Hawaiian group won't return relics
By Robbie Dingeman
Advertiser Staff Writer
The Native Hawaiian organization that took possession of 83 Hawaiian artifacts from the Bishop Museum three years ago said yesterday that it will not return the relics.
Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawai'i Nei — which means "group caring for the ancestors of Hawai'i" — responded publicly for the first time yesterday in a statement to The Advertiser after a federal committee that reviewed the case recommended last week that the museum take back the items.
The artifacts fall under the federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, which is administered by the National Park Service and provides for the return of human remains and other significant cultural items to Native American and Native Hawaiian groups.
Hui Malama's Kunani Nihipali said that because the NAGPRA review committee serves as an advisory board, the organization is not bound by its findings. "It cannot order repatriation, nor can it undo one," he said.
A decision on custody of the artifacts could end up before a federal court.
The issue concerns artifacts taken from a Big Island cave in 1905 and kept at the museum until February 2000. Museum officials released the items to Hui Malama, drawing objections from other Hawaiians who claimed cultural ties to the objects. The items include a carved wood figure and two stick 'aumakua. The items are said to be priceless as rare examples of the Hawaiian culture before contact with Western civilization.
Another Native Hawaiian organization, the Royal Hawaiian Academy of Traditional Arts, represented by La'akea Suganuma, had requested the federal review of the case after the group made repeated attempts to get the museum to reclaim the items in 2000 and 2001.
Hui Malama has said that the items have been returned to the cave from which they were taken so they could rest with the ancestors who also were buried there.
"The case strikes an extraordinarily sensitive nerve for some who demand that Bishop Museum recall the 'artifacts' it loaned to us despite the fact that this would result in re-disturbance," Nihipali said.
Suganuma rejects that argument. He is among what has been a majority of claiming organizations that voted for recall of the loan.
"Many learned kupuna claim that these were not funerary items but were hidden for safekeeping at the time when the new Christian religion fostered the destruction of anything to do with the old beliefs," he said.
The federal committee found that the museum's handling of the matter was flawed and recommended that the museum recall the items so that all 13 Native Hawaiian organizations that claimed a connection to the artifacts could determine the next step.
William Y. Brown, president and chief executive officer of Bishop Museum, took over the museum after the loan was made. He was unavailable for comment yesterday. But he has said he agrees that the museum erred and will move to recall the artifacts, even if Hui Malama refuses to cooperate.
Nihipali said his organization believes that repatriation occurred in 2001 when the museum turned over the matter to the 13 organizations.
Suganuma said repatriation could not have taken place because the museum lacked possession or control of the items at the time.
"The museum has to take whatever action is necessary to recover these artifacts themselves," Suga-numa said, "which means opening up that cave and finding out what's still in there."
John Robbins, assistant director of cultural resources for the National Park Service in Washington, said the committee acts in an advisory capacity to administer the federal act. But the law also indicates that the committee's findings can be introduced as evidence in federal court if someone makes the case that the act was violated.
So taking the matter to the committee is a logical step toward resolution. According to the law, "the United States District Courts have jurisdiction over any action brought that alleges a violation of the act," Robbins said.
