The Changing Attitudes towards Restitution

The Changing Attitudes towards Restitution
Student Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date
The Changing Attitudes towards Restitution
Introduction
Antiquities have remained one of the most visible manifestations of people's unique identity and cultural aspects. The cultural heritage of a group is manifested in its artifacts that have survived to date. Without such antiquities, it is challenging to deconstruct how the past was for the ancestors. Artifacts have become a source of wonder and curiosity for the research community and the general public (Macdonald, 2011). People go to museums and exhibitions to look at antiquities from different parts of the world that depict different historical periods. At the same time, antiquities have become a source of contention when used to eliminate the communities. During colonialism in the 18th and 19th centuries, the massive displacement of antiquities in the colonized territories became a reason for the looting and trading of the items. The scientific community exchanged antiquities, displacing them from their countries of origin into European museums. When the former colonies gained independence, the people demonstrated the need to recover their heritage by repossessing the antiquities. Most importantly, the former colonies have demonstrated the need to get their cultural objects scattered in different museums worldwide. Since the 1960s, there has been a massive call for the restitution of antiquities, but something has been met with resistance. Despite the challenges in the restitution of antiquities, museums are changing their attitude towards restitution and accepting to return objects to their rightful owners.
Restitution in International Law
When dealing with the restitution of antiquities, it is essential to consider international law. Under international law, restitution demonstrates a state’s responsibility for reparation from wrongful acts committed by other states. According to Article 35 of the International Law Commission (ILC), restitution implies reestablishing a situation before the unlawful act was done. Article 36 further elaborates that restitution is a primary remedy for reparation (Crawford, Peel & Olleson, 2001). However, compensation occurs where the damage caused cannot be made good via restitution. ILC considers restitution vital because it allows the responsible state to deal with the legal and material results of its wrongful acts by re-establishing the situation that would exist if the act had not been done.
The long-held tradition of the right to conquest led to the idea of looting an enemy’s resources, including artifacts. Looting an enemy’s cultural artifact was celebrated during the Roman era. The Peace of Westphalia of 1648 ended the plundering of cultural artifacts for European sovereigns (Patton, 2019). In the 18th century, European nations almost abandoned the looting of cultural artifacts. The countries urged each other to desist from plundering such objects. This came about due to the change in the perception of justice and reasonableness, which limited the traditional right of conquest.
The need for Restitution
Restitution is critical because it is a major milestone toward recovering part of the memory and i...