Rebroadcast: Emiline Smith on Demystifying Cultural Trafficking and Nepal’s Quest for Restorative Justice

[00:00:00] Hey there, it's Kushi from PEI. Last month in January several stolen cultural heritage

[00:00:13] were returned to Nepal from the United States. Among them were the sacred idols of the Hindu

[00:00:18] D.A.T. Uma Maheshwar that were stolen almost 50 years ago from Chassal Patun.

[00:00:23] They were identified recently in the storage facilities of the Brooklyn Museum in New York,

[00:00:48] which began repatriation after the efforts of New Algotini, New York. Locals welcomed their

[00:00:53] gods with heartfelt celebrations and a puja for forgiveness and the idols were taken around

[00:00:58] in the city in Chariots and finally reinstated in Chassal Hidi.

[00:01:05] In recent years, Nepal has seen many such successful repatriation efforts. The trafficking

[00:01:19] of cultural heritage had once left local communities with immeasurable pain and loss. So in this

[00:01:25] re-broadcast we bring my conversation with criminologist Dr. Emeline Smith about cultural heritage

[00:01:31] trafficking in Nepal. This episode is a deep exploration of the phenomenon and its multifaceted

[00:01:36] impacts on its victims. Thank you for tuning in.

[00:01:47] Namaste and welcome to PODS by PEI, a policy discussion series brought to you by Policy Entrepreneurs Inc.

[00:01:55] My name is Sonia Jimmy. In today's episode, which is the 50th edition of PODS, we have PEI colleague

[00:02:02] Kushihang conversing with Emeline Smith on demystifying cultural trafficking and Nepal's quest

[00:02:09] for restorative justice. Kushih and Emeline delve into the obscure world of cultural heritage

[00:02:15] trafficking and its impact on communities with a particular focus on Nepal. The two tap into

[00:02:21] Emeline's expertise as a criminologist to understand the processes involved in the trafficking

[00:02:27] of cultural objects and its history and persistence in Nepal. They then discuss the repatriation

[00:02:34] of such objects and how restorative justice can be achieved in the process. Dr. Emeline Smith

[00:02:41] is a lecturer in criminology at the University of Glasgow Scotland. She is a fellow of the centre

[00:02:47] of criminology at the University of Hong Kong and a member of the Trafficking Culture Research

[00:02:52] Consortium. In addition, she is an advisor to the Nepal Heritage Recovery campaign and several

[00:02:59] other NGOs. She recently authored and published a trilingual storybook for children titled

[00:03:05] Pema and the stolen statue from Dolpa. We hope you enjoy the conversation.

[00:03:12] Welcome to the show Emeline. How are we doing today?

[00:03:15] I'm great. Thank you so much for having me. I have to tell you, I'm really excited about today's

[00:03:20] conversation to have a professional criminologist here with us to talk about cultural trafficking.

[00:03:27] You've built your career studying and collaborating with a wide spectrum of stakeholders

[00:03:32] ranging from affected communities to renowned museums. So I'm really looking forward to tapping into

[00:03:38] your expertise and experiences to not only understand the topic at hand but also to animate it

[00:03:45] real-life instances. Let's begin with demystifying the process of cultural trafficking itself,

[00:03:52] a very basic but adequate definition would perhaps be the illicit import, export and transfer

[00:04:00] of ownership of cultural property. I think everyone has that basic understanding but what

[00:04:06] really is obscure for most of us is the process of it. Often these stolen artifacts that go missing

[00:04:13] from their original locations are eventually found in the lavish halls of renowned public museums

[00:04:19] or private collections. So let's begin by tracing how this happens. What typical routes are the

[00:04:26] artifacts taken through to convert them from loot to antiques? Great question. I think there are

[00:04:34] many different routes that cultural objects can take. In the process they are converted

[00:04:40] invaluable, amazing cultural objects that people use for worship and for cultural purposes

[00:04:46] and they are reduced to mere commodities in the market. That is where most of the pain lies around

[00:04:53] this topic. It's a very emotional and sensitive and political topic. Now I have to address that you

[00:04:59] use the terms property artifacts and antiquities which is completely understandable. Terminology is

[00:05:05] important because of this conversion of what cultural objects go through. I use the term cultural

[00:05:11] objects but even that and of itself can be painful because these are not objects to certain people,

[00:05:16] they might be gods for example. So in the English language we don't have a specific term for them

[00:05:23] in Nepal you use Moti for example. In Tibetan there's a specific term for sort of the

[00:05:31] valuables that are held inside of the gumpa, the monastery. But we don't have a specific term for

[00:05:37] it so overall I'll be using cultural objects because it's the most neutral. It doesn't emphasize

[00:05:41] for example if you use art, it emphasizes only the aesthetic qualities or if you use antiquity

[00:05:47] it only emphasizes the age of the object but we want to emphasize that these are really important

[00:05:53] cultural religious items. Now in terms of the routes that they take in order to end up in a museum

[00:06:00] they might have been stolen from a monastery or a temple, a place of worship. They might be stolen

[00:06:06] from a private collection or someone's home and they might have a direct link to the market

[00:06:12] or they might extend hands multiple times so it's a different process however in the end they

[00:06:20] always end up in the market, they're always reduced to commodities and even though museums say

[00:06:24] that they're all about education they haven't actually been able to address these problematic

[00:06:30] foundations of their collections up until recently. So that's why we have to do so.

[00:06:38] In your answer I really liked the fact that you talked about the pain for a bit and I think

[00:06:43] I would like to build on that further. The immediate effects of such smuggling are perhaps first

[00:06:48] felt by the locals. What is trafficking inflict upon the locals who lose their heritage? Of course

[00:06:55] there is this dark absence of communal acid, a very material loss but the effects seep deeper than

[00:07:02] that. In an article you wrote last May on the return of the Vajra Dharas culture. You began by

[00:07:09] illustrating the physical and emotional turmoil the family who guarded the sculpture faced.

[00:07:16] Maybe we can start unpacking the layers of loss by first elaborating on this instance.

[00:07:22] You're right there's definitely a physical loss but most importantly there is an intangible

[00:07:27] heritage loss so it really impacts the practices, the worshiping and cultural practices of communities.

[00:07:34] Now up until recently this would have been seen as a victimless crime as a crime of the elite

[00:07:39] because there's a lot of movies that display the art thief as a gentleman and so

[00:07:47] the immediate effects of the art market aren't necessarily on display for those who don't work

[00:07:52] with communities of origin that lose their heritage. But I think with the recent push for repatriations

[00:08:00] a lot of communities of origin have found their voice in asking for what they so rightfully deserve.

[00:08:07] And so in that sense I think that we've also been confronted more with the loss

[00:08:11] on an individual, a communal, a national and even an international level. It has many different

[00:08:17] consequences not only to an individual or a community that loses their heritage but also for

[00:08:24] example in how we approach art history and how we view certain objects and where they come from

[00:08:29] especially when we don't know where they come from because they've been looted from the ground.

[00:08:33] It may impact worshiping practices, especially outside of the Kathmandu Valley. We know that a lot

[00:08:39] of intangible heritage has changed. It might also change how they use the places where these cultural

[00:08:46] objects were previously where they lived. So for example, Gompas monasteries are abandoned. People move

[00:08:54] from the places of worship because they feel so guilty and so responsible for the fact that their

[00:08:59] gods have disappeared. So you can imagine that these are not art objects that should be for sale.

[00:09:07] These are living cultural objects that are at the core of ongoing worshiping practices

[00:09:11] that involve intangible heritage such as food or festivals, rituals, dance, songs and a lot

[00:09:18] of stories. And so removing those cultural objects from their communities of origin has a great

[00:09:24] impact which is intergenerational harm. So there are many different communities but even families

[00:09:33] caretaker families that may have taken care of these cultural objects and once they disappear,

[00:09:39] they also lose their sense of dignity. They're ousted by their own communities or by their own

[00:09:44] families. It changes not only their worshiping practices but also their mindset. They feel

[00:09:51] responsible and guilty. And this is why I mentioned the term intergenerational harm because it changes

[00:09:59] the mindset and the practices from father to son, from mother to daughter. We also lose a lot of

[00:10:06] knowledge when these objects disappear not only in terms of where the cultural object comes from

[00:10:11] the archaeological context but also how it's being used, how people engage with them because they

[00:10:18] don't want to, they feel like they feel too pressured too guilty to responsible when they're lost.

[00:10:23] As we try to understand this phenomenon I think an important angle we often miss out on is the

[00:10:30] relevance of cultural trafficking to larger criminal activities. Current studies have found that

[00:10:36] while cultural trafficking is a crime in and of itself with its own ends it is also sometimes a part

[00:10:43] of larger criminal activities and essentially acts as a revenue source for them. What are your

[00:10:49] observations on this? I think with larger criminal activities you might be referring to terrorism

[00:10:56] and other funding of wartime activities. And we have very limited empirical evidence for that

[00:11:05] even though it sounds very likely that antiquities are used or cultural objects are used for this

[00:11:11] purpose. This empirical evidence comes, some of it comes from Asia and some of it comes from

[00:11:17] the Middle East so we do know that some of it is definitely goes towards wartime financing or

[00:11:22] terrorist activities. In general there's this or there has been this discussion within criminology.

[00:11:30] Criminology as a social science is very much interested in how and why criminal activities and

[00:11:35] harms take place. And so we've been discussing for a number of years if cultural objects,

[00:11:43] trafficking the trafficking of cultural heritage is a form of organized crime. Does it finance organized

[00:11:50] crime in any way? Is it linked? And yes it is but in and of itself it's a crime that is organized

[00:11:57] and it may interlink with organized criminal activities such as for example traditional criminal

[00:12:04] enterprise like the mafia or the aqua or whatever by way of logistics for example or by way

[00:12:11] of financing but again we have very limited empirical evidence for that. We do know that it is

[00:12:17] connected to other forms of white collar crime like fraud and other types of financial crime

[00:12:22] and that very serious crime is involved so going back to my previous statement about victimless

[00:12:28] crime it definitely isn't a lot of murder physical violence and other type of serious crime is

[00:12:34] involved in this. Definitely so Emily let's zoom in on Nepal for a bit it is one of the many

[00:12:41] nations that have been plagued by cultural trafficking and Nepal has also been a prime subject

[00:12:48] of interest for you as a scholar of criminology and you studied its cases in great depth. I'm

[00:12:55] curious to know why Nepal was of such particular interest to you as a scholar and a practitioner.

[00:13:03] I came across Nepal very early on during my doctoral research there were a lot of dealers that

[00:13:10] formerly were based in Kathmandu and we're now based in Hong Kong. Hong Kong being one of the

[00:13:15] renowned centers for for cultural objects especially because it's a it's a transit portal because

[00:13:22] it doesn't have any laws that pertain to the trade import export of cultural objects and when I was

[00:13:30] talking to these dealers they would always tell me about the golden age of Kathmandu trafficking

[00:13:35] that they would get an unlimited supply of cultural objects fresh from the ground or from their

[00:13:41] places of worship that they could sell for so much money abroad and so I was always very interested in

[00:13:47] Nepal. What's also interesting about Nepal is that it was never colonized in the traditional sense

[00:13:54] so of course it was exploited by foreign powers for a long time but because it was never colonized

[00:14:00] it became an interesting question of what to do with repatriation because the moral argument

[00:14:06] might not have necessarily been there and yet because the looting in Nepal has happened relatively

[00:14:13] recently only since the 1950s it was very easy to pinpoint exactly what was illegal and illegally

[00:14:20] held abroad because everything outside of the 1956 ancient monuments preservation act would have

[00:14:27] been exported illegally so it would have been held illegally outside of Nepal and so it was a

[00:14:32] very interesting defined period to focus on in terms of a source of study and what I found most

[00:14:38] interesting is that there was a lot of information around the Kathmandu valley around what was lost

[00:14:44] and what should be repatriated but Nepal is a very diverse country with a lot of different cultures

[00:14:52] and religions and languages and I felt like they were very underrepresented in the scholarship

[00:14:58] that we have on this topic to date. That's amazing and in your study you have

[00:15:05] traced the history of cultural trafficking in Nepal. I first read or came to know of this

[00:15:12] in your 2022 paper titled The ongoing Quest for Nepal's Looted Cultural Heritage and

[00:15:18] I really found it to be very intriguing. Could you maybe briefly share that the findings of

[00:15:24] that paper with our listeners too? Yeah for sure. In the 1950s when Nepal opened up there were

[00:15:32] a lot of European and North American travelers that had the funds to travel around the world post-World

[00:15:39] War II and they developed something called the hippie trail so in the 1960s and 70s especially

[00:15:46] there were a lot of these travelers that would settle in the Kathmandu valley. They would smoke

[00:15:52] a lot of weed and find enlightenment and base themselves here and at the same time of course

[00:15:57] there were a lot of Tibetan refugees that were fleeing Chinese genocide and they had with them

[00:16:03] a lot of cultural objects that out of necessity they had to sell. So there was a ready supply

[00:16:09] and there was also a ready market because these European and North American travelers that

[00:16:14] followed the hippie trail they were so impressed with the exodified oriental culture and

[00:16:22] the cultural objects of the Kathmandu valley which ultimately spread out to the rest of Nepal.

[00:16:27] And so I think that Nepal was relatively closed off until 1950 and therefore relatively

[00:16:33] protected from looting but when it opened up it opened up with an explosion to the market. This is

[00:16:40] one most of the North American Himalayan collections for example came about in the 1960s,

[00:16:46] 1970s and 80s and when most of the looting happened. Now the looting was so drastic that individual

[00:16:52] two individual scholars started documenting these these removals and thefts and that's what

[00:16:59] we use as evidence nowadays their books. So now that we have the past sorted out let's talk about

[00:17:06] contemporary events in this topic. Recently we have seen a significant rise in activism for

[00:17:12] the return of Nepal cultural objects and really not in vain because only last year Nepal retrieved almost

[00:17:21] half a dozen of its cultural objects from all over the world. Most of the efforts occurred online though

[00:17:28] with social media pages like lost arts of Nepal gaining immense traction. As one of the core advisors

[00:17:35] to these organizations both online and otherwise what do you think caused this sudden interest

[00:17:41] and fast mobilization and what interesting features do you see in this movement?

[00:17:49] Great question. This is such an interesting time especially in Asia because you see that a lot

[00:17:54] of communities are finding their voice in asking for these cultural objects back. In Asia it's

[00:18:00] definitely Cambodia and Nepal and India that have taken the lead on this although of course the

[00:18:04] movement for the return of the Benin bronzes has also gained a lot of traction in recent years.

[00:18:10] In Nepal I think all of the noses are pointing in the right direction. The government,

[00:18:15] the NGOs, the social media activists everyone wants to work together to bring the gods home

[00:18:23] and that's a wonderful opportunity that we don't get in a lot of these other especially Asian

[00:18:29] countries where some of these movements have perhaps popped up but there hasn't always been

[00:18:35] governmental support or enough activist support. I think what happened in Nepal is that COVID happened.

[00:18:41] A lot of the museums put their collections online which is a wonderful opportunity for us to

[00:18:47] look at exactly what they have in storage especially and it democratizes the search for

[00:18:53] people's heritage. Everyone can look at a museum website from their own home and think oh you know

[00:18:59] what that is exactly what I used to have in my temple why is it now behind glass you know somewhere in

[00:19:05] London or New York? And so I think COVID played an especially large part in this because there was

[00:19:12] much more social media engagement around this topic. At the same time social media has also very much

[00:19:19] helped in spreading awareness about this. For example most of my fieldwork at the moment takes place

[00:19:23] in Dolpa you know there's no electricity for six months out of the year most of the electricity

[00:19:28] comes from solar panels but everyone has a smartphone and knows about lawsuits of Nepal Facebook page

[00:19:34] everyone is asking hey have you seen this statue? And so it's wonderful to see how many corners

[00:19:40] of the world can reach again bringing in people that would have perhaps usually not thought about

[00:19:47] this topic or not have the confidence to research this and ask for their statues back. Now we actually

[00:19:54] can connect those links. That's very interesting that those are amazing observations. Now I want

[00:20:02] to take this conversation forward into talking about the long way home for these cultural objects

[00:20:09] but before I do that there is a very interesting question that I have in my mind and

[00:20:16] this came from reading the same 2022 article where you mentioned the role of avid scholars

[00:20:23] in historians of culture in the whole process of cultural heritage trafficking. The intrigue for

[00:20:31] me in this was when we think about the extraction of cultural heritage we suppose the perpetrators are

[00:20:37] criminals, smugglers or entitled aristocrats while that is true for most parts of it there have

[00:20:45] been some unusual groups and those are the avid scholars in historians and they are in some

[00:20:51] ways complicit but I understand that their role is like of a double edged sword as in they're both

[00:20:59] enthusiastic scholars who produce this myriad of information and knowledge but also very avid

[00:21:06] consumers. What is your take on this? For sure we recently with my colleague Dr. Antumson we recently

[00:21:14] published a paper on Mary slusser who's a renowned scholar of Nepali art history. She is still very

[00:21:20] much celebrated as a renowned scholar of Nepali history even though there's plenty of evidence

[00:21:26] that points in the direction that she not only benefited from looting but also was complicit in it

[00:21:32] and I think that we have to now realize that academics have long benefited from the

[00:21:40] looting and trafficking of cultural objects because they have the privilege of studying them

[00:21:45] interacting with them building knowledge on them publishing about them and building a career on

[00:21:49] them right not everyone has that but these academics have had that privilege and especially museum

[00:21:57] representatives and academics those who engage with these cultural objects they are clear stakeholders

[00:22:02] in the trade but they haven't necessarily been acknowledged as such this is the time to hold them

[00:22:07] accountable as well and they've definitely actively benefited from the don't ask don't tell

[00:22:14] culture that the art market is based on the global trading cultural objects. Now it is my position

[00:22:22] that collecting retaining displaying handling cultural objects that were removed due to exploitation

[00:22:30] or violence whether it's colonial or otherwise is a continuation of the perpetration of this

[00:22:36] violence you're continuing to commit that violence when you keep these objects in your collection

[00:22:42] and not only do people keep them in their collections but they build knowledge upon them they

[00:22:47] put them on the internet these are objects these are gods that should perhaps never even have been

[00:22:54] seen by outsiders and yet now they're on a museum website on a bag on Instagram everyone is sharing it

[00:23:02] that is extremely problematic so we're not only talking about the physical lives of objects we're

[00:23:07] also talking about the intellectual property around it the digital lives of these objects and I don't

[00:23:15] think a lot of us that handle or talk about or write about cultural objects have asked ourselves how

[00:23:22] exactly are we contributing to the illicit trading cultural objects how are we also complicit

[00:23:29] and how should we hold each other accountable now at the moment because there's such a wave of

[00:23:35] repatriation and in Nepal it's not just you know it doesn't object in the last two years we see

[00:23:41] over a hundred objects returned so this is the time to ask yourself what can we do differently

[00:23:47] repatriation in itself can also be performative it's not just about giving back the object and you're

[00:23:54] done with it right it's also about addressing epistemic injustice so how have these voices of

[00:24:01] underrepresented communities continuously been silenced how are they not benefiting from their own

[00:24:06] cultural heritage and how can we actually change that how can we rectify that

[00:24:11] Hi there this is Sonia Jimmy from Policy Entrepreneurs Inc you have been listening to pods by PEI

[00:24:25] if you enjoy PEI's content and would like to hear more from our team we have good news for you

[00:24:31] we are thrilled to introduce you to our free newsletter service PEI substack of policies

[00:24:37] and politics PEI substack draws from PEIs in house expertise and experience in policy research

[00:24:44] and reform initiatives to present thought pieces on but not limited to politics policies economics

[00:24:52] development energy and climate subscribe now to PEI substack at policyontro.substack.com

[00:25:01] or through the link in description to receive weekly newsletters issue coverages event updates

[00:25:07] and full access to our recent publications now let's get back to the episode

[00:25:13] the point that you bring about regarding restorative the sense of restorative justice and

[00:25:24] repatriation I think that's central to most of your works and we will come back to those

[00:25:30] later in the conversation but before that I think what we need to clear out is

[00:25:36] certain groups still exist that defend museums and art institutions claiming that cultural objects

[00:25:44] are safer and better preserved under the care than they are in their origin or others

[00:25:52] emphasize the fact that these institutions are free for all to visit and consume how do you

[00:25:58] challenge these arguments incriminology we call that techniques of neutralization these are

[00:26:04] justifications of wrongdoing the fact that they hold nipoli cultural objects is illegal it is

[00:26:10] against nipoli law so yeah of course you can embellish it and say that it's better to keep

[00:26:15] them there because you clean them once in a while but we're talking about the illegal removal

[00:26:20] of a god from a community of origin that you then put behind glass it's not worshipped it's not

[00:26:25] washed it's not you know there's no rituals around it and instead hundreds of people a day

[00:26:31] augulant that in itself is extremely unethical so of course museums private and public collectors they

[00:26:38] come up with justifications to say why they should keep these objects especially because they paid

[00:26:44] a lot of money for it but by way of doing that they're also very much highlighting their privilege

[00:26:51] because who are we actually educating we're only educating the few we're only educating the people

[00:26:57] are able to go to museums for example and often these museums are very far removed from their

[00:27:02] communities of origin we're also highlighting the fact that knowledge around these objects again

[00:27:09] is only created for a select few this is only created for audiences that can read in a specific

[00:27:16] language that can interact with these objects in a specific way and so it's not a demac

[00:27:21] democratization process if you exclude the voices that have actually made the object themselves

[00:27:28] and own the object not only that but keeping these cultural objects in public and private

[00:27:36] collections abroad means that you're continuing the injustice the violence the exploitation

[00:27:43] that caused their removal of their communities of origin in the first place and so these

[00:27:48] cultural objects are symbols of that violence of that exploitation of that exclusion so

[00:27:55] cultural objects are an integral part of Nepal's cultural and spiritual life and of course they

[00:28:00] should be with the communities of origin if they so desire once they're removed no mental peace

[00:28:07] no frame no beautiful glass case can do justice to the context in which it is present in Nepal right

[00:28:16] and so why would you loot just one object when you can travel to the community of origin you can

[00:28:21] travel to the original context and you can interact with with the cultural and spiritual life that

[00:28:27] it is part of truly soaking in the full experience of Nepal's cultural heritage wow that's brilliant

[00:28:36] and I think that that does justice to the argument but something that keeps coming back time

[00:28:42] and again is a talks surrounding institutional mechanisms the provisions policies and acts

[00:28:50] that have been put in place to protect cultural objects from trafficking and displacement

[00:28:57] could you please outline these from both the perspectives of

[00:29:03] national and international aspects but also art and cultural institutions that housed

[00:29:10] the objects yeah for sure Nepal has its 1956 antiquities ordinance which protects

[00:29:17] a cultural object from being looted or trafficked so for example it prevents the export of cultural

[00:29:24] objects if there's no governmental approval for this in general almost all countries in the world

[00:29:32] have some form of cultural heritage law that protects the culture heritage which can be found within

[00:29:37] its borders and internationally there are several agreements that countries have to adhere to

[00:29:45] if they are a state party to these agreements like for example the 1970 UNESCO Convention

[00:29:50] there's a 1995 UNIDRA convention they are international agreements where state parties say listen

[00:29:56] we should definitely work on this together in general only recently these agreements are addressed

[00:30:05] on a regional perspective on a regional level and on a regional level you might say they're much

[00:30:12] more effective in Asia for example you should work with neighboring countries to address the

[00:30:18] trafficking of cultural objects because that's probably where the culture objects go first

[00:30:24] so there are definitely international and as well as national agreements as well as memorandia

[00:30:29] of understanding between two or more countries and these are bilateral agreements where countries

[00:30:35] make specific agreements around the import and export of cultural objects from the perspective

[00:30:43] of art institutions and cultural institutions they have tried to become more transparent and become

[00:30:51] more accountable ethics is a very sexy word and so you'll find it on a lot of different museum

[00:30:57] website but policy and practice of museums can be very different right a museum can say that it's

[00:31:04] all about transparency and ethics but then when we ask for a cultural object that is clearly

[00:31:09] looted to be returned they may drag their heels and it might take years and years in order to

[00:31:14] get this object back if at all so in that sense I think that what we have on paper looks fantastic

[00:31:21] but it's all about implementation and that's where where it's lacking that's a point will noted

[00:31:28] and it takes me to my other question which is in the case of Nepal despite having very strict

[00:31:35] legislations very early on it still struggles to keep its cultural objects safe what's the problem

[00:31:43] here there's a multitude of problems and challenges that Nepal faces that are not unique to

[00:31:50] Nepal for example there's limited law enforcement so there's limited enforcement of these laws that

[00:31:56] I previously described there's limited security resources so when you walk around Kathmandu Valley

[00:32:02] for example you'll see that a lot of the temples and places of worship are gated off

[00:32:08] these gates and fences have usually been paid for by the community themselves because it would be

[00:32:13] a huge financial resource to protect all of the culture heritage that Nepal has and we're only

[00:32:20] talking about the Kathmandu Valley we haven't even started thinking about how to protect the cultural

[00:32:26] heritage that is in remote and isolated areas like Indulpa so these remote areas are very much

[00:32:33] underrepresented when it comes to the making of policy when it comes to the creation of legislation

[00:32:39] when it comes to the creation of security measures for cultural heritage what works for them

[00:32:46] might not work for those in the Kathmandu Valley and vice versa there are not a lot of inventories

[00:32:52] of cultural heritage in Nepal which also makes things very difficult because when something is lost

[00:32:58] we need some form of evidence to get it back now you can imagine that all tourist photos have been

[00:33:03] extremely beneficial to us and now that lost arts of Nepal and the Nepal Heritage Recovery Campaign

[00:33:10] are gaining traction a lot of tourists that were here in the 1960s 70s and 80s are sending us their

[00:33:17] old photos which has helped tremendously in matching up cultural objects held abroad because again

[00:33:23] if they were exported after 1956 they are definitely illegal but in remote areas they may not have had

[00:33:33] these photos they definitely would not have had cameras there's no lists of or other types of

[00:33:39] inventory so it's very difficult to find proof evidence of theft in general now is the time to hold

[00:33:46] the market accountable this is not only a question of what should governments do what should local

[00:33:52] communities do what should academics do for example to hold the market accountable or governments

[00:33:58] to hold the market accountable but as a museum goer for example where are the critical questions

[00:34:04] why are we not asking hey how did you get this object where is it from does the community of origin

[00:34:09] know knows that it's here are they okay with how it's displayed why are you telling this story

[00:34:15] in such a way is the museum the best place for these objects this is something that we can start with

[00:34:20] tomorrow if you're a museum goer and one of the most important things I think is to make this a

[00:34:26] talked about topic so there's a lot of stigma a lot of emotion attached to this topic especially

[00:34:35] when a community has lost its god that you know it's a very sensitive topic to talk about but it

[00:34:41] is essential to talk about this in order to address how we're actually going to fix it and this is

[00:34:46] one of the reasons why I recently published wrote and published a children's book called Paymy and the

[00:34:51] stolen statue from dolepa dolepa is a very isolated and remote area in Nepal and so we want to

[00:34:58] inspire the future generation to think about okay what works for them in terms of culture heritage

[00:35:04] how do they want to protect use own culture heritage now I say use own and engage with culture

[00:35:13] heritage because this should be their choice it should not be the choice of public and private

[00:35:19] collectors where these cultural objects are held now and their voices have been completely removed

[00:35:25] in this process but with more equitable sustainable collaboration and knowledge exchange practices

[00:35:33] we can actually foreground those underrepresented voices because they should be the ones leading

[00:35:39] these conversations and I think this really brings us back to the point you are making previously about

[00:35:46] restorative justice in the processes of returning these cultural objects I think for most of us it's

[00:35:53] hard to understand that a return isn't always what communities want or at least not all of it do you

[00:36:00] have certain examples or case scenarios where certain groups have wanted something otherwise or

[00:36:07] things of that sort in many cases local communities want their cultural objects back because it's

[00:36:13] the rightful place and they want access and agency back so they want to be the ones that decide

[00:36:20] over what happens to the cultural objects and it is their legal and moral right to do so especially

[00:36:26] in the case for Nepali cultural objects because they were removed illegally so even if they wanted

[00:36:31] to throw it off a cliff and Nepal doesn't have a lot of cliffs but even if they wanted to throw

[00:36:35] it off a cliff tomorrow it should be their right to do so because it's their heritage right but sometimes

[00:36:42] communities of origin want more than just the repatriation of a cultural object they want

[00:36:48] they strive for reparations this is especially the case in formerly colonized countries and so

[00:36:55] they might request for example financial reparations or equitable knowledge exchange practices

[00:37:01] like for example a collaboration between museum and local communities or the building of scholarship

[00:37:07] that sort and this is where repatriation again can be so performative because once a museum gives

[00:37:14] back the object then that's it there's no engagement with the with the community of origin that will

[00:37:19] also not build any paths towards justice instead the community of origin should always be asked what

[00:37:26] they actually want and repatriation might not be what they want and need in that time so to increase

[00:37:34] custodianship of culture heritage it also means working towards epistemic injustices repatriation

[00:37:40] or the question for return is a wonderful opportunity for market stakeholders to work towards rectifying

[00:37:48] epistemic injustices meaning that they empower communities of origin to think about their own

[00:37:54] priorities and needs what works for them instead of shutting them out of the conversation ignoring

[00:37:59] their wishes and excluding them from these conversations because realistically market actors have

[00:38:05] dominated the conversation around what should happen to culture heritage how it should be displayed

[00:38:10] how we should think about it for so so long and yet this is where communities of origin should be

[00:38:17] foregrounded amazing I think that brings us to the end of our conversation at least on my end

[00:38:25] and Maline is there anything else you want to share with our audience maybe as a parting thought

[00:38:31] I'm excited to read about and learn about all of the critical questions that you're going to be

[00:38:37] asking these museums all around the world to hold them accountable for their role in the illicit

[00:38:42] trading culture objects and I would love to engage with you all on social media especially when

[00:38:48] you have evidence of looted cultural objects because this is a movement that we are all part of

[00:38:55] this is not just my work but this is the work of a generation definitely thank you so much

[00:39:02] Emily for being here with us I think that was a brilliant brilliant conversation I enjoyed it

[00:39:08] thoroughly it was a pleasure thank you yeah we thank you for sharing with us your time and

[00:39:12] knowledge and we wish you all the very best for all your future endeavors thank you so much I

[00:39:18] appreciate it thanks for listening to pods by PEI I hope you enjoyed cushy's conversation with

[00:39:25] Emily on demystifying cultural trafficking and a pal's quest for restorative justice today's

[00:39:32] episode was produced by Niergen Rai with support from Ridesh Sapkota Kushihang and Mi Sonia Jimmy

[00:39:38] the episode was edited by Niergen Rai our theme music is courtesy of Roit Shakyar from Jindabad

[00:39:45] if you liked today's episode please subscribe to our podcast also please do us a favor by

[00:39:51] sharing us on social media and leaving a review on Spotify Apple Podcast Google Podcast or wherever

[00:39:58] you listen to the show for PEI's video related content please search for policy entrepreneurs on

[00:40:04] YouTube to catch the latest from us on Nepal's policy and politics please follow us on Twitter

[00:40:10] at tweet to PEI that's tweet followed by the number two and PEI and on Facebook at policy entrepreneurs

[00:40:17] ink you can also visit pei.center to learn more about us thanks once again for me Sonia we'll see

[00:40:25] you soon in our next episode