Congress passed the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in 1990. It aims to facilitate the protection and return of Native American items, including funerary objects, human remains and sacred objects. Since it was enacted over 30 years ago, the law has led to the repatriation of a number of items. But, challenges remain.
Shondiin Mayo, a grad student at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at ASU, has written about this. Her piece appeared in Arizona Highways Magazine.
Mayo joined The Show to discuss how the law has worked over the years.
Full conversation
SHONDIIN MAYO: Yeah. So, when I was tasked with writing this topic, I actually had to learn about it myself. It was the first time that I heard about this law, and all the interviewees were — even though they all had different backgrounds and approaches to this, to law — it was very important to them, not only culturally, but also in their profession as well.
And one thing that I didn’t learn is that I believe it’s interpreted in different ways, especially when it comes to an Indigenous person who it is their relatives, versus a person who might be interpreting the law on like a Wednesday afternoon as part of their job.
MARK BRODIE: Well, so has that led to different enforcement or following of the law?
MAYO: I believe so. So, I think when I was interviewing and researching this story, I, from what I understood, the people on the ground were obviously a little bit more, hands on because they were dealing with the artifacts and their relatives.
And so I think that they were a little bit more aware of the law and the real impacts of this. Maybe whereas someone who is more aware of the regulations, just like following the regulations and are motivated by different things. Like, when I was hearing about the museum, employees, it was, their duty and motivation to actually reduce the amount of artifacts that were in their museum.
And so, yeah, I believe everyone interpreted it differently and is motivated to do good things in different ways.
BRODIE: How have those different ways of looking at this law impacted the way that the work that it is aiming to be carried out?
MAYO: I think there’s so many moving parts. After reading about this. You have the museum side, which is working as fast as they can, with their limited resources.
And then after that it goes to the actual return of the ancestors. And even that itself, when I was interviewing, the source who was doing the work on the ground was saying that they’re a one-person operation, and it is also very much a cultural interaction when they do return the ancestors.
So they have to do extra work to make sure that they protect themselves and their family and loved ones. And then you also have legislative initiatives to try to give funding to speed up the process. But, definitely it’s, like fast and slow and maybe it stops there. But, at the end of the day, I think all the interviewees were just really dedicated to returning their people.
BRODIE : What is the significance of this law and what it represents to Indigenous communities?
MAYO: The significance is the return of familiar items and our relatives. I think when I was first writing this, I was like, “Oh, my gosh, how do I write this? It’s like, it’s about a law. It’s about something that has happened a while ago. And how do I write this to make it relatable?”
I think everyone has experienced a loss of something. And, I think that’s one way that I tried to communicate how native people have felt for generations.
One of the sources who is working on the return in his Indigenous community, what he said was really profound. And one of his prayers that he gives is, you know, “Thank you, and I hope you return to us so that way we can continue our ways of living.”
And I think that’s what it means.
BRODIE: It sounds like there are other challenges associated with carrying out this law, even among well-meaning museum employees, just in terms of the challenges of maybe determining where a particular artifact should go.
MAYO: Yeah, so one of the, interviewees was, talking about this, and they were saying that due to the lack of documentation, a lot of the artifacts when they’re being distributed is that people don’t know where they go or where it belongs because of the continuous migration. You know, colonization has really changed the landscape, back then and even now.
And so, what the interviewee continued to say and share is that, even tribes themselves may, have conflicting views on where the item may go. And so just those distinctions and fluid boundaries and meanings based off the items also further create confusion, which is another obstacle.
