RESTITUTION OF THE BENIN ART WORKS-SOME FURTHER REFLECTIONS
The recent discussions on the question of the restitution of the Benin artworks have led me to some thoughts which I would like to share with all. The case of Benin is surely not the only one in Africa for there are claims from Egypt, Ghana, Mali, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Congo Republic etc but Benin is the best known and the one case where the facts are very clear and the documentation is also rich. We therefore must win this case if we are to be successful in the other cases which may not be too easy to establish or document.
Discussion on the issue must be encouraged and constantly revived. It is good that the discussion is going in Vienna but more important will be further discussions in Nigeria for it is only pressure from Nigeria, not from Vienna, which will set matters rolling a little faster. To that extent, it may be useful to have a report on the on-going exhibition published in Nigeria by the Nigerian delegation that attended the opening, if this has not been already done.
We should also have a very clear written statement outlining the position of the people of Benin and the Nigerian Government, above all dispelling the alleged existence of conflict of interest which the Director of the Museum of Ethnology (Museum für Völkerkunde) Vienna has been trying to establish. Such a statement should, if possible, state the full extent of the claim, e.g. asking, in addition to restitution, for interests since the illegal looting in 1897. The text attached below is good but is addressed only to the British Parliament. The text should preferably be established with the assistance of some lawyers in Nigeria which has an abundance of good lawyers. This should be a document addressed to the Government of the particular country and the relevant museum. Other declarations or writings on the issue are useful but do not replace the need for a straightforward statement of claim.
In addition to a statement of claim and indeed as part thereof, there should be established a list of all the stolen items. The catalogues of the present exhibition and others will be useful in this respect. It is my understanding that before 1897 there were very few Benin artworks outside Benin and so the presumption is that all the art works acquired in 1897 and thereafter are illegal acquisitions.
There should be serious mobilization of Nigerians and other Africans in all the cities, Paris (October 2, 2007-January 6, 2008), Berlin (February 7-May 25, 2008 and Chicago (June 27-September 21, 2008) where the Exhibition will be shown and attempts should be made to obtain maximum publicity for the issues involved. The Nigerian Embassies and Consulates can play a very decisive role in this as well as in other aspects. My discussions with many Europeans convince me that there is much sympathy among the general public in Europe for our cause once matters are carefully explained. Generally, the average European is not aware that there are such stolen art works in their museums and are embarrassed by the issue. Very few will support the position of the museum directors who act as if they needed these art works in order to define their national identities. Some even fear that their museums will be empty if these stolen objects were to be returned to their rightful owners. Are the European museums then thieves’ dens?
One should also consider mobilization at the level of the African Union, United Nations General Assembly and UNESCO. Possibly, we should have a resolution on “Day of Restoration/Restitution of (African) Cultural Property”. A coordination of strategy with countries such as China, Greece, Mexico, Turkey and Egypt that have their own claims can only be to our advantage.
Equally important for public relations will be the availability of material for general and popular consumption. Perhaps there already exists a simple pamphlet (20pages or less, with photos) describing and explaining the events of 1897 from the point of view of the Edo people. I believe that a firm indication that Nigerian authorities care very much about such cultural matters will yield immense benefit not only in this particular context but also in other areas. People elsewhere will come to learn about, Ife, Nok and the very rich and varied cultures that exist in Nigeria, from the North to the South. It would also be useful to think of a central coordination point where one can seek information or send information of the question of restitution of Benin art works-in Benin City, Lagos, Abuja ?
Attempts should be made to have the events of 1897 and their consequences reflected in music (rap afro-beat, etc), in literature-drama and poetry and in dance. Such materials should be available for general public consumption. We owe it to ourselves and to future generations not to accept blatant imperialist looting as a proper standard of conduct for States, however powerful they may be or may have been. Restitution is an absolutely essential part of the right of self-determination for if we cannot determine the use and location of our cultural objects, leaving it to our former colonial masters to decide, where then is our right to self-determination? A look at the exhibition in Vienna shows that most of the pieces are the “property” of private museums and collections in Europe and U.S.America and very few from Nigeria. This means the average Nigerian or African has no chance of seeing these objects at all since the exhibition does not go to anywhere in Africa. Why should we accept that the average Nigerian is denied the opportunity to see Benin art whereas this is possible for the European?
All these cultural objects should have been restored to their rightful owners on the eve of independence for there has never been any legal justification (apart from the use of force) for such actions.