Second, there is an overview of existing international humanitarian law (IHL) and human rights (HR) provisions covering cultural rights and cultural heritage during armed conflict and occupation. Third, the response of professional bodies and associations of heritage professionals through their codes of ethics and public pronouncements to these emerging challenges is detailed. Finally, in the light of this, the existing lacunae in international law are exposed and challenges for the protection of cultural rights and cultural heritage specifically are outlined

Reparations for cultural loss

Destruction, damage and dispossession of culture and heritage loom large in actions pursued by indigenous peoples at the international, regional and domestic levels. This chapter considers how the claims and remedies for cultural losses sustained by indigenous peoples, collectively and individually, push the existing boundaries of international law. First, it outlines how culture and its manifestations is conceptualized by indigenous peoples. Second, how claims for cultural loss are framed by expanding upon existing international human rights law and international humanitarian law is explained. Finally, it examines the application of recent developments at the international and regional levels to accommodate broader mechanisms of redress for cultural loss sustained by indigenous peoples

Human rights and genocide : the work of Lauterpacht and Lemkin in modern international law

2008 marked the sixtieth anniversary of the adoption of the Genocide Convention and Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the UN General Assembly. These two instruments adopted and proclaimed by the then newly formed world body on successive days, 9 and 10 December 1948 respectively, represent two sides of one coin. Born of the horrors of the 1930s and 1940s, the United Nations Charter speaks of human rights and to the importance of the rule of law. The Genocide Convention and UDHR are integral to the pursuit of these aims. The work of two international lawyers, Hersch Lauterpacht and Raphael Lemkin, whose personal and familial histories traverse the tragedies of 20th century Europe, was instrumental in the realization of these twin efforts. This article examines their respective contributions to contemporary international law by concentrating on their European experience from their youth in Central Europe and the early days of the League of Nations to their mature work up to and including the Nuremberg Judgment

Intentional destruction of cultural heritage and international law

This note considers the impact of the ICTY jurisprudence and the 2003 UNESCO Declaration upon two discernible trends in the international law concerning cultural heritage. First, the dissolving of the divide between the protection afforded during period of armed conflict and peacetime. Second, the recognition of the importance of cultural heritage to subjects beyond the State in which it may be located: namely, humanity generally (including future generations), and non-state groups. These trends are complementary and reflect the increasing significance of the protection and promotion of cultural diversity in international law. Yet, they are also being met with significant trepidation by States, as exemplified by their reluctance to create new legal obligations with the 2003 UNESCO Declaration. Nonetheless, the events which triggered these developments highlight that the stakes are significant because the consequences of such acts are often irreversible

Article 14, The secretariat and support of the World Heritage Committee

If the rationale for the protection of World Heritage and the philosophical outlook of the Convention were revolutionary, Part III including Article 14 embodies the related ground-breaking aspect the mechanisms to implement its goals. The roles devolving to and evolving for the Secretariat of the World Heritage Committee and the Advisory Bodies are unique and extensive. So extensive and ill-defined in fact that it has led to tensions and recent efforts to more clearly articulate the competences of the Secretariat, the World Heritage Committee, the General Assembly of States Parties to the Convention, and the various organs of UNESCO. The composition, role and interplay of the Secretariat with the other institutional components of the World Heritage framework are the subject of this chapter. The first part examines the historical development of the Secretariat and defines its relationship to other conventional organs and the broader UNESCO institutional framework; and details its current role. The second part examines how this role is complemented over time by the work of the of the Advisory Bodies; then there is a brief backgrounder to each of the Advisory Bodies; and their roles as they are currently defined in respect of the Secretariat s activities is outlined

Liberty, equality, diversity : states, cultures, and international law

This chapter explores how culture is addressed by contemporary international law, with particular reference to human rights law norms. The first part covering freedom focuses on the rise of the modern state and its conscious reimagining of ties with its citizens through the promotion of tolerance and a secular, national identity. The shift is explored through the prisms of the freedom of religion, the right to participate in (national) cultural life, and the limitations on freedom of expression. The second part on equality centres on the relationship between the state, the group and its individuals by moving beyond the strictures of tolerance to the fostering of non-discrimination not only in respect of civil and political rights but also cultural rights. The third and final part concentrates on the embracing of cultural diversity by the international community as a common good. The promotion of diversity is considered at the state level, at the international level, and at the group level