Sweden

29th Dec 2024

At a glance:

No national laws or policies on repatriation, but there is national guidance
The national ‘Guidance for Managing the Return of Cultural Objects’ (2020) acknowledges Article 12 of UNDRIP and was written ‘in order to help museums to draw up their own policies on how to deal with issues relating to returning objects’.
The National Museums of World Cultures has a public Repatriation Policy and say that they open to repatriation claims

Jump to:

Overview

The Sámi are Indigenous peoples that live across Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia. As a result of this, there has been a more recent focus on the return of Sámi belongings from museums in Sweden. In May 2022, ‘the Swedish parliament voted to direct the Swedish government to propose rules and a framework for returning cultural heritage items, including cultural objects and human remains, to the indigenous Sámi population’.

However, there has also been a lot of movement within international repatriation following the publication of national guidance (outlined below). On 5 May 2022, the Swedish government announced that it would approve the return of belongings to the Yaqui people that are currently held by the Swedish National Museums of World Culture stating that:

‘The museum has decided that it will return the items for humanitarian reasons, citing article 15 of the 1970 UNESCO Convention and article 12 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Before the decision, the museum had expressed particular concern over the risks of returning the object to the wrong recipient and maintained that there was no legal obligation to return the item because of how it was acquired.’

The objects have subsequently not been returned to the Yaqui, but to the Mexican government and are housed at the INAH until the Yaqui are ready for their return.

A note on Swedish culture

It’s important to note that the Swedes are extremely conflict-averse, and that even a repatriation claim could be seen as adversarial. Therefore, diplomacy is incredibly important when working with Swedish institutions. This applies even to emails and initial contact.

For this reason, the initial step of building a relationship with the relevant curator in advance of making a claim is highly recommended in Sweden. Also, providing your own proof as to why there would be no competing claims can be important in avoiding conflict in the future that may worry the museum.

Swedes also respond to emotion, so building the emotional case for the importance of repatriation can be an effective tool when building that relationship and making your claim.

Laws and policies

Swedish Museum Act (2017)

In 2017, the Swedish Government introduced a new museum law which regulated the primary roles of public museums and included measures to protect museums’ independence from political involvement. The Bill also stated that ‘Swedish museum practice must be exemplary from an international perspective when returning and handling human remains’.

Establishing museums’ independence includes that they are themselves responsible for their collection management and are instructed to assess if there is reason to dispose of items by repatriation.

This Museum Act has triggered a lot of the following guidance that has been released by the Swedish National Heritage Board. These policies are still relatively new and need time to be tested and implemented, so it’s worth bearing in mind that Swedish museums are unexperienced when it comes to repatriation.

Good Collections Management: Guidance for Handling Human Remains in Museum Collections (Swedish National Heritage Board, 2020)

In 2020, the Swedish National Heritage Board released its guidance document for handling human remains in collections. The guidance advises that each museum should set up their own policy, which should include ‘a description of how the museum deals with requests for the return of human remains and whether the museum itself aims to initiate returns.’

They define ‘human remains’ as ‘anything that once belonged to a human body. This may include all or parts of a skeleton, ashes, hair, teeth or nails, or soft parts such as organs, skin or embryos. Processed remains such as objects made from bone or hair, or objects with parts made from such items, are also deemed to be human remains in this context. This also includes art and works of art that contain human remains in a variety of ways; in the form of hair or body fluids, for example.’

Good Collections Management: Guidance for Managing the Return of Cultural Objects (Swedish National Heritage Board, 2020)

In the same year, the Swedish National Heritage Board also released guidance on managing the return of cultural objects ‘in order to help museums to draw up their own policies on how to deal with issues relating to returning objects’. The guidance makes a number of references to Article 12 of UNDRIP but emphasises that ‘every return should be handled as a separate initiative, and the museum should communicate the fact that the decision made in one case cannot be translated to apply to all cases.’

The guidance states that ‘the embassies of most countries can assist with finding the right points of contact with museums, institutions or groups’. If you are struggling to find collections, it may be worth getting in touch with your embassy in Sweden.

The guidance includes object categories for claims which are outlined as follows:

Objects obtained in a colonial context – ‘colonial context refers to direct links with colonialism, but also colonial structures in a wider sense’
Human remains
Ceremonial and religious objects – ‘whether the term refers to objects of religious significance or also includes objects used for ceremonial purposes but without being regarded as sacred or as bearers of religious symbolism is all a matter of interpretation’. The guidance also states that ‘the familiarity with the NAGPRA definition is a valuable asset as Swedish museums may be involved in matters relating to objects from Native American groups’
Nazi-confiscated art
Objects suspected of having been stolen, confiscated or exported illegally from their country of origin – ‘objects suspected of having been stolen, confiscated or exported illegally from their country of origin in any part of the ownership chain can be claimed back by another state or, in certain cases, by an individual pursuant to chapters 6 and 7 of the Historic Environment Act (1988).’

It should be noted that the guidance states that there are no mandatory rules regarding the return of objects and that ‘this document does not answer the question of whether specific objects ought to be returned’ which means ‘that it is up to the person making the decision to determine whether or not the object is to be returned.’

They also write that ‘submitters of claims (legal entities or natural persons) also have the option of suing a museum and arguing that they have more of a right to the object (legal ownership) than the museum. In this case, private international law is applicable.’ Not only does this route not have a precedent of succeeding, but as noted above the Swedes are not fans of conflict and so pursuing legal action would not be well-received.

The guidance goes on to recommend what a formal claim, made in writing, should include:

The name and contact details of the recipient
If a claim is submitted via a third party, documentation must be available confirming that this party is representing the submitter of the claim
A description of how the recipient is related to the object
Reasons and background
The designations and identification numbers of each object
A description of how the object was used previously, and by whom

And the criteria for considering a claim:

Possible recipients – ‘the museum needs to investigate whether there are one or more entitled recipients who have an interest in the object and have the opportunity to receive and manage it. The continuous link to the object should be investigated in this regard’
Significance of the Object to the Recipient – ‘the significance of the object to the recipient is generally a compelling reason that is taken into account in the decision-making process. Its significance may be based on historical, religious or identity-related values. Strong emotional ties and aspects of reconciliation may also need to be taken into account’
Significance of the Object in the Museum’s Collection – ‘the museum needs to formulate the role of the object in the museum’s collection’
How the Object was Collected – ‘the way in which the object was collected and became part of the museum’s collection is of significance to the assessment of whether the object should be returned’
Whether the Object is Part of a Specific Context – ‘is the object in question part of a specific material context in the museum collection, or does the object belong more to a context relating to the recipient?’
The Research Value of the Object – ‘the museum should note how the object has been used for research purposes, and assess its future value to research as far as possible’
The Future of the Object if it is Returned – ‘how the recipient plans to use the object may influence any decision to return it’

Decisions on claims from museums in municipalities are controlled by the Local Government Act and may be subject to a legal assessment where an administrative court examines whether a decision has been made correctly.

For museums run in the form of foundations, their Memorandum of Association determines whether items may be deaccessioned from their collections.

For national museums, the Government will generally make decisions on returns as to do so also involves transferring state chattels.

National Museums of World Cultures

Sweden’s National Museums of World Cultures consists of four museums:

Sweden’s National Museum of World Cultures have a few examples of previous returns, including:

1990 – New Zealand – a toi moko
1997 – Australia – a human skull
2004 – Australia – human remains
2009 – New Zealand – human remains
1994 – Guatemala – lower part of a stela
2006 – Canada – G’psgolox totem pole
2022 – Mexico – Yaqui collection

(Follin, 2020)

Director General Ann Follin outlined the museums’ ambitions for repatriation moving forward in a 2020 presentation to the United Nations Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. She spoke of their aim to conduct proactive repatriation and collaboration on the international level. However, it’s worth noting that Follin’s post of Director General is a fixed-term government-appointed post, and she only guaranteed to be there until 2025.

In 2021, the museum released their ‘Policy for Return of Objects’. The policy is limited to items that were added to the collection from the late 1800s onwards. It states:

‘This policy is made concrete in a routine description for handling external incoming requests for return and will be supplemented by a strategy for proactive return that will extend over approximately three years and be formulated in close relation to other business plans.’

‘Each case is investigated and considered separately. Decisions made are based on the factors pertaining to the specific case. Objects that may be considered for return are those that at any point may have been stolen, looted, or illegally exported from the country of origin, or in cases where there are special ethical reasons. Objects acquired through a third party that was not the valid owner of the objects at the time of acquisition, may also be considered for return’.

How to make a claim

Swedish curators are not encouraged to be proactive about repatriation; they need claims to work with. However, it can be incredibly helpful to informally contact the curator to build a relationship before submitting a claim. Sometimes, securing a long-term loan before pursuing repatriation can be a much faster way of getting ancestors and belongings home, as repatriation can take many years.

For the National Museums of World Cultures, international claims will require approval from the government, as they are national museums. The museums’ Object Return Routine Description clearly outlines that ‘claims for return can be made, for example, by a government, a legal descendant, or a native people/tribe/nation. A formal request is made to the Director General of the National Museums of World Culture via the authority’s registrar’.

Claims must include:

Names and contact details of claimants. If a claim is presented by a third party, proof that the party represents the claimant.
Description of the claimant’s association with the object in question (e.g. family, group affiliation, national claimant, estate)
Reasons for return
Name and preferably object number of each object
Description of the context of use for the object (e.g. ceremonial, burial or grave goods, utilitarian objects) and information on the original user

They must be sent to registrator@varldskulturmuseerna.se who will then send a written confirmation that the claim has been received, and the museum then opens a case. If the Director General decides that there are grounds for return, the Swedish government is informed and then makes a decision on the case.

The museum will not pay towards repatriation or reburial costs, including transportation.

Where to find ancestors and belongings

National Museum of World Cultures

The Americas make up around 40% of the National Museums of World Cultures collections. The database has been available online for more than 20 years.

You can search the National Museums of World Cultures’ collections on this webpage.

There are other collections in Sweden besides the one at the National Museums of World Culture, but many of them do not have online databases and most collections are rather small. Depending on ownership, different rules concerning repatriation might apply. Here I have focused on the National Museums of World Culture because of their policy and size of collection.

The Association on American Indian Affairs has a webpage on the collections of the National Museums of World Culture which includes a list of the most significant collections.

The National Heritage Board in Sweden

The National Heritage Board in Sweden has a database for collections in public museums. On the left-hand side there is a list of institutions that shows the number of search results per institution.

Lund University’s Anatomical Collection

There are around 170 ancestors from around the world at Lund University. They have previously repatriated ancestors on three occasions to Australia and New Zealand. You can find out more information about the collection, their repatriation process, and who to contact on this webpage.