RETURNS

The "Restitution of African Cultural Heritage" report, commissioned by French President Macron in 2018 triggered numerous international comments. The authors Bénédicte Savoy and Felwine Sarr advocated the repatriation of cultural assets if they are claimed by the countries of origin.

In addition to the acquisition of objects from a colonial context, the discussion particularly focused on valuable cultural assets that had found their way into European collections as part of "punitive expeditions", through theft or illegal trade. The restitution of these objects that were unlawfully, violently or extortionately confiscated, has since become a matter of public interest. 
The repatriation of human remains from scientific or ethnological collections, required by the families of origin for decades, is another focus.

The Mission Museum does not have any exhibits from these categories - the focus of the collection is predominantly on everyday culture.

Legal Situation

Finding the legal successors or heirs of the stolen cultural property represents a challenge. Provenance research is associated with great difficulties in ethnological museums, but especially in missionary collections, because of the often incomplete documentation.

Since the circumstances surrounding the theft of cultural assets are assessed very differently, discussions arise on a legal, political and moral level.

The legal situation in Germany currently does not provide for the repatriation of cultural property unless it falls under the Hague Convention (appropriation during armed conflict). The period of validity of the UNESCO Resolution (1970) and the Cultural Property Protection Act (2007/2016) does not extend to the colonial period; the Washington Principles (1989) refer to looted property confiscated as a result of Nazi persecution.

The United Nations' "Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" of September 2007, which takes communities of origin into account, is only legally binding insofar as it refers to international law that is already in force.
However, the German Bundestag states that there is neither a right under international law nor under customary international law to the repatriation of cultural assets that were brought to Germany from the states of origin in peacetime; therefore, the UN declaration cannot support such a claim on the part of the originating states.

Only the UNIDROIT Convention (1995) meets the conditions for return; However, Germany, like many other nations, has not yet ratified this convention.

Alternative Commitments

In response to the current legal situation, 26 large German-speaking museums and collections signed the "Heidelberg Statement on the Decolonization of Museums" in 2019, which emphasizes the greatest possible degree of transparency regarding the objects and dialogue with communities of origin.

The Mission Museum agrees with this statement and is also participating in the three-way strategy for the digital publication of collections from colonial contexts. Guidelines from ICOM, the German Museum Association and the German Lost Art Foundation* on the topic are used in our museum work.

The greatest possible processing and research is necessary, not least for the discussion about reparation. Colonial systems of rule have left traces not only in geography, but also in economic and trade relations between the Global North and the formerly colonized, which continue to have an impact today.

Cooperation instead of Restitution

To date, no demands have been made for the restitution of objects to the Mission Museum. Our positive attitude towards returns is also reflected in our mission statement and the restitution concept. However, the museum has successfully relied on the concept of voluntary returns as part of cooperation for many years.

As part of a cooperation with the Republic of Korea (South Korea), we already donated several objects; for more information, visit our Returns website. Cooperations with communities of origin are currently being established in Tanzania.

Our motivations for returning or donating an object are - in addition to the object's great emotional significance for the society of origin - its rarity and its significance for research.

Current situation

There have been predominantly positive reactions to the Savoy and Sarr report from Africa; significant restitution has already been carried out in some countries. Some African curators are also critical of the returns because of the large number of cultural assets and the inadequate equipment of local museums. 
Cultural scientists say that there is little interest in museums in Africa because the objects come from historical cultures and their spiritual function is no longer known in today's globalized African world.

In addition to affirmative positions on restitution, European museum directors also hold positions that only allow loans or reject restitution on the grounds that valuable cultural assets, as shared heritage of humankind, could be better protected and presented in European museums than in the countries of origin. In other European countries there is also a lack of legal basis for the repatriation of cultural property.

 

* The German Lost Art Foundation acts as the central contact; since 2018, this foundation has been conducting research and providing information on cultural and items from colonial contexts. The Mission Museum is part of a working group that deals with cultural assets from missionary collections.