-
In dismissing a lawsuit by victims of the German genocide of the Ovaherero and Nama peoples, US Federal Court also takes a swipe at reparations for grave-robbing,* whose ultimate beneficiaries in this case were the @AMNH and the estate of anthropologist Felix von Luschan… @J_Andrew_Boyle/1309484601056915457On twitter.com
♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 3 Favorites Mood -5 🙁
-
* Unfortunately, there were no graves in this instance, just the unburied bodies of people killed by a systematic genocide, one scholars have called a precursor to the Germany's death camp system for Jews four decades later. ushmm.org/collections/bibliography/herero-and-nama-genocidePermalink On twitter.com
-
The larger lawsuit was an attempt for the descendants of genocide victims to seek civil damages for the genocide from Germany in US Court, citing its use of German Southwest Africa (now Namibia) funds as general revenues to buy properties in NYC.Permalink On twitter.com
-
Generally, targeting national governments for civil lawsuits is prohibited by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, except when the govt engages in commercial activities. But the plaintiffs proposed just such an exception: the traffic in their ancestors' bones.Permalink On twitter.com
-
At issue are the skulls and bones of Ovaherero and Nama indigenous peoples, sold to the American Museum of Natural History, and still held by the AMNH years after their nefarious provenance was revealed. newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-troubling-origins-of-the-skeletons-in-a-new-york-museumPermalink On twitter.com
-
In 2019, the @AMNH denied descendants of genocide victims access to view the skulls in question citing—seemingly without irony or shame—their pending lawsuit against Germany. medium.com/@Jade_Lennon/new-york-museum-closes-access-to-namibian-bone-collection-a472c7f01b7aPermalink On twitter.com
-
Plaintiffs alleged that a German state entity, the Museum für Völkerkunde, Berlin, Germany, effected the sale, whose proceeds benefitted the widow of anthropologist and skull collector Felix von Luschan. Here is where the ruling takes a dark turn for anthropology and ethics.Permalink On twitter.com
-
Ruling today, the Court makes the stunning contention that selling skulls in the past is not a "German commercial activity" if Germany does not sell skulls in the present.Permalink On twitter.com
-
Leaving aside the sovereign immunity question, this is a devastating take that undermines any continuity in historical accountability for atrocious commercial activity. Clearly, genocidal governments won't accept commercial liability, but their successors should.Permalink On twitter.com
-
No one involved here, the German state @GermanyinUSA or @AMNH, or von Luschan's heirs, should need a Federal Court to tell them to make reparations to the Ovaherero and Nama people. Yesterday. Or the moment they learned they were holding stolen bones.Permalink On twitter.com
-
Summary of the (registration-walled) New Yorker article: @readwriteradio/956258361808441345 Today's court opinion: ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/08ec5c2e-c04a-4e09-aca6-c9117a711c6e/3/doc/19-609_opn.pdf#xml=https://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/08ec5c2e-c04a-4e09-aca6-c9117a711c6e/3/hilite/Permalink On twitter.com