MEG’s Approach to Repatriations
Repatriation Guidelines
In 1994, MEG issued guidelines relating to human remains and sacred objects found in global cultures collections. These guidelines addressed procedures to be followed for the repatriation of ancestors and their, belongings, advising that each request be considered on a case-by-case basis.
There is a long history of repatriations between museums as well as museums and communities. From national to the local, museums have returned material to originating communities and previous owners, leading to a growth in knowledge and expertise among collections staff involved in these processes.
MEG aims to bring such expertise together, to offer advice, support, and a network of contacts representing communities of origin, museum practitioners, and other stakeholders or specialists for museums dealing with claims for World Cultures material.
The Culture Secretary’s decision to announce a blanket ban on repatriating any object from a national collection is disquieting, especially at a time when museums are under unprecedented scrutiny as part of the movement, both internal and external, to decolonise.
This is at odds with the Manchester Museum’s recent decision to return 43 sacred items to indigenous Australians through the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. In returning these objects, the museum recognises the importance of repatriation in healing and reconciling communities.
Collaboration, Sensitivity, and Building Relationships
The MEG and Museum Association guidelines advocate collaboration and partnerships with originating communities, and sensitive responses to claims for repatriation. The Collections Trust provides checklists on researching, recording, and processing a claim. There are different ways of repatriating: it could be sharing rather than returning, exchanging, digital repatriation, or it could be outright return. The outcomes in terms of sharing knowledge, interpreting objects, and building relationships by repatriating cultural property in some way or the other, can be more important than the object itself.
MEG supports working with communities and museums to respond sensitively and build relationships, out of which will come the best response to claims. If that means that an object is returned to be buried or destroyed, as culturally appropriate, then that may be the best outcome if it heals communities and builds relationships.
Repatriation Resource
We have created a free, open access resource for museum professionals, originating communities, research institutions, and anyone interested in museums and repatriation.
MEG is a long-standing supporter of repatriation and ethical collaborative practices in the UK. This resource is an extension of our advocacy and support to museum colleagues and originating communities worldwide. MEG’s membership has significant knowledge and expertise in supporting repatriation claims to UK museums. Therefore, in addition to this open access resource, we are working towards developing a MEG members-only support network that will allow members to confidentially share information on new and on-going requests, as well as offer guidance and assistance on repatriation processes.
We are currently updating the resource and will provide a link here once the changes are complete.
