Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality,
and to see the links to virtual rooms.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Deogratias Maruhukiro
(Universität Freiburg)
Aimé-Parfait Niyonkuru (UNIVERSITE PARIS NANTERRE)
Klaus Baumann (Albert-Ludwigs-Universität)
Gerard Birantamije (Université Libre de Bruxelles)
Send message to Convenors
- Discussant:
-
Libérat Ntibashirakandi
(Université Libre de Bruxelles)
- Format:
- Panel
- Stream:
- Restitution!
- Location:
- Room 1098
- Sessions:
- Thursday 9 June, -
Time zone: Europe/Berlin
Short Abstract:
Our panel seeks to bring together a diverse group of researchers and experts interested in the issue of restitution of cultural property and human remains in relation with African colonial contexts with the Belgian possessions as case study. Restitution of cultural property and human remains in relation with African colonial contexts: the case of the Belgian possessions will be held exclusively in French.
Long Abstract:
The last few years have witnessed a resurgence of the debate on the restitution of cultural property and human remains in relation with African (de)colonial contexts. In many countries, postcolonial and decolonial dialogues are engaged (Belgium, UK, Germany, France) as a broad issue of negotiation of the colonial past.
This panel aims to discuss the issue of restitution of cultural property and human remains illegally taken by the kingdom of Belgium from its former African possessions, consisting of the former Belgian Congo and the Rwanda and Burundi colonial territories. As far as the Belgium is concerned, the Chamber of Representatives approved in July 2020 the establishment of the Special Commission with the task of "conducting research on the Belgian colonial past in Congo (1885-1960), Rwanda and Burundi (1919-1962).
If there is a consensus on the principle of restitution of cultural goods and artefacts illegally taken abroad in colonial contexts, the effective implementation of such restitution raises a series of problematics and challenges. Among others, legal questions on the protection of cultural property, the identification and localization of concerned goods and collections disseminated between public, private or individuals' entities, the existence or not of appropriate conservative infrastructures and qualified personnel in the countries of origin, the political perceptions, and debates on decolonization of knowledges…. Our panel seeks to engage a debate on such a complex issue and, using an interdisciplinary approach associating different disciplines, to pave a way forward for a fair and lasting settlement of the said issue.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Thursday 9 June, 2022, -Aimé-Parfait Niyonkuru (UNIVERSITE PARIS NANTERRE)
Paper short abstract:
Colonial expeditions and occupations were accompanied by looting and spoliation of cultural property in the conquered territories. With the former Belgian possessions as a case study, we propose a reflection on the legal stakes of the restitution of cultural goods and human remains.
Paper long abstract:
The issue of the return and restitution of cultural property to countries from which they originate “is an old question discussed within international cultural organisations” SYLLA (2005), . Neither new is the issue of the restitution of human remains kept in Western museums and other collections. Both issues are not only at the heart of the 21st century political agenda in concerned countries, discussed and debated in scholarly works, but are also undergoing major developments. After numerous claims for restitution, after heated diplomatic negotiations commensurate with the importance of the issues at stake, the question of the restitution of cultural property and human remains illicitly taken from colonial territories is experiencing a major turning point with the third decade of the 21st century. Indeed, this decade will witness a more proactive commitment by Belgium and Germany to the restitution of cultural property and human remains illegally taken from their former possessions. Despite this commitment, however, the issue is far from being completely resolved in its multifaceted aspects. Our paper proposes to address the legal problem of the restitution of cultural property and human remains illicitly taken from former Belgian possessions. From a legal standpoint, this restitution is based on both international law –conventional and customary– and national law. However, this legal framework contains a certain number of obstacles which, today, oppose or make restitution difficult. Beyond an inventory of the issues of international law and the law of nations related to restitution, an outline of solutions will be proposed.
Balingene Kahombo (University of Goma (DRC))
Paper short abstract:
This paper interrogates the Democratic Republic of Congo’s approach to the restitution of cultural objects that Belgium had acquired during the colonial period.
Paper long abstract:
This paper interrogates the Democratic Republic of Congo’s approach to the restitution of cultural objects that Belgium had acquired during the colonial period. It stems from the assumption that over the past years, the debates on the restitution of cultural property have been dominated by the former colonial power and characterized by the marginalization of narratives from the country of provenance. Belgium has developed its own policy which signals that it would be reluctant to the physical recovery of cultural objects by its former colony. However, this cannot be taken for granted. The DRC may have its own perceptions on the matter. It is therefore important to know its approach. Is there a right to restitution or simply a case of voluntarily cooperation to repair colonial harms and achieve reconciliation between the two countries? If there is a right to restitution, what might be its bases in order to build a case for recovering those objects? These questions will be answered, mainly, based on an international legal perspective; but the study remains interdisciplinary and explores the Congolese approach from different sources of information, including political speeches made by the DRC Head of State, ministerial documents and claims voiced at the continental level through the African Union. The study seeks to make recommendations concerning a strategic choice to make between embracing the Belgian approach that seems to give preference to immaterial restitution and cooperation through the conclusion of bilateral agreements, and building a case to raise for an international dispute settlement.
Joseph GAHAMA (East African University Rwanda)
Paper short abstract:
Cette contribution se veut être une analyse de la manière dont les Belges ont succèdé aux Allemands après 1916, date à laquelle le Ruanda- urundi est devenu un "territoire occupé de l'Est africain " jusqu'en 1924 quand une loi belge approuva le Mandat de la Société des Nations.
Paper long abstract:
Cette contribution se veut être une analyse de la manière dont les Belges ont succèdé aux Allemands après 1916, date à laquelle le Ruanda- urundi est devenu un "territoire occupé de l'Est africain " jusqu'en 1924 quand une loi belge approuva le Mandat de la Société des Nations.
Cette période asssez mal connue mais riche en négociations politiques aussi bien sur les plans international que local se caractérise par autant de ruptures que de continuités.
Ruptures car les Allemands sont battus et obligés de quitter le pays et qu'un plébiscite organisé en 1918 reconnaît officiellement l'autorité belge d'une part et qu'au traité de Versailles en 1919 l'Allemagne accepte de céder ses anciennes colonies aux vainqueurs d'autre part.
Continuités car la colonisation continue: les Belges adoptent le système d'administration indirecte inauguré par les Allemands et poursuivent leur politique économique et sociale.
L'héritage allemand aura été assez maigre malgré les mythes et fantasmes qui continuent encore de circuler à propos de cette page de l'histoire coloniale du Ruanda- Urundi.
Gerard Birantamije (Université Libre de Bruxelles)
Paper short abstract:
This contribution wants to question the restitution of cultural goods and human remains as a public policy at intersection between the global and the local, and analyze the ownership of these policies in the Great lakes region.
Paper long abstract:
Following the demands of the Black Lives Matter movement, there is a renewal of the ‘decolonial movement’ involving both the former metropolises and their colonies. Amongst other demands and actions are the restitution of cultural goods and human remains stolen from former colonies. This paper aims to question the potential of ownership of these public policies in the former colonies, taking the Great Lakes Region as the case study. Thus, in a first step, I situate restitution policies in the global framework of the decolonial movement by focusing on the political positions of the actors involved. Secondly, I analyse the potential of ownership of these policies by questioning the political practices upstream and downstream of the restitution process of cultural goods and human remains in the Great Lakes region. I conclude with a critical note on the ownership of these policies.
Keywords: Great Lakes region, restitution policies, decolonial movement, ownership