Table of Legislation

Belgium

Private International Law Code (‘Code de droit international prive´’), 16 July 2004.

Canada

Alberta First Nations Sacred Ceremonial Objects Repatriation Act, RSA 2000, c. F-14. An Act to Amend and Consolidate the Laws Respecting Indians, SC 1880, c. 28. An Act Further to Amend The Indian Act of 1880, SC 1884, c. 27, s. 3. An Act to Amend the Indian Act, SC 1918, c. 26. An Act Respecting Indians, SC 1951, c. 29, s. 123(2). Cultural Property Export and Import Act, RSC 1985, c. C-51.

European Union

Council Regulation 2001/44/EC of 22 December 2000 on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters/ Brussels I Regulation (OJ L 12, 16 January 2001). Council Directive 93/7/EEC of 15 March 1993 on the Return of Cultural Objects Unlawfully Removed from the Territory of a Member State (OJ L 74/74, 27 March 1993).

K. Kuprecht, Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Property Claims, 193 DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-01655-9, © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014 194 Table of Legislation

France

Act No. 2002-323 of 6 March 2002 concerning the Restitution of the Mortal Remains of Saartjie Baartman from France to South Africa (‘Loi relative a` la restitution par la France de la de´pouille mortelle de Saartjie Baartman a` l’Afrique du Sud’). Act No. 2010-501 of 18 May 2010 aiming at Authorising the Restitution of Ma¯ori Heads from France to New Zealand and on the Management of Collections (‘Loi visant a` autoriser la restitution par la France des teˆtes maories a` la Nouvelle- Ze´lande et relatives a` la gestion des collections’). Civil Code (‘Code civile’), 21 March 1804. Heritage Code (‘Code du patrimoine’), 20 February 2004.

Germany

Act to Implement the UNESCO Convention of 14 November 1970 on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property and to implement the Council Directive 93/7/EEC of 15 March 1993 on the Return of Cultural Objects Unlawfully Removed from the Territory of a Member State (‘Gesetz zur Ausfu¨hrung des UNESCO- U¨ bereinkommens vom 14. November 1970 u¨ber Maßnahmen zum Verbot und zur Verhu¨tung der rechtswidrigen Einfuhr, Ausfuhr und U¨ bereignung von Kulturgut und zur Umsetzung der Richtlinie 93/7/EWG des Rates vom 15. Ma¨rz 1993 u¨ber die Ru¨ckgabe von unrechtma¨ßig aus dem Hoheitsgebiet eines Mitgliedstaats verbrachten Kulturgu¨tern’), 18 May 2007 (BGBl. I p. 757, No. 21, 2547).

Italy

Italian Civil Code (‘Codice civile’), Regio Decreto 16 March 1942 (n. 262).

Philippines

Philippines’ Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997. Table of Legislation 195

Switzerland

Agreement between the Swiss Federal Council and the Government of the Republic of Peru about the Collaboration in Preventing Illicit Trade in Archaeological Objects (‘Vereinbarung zwischen dem Schweizerischen Bundesrat und der Regierung der Republik Peru u¨ber die Zusammenarbeit zur Verhu¨tung des rechtswidrigen Handels mit archa¨ologischen Gu¨tern’) (adopted on 28 December 2006). Canton Lucerne Protection of Cultural Monuments Act (‘Gesetz u¨ber den Schutz der Kulturdenkma¨ler’), 8 March 1960. Civil Code (‘Schweizerisches Zivilgesetzbuch’), 10 December 1907 (SR 210). Decree of the Federal Council of 10 December 1945 on Claims for Return of Objects Taken in Territories Occupied in Times of War (‘Bundesratsbeschluss vom 10. Dezember 1945 betreffend die Klagen auf Ru¨ckgabe in kriegsbesetzten Gebieten weggenommener Vermo¨genswerte’), 1945 (AS 61). Federal Act on the International Transfer of Cultural Property (‘Bundesgesetz u¨ber den internationalen Kulturgu¨tertransfer’), 20 June 2003 (SR 44.1). Federal Private International Law Act (‘Bundesgesetz u¨ber das Internationale Privatrecht’), 18 December 1987 (SR 291). Federal Regulations on the International Transfer of Cultural Property (‘Verordnung u¨ber den internationalen Kulturgu¨tertransfer’), 13 April 2005 (SR 444.11).

United Kingdom

Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences) Act 2003. Human Tissue Act 2004.

United States

Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, 16 U.S.C. §§ 470bb–470mm. Constitution of the United States, Amendment 5 (passed 25 September 1791, ratified 15 December 1971). Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act of 1983, 19 U.S.C. §§ 2601-2613. Indian Appropriation Act of 3 March 1871, 25 U.S.C. § 71. Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, 8 U.S.C. § 1401(b). Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, 25 U.S.C. §§ 461–479. Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975, 25 U.S.C. § 450a. National Museum of the American Indian Act of 1989, 20 U.S.C. §§ 80q–15. 196 Table of Legislation

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990, 25 U.S.C. §§ 3001–3013 and 18 U.S.C. § 1170. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Regulations, 43 C.F.R. § 10. New York State Indian Law of 1899. Table of International Conventions and Declarations

1919 Covenant of the League of Nations (adopted on 29 April 1919, entered into force 10 January 1920). African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 21 ILM 58 (adopted on 27 June 1981, entered into force 21 October 1986). American Convention on Human Rights, OAS Treaty Series No. 36; 1144 UNTS 123 (adopted on 22 November 1969, entered into force 18 July 1978); reprinted in Basic Documents Pertaining to Human Rights in the Inter-American System, OEA/Ser.L.V/II.82 doc.6 rev.1 at 25 (1992). Convention on Biological Diversity. 1760 UNTS 143 (adopted on 5 June 1992, entered into force 29 December 1993). Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 78 UNTS 277 (adopted on 9 December 1948, entered into force 12 January 1951). New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 330 UNTS 38 (adopted on 10 June 1958, entered into force 7 June 1959). European Convention on Human Rights, CETS No. 005 (adopted on 4 November 1950, entered into force 3 September 1953). European Convention on Human Rights, Protocol 1, CETS No. 009 (adopted on 20 March 1952, entered into force 18 May 1954). European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, 472 UNTS 185 (adopted on 20 April 1959, entered into force 12 June 1962). ILO Convention No. 107 Concerning the Protection and Integration of Indigenous and Other Tribal and Semi-Tribal Populations in Independent Countries, 328 UNTS 24 (adopted on 26 June 1957, entered into force 2 June 1959). ILO Convention No. 169 Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries, 1659 UNTS 383 (adopted on 27 June 1989, entered into force 5 September 1991). Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgements in Civil and Commercial Matters, 28 ILM 620 (adopted on 16 September 1988, entered into force 1 January 1992, revised on 30 October 2007).

K. Kuprecht, Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Property Claims, 197 DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-01655-9, © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014 198 Table of International Conventions and Declarations

Mataatua Declaration on Cultural and Intellectual Property Rights (Whakatana, 12–18 June 1993). Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity (UN Doc. UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/1) (adopted on 29 October 2010). Second Protocol to the Hague Convention of 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, 2253 UNTS 212 (adopted on 26 March 1999, entered into force 9 March 2004). The Hague Convention II with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land: Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, 32 Stat. 1803, 2 Martens Nouveau Recueil (2d) 949 (adopted on 29 July 1899, entered into force 4 September 1900). The Hague Convention IV respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, 36 Stat. 2277, 1 Bevans 631 (adopted on 18 October 1907, entered into force 26 January 1910). The Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, 249 UNTS 240 (adopted on 14 May 1954, entered into force 7 August 1956). The Hague Convention relating to Civil Procedure, 286 UNTS 267 (adopted on 1 March 1954, entered into force 12 April 1957). UN Charter, 1 UNTS XVI (adopted on 26 June 1945, entered into force 24 October 1945). UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, General Assembly Resolution 217A (III) (UN Doc. A/810) (adopted on 10 December 1948). UN International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimi- nation, 660 UNTS 195 (adopted on 21 December 1965, entered into force 4 January 1969). UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 993 UNTS 3; 6 ILM 360 (adopted on 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976). UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 999 UNTS 171 and 1057 UNTS 407 (adopted on 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976). UN Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, General Assembly Resolution (UN Doc. A/RES/1514 (XV)) (adopted on 14 December 1960). UN Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution (UN Doc. A/RES/55/2) (adopted on 18 September 2000). UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, General Assembly Resolution 61/295 (UN Doc. A/61/L.67 and Add.1) (adopted on 13 September 2007). UNESCO Constitution, 4 UNTS 275 (adopted on 16 November 1945, entered into force 4 November 1946). UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, 823 UNTS 231 (adopted on 14 November 1970, entered into force 24 April 1972). Table of International Conventions and Declarations 199

UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, 2368 UNTS 1 (adopted on 17 October 2003, entered into force 20 April 2006). UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, 2440 UNTS 311 (adopted on 20 October 2005, entered into force 18 March 2007). UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects, 34 ILM 1322 (adopted on 24 June 1995, entered into force 1 July 1998). UNESCO Mexico City Declaration on Cultural Policies (UNESCO Doc. CLT/MD/1) (adopted on 6 August 1982). Table of Cases

Canada

Reference Re Secession of Quebec (1998) 161 DLR (4th) 385 (Supreme Court).

France

Association Survival International France v S.A.R.L. Ne´ret-Minet Tessier Sarrou (2013) No. RG 13/52880 BF/No. 1 (Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris). Cne Rouen v Pre´fet de la re´gion Haute-Normandie (2008) 44 JCP II 10181 (CAA Douai, ple´n.). Jean Bonnin v Villes de Maˆcon et de Lyon (17 June 1896) (Cour de cassation). Pre´fet Seine-Maritime (2007) 5 JCP Adm. 2021 (TA Rouen).

Germany

Nigerian masks case (22 June 1972) BGH II ZR 113/70, 59 BGHZ 82 (Bundesgerichtshof). Zivilrechtliche Anspru¨che eines Erben eines ju¨dischen Eigentu¨mers einer durch das Reichspropagandaministerium des Dritten Reiches weggenommenen Plakatsammlung auf Ru¨ckgabe (28 January 2010) 8 U 56/09 (Kammergericht Berlin).

K. Kuprecht, Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Property Claims, 201 DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-01655-9, © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014 202 Table of Cases

United Kingdom

Attorney-General of New Zealand v Ortiz (1982) QBD 349, (1982) 2 WLR 10, (1982) 3 All ER 432 (Queens Bench Division); (1984) AC 1, (1982) 3 WLR 570, (1982) 3 All ER 454 (Court of Appeal); (1984) AC 41, (1984) 2 WLR 809, (1983) 2 All ER 93 (House of Lords). Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran v The Barakat Galleries Ltd (2007) EWCA Civ 1374, Case No. A2/2007/0902/QBENF, A2/2007/0902(A)/FC3 (Court of Appeal (Civil Division)).

Switzerland

India v Credit Agricole Indosuez (Switzerland) SA (8 April 2005) BGE 131 III 418 (Federal Supreme Court).

United States

Bonnichsen v United States (2002) 217 F Supp 2d 1116, 1152-55 (D Or); (2004) 367 F 3d (9th Cir). Cherokee Nation v State of Georgia (1831) 5 Peters 178, Marshall J. Estate of Tasunke Witko v G. Heileman Brewing Co. et al. (1996) 23 Indian L Rep 6106 (Rosebud Sioux Sup Ct). Hornell Brewing Co. v Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court (1998) 133 F3d 1087 (8th Cir). Johnson v M’Intosh (1823) 21 US 543 (8 Wheat), Marshall J. Montoya v United States (1901) 180 US 261. Morton v Mancari (1974) 417 US 535. Onondaga Nation v Thatcher (1901) 29 Misc 428, 61 NYS, 1027, 169 NY Rep 584. Rice v Cayetano (2000) 528 US 495. United States v Hollinshead (1974) 495 F 2d 1154 (9th Cir). United States v McClain (1977) 545 F 2d 988 (5th Cir); (1979) 593 F 2d 658 (5th Cir). United States v Kramer (1999) 168 F 3d 1196 (CA10, NM). United States v Pre-Columbian Artifacts and the Republic of Guatemala (1993) 845 F Supp 544 (ND Ill). United States v Rogers (1846) 45 US (4 How) 567. United States v Schultz (2002) 178 F Supp 2d 445 (SDNY); (2003) 333 F 3d 393 (2d Cir), (2004) 157 L Ed 2d 891. Table of Cases 203

Arbitration

Altmann v Republic of Austria (15 January 2006), Arbitral Award, available online at http://www.adele.at/Schiedsspruch/Schiedsspruch.pdf;

International

African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, The Social and Economic Rights Action Center and the Center for Economic and Social Rights v Nigeria, Communication No. 155/96, AHRLR 60, 2001. African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Centre for Minority Rights Development (Kenya) and Minority Rights Group International on behalf of Endorois Welfare Council v Kenya, Communication No. 276/2003. Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Aleoboetoe v Suriname, Ser C No. 15, 10 September 1993. Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Case of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v Nicaragua, Ser C No. 79, 31 August 2001. UN Human Rights Committee, Ivan Kitok v Sweden, Communication No. 197/1985, Suppl. No. 40, UN Doc. A/43/40, views adopted on 27 July 1988. UN Human Rights Committee, Bernard Ominayak, Chief of the Lubicon Lake Band v Canada, Communication No. 167/1984, Suppl No. 40, UN Doc. A/38/40, views adopted on 26 March 1990. Bibliography

AA stands for unidentifiable author. All online resources were accessed in June 2012. AA, ‘American Indians: Gambling on nation-building’, The Economist (7 April 2012) (electronic version). AA, ‘Australia apology to Aborigines’, BBC News (13 February 2008), available online at http:// news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7241965.stm. AA, ‘Hopi tribe masks fetch record prices at Paris auction’, BBC News Europe (12 April 2013), available online at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22119146. AA, Dictionnaire compare´ du droit du patriomoine culturel, Paris: CNRS Editions, 2012. AA, ‘First Aboriginal remains to be returned from U.S.’, Reuters (25 July 2008), available online at http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/07/26/us-australia-aborigines-idUSSP21999620080726. AA, ‘Herausgabeanspruch bei NS-verfolgungsbedingt abhanden gekommenen Sachen’ (2010) KUR: Journal fu¨r Kunstrecht, Urheberrecht und Kulturpolitik, 12(1), pp. 17–21. AA, ‘Huldvoller Amtsantritt von Evo Morales in Bolivien’, Neue Zu¨rcher Zeitung (23 January 2006). AA, ‘Immer mehr Stadtindianer in Mexiko’, NZZ Online (26 March 2010). AA, ‘International Law Association’, available at http://www.ila-hq.org. AA, ‘Obama backs U.N. indigenous rights declaration’, Reuters (16 December 2010), available online at http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/16/us-obama-tribes-idUSTRE6BF4QJ20101216. AA, The Harvard project on American Indian economic development, The state of the Native nations: Conditions under U.S. policies of self-determination, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. AA, ‘The Metropolitan Museum of Art – Republic of Italy Agreement of February 21, 2006’ (2006) International Journal of Cultural Property, 13, pp. 427–434. AA, ‘US apologizes to American Indians for mistreatment’, The Economic Times, (20 May 2010), available online at http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2010-05-20/news/27611693_ 1_apology-tribes-brownback. Advisory Committee on the Assessment of Restitution Applications for Items of Cultural Value and the Second World War, ‘The Restitutions Committee’, available at http://www. restitutiecommissie.nl/en. Afrasiabi, Peter, ‘Property rights in ancient human skeletal remains’ (1997) Southern California Law Review, 70, pp. 805–840. ´ A˚ hre´n, Matthias, ‘Indigenous peoples’ culture, customs, and traditions and customary law: The Saami people’s perspective’ (2004) Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 21, pp. 63–112.

K. Kuprecht, Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Property Claims, 205 DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-01655-9, © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014 206 Bibliography

´ A˚ hre´n, Matthias, ‘Protecting peoples’ cultural rights: A question of properly understanding the notion of states and nations?’, in Francesco Francioni and Martin Scheinin (eds), Cultural human rights, Leiden and Boston: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2008, pp. 91–118. Alderman, Kimberly L., ‘The human right to cultural property’ (2011) Michigan State University College of Law International Law Review, 20, pp. 69–81. Alfredsson, Gudmundur, ‘Indigenous populations, protection’, in Rudolf Bernhardt (ed.), Ency- clopedia of public international law, Amsterdam: North-Holland, et al., 1995. Alfredsson, Gudmundur, ‘Indigenous populations, treaties with’, in Rudolf Bernhardt (ed.), Encyclopedia of public international law, Amsterdam: North-Holland, et al., 1995. Allen, Stephen, ‘The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Towards a global legal order on indigenous rights?’, in Andrew Halpin and Volker Roeben (eds), Theorizing the global legal order, Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing, 2009. Alston, Philip (ed.), Peoples’ rights, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. American Indian Ritual Object Repatriation Foundation (ed.), Mending the circle: A Native American repatriation guide: Understanding and implementing NAGPRA and the official Smithsonian and other repatriation policies, New York: American Indian Ritual Object Repatriation Foundation, 1996. American Indian Ritual Object Repatriation Foundation, ‘Sotheby’s new policy’ (1995) News and Notes, 2 (1). American Indian Ritual Object Repatriation Foundation, ‘Sotheby’s closes American Indian Art Department’ (2001) News and Notes, 8 (2). American Indian Ritual Object Repatriation Foundation, ‘An intercultural partnership’, available at http://www.repatriationfoundation.org/index.html. Anaya, S. James, Indigenous peoples in international law, 2nd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Anaya, S. James, ‘International human rights and indigenous peoples: The move toward the multicultural state’ (2004) Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 21, pp. 13–61. Anaya, S. James, and Siegfried Wiessner, ‘The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Towards re-empowerment’, Jurist Legal News & Research (3 October 2007), avail- able online at http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2007/10/un-declaration-on-rights-of-indige nous.php. Anderson, Terry L. (ed.), Self-determination: The other path for Native Americans, Stanford Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2006. Anderson, Terry L. and Fred S. McChesney (eds), Property rights: Cooperation, conflict, and law, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003. Antons, Christoph (ed.), Traditional knowledge, traditional cultural expressions, and intellectual property law in the Asia-Pacific region, Alphen aan den Rijn and Frederick, MD: Kluwer Law International and Aspen Publishers, 2009. Antons, Christoph, ‘Intellectual property rights in indigenous cultural heritage: Basic concepts and continuing controversies’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indige- nous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 144–174. Armstrong, Jeannette, ‘Community: “Sharing one skin”’, in Jerry Mander and Victoria Tauli- Corpuz (eds), Paradigm wars: Indigenous peoples’ resistance to globalization, San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 2009, pp. 35–40. Asmuss, Kerstin, Anspru¨che indigener Vo¨lker auf Ru¨ckfu¨hrung rechtswidrig ausgefu¨hrten Kulturgutes, Hamburg: Nomos, 2011. Austin, Raymond D., Navajo courts and Navajo common law: A tradition of tribal self- governance, Minneapolis Minn.: University of Minnesota Press, 2009. Australian Government, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Office for the Arts, ‘Australian government policy on indigenous repatriation’ (August 2011), available at http:// www.arts.gov.au/sites/default/files/indigenous/repatriation/repatriation-policy.pdf. Bibliography 207

Australian Government, Department of Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport, ‘Indigenous Repatriation Program’, available at http://www.arts.gov.au/indigenous/repatriation. Australian Museum (Sydney), The University of Sydney, ‘Policies’, available at http://sydney.edu. au/museums/about/repat.shtml. Austria, Parliament of the Austrian Republic, Wolfgang Zinggl, et al., ‘Schenkung der “Federkrone Montezumas” an Mexiko’, Entschliessungsantrag (524/A(E)XXIV.GP, 11 March 2009). Bandarin, Francesco, ‘International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Comments from UNESCO in light of its international standard-setting instruments in the field of culture’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 306–328. Bandle, Anne L., et al., ‘Case Note 17 Tasmanian Human Remains – Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre and Natural History Museum London’ (2011) Platform ArThemis, Art-Law Centre University of Geneva, available at https://plone2.unige.ch/art-adr/Affaires/case-tac-v.-natu ral-history-museum-london/Case%20Note%20-%20TAC%20v.%20Natural%20History% 20Museum%20London.docx/view. Barelli, Mauro, ‘Free, prior and informed consent in the aftermath of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Developments and challenges ahead’ (2012) The International Journal of Human Rights, 16, pp. 1–24. Barkan, Elazar, The guilt of nations: Restitution and negotiating historical injustices, 1st edn, New York: Norton, 2000. Barraclough, Geoffrey, ‘Europa¨isches Gleichgewicht und Imperialismus’, in Golo Mann (ed.), Propyla¨en Weltgeschichte: Eine Universalgeschichte, vol. 8, Frankfurt, etc.: Ullstein GmbH., 1960, pp. 705–739. Barrett, Carole A., ‘Sioux’, in Harvey Markowitz (ed.), American Indians. Pueblo tribes, western – Zuni language, Pasadena and Englewood Cliffs: Salem Press, Inc., 1995, pp. 718–723. Barsh, Russel L., ‘Indigenous peoples and the idea of individual human rights’ (1995) Native Studies Review, 10, pp. 35–55. Barsh, Russel L., ‘Putting the tribe in tribal courts: Possible? Desirable?’ (1998-1999) Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, 8, pp. 74–96. Barstow Magraw, Daniel and Lauren Baker, ‘Globalization, communities and human rights: Community-based property rights and prior informed consent’ (2007) Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, 35, pp. 413–428. Barth, William K., On cultural rights: The equality of nations and the minority legal tradition, Leiden: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2008. Basedow, Ju¨rgen, et al. (eds), Private law in the international arena: From national conflict rules towards harmonization and unification. Liber amicorum Kurt Siehr, The Hague: TMC Asser Press, 2000. Bator, Paul M., ‘An essay on the international trade in art’ (1982) Stanford Law Review, 34, pp. 275–384. Bauer, Alexander A., ‘New ways of thinking about cultural property: A critical appraisal of the antiquities trade debates’ (2008) Fordham International Law Journal, 31, pp. 690–724. Bell, Catherine, ‘Repatriation of cultural material to First Nations in Canada: Legal and ethical justifications’, in James A. R. Nafziger and Ann M. Nicgorski (eds), Cultural heritage issues: The legacy of conquest, colonization, and commerce, Leiden: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2009, pp. 81–106. Bell, Catherine, ‘Restructuring the relationship: Domestic repatriation and Canadian law reform’, in Catherine Bell and Robert K. Paterson (eds), Protection of First Nations cultural heritage: Laws, policy, and reform, Vancouver and Toronto: U.B.C. Press, 2009, pp. 15–77. Bell, Catherine, ‘Ownership and trade of aboriginal cultural heritage in Canada’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 362–395. 208 Bibliography

Bell, Catherine and David J. Kahane (eds), Intercultural dispute resolution in aboriginal contexts, Vancouver and Toronto: U.B.C. Press, 2004. Bell, Catherine and Val Napoleon (eds), First Nations cultural heritage and law: Case studies, voices, and perspectives, Law and society series, Vancouver BC: U.B.C. Press, 2008. Bell, Catherine, et al., ‘Protection: Reflections on the Kainai experience’, in Catherine E. Bell and Val Napoleon (eds), First Nations cultural heritage and law: Case studies, voices, and perspectives, Law and society series, Vancouver BC: U.B.C. Press, 2008, pp. 203–257. Bell, Catherine, et al., ‘Recovering from colonization: Perspectives of community members on protection and repatriation of Kwakwaka’wakw cultural heritage’, in Catherine E. Bell and Val Napoleon (eds), First Nations cultural heritage and law: Case studies, voices, and perspectives, Law and society series, Vancouver BC: U.B.C. Press, 2008, pp. 33–91. Bell, Catherine and Robert K. Paterson (eds), Protection of First Nations cultural heritage: Laws, policy, and reform, Vancouver and Toronto: U.B.C. Press, 2009. Bell, Catherine and Robert K. Paterson, ‘International movement of First Nations cultural heritage in Canadian law’, in Catherine Bell and Robert K. Paterson (eds), Protection of First Nations cultural heritage: Laws, policy, and reform, Vancouver and Toronto: U.B.C. Press, 2009, pp. 78–109. Berman, Paul S., ‘The new legal pluralism’ (2009) Annual Review of Law & Social Science,5, pp. 225–242. Bernhardt, Rudolf (ed.), Encyclopedia of public international law, vol. 4, Amsterdam: North- Holland, et al., 2000. Berry, Christina, ‘What’s in a name? Indians and political correctness’, All Things Cherokee, available at http://www.allthingscherokee.com/articles_culture_events_070101.html. Bisaz, Corsin, ‘The concept of group rights in international law’, Universita¨tZu¨rich, Dissertation (2011). Blackstone, William, ‘Commentaries on the laws of England in four books’ (1753), reprinted in George Sharswood (ed.), Commentaries on the laws of England in four books, vol. 1, Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1893. Blair, Bowen, ‘Indian rights: Native Americans versus American museums – A battle for artifacts’ (1979) American Indian Law Review, 7, pp. 125–145. Blumm, Michael C., ‘Retracting the discovery doctrine: Aboriginal title, tribal sovereignty, and their significance to treaty-making and modern natural resources policy in Indian country issues’ (2004) Vermont Law Review, 28(3), pp. 713–777. Boele-Woelki, Katharina, et al. (eds), Convergence and divergence in private international law: Liber Amicorum Kurt Siehr, Zurich: Schulthess, 2010. Boggio, Andrea, ‘Transnational perspective on human genetics and property rights mobilizations of indigenous peoples’, in Wayne V. McIntosh (ed.), Property rights and neo-liberalism: Cultural demands and legal actions, Farnham: Ashgate, 2010, pp. 111–123. Borges, Luiz C., and Marilia B. Botelho, ‘Le Muse´e et la question de la restitution: Etude de deux cas concernant le patrimoine culturel bre´silien’, in ICOM International Committee for Muse- ology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39, pp. 81–91. Bowrey, Kathy, ‘International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: An Australian perspective’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 396–438. Brodie, Neil, et al., ‘Stealing history: The illicit trade in cultural material’, Report on behalf of the ICOM UK and the Museums Association, Cambridge: The McDonald Institute for Archaeo- logical Research, 2000. Brown, Dee, Bury my heart at wounded knee: An Indian history of the American West, New York: Sterling Publishing Co., Inc., 2009. Brown, Michael F. and Margaret M. Bruchac, ‘NAGPRA from the middle distance: Legal puzzles and unintended consequences’, in John H. Merryman (ed.), Imperialism, art and restitution, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 193–217. Bibliography 209

Brownlie, Ian, Principles of public international law, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Bru¨ggemann, Gerd, ‘Jedem Ha¨uptling sein Kasino’, NZZ am Sonntag (15 January 2006), p. 9. Brust, Alexander, ‘Don’t be afraid of the Indians! A case study of alternative solutions for restitution claims of Brazilian native people and state institutions’, Basel Institute on Gover- nance Conference on Governance of Cultural Property: Preservation and Recovery, Basel, 29–30 September 2009, Presentation available at http://www.baselgovernance.org/events/past- events/combating-the-financing-of-terrorism-copy-1/governance-of-cultural-protery-presentations- and-papers/. Bucher, Andreas and Pierre-Yves Tschanz (eds), Private international law and arbitration, Switzerland, basic documents, Basel and Frankfurt am Main: Helbing Lichtenhahn, 1996. Burri-Nenova, Mira, ‘The long tail of the rainbow serpent: New technologies and the protection and promotion of traditional cultural expressions’, in Christoph B. Graber and Mira Burri- Nenova (eds), Intellectual property and traditional cultural expressions in a digital environ- ment, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2008. Burri, Mira, ‘Digital technologies and traditional cultural expressions: A positive look at a difficult relationship’ (2010) International Journal of Cultural Property, 17, pp. 33-63. Busk, Neal, Head of the E. P. and Dorothy Hickman Pectol Family Organization, ‘Pectol Shields,’ (6 March 2012), Email, on file with the author. Byrne-Sutton, Quentin, ‘Resolution methods for art-related disputes: Art-Law Centre, Geneva (October 17, 1997)’ (1998) International Journal of Cultural Property, 7, pp. 249–257. Byrne-Sutton, Quentin, ‘Introduction: Alternative paths to explore’, in Quentin Byrne-Sutton and Fabienne Geisinger-Marie´thoz (eds), Resolution methods for art-related disputes: Proceedings of a symposium organised on 17 October 1997 by the Centre du Droit de l’ Art, Zurich: Schulthess, 1999. Byrne-Sutton, Quentin, and Fabienne Geisinger-Marie´thoz (eds), Resolution methods for art-related disputes: Proceedings of a symposium organised on 17 October 1997 by the Centre du Droit de l’ Art, Zurich: Schulthess, 1999. Canadian Museum of Civilization, ‘Repatriation policy’, available at http://www.civili-zation.ca/ about-us/corporation/about-the-corporation/repatriation-policy. Canby, William C., American Indian law in a nutshell, 4th edn, St. Paul Minn.: West Group, 2004. Carducci, Guido, La restitution internationale des biens culturels et des objects d’art, Paris: Librairie Ge´ne´rale de Droit et de Jurisprudence E.J.A., 1997. Carino, Joji, ‘Chapter II: Poverty and well-being’, in UN, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Social Policy and Development, Secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (ed.), State of the world’s indigenous peoples: ST/ESA/328, New York: United Nations publication, 2009, pp. 13–49. Carpenter, Kristen A., et al., ‘In defense of property’ (2009) The Yale Law Journal, 118, pp. 1022–1125. Cassese, Antonio, Self-determination of peoples: A legal reappraisal, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Champagne, Duane (ed.), The native North American almanac: A reference work on native North Americans in the United States and Canada, Detroit Mich.: Gale Research, 1994. Champagne, Duane, Social change and cultural continuity among native nations, Lanham Md.: AltaMira Press, 2007. Champagne, Duane, Notes from the center of Turtle Island, Lanham Md.: AltaMira Press, 2010. Champagne, Duane, ‘Indigenous self-government, cultural heritage, and international trade: A sociological perspective’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 31–58. Charters, Claire, ‘Reparations for indigenous peoples: Global international instruments and institutions’, in Federico Lenzerini (ed.), Reparations for indigenous peoples: International and comparative perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 163–195. 210 Bibliography

Chartrand, Paul L. A. H., ‘Reconciling indigenous peoples’ sovereignty and state sovereignty’ AIATSIS, Research Discussion Paper No. 26 (2009), available at http://www.aiatsis.gov.au/ research/discussion.html. Christ, Thomas and Claudia von Selle, ‘Basel art trade guidelines: Intermediary report of a self- regulation initiative’ Basel Institute on Governance, Working Paper No. 12 (2012), available at http://www.baselgovernance.org/publications/working-papers/. Christen, Kimberly, ‘Opening archives: Respectful repatriation’ (2011) The American Archivist, 74, pp. 185–210. Citroni, Gabriella and Karla I. Q. Osuna, ‘Reparations for indigenous peoples in the case law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’, in Federico Lenzerini (ed.), Reparations for indige- nous peoples: International and comparative perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 318–344. Clijmans, Caroline and Paul Torremans, ‘Law of 16 July 2004 holding the Code of Private International Law (Belgian Official Journal 27 July 2004 – in force as from 1 October 2004)’, in Petar Sˇarcˇevic´, et al. (eds), Yearbook of private international law, vol. 6, Munich and Bern: Sellier European Law Publishers and Sta¨mpfli, 2004, pp. 319–376. Cole, Mark D., Das Selbstbestimmungsrecht indigener Vo¨lker: Eine vo¨lkerrechtliche Bestandsaufnahme am Beispiel der Native Americans in den USA, Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2009. Cometti, Marta, Il Museo delle Culture. Guida alla Collezione, Lugano: Edizioni Citta di Lugano/ MCL, 2009. Coombe, Rosemary J., ‘The properties of culture and the politics of possessing identity: Native claims in the cultural appropriation controversy’ (1993) Canadian Journal of Law and Juris- prudence, 6 (2), pp. 249–285. Coombe, Rosemary J., ‘Legal claims to culture in and against the market: Neoliberalism and the global proliferation of meaningful difference’ (2005) Law, Culture and the Humanities,1, pp. 35–52. Coombe, Rosemary J., ‘Protecting cultural industries to promote cultural diversity: Dilemmas for international policy-making posed by the recognition of traditional knowledge’, in Keith E. Maskus and Jerome Reichman (eds), International public goods and transfer of technology under a globalized intellectual property regime, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 559–641. Coombe Rosemary J., and Joseph F. Turcotte, ‘Indigenous cultural heritage in development and trade: Perspectives from the dynamics of cultural heritage law and policy’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 272–305. Cooter, Robert D., and Wolfgang Fikentscher, ‘Indian common law: The role of custom in American Indian tribal courts (part I of II)’ (1998) American Journal of Comparative Law, 46, pp. 287–338. Cornell, Stephen and Joseph P. Kalt (eds), What can tribes do? Strategies and institutions in American Indian economic development, Los Angeles: UCLA, American Indian Studies Center, 1993. Cornell, Stephen and Joseph P. Kalt, ‘Reloading the dice: Improving the chances for economic development on American Indian reservations’, in Stephen Cornell and Joseph P. Kalt (eds), What can tribes do? Strategies and institutions in American Indian economic development, UCLA, American Indian Studies Center, 1993, pp. 1–51. Cornu, Marie, ‘France’, in Toshiyuki Kono (ed.), The impact of uniform laws on the protection of cultural heritage and the preservation of cultural heritage in the 21st century, Leiden and Boston: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2010, pp. 337–419. Cornu, Marie and Centre d’e´tudes sur la coope´ration juridique internationale Universite´ de Poitiers (eds), Protection de la proprie´te´ culturelle et circulation des biens culturels: E´tude de droit compare´ Europe/Asie, 2008. Bibliography 211

Cornu, Marie, et al., ‘Rapport national: France’, in Marie Cornu and Centre d’e´tudes sur la coope´ration juridique internationale Universite´ de Poitiers (eds), Protection de la proprie´te´ culturelle et circulation des biens culturels: E´tude de droit compare´ Europe/Asie, 2008, pp. 145–253. Cornu, Marie, et al., ‘Synthe`se comparative’, in Marie Cornu and Centre d’e´tudes sur la coope´ra- tion juridique internationale Universite´ de Poitiers (eds), Protection de la proprie´te´ culturelle et circulation des biens culturels: E´tude de droit compare´ Europe/Asie, 2008, pp. 7–74. Cornu, Marie and Marc-Andre´ Renold, ‘New developments in the restitution of cultural property: Alternative means of dispute resolution’ (2010) International Journal of Cultural Property, 17, pp. 1–31. Council of the Canton of Lucerne (‘Regierungsrat des Kantons Luzern’), Protocol No. 1328, 31 May 1988, Luzerner Gerichts- und Verwaltungsentscheide 1988 III No. 16. Cranmer Webster, Gloria, ‘Part III. Repatriation and protection of First Nations culture in Canada: The Potlatch collection repatriation’ (1995) University of British Columbia Law Review, Special issue, pp. 137–142. Cuno, James, Who owns antiquity? Museums and the battle over our ancient heritage, Princeton NJ etc.: Princeton University Press, 2008. Daes, Erica-Irene, ‘An overview of the history of indigenous peoples: Self-determination and the United Nations’ (2008) Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 21 (1), pp. 7–26. Davis, Ann, ‘Repatriation of indigenous artifacts and beyond: How the Glenbow Museum is attempting to change colonial attitudes’, in ICOM International Committee for Museology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39, pp. 115–122. Davis, Megan, ‘The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’, University of New South Wales, Research Paper No. 16 (2008), pp. 55–63, available at http://ssrn.com/ abstract¼1392569. Davies, Caroline,‘Aborigines demand that British Museum returns Truganini bust’, theguardian (16 September 2009), available online at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/16/ tasmania-aborigines-ancestors-repatriation?INTCMP¼SRCH. De Laveleye, Emile, Primitive property, translated from the French by G.R.L. Marriott, London: Macmillan and Co., 1878. De Meo, Antonia M., ‘More effective protection for Native American cultural property through regulation of export’ (1994) American Indian Law Review, 19, pp. 1–72. De Palma, Anthony, ‘Canada’s indigenous tribes receive formal apology’, New York Times (8 January 1998), available online at http://www.nytimes.com/1998/01/08/world/canada-s- indigenous-tribes-receive-formal-apology.html?pagewanted¼all&src¼pm. De Ravel d’Esclapon, Thibault, ‘Teˆtes Ma¯ories: proposition pour un retour en Nouvelle-Ze´lande’, Le Blog Dalloz (9 July 2009), available at http://blog.dalloz.fr/2009/07/09/tetes-maories-prop osition-pour-un-retour-en-nouvellezelande/#more-6375. De Soto, Hernando, ‘Why capitalism works in the west but not elsewhere’, International Herald Tribune (5 January 2001). De Soto, Hernando, ‘Push property rights’, Washington Post (6 January 2002). De Vattel, Emer, Le droit des gens ou principes de la loi naturelle, applique´s a` la conduite et aux affaires des nations et des souverains, London 1758. Denzin, Norman K., et al. (eds), Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies, Los Angeles: SAGE, 2008. Dewhurst, Dale, ‘Parallel justice systems, or a tale of two spiders’, in Catherine Bell and David J. Kahane (eds), Intercultural dispute resolution in aboriginal contexts, Vancouver and Toronto: U.B.C. Press, 2004, pp. 213–231. Dockery, Alfred M., ‘Culture and wellbeing: The case of indigenous Australians’, Curtin Univer- sity of Technology, CLMR Discussion Paper Series No. 09/01 (2009), available at http://ssrn. com/abstract¼1351633. 212 Bibliography

Drahos, Peter, ‘Towards an international framework for the protection of traditional group knowledge and practice’, UNCTAD-Commonwealth Secretariat Workshop on Elements of National Sui Generis Systems for the Preservation, Protection and Promotion of Traditional Knowledge, Innovations and Practices and Options for an International Framework, Geneva, 4–6 February 2004, Presentation note (on file with the author). Dussias, Allison M., ‘Ghost dance and holy ghost: The echoes of nineteenth-century Christianiza- tion policy in twentieth-century Native American free exercise cases’ (1997) Stanford Law Review, 49, pp. 773–852. Dutfield, Graham, ‘Legal and economic aspects of traditional knowledge’, in Keith E. Maskus and Jerome Reichman (eds), International public goods and transfer of technology under a globalized intellectual property regime, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 495–520. Echo-Hawk, Walter, ‘Putting spirits to rest. Sacred tribal artefacts and remains finally coming home 5 years after law was passed’, Seattle Post Intelligence (11 March 1996). Eggertsson, Thra´inn, ‘Open access versus common property’, in Terry L. Anderson and Fred S. McChesney (eds), Property rights: Cooperation, conflict, and law, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003, pp. 73–89. Eide, Asbjørn, ‘Economic, social and cultural rights as human rights’, in Asbjørn Eide, et al. (eds), Economic, social and cultural rights: A textbook, 2nd edn, Dordrecht etc.: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2001, pp. 9–28. Eide, Asbjørn, et al. (eds), Economic, social and cultural rights: A textbook, 2nd edn, Dordrecht etc.: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2001. Eide, Asbjørn, and Allan Rosas, ‘Economic, social and cultural rights: A universal challenge’, in Asbjørn Eide, et al. (eds), Economic, social and cultural rights: A textbook, 2nd edn, Dordrecht etc.: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2001, pp. 3–7. Einhorn, Talia, ‘American vs. European private international law: The case for a model conflict of laws act (MCLA)’, in Katharina Boele-Woelki, et al. (eds), Convergence and divergence in private international law: Liber Amicorum Kurt Siehr, Zurich: Schulthess, 2010, pp. 3–36. Engels, Friedrich, The origin of the family, private property and the state: In the light of the researches of Lewis H. Morgan, 6th edn, Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House (first published in 1884 in Zurich). Engelsman, Steven, interview by Julia Kospach, ‘Das Ende des Dornro¨schenschlafs’, A4 Magazin fu¨r Aussereuropa¨ische Kunst und Kultur (April 2012), pp. 75–77. Esposito, Tania, ‘Finanzhilfen fu¨r den Erhalt des beweglichen kulturellen Erbes im musealen Kontext’, in Schweizerische UNESCO-Kommission (ed.), Die UNESCO-Konvention von 1970 und ihre Anwendung ¼ La Convention UNESCO de 1970 et sa mise en application: Standort- bestimmung und Perspektiven ¼ Etat des lieux et perspectives, Zurich, etc.: Dike, et al., 2011, pp. 87–93. Fayet, Roger, ‘Out of neverland: Towards a consequentialist ethics of alienation’, in ICOM International Committee for Museology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39, pp. 51–59. Fechner, Frank, et al. (eds), Prinzipien des Kulturgu¨terschutzes: Ansa¨tze im deutschen, europa¨ischen und internationalen Recht, Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1996. Fenton, William N., ‘The New York State wampum collection: The case for the integrity of cultural treasures’ (1971) Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 115, pp. 437–461. Fenton, William N., ‘Return of eleven wampum belts to the Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy on Grand River, Canada’ (1989) Ethnohistory, 36, pp. 392–410. Fiedler, Wilfried, ‘Die Alliierte (Londoner) Erkla¨rung vom 5.1.1943: Inhalt, Auslegung und Rechtsnatur in der Diskussion der Nachkriegsjahre’, in Ju¨rgen Basedow, et al. (eds), Private law in the international arena: From national conflict rules towards harmonization and unification. Liber amicorum Kurt Siehr, The Hague: TMC Asser Press, 2000. Bibliography 213

Fiedler, Wilfried, ‘Zwischen Kriegsbeute und internationaler Verantwortung – Kulturgu¨ter im Internationalen Recht der Gegenwart: Pla¨doyer fu¨r eine zeitgema¨sse Praxis des Internationalen Rechts’, in Gerte Reichelt (ed.), Neues Recht zum Schutz von Kulturgut: Internationaler Kulturgu¨terschutz. EG-Richtlinie, UNIDROIT-Konvention und Folgerecht, Vienna: Manzsche Verlags- und Universita¨tsbuchhandlung, 1997, pp. 147–160. Fikentscher, Wolfgang, Law and anthropology: Outlines, issues, and suggestions, Munich: Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2009. Fitschen, Thomas, ‘30 Jahre “Ru¨ckfu¨hrung von Kulturgut“’ Vereinte Nationen, 2004, pp. 46–51. Fitzpatrick, Daniel, ‘Possession, custom and social order: Property rights in a fragile state’, 2nd Annual Meeting of the Law, Property and Society Association (ALPS), Washington D.C., 4–5 March 2011 (Presentation). Flanagan, Thomas, First Nations? Second thoughts, Montreal Ithaca NY: McGill-Queen’s Uni- versity Press, 2000. Fletcher, Matthew L. M., ‘Toward a theory of intertribal and intratribal common law’ (2006) Houston Law Review, 43, pp. 701–741. Forde, Cressida, et al. (eds), The dead and their possessions: Repatriation in principle, policy, and practice, New York: Routledge, 2004. Francioni, Francesco, ‘Reparation for indigenous peoples: Is international law ready to ensure redress for historical injustices?’, in Federico Lenzerini (ed.), Reparations for indigenous peoples: International and comparative perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 27–45. Francioni, Francesco and Martin Scheinin (eds), Cultural human rights, Leiden and Boston: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2008. Frankel, Susy, ‘A New Zealand perspective on the protection of ma¯tauranga Ma¯ori (traditional knowledge)’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 439–459. Frankel, Susy, ‘Attempts to protect indigenous culture through free trade agreements’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 118–143. Fraoua, Ridha, Le traffic illicite des biens culturels et leur restitution: Analyse des re´glementations nationales et internationales, critiques et propositions, Fribourg: Editions Universitaires, 1985. Freytag, Christiane, ‘“Cultural Heritage“: Ru¨ckgabeanspru¨che von Ursprungsla¨ndern auf “ihr“ Kulturgut?’, in Frank Fechner, et al. (eds), Prinzipien des Kulturgu¨terschutzes: Ansa¨tze im deutschen, europa¨ischen und internationalen Recht, Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1996, pp. 175–200. Gegas, Evangelos I., ‘International arbitration and the resolution of cultural property disputes: Navigating the stormy waters surrounding cultural property’ (1997) Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 13, pp. 129–166. Gerstenblith, Patty, ‘Acquisition and deacquisition of museum collections and the fiduciary obligations of museums to the public: Symposium’ (2003) Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law, 11, pp. 409–465. Gerstenblith, Patty, Art, cultural heritage, and the law: Cases and materials, 2nd edn, Durham NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2008. Ghosh, Shubha and Robin P. Malloy (eds), Creativity, law and entrepreneurship, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2011. Gibson, Johanna, ‘The UDHR and the group: Individual and community rights to culture’ (2008) Hamline Journal of Public Law & Policy, 30, pp. 285–317. Gienow-Hecht, Jessica C. E. and Mark C. Donfried (eds), Searching for a cultural diplomacy, New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2010. Gienow-Hecht, Jessica C. E. and Mark C. Donfried, ‘The model of cultural diplomacy: Power, distance, and the promise of civil society’, in Jessica C. E. Gienow-Hecht and 214 Bibliography

Mark C. Donfried (eds), Searching for a cultural diplomacy, New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2010, pp. 13–29. Gienow-Hecht, Jessica C. E., ‘What are we searching for? Culture, diplomacy, agents, and the state’, in Jessica C. E. Gienow-Hecht and Mark C. Donfried (eds), Searching for a cultural diplomacy, New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2010, pp. 3–12. Gii-dahl-guud-sliiaay (Terry-Lynn Williams), ‘Cultural perpetuation: Repatriation of First Nations cultural heritage’ (1995) U.B.C. Law Review, Special edition, pp. 183–201. Girsberger, Martin and Benny Mu¨ller, ‘International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: An IP-practitioners’ perspective’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 175–195. Goldberg, Adam, ‘Reaffirming McClain: The national Stolen Property Act and the abiding trade in looted cultural objects’ (2006) University of California Law Review, 53, pp. 1031–1071. Goldberg, Carole, ‘Law and legislation: Overview: U.S. law and legal issues’, in Duane Champagne (ed.), The native North American almanac: A reference work on native North Americans in the United States and Canada, Detroit Mich.: Gale Research, 1994, pp. 449–461. Goldberg, Carole, ‘American Indians and preferential treatment’ (2002) UCLA Law Review, 49, pp. 943–989. Goldberg, Carole, ‘Individual rights and tribal revitalization’ (2003) Arizona State Law Journal, 35, pp. 898–938. Goldberg, Carole, ‘A United States perspective on the protection of indigenous cultural heritage’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 331–361. Goldberg, Carole, et al., American Indian law: Native nations and the federal system cases and materials, 6th edn, New Providence NJ and San Francisco CA: LexisNexis Matthew Bender, 2010. Graber, Christoph B., Handel und Kultur im Audiovisionsrecht der WTO: Vo¨lkerrechtliche, o¨konomische und kulturpolitische Grundlagen einer globalen Medienordnung, Bern: Sta¨mpfli, 2003. Graber, Christoph B., ‘The new UNESCO Convention on Cultural Diversity: A counterbalance to the WTO?’ (2006) Journal of International Economic Law, 9, pp. 553–574. Graber, Christoph B., ‘Traditional cultural expressions in a matrix of copyright, cultural diversity and human rights’, in Fiona Macmillan (ed.), New directions in copyright law, vol. 5, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2007, pp. 45–71. Graber, Christoph B., ‘Substantive rights and obligations under the UNESCO Convention on Cultural Diversity’, in Hildegard Schneider and Peter van den Bossche (eds), Protection of cultural diversity from an international and European perspective, Antwerp: Intersentia, 2008, pp. 141–162. Graber, Christoph B., ‘Using human rights to tackle fragmentation in the field of traditional cultural expressions: an institutional approach’, in Christoph B. Graber and Mira Burri-Nenova (eds), Intellectual property and traditional cultural expressions in a digital environment, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2008, pp. 98–120. Graber, Christoph B., ‘Can modern law safeguard archaic cultural expressions?: Observations from a legal sociology perspective’, in Christoph Antons (ed.), Traditional knowledge, tradi- tional cultural expressions, and intellectual property law in the Asia-Pacific region, Alphen aan den Rijn and Frederick MD: Kluwer Law International and Aspen Publishers, 2009, pp. 159–176. Graber, Christoph B., ‘Institutionalization of creativity in traditional societies and in international trade law’, in Shubha Ghosh and Robin P. Malloy (eds), Creativity, law and entrepreneurship, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2011, pp. 234–263. Graber, Christoph B., ‘Stimulating trade and development of indigenous cultural heritage by means of international law: Issues of legitimacy and method’, in Christoph B. Graber, Bibliography 215

et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 3–30. Graber, Christoph B. and Mira Burri-Nenova (eds), Intellectual property and traditional cultural expressions in a digital environment, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2008. Graber, Christoph B., et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012. Graham, Sarah E., ‘The (real)politics of culture: U.S. cultural diplomacy in UNESCO, 1946–1954’ (2006) Diplomatic History, 30(2), pp. 231–251. Greenfield, Jeanette, The return of cultural treasures, 3rd edn, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Grimm-Weissert, Olga, ‘Fu¨r Indianer ein Sakrileg: Hopi-Masken trotz Protesten in Paris versteigert’, NZZ E-Paper (20 April 2013). Grunstra, Lydia, ‘The duty under NAGPRA to inform repatriation recipients of potentially hazardous substances: A best-practice guide’, in Sherry Hutt and David Tarler (eds), Yearbook of cultural property law 2010, Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press, 2010, pp. 237–258. Gunn, Steven J., ‘The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act at twenty: Reaching the limits of our national consensus’ (2010) William Mitchell Law Review, 36(2), pp. 503–532. Hagan, Horace H., ‘Tribal law of the American Indian’ (1917) Case and Comment: The Lawyer’s Magazine, 23, pp. 735–738. Halpin, Andrew and Volker Roeben (eds), Theorizing the global legal order, Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing, 2009. Harding, Sarah, ‘Bonnichsen v. United States: Time, place, and the search for identity’ (2005) International Journal of Cultural Property, 12, pp. 249–263. Harris, Jennifer, ‘Institutional identity, communities and deaccession’, in ICOM International Committee for Museology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39, pp. 123–133. Hartung, Hannes, ‘Kunstraub in Krieg und Verfolgung: Die Restitution der Beute- und Raubkunst im Kollisions- und Vo¨lkerrecht’, Universita¨tZu¨rich, Dissertation (2004). Hay, Peter, et al. (eds), Resolving international conflicts. Liber amicorum Tibor Va´rady, Budapest and New York: Central European University Press, 2009. Haudenosaunee (Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca, Tuscarora: Kahnawake Branch of the Mohawk Nation, Six Nation Iroquois Confederacy), ‘History & Culture’, available at http:// www.kahnawakelonghouse.com/index.php?mid¼2. Hennessy, Kate, et al., ‘Virtual repatriation and the Application Programming Interface: From the Smithsonian Institution’s MacFarlane Collection to “Inuvialuit Living History”’, in N. Proctor and R. Cherry (eds), Museums and the Web 2012: Proceedings, San Diego: Archives & Museum Informatics (12 April 2012), available at http://www.museumsandtheweb.com/ mw2012/papers/virtual_repatriation_and_the_application_progr. Herna´ndez, Francisca, ‘Museologı´a, restitucio´n del patrimonio e identidad cultural de los pueblos’, in ICOM International Committee for Museology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39, pp. 135–144. Hill, Richard W., ‘Repatriation and the Indian way of mind’, in Sheila Watson (ed.), Museums and their communities, London: Routledge, 2008, pp. 292–323. Hoffman, Barbara T., (ed.), Art and cultural heritage: Law, policy, and practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Holiday, John and Robert S. McPherson, A Navajo legacy: The life and teachings of John Holiday, Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2005. Honan, William H., ‘U.S. returns stolen ancient textiles to Bolivia’, New York Times (27 September 1992). 216 Bibliography

Huang, Patricia H. and Tsung-Huang Hsiao, ‘The brave music of a distant drum’, in ICOM International Committee for Museology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39, pp. 145–154. Humphrey, Caroline and Katherine Verdery, ‘Introduction: raising questions about property’, in Katherine Verdery (ed.), Property in question: Value transformation in the global economy, Oxford: Berg, 2004, pp. 1–25. Hunter, Mary J. B., ‘Tribal court opinions: Justice and legitimacy’ (1998–1999) Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, 8, pp. 142–146. Hutt, Sherry (ed.), Yearbook of cultural property law 2006, Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press, 2006. Hutt, Sherry and David Tarler (eds), Yearbook of cultural property law 2010, Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press, 2010. ICOM International Committee for Museology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39. ICOM, ’ICOM-WIPO Art and Cultural Heritage Mediation’, available at http://icom.museum/ what-we-do/programmes/art-and-cultural-heritage-mediation/icom-wipo-art-and-cultural-heri tage-mediation.html. ICOM, International Council of Museums, ‘Code of Ethics’, available at http://icom.museum/the- vision/code-of-ethics/. ICOM, International Council of Museums, ‘ICOM missions’, available at http://icom.museum/ who-we-are/the-organisation/icom-missions.html. ILO, ‘Convention No. 169’, available at http://www.ilo.org/indigenous/Conventions/no169/lang– en/index.htm. ILO, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, ‘Indigenous people still the poorest of the poor’ (8 August 2001), available at http://www.ilo.org/asia/info/public/pr/lang–en/WCMS_BK_PR_ 26_EN/index.htm. Institut de Droit International, ‘History’, available at http://www.idi-iil.org/idiE/navig_history. html. Institute for Cultural Diplomacy, ‘About the Institute for Cultural Diplomacy’, available at http:// www.culturaldiplomacy.org/index.php?en_abouticd. Institute for Cultural Diplomacy, ‘What is cultural diplomacy?’, available at http://www. culturaldiplomacy.org/index.php?en_culturaldiplomacy. Institute on Mesoamerican History and Culture, University of Oregon-Eugene, ‘Quest for the Maya Codex. Repatriation of Cultural Objects’ (2008), available at http://www. lakelandschools.us/lh/bgriffin/Library/mesoam.htm. International Court of Justice, ‘Legal consequences for states of the continued presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council resolution 276 (1970)’, Advisory Opinion, Reports, 1971. International Court of Justice, ‘Western Sahara’, Advisory Opinion, Reports, 1975. International Law Association (ILA), Committee of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, ‘Interim Report’, The Hague Conference, 2010. Iraola, Roberto, ‘A primer on the criminal penalty provisions of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act’ (2003–2004) American Indian Law Review, 28, pp. 431–445. Jack, Sybil M., ‘The “debatable lands”, terra nullius, and natural law in the sixteenth century’ (2004) Northern History, 41 (2), pp. 289–300. Jayme, Erik, ‘Protection of cultural property and conflict of laws: The Basel Resolution of the Institute of International Law’ (1997) International Journal of Cultural Property, 6(2), pp. 376–378. Jayme, Erik, ‘L’immunite´ des oeuvres d’art preˆte´es: Quelques procedures et legislations re´centes en Europe’, in Marc-Andre´ Renold and Pierre Gabus (eds), Claims for the restitution of looted art ¼ La revendication des oeuvres d’art spolie´es, Zurich: Schulthess, 2004, pp. 175–182. Jessiman, Stacey R., ‘The repatriation of the g’psgolox totem pole: A study of its context, process, and outcome’ (2011) International Journal of Cultural Property, 18, pp. 365–391. Bibliography 217

Johnson, Ralph W. and Sharon I. Haensly, ‘Fifth amendment takings implications of the 1990 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act’ (1992) Arizona State Law Journal, 24, pp. 151–173. Juris International Arbitration and Mediation Centres, ‘International Arbitration - Venice Chamber of National and International Arbitration’ (2006), available at http://www.jurisint.org/en/ctr/ 160.html. Kagan, Tamara, ‘Recovering aboriginal cultural property at common law: A contextual approach’ (2005) University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review, 63, pp. 1–44. Karavas, Vaios and Gunther Teubner, ‘http://CompanyNameSucks.com: The horizontal effect of fundamental rights on private parties within autonomous internet law’, (2003) German Law Journal, 4, pp. 1335–1356. Kaser, Max and Rolf Knu¨tel, Ro¨misches Privatrecht: Ein Studienbuch, 19th edn, Munich: C.H. Beck, 2008. Kasten, Erich (ed.), Properties of culture – culture as property: Pathways to reform in post-Soviet Siberia, Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag, 2004. Kaufmann-Kohler, Gabrielle, ‘Art et arbitrage: Quels enseignements tirer de la re´solution des litiges sportifs?’, in Quentin Byrne-Sutton and Fabienne Geisinger-Marie´thoz (eds), Resolution methods for art-related disputes: Proceedings of a symposium organised on 17 October 1997 by the Centre du Droit de l’Art, Zurich: Schulthess, 1999, pp. 123–151. Kaye, Lawrence M., ‘Disputes relating to the ownership and status of cultural property’, in Quentin Byrne-Sutton and Fabienne Geisinger-Marie´thoz (eds), Resolution methods for art-related disputes: Proceedings of a symposium organised on 17 October 1997 by the Centre du Droit de l’Art, Zurich: Schulthess, 1999, pp. 35–53. Kellerhals, Andreas (ed.), Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Zurich: Schulthess, 1997. Kelly, David, ‘Indians deciding artifacts’ fate. Some want to put relics on display. Others would prefer to dispose of them according to tribal customs’, The Press-Enterprise (11 January 1998). Kipuri, Naomi, ‘Chapter II: Culture’, in UN, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Social Policy and Development, Secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (ed.), State of the world’s indigenous peoples: ST/ESA/328, New York: United Nations publication, 2009, pp. 51–81. Kley-Struller, Andreas, ‘Die Staatszugeho¨rigkeit juristischer Personen’ (1991) Schweizerische Zeitschrift fu¨r internationales und europa¨isches Recht, 2, pp. 163–202. Knott, Hermann J., Der Anspruch auf Herausgabe gestohlenen und illegal exportierten Kulturguts, Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1990. Kono, Toshiyuki (ed.), The impact of uniform laws on the protection of cultural heritage and the preservation of cultural heritage in the 21st century, Leiden and Boston: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2010. Kuprecht, Karolina, ‘Lost within culture. A legal abstract about rights and duties in a cultural property case between the Native American Museum of Zurich, Switzerland and the Native Americans’, UCLA University of California, LL.M. Thesis (Los Angeles, February 2002), on file with the author. Kuprecht, Karolina, ‘Human rights aspects of indigenous cultural property’, in Kerstin Odendahl and Peter J. Weber (eds), Kulturgu¨terschutz – Kunstrecht – Kulturrecht: Festschrift fu¨r Kurt Siehr zum 75. Geburtstag aus dem Kreise des Doktoranden- und Habilitandenseminars “Kunst und Recht“, Baden-Baden, etc.: Nomos, et al., 2010. Kuprecht, Karolina, ‘The concept of “cultural affiliation” in NAGPRA: Its potential and limits in the global protection of indigenous cultural property rights’ (2012) International Journal of Cultural Property, 19, pp. 33–63. Kuprecht, Karolina and Kurt Siehr, ‘International trade in moveable tangible cultural heritage of indigenous peoples: A European perspective’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), Interna- tional trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 246–271. 218 Bibliography

Kurth, James, ‘Western civilization, our tradition’ (2003/2004) Intercollegiate Review, 39, pp. 5–13. Lai, Jessica C., ‘Ma¯ori culture in the modern world: Its creation, appropriation and trade’ University of Lucerne, Switzerland, i-call Working Paper No. 2 (2010), available at http:// www.unilu.ch/files/i-call_working_paper02_lai.pdf. Lai, Jessica C., ‘The protection of Ma¯ori cultural heritage: Post-endorsement of the UN Declara- tion on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’ University of Lucerne, Switzerland, i-call Working Paper No. 2 (2011), available at http://www.unilu.ch/files/i-call_working_paper_2011_02_lai_ maori_cultural_heritage__undrip.pdf. Lai, Jessica C., ‘Ma¯ori traditional cultural expressions and the Wai 262 report: Looking at the details’ University of Lucerne, Switzerland, i-call Working Paper No. 2 (2012), available at http://www.unilu.ch/files/i-call_working_paper_2012_02_jcl_wai-262_and_tces.pdf. Lenzerini, Federico (ed.), Reparations for indigenous peoples: International and comparative perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Lenzerini, Federico, ‘The trail of broken dreams: The status of indigenous peoples in international law’, in Federico Lenzerini (ed.), Reparations for indigenous peoples: International and comparative perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 73–116. Leshchenko, Anna, ‘The principle of the indivisibility of museum collections as part of museo- logical theory and Russian reality’, in ICOM International Committee for Museology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39, pp. 61–71. Lindholm, Charles, Culture and authenticity, Malden, MA and Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2008. Lobo, Susan, ‘The fabric of life: Repatriating the sacred Coroma textiles’, Cultural Survival Quarterly (4 March 2010), available online at http://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/ cultural-survival-quarterly/bolivia/fabric-life-repatriating-sacred-coroma-textiles. Loma’Omvaya, Micah, ‘NAGPRA artefact repatriation and pesticides contamination: The Hopi experience’ (2001) Collection Forum, 17 (1-2), pp. 30–37. Long, Larry and Clay Smith, American Indian law deskbook: Conference of western attorneys general, 4th edn, Boulder Colo.: University Press of Colorado, 2008. Lost Art Koordinierungsstelle Magdeburg, ‘Beratende Kommission’ (1994), available at http:// www.lostart.de/Webs/DE/Kommission/Index.html. Loulanski, Tolina, ‘Revising the concept for cultural heritage: The argument for a functional approach’ (2006) International Journal of Cultural Property, 13, pp. 207–233. Lubina, Katja, ‘Contested cultural property: The return of nazi spoliated art and human remains from public collections’, Universiteit Maastricht, Dissertation (2009). Ludescher, Monika, Menschenrechte und indigene Vo¨lker, Frankfurt am Main and New York: P. Lang, 2004. Luehrmann, Sonja, ‘Beyond repatriation: Collaborations between museums and Alaska native communities’, in Erich Kasten (ed.), Properties of culture – culture as property: Pathways to reform in post-Soviet Siberia, Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag, 2004, pp. 217–229. Macklem, Patrick, ‘Indigenous recognition in international law: Theoretical observations’ (2008) Michigan Journal of International Law, 30, pp. 177–210. Macmillan, Fiona (ed.), New directions in copyright law, vol. 5, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2007. Mairesse, Franc¸ois, ‘La question de l’alie´nation: Cinq pistes de re´flexion’, in ICOM International Committee for Museology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39, pp. 19–24. Mander, Jerry and Victoria Tauli-Corpuz (eds), Paradigm wars: Indigenous peoples’ resistance to globalization, San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 2009. Mann, Golo (ed.), Propyla¨en Weltgeschichte: Eine Universalgeschichte, vol. 8, Frankfurt, etc.: Ullstein GmbH., 1960. Bibliography 219

Markowitz, Harvey (ed.), American Indians. Pueblo tribes, western – Zuni language, Pasadena and Englewood Cliffs: Salem Press, Inc., 1995. Mashberg, Tom, ‘Hopis try to stop Paris sale of artifacts’, New York Times (3 April 2013), available online at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/04/arts/design/hopi-tribe-wants-to-stop- paris-auction-of-artifacts.html?pagewanted¼all&_r¼0. Maskus, Keith E. and Jerome Reichman (eds), International public goods and transfer of technol- ogy under a globalized intellectual property regime, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. McCorquodale, Robert (ed.), Self-determination in international law, The library of essays in international law, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000. McHugh, Paul G., Aboriginal societies and the common law: A history of sovereignty, status, and self-determination, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. McIntosh, Wayne V. (ed.), Property rights and neo-liberalism: Cultural demands and legal actions, Farnham: Ashgate, 2010. McKeown, C. Timothy and Sherry Hutt, ‘In the smaller scope of conscience: The Native American Graves Protection & Repatriation Act twelve years after’ (2002/2003) UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy, 21, pp. 153–212. Mead, H.M., ‘Mataatua Declaration and the case of the carved meeting house Mataatua’ (1995) U.B.C. Law Review, Special edition, pp. 69–75. Melton, Ada P., ‘Indigenous justice systems and tribal society’ (1995–1996) Judicature, 79, pp. 126–133. Merry, Sally E., ‘Legal pluralism’ (1988) Law & Society Review, 22, pp. 869–896. Merryman, John H., ‘Two ways of thinking about cultural property’ (1986) American Journal of International Law, 80, pp. 831–853. Merryman, John H., Two ways of thinking about cultural property: Critical essays on cultural property, art and law, The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2000. Merryman, John H., ‘Cultural property internationalism’ (2005) International Journal of Cultural Property, 12, pp. 11–39. Merryman, John H. (ed.), Imperialism, art and restitution, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Meyer-Hauser, Bernhard F., ‘Ad hoc Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit und UNCITRAL Verfahren- sordnung’, in Andreas Kellerhals (ed.), Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Zurich: Schulthess, 1997, pp. 207–222. Michaels, Ralf, ‘Global legal pluralism’ (2009) Annual Review of Law & Social Science,5, pp. 243–262. Miller, Dorothy L., ‘Non-reservation Indians in the United States’, in Duane Champagne (ed.), The native North American almanac: A reference work on native North Americans in the United States and Canada, Detroit Mich.: Gale Research, 1994, pp. 605–615. Miller, Robert J. and Jacinta Ruru, ‘An indigenous lens into comparative law: The doctrine of discovery in the United States and New Zealand’ (2008) West Virginia Law Review, 111, pp. 849–918. MOA Museum of Anthropology, ‘Collections & research’, available at http://www.moa.ubc.ca/ collections/index.php. Mooney, James, The ghost-dance religion and the Sioux outbreak of 1890, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1991. Morris, Fred A., ‘Law and identity: Negotiating meaning in the Native American Graves Protec- tion and Repatriation Act’ (1997) International Journal of Cultural Property, 6, pp. 199–230. Morris, Kate, ‘Section IV. The private sector. Chapter 2: Strategies and procedures for the repatriation of materials from the private sector’, in American Indian Ritual Object Repatri- ation Foundation (ed.), Mending the circle: A Native American repatriation guide: Under- standing and implementing NAGPRA and the official Smithsonian and other repatriation policies, New York: American Indian Ritual Object Repatriation Foundation, 1996, pp. 64–71. 220 Bibliography

Mosimann, Peter, et al. (eds), Kultur, Kunst, Recht: Schweizerisches und internationales Recht, Basel: Helbing Lichtenhahn, 2009. Mosimann, Peter and Beat Scho¨nenberger (eds), Kunst & Recht: Referate zur gleichnamigen Veranstaltung der Juristischen Fakulta¨t der Universita¨t Basel vom 17. Juni 2011, Bern: Sta¨mpfli, 2011. Mousourakis, George, Fundamentals of Roman Private Law, Heidelberg, et al.: Springer, 2012. Mukurtu, available at http://www.mukurtu.org/. Mu¨ller-Chen, Markus, ‘Die Crux mit dem Eigentum an Kunst’ (2003) Aktuelle Juristische Praxis (AJP), pp. 1267–1279. Mu¨ller-Chen, Markus, ‘Neuere Entwicklungen im internationalen Sachenrecht’ (2005) Aktuelle Juristische Praxis (AJP), pp. 273–280. Mu¨ller-Katzenburg, Astrid, Internationale Standards im Kulturgu¨terverkehr und ihre Bedeutung fu¨r das Sach- und Kollisionsrecht, Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1996. Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, ‘Repatriation’, available at http://www.tepapa. govt.nz/aboutus/repatriation/Pages/overview.aspx. Museum Victoria, ‘Ancestral remains collection’, available at http://museumvictoria.com.au/ collections-research/our-collections/indigenous-cultures/ancestral-remains/. Musgrave, Thomas D., Self-determination and national minorities, Oxford: University Press, 2002. Nafziger, James A. R., ‘Cultural heritage law: The international regime’, in James A. R. Nafziger and Tullio Scovazzi (eds), Le patrimoine culturel de l’humanite´ ¼ The cultural heritage of mankind, Leiden and Boston: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2008, pp. 145–247. Nafziger, James A. R., ‘Protection and repatriation of indigenous cultural heritage in the United States’, in James A. R. Nafziger and Ann M. Nicgorski (eds), Cultural heritage issues: The legacy of conquest, colonization, and commerce, Leiden: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2009, pp. 3779. Nafziger, James A. R. and Rebecca J. Dobkins, ‘The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in its first decade’ (1999) International Journal of Cultural Property,8, pp. 77–107. Nafziger, James A. R. and Tullio Scovazzi (eds), Le patrimoine culturel de l’humanite´ ¼ The cultural heritage of mankind, Leiden and Boston: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2008. Nafziger, James A. R. and Ann M. Nicgorski (eds), Cultural heritage issues: The legacy of conquest, colonization, and commerce, Leiden: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2009. Nafziger, James A. R., et al., Cultural law: International, comparative, and indigenous, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, ‘Federal agency implementation of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. A report by the Makah Indian Tribe and the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers’ (30 June 2008), available at http://www.nathpo.org/nagpra.html. Nationalatlas.gov, ‘Federal lands and Indian reservations’, available at http://nationalatlas.gov/ printable/fedlands.html. Newton, Nell J., ‘Tribal court praxis: One year in the life of twenty Indian tribal courts’ (1997–1998) American Indian Law Review, 22, pp. 285–354. Nicholas, George, et al., ‘Beyond the tangible: Repatriation of cultural heritage, bioarchaeological data, and intellectual property’ (2010) Anthropology News, 51, pp. 11–12. Niesel, Zoe E., ‘Better late than never?: The effect of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act’s 2010 regulations’ (2011) Wake Forest Law Review, 46, pp. 837–865. Noyes, Reinold C., The institution of property: A study of the development, substance and arrangement of the system of property in modern Anglo-American law, New York and Toronto: Longmans and Green and Co., 1936. Nyberg, Helena, ‘Skizirkus auf gestohlenem Land’, Neue Zu¨rcher Zeitung (6 February 2010). Odendahl, Kerstin, Kulturgu¨terschutz: Entwicklung, Struktur und Dogmatik eines ebenenu¨ber- greifenden Normensystems,Tu¨bingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005. Bibliography 221

Odendahl, Kerstin and Peter J. Weber (eds), Kulturgu¨terschutz – Kunstrecht – Kulturrecht: Festschrift fu¨r Kurt Siehr zum 75. Geburtstag aus dem Kreise des Doktoranden- und Habilitan- denseminars “Kunst und Recht”, Baden-Baden, etc.: Nomos, et al., 2010. Office of Indian Affairs, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1883. O’Keefe, Patrick J., ‘Export and import controls on movement of the cultural heritage: Problems at the national level’ (1983) Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce, 10, pp. 352–370. O’Keefe, Patrick J., Commentary on the UNESCO 1970 Convention on the means of prohibiting and preventing the illicit import, export and transfer of ownership of cultural property, 2nd edn, Leicester: Institute of Art and Law, 2007. O’Keefe, Patrick J., ‘Repatriation of sacred objects’, in Lyndel V. Prott (ed.), Witnesses to history. A compendium of documents and writings on the return of cultural objects, Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2009, pp. 225–238. Organization of the American States (OAS), Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs, ‘Record of the current status of the Draft American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’, (OAS Doc. OEA/Ser.K/XVI-GT/DADIN/doc.334/08 rev. 6 corr. 1, 20 March 2011). Overstall, Richard, et al., ‘The law is opened: The constitutional role of tangible and intangible property in Gitanyow’, in Catherine E. Bell and Val Napoleon (eds), First Nations cultural heritage and law: Case studies, voices, and perspectives, Vancouver BC: U.B.C. Press, 2008. Palmer, Norman E., ‘Art loans’ (1995) U.B.C. Law Review (Special edition), pp. 285–305. Palmer, Norman E., ‘Extra-curial resolution of contract issues involving art and antiquities: The English experience’, in Quentin Byrne-Sutton and Fabienne Geisinger-Marie´thoz (eds), Reso- lution methods for art-related disputes: Proceedings of a symposium organised on 17 October 1997 by the Centre du Droit de l’Art, Zurich: Schulthess, 1999, pp. 55–81. Palmer, Norman E., Museums and the holocaust: Law, principles and practice, London: Institute of Art and Law, 2000. Palmer, Norman E., ‘Relinquishment and responsibility: The de-accessioning of objects from museum collections in England and other common law countries’, in Peter Mosimann and Beat Scho¨nenberger (eds), Kunst & Recht: Referate zur gleichnamigen Veranstaltung der Juristischen Fakulta¨t der Universita¨t Basel vom 17. Juni 2011, Bern: Sta¨mpfli, 2011, pp. 13–76. Palmer, Christian and Mervyn L. Tano, Mokomokai: Commercialization and desacralization, Denver, USA: International Institute for Indigenous Resource Management, 2004 (electronic version). Panel for a National Dialogue on Museum/Native American Relations, ‘Report of the Panel for a National Dialogue on Museum/Native American Relations’, 28 February 1990, reprinted in (1992) Arizona State Law Journal, 24, pp. 487–500. Paradies, Yin C., ‘Beyond black and white: Essentialism, hybridity and indigeneity’ (2006) Journal of Sociology, 42, pp. 355–367. Paterson, Robert K., ‘Case notes: Bolivian textiles in Canada’ (1993) International Journal of Cultural Property, 2, pp. 359–370. Paterson, Robert K., ‘Claiming possession of the material cultural property of indigenous peoples’ (2001) Connecticut Journal of International Law, 16, pp. 283–295. Pearson, Heath, ‘Homo economicus goes native, 1859–1945: The rise and fall of primitive economics’ (2000) History of Political Economy, 32 (4), pp. 933–989. Pommersheim, Frank, ‘Tribal courts: providers of justice and protectors of sovereignty’ (1995) Judicature, 79, pp. 110–112. Porter, Robert B., ‘Strengthening tribal sovereignty through peacemaking: How the Anglo- American legal tradition destroys indigenous societies’ (1996–1997) Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 28, pp. 235–306. Prott, Lyndel V., Commentary on the UNIDROIT Convention, Leicester: Institute of Art and Law, 1997. 222 Bibliography

Prott, Lyndel V., ‘The international movement of cultural objects’ (2005) International Journal of Cultural Property, 12, pp. 225–248. Prott, Lyndel V. (ed.), Witnesses to history. A compendium of documents and writings on the return of cultural objects, Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organi- zation, 2009. Prott, Lyndel V. and Patrick J. O’Keefe, Law and the cultural heritage, London and Edinburgh: Butterworths, 1989. Prott, Lyndel V. and Patrick J. O’Keefe, ‘“Cultural heritage” or “cultural property”?’ (1992) International Journal of Cultural Property, 1, pp. 307–320. Protzman, Ferdinand, ‘Justice delayed’, ARTnews (1998). Proudhon, Pierre J., ‘Qu’est-ce que la proprie´te´? ou Recherche sur le principe du droit et du government’, edited and translated by Donald R. Kelley and Bonnie G. Smith, in What is property, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994 (first published 1840 in French). Pullar, Gordon, ‘The Qikertarmiut and the scientist: Fifty years of clashing world views’ (1995) U.B.C. Law Review, Special issue, pp. 119–135. Qureshi, Sardiah, ‘Displaying Sara Baartman, the “Hottentot Venus”’ (2004) History of Science, pp. 233–257. Raicˇ, David, Statehood and the law of self-determination, The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2002. Rao, Vijayendra and Michael Walton (eds), Culture and public action, Stanford: Stanford Univer- sity Press, 2004. Rasche`r, Andrea, Kulturgu¨tertransfer und Globalisierung, Zurich and Baden-Baden: Schulthess and Nomos, 2000. Rasche`r, Andrea, et al. (eds), Cultural property transfer ¼ Transfert des biens culturels ¼ Trasferimento dei beni culturali ¼ Kulturgu¨tertransfer, Zurich, etc.: Schulthess, et al., 2005. Rasche`r, Andrea and Giorgio Bomio, ‘6. Kapitel: Kulturgu¨tertransfer: § 6 Strafen und Rechtshilfe’, in Peter Mosimann, et al. (eds), Kultur, Kunst, Recht: Schweizerisches und internationales Recht, Basel: Helbing Lichtenhahn, 2009, pp. 367–394. Rau, Alan S., et al., ‘Mediating in art-related disputes’, in Quentin Byrne-Sutton and Fabienne Geisinger-Marie´thoz (eds), Resolution methods for art-related disputes: Proceedings of a symposium organised on 17 October 1997 by the Centre du Droit de l’Art, Zurich: Schulthess, 1999, pp. 153–198. Reciprocal Research Network, ‘First Nations items from the Northwest Coast’, available at http:// www.rrnpilot.org/. Reichelt, Gerte, ‘Einfu¨hrung in die Thematik’, in Gerte Reichelt (ed.), Internationaler Kulturgu¨- terschutz. Wiener Symposion 18./19. Oktober 1990, Vienna: Manzsche Verlags- und Universi- ta¨tsbuchhandlung, 1992, pp. 31–38. Reichelt, Gerte (ed.), Internationaler Kulturgu¨terschutz. Wiener Symposion 18./19. Oktober 1990, Vienna: Manzsche Verlags- und Universita¨tsbuchhandlung, 1992. Reichelt, Gerte (ed.), Neues Recht zum Schutz von Kulturgut: Internationaler Kulturgu¨terschutz. EG-Richtlinie, UNIDROIT-Konvention und Folgerecht, Vienna: Manzsche Verlags- und Universita¨tsbuchhandlung, 1997. Reid, John P., ‘The Cherokee thought: An apparatus of primitive law’ (1971) New York University Law Review, 46, pp. 281–302. Renold, Marc-Andre´, ‘An important Swiss decision relating to the international transfer of cultural goods: The Swiss supreme court’s decision on the giant antique mogul gold coins’ (2006) International Journal of Cultural Property, 13, pp. 361–369. Renold, Marc-Andre´, ‘Le droit de l’art et des biens culturels en Suisse: Questions choisies’ (2010) Zeitschrift fu¨r Schweizerisches Recht, 129, pp. 139–219. Renold, Marc-Andre´ and Pierre Gabus (eds), Claims for the restitution of looted art ¼ La revendication des oeuvres d’art spolie´es, Zurich: Schulthess, 2004. Renold, Marc-Andre´ and Raphae¨l Contel, ‘Rapport national: Suisse’, in Marie Cornu and Centre d’e´tudes sur la coope´ration juridique internationale Universite´ de Poitiers (eds), Protection de Bibliography 223

la proprie´te´ culturelle et circulation des biens culturels: E´tude de droit compare´ Europe/Asie, 2008, pp. 323–428. Richert, Philippe, ‘Proposition de loi visant a` autoriser la restitution par la France des teˆtes Ma¯ories ’, Report to the Commission of Cultural Affairs, Report No. 482, 2008-2009, (23 June 2009). Richland, Justin B. and Sarah Deer, Introduction to tribal legal studies, Lanham: AltaMira Press, 2010. Riley, Angela, ‘Indian remains, human rights: Reconsidering entitlement under the Native Ameri- can Graves Protection and Repatriation Act’ (2002) Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 34, pp. 49–94. Riley, Angela, ‘“Straight stealing”: Towards an indigenous system of cultural property protection’ (2005) Washington Law Review, 80, pp. 69–164. Rodrı´guez-Pin˜ero, Luis, Indigenous peoples, postcolonialism, and international law: The ILO regime (1919-1989), Oxford New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Rowley, Susan et al., ‘Building an on-line research community: The Reciprocal Research Net- work’, in J. Trant and D. Bearman (eds), Museums and the Web 2010: Proceedings, Toronto: Archives & Museum Informatics (31 March 2010) available at http://www.archimuse.com/ mw2010/papers/rowley/rowley.html. Roy, Raja D., ‘Challenges for juridical pluralism and customary laws of indigenous peoples: The case of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh’ (2004) Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 21, pp. 113–183. Rudenstine, David, ‘Symposium. IV. Cultural property: The hard question of repatriation: The rightness and utility of voluntary repatriation’ (2001) Cardozo Art & Entertainment Law Journal, 19, pp. 69–104. Sackler, Elizabeth, ‘Section IV. The private sector. Chapter 1: About the American Indian Ritual Object Repatriation Foundation’, in American Indian Ritual Object Repatriation Foundation (ed.), Mending the circle: A Native American repatriation guide: Understanding and implementing NAGPRA and the official Smithsonian and other repatriation policies, New York: American Indian Ritual Object Repatriation Foundation, 1996, pp. 58–63. Sanborn, Andrea, ‘The ceremonial mask of the Kwakwaka’wakw First Nations from the British Museum – on long-term loan – to the U’mista Cultural Centre in Alert Bay, British Columbia, Canada’ (1 May 2008), available at http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php-URL_ ID¼37121&URL_DO¼DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION¼201.html. Scheiner, Tereza M., ‘Museums, museology and the restitution of cultural heritage at the dawn of a new global ethics’, in ICOM International Committee for Museology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39, pp. 31–32. Schillaci, Michael A. and Wendy J. Bustard, ‘Controversy and conflict: NAGPRA and the role of biological anthropology in determining cultural affiliation’ (2010) Political and Legal Anthro- pology Review, 32 (2), pp. 352–373. Schilling-Vacaflor, Almut, ‘Democratizing resource governance through prior consultations? Lessons from Bolivia’s hydrocarbon sector’ German Institute of Global and Area Studies, GIGA Working Papers No. 184 (2012), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? abstract_id¼1984033. Schneider, Cynthia P., Diplomacy that works: ‘Best practices’ in cultural diplomacy, Washington D.C.: Center for Arts and Culture, 2003. Schneider, Hildegard and Peter van den Bossche (eds), Protection of cultural diversity from an international and European perspective, Antwerp: Intersentia, 2008. Schneider, Marina, ‘1995 UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects: Explanatory report prepared by the UNIDROIT Secretariat’ (2001) Uniform Law Review, 61, pp. 476–564. Scho¨nenberger, Beat, ‘Don’t be afraid of the Indians! Case study part II: Analysis’, Basel Institute on Governance Conference on Governance of Cultural Property: Preservation and Recovery, Basel, 29–30 September 2009, Presentation available at http://www.baselgovernance.org/ 224 Bibliography

events/past-events/combating-the-financing-of-terrorism-copy-1/governance-of-cultural-protery- presentations-and-papers/. Scho¨nenberger, Beat, Restitution von Kulturgut: Anspruchsgrundlagen, Restitutionshindernisse, Entwicklung, Bern: Sta¨mpfli, 2009. Schweizerische UNESCO-Kommission (ed.), Die UNESCO-Konvention von 1970 und ihre Anwendung ¼ La Convention UNESCO de 1970 et sa mise en application: Standort- bestimmung und Perspektiven ¼ Etat des lieux et perspectives, Zurich etc.: Dike, et al., 2011. Schuster, Peter-Klaus, ‘The Treasures of World Culture in the Public Museum’ (2004) ICOM News,1. Scott, Craig, ‘Interdependence and permeability of human rights norms: Towards a partial fusion of the international covenants on human rights’ (1989) Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 27, pp. 769–878. Scott, John and Federico Lenzerini, ‘International indigenous and human rights law in the context of trade in indigenous cultural heritage’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 61–87. Scovazzi, Tullio, ‘La notion de patrimoine culturel de l’humanite´ dans les instruments internationaux’, in James A. R. Nafziger and Tullio Scovazzi (eds), Le patrimoine culturel de l’humanite´ ¼ The cultural heritage of mankind, Leiden and Boston: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2008, pp. 145–247. Sealaska, ‘About us’, available at http://www.sealaska.com/page/about_us.html. Serv Wiemers and Leo van der Vlist, ‘Hillary Clinton erkende dat paspoort wel: Erken indiaans paspoort ook hier’, NRC (9 April 2013). Shapiro, Daniel, ‘Introduction: Ethical considerations and cultural property’ (1998) International Journal of Cultural Property, 7, pp. 5–6. Shaw, Malcolm N., International law, 6th edn, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Siehr, Kurt, ‘Zivilrechtliche Fragen des Kulturgu¨terschutzes’, in Gerte Reichelt (ed.), Internationaler Kulturgu¨terschutz, Vienna: Manzsche Verlags- und Universita¨tsbuch- handlung, 1992. Kurt Siehr, ‘International art trade and the law’ (1993) Recueil des cours. Collected courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, 243 (4), pp. 9–292. Siehr, Kurt, ‘Rechtsfragen zum Handel mit geraubten Kulturgu¨tern in den Jahren 1935–1950’, in Unabha¨ngige Expertenkommission Schweiz – Zweiter Weltkrieg (UEK) (ed.), Die Schweiz, der Nationalsozialismus und das Recht. Band 2: Privatrecht, vol. 19, Zurich: UEK Publications, 2001. Siehr, Kurt, ‘Resolution of Disputes in International Trade, Third Annual Conference of the Venice Court of National and International Arbitration’ (2001) International Journal of Cultural Property, 10, pp. 122–126. Siehr, Kurt, ‘Restitution of looted art in private international law’, in Marc-Andre´ Renold and Pierre Gabus (eds), Claims for the restitution of looted art ¼ La revendication des oeuvres d’art spolie´es, Zurich: Schulthess, 2004, pp. 71–94. Siehr, Kurt, ‘Internationaler Rechtsschutz von Kulturgu¨tern: Schutz der bildenden Kunst in Vergangenheit, Gegenwart und Zukunft’ (2005) Swiss Review of International and European Law, 1, pp. 53–77. Siehr, Kurt, ‘Minderheiten im Internationalen Privatrecht’, in Michael Stathopoulos, et al. (eds), Festschrift fu¨r Apostolos Georgiades, Munich and Bern: Beck and Sta¨mpfli, 2005, pp. 921–939. Siehr, Kurt, ‘Internationale Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit u¨ber Kulturgut-Streitigkeiten’, in Peter Hay, et al. (eds), Resolving international conflicts. Liber Amicorum Tibor Va´rady, Budapest and New York: Central European University Press, 2009, pp. 255–266. Siehr, Kurt, ‘Indigenous cultural heritage in domestic and international trade and commerce: Legal aspects’, Workshop on International Trade in Indigenous Cultural Heritage, Lucerne, 17–19 January 2011 (Presentation). Bibliography 225

Simpson, Moira G., Making representations: Museums in the post-colonial era, London and New York: Routledge, 2001. Singer, Joseph W., ‘Original acquisition of property: From conquests & possession to democracy & equal opportunity’ Harvard Law School, Public Law & Legal Theory Working Paper Series No. 10-28 (2010), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract¼1587363. Smith, Linda T., Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples, London: Zed Books, 2006. Sprecher, Jo¨rg, ‘Ru¨ckkehr der Segesserschen Ledermalereien nach New Mexico’, in Peter J. Weber, et al. (eds), Liber discipulorum et amicorum: Festschrift fu¨r Prof. Dr. Kurt Siehr zum 65. Geburtstag, Zurich: Schulthess, 2001, pp. 207–214. Stamatoudi, Irini A., Cultural property law and the restitution of cultural property: A commentary to international conventions and European Union law, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2011. Stathopoulos, Michael, et al. (eds), Festschrift fu¨r Apostolos Georgiades, Munich and Bern: Beck and Sta¨mpfli, 2005. Stavenhagen, Rodolfo, ‘Cultural rights: A social science perspective’, in Asbjørn Eide, et al. (eds), Economic, social and cultural rights: A textbook, 2nd edn, Dordrecht etc.: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2001, pp. 85–109. Steiner, Henry J. and Philip Alston, International human rights in context: Law, politics, morals, 2nd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Survival for tribal peoples, ‘About us’, available at http://www.survivalinternational.org/info. Sutton, Imre, ‘Indian land tenure in the twentieth century’, in Duane Champagne (ed.), The native North American almanac: A reference work on native North Americans in the United States and Canada, Detroit Mich.: Gale Research, 1994, pp. 216–223. Switzerland, Federal Department of the Interior, Office of Culture, ‘Bilateral Agreements’, available at http://www.bak.admin.ch/kulturerbe/04371/04377/index.html?lang¼en. Switzerland, Canton of Basel-Stadt, Department of Presidential Affairs, Cultural Office, ‘Museum der Kulturen unterzeichnet Schenkungsvertrag mit Zukunftspotential: Sammlung mit Objekten der Waura´-Indianer verbleibt in Brasilien’ (22 September 2009), available at http://www. medienmitteilungen.bs.ch/showmm.htm?url¼2009-09-22-pd-003. Task Force on Museums and First Peoples (Canada), ‘Turning the page: Forging new partnerships between museums and First Peoples’, Ottawa, 1991. Taubman, Antony, ‘Saving the village: Conserving jurisprudential diversity in the international protection of traditional knowledge’, in Keith E. Maskus and Jerome Reichman (eds), Interna- tional public goods and transfer of technology under a globalized intellectual property regime, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 521–564. Taubman, Antony and Matthias Leistner, ‘Part III. Section 1’, in Silke von Lewinski (ed.), Indigenous heritage and intellectual property: Genetic resources, traditional knowledge, and folklore, 2nd edn, Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2008, pp. 59–179. Tauli-Corpuz, Victoria, ‘Statement of Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, chair of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues on the occasion of the adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’, (13 September 2007), available at http://social.un.org/index/ IndigenousPeoples/DeclarationontheRightsofIndigenousPeoples.aspx. Tauli-Corpuz, Victoria, ‘Our right to remain separate and distinct’, in Jerry Mander and Victoria Tauli-Corpuz (eds), Paradigm wars: Indigenous peoples’ resistance to globalization, San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 2009, pp. 13–21. Teeter, Wendy and Hidonee Spoonhunter, the Curator and Assistant Curator of Archaeology of the UCLA Fowler Museum in Los Angeles, Interview, undertaken on 16 March 2011, on file with the author. Teubner, Gunther and Andreas Fischer-Lescano, ‘Cannibalizing epistemes: Will modern law protect traditional cultural expressions?’, in Christoph B. Graber and Mira Burri-Nenova (eds), Intellectual property and traditional cultural expressions in a digital environment, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2008, pp. 17–45. 226 Bibliography

Teubner, Gunther and Peter Korth, ‘Two kinds of legal pluralism: Collision of transnational regimes in the double fragmentation of world society’, in Margaret Young (ed.), Regime interaction in international law: Facing fragmentation, Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press, 2012, pp. 23–54. The British Museum, ‘Human remains’, available at http://www.britishmuseum.org/about_us/ news_and_press/statements/human_remains.aspx. The British Museum, ‘Human remains. Request for Repatriation of Human Remains to the Torres Strait Islands, Australia’, Web Announcement, available at http://www.britishmuseum.org/ about_us/news_and_press/statements/human_remains/repatriation_to_torres_strait.aspx. The British Museum, ‘Human remains. Request for Repatriation of Human Remains to Tasmania’, Minutes of the Meeting of the Trustees (March 2006). The British Museum, ‘Human Remains. Request for Repatriation of Human Remains to New Zealand’, Minutes of the Meeting of the Trustees (April 2008). The Council of Australian Museums Association, ‘Previous possession, new obligations: Policies for museums in Australia and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’, (1993). The Department for Culture, Media and Sport, ‘Spoliation Advisory Panel’, available at http:// www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/cultural_property/3296.aspx. The World Bank, ‘Indigenous peoples’, Operational Manual, (OP 4.10, July 2005). The World Bank, ‘Physical cultural resources’, Operational Manual, (OP 4.11, July 2006). Theurich, Sarah, ‘Alternative dispute resolution in art and cultural heritage: Explored in the context of the World Intellectual Property Organization’s work’, in Kerstin Odendahl and Peter J. Weber (eds), Kulturgu¨terschutz - Kunstrecht - Kulturrecht: Festschrift fu¨r Kurt Siehr zum 75. Geburtstag aus dem Kreise des Doktoranden- und Habilitandenseminars “Kunst und Recht”, Baden-Baden, etc.: Nomos, et al., 2010, pp. 569–594. Theurich, Sarah, ‘The role of international institutional dispute resolution in art and cultural heritage matters: The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and its Arbitration and Mediation Center’, International Symposium of Litigation in Cultural Property: Judicial and Alternative Means of International Dispute Resolution, Geneva, 11 November 2011, Presentation note (on file with the author). Thorn, Bettina, Internationaler Kulturgu¨terschutz nach der UNIDROIT-Konvention, Berlin: De Gruyter Recht, 2005. Thornberry, Patrick, Indigenous peoples and human rights, Manchester: Manchester University Press; Juris Publishing, 2002. Threedy, Debora L., ‘Claiming the shields: Law, anthropology, and the role of storytelling in a NAGPRA repatriation case study’ (2009) Journal of Land, Resources & Environmental Law, 29, pp. 91–119. Titze, Anja, ‘Die Vereinten Nationen und indigene Vo¨lker’ (2007) Vereinte Nationen,5, pp. 190–197. Tomuschat, Christian (ed.), Modern law of self-determination, Dordrecht etc.: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1993. Tomuschat, Christian, ‘Self-determination in a post-colonial world’, in Christian Tomuschat (ed.), Modern law of self-determination, Dordrecht etc.: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1993, pp. 1–20. Torres, Elizabeth, ‘Chronological overview on developments in Bolivian and Latin American cultural heritage legislation with a special emphasis on the protection of indigenous culture’, in Barbara T. Hoffman (ed.), Art and cultural heritage: Law, policy, and practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 124–133. Tramontana, Enzamaria, ‘Civil society participation in international decision making: Recent developments and future perspectives in the indigenous rights arena’ (2012) The International Journal of Human Rights, 16, pp. 173–192. Trope, Jack F., ‘Section I. NAGPRA. Chapter 1: The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act’, in American Indian Ritual Object Repatriation Foundation (ed.), Mending the circle: A Native American repatriation guide: Understanding and implementing NAGPRA and the official Smithsonian and other repatriation policies, New York: American Indian Ritual Object Repatriation Foundation, 1996, pp. 8–18. Bibliography 227

Trope, Jack F. and Walter R. Echo-Hawk, ‘The Native American Graves Protection and Repatri- ation Act: Background and legislative history’ (1992) Arizona State Law Journal, 24, pp. 35–76. Tsosie, Rebecca, ‘Native nations and museums: Developing an institutional framework for cultural sovereignty’ (2009) Tulsa Law Review, 54, pp. 3–23. Tsosie, Rebecca, ‘Who controls native cultural heritage?: “Art”, “artifacts”, and the right to cultural survival’, in James A. R. Nafziger and Ann M. Nicgorski (eds), Cultural heritage issues: The legacy of conquest, colonization, and commerce, Leiden: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2009, pp. 3–36. Tsosie, Rebecca, ‘International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: An argument for indigenous governance of cultural property’, in Christoph B. Graber, et al. (eds), International trade in indigenous cultural heritage: Legal and policy issues, Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar, 2012, pp. 221–245. U’mista Cultural Society, ‘The potlatch collection history’, available at http://www.umista.org/ collections/index.php. UN, Commission on Human Rights, ‘Human rights and indigenous issues’, Resolution, (UN Doc. E/CN.4/RES/2001/57, 24 April 2001). UN, Commission on Human Rights, Chairperson-Rapporteur Luis-Enrique Cha´vez (Peru), ‘Report of the working group established in accordance with Commission on Human Rights resolution 1995/32 of 3 March 1995 on its tenth session’, (UN Doc. E/CN.4/2005/WG.15/2, 1 September 2005). UN, Commission on Human Rights, Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, Special Rapporteur Jose´ M. Cobo, ‘Study of the problem of discrimi- nation against indigenous populations, volume V: Conclusions, proposals and recommenda- tion’, (UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1986/7/Add.4, UN Sales No. E.86.XIV.3, 1987). UN, Commission on Human Rights, Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, Chairperson-Rapporteur Erica-Irene Daes, ‘Discrimination against indigenous peoples: Study on the protection of the cultural and intellectual property of indigenous peoples’, (UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1993/28, 28 July 1993). UN, Commission on Human Rights, Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, ‘Draft United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’, (UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub2/1994/56, 26 August 1994). UN, Commission on Human Rights, Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, Chairperson-Rapporteur Erica-Irene Daes, ‘Discrimination against indigenous peoples: Protection of the heritage of indigenous people’, Final Report, (E/CN.4/ Sub.2/1995/26, 21 June 1995). UN, Commission on Human Rights, Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, Chairperson-Rapporteur Erica-Irene Daes, ‘Standard setting activities: Evolution of standards concerning the rights of indigenous peoples’, Working paper on the concept of indigenous peoples, (UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub2/AC.4/1996/2, 10 June 1996). UN, Commission on Human Rights, Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Chairperson-Rapporteur Erica-Irene Daes, ‘Human rights of indigenous peoples: Report of the seminar on the draft principles and guidelines for the protection of the heritage of indigenous people’, (UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/26, 19 June 2000). UN, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Social Policy and Development, Secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (ed.), State of the world’s indigenous peoples: ST/ESA/328, New York: United Nations publication, 2009. UN, Economic and Social Council, ‘Study of the problem of discrimination against indigenous populations’, Resolution, (UN Doc. E/RES/1982/34, 7 May 1982). UN, Economic and Social Council, ‘Consultative relationship between the United Nations and non-governmental organizations’, Resolution, (UN Doc. E/RES/1996/31, 25 July 1996). 228 Bibliography

UN, Economic and Social Council, ‘Establishment of a Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues’, Resolution, (UN Doc. E/RES/2000/22, 28 July 2000). UN, Economic and Social Council, Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, Report on the Fifth Session, Supplement No. 3, (UN Doc. E/1991/23-E/C.12/1990/8, 1991). UN, Economic and Social Council, Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 21, Right of everyone to take part in cultural life (art. 15, para. 1 (a), of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights), (UN Doc. E/C.12/GC/21, 2009). UN, Economic and Social Council, Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, ‘Report of the international workshop on methodologies regarding free, prior and informed consent and indigenous peoples’, (UN Doc. E/C.19/2005/3, 17 February 2005). UN, General Assembly, ‘Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States’, Resolution, (UN Doc. A/RES/375 (IV), 6 December 1949). UN, General Assembly, ‘Right to exploit freely natural wealth and resources’, Resolution, (UN Doc. A/RES/626 (VII), 21 December 1952). UN, General Assembly, ‘Permanent sovereignty over natural resources’, Resolution, (UN Doc. 1803 (XVII), 14 December 1962). UN, General Assembly, ‘Charter of economic rights and duties of states’, Resolution, (UN Doc. 3281 (XXIX), 12 December 1974). UN, General Assembly, ‘Restitution of works of art to countries victims of expropriation’, Resolutions, (UN Doc. A/RES/3187(XXVIII), 18 December 1973 and UN Doc. A/RES/3391 (XXX), 19 November 1975). UN, General Assembly, ‘International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People’, Resolution, (UN Doc. A/RES/48/163, 21 December 1993). UN, General Assembly, ‘Second International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People’, Reso- lution, (UN Doc. A/RES/59/174, 24 February 2005). UN, General Assembly, ‘Basic principles and guidelines on the right to a remedy and reparation for victims of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law’, Resolution, (UN Doc. A/RES/60/147, 21 March 2006). UN, General Assembly, ‘Human Rights Council’, Resolution, (UN Doc. A/RES/60/251, 3 April 2006). UN, General Assembly, ‘Return or restitution of cultural property to the countries of origin’, Resolution, (UN Doc. A/RES/56/97, 14 December 2001, UN Doc. A/RES/58/17, 3 December 2003, and UN Doc. A/RES/61/52, 4 December 2006). UN, Human Rights Committee, CCPR General Comment No. 12, Article 1, (UN Doc. HRI/GEN/ 1/Rev.1, 1994, adopted 1984). UN, Human Rights Committee, CCPR General Comment No. 23, Article 27, (UN Doc. HRI/GEN/ 1/Rev.1, 1994, adopted 1994). UN, Human Rights Committee, Concluding Comments on the United States of America, (UN Doc. CCPR/C/79/Add 50, 1995). UN, Human Rights Council, ‘Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’, Resolution, (UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/6/36, 14 December 2007). UN, Human Rights Council, ‘Independent expert in the field of cultural rights’, Resolution, (UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/10/23, 26 March 2009). UN, Human Rights Council, ‘Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights’, Resolution, (UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/19/6, 3 April 2012). UN, Human Rights Council, Independent expert in the field of cultural rights Farida Shaheed, ‘Report’, (UN Doc. A/HRC/17/38, 21 March 2011). UN, Treaty Collections, ‘Chapter IV. Human rights’, available at http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ Treaties.aspx?id¼4&subid¼A&lang¼en. UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), ‘Open-ended intergovernmental expert group on protection against trafficking in cultural property’, available at http://www.unodc.org/unodc/ en/organized-crime/trafficking-in-cultural-property-expert-groups.html. Bibliography 229

Unabha¨ngige Expertenkommission Schweiz – Zweiter Weltkrieg (UEK) (ed.), Die Schweiz, der Nationalsozialismus und das Recht. Band 2: Privatrecht, IXX, Zurich: UEK Publications, 2001. UNESCO, ‘Beginnings: Local & Indigenous Knowledge Systems (LINKS) project’, available at http://portal.unesco.org/science/en/ev.php-URL_ID¼4856&URL_DO¼DO_TOPIC&URL_ SECTION¼201.html. UNESCO, ‘Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Paris, 17 October 2003’, available at http://www.unesco.org/eri/la/convention.asp?language¼E&KO¼17116. UNESCO, ‘Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property. Paris, 14 November 1970’, available at http:// portal.unesco.org/la/convention.asp?KO¼13039&language¼E&order¼alpha. UNESCO, ‘Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions. Paris, 20 October 2005’, available at http://www.unesco.org/eri/la/convention.asp? KO¼31038&language¼E. UNESCO, ‘Resolutions adopted by the United Nations General Assembly about return and restitution of cultural property’, available at http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/themes/ movable-heritage-and-museums/restitution-of-cultural-property/resolutions-adopted-by-the- united-nations-general-assembly-about-return-and-restitution-of-cultural-property/. UNESCO, ‘Cultural Expressions. Operational Guidelines. Articles 7, 8, 17’ (June 2009). UNESCO, ‘Database of national cultural heritage laws’, available at http://www.unesco.org/new/ en/unesco/partners-donors/the-actions/culture/database-of-national-cultural-heritage-laws/. UNESCO, ‘Report of the director-general on the execution of the programme and budget during the previous biennium (2002–2003)’, (UNESCO Doc. 170 EX/6, 33 C/3, 27 August 2004). UNESCO, ‘Report by the director-general on the implementation of the programme and budget (33 C/5) and on results achieved in the previous biennium (2006–2007)’, (UNESCO Doc. 179 EX/4 Rev., Draft 35 C/3, 26 March 2008). UNESCO, ‘Report by the director-general on the execution of the programme (34 C/5) (01 January – 31 December 2008) major programme IV, culture’, (UNESCO Doc. 181-EX4/MAF/CLT, Part II). UNESCO, ‘Report by the director-general on the execution of the programme adopted by the general conference’, (UNESCO Doc. 186 EX/4, Part I, 21 April 2011). UNESCO, ‘Report by the director-general on the execution of the programme adopted by the general conference’, (UNESCO Doc. 187 EX/4, Part I, 26 August 2011). UNESCO, ‘Rules of Procedure for Mediation and Conciliation in Accordance with Article 4, Paragraph 1, of the Statutes of the Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in Case of Illicit Appropriation’, (UNESCO Doc. CLT-2010/CONF.203/COM.16/7, 2010). UNESCO, ‘UNESCO and UNIDROIT – Cooperation in the fight against illicit traffic in cultural property’, Information note, (UNESCO Doc. CLT-2005/Conf/803/2, 16 June 2005). UNESCO, General Assembly, ‘Recommendation concerning the international exchange of cul- tural property’, 26 November 1976. UNESCO, General Assembly, ‘Recommendation for the protection of movable cultural property’, 28 November 1978. UNESCO, General Conference, ‘Resolution creating the Intergovernmental Committee for Pro- moting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in case of Illicit Appropriation’, (UNESCO Doc. 20 C/Resolution 4/7.6/5, 1978). UNESCO, General Conference, ‘Statutes of the Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in case of Illicit Appropriation’, (UNESCO Doc. CLT/CH/INS-2005/21, October 2005) (adopted on 24 October – 28 November 1978, by 20 C/Resolution 4/7.6/5). UNESCO and UNIDROIT, Expert Committee on State Ownership of Cultural Heritage, ‘Model provisions on state ownership of undiscovered cultural objects: Explanatory report with model provisions and explanatory guidelines’, available at http://www.unesco.org/new/en/culture/ themes/movable-heritage-and-museums/restitution-of-cultural-property/standards-for-owner ship/#c317252. 230 Bibliography

UNIDROIT, ‘UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects(Rome, 1995)’, available at http://www.unidroit.org/english/conventions/1995culturalproperty/main. htm United Kingdom, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, Cultural Property Unit, Norman Palmer and James Dowling, ‘The report of the working group on human remains’ (November 2003, updated February 2007). United Kingdom, House of Commons, Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport, ‘Cultural property: Return and illicit trade’, Seventh Report, (HC 371-I, II and III, 18 July 2000). United Kingdom, House of Commons, Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport, ‘Cultural property: Return and illicit trade’, Seventh Report, Minutes of Evidence, Memorandum submit- ted by Glasgow City Council, (Vol. II, HC 371-II, 18 July 2000). United Kingdom, Ministerial Advisory Panel on Illicit Trade, Report on behalf of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, December 2000. United States, Department of the Interior, Indian Affairs, ‘Who we are’, (last updated 5 May 2012), available at http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/index.htm. United States, Department of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, ‘Import Restrictions List & Chart’, available at http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/culprop/ listactions.html. United States, Federal Government, Federal Register (60/232, 4 December 1995). United States, Federal Government, Federal Register (75/190, 1 October 2010). United States, Government Accountability Office (US GAO), ‘Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act: After almost 20 years, key federal agencies still have not fully complied with the Act’, Report to Congressional Requesters (US GAO Doc. GAO-10-768, 2010). United States, Office of Indian Affairs, Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1891. United States, Senate, ‘Providing for the protection of Native American graves and the repatriation of Native American remains and cultural patrimony’, Report No. 101-473, 1990. UNPFII, ‘News and Media’ available at http://social.un.org/index/IndigenousPeoples/ NewsandMedia/MoreNewsandMedia/tabid/1184/currentpage/1/Default.aspx. Vallterra, Marie C., ‘La lutte internationale contre le trafic illicite des biens culturels et la Convention UNESCO de 1970: L’expe´rience trente-cinq ans apre`s’, in James A. R. Nafziger and Tullio Scovazzi (eds), Le patrimoine culturel de l’humanite´ ¼ The cultural heritage of mankind, Leiden and Boston: M. Nijhoff Publishers, 2008, pp. 559–598. Van Banning, Theo R. G., The human right to property, Antwerpen: Intersentia, 2002. Vautravers, Rene´, ‘Tourismus als Chance fu¨r die Aborigines’, Neue Zu¨rcher Zeitung (8 January 2010). Verdery, Katherine (ed.), Property in question: Value transformation in the global economy, Wenner-Gren international symposium series, Oxford: Berg, 2004. Verdross, Alfred, ‘Die Entwicklung des Vo¨lkerrechts’, in Golo Mann (ed.), Propyla¨en Weltgeschichte: Eine Universalgeschichte, vol. 8, Frankfurt, etc.: Ullstein GmbH., 1960, pp. 673–701. Vigneron, Sophie, ‘Rapport national: Grande-Bretagne’, in Marie Cornu and Centre d’e´tudes sur la coope´ration juridique internationale Universite´ de Poitiers (eds), Protection de la proprie´te´ culturelle et circulation des biens culturels: E´tude de droit compare´ Europe/Asie, 2008, pp. 155–322. Vilkuna, Janne, ‘The deaccession of cultural and natural heritage in the traditional museum and the “great museum”: A Finnish view’, in ICOM International Committee for Museology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39, pp. 73–78. Villazor, Rose C., ‘Blood quantum land laws and the race versus political identity dilemma’ (2008) California Law Review, 96, pp. 801–838. Vincenti, Carey N., ‘The reemergence of tribal society and traditional justice systems’ (1995- 1996) Judicature, 79, pp. 134–141. Bibliography 231

Von Feigenblatt, Otto F., ‘Identity and culture: A cultural interpretation of the Hopi-Navajo land dispute’ (2010) Vivat Academia, 111, pp. 35–47. Von Lewinski, Silke (ed.), Indigenous heritage and intellectual property: Genetic resources, traditional knowledge, and folklore, 2nd edn, Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2008. Vrdoljak, Ana F., International law, museums and the return of cultural objects, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Vrdoljak, Ana F., ‘Reparations for cultural loss’, in Federico Lenzerini (ed.), Reparations for indigenous peoples: International and comparative perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 197–228. Waitangi Tribunal, ‘About the Tribunal’, available at http://www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz/about/. Waitangi Tribunal, ‘Ko aotearoa te¯nei: A report into claims concerning New Zealand law and policy affecting Ma¯ori culture and identity’ (2011), available at http://www.waitangitribunal. govt.nz/reports/summary.asp?reportid¼{BF981901-5B55-441C-A93E-8E84B67B76E9}. Waldbauer, Richard and Sherry Hutt, ‘“Cultural property” begins: The centennial of the antiquities act’, in Sherry Hutt (ed.), Yearbook of cultural property law 2006, Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press, 2006, pp. 147–174. Walker, Patrick and Clarine Ostrove, ‘The aboriginal right to cultural property’ (1995) U.B.C. Law Review, Special edition, pp. 13–28. Watson, Sheila (ed.), Museums and their communities, London: Routledge, 2008. Watt, Robin, ‘Museums can never own the remains of other people but they can care for them’ (1995) U.B.C. Law Review, 77, pp. 77–89. Weber, Marc, ‘Archa¨ologische Objekte vor US-amerikanischen Gerichten’, in Peter J. Weber, et al. (eds), Liber discipulorum et amicorum: Festschrift fu¨r Prof. Dr. Kurt Siehr zum 65. Geburtstag, Zurich: Schulthess, 2001, pp. 225–264. Weber, Marc, Unvera¨usserliches Kulturgut im nationalen und internationalen Rechtsverkehr, Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002. Weber, Peter J., et al. (eds), Liber discipulorum et amicorum: Festschrift fu¨r Prof. Dr. Kurt Siehr zum 65. Geburtstag, Zurich: Schulthess, 2001. Weidner, Amalie, Kulturgu¨ter als res extra commercium im internationalen Sachenrecht, Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 2001. Weller, Matthias, ‘Immunity for artworks on loan: A review of international customary law and municipal anti-seizure statutes in light of the Liechtenstein litigation’ (2005) Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 38, pp. 979–1039. Whitt, Laurelyn, Science, colonialism, and indigenous peoples: The cultural politics of law and knowledge, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Widmer, Benno, ‘Die Richtlinien der Washingtoner Konferenz in Bezug auf Kunstwerke, die von den Nazis konfisziert wurden: Anwendung in der Schweizerischen Eidgenossenschaft’ (2009) KUR: Journal fu¨r Kunstrecht, Urheberrecht und Kulturpolitik, 11 (3/4), pp. 86–91. Widmer, Benno, ‘Die Umsetzung der UNESCO-Konvention 1970 durch das Kulturgu¨tertrans- fergesetz in der Schweiz’, in Schweizerische UNESCO-Kommission (ed.), Die UNESCO- Konvention von 1970 und ihre Anwendung ¼ La Convention UNESCO de 1970 et sa mise en application: Standortbestimmung und Perspektiven ¼ Etat des lieux et perspectives, Zurich, etc.: Dike, et al., 2011, pp. 35–49. WIPO, Arbitration and Mediation Center, ‘WIPO Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) for Art and Cultural Heritage’, available at http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/center/specific-sectors/art/. WIPO, ‘Intellectual property needs and expectations of traditional knowledge holders. WIPO report on fact-finding missions on intellectual property and traditional knowledge (1998–1999)’, (April 2001). WIPO, IGC, ‘Protection of traditional knowledge: Overview of policy objectives and core principles’, (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/7/5, 20 August 2004). WIPO, IGC, ‘The protection of traditional cultural expressions/expressions of folklore: Overview on policy objectives and core principles’, (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/7/3, 20 August 2004). 232 Bibliography

WIPO, IGC, ‘The protection of traditional cultural expressions/expressions of folklore: Revised objectives and principles’, (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/16/4, 22 March 2010). WIPO, IGC, ‘The protection of traditional knowledge: Revised objectives and principles’, (WIPO/ GRTKF/IC/18/5, 10 January 2011). Wolfrum, Ru¨diger, Die Internationalisierung staatsfreier Ra¨ume: Die Entwicklung einer internationalen Verwaltung fu¨r Antarktis, Weltraum, Hohe See und Meeresboden ¼ The internationalization of common spaces outside national jurisdiction, Berlin: Springer, 1984. Wright, Shelley, ‘Aboriginal cultural heritage in Australia’ (1995) University of British Columbia Law Review, 45, pp. 45–68. Xanthaki, Alexandra, Indigenous rights and United Nations standards, self-determination, culture and land, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Xiaoyuan, Tu and Tian Jiaxin, ‘Return of cultural relics to the nation(s) of origin: Reflections on the transfer of museum pieces’, in ICOM International Committee for Museology (ed.), ‘Deaccession and return of cultural heritage: A new global ethics’ (2010) ICOFOM Study Series ISS, 39, pp. 207–215. Yazzie, Robert, ‘Navajo peacekeeping: Technology and traditional Indian law’ (1997-1998) St. Thomas Law Review, 10, pp. 95–102. Young, Margaret (ed.), Regime interaction in international law: Facing fragmentation, Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Yu, Peter K., ‘Cultural relics, intellectual property, and intangible heritage’ (2008) Temple Law Review, 81, pp. 1–59. Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2009 Edition. Ziegler, Jean, Der Hass auf den Westen: Wie sich die armen Vo¨lker gegen den wirtschaftlichen Weltkrieg wehren, Munich: C. Bertelsmann, 2009. Zion, James W. and Robert Yazzie, ‘Indigenous law in North America in the wake of conquest’ (1997) Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, 20, pp. 55–84. Index

A Australian government, 149, 150 Abelam, 41 Australian Government Policy on Indigenous Aboriginal titles, 25 Repatriation, 149 Aborigines, 9, 27, 52, 149, 153 Austria, 19 Access, 68, 76, 84, 85, 91, 97, 99, 144, 167, museum of ethnology Vienna, 186 168, 173, 178, 185, 187, 190 Activists, 2, 26, 77, 125, 133, 147 Adverse possession, 102 B Africa, 18, 166 Belgium, 119 commission, 175 private international law code, 120 Alaska, 2, 35, 37 Beneficiaries, 69, 70 Alliances, 134 Benefit of all mankind, 177 Alternative dispute resolution, 92, 139 Benefit-sharing, 187 Alutiiq, 2 BIA, 34, 37, 136 American Indians, 33, 81 Bill of Human Rights, 190 American languages, 34 Binding law, 17, 22, 124, 165, 191 Ancestors, 32, 40, 41, 111, 133, 178, Blackfoot, 153 181, 182 Blood, 34, 35, 38 Ancestral territories, 32 Bolivia, 16, 27, 150, 176 Anthropologists, 6, 13, 50, 57, 176 Bolivian, 11, 16 Apology, 26, 27 Brazil, 148 Applicable law, 17, 18, 92, 111, 133 museum of archaeology and ethnology in Approved assimilation, 6 sa˜o paulo (‘museu de arqueologia e Arbitration, 132, 142–144, 156 etnologia’), 185 Archaeological sites, 7, 104 Brazilian, 185 Artefacts,76 British museum, 15, 16, 107, 116, 130, 153, Artists, 40, 85, 147 182, 185 Art market, 6, 7, 126 Burial objects, 1 Art trader, 134 Asia, 153 Asian, 154 C Assimilation, 10, 25–27, 61 Canada, 16, 18, 23, 26, 51, 52, 76, 88, 96, 105, Association, 68, 108, 126, 128, 129, 133, 134, 129, 161, 172, 176, 183 151, 155 cultural property export and import act Auction, 6, 111, 121, 134, 154, 155 (CPEIA ), 105 Australia, 1, 9, 18, 26, 76, 130, 149, 183 Glenbow Museum, 134, 153, 179

K. Kuprecht, Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Property Claims, 233 DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-01655-9, © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014 234 Index

Canada (cont.) 114, 126–128, 131, 148, 150, 153, 154, MOA museum of anthropology, 130, 186 159, 161, 167, 183, 190, 191 royal ontario museum, 15 Compensation, 78, 89, 94, 120, 123 victoria memorial museum, 15 Competing repatriation requests, 67 Canadian, 11, 14, 15, 179 Conflict of law, 20, 118–120, 167, 168 Capacity to bring an action, 29, 38, 132, 133 Congressional resolution, 27 Capitalism, 46, 52–54 Congress of Vienna, 24 Caribbean, 114 Consultation, 61, 152, 160–162, 170 Casino industry, 27 Context, 7, 11, 22, 80, 125, 127, 130, 138, 164, Cayuga, 12 166, 178, 181 Ceremonial items, 10 Control, 16, 52, 54, 61, 63, 64, 73, 76, 77, 81, Ceremonial objects, 41, 44, 57, 76, 77, 91, 84, 85, 101, 105, 170, 172 114, 189 Convention, 27 Ceremonies, 76 Convention 1970, 40 Ceremony, 2, 12, 14, 15, 27, 41, 54, 67, 78, Convention on Biological Diversity, 160, 177 173, 178, 179, 183 Cook Islands, 1 Chancay, 114 Cooperation, 33, 60, 62, 67, 127, 128, 134, 147, Cherokee, 36, 136 148, 153, 156, 160–161, 185, 186, 190 Chickasaw, 136 Coromen˜os, 16–17, 150, 176 Chiefs, 9, 132, 136 Costs, 135, 137–139, 156, 163 Choctaw, 136 Country of origin, 113 Christianisation, 10, 11, 183 Court(s), 20, 25, 34, 49, 58, 92, 102, 114, 120, Civil law, 100, 103, 133, 135, 137, 184 121, 132, 133, 135–137, 144 Civil rights, 60 Court fees, 139 Claimant, 95, 102, 132, 135, 138, 139, Court litigation, 92, 132, 135–139, 142, 144, 148, 183 156, 187 Code(s), 17, 19, 49, 100, 125, 162, 171 Covenant of the League of Nations, 25 Code of Ethics, 46 Criminal complaint, 138 Collecting, 5, 10, 12, 152, 153 Criminal law, 112 Collection(s), 5, 9, 10, 17, 39, 46, 60, 61, 63, Cultural affiliation, 55–59, 62–64, 66, 68–72, 65–67, 73, 85, 92, 104, 107, 109, 110, 119, 140, 162, 163, 173, 183, 189 115, 117, 127, 130, 150, 153, 154, 156, Cultural diplomacy, 92, 132, 145–149, 151, 181–182, 184–186, 189–191 153, 154, 156 Collection histories, 181–182 Cultural diversity, 23, 26, 67, 98, 99, 147, 177 Collective human rights, 75, 97, 164, 189 Cultural exchange, 145, 190 Collective property, 42–43, 52 Cultural expressions, 84, 98, 99 Collective rights, 19, 43, 75, 88, 132, 133, 169 Cultural heritage, 40–42, 83–85, 90–92, 97, Collectivism, 51 103, 104, 119, 120, 123, 138, 143, 160, Collector(s), 14, 15, 17, 106, 111, 112, 120, 166, 169–171, 175, 177, 190 134, 143, 154, 155, 180, 181 Cultural heritage of mankind, 52 Collision norms, 165, 167–169 Cultural identity, 176–177 Colonies, 19 Cultural indigenism, 3, 91, 92, 190 Colonisation, 2, 21, 24, 25, 32, 38, 54, 93, 109, Cultural institutions, 17, 19, 85, 125, 134, 145, 110, 137, 174–175 146, 157, 182, 183 Columbia, 114 Cultural internationalism, 90, 129 Commercialisation, 182 Culturally sensitive material, 127, 130 Committee of the Rights of Indigenous Cultural nationalism, 90, 105, 176 Peoples of the International Law Cultural patrimony, 10, 44, 45, 55, 61, 63, 64, Association, 32 67, 71, 107 Commoditisation, 42 Cultural property exchange, 152, 157 Common land, 43 Cultural property for mankind, 180 Common law, 33, 100, 137, 165, 171 Cultural property law, 3, 17–19, 42, 64, 71, 90, Communally important cultural objects, 95 92–106, 108, 115–117, 120, 122, 124, Communities, 5, 16, 21, 23, 29, 30, 32, 33, 49, 157, 174 53, 62, 84, 91, 97, 101, 103, 106, 110, Cultural value, 42 Index 235

Custom(s), 17, 21, 28, 48, 53, 54, 57, 63, 76, Excavated/excavations, 2, 4, 8, 55, 63, 64, 70, 119, 128, 132, 144, 150, 157, 162, 96, 108, 119, 146, 162, 174 164–173, 184, 189, 191 Exhibition(s), 13, 61, 153, 178 Customary laws, 17, 21, 32, 49, 62, 97, 98, 109, Expert(s), 23, 56, 57, 84, 93–96, 104, 117, 121, 132, 144, 157, 164–173, 184, 190 122, 127, 135, 150, 156, 178, 185 Cutural affiliation, 73 Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 29 Exported, 8 D Extractive industries, 159 Dances, 11, 12 Darwinism, 7 Deaccessioning, 107, 117, 118, 180 F Decision-making, 62, 84, 131, 136, 160, Fact-finding, 139 168, 189 Family, 10, 26, 43, 51, 62, 117, 136, Declaration on the Granting of Independence to 138, 164 Colonial Countries and Peoples, 25 Fiduciary duties, 67, 181 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Fills museums, 6 Peoples, 19, 28, 76, 84, 189 Financial grants, 67, 115 Decolonisation, 25, 79, 174 Financial resources, 154, 156 Defendant, 71, 96, 101, 132, 135, 149 First International Conference on the Cultural Democratisation, 159 and Intellectual Property Rights of Development Indigenous Peoples, 1 cultural, 80, 82, 181, 184 First Nation(s), 14, 27, 105, 106, 129, 134, 172, economic, 53, 54, 72 176, 186 indigenous, 99 Formalities, 156 individual, 51 Fowler Museum, 66 social, 127 France, 18, 92, 100, 102, 103, 108–112, 116, sustainable, 148 119, 129, 134, 149, 150 tribal, 137 civil code, 109–110 Dialogue, 98, 110, 128, 148, 156, 159, 191 cour de cassation, 103 Discovered, 25, 63, 64, 70, 119 Heritage Code, 109, 110, 116, 118 Discovery doctrine, 25 museum quai branly (muse´e du quai Discrimination, 30, 32, 60, 76, 174, 177 branly), 110 Dispute resolution by commissions and Noumea Agreement, 109 committees, 140 Rouen city Museum for Natural History, Disputes, 23, 25, 27, 48, 58, 91, 132, 135, Ethnography and Prehistory, 109 140–143, 145, 156, 189 Free, prior and informed consent (FPIC), 76, Domestic dependent nation, 36 160–162 Ducation, 146 Free trade agreement, 113 Full-blood, 9 Funerary objects, 44, 55–57, 64, 71, 77 E Education(al), 98, 179, 181 Elders, 132 G Elgin marbles, 182 Gallery, 107, 122, 134 Enforceability, 100, 131 General assembly, 28 England, 18, 81, 92, 102, 116, 121–123, 129, Generations, 30, 47, 86 141, 149, 152 Genetic resources, 161, 167 Estoppel, 102 Gentes, 135 Ethics, 7, 112, 125, 128, 132, 144, 151, 153, Germany, 81, 102, 129, 150 157, 190 Ghost dance, 11–12, 133, 151, 152, 179 Europe, 5, 19, 24, 92, 100, 116, 118, 120, 138, Ghost dancers, 11 184, 190 Glasgow Museums, 12 236 Index

Globalisation, 21, 26, 98 Individual development, 51–52 Good faith (bona fide), 64, 88, 102–104, 116, Individualism, 51 120, 123, 159 Individual rights, 51, 62, 75, 132 Good title, 7 Indonesia, 31 Government, 2, 10, 18, 24, 26, 72, 81, 115, 134, Institute of International Law, 119 136, 145, 148–152 Institutions, 1, 6, 21, 28, 30, 65, 85, 92, 107, G’psgolox totem pole, 185 109, 132, 134, 142, 148, 150, 156, 159, Greece, 46, 102, 182 163, 184 Guinea, 41 Intangible, 41, 42, 45 Intangible cultural property, 97–99 Intellectual property law, 169 H Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 87, Hague Convention for the Protection of 164, 175 Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Interfaces, 169–171 Conflict, 93 Interface system, 170 Haida, 66 Intermediaries, 16, 150, 156 Haisla, 186 International Council of Museums (ICOM), Health, 52, 65, 67 126–128, 144, 153, 190 Hearsay, 56, 57 International Covenant on Civil and Political Heirs, 134, 141 Rights (CCPR), 79–85, 169, 190 Hopi, 65, 111, 112, 134, 154 International customary law, 29, 85–91, 184 Hottentote woman Saartije Baartman, 110, International customary right, 86–88 111, 149 International Decade of the World’s Huari, 114 Indigenous People, 19, 28 Human remain(s), 1, 8–10, 36, 44, 46, 55, 56, International Labour Organization (ILO), 189 58, 60, 64, 65, 72, 76, 77, 89, 91, 107, International law, 17, 19, 23, 27–29, 36, 109, 110, 114, 116, 127, 130, 144, 145, 43, 79, 80, 86, 88, 92, 123, 172, 149, 153, 162, 182, 184 174, 175, 189 Human Rights Council, 28, 29 International organisation(s), 17, 20, 29, 39, Human rights law, 3, 17, 19, 29, 61, 62, 125, 135, 142, 146, 148, 159, 163 75–156, 165, 169, 172, 183, 190 International resolutions, 125 Inventory(ies), 1, 61, 98, 115, 189 Iran, 122 I Civil Code, 122 ICOM Code of Ethics, 126–128, 153 Iroquois, 12–14, 81, 134 ICOM-WIPO Mediation Rules and Italy, 102, 104, 129 Procedures, 144 Identity, 30, 56, 67, 86, 95, 99, 109, 111, 140, 148, 176, 177 J ILA, 32, 86 Japan, 1 ILO, 20, 27–30, 78–79, 87, 158, 161, 164 Judges, 136, 137 ILO Convention 107, 78 Jurisdiction, 34, 35, 50, 72, 103, 121, 124, 133, ILO Convention No.169, 28, 31, 78–79, 158, 135, 138, 142, 146 161, 164 Immunity, 138 Import, 8, 94, 114 K Importation, 113, 150 Kainai, 176, 179 Inalienability, 104, 112 Kamaeku, 23 India, 1, 18, 31, 121 kat’sina mask(s), 111, 134, 154, 183 Indian Act, 15 Kelvingrove Museum, 12 Indian tribe, 36, 45 Kennewick man, 58 Indigenous dispute resolution mechanisms, 137 kinship(s), 47, 50, 54, 56, 135, 136, 163 Indigenous justice, 137 Kwakwaka’wakw, 14–16, 133, 185 Index 237

L National law, 3, 16, 17, 84, 92–124, 130, Label, 139 131, 165 Lakota, 11–12, 133, 138, 179 National Museum of the American Indian Land, 7, 23–25, 40, 43, 47, 54, 61, 64, 68, 87, (NMAI), 5, 15, 60, 129, 153 101, 105, 161, 162, 164, 175 Native American(s), 3, 11, 16, 33, 34, 36, 38, Language(s), 13, 32, 40, 52, 53, 64, 78, 79, 82, 53, 55–73, 81, 83, 88, 105, 119, 136, 142, 144, 147, 176 137, 154, 155 Lapse of time, 103 Native American Graves Protection and Leaders, 10, 44, 61, 136, 140 Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 35 Legal aid, 113, 138 Native Hawaiian organisation(s), 56, 59, Legal pluralism, 17–18, 21, 22 61–63, 65, 140 Lex originis, 119, 120 Natural law, 7, 24, 43 Lex rei sitae, 112, 118, 119 Navajo, 57, 65, 137, 154, 181, 183 Lineal descendants, 64, 140 Peacemaker Court, 137 Loans, 13, 16, 146, 179, 185 Peacemaking Division, 137 Local community, 134 Nazca, 114 Localised states, 21 Negotiations, 13, 90, 96, 136, 141, 147, 160, London Natural History Museum (NHM), 145 182, 187 Nemo plus iuris, 101, 102 The Netherlands, 81 M Restitution Commission, 141 Maasai, 23 New Caledonia, 109 Maˆori, 1, 9, 109, 113, 140, 149, 153, 169, 170, New Zealand, 1, 18, 23, 76, 109, 113, 120, 121, 182 130, 140, 149, 161, 169, 183 Martial law, 86, 93 Historic Articles Act, 121 Media, 5, 26 National Museum Te Papa Tongarewa, Mediation, 132, 140, 141, 144, 145, 156 109, 130, 149, 153 Mediation agreements, 144 NGO, 17, 26, 97, 112, 125, 133, 134, Mexico, 57, 117, 151 160, 163 Minimal standards, 172, 190 Nicaragua, 164 Minimum standards, 126 Non-binding, 28, 29, 68, 85, 91, 92, 141, Minorities, 79, 82, 83, 85 147, 189 Modernisation /modernising, 22, 180, 184 Non-governmental organisations, 17 Mohawk, 12, 187 Non-retroactivity, 88, 94, 123–124, 190 Mokomokai, 9, 109, 110, 149 North America, 16, 24, 117 Montezuma:crown of, 151 Not-for-profit organisations, 125, 145–146 Morality, 144 Notice, 61 Mukurtu Archive, 186 NPFII, 148 Muscogee, 136 Nuxalk, 106 Museum, 1, 2, 5, 6, 12, 16, 19, 58, 59, 61, 62, 66, 68, 71, 73, 92, 106, 107, 109, 110, 115, 116, 125–131, 134, 140, 145, 146, O 152–156, 178–180, 182, 185, 186, 189, Oceania, 18 190 Office of Federal Acknowledgement policies, 107, 129 (OFA), 36 practices, 88, 162, 178–179 Omaha, 183 Oneida, 12 Onondaga, 12–14, 134 N Ordre public, 120, 122, 168 Nagoya Protocol, 160, 161, 167 Ownership, 8, 16, 25, 54, 55, 57, 63, 64, 68, 70, NAGPRA 96, 100–104, 106, 111, 112, 118, 119, Review Committee, 140, 162 122, 134, 174, 183, 185 238 Index

P Reference system, 184 Paiute, 6, 183 Referral rules, 169 Panama, 1 Referral system, 118, 167, 172 Papua New Guinea, 23 Rei vindicatio, 101, 102 Participation, 11, 27, 65, 80, 97–99, 128, 131, Relationship(s), 22, 32, 47, 56, 58, 64, 69, 72, 157–163, 167, 168, 184, 191 81, 85, 88, 101, 129, 143, 150, 153, Partnerships, 67, 127, 148 168–170, 185 Pawnee, 9 Relocation, 6, 161 Peace, 86, 93 Repatriation campaigns, 133 Pectol Shields, 57, 65, 181, 183 Repatriation programme, 153 Peru, 1, 114 Representation, 123, 132, 150, 163 Philippines, 1 Representatives, 1, 90, 132, 133, 146, 156, 159, Philippines’ Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act, 163, 189 167 Reservations, 11, 33, 136 Pluralism, 21 Res extra commercium, 63, 71, 103, 104 Possession, 1, 7, 14, 15, 54, 56, 57, 63, 76, 100, Respecting Indians, 15 102, 118, 121, 122, 131, 162, 187 Revitalisation, 53 Possessor, 2, 56, 70, 95, 101, 111, 120, 138, Right of possession, 62, 71, 162 173, 182 Right to culture, 82, 85 Post-colonial, 21, 183 Right to repatriation, use or access, Pothunters, 7 157, 184 Potlatch, 14–16, 106, 133 Right to take part in cultural, 79, 83–85, 190 Pre-colonial, 21, 30, 32, 64 Rituals, 41, 52, 56, 178 Pre-Columbian, 6 Ritual use, 44, 96, 173 Pre-Columbian heritage, 60, 155 Roman law, 100, 101, 103 Preferential treatment, 69 Russia, 18, 129, 181 Preservation, 6, 47, 66, 84, 114, 147, 171, 180, 184 Principle of laches, 102 S Private international law, 17, 20, 112, 118–120, Saami, 23 124, 133, 165, 168 Sacred, 2, 7–10, 16–17, 40, 41, 44–46, Private law, 20, 95, 116, 133, 159 50, 55, 57, 62, 63, 67, 71, 89, 95, 103, Private parties, 70–72, 95, 154–156 104, 111, 112, 127, 153, 171, 175, Private property, 56, 57, 62, 64, 70, 73, 89, 176, 178, 100–102, 104, 116–117, 124, 137, 174 179, 183 Procedures, 38, 69, 92, 131–159, 163, 167, objects, 44, 45 184, 191 textiles, 17, 150 Property, 8, 92, 103, 115 Scandinavia, 23 Property law, 18, 42, 55, 62–64, 73, 96, Science, 39, 40, 45, 147, 181 100–106, 116–117, 124, 137, 170, Scientific tests, 184 174, 180 Scientists, 2, 5, 7, 21, 26, 58, 67, 73, 85, Protocols, 66, 167 133, 158 Provenance, 8, 9, 12 Scotland Public awareness, 77, 133 Glasgow Museums, 133, 151 Public law, 20, 118, 120–123 Kelvingrove Museum Glasgow, 179 Public policy, 112, 159, 190 Second Protocol for the Protection of Cultural Public property, 104, 180 Property in the Event of Armed Pueblo Indians, 23 Conflict, 93 Seizure, 108, 113, 138 Self-determination, 29, 36, 51, 59, 79–82, 85, R 90, 170, 172, 189 Reburial, 67, 184 Self-governance, 163 Redistribution, 68–70, 182 Self-government, 135 Index 239

Self-identification, 31, 32 T Self-regulation, 46, 92, 125, 126, 130, 190 Taiwan Self-restraining rules, 168 National Taiwan Museum, 153 Seminole, 136 Takings, 7–8, 11, 16, 61, 63, 103, 112, 173 Seneca, 12, 14, 136 Taonga, 149, 170 Settlement, 9, 144 Tasmania, 9, 145 Sharing, 11, 46, 127, 156, 167, 186 Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre, 133, 145 Sharing Collections, 186 Tatar, 23 Sioux, 135, 138 Terra nullius, 24 Smithsonian Institution, 2, 5, 12, 60, 186 Territoriality, 72, 106, 118–124, 190 Social networks, 163 Theft, 106, 150 Social norms, 21, 168–169, 172 Time limitation, 95 Soft law, 76 Tinglit, 6 Sotheby’s, 120, 154, 155 Title, 8, 13, 15, 68, 94, 101, 119, 122, 126, 127, Soto states, 48 132, 155, 174 South Africa, 111, 149 Tlingit, 66 South America, 18 Trade, 6, 9, 10, 24, 42, 53, 71, 103, 106, 108, Sovereignty, 24, 25, 50–51, 80, 81, 87, 90, 118, 112, 113, 184 160, 171 Tradition(s), 10, 25, 28, 43, 45, 53, 57, 58, 76, Spain, 102, 129 119, 127, 144, 162, 167, 171, 173, 176, Special Rapporteur, 28 189 Specific context, 35 Traditional cultural expressions, 99, 160, 165 States, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 33, 37, 38, 50, 60, Traditional knowledge (TK), 84, 99, 160, 161, 64, 68, 70, 76–80, 83, 85–92, 94, 95, 97, 165–167, 177 98, 100, 104, 113, 115, 116, 118, 119, Traditional life, 1, 54 123, 124, 127, 142, 146, 148, 151, 156, Traditional societies, 168 158, 160, 162, 163, 165, 167, 169, 182, Transfer of title or ownership, 102, 112 184, 190 Transnational(ity), 23, 126 Statute of limitations, 102 Transnational bodies, 168, 169 Stewards, 62, 63 Transnational community, 124, 190 Stewardship, 170, 173 Transnationality, 23, 130 Stolen, 8, 16, 94–96, 102, 104, 112, 116, 121, Transnational law, 3, 92, 124–131, 157, 190, 191 174, 176 Triangular relationship, 38 Subjectivity, 29, 86 Tribal, 70 Sui generis system(s), 119, 165–167, 169 Tribal art, 6, 126, 184 Supreme Court, 36 Tribal constitutions, 137 Suriname, 1, 164 Tribal councils, 132, 135 Survival, 2, 6, 27, 52, 73, 183 Tribal court(s), 137, 138 Sweden Tribal government(s), 61, 81, 171 museum of Ethnography (‘Etnografiska Tribal groups, 23, 33 Museet’), 185 Tribal lands, 63, 64, 119 Swiss Civil Code, 22 Tribal law, 165, 171 Switzerland, 18, 92, 96, 100, 102, 112–115, Tribal museums, 67 117, 123, 185 Tribal structures, 26, 136, 166 bilateral cultural property agreements, Tribe(s), 1, 9, 10, 13, 23, 28, 33, 34, 36–38, 50, 114 56–59, 62, 64–66, 68, 69, 73, 78, 83, Federal Act on the International Transfer of 112, 117, 133, 134, 140, 154, 155, 162, Cultural Property (CPTA), 112, 113, 163, 170, 171, 183, 189 115, 117 Truganini, 9, 111 Federal Government, 115, 123 Trust, 13, 14, 34, 117, 173, 185 Federal Supreme Court, 96, 121, 123 Tsimshian, 66 Museum of Cultures Basel (‘Museum der Turkey, 22 Kulturen Basel’), 185 Tuscarora, 12 240 Index

U United States (US), 1, 3, 6, 8, 11, 15–18, 26, 27, Ukraine, 23 33–34, 37, 38, 53, 55, 57, 59, 60, 64, 65, Uluru-Kata-Tjuta National Park, 27 68–72, 76, 80, 82, 83, 88, 89, 92, 105, U’mista Cultural Society, 15, 133, 185 111, 112, 119, 121, 123, 126, 129, 138, UNDRIP, 28–31, 44, 46, 73, 76–78, 80, 84–86, 150, 154, 161, 163, 171, 172, 176, 91, 111, 125, 148, 151, 160–164, 173 183, 189 UNESCO, 20, 29, 39, 40, 43, 45, 60, 84, 93, 94, American Indian Religious 96–100, 104, 106, 108, 112, 121, 123, Freedom Act, 111 141, 146–148, 150, 156, 158, 173, 177 Archaeological Resources Protection Act Goodwill Ambassadors and Artists For (ARPA), 105 Peace, 148 Code of Indian Offenses, 11 Intergovernmental Committee for Congress, 34, 65, 71 Promoting the Return of Cultural Federal Government, 60, 69, 72, 105, Property to its Countries of Origin or its 151, 189 Restitution in case of Illicit federally recognised, 34, 36, 163 Appropriation, 141, 146–147 Indian agents, 11, 136 Local and Indigenous Knowledge Systems Indian Reorganization Act (IRA), (LINKS), 147 35, 81, 136 UNESCO Convention 1970, 39–41, 43, 45, 93, Indian Self-Determination and Education 96, 97, 106, 108, 112, 115, 123, 146, Assistance Act, 81 147, 150 National Museum of Natural UNESCO Conventions 2003 and 2005, 31, History, 186 97–99, 158, 177 National Stolen Property Act, 121 UNIDROIT, 31, 44, 95–97, 104, 106–108, 115, Native American Graves Protection and 116, 142, 143, 173 Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 37, 38, UNIDROIT Convention 1995, 31, 95–97, 106, 55–73, 88, 92, 105, 112, 119, 124, 126, 108, 115, 116, 173 129, 140, 150, 157, 162, 163, 179, 182, United Kingdom (UK), 46, 100, 102, 106–108, 189, 190 112, 122, 128, 150 United States American Indian Religious Advisory Panel on Illicit Trade, 108 Freedom Act, 8 Court of Appeal, 121, 122 University, 13, 14, 129, 130, 134, 186 Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences) Act, Unrestricted trade, 26 108, 112, 122 High Court London, 145 Human Tissue Act, 107, 130, 153 V Museums and Galleries Act, 116 Venice Court of National and International National Heritage Act, 116 Arbitration, 142 Select Committee on Culture, Media and Virtually repatriate, 186 Sport, 106, 152 Voluntary activities, 154 Spoliation Advisory Panel, 141 Voluntary consent, 71, 162 United Nations (UN), 1, 19, 20, 25, 28–30, 39, Voluntary repatriation, 155 50, 72, 79, 80, 83, 84, 125, 159, 160, 173, 175, 189 Committee on Economic, Social and W Cultural Rights, 83, 85, 91 Waitangi, Treaty of, 113, 170 General Assembly, 76, 173, 189 Waitangi Tribunal, 140, 169 Human Rights Committee, 80, 82, 83 Wampum belt(s), 12–14, 134 Human Rights Council, 84 War booty, 93 Millennium Development Goals, 159 Warrior societies, 136 Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, 28, Western law, 49, 172 78, 148, 160 Western societies, 46, 47 Special Rapporteur, 30, 76, 84 WIPO, 29, 144, 160, 165 Working Group, 77 Arbitration and Mediation Center, 143 Index 241

Intergovernmental Committees on World War II, 123, 141 Intellectual Property and Genetic Wounded Knee, 11, 12, 151 Resources, Traditional Knowledge and WTO, 29 Folklore (IGCs), 160 Wupamos Indians, 183 Working Group, 28, 30 World Bank, 33 World view(s), 3, 23, 45–47, 51, 53, 54, 62, 73, Z 131, 145, 157–158, 168, 190 Zuni, 155, 183