EDITORIAL
Museum makes right decision on claims

A decision by the Bishop Museum to drop its plan to become a "Native Hawaiian Organization" for purposes of becoming a claimant to Hawaiian artifacts was the right thing to do.

The proposal now abandoned was based on the museum's desire to be a more active player under a federal law that "repatriates" human remains and artifacts associated with Native Americans and Hawaiians.

The law, known as NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act), was based on the recognition that Native American remains and other artifacts had been improperly taken from their resting places and should be returned, if rightful claimants could be identified.

While there is no substantive disagreement over the need to repatriate human remains, there is dispute over other objects.

How closely related to a burial or other cultural practices must an object be, to qualify for repatriation? That's at the heart of the dispute in Hawai'i, where claiming groups, most prominently Hui Malama, have taken a relatively broad stance on this issue.

That is, if objects can be demonstrated to have come from a cave or other place where a burial was conducted, they are presumptively moepu, or associated funerary objects.

The museum has taken a more limited view, arguing that the vast majority of objects in its collection are not covered by the intent of the NAGPRA law, which also covers "sacred objects" or "objects of cultural patrimony."

And of those objects that might be covered, the museum originally argued, it should be among the individuals or organizations permitted to claim them. That position has now been dropped, and rightly so. There was an inherent conflict of interest, since it is the museum's job to decide whether an object should be repatriated and to whom.

Our position has long been that the Bishop Museum is the right place for the vast majority of these cultural and historic items to rest. It has been, with some slips, a good custodian. Keeping the objects in the museum makes them available for all to study, understand and respect.

And indeed, most of the collection will never be subject to repatriation claims.

But when an object has a clear association with a burial, there is an obligation on the museum to entertain repatriation to those who can most convincingly demonstrate cultural affiliation or direct lineal descent. It could not have played that role if it was a qualified Native Hawaiian organization itself.