Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T04:06:42.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cultural affiliation is not enough: the repatriation of Ainu human remains

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 February 2017

Naohiro Nakamura
Naohiro Nakamura*
Affiliation:
School of Geography, Earth Science and Environment, Faculty of Science, Technology and Environment, The University of the South Pacific, Laucala Campus, Private Bag, Suva, Fiji (nakamura_n@usp.ac.fj)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The challenges faced by indigenous peoples in repatriation negotiations vary across the globe. In 2012, three Ainu individuals launched a legal case against Hokkaido University, demanding the return of the human remains of nine individuals and a formal apology for having conducted intentional excavations of Ainu graveyards, stolen the remains and infringed upon their rights to perform ceremonies of worship. This action marked the first of such legal cases in Japan. The Ainu experienced both legal and ethical challenges during negotiations with the university; for example, while the claimants applied the Ainu concept kotan as a legal argument for collective ownership of the remains, Hokkaido University claimed the lack of assumption of rights relating to worship under the Civil Code of Japan. There has been significant progress recently on repatriation, mainly due to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in the US, and several meaningful recommendations have been made to ease the repatriation process. However, such recommendations are often case specific and variations in the experiences of indigenous peoples from country to country have not been widely documented. This article discusses the challenges faced by the Ainu in repatriation negotiations in Japan, with a particular focus on the difficulties of applying indigenous customs and philosophies within legal frameworks.

Type
Notes
Information
Polar Record , Volume 53 , Issue 2 , March 2017 , pp. 220 - 224
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Colwell-Chanthaphonh, C., Maxson, R. and Powell, J. 2011. The repatriation of culturally unidentifiable human remains. Museum Management and Curatorship, 26, 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erdrich, H.E. 2010. National monuments. Museum Anthropology, 33, 249–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, T.J. 2010. Repatriation of Ahayu:da: 20 years later. Museum Anthropology, 33, 194–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenfield, J. 2007. The return of cultural treasures, third edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hamilton, M.A. 2010. Collection and objections: aboriginal material culture in southern Ontario. Montreal, QC: McGill-Queen's University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hasegawa, J. and Mitsurui, S. 2016. Hokkaido University returns 16 Ainu human remains, conciliating with the descendants. Asahi Shimbun. 26 March 2016. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
Hemenway, E. 2010. Trials and tribulations in a tribal NAGPRA program. Museum Anthropology, 33, 172–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirata, T. 2012. Ainu human remains in unrest. Shukan Kinyobi, 910, 56–57. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
Hokkaido Shimbun . 2012. The return of Ainu human remains, Hokkaido University confirms to obey the court decision. 28 November 2012. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
HU (Hokkaido University). 2013. Report on the Ainu human remains stored in the School of Medicine, Hokkaido University. Sapporo: Hokkaido University. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
Izumi, K. 2013. Ainu remains the victim of research. Asahi Shimbun, 3 August 2013. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
Jenkins, T. 2011. Contesting human remains in museum collections: the crisis of cultural authority. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kakaliouras, A.M. 2012. An anthropology of repatriation: contemporary physical anthropological and Native American ontologies of practice. Current Anthropology, 53 (Sup. 5), S210–S221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuprecht, K. 2012. The concept of ‘cultural affiliation’ in NAGPRA: its potential and limits in the global protection of indigenous cultural property rights. International Journal of Cultural Property, 19, 33–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinez, D.R., Teeter, W.G. and Kennedy–Richardson, K. 2014. Returning the tataayiyam honuuka’ (Ancestors) to the correct home: the importance of background investigations for NAGPRA claims. Curator: The Museum Journal, 57, 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKeown, C.T. 2010. ‘A willingness to listen to each side’: The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee, 1991–2010. Museum Anthropology, 33, 218–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrill, W.L., Ladd, E.J., Ferguson, T.J., Cruwys, E., Downer, A.S., Feest, C.F., Frisbie, C.J., Herold, J., Jones, S., Layton, R. and Zimmerman, L.J. 1993. The return of the Ahayu:da: lessons for repatriation from Zuni Pueblo and the Smithsonian Institution. Current Anthropology, 34, 523–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, N. 2014. Realising Ainu indigenous rights: a commentary on Hiroshi Maruyama's ‘Japan's post-war Ainu policy. Why the Japanese Government has not recognised Ainu indigenous rights?’ Polar Record, 50, 209–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Park Service. n.d. NAGPRA glossary. https://www.nps.gov/nagpra/TRAINING/GLOSSARY.HTM, accessed 30 May 2016.Google Scholar
Ogawa, R. and Takizawa, T. 2015. Oreno uchashikuma: aru Ainu no sengoshi. Sapporo: Jurosha. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
Schillaci, M.A. and Bustard, W.J. 2012. Controversy and conflict: NAGPRA and the role of biological anthropology in determining cultural affiliation. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 33, 352–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidemann, R.M. 2010. NAGPRA at 20: what have the states done to expand human remains protections? Museum Anthropology, 33, 199–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siddle, R. 1996. Race, resistance and the Ainu of Japan. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Siddle, R. 1997. The Ainu and the discourse of ‘race’. In Dikötter, F., ed. The construction of racial identities in China and Japan. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 136–157.Google Scholar
Thomas, D.H. 2000. Skull wars: Kennewick man, archaeology, and the battle for Native American identity. New York: Nevraumont.Google Scholar
Ueki, T. 2005. Notes on the excavations of Ainu skulls by Kodama Sakuzaemon. Bulletin of Tomakomai Komazawa University, 14, 1–28. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
Ueki, T. 2007. Notes on the excavations of Ainu skulls by Kodama Sakuzaemon (part 4): ethic and socio–political problems. Bulletin of Tomakomai Komazawa University, 17, 1–36. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
United Nations. 2007. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. New York, NY: United Nations.Google Scholar