In this study, we argue that uncovering losses from public collections and making efforts to recover them is of fundamental importance concerning the responsible management of state assets and the maintenance of the cultural public interest. In recent times, the perception of museums has been in a constant state of flux, with international expectations associated with them sometimes appearing to be contradictory. While much attention has been paid to the diligence of care, museums must exercise in areas such as acquisition, deaccessioning policies, repatriation, and decolonization, an equally important function – but one less discussed in the international literature – which is the duty of public collections to safeguard and manage state-owned assets. In 2023, the Hungarian National Museum implemented a new initiative aimed at recovering cultural property that had disappeared from public collections under unknown circumstances. This procedure has already generated numerous insights that the current study analyzes, ranging from the difficulty of shedding light on decades-long ownership chains to the challenges of acquisition and the effectiveness of dispute resolution. The Hungarian initiative represents an additional approach to the protection of cultural property, addressing a significant gap in the Hungarian heritage protection system that has received less attention.

This case note analyzes the arbitral tribunal’s assessment in Gabriel Resources v. Romania, focusing on the investors’ “second alternative claim” that Romania’s nomination and subsequent inscription of the Roșia Montană Mining Landscape on the World Heritage List constituted a breach of its obligations under the applicable bilateral investment treaties. It examines whether the tribunal’s reasoning aligns with prior investment case law involving the World Heritage Convention, and it reflects on certain aspects of the award that may warrant closer scrutiny, particularly in light of the potential normative tensions between the protection of host states’ heritage and the rights of foreign investors.

Alisha Sijapati and Erin Thompson’s article “Making a market for ‘The Art of Nepal’: Tracing the flow of Nepali cultural property into the United States” makes a series of unsubstantiated claims about the nature and scope of the Nepali antiquities market in the 1950s and 1960s based on the authors’ research of a single 1964 exhibition of Nepali antiquities in the United States. This critical response will contest these claims by examining the broader Nepali antiquities market as it existed prior to 1970, particularly within Nepal and in South Asia, while also locating the authors and their claims in the context of the recent repatriation campaign by Nepali activists. Finally, the response will conclude that if there is to be an ethical turn in voluntary repatriation, there must be greater consideration of contexts beyond the West and a refocusing of provenance research beyond Western collectors and institutions.

The Blue Shield UK Underwater Heritage Working Group (UHWG) is dedicated to protecting underwater cultural heritage in crisis, both within the United Kingdom (UK), UK Overseas Territories and internationally. In pursuit of this mission, the UHWG’s objectives are threefold:

This article examines the challenges Indigenous communities face in safeguarding their intangible cultural heritage (ICH) in the digital age, using two case studies. Referring to the Te Hiku Media case, it analyzes the threat of data colonialism posed by corporate digitization projects. The article argues that existing legal frameworks provide limited protection for Indigenous ICH, prompting Indigenous communities to develop the innovative theory of Indigenous data sovereignty (ID-SOV). The Government of Nunavut–Microsoft partnership case highlights the benefits and drawbacks of public–private partnerships (PPPs) for Indigenous ICH. Key takeaways from both cases’ analysis lead to our proposal of integrating ID-SOV principles into PPPs to limit data colonialism risks and improve the sustainability of Indigenous ICH digitization projects. The article contends that implementing ID-SOV principles by design and by default in PPPs can empower Indigenous communities while leveraging the oversight of public actors and resources of private partners to safeguard Indigenous ICH through digital tools.

Art theft is still a crime surrounded by inaccuracies. From the perception of flashy fictional thieves to unintentionally misleading monetary claims, the general public and some art and security professionals have a distorted vision of the scope of the criminal enterprise. As there is an alarming lack of empirical studies into the matter, this study aims to remedy the issue through the elaboration of a database to find common characteristics and aspects of interest amongst multiple art heists from the last three decades to provide a better understanding of crucial theft traits such as defeated security measures, methods of deception, timing and target selection, use of weapons and insider participation impact. Results indicate thieves tend to use brute force to defeat security measures; diversions and deceptions are a standard, uniform trends are present in absolute timing matters, and neither the use of weapons nor insiders appears to be the norm.

This article examines the evolution of artifact hunting in Spain, particularly in Andalusia, highlighting the legal measures implemented to combat archaeological looting over the past three decades. In contrast to the liberal model led by England and Wales, a more conservative approach, like the Spanish one, offers valuable insights with a clear effect in the protection of archaeological heritage that can serve as an example for other nations grappling with similar challenges.

A museum should be a place where cultures, dialogue, and social relations are enhanced. Given the renewed public interest in the topic, the author poses the question: Is there a need and a possibility to decolonize ethnographic museums? Should we have common and shared practices? In an attempt to eliminate colonial vestiges in museums, an analysis of literature and practices leads the author to analyze five European ethnographic museums in order to understand their merits and shortcomings. The subjectivity of these institutions and the diversity with which colonization can be presented makes the proposal of a single generalized solution not preferable. An objective analysis, based on actions and variables, drives the author to determine, however, that in order to revitalize museum practices, there is a need to create a sharable framework. The design of minimum standards can help museums set clear and measurable goals to achieve a higher level of decolonization.

On 22 January 2025, an international conference titled “Patrimoine en péril?” was held at the Museum of Art and History in Geneva. It was organized by the UNESCO Chair in the International Law of the Protection of Cultural Heritage (University of Geneva), the Museum of Art and History (MAH), and the International Alliance for the Protection of Heritage (ALIPH) Foundation. This event was part of the eponymous exhibition at MAH,1 commemorating the seventieth anniversary of the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, and coinciding with the twentieth anniversary of the entry into force of the Swiss Cultural Property Transfer Act. The conference explored these two themes, bringing together international experts from academia, law, and heritage conservation and management, reflecting a cross-disciplinary perspective on the protection of cultural property in times of crisis. In his opening remarks, Marc-Olivier Wahler (Director of the MAH) highlighted the evolving role of museums in contemporary society. The conference was split into five sessions, each addressing various critical issues related to cultural property, and were moderated by Béatrice Blandin (MAH), Antoinette Maget Dominicé (University of Geneva), and Marc-André Renold (University of Geneva).

Adopting a human rights-based approach, this paper scrutinizes the treatment of illicit trafficking in cultural property as a human rights issue. The study focuses on the Iraqi contribution to the international agenda, revealing that Iraq co-sponsored at least 13 UN resolutions on the restitution of illegally expropriated cultural property, actively contributing to the negotiation of others, along with submitting its legal opinions on the drafts of relevant international documents, starting from as early as 1936 to culminate with the calls to stop cultural plunder feeding Western markets since the 1990s. Centering the Iraqi voices and adopting a critical decolonial rights-based perspective, the study showcases how illicit trade in cultural property clearly emerges as a violation of a state’s permanent sovereignty over its wealth and resources, negatively impacting its ability to guarantee the right to pursue economic, social, and cultural development for its people, as well as to freely dispose of their resources, the key components of the right to self-determination.

This article examines how Indigenous Peoples who depend on World Heritage sites for their culture and livelihood can appeal to the Committee when State Parties fail to comply with their obligations. While scholars criticize the World Heritage Convention for the lack of participation of Indigenous Peoples, particularly in the inscription and management processes, the framework of the Convention also allows representation and visibility. Indeed, compliance mechanisms offer opportunities for Indigenous advocates to negotiate Land sovereignty and environmental protection. TWAIL, which places the worldview of Indigenous Peoples at the center of legal practice, is crucial to understanding the interactions between Indigenous Peoples and the 1972 UNESCO Convention. TWAILers highlight how international law historically denies sovereignty rights to Indigenous Peoples. Article 6(1) echoes this absence of sovereignty. This article examines three cases in which Indigenous advocates petition to protect Native Lands against environmental degradations and colonization: Kakadu, Wood Buffalo, and Uluru. Ultimately, the challenges of Indigenous activists in their quest to preserve nature and culture reveal that the absence of sovereignty prerogatives remains a substantial issue. While the Convention provides a venue for advocacy and international awareness, Indigenous Peoples still must negotiate Land autonomy and cultural sovereignty with the State.

Much of today’s academic scholarship of international cultural heritage law circles around cultural heritage’s protection for the benefit of future generations. Despite this, the efforts to systematically examine the concept in more detail are scarcer. This paper seeks to fill this gap by taking a closer look at the ways in which the notion of future generations features in the body of international cultural heritage law. This contribution firstly illustrates how central the idea of protecting cultural heritage for the benefit of future generations is in international cultural heritage law. Despite this centrality, evidenced by an extensive analysis of international and regional hard and soft law, national law, case law, and policy options, its precisely contours the second argument of this paper, is that they remain elusive. Finally, skepticism is voiced over the concept’s potential ambivalent use with respect to the protection of cultural heritage.

Legal, ethical, historical, cultural, and political questions in relation to African cultural heritage are increasingly the focal point of international, regional, and national debates. It is now widely recognized that African cultural disputes – often between African States (or State institutions) on the one hand, and Western States, State institutions and private actors on the other – are ripe for settlement, especially on the basis of law, including international law. This article focuses on international arbitration as a means for resolving African cultural heritage-related disputes and, for the first time analyses the benefits of all types of international arbitration (State-to-State arbitration, investment treaty arbitration and commercial (contract-based) arbitration) from the perspective of African States and actors in relation to the resolution of African cultural heritage disputes, which include disputes regarding the return of African cultural objects. This article examines for the first time the potential role of all types of arbitral proceedings ((i) State-to-State arbitration, (ii) international investment treaty arbitration (or, as often-called, Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)), and (iii) commercial arbitration) for the resolution of Africa-related cultural heritage disputes.

The concept of the African Renaissance expresses the idea that the African continent is experiencing a crucial phase of its history and will overcome the current challenges of poverty, inequality, and violence to achieve cultural, political, and economic renewal and a more just and equitable order. First articulated by the Senegalese historian Cheikh Anta Diop (1923–1986) in the aftermath of World War II, the concept encourages African peoples to take pride in their rich cultural heritage and long history, to take charge of their lives and rebuild the economy, and to set Africa as a significant player in international affairs. For the African Union, the continent should take advantage of and build on its rich diversity of cultures in its quest for prosperity.

The safeguarding of African heritage and diversity can benefit local communities, promoting intercultural dialogue and peace as well as sustainable development. This article thus aims to spark conversation about Africa’s heritage and identify some methods to realize the African Renaissance. First, it discusses the legacies of colonialism. Second, it explores the promise of cultural decolonization. Third, it scrutinizes the concept of the African Renaissance, its historical roots, and its current legal significance. Fourth, it investigates the linkage between the African Renaissance and sustainable development. Fifth, it focuses on how the World Heritage Convention protects African sites of cultural and natural outstanding value and whether such protection is adequate or could be improved. Finally, it offers some preliminary conclusions.

This essay makes the case that law in most of Africa has, since colonial times, been used as a framework of domination and imperialism. This has always been through repugnancy/supremacy clauses, which were predicated on the highly problematic assumption that European ways of knowing were superior to the African ones. This essay also demonstrates that, sadly, these clauses are still on the statute books of many African countries and continue to haunt the protection through law of Africa’s precious and unique tangible and intangible cultural heritage. The essay also shows that another way through whichthe development of African heritage was arrested through law was by criminalizing traditional Indigenous practices, which European imperial powers did not fully understand in terms of ontology. It is also argued that the same problems bedeviling the legal protection of African cultural heritage at the domestic level haunt this protection, even at the regional level(s). African regional courts continue to sadly apply alien notions of law to the exclusion of majority Africans. International law, being state-centric, has not been applied in the African context to revolutionarily protect African heritage. Where it has done so, it has been failed by the states or has been generally limited by its problematic colonial foundations. Finally, it is agued that African states need to de-elitesize, de-Westernize and decolonize the law if it is to effectively protect cultural heritage and property and make meaning to the ordinary African. This is urgent and imperative from a cultural, security and geopolitical vantagepoint.

This article aims to explain the strains and paradoxes of how African communities have been unable to obtain legal access and control to expropriated or stolen cultural heritage held in foreign museums despite their increased participation in international cultural heritage law. Further, it outlines the strained relationship between communities’ participation in cultural heritage governance under international cultural heritage law and cultural heritage law in Kenya. Using a postcolonial critique, this article examines these cultural heritage laws using notions of communitarianism and relationality in relation to the African Renaissance. It is demonstrated that communities should have increased participation in cultural heritage governance and, as a result, access to and control over their appropriated cultural heritage held in foreign museums. The purpose of a post-colonial critique of cultural heritage laws seeks to allow states and communities to listen to each other as opposed to one replacing the other in matters of cultural heritage.

Shipwrecks are archaeological, economic, historical, and political time capsules waiting to be unlocked. Their discovery results in debates over matters relating to their protection including ownership, jurisdiction, and the manner of their preservation. Interested parties include flag States, particularly in case of sunken State vessels, States in the maritime zone of which the wrecks are found, private owners of items submerged with the wrecks as well as other States linked to the objects. Sunken State vessels involve the additional disputing issue of sovereign immunity. Africa has thousands of historic shipwrecks lying around its coasts. This article examines, in the context of the African Renaissance, laws from 22 select African States in protecting underwater cultural heritage, particularly sunken (State) vessels, in light of relevant international treaties particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage.

In their 2022 publication in this journal, Suber and colleagues attempt to apply crime mapping to the illicit trade of cultural objects from the Middle East to establish a causal relationship between conflict and heritage looting. The article calls for comments by readers on the methodological approaches and results (p. 559). This commentary addresses the article’s shortcomings, specifically highlighting its inadequate grounding in existing literature, methodological limitations, and problematic data approach.

Old collections, real or fake, are a basic part of the collection history of an antiquity or artwork. This article is a starting point for a study of the concept: how old collections are employed, what functions they have, and how fictitious old collections are chosen and constructed. To explore these concepts, the article considers the example of Cumberland Clark, an early 20th-century collector who serves as the putative origin of cuneiform tablets in a handful of present-day collections, most notably the Schøyen Collection. This article looks at the life and collections of Cumberland Clark, then argues that the Clark provenance for current collections is a fabrication, and concludes by looking at Clark in the context of other old collections in order to draw some lessons about fabricated provenance.

“Sovereign Objects: International Dimensions of Indigenous Repatriation in Canada” explores the complexities of cultural repatriation in Canadian museums, advocating for its recognition as an international issue. By framing repatriation this way, the study acknowledges Indigenous sovereignty and aligns with international legal standards such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). The international approach enhances political, social, and cultural outcomes for First Nations peoples, providing a robust legal framework and fostering greater recognition of Indigenous nations as sovereign entities. The manuscript highlights the importance of acknowledging the distinct cultural and political status of Indigenous communities, supported by historical treaties and contemporary legal recognition. It provides case studies, such as the repatriation of human remains from the Royal Ontario Museum to the Rainy River First Nations, to illustrate the practical application of these principles. The study also critically examines the challenges of adopting the discourse of “nations,” including the technical, political, social, and cultural expectations involved. By redefining repatriation as an international issue, this research promotes a deeper understanding of Indigenous sovereignty and facilitates more effective and culturally sensitive repatriation efforts. The manuscript argues that such an approach is essential for ensuring that repatriation processes are respectful, equitable, and aligned with the unique governance structures of Indigenous communities.

In 2021, the 44th session of the World Heritage Committee Meeting voted to list the Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex as a Natural World Heritage Site, seven years after it was first nominated for consideration by Thailand. A central point to the debate was concerns raised over human rights abuses relating to the Indigenous Karen people living inside the park boundaries. This paper undertakes an analysis of the World Heritage Committee discussion, unpacking key themes of Outstanding Universal Value, human rights, and the role of local communities to illustrate the impact that World Heritage – and the subsequent Authorized Heritage Discourse (AHD) it creates – can have on Indigenous communities.

States have the sovereign right to pursue their social and economic development, often involving urbanization, industrialization, infrastructure development, and tourism promotion. Regrettably, these endeavors frequently lead to destruction or damage to the authenticity and integrity of their cultural heritage. In light of this, one might wonder whether and to what extent, under customary international law, states’ right to development must be harmonized with the need to preserve their own cultural heritage for the benefit of future generations. The present contribution examines various elements of international practice, including treaty practice, resolutions of international organizations, national legislation, and states’ conduct in actual cases to determine the existence of a customary prohibition or clear limits on damaging cultural heritage for social and economic development. It also reflects more broadly on the international regime for protecting cultural heritage during peacetime and the ambiguous relationship between the World Heritage Convention and customary law.