How FG’s lethargy, weak foreign policies hamper repatriation of multimillion dollar Benin artefacts

It is a known fact that 80 per cent of African archaeological treasures reside in different European countries after the continent was plundered and partitioned in the 18th century. The Benin bronze is one of such notable artefacts stolen in 1897 by British troops after the invasion of the then Benin Kingdom and exiled its king, Oba Ovonramwen. These artefacts are currently still on display in the United Kingdom, Germany, Austria and the United States over a century later, and demands to get them back have yielded no positive result.

Nigeria has been demanding the return of these artefacts for decades, as they represent an unapologetic stance by the United Kingdom for the massacre it enacted in the Benin region in 1897, popularly referred to as ‘the Benin massacre of ‘97.’

Various groups and agencies such as the National Commission for Museums and Monuments (NCMM) have led campaigns calling for the unconditional return of the cultural artefacts and works stolen from Nigeria and other parts of Africa.

Standoff over return of artefacts

Most recently, Nigeria reiterated its demand for the repatriation of these artefacts as it plans to open the Royal Museum to house these treasures. In response to the request, the British Museum, which reportedly holds a more significant percentage of the artefacts, said it was only open to loaning some of the artefacts to Nigeria with the aim of getting it back after a while.

The British response sparked uproar among many concerned Nigerians both within and outside the country. Many of the interested parties urged the Federal Government to put more pressure and create a proper structure for the repatriation of the artefacts.

The statement by the British museum also increased pressure on European states as more African countries re-energised their previous stance for the return of their historic treasures looted during the era of colonialism.

It is a known fact that 80 per cent of African archaeological treasures reside in different European countries after the continent was plundered and partitioned in the 18th century. The Benin bronze is one of such notable artefacts stolen in 1897 by British troops after the invasion of the then Benin Kingdom and exiled its king, Oba Ovonramwen. These artefacts are currently still on display in the United Kingdom, Germany, Austria and the United States over a century later, and demands to get them back have yielded no positive result.

Nigeria has been demanding the return of these artefacts for decades, as they represent an unapologetic stance by the United Kingdom for the massacre it enacted in the Benin region in 1897, popularly referred to as ‘the Benin massacre of ‘97.’

Various groups and agencies such as the National Commission for Museums and Monuments (NCMM) have led campaigns calling for the unconditional return of the cultural artefacts and works stolen from Nigeria and other parts of Africa.

Standoff over return of artefacts

Most recently, Nigeria reiterated its demand for the repatriation of these artefacts as it plans to open the Royal Museum to house these treasures. In response to the request, the British Museum, which reportedly holds a more significant percentage of the artefacts, said it was only open to loaning some of the artefacts to Nigeria with the aim of getting it back after a while.

The British response sparked uproar among many concerned Nigerians both within and outside the country. Many of the interested parties urged the Federal Government to put more pressure and create a proper structure for the repatriation of the artefacts.

The statement by the British museum also increased pressure on European states as more African countries re-energised their previous stance for the return of their historic treasures looted during the era of colonialism.

Deputy Director and Curator, National Museum, Benin, Mr Theophilus Umogbai, in an interview with Nigerian Tribune stated that the Federal Government was doing its best in securing the return of the artefacts.

According to him, “In 1977, the Obasanjo administration requested the return of the Queen Idia ivory mask from Britain; it was then proposed to be used as the symbol for the Festival of Arts and Culture (FESTAC) 1997, although the request was denied. Consequently, Oba Akenzua commissioned another Benin sculptor to make a replica that was used for the festival.”

He noted that although efforts were being made, results were not being recorded.

Umogbai also noted that the National Commission for Museums and Monuments (NCMM) has been canvassing for the return of these artefacts.

Efforts by NCMM

According to him, “the NCMM was established to be that arm that would push and represent the views of the Federal Government concerning our cultural heritage and heritage assets. The NCMM has utilised different opportunities to canvass for the return of these artefacts.”

He added that in 2007, when Benin kings and rituals exhibition held in Vienna, Austria and notably all the objects used there were of Benin origin, it got the European curators thinking it was high time they started returning the objects back to their country of origin.

In 2010, the first meeting of the Benin dialogue group, which is a collaborative working group comprising curators from Sweden, England, the Netherlands, Austria with notable inclusion from the Benin royal court, and representative from the National Museum was held. The various groups since 2010 have been meeting to canvass for and devise means to get these artefacts returned.

FG not doing enough to repatriate artefacts —Art enthusiasts

Very few seem to share the same opinion of the Nigerian government as the national curator does. According to Osareme Felix of the Department of History and International Studies, University of Benin, the Federal Government was doing absolutely nothing to get the artefacts back. He noted that the Nigerian government was always saddled with issues that involved politics rather than matters pertaining to governance.

He explained that “the Federal Government has continued to fail to understand that our culture defines our identity, and the Nigerian government needs to make it obligatory to demand and pressurise European countries for the return of these artefacts.”

Dr Orobator Daniel of the same Department of History and International Studies also derided the inaction of the Federal Government. “The international bodies are not doing anything to assist with the repatriation because the Federal Government is also not showing the necessary attitude towards the current situation. Those artefacts are a source of generating revenue for the United Kingdom, so releasing them at this point will also affect their economy, and this is among many reasons why the artefacts might not be repatriated on time,” he said.

Umoahlor Jeffery, an expert in international diplomacy, blamed the difficulty in getting the artefacts back on the poor policy adopted by the Federal Government. According to him, “the policy of quiet diplomacy employed by the Nigerian government has not created any awareness, and until Nigeria changes this and raises the issue of restoration of Benin artefacts to their ancestral home on the global scene, Nigeria will not achieve its aim.

“Once Nigeria abandons the ineffective policy of quiet diplomacy, and chooses to embark on a massive campaign of public education about the importance and value of its national treasures, it stands a better chance of getting them back.”

The Benin traditional ruler, Oba Ewuare’s interest in having a royal museum has drawn more awareness towards the restoration of the artefacts. This prompted the Edo State government’s promise of its readiness in establishing a royal museum by 2021.

The British Museum’s response to the request of returning the artefacts to be placed in the proposed museum was just a promise of loaning Nigeria some of these artefacts at the completion of the museum.

The controversial response caused uproar among Edo citizens and some foreign and local curators who deemed the response derogatory and unsatisfactory.

Mr Umogbai, however, sees this from a different perspective. “It’s a welcome development because people before us were not able to achieve this. That was not the first time loaning would take place; France and Korea are examples. The manuscripts taken away from Korea by France during its period of colonialism were loaned back to them with an option of renewal every 5 years.

Why repatriation is urgent

“If we cannot have these objects by way of transfer and total repatriations then can’t we just have the objects by another means and let our people see them? To view these objects currently costs much. Total repatriation and reparation are always solved at the table of government negotiation. The Nigeria government would have to intensify its demand for the complete return of the artefacts.

“These objects help tell our stories to the Europeans; they change the negative stereotypes. When the white man saw the exquisite nature of the artifacts, he knew the black man was actually civilized,” he stated.

Dr Orobator, while speaking to Nigerian Tribune, added that “to create awareness that would help in the recovery of the stolen artefacts, there is the need to understand the particular way and manner these artefacts were taken from the Benin Kingdom. The British soldiers at that time provoked the people of Benin into killing them, which led to retaliation and the eventual massacre of the kingdom.”

According to him at the time the British emissaries came to Benin, they were not allowed to go in based on some particular festival taking place at that specific time. The Oba at that time was not allowed to see the foreigners. Still, the emissaries insisted and forced their way in, which eventually provoked the Benin people into killing those people. The British people in retaliation murdered the Benin people and burnt down an entire kingdom, while also looting their treasures in the process.

Orobator noted that the killing of Captain Phillips and his men by the Benin strike force was wrong. Still, the British massacre of an entire clan was also not proper as they were only upholding and protecting their traditional beliefs and integrity.

“Why UNESCO must step in”

He further said that the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) Intergovernmental Committee on Restitution of Cultural Property, must be asked to assist in getting the artefacts back.

“The opening of the royal museum is not the main issue but structures must be put in place for such an initiative to function. If they can’t build their museum first, then why do you think the British people will take them seriously?

“The wrong impression Nigerians put out about themselves is the way the foreign government treats us. And our leaders do not care about the prosperity of the country. This is one of those things that can boost our cultural heritage. But they left them overseas for decades, ignoring the relevant facts that these artefacts can also serve a purpose in developing and generating income for the country.”

Bright Azebokhe, a student of International Diplomacy, took a different stance when he stated that the artefacts in Europe serve more purpose than in Nigeria.

He noted that foreigners who see these artefacts in foreign museums like the  Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; British Museum, London; Ethnology Museum, Berlin; Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; Musée de Louvre, Paris, Musée du Quai Branly, Paris; World Museum, Vienna, amongst others would be intrigued and interested to study more about the continent.

An anonymous source from the Benin palace also stated that efforts being made to recover these artefacts have not been yielding results because the palace is getting little assistance from the Federal Government.

“There is no assistance from the Federal Government and groups that have risen to demand the return are not taken seriously by European countries,” the source said.

It is also worthy of mention that in 2017 France President, Emmanuel Macron thrilled students at the University of Ouagadougou in Burkina Faso when he promised the repatriation of these artefacts.

In his speech at Ouagadougou, he said: “I cannot accept that a large share of several African countries’ cultural heritage be kept in France, within five years I want the conditions to exist for temporary or permanent returns of African heritage to Africa.”

Macron after his promise, three years later, is yet to completely return all the stolen artefacts in France’s possession back to their owner countries. However, the French president’s attitude towards the issue is currently what the Nigerian populace demands from the rest of the European where these artefacts are kept.

According to the curator of the National Museum, these artifacts are priceless. “How do you place value on an ancestor in captivity? These artefacts are beyond price, as they possess much more value to the Benin people than currency can buy.

“However, of recent the value of each of these artefacts was estimated at between £25,000 and £35,000 in the auction catalogue,” he said.