Heritage Justice

Human Rights and Justice: Philosophical, Economic, and Social Perspectives, 2018

Seattle Journal of Social Justice, 2020

In 2016, the International Criminal Court (ICC) focused on the sole charge of crimes against cultural property in the Prosecutor v. Al Mahdi case. This judgment marks a first under several aspects, and scholars have published excellent studies regarding that case’s decision and proceedings by extending the analytic lens into different places and varied spaces. In every scholarly publication, however, authors have failed to explore two components of the ICC judgment that are worth noting: first, the role played by the inhabitants of the Timbuktu area in preserving and safeguarding the buildings and institutions that have been then destroyed; and second, the elements of restorative justice traceable in the ICC Trial Chamber (TC)’s reasoning, in the behavior of those convicted, and in the kind of reparation the TC and the Trust Fund for Victims (TFV) awarded to victims. This article will present (1) a summary of the Al Mahdi case and the ICC judgment; (2) an excursus on the crimes against culture at international level; (3) an analysis of the notion of ‘heritage community’ as applied to the Timbuktu community engaged in the protection of their cultural heritage; and (4) an analysis of the restorative justice measures taken by the ICC as part of the reparation awarded (5 and 6).

Social Science Research Council, 2022

Pierre Losson considers how artifact restitution from museums can repair structural violence to which nations and communities have been subjected—but can also engage in new forms of the same dynamics in the present. Returns reflect changing perceptions of museums and a reckoning with their roles in producing imperialist knowledge. Still, such restitutions are not simple processes, as Losson shows: One key question is, to whom are objects returned? And how do returns interrelate with nationalist dynamics and local politics?

Heritage and Society, 2014

What is the distinction between human rights and social justice frameworks? I argue that in heritage contexts, distinctions do matter. Despite its potential in protecting cultural heritage and mediating conflict, human rights regimes have been overburdened in taking on heritage issues. In certain contexts, a shift to a social justice agenda provides advocacy and voice to communities whose needs have been marginalized. I suggest that a social justice approach is positioned to take on issues of inequalities, injustices, or violations of heritage rights, and provide avenues for ‘communities of connection’ (i.e., indigenous, subaltern, descendant and local communities) to challenge how their heritage is represented.

2010. In Anthropological Quarterly, Vol. 83, No. 4, pp. 839-860 This paper discusses the efficacy of applying a framework of universal human rights to resolve heritage conflicts. It considers the pitfalls and potentials in particular heritage settings for both archaeologists and the constituencies we seek to represent. A distinction is made throughout the paper between invoking universal human rights, as opposed to other rights or claims more broadly. Specifically, I ask what does the mantle of universal human rights bring to heritage? What additional work might it perform, and who wins and loses when archaeologists elevate cultural heritage to this arena of urgency? If archaeologists want to pursue this route, what steps might they take to be conversant with human rights and, more importantly, effective in practically implementing that knowledge? I then describe the situation in post-apartheid South Africa—a nation that has arguably crafted the world’s most liberal constitution, yet in reality faces numerous challenges to instrumentalizing human rights. In terms of South African heritage rights, the archaeological site of Thulamela is offered as an example of conflict resolution at the local level by briefly examining the role of archaeologists and several connected communities each vying for access and ownership of the site. Following Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum I suggest that heritage practitioners might be more effective and ethically responsible by being attendant to pragmatic approaches that enhance human capabilities and human flourishing.

International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law, 2011

The exceptionalism originally afforded cultural heritage in international humanitarian law arose from its perceived significance to humanity through its advancement of the arts and sciences, and knowledge. By the mid-twentieth century, and the rise of human rights in international law, this rationale was recalibrated to emphasise its importance to the enjoyment of human rights and promotion of cultural diversity. This shift in rationale manifested itself most clearly in the articulation and prosecution of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Cultural heritage and its protection was no longer based on its exclusivity but its intrinsic importance to people and individuals, to their identity and their enjoyment of their human rights. In examining the protection of cultural heritage in this chapter, I focus on this shifting rationale to highlight the ever-present interplay and interdependence between international humanitarian law and human rights law. First, I outline the exceptional treatment of cultural heritage in general international humanitarian law instruments, and its overlap with international human rights law. Then, I detail how this protection has been built upon by the specialist regime for the protection of cultural heritage during armed conflict and belligerent occupation developed under the auspices of UNESCO. Next, I analyse international criminal law jurisprudence from the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg to the International Criminal Court for the former Yugoslavia, to show how efforts to prosecute violations of the laws and customs of war relating to cultural heritage have been intrinsic to the articulation and prosecution of crimes against humanity and genocide. Finally, I consider the evolving and potential future normative trends in this field in the light of recent developments.

International Journal of Cultural Property, 2008

Is there a universal right to the free expression and preservation of cultural heritage, and if so, where is that right articulated and can it be protected? How is the notion of "heritage" used variously to unite and divide communities? Who defines cultural heritage and who should control stewardship and the benefits of cultural heritage? These are the important questions that Helaine Silverman and D. Fairchild Ruggles pose on the back cover of Cultural Heritage and Human Rights. A volume both broad and rich, it addresses the political aspect of heritage preservation and management as it relates to human rights. This book is the outcome of a workshop organized in 2006 by the Collaborative for Cultural Heritage and Museum Practices (CHAMP) held at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. The workshop brought together a group of contributors from a range of fields: archaeology, anthropology, history, culture studies, landscape architecture, and geography. Their objective was to examine and interrogate heritage as it relates to cultural identity. Their published essays present a cross-section of the academic discussions about cultural heritage and human rights. Cultural Heritage and Human Rights has three strengths. First, the editors make the argument that "human rights and cultural heritage are not self contained," and the chapters insightfully demonstrate how "they may overlap and in doing so may conflict with each other" (p. 6). Second, they have included case studies that show the ambivalence of heritage and the challenges involved in its preservation and production. Third, the volume reveals that much substantive fieldwork on cultural heritage and human rights is undertaken by those critical of conservation discourse and international management practices. In this way the book provides a solid overview of the critical dimensions of cultural preservation for scholars, policymakers, students, and heritage workers. If, as Silverman and Ruggles argue in their introduction, "cultural heritage does not figure prominently in the extensive literature on human rights" (p. 41), the chapters by William Logan, James Wescoat, Jr., and Christopher Silver are an important corrective. They demonstrate how conservation is a problematic force that undermines as well as supports the maintenance and extension of human rights.

Journal of the History of International Law / Revue d’histoire du droit international

This article provides a new narrative for the history of cultural heritage law and seeks to contribute to current legal debates about the restitution of cultural objects. The modern protection laws for cultural objects in domestic and international law evolved in the 19th and 20th century. The article makes three new arguments regarding the emergence of this legal regime. First, ‘civilisation’ was a main concept and colonialism an integral part of the international legal system during the evolution of the regime. The Eurocentric concept of civilisation has so far been an ignored catalyst for the international development of cultural heritage norms. Second, different states and actors used cultural heritage laws and their inherent connection to the concept of civilisation for different purposes. Third, the international legal system of cultural heritage partly still reflects its colonial roots. The current restitution discussions are an outcome of this ongoing problematic legal const...

Human Rights Quarterly, 2019

New actors and emerging norms are strengthening the focus on the protection of cultural heritage in conflict zones and the codification of transna-tional legal processes. Following the destruction of cultural and religious sites in Timbuktu in 2012, the International Criminal Court (ICC) prompted a watershed moment in international criminal justice-the Al Mahdi trial, which represented the first ever case before an international court where the defendant was solely charged with the war crime of destruction of cultural heritage. The Al Mahdi case provided an opportunity to identify the victims of crimes of destruction of cultural heritage in international law. Beyond the local communities for whom the destroyed sites were of value, it is apparent that the "international community," personified in this case by UNESCO emerged as an actor with legal and symbolic standing. This article charts the trajectory through which UNESCO became the representative via bifurcation-of the international community in cases of destruction of cultural heritage.

Backdirt, 2021