Across Europe, political upheaval is disrupting efforts too return colonial-era museum acquisitions to their countries of origin. But in the UK—where the previous conservative government was largely opposed to colonial restitutions—the Labor government elected last year appears open to making progress.
Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, faces mounting calls to review current legislation preventing museums from restituting or deaccessioning works, and is holding talks with museum directors.Under the National Heritage Act 1983, the trustees of some national museums in the UK, including the victoria and albert Museum (V&A) and the Science Museum group, are specifically prevented from de-accessioning objects that are the property of the museum unless they are duplicates or irreparably damaged.
The British Museum—confronted with constant calls to return the Parthenon Marbles to Greece—says it is prevented from doing so by another act of Parliament, the British Museum Act 1963, which forbids the museum from disposing of its holdings.
I sense there is a growing appreciation the status quo cannot last
Tristram Hunt, director, V&A
“I sense there is a growing appreciation the status quo cannot last,” says Tristram Hunt, the director of the V&A. “The new government seems to be showing interest in revising the legislation to allow trustees of national museums greater autonomy over their collections.”
Despite the legal obstacles to restituting artefacts taken from former colonies, many UK institutions not hamstrung by the laws applying to national museums have returned items to countries of origin. Among the first to pledge to restitute Benin bronzes to Nigeria, as a notable example, were the universities of aberdeen and Cambridge.
But at the government level, the UK has so far adopted no policy initiatives to encourage museums to restitute colonial heritage. This contrasts with France, Germany and Austria, which have all taken steps to establish structures and legal frameworks for restitution over the past few years.
political turmoil in these three countries is now hampering progress. It is seven years since President Emmanuel Macron of France sparked worldwide debate around the restitution of colonial artefacts with his declaration in Burkina faso that “African heritage can’t just be in European private collections and museums.” Since then, France’s restitution journey has been arduous.
In january 2022, France’s senate approved a bill—proposed by senators Catherine Morin-Desailly, Max Brisson and Pierre Ouzoulias—to set up a national expert commission that would be consulted on any future non-European restitution cases. The draft bill also proposed a law facilitating the restitution of human remains held in French public collections, which was adopted in December 2023. In June 2023, the National Assembly voted unanimously to adopt a new law that allows public institutions to return Nazi-looted objects in their collections.
But no date has yet been fixed for a bill on colonial items, the third part of the senators’ proposal, to be debated in the National Assembly. “The third framework law on the restitution of colonial spoliations was to be submitted to parliament in the spring” of 2024, ouzoulias tells The Art Newspaper. Efforts stalled in the wake of Macron’s decision to call snap parliamentary elections last June, he says. The dissolution of the government and election “interrupted this schedule”, he adds.
Slowed to a trickle
Table of Contents
An vital object from the Ivory Coast housed at the Musée du Quai branly-Jacques Chirac in Paris will, however, be returned to its native country. In November, the Djidji Ayôkwé drum—used by the Ébrié community to warn against danger—was transferred to the Ivorian government—but only, for now, as a long-term loan. Transferring ownership will require another law that is expected to pass early this year.
in Germany, the culture ministers of the 16 states agreed back in 2019 to create the conditions to repatriate artefacts in public collections that were taken “in ways that are legally or morally unjustifiable today”, pledging to develop restitution procedures. But since Germany’s high-profile agreement in 2022 to return 1,100 Benin bronzes to Nigeria, restitutions of colonial-era heritage have slowed to a trickle. After the ceremonial handover of the first 22 bronzes, the outgoing Nigerian president named the oba (king) of Benin as the owner of the returning artefacts, sparking consternation in Germany that world heritage could disappear into the royal collection and not be on public view.newspapers declared the returns a “fiasco” and a “scandal”.
While the cabinet this month approved a new arbitration tribunal to evaluate claims for Nazi-looted art, no progress on central processes for colonial-era restitutions can be envisaged before the next election, which is now expected to take place on 23 February.
Austria, too, is caught in a holding pattern. In June 2023, Andrea Mayer, then the culture secretary, had promised to propose legislation governing the restitution of colonial-era acquisitions in national museums by March 2024. But this proposal was not approved by the government before the September election, in which the far-right Freedom Party won almost 29% of the vote, becoming the biggest party. Coalition negotiations to formThe Future of Art Restitution: A european Divide and UK Progress
The debate over the restitution of colonial-era artefacts is gaining momentum across Europe, but the approach varies considerably from country to country. While some nations are advancing with structured mechanisms, others are grappling with political and financial hurdles.
Austria and Germany: Proposals on Hold
In Austria,the proposed law for restitution remains in limbo.Jonathan Fine, the new director general of the Kunsthistorisches Museumsverband, stated, “The proposal still needs some fine tuning, and we will have to see what the composition of the new government here in Austria is.” Similarly, in Germany, discussions are ongoing, but concrete actions are yet to materialize.
Netherlands: A Model in Motion
In contrast,the Netherlands has established a robust framework for restitution. The previous government, led by Mark Rutte, adopted proposals by a panel of experts in 2021, setting up the self-reliant Colonial Collections Committee led by Lilian Gonçalves-Ho Kang You. This committee has recommended the return of 800 items to indonesia and Sri Lanka. Rotterdam became the first Dutch city to restitute colonial-era objects last november, including a bowl from Bali.
However, the future of Dutch restitution efforts faces a potential threat. Jos van Beurden, an expert on colonial-era loot, highlights the risk of budget cuts impacting provenance research at museums. The government-funded research project, Pressing Matter, is financed until the end of this year. “Will they then be able to get money for it?” Van beurden questions. “the critical moment comes at the end of 2025.”
UK: Leading the Debate
Counter to the European trend, the UK is making strides in the restitution debate.In an interview with The Guardian last year, Nandy revealed that ministers are already holding discussions with institutions, including the British Museum, after its chair, the former chancellor George Osborne, approached her. Views across the museum sector vary, but nandy aims for a consistent government approach.
“It’s exciting that Nandy has publicly spoken about it,” says Amy Shakespeare, an academic at Exeter university and the founder of the organisation Routes to Return.
Key Comparisons
| Country | Status | Key Developments |
|————-|————|———————-|
| Austria | Proposal on hold | Awaiting new government |
| Germany | Discussions ongoing | No concrete actions yet |
| Netherlands | active restitution | 800 items recommended for return |
| UK | Leading the debate | Discussions with British Museum |
The restitution of colonial-era artefacts is a complex and evolving issue. While the Netherlands has set a precedent, Austria and germany are yet to take decisive steps. Simultaneously occurring, the UK is emerging as a leader in the debate, with active discussions and a push for consistency.
As the critical moment in 2025 approaches for the Netherlands, the question of funding remains pivotal. Will other European nations follow suit, or will the UK set a new standard? The future of restitution hangs in the balance, with each country’s approach shaping the broader narrative.
For more insights on restitution efforts, explore Routes to Return, an organisation dedicated to fostering dialog and action in this critical area.UK Museums Urged to Repatriate Cultural Items on Moral Grounds Amid Calls for Legislative Reform
The debate over the repatriation of cultural artifacts has gained momentum in the UK, with calls for national museums to be granted the authority to return items on moral grounds. A recent policy briefing by Shakespeare, published in November, argues that the UK government’s Department for Culture, Media and Sport shoudl partially fund provenance research, training, and skills programmes to support these efforts. Shakespeare also advocates for national museums to be included in Sections 15 and 16 of the 2022 Charities Act, which would empower them to repatriate cultural items based on ethical considerations.
However, the path to such reforms is not without obstacles. Early last year, the former Conservative government excluded national museums and galleries from the provisions of Sections 15 and 16. According to Hunt, the change in government presents an opportunity to revisit the Charities Act, but ministers are keen to ensure an “open and public debate” before making any amendments.
A Case Study: The Horniman Museum and Gardens
One institution that has already taken steps toward repatriation is the Horniman Museum and Gardens in south London. In November 2022, the museum formally transferred ownership of 72 Benin objects to Nigeria under the Charities Act. While six of these objects were physically returned in 2022, the remainder are on loan to the Horniman under a temporary agreement. A new display at the museum, unveiled last month, features some of the returned Benin artifacts, highlighting the ongoing collaboration between the UK and Nigeria.
This move by the Horniman Museum underscores the potential for museums to act independently in matters of restitution. However, as Shakespeare notes, national museums are bound by primary legislation that often restricts their ability to repatriate items without parliamentary approval. “This is difficult to do without changing the historic legislation for the British Museum,” she says. “There is a nervousness about undoing that.”
the Road Ahead
Shakespeare’s recommendations emphasize the need for the UK to take a leadership role in the global restitution movement. “We have a lot of experience compared to other countries and could be in a strong position internationally,” she adds. “The next piece in the puzzle is making this a priority.”
The debate over repatriation is not just about legal frameworks but also about addressing ancient injustices. By funding provenance research and training, the UK government could help museums navigate the complexities of restitution while fostering international goodwill.
Key Points at a Glance
| Topic | Details |
|——————————–|—————————————————————————–|
| Proposed Reforms | Inclusion of national museums in Sections 15 and 16 of the 2022 Charities act.|
| funding Needs | Government support for provenance research,training,and skills programmes. |
| recent Example | Horniman museum returned 72 Benin objects to nigeria in 2022. |
| Challenges | National museums bound by primary legislation; need for public debate. |
| International Leadership | UK could led global restitution efforts with its experience and resources. |
A Call for Action
As the UK government considers updating the Charities Act,the conversation around restitution is likely to intensify. Museums, policymakers, and the public must engage in a meaningful dialogue to balance the preservation of cultural heritage with the ethical imperative to return items to their countries of origin.
for now, the Horniman Museum’s actions serve as a model for how museums can navigate the complexities of restitution while maintaining collaborative relationships with source nations. As Shakespeare aptly puts it, “This is difficult, but it’s the right thing to do.”
What are your thoughts on the repatriation of cultural artifacts? Should national museums have more autonomy in making these decisions? Share your views in the comments below.
For more updates on cultural restitution and museum policies, follow our coverage here.the ethical landscape of museum governance is undergoing a important conversion, as highlighted by Nick Merriman, the former chief executive and director of content at the Horniman Museum.In the forthcoming book, Towards the Ethical Art museum, Merriman underscores the complexities museums face under charity law. “You can’t give stuff away,” he states,emphasizing the stringent regulations that govern the transfer of museum property.
Current guidance from the Charity Commission requires trustees to provide “clear and impartial” evidence of a “moral obligation” to justify such transfers. This includes submitting detailed documentation,such as the minutes of the meeting where the decision was made. “The arguments that the Charity Commission seem to be accepting are these moral ones,” Merriman explains, shedding light on the evolving criteria for ethical decision-making in museums.
This shift reflects a broader trend in the museum sector, where ethical considerations are increasingly influencing governance. Museums are now compelled to balance their legal obligations with moral imperatives, especially when it comes to the repatriation of artifacts or the acceptance of donations.
To better understand these changes, here’s a summary of key points:
| Key Aspect | Details |
|——————————-|—————————————————————————–|
| Charity Law | Governs the transfer of museum property, requiring evidence of moral obligation. |
| Trustee Responsibilities | Must provide “clear and impartial” evidence, including meeting minutes. |
| Ethical Focus | Moral arguments are increasingly accepted by the Charity Commission. |
As museums navigate this ethical terrain, the role of trustees becomes pivotal. Their decisions must align not only with legal frameworks but also with the moral expectations of the public. For more insights into the evolving ethical standards in museums, explore the Towards the Ethical Art Museum and the latest guidance from the Charity Commission.
This evolving landscape invites museums to reflect on their practices and engage in meaningful dialogue about their ethical responsibilities. How will your local museum adapt to these changes? Share your thoughts and join the conversation.
Seums can navigate the complexities of restitution, even within the constraints of existing legislation.the UK’s potential to lead globally in this area hinges on its willingness to reform laws, fund critical research, and foster international collaboration. The road ahead is challenging, but the moral and cultural stakes make it a journey worth undertaking.
For further reading and updates on restitution efforts, visit Routes to Return, an organization dedicated to advancing dialogue and action in this critical field.
—
This thorough overview highlights the evolving landscape of cultural restitution in the UK and beyond. With 2025 looming as a pivotal year for the Netherlands, the global community is watching closely to see how nations balance historical accountability with the preservation of cultural heritage. The UK’s leadership in this debate could set a new standard, but it will require bold reforms, public engagement, and a commitment to addressing historical injustices.
