Politics of Repatriation: Formalizing Indigenous Cultural Property Rights by Ashleigh ML Breske

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Politics of Repatriation: Formalizing Indigenous Cultural Property Rights by Ashleigh ML Breske Politics of Repatriation: Formalizing Indigenous Cultural Property Rights By Ashleigh ML Breske Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In Planning, Governance, and Globalization Timothy W. Luke, Chair Ann-Marie Knoblauch Aaron Ansell Tom Skuzinski June 25, 2018 Blacksburg Virginia Keywords: Repatriation, NAGPRA, cultural property indigenism, institutions Copyright 2018 Politics of Repatriation: Formalizing Indigenous Cultural Property Rights Ashleigh ML Breske ABstract This project will be an empirical study into repatriation as a political practice. This theoretically-oriented project investigates how institutions and cultural values mediate changes in the governance of repatriation policy, specifically its formalization and rescaling in the United States. I propose a critical approach to understanding repatriation; specifically, I will draw together issues surrounding museums, repatriation claims, and indigenous communities throughout the development of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) in 1990 and current repatriation policy. The interdisciplinary academic narrative I build will explore practices of repatriation and how it relates to the subject of indigenous cultural rights. Using the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology in Philadelphia, PA and the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, IL as models for the repatriation process, I will show the historic political tensions and later attempts to repatriate culturally significant objects and human remains in the United States. By examining entrenched discourses prior to NAGPRA and what changed to allow a new dominant discourse in the debates over repatriation claims, I will show that culturally- structured views on repatriation and narratives surrounding indigenous cultural property were transformed. By examining ownership paradigms and analyzing discourses and institutional power structures, it is possible to understand the ramifications of formalizing repatriation. The current binary of cultural property nationalism/cultural property internationalism in relation to cultural property ownership claims does not represent the full scope of the conflict for indigenous people. Inclusion of a cultural property indigenism component into the established ownership paradigm will more fully represent indigenous concerns for cultural property. Looking at the rules, norms and strategies of national and international laws and museum institutions, I will also argue that there are consequences to repatriation claims that go beyond possession of property and a formalized process (or a semi- formalized international approach) can aid in addressing indigenous rights. I will also ask the question, does this change in discourse develop in other countries with similar settler colonial pasts and indigenous communities, i.e. in Canada, New Zealand, Australia? My work will demonstrate that it does. Essentially, the repatriation conversation does not immediately change in one country and then domino to others. Instead, it is a change that is happening concurrently, comparative to other civil rights movements and national dialogues. The cultural and institutional shifts demanding change appear to have some universal momentum. The literatures to which this research will contribute include: museum studies, institutional practices, material cultural and public humanities, and indigenous right. Politics of Repatriation: Formalizing Indigenous Cultural Property Rights Ashleigh ML Breske General Audience ABstract By examining how institutions and cultural values mediate changes in the governance of repatriation policy, specifically its formalization and rescaling in the United States, this project looks at repatriation as a political practice. This dissertation explores the subject of indigenous cultural rights and explores issues surrounding museums, repatriation claims, and indigenous communities throughout the development of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) in 1990 and current repatriation policy both domestically and internationally. Case studies of institutional practices are developed utilizing the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology in Philadelphia, PA and the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, IL as models for the repatriation process. This will demonstrate the historic political tensions and later attempts to repatriate culturally significant objects and human remains in the United States and abroad. This research also investigates the current cultural property nationalism/cultural property internationalism paradigm and calls for an inclusion of a cultural property indigenism component to represent indigenous concerns for cultural property more fully. Looking at the rules, norms and strategies of national and international laws and museum institutions, I will also argue that there are consequences to repatriation claims that go beyond possession of property and a formalized process (or a semi-formalized international approach) can aid in addressing indigenous rights. Acknowledgements First and foremost, I want to thank Timothy W. Luke for the advice, guidance, and encouragement over the years. You were the first person I spoke with about coming to the Planning, Governance, and Globalization program and I am forever indebted to you for encouraging me to apply. My deepest gratitude to Ann-Marie Knoblauch, Aaron Ansell, Tom Skuzinski, and Patricia Nickel for guidance as committee members over the years. You have all given excellent edits, helpful critiques, and book recommendations to guide my research. Lastly, I would like to thank my friends and family for your love and patience over the years. To my husband, Adam, and two lovely daughters, Evelyn and Isla, thank you for being supportive and helping to create an environment where I could work and grow with this project. To my brother, Jared, for kindly reading multiple iterations of articles and chapters over the years. To my fellow students, friends, and everyone else who has ever listened to me talk about repatriation, thank you for your support. I was recently asked why I wanted to write a dissertation on indigenous repatriations— what had led me down this research path? It all began when I worked as a docent in the Field Museum in 2010-2011 leading tours and giving talks on the Ancient Egypt exhibit. Occasionally, museum guests would ask why we had certain objects and how they had made their way into our collection. Had we purchased everything? What had been excavated? And in hushed tones, how much of our collection had been stolen? I readily supplied answers based on the docent training—we had a bill of sale for every object, the collection mostly stemmed from the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago, and the Field Museum was a research institutions and not in the habit of stealing, etc. I felt very sure of the collection. The objects here were helping to spread knowledge about the ancient world, to show us how we are all connected. But then, while exploring the Ancient Americas exhibit, I came across a sign over a boarded-over exhibit explaining why the display could not be viewed by the public according to NAGPRA regulation. I was curious as to why these objects were not just given back to the indigenous community in question. Why did they stay at the museum—hidden behind a wall, but still in the museum’s possession? This question inspired my research into power relationships at the museum and NAGPRA as federal legislation. I want to thank the Field Museum especially for the essence of an idea that became this research project. iv Table of Contents INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER ONE: ...................................................................................................................................................... 8 HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS AND HOW REPATRIATION WAS FORMALIZED IN THE US .................. 8 WHAT IS REPATRIATION TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH TODAY? ......................................................................................... 9 A HISTORY OF THE SETTLER MENTALITY IN THE UNITED STATES ......................................................................... 10 MUSEUMS AS AN EXPRESSION OF SETTLER MENTALITY ............................................................................................ 11 COLONIAL PRACTICES AND DEPATRIATION: ................................................................................................................. 14 UNDERSTANDING 19TH-20TH CENTURY US LEGISLATION RELATED TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLES ...................... 15 CULTURAL SHIFTS THAT LED TO CHANGES IN REPATRIATION NORMS ................................................................. 21 VALUE SHIFTS: ART OR ETHNOGRAPHY? ....................................................................................................................... 25 KEY INSTITUTIONAL SHIFTS .............................................................................................................................................. 26 A SHIFT IN REPATRIATION DISCOURSE .......................................................................................................................... 27 THE BEGINNING OF FORMALIZED
Recommended publications
  • Cultural Heritage Education in UNESCO Cultural Conventions
    sustainability Article Cultural Heritage Education in UNESCO Cultural Conventions Alicja Jagielska-Burduk * , Mateusz Pszczy ´nskiand Piotr Stec Institute of Law, University of Opole, 45-060 Opole, Poland; [email protected] (M.P.); [email protected] (P.S.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The aim of the article is to analyse UNESCO conventions dealing with culture and assess the visibility and importance of cultural heritage education in these conventions and their implemen- tation. First, it briefly presents the role of UNESCO in the area of culture and education, together with the UN Agenda 2030 and the challenges faced currently. Next, it discusses the existing UNESCO cultural conventions and their educational dimension with reference to the conventions’ provisions and aims. Each convention refers to education in the activities undertaken by States Parties, provid- ing various tools and measures tailored to the scope of the convention. The article concludes that despite a lack of synergy and creation of education-related programs in convention-related siloes, UNESCO has managed to create a uniform and evolving system of educational measures aimed at various stakeholders and focus on various levels of awareness. Cultural heritage education is an imminent part of activities undertaken within States’ obligations and should involve various stakeholders, building networks and existing in synergy with other actions or campaigns based on different conventions. Citation: Jagielska-Burduk, A.; Pszczy´nski,M.; Stec, P. Cultural Heritage Education in UNESCO Keywords: cultural heritage; UNESCO; cultural conventions; education; awareness raising Cultural Conventions. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3548. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/su13063548 1. Introduction Academic Editors: Cosme UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) is Jesús Gómez-Carrasco, an international organization with 193 Member States.
    [Show full text]
  • The Legal Protection of Cultural Heritage in International Law and Its Implementation in Dutch Law
    Design by Catharina Veder The legal protection of cultural heritage in international law And its implementation in Dutch Law Lucky Belder The legal protection of cultural heritage in international law And its implementation in Dutch Law De juridische bescherming van cultureel erfgoed in internationaal recht en de implementatie in Nederlands recht (met een samenvatting in het Nederlands). Proefschrift Ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit Utrecht op gezag van de rector magnificus, prof.dr. G.J. van der Zwaan, ingevolge het besluit van het college voor promoties in het openbaar te verdedigen op vrijdag 27 september 2013 des middags te 2.30 uur. door Lucretia Philippine Christine Belder geboren op 9 juli 1959 te ‘s Gravenhage Promotoren Prof. dr. M. de Cock Buning Prof. dr. H.E.G.S. Schneider Leescommissie Prof. T.J.C.A. van Engelen Prof. E.H. Hondius Prof. C. Flinterman Prof. I.C. van der Vlies Prof. S.A. de Vries Table of Contents 07 Preface 14 I. Introduction 16 1.1. Introduction 17 1.2. The background of the research project: the networked society 19 1.3. The research task and its delineation 25 1.4. Methodology 28 1.5. Terminology 29 II. Developments in thinking on the protection of cultural heritage 32 2.1. Introduction 33 2.2.1. Approaches to culture and cultural heritage 35 2.2.2. Essentialist approach 35 2.2.3.1. Instrumental approach, introduction 38 2.2.3.2. Cultural heritage as a resource of economic value 38 2.2.3.3. Cultural heritage as instrumental in the construction of identity and social cohesion 39 2.2.4.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Country Fair Board of Directors' Meeting February 1, 2016, 7:00, NW Youth Corps, Columbia Room
    Oregon Country Fair Board of Directors' Meeting February 1, 2016, 7:00, NW Youth Corps, Columbia room Board members present: Diane Albino, Casey Marks Fife, Justin Honea, Lucy Kingsley, Jack Makarchek (president), Indigo Ronlov (vice-president), Kirk Shultz, Jon Silvermoon , Lawrence Taylor (Alternate), Sue Theolass, Bear Wilner-Nugent. Peach Gallery present: Staff (Tom, Crystalyn, Robin and Shane), Officers (Hilary, Grumpy and Randy), and 41 members and guests. Indigo: I would like move the reports for committee and staff after the Old business due to the amount of business that we have to cover tonight. Everyone agreed. New Business Approve Capital Projects (Bear) Approve Caretaker job description (Jon) Appoint Caretaker hiring committee (Jon) Appoint Pablo Bristow to the Vision Action committee Appoint Carmella Fleming to the Diversity Task Force Appoint Paxton to the Community Center Committee (Kirk) Policy for naming New Area (Kirk) Appoint Becky Lamarsh as Site crew coordinator (Bear) Announcements Peggy: KOCF fundraiser is March 5, 2016 at Domaine Meriwether winery from 6:00pm to 8:30pm. It will be a silent auction and we are accepting donations. Etouffee will be the band. Gary: My wife Monica and I bought the Noti High School. We will keep it a school and open it up for camping during this year’s Fair. Sue: Sunday, February 7, 2016 is the second annual Kareng fund art bingo at the Broadway Commerce Center at 44 W Broadway. There will be select goodies from Dana’s cheesecake with all of those proceeds going to the Kareng fund. The Kareng Fund aids Oregon crafters and artisans experiencing a career-threatening crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 UCL INSTITUTE of ARCHAEOLOGY ARCL0199: Heritage Ethics and Archaeological Practice in the Middle East and Mediterranean 2019
    UCL INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ARCL0199: Heritage Ethics and Archaeological Practice in the Middle East and Mediterranean 2019–20 MA Module (15 credits) Turnitin Class ID: 3885721 Turnitin Password IoA1819 Deadlines for coursework for this module: Essay 1: Monday 17th February (returned by 2 March) Essay 2: Friday 3 April (returned by 1 May) Co-ordinator: Corisande Fenwick/ Alice Stevenson Email: [email protected] / [email protected] Tel: 0207-679-4746 Room 502 Office hours: Corisande Fenwick (Fri 11:30am—1:30pm) Alice Stevenson (Wed 10am-12pm). Please see the last page of this document for important information about submission and marking procedures, or links to the relevant webpages. 1 1. OVERVIEW This module provides a comparative overview of key debates, as well as the frameworks of practice, policy and ethical issues in cultural heritage as they are played out in the Middle East and Mediterranean today. Key themes include the history of archaeology in the region, museum practice, archaeology in conflict zones, disaster recovery, illicit trade in antiquities, UNESCO politics, legislation, fieldwork ethics, site management, stakeholders and audience. Throughout the emphasis is on comparative, critical analysis of contemporary practices in heritage, grounded in real-world case-studies from the region. Week-by-week summary (SG = Seminar Group) Date Topic 2-3pm 3-4pm 4-5pm 1 16 Jan Introduction: Archaeology and the Lecture Scramble for the Past 2 23 Jan Who owns the past? From national to Lecture SG 1 SG 2 universal heritage.
    [Show full text]
  • The Destruction of Cultural Heritage: a Crime Against Property Or a Crime Against People?
    THE JOHN MARSHALL REVIEW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW THE DESTRUCTION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE: A CRIME AGAINST PROPERTY OR A CRIME AGAINST PEOPLE? PATTY GERSTENBLITH ABSTRACT The destruction of cultural heritage has played a prominent role in the ongoing conflicts in Syria and Iraq and in the recent conflict in Mali. This destruction has displayed the failure of international law to effectively deter these actions. This article reviews existing international law in light of this destruction and the challenges posed by the issues of non-international armed conflict, non-state actors and the military necessity exception. By examining recent developments in applicable international law, the article proposes that customary international law has evolved to interpret existing legal instruments and doctrines concerning cultural heritage in light of the principles of proportionality and distinction and a definition of intentionality that includes extreme negligence and willful disregard. As a result, international law may more effectively foster the preservation of cultural heritage for future generations. Copyright © 2016 The John Marshall Law School Cite as Patty Gerstenblith, The Destruction of Cultural Heritage: A Crime Against Property or a Crime Against People?, 15 J. MARSHALL REV. INTELL. PROP. L. 336 (2016). THE DESTRUCTION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE: A CRIME AGAINST PROPERTY OR A CRIME AGAINST PEOPLE? PATTY GERSTENBLITH I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • In Remembrance Chief Cumshewa Chief Skidegate
    April 2008 SEEING WHAT AN HUMMING- OTHER NATIONS UNBROKEN BIRD BOOK ARE UP TO THREAD page 11 page 16 page 6 HAIDA LAAS HAIDANewsletter of the Haida Nation LAAS April 2008 In Remembrance Chief Cumshewa Chief Skidegate 1 Haida Laas - Newsletter of the Haida Nation Haida Laas, Haawa Chief Skidegate ... for your generosity in providing for your people for these many years ... for your courage and conviction in standing up for your people and our lands HAIDA LAAS Haawa Chief Cumshewa NEWSLETTER OF THE HAIDA NATION ... for giving of yourself and being there for your people when they needed you published by the Council of the Haida Nation ... for the dignity in which you carried yourself in representing your Clan and the Nation Managing Editor Cindy Boyko (temporary) [email protected] ... Haawa to our Chiefs for your devotion to the unity of our p.250.559.8755 people and well being of our lands Council of the Haida Nation for showing us the power of respect Administrator Box 589, Old Massett we have to accept your well earned rest Haida Gwaii V0T 1M0 p.250.636.5252 we will take what you have given us and finish f.250.626.3404 the good fight 1.888.638.7778 [email protected] ... we will miss you Council of the Haida Nation Haawa Kilslii Administrator Box 98, Queen Charlotte Haida Gwaii V0T 1S0 p.250.559.4468 f.250.559.8951 1.877.559.4468 [email protected] In Remembrance www.haidanation.ca Old Massett Skidegate Gerald Williams Chief Sgiidagids, Dempsey Collinson APRIL 2008 Bertha Williams s Earl Jones The Council of the Haida Nation haidanation.ca extends its deepest sympathies program reports : haida laas links : diplomacy : agreements to the families.
    [Show full text]
  • A Critical History of International Cultural Heritage Law in the 19Th and 20Th Century
    Journal of the history of International Law 22 (2020) 329–354 brill.com/jhil Civilisation, Protection, Restitution: A Critical History of International Cultural Heritage Law in the 19th and 20th Century Sebastian M. Spitra Department of Legal and Constitutional History, Faculty of Law, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria [email protected] Received: 31 March 2019 | Revised: 09 March 2020 | Accepted: 13 June 2020 | Published online: 28 October 2020 Abstract This article provides a new narrative for the history of cultural heritage law and seeks to contribute to current legal debates about the restitution of cultural objects. The modern protection laws for cultural objects in domestic and international law evolved in the 19th and 20th century. The article makes three new arguments regarding the emergence of this legal regime. First, ‘civilisation’ was a main concept and colonialism an integral part of the international legal system during the evolution of the regime. The Eurocentric concept of civilisation has so far been an ignored catalyst for the inter- national development of cultural heritage norms. Second, different states and actors used cultural heritage laws and their inherent connection to the concept of civilisation for different purposes. Third, the international legal system of cultural heritage partly still reflects its colonial roots. The current restitution discussions are an outcome of this ongoing problematic legal constellation. Keywords cultural heritage – colonialism – restitution – third world approaches to international law (TWAIL) – UNESCO – cultural property protection © Sebastian M. Spitra, 2020 | doi:10.1163/15718050-12340154 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NCDownloaded 4.0 license.
    [Show full text]
  • Fund for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict Description
    1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and its two (1954 and 1999) Protocols United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization The Fund for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict Description The Fund for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (“the Fund”) was established by the 1999 Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention. It is a trust fund in conformity with the Financial Regulations of UNESCO. Contributions to the Fund are entirely voluntary. What is the purpose of the Fund? The purpose of the Fund is to provide financial and other assistance in support of preparatory and other measures usually taken in peacetime, such as the safeguarding of cultural property, domestic legal and administrative measures for the protection of cultural property, and public information. The Fund also serves to provide financial and other assistance for emergency, provisional and other measures to protect cultural property during periods of armed conflict or recovery immediately after the end of hostilities. The Fund can also be used for financing international and other forms of assistance provided by the Committee. Resources of the Fund � Voluntary contributions made by the Parties � Contributions, gifts or bequests made by: other States UNESCO or other organizations of the United Nations system other intergovernmental or non-governmental organizations public or private bodies or individuals � Any interest accruing on the Fund � Funds raised by collections and receipts from events organized for the benefit of the Fund � All other resources authorized by the guidelines applicable to the Fund ©United Nations Photo/Flickr 2 Use of the Fund The Committee for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (“the Committee”) decides on how the Fund is to be used.
    [Show full text]
  • May 2008 Issue.Indd
    2008 Chickasaw graduates - See page 36 ChickasawOffi cial Timespublication of the Chickasaw Nation Vol. XXXXI11 No. 5 May 2008 Ada, Oklahoma Metal Mayhem shines at robot challenge Young engineers named top robotics rookies designed, built and operated that we got rookie of the year,” a robot to specifi cations. The said Metal Mayhem student Metal Mayhem robot competed team leader Zac Dennis, of Ada with robots constructed by other High School. high school teams from the U.S. When the team was started, and several other countries. Zac said, team members didn’t In addition to their engineer- think they had a chance to win ing prowess, Metal Mayhem rookie of the year at the regional members were recognized for level, much less at the national their signifi cant contributions championship. to the local community. Woodie “It was really exciting, be- Flowers, FIRST advisory board cause we put a whole lot of hard chairman, specifically men- work into it,” said team member tioned the team’s effort to pro- Laura Medcalf. mote the Chickasaw language Jacob Pittman, the team stu- when making the rookie award dent construction leader, said announcement. he got a great deal of personal Metal Mayhem team members after being named Rookie All Star Team of the Other community service satisfaction from taking part in projects included a “graffiti the project. Year at the FIRST National Championship in Atlanta, Georgia. paint out,” collecting money “It felt really good to give ATLANTA - An Ada-area tion of Science and Technology consists of a number of Ada-area for “Tunes 4 Troops,” a fi tness back to the community,” he team received the National (FIRST) Robotics challenge.
    [Show full text]
  • Targeting Cultural Property: the Role Of
    Targeting Cultural Property: The Role of International Law 91 5 TARGE T ING CUL T URAL PRO P ER T Y : THE ROLE OF IN T ERNA T IONAL LAW Ashlyn Milligan Oftentimes the exigencies of war necessarily take primacy over the preservation of cultural property, but emerging norms and sentiments within the international community have signaled an increased desire on the part of states to preserve, for posterity, the cultural heritage of mankind. Thus, the critical question becomes: how do states balance these seemingly irreconcilable ends, and to what extent is the current state of the international legal regime able to facilitate an adequate response to the protec- tion of cultural property during an armed conflict? This paper will examine current examples drawn from conflicts in Iraq, the Balkans, and Afghanistan in order to expound these questions and discuss in greater detail some of the factors that underpin the decisions made by states when they either deliberately target or are required out of military necessity, to use cultural property in armed conflict. This article will assess the ability of international law to address and mitigate the deleterious effect of these motivations before making several recommendations for international policy. INTRODUCT I ON The targeting, destruction, and plunder of cultural property during armed conflict – either as incidental to the exigencies of war or as deliberate acts in and of themselves – has an extremely long history. Damage and looting during the Crusades represent some of the earliest accounts of the vulner- Ashlyn Milligan is a Master of Arts candidate at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carlton University.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Cultural Property in Syria: New Opportunities for States to Enhance Compliance with International Law?
    International Review of the Red Cross (2017), 99 (3), 1037–1074. Conflict in Syria doi:10.1017/S1816383118000322 Protecting cultural property in Syria: New opportunities for States to enhance compliance with international law? Polina Levina Mahnad Polina Levina Mahnad is a member of the International Committee of the Blue Shield’s roster of experts on cultural property protection in armed conflict. Abstract The war in Syria has lasted for six years and has led to massive destruction and loss of life. Stymieing international peace efforts from the outset, there is increasing doubt that the conflict will reach a resolution or political settlement in the near future. This frustration has triggered an appetite among States, civil society and the international community for finite and concrete measures that can contribute to greater protection and compliance with international law. A recent constellation of events around the protection of cultural property appears to herald a shift in the response of the international community toward prescribing practical and actionable measures forthird-partyStates.Drawingonthe responsibility of third States “to respect and ensure respect for” international humanitarian law, this article examines the legal framework protecting cultural property and recent innovative protectionresponsesthatcontributetoensuring compliance with international law in Syria, short of military assistance and intervention. Keywords: Syria, cultural property, cultural heritage, compliance, common Article 1, 1954 Hague Convention, innovation, protection. © icrc 2018 1037 P. Levina Mahnad “A nation stays alive when its culture stays alive.” The motto of the National Museum of Afghanistan, where some 2,750 pieces were destroyed by the Taliban in 2001. Introduction With political negotiations yielding no results, international humanitarian law (IHL) routinely ignored and international humanitarian agencies severely restricted, the crisis in Syria has led to fatigue and frustration across the international community.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Property V. Cultural Heritage: a “Battle of Concepts” in International Law?
    05_article_Frigo 2.7.2004 9:49 Page 367 RICR Juin IRRC June 2004 Vol. 86 No 854 367 Cultural property v. cultural heritage: A “battle of concepts” in international law? MANLIO FRIGO* The influence of domestic legal traditions in the elaboration of multilingual international conventions According to an established rule of customary international law, the destruction, pillage, looting or confiscation of works of art and other items of public or private cultural property in the course of armed conflicts must be considered unlawful. The illicit character of the above practices may be asserted at least since the codification of that rule in the Hague Convention respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, adopted and revised respectively by the First and Second Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907, and in the 1907 Hague Convention concerning Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War. Although the opening sentence appears clear and correct, doubt may arise as to the meaning of some concepts expressed and hence the scope of the protection granted by the relevant international law rules. The scope of international legal protection cannot be determined without defining the scope of application of those rules. In legal doctrine, the difficulty of providing a sole and universally accepted definition of the interests and values protected has been encountered by a number of authors, who have emphasized the difference between the con- cept of “cultural property” and the broader concept of “cultural heritage”.1 It is well known that the first use of the term cultural property in an international legal context occurred in the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict,2 followed some fifteen years later by the 1970 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of * Professor of European Union and international law, Università degli Studi di Milano.
    [Show full text]