For some years now, the exchange on the restitution of cultural assets and human remains from colonial contexts has been intensifying. At the same time, many countries of origin expect a clear state contact in view of the federal responsibilities in Germany.
In several countries – including Cameroon, Tanzania, Ghana and Togo – state structures and restitution bodies have been formed for this purpose, which seek a coordinated dialogue with Germany.
In 2025, the federal, state and municipal umbrella associations agreed on joint guidelines for the handling of cultural assets and human remains from colonial contexts. These form the framework for transparency, cooperation and dealing with restitution claims.
The Coordination Council is aimed exclusively at governments in former colonies, NOT at civil society actors. It is to be expected that the Coordination Council will only act reactively, not proactively.
Comment Thomas Fues:
The new guidelines address some of the concerns raised by the stakeholders involved, for example with regard to epistemic sensitivity and the non-use of the term “no longer justifiable today” for legally and ethically questionable forms of appropriation. Other issues raised, such as criticism of the separate jurisdiction for human remains and cultural belongings, the significance of such belongings for communities of origin, and funding opportunities for them, are not reflected in the document.
Concretely:
- It remains unclear who will control the coordination committee, where it will be based and what financial resources it will have at its disposal. The committee’s focus on the governments of former colonial territories is understandable, as communities of origin can continue to contact the “Contact Point for Collections from Colonial Contexts” at the Cultural Foundation of the German States.
- One positive aspect of the guidelines is that they identify the handling of regionally unattributable remains from colonial contexts as an important challenge for German institutions. The need for dignified storage in Germany also applies to cases where the communities of origin expressly do not wish the remains to be returned.
- One weakness of the guidelines is the lack of specific references to human rights and international law, even though Germany has entered into relevant commitments in this regard.
- A key criterion in the guidelines for restitution is the restrictive statement that the “appropriation took place in a legally or ethically unjustifiable manner.” This raises the question of who must provide proof of this and in what form, and what happens if the German side does not agree with the demand for restitution.
- The options for action available to communities of origin and traditional authorities, affected communities and descendants are limited not only for domestic political reasons, but also for financial reasons. So far, there has been little financial support from the German side. In the 2024 federal budget.
- The issues of reparations, compensation, restitution and apologies for colonial injustices are completely ignored.
Comment Decolonize Berlin (mentioned by Thomas Fues):
- “We note with disappointment that the guidelines do not contain a general recognition of colonial contexts as contexts of injustice. Recognising this would mean understanding appropriations in colonial contexts as fundamentally unlawful.”
