DISPUTE OVER THE RETURN OF THE LOOTED BENIN ARTIFACTS; MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING ?

DISPUTE OVER THE RETURN OF THE LOOTED BENIN ARTIFACTS; MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING ?

About one hundred and fourteen years ago. The beautiful and sacred Benin Empire was desecrated after European Invaders had come in to destroy and loot this beautiful kingdom. During their invasion Its citizens were killed, its Oba was deposed and cultural artifacts which bared a significant spiritual and historical connection to its land were carted away and many of them disposed of to compensate the Invaders for the cost of their inglorious invasion and rape of this beautiful kingdom.
For over 100 years, the kingdom and its citizens have not acquiesced their rights for the return of their cultural entitlements. A lot of advocacy both at the local and international level for the restitution of the looted artifacts. Alas, in recent times there have indications that the holders of these artifacts have heeded to the voice of reasoning and have decided to return these artistic works to their spiritual homes.
However, the proposed return has led to a new form of agitation in the Homeland as to who would possess and control the artifacts when returned. Is it the; Federal Government, State Government or the Benin Monarch?
By virtue of the UNESCO Resolution of 1970. The only party who has the right to label an artifact a cultural property haven met other requirements outlined in the resolution is the state. The states who are also the signatories to this resolution are the only internationally recognized entity to negotiate the restitution of stolen cultural properties. Thus, it would only be proper if the Federal government negotiates and receives the looted artifacts and returns them to the rightful owners, which are the Edo's. The next issue would be, who is the competent party to manage these artifacts for the benefit of the Benin's. Ordinarily this question should not be a hard nut to crack as there are similar laws, especially as it relates to ownership of land in Nigeria. The Constitution designated the Governor's as trustees. It would likewise make a good argument that in other issues that relate to the management of rights for the benefit of citizens in a particular state, the Governor's should hold them as trustees for the benefit of their citizens. However, prior to the British Invasion of the Benin Kingdom, the Oba wielded both Spiritual, Economical and Political control of his Kingdom. Thus, in that era, the Benin monarch managed all economic and cultural activities for the benefit of the Edo's. However, this has been overtaken by events. As at 1979 the Traditional Rulers and Chiefs Edict 1979 of Bendel State of Nigeria was promulgated, and all traditional institution were subsumed under the subnational Government. Thus, as of today, traditional monarchs no longer wield political and economic control of their regions. They mostly restrict themselves to spiritual considerations, carrying out activities that advance their culture, as well as advising the legally recognized authorities on the best way to advance the Society. Thus, in a way, they are the de facto prime Ministers of their region. And in my opinion, their roles complement that of the Subnational Government. 
 Ordinarily, the innate lawyer instinct in me would have been eager to see a judicial resolution of this dispute which would lay to rest the control and management of artifacts of this nature. Which would serve as a guide to other societies in Africa who's looted artifacts would be returned in the nearest future. However, a full-blown lawsuit have far-reaching consequences, especially when one takes cognizance of the political and cultural antecedent of Benin city and Edo state in general. The political and social economic upheaval that would arise would not be worth it. Thus, my best advice would be for a comprehensive conversation between the Monarch, the State Government and the private investors. With the objective of arriving at a win-win resolution. If possible, the State Government can approach local investors who have the capacity to drive this level of investment. Probably this would help to soothing the sentiment of giving 'our aggressors' our heritage for the second time. At the end of the day what is important is the advancement of Benin city and undoubtedly the return of these artifacts would create a serious economic and cultural drive for the State. Thus, the sooner this saga is put to a close, the better.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Analysing CAS decision on the prortionality of the FIFA Football Agents Regulation

Analysing CAS decision on the prortionality of the FIFA Football Agents Regulation~E.U Olubor Esq. The subject of this dispute bother on the fundamental question, whether FIFA can extend its regulatory powers beyond the task of governing the sport of football itself and cover peripheral economic activities, particularly the market of football agent service which it did with the establishment of the FFAR The Panel in reviewing Article 15(2) of the FFAR which imposes a service fee cap on service charges to be paid to football agents. The panel in assessing its compatibility with article 101TFEU. The panel concurs with the position of PROFAA that FIFA is an association of undertakings which holds a dominant market position within the definition of article 101& 102 of the TFEU respectively and also relying on the decision in Piau where the EU General Court specifically confirmed that FIFA holds a “collective dominant” position under Article 102 TFEU in the relevant market of football a
Read more

UNDERSTANDING THE DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE (ECJ) ON THE PROPOSED EUROPEAN SUPER LEAGUE

UNDERSTANDING THE DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE (ECJ) ON THE PROPOSED EUROPEAN SUPER LEAGUE~ Emmanuel Uyi Olubor Esq.  The ECJ ruled on the issue of whether UEFA or FIFA rules restricting teams from constituting a separate league are anticompetitive and a breach of a dominant position.  Before I descend into the nitty-gritty of the decision of the ECJ, I would like to commence by establishing certain facts First, the decision is not binding in Britain as a result of BREXIT, thus British teams like Arsenal, Chelsea et al. Can't use this decision reached by the ECJ as a pretext to join the European Super League. Secondly, as against what was reported by most media outlets, the ECJ did not authorize the establishment of a European Soccer league, instead what played out was that the ECJ ruled on points of law on an issue that was sent to it by the commercial court in Spain which was hitherto instituted by the European Super League Company. The ECJ decided on whether UEFA an
Read more

GUNNARSDÓTTIR v OLYMPIC LYONNAIS: An AFFIRMATION BY FIFA ON THE MATERNITY RIGHTS OF FEMALE FOOTBALLERS

GUNNARSDÓTTIR v OLYMPIC LYONNAIS: An AFFIRMATION BY FIFA ON THE MATERNITY RIGHTS OF FEMALE FOOTBALLERS.~Uyi Olubor Esq. The new edition of the FIFA Regulation on Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP)came with numerous innovations. One of those innovations is the enthronement of Maternity rights for Female Footballers. To the extent that, football clubs are forbidden from making the validity of a player's contract subject to a player being or becoming pregnant during its term. These new provisions were recently tested in the dispute between Sarah Bjork Gunnarsdóttir v Olympique Lyonnais at the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chambers (DRC). The dispute arose after a Player who just became pregnant agreed with her club, to leave her base in France and return to her home country in Iceland for the duration of her pregnancy. The club immediately, filed for the social security allowance on behalf of the player amounting to EUR 45.99 per day. The player then inquired as to the reasons why her sa
Read more