Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 13, Number 6, 1 Iune 1996 — Bringing home the past [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Bringing home the past

Work continues on carrying out repatnation legislation

Submitted by the Native Hawaiian Preservation Council Following the passage of the Native American Graves Protection

anel Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) on November 16, 1990, Native Americans celebrated in hopes that their lost ancestors and sacred objects would be returned after many years of Ioss and separation. Repatriation is very important to native peoples who see the retum of ancestral remains as a restoration of their cultural and spiritual foundation. It is undertaken with the advice of kūpuna knowledgeable in Hawaiian cultural traditions. NAGPRA protects burial sites on federal and tribal lands and creates a process for the repatriation of Native Hawaiian human remains, funeraryand sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony to appropriate individuals. tribes and organizations. In November 1993, museums holding certain Native Ameiiean artifacts were required to prepare written summaries of their collections

for distribution to culturally affiliated tribes and native Hawaiian organizations. In November 1995, museums were required to prepare detailed inventories of their Native Amenean eolleeiion. For purposes of NAGPRA, native Hawaiians are considered Native Americans and the OfFtce of Hawaiian Affairs and Hui Malama I Na Kūpuna are named as organizations eligible to receive repatriated items and objects. This legislation affects several thousand museums, universities, federal agencies, and Native Americans. Summaries have been provided by 944 museums and federal agencies and five hundred inventories have been provided to Indian tribes and Hawaiian organizations. Issues and problems Legality of ownership: Now that the summaries and most of the inventories required by NAGPRA have been completed, the next phase of implementation involves the verification of rights to particular Native American remains and sacred

objects through consultation. Native Americans must prove that eaeh object meets the definitions established in the law. For example, if the item or object is claimed as eul-

tural patrimony, it must be demonstrated that the object was previously communally owned in terms of traditional property law. To support a elaim for an unassociated object or sacred object, Native Americans may need to describe ceremonies in whieh the object was used as well as the role of their religious ideologies. Although many native people view most traditional materials to some degree as sacred in nature, the law has

been interpreted very narrowly. Under the law the museum and/or federal agency determines whether the item or object meets the definitions. For eaeh item or object claimed, evidence must be presented that the museum or federal agency does not have lawful "right of possession." Again the determination of "right of possession" rests with the museum and/or federal agency. Although the museums and/or federal agenc>' may not have the expertise or the necessary knowledge to make this determination alone, it remains to be seen how they will handle the claims process. Laek of Regulations: Although key deadlines for the Act regarding the filing of summaries and inventories have passed, the final rule was only recently published on December 4, 1995 in the Federal Register. The absence of regulations for over five years has hampered repatriation efforts. These issues are very complex and the laek of rules has contributed to confusion, delay and excessive costs for all affected parties.

Cost Perhaps the most critical of obstacles hindering the full and complete implementation of NAGPRA is the laek of funding. The Native Ameiiean community as well as the museums face great costs in implementing NAGPRA. Greater federal financial assistance for tribal review of inventories and consultation is needed to help Indian tribes, native Hawaiian organizations, museums, and universities in complying with NAGPRA's requirements and deadlines. Congress has appropriated $4.37 million for grants to museums and tribes (total request from tribes and museums was $30 million). This amount is less than 5 percent of the total, conservatively estimated $55 million in costs for NAGPRA implementation to date. It is clear that NAGPRA cannot remedy the

problem it was intended to unless, and until, adequate funds are appropriated so that tribes and museums ean complete the repatriation process.

Care of materials Another difficulty is the laek of physical resources to house eolleetions as they are transferred and received from museums and federal agencies. It is apparent that Indian tribes and native Hawaiian organizations must develop partnerships and enter into cooperative agreements with federal and state agencies until suitable facilities ean be built. Disputes As inventory notices are published, the number of disputes is expected to increase making it more difficult to resolve conflicts between museums, Indian tribes, and native Hawaiian organizations. There are still many non-natives who reftise to believe that repatriation is morally right. The NAGPRA Review Committee was estabhshed to monitor implementation, consult with the Secretary, advise Congress and facilitate dispute resolution if necessary.

Returned to native peoples under NAGPRA: • over 2,805 Native American human remains • 112,664 associated funerary objects; • 31,651 unassociated funerary objects; • 4 objects of cultural patrimony; • 223 sacred objects; and • 21 objects considered as both sacred objects and cultural patrimony (as of March 1996.)

Conclusion NAGPRA has been successfiil in increasing understanding and appreciation of native peoples cultures and experiences. Greater knowledge of collections and better interpretation of Native American art and culture has resulted. Relationships between affected parties have improved leading to increased respect for different world views and cultural values. NAGPRA has resulted in the important recognition of equal treatment under the law for our deceased ancestors. Many traditional Native American practices have been restored as well as individual, cultural and religious integrity. Working partnerships among many museums, universities, and federal agencies and Native peoples have developed. For more information on NAGPRA, please contact Linda Delaney, officer of the Land and Sovereignty division at 594-1888.

Ki'i la'au: now held by a Rhode lsland museum but possibly eligible for repatriation. AP photo