Namibia
Officially the Republic of Namibia, is a country in Southern Africa. Its borders include the Atlantic Ocean to the west, Angola and Zambia to the north, Botswana to the east and South Africa to the south.
Capital:
Windhoek
GPS Coordinates:
-22.5776104, 17.0772739
Official Language:
English
Population:
3m (2024)
Field of Practice
Constitution of the Museums Association of Namibia (MAN)
Objectives:
This Constitution outlines the legal status, aims, objectives, functions and administrative protocols for Museums Association of Namibia (a non-governmental organisation).
Restitution Measures:
None.
The organisation’s constitutional aims include:
Seeking the repatriation of cultural property of Namibian origin held in museums outside Namibia and seeking to prevent the illegal trade in cultural artefacts from Namibia. Serving as the umbrella organisation for all Namibian museums.
Framework Limitations:
As an NGO, MAN has no legal authority to enforce restitution claims or compel foreign institutions to return cultural property. MAN cannot act independently on restitution matters. While the Constitution mandates MAN to seek repatriation of cultural property, it has no jurisdiction over:
International negotiations (handled by government ministries)
Legal disputes in foreign courts
Direct enforcement of claims against foreign institutions
Decisions on final placement or custody of repatriated items (these involve traditional authorities and government bodies)
Joint Declaration by the Federal Republic of Germany and the Republic of Namibia: United in Remembrance of Our Colonial Past, United in Our Will to Reconcile, United in Our Vision of the Future
Objectives:
The Joint Declaration by Germany and Namibia (2021) is a reconciliation agreement addressing the 1904-1908 Herero-Nama genocide during German colonial rule. Germany officially recognised the genocide and agreed to fund 1.1 billion euros worth of Namibian projects over 30 years. However, the funds are described as “grants” rather than “reparations”, and many Indigenous leaders criticised their exclusion from negotiations. Germany rejected any legal responsibility for the genocide. Germany called the events “what they are from today’s perspective: a genocide”, but critically the term ‘genocide’ was employed in a historical-political, rather than in a legal sense.The agreement remains unratified.
Restitution Measures:
None.
When the special envoys initialled the draft in May 2021, the Ovaherero Traditional Authority and Nama Traditional Leaders Association dismissed it as a public relations coup by Germany and an act of betrayal by the Namibian government.
Framework Limitations:
UN Special Rapporteurs sent letters to both governments on 23 February 2023 noting the negotiations violated the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The Ovaherero Traditional Authority and the Nama Traditional Leaders Association submitted a lawsuit to the high court in early 2023 seeking to declare the declaration unlawful.
National Heritage Act, 2004 (Act No. 27 of 2004) (Namibia)
Objectives:
The Namibian Heritage Council Act of 2004 (Act No. 27) aims to protect and conserve places and objects of heritage significance in Namibia. It’s mandated to also recover and repatriate movable national heritage. The core restitution provisions are in PART VI (Sections 40-42): “Recovery and Repatriation of Movable National Heritage.” of the Act.
Restitution Measures:
None.
Framework Limitations:
Like all national laws, it cannot compel foreign states or institutions. Its “demand” for return is a formal legal request that must be enforced through diplomacy, persuasion, or foreign courts (often under principles of international law like the 1970 UNESCO Convention). The burden of proof lies with Namibia. Namibia must substantiate claims of illegal export/possession, which can be difficult for historical removals. Success requires significant funding for provenance research, legal expertise, and negotiation.
Policy on Arts and Culture of the Republic of Namibia Unity, Identity and Creativity for Prosperity (2001)
Objectives:
The Ministry derives its mandate from the Namibian Constitution, in particular Article 20 which deals with education, and Articles 19 and 21 which make provision for arts and culture. The Ministry’s mission is to educate and train for sustainable national development and promote arts and culture, with a vision to be a Ministry of Excellence in providing quality education and promoting arts and culture for the prosperity of the Nation. The aim is to encourage mutual understanding, respect and tolerance and thus to achieve national unity. The preservation of the cultural legacy is another priority. Ultimately, it is a high-level strategic document setting out principles and priorities for the Ministry of Education and Culture (now the Ministry of Education, Arts and Culture).
Restitution Measures:
None.
The 2001 Policy provides the philosophical and administrative foundation for caring for heritage. The National Heritage Act 2004 provides the legal tools and authority for restitution.
Framework Limitations:
The policy framework lacks specific mechanisms for international cultural property restitution. While it establishes domestic cultural preservation mandates, it does not provide direct authority for pursuing restitution claims from foreign institutions or negotiating international heritage recovery agreements. The National Heritage Act, 2004, which operates under the policy’s broad umbrella, is the law that establishes Namibia’s legal framework for pursuing international restitution claims and recovering heritage.
Constitution of the Museums Association of Namibia
This Constitution outlines the legal status, aims, objectives, functions and administrative protocols for Museums Association of Namibia (a non-governmental organisation)
Inter-ministerial Committee
Directorate of National Heritage and Culture Programmes works closely with the Ministry of International Affairs to manage these processes and negotiations that are around the returns. Ministry of Education, arts and culture, is the main government body that regulates and manages the issues of restitution and repatriation.
Repatriation and Handling of Human Remains and Objects in Namibian Museums
Draft policy (under review) that replaces ‘Unity, Identity and Creativity for Prosperity Policy on Arts and Culture of the Republic of Namibia (2001)’ policy.
Namibian Heritage Council Act of 2004 (Act No. 27)
Objectives:
The Namibian Heritage Council Act of 2004 (Act No. 27) aims to protect and conserve places and objects of heritage significance in Namibia. Objectives: Its objectives include establishing the National Heritage Council and a National Heritage Register to identify, preserve, and manage heritage sites and objects. The Council advises the Minister on heritage matters, promotes public understanding, and facilitates conservation efforts through research, education, and financial assistance.
Restitution measures:
Restitution measures under the Act empower the Council to acquire heritage properties, enter agreements with private owners for preservation, and implement conservation, restoration, and security measures. The Act also allows for the registration of heritage places and objects, providing legal protection and control over alterations, relocations, or destruction.
Limitations:
Limitations include the requirement for permits for works affecting protected heritage sites or objects, with penalties for unauthorized actions including fines up to N$100,000 or imprisonment up to five years. The Council may exempt certain activities from permits but retains oversight to prevent damage or deterioration of heritage resources.
Unity, Identity and Creativity for Prosperity | Policy on Arts and Culture of the Republic of Namibia (2001)
Objectives:
The Ministry derives its mandate from the Namibian Constitution, in particular Article 20 which deals with education, and Articles 19 and 21 which make provision for arts and culture. The Ministry’s mission is to educate and train for sustainable national development and promote arts and culture, with a vision to be a Ministry of Excellence in providing quality education and promoting arts and culture for the prosperity of the Nation. The aim is to encourage mutual understanding, respect and tolerance and thus to achieve national unity. The preservation of the cultural legacy is another priority.
Restitution measures:
The National Arts Council of Namibia works to unlock the creative potential of the nation, thereby contributing to a rich Namibian identity, and to build an enabling environment for the identification, support and development of the creative talents of all Namibians. Various laws apply to arts and culture, including the National Archives and Libraries Act, 1992 and Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Protection Act, 1994.
Limitations:
The policy framework lacks specific mechanisms for international cultural property restitution. While it establishes domestic cultural preservation mandates, it does not provide direct authority for pursuing restitution claims from foreign institutions or negotiating international heritage recovery agreements.
Eastern and Southern African Regional Branch of the International Council on Archives Resolution on Migrated Archives (2011)
Objectives:
The ESARBICA Resolution on Migrated Archives (2011) addressed longstanding difficulties Africans faced retrieving archival records removed during colonial periods to Western capitals. ESARBICA brings together fourteen national archival institutions in Eastern and Southern Africa on archives and records management matters, with efforts underway to include Rwanda, Burundi and South Sudan. Nine countries (South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Kenya, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Malawi and Swaziland) were covered in various studies and activities.
Restitution Measures:
The resolution provided frameworks for identifying and repatriating scattered liberation struggle archives and colonial records. Between 2006-2009, ESARBICA undertook regional assessments of liberation struggle heritage, noting much heritage had been identified and repatriated with requisite documentation. It established protocols for systematic identification, documentation, and return of displaced archives to origin countries.
Framework Limitations:
The problem has been approached primarily as a legal issue, producing relatively few resolutions to archival claims. The resolution lacked enforcement mechanisms and depended on voluntary cooperation from holding institutions. Most organizations failed to implement comprehensive archival management practices despite identification efforts. Success remained contingent on diplomatic negotiations and goodwill rather than binding legal obligations.
Joint Declaration by the Federal Republic of Germany and the Republic of Namibia
About:
The Joint Declaration by Germany and Namibia (2021) is a reconciliation agreement addressing the 1904-1908 Herero-Nama genocide during German colonial rule. Germany officially recognized the genocide and agreed to fund 1.1 billion euros worth of Namibian projects over 30 years. However, the funds are described as “grants” rather than “reparations”, and many Indigenous leaders criticized their exclusion from negotiations. The agreement remains unratified.
2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage
About:
The 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage is an international agreement to protect and promote non-material cultural heritage; The Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention deals with practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills that communities recognise as their cultural heritage; communities and bearers are key actors for safeguarding and transmission; experts are associated.
Restitution Measures: None.
Framework Limitations: The element must be nominated following widest possible participation of community, group or individuals concerned with their free, prior consent
The Common African Position (CAP) on Restitution of Heritage Resources (2024)
Objectives:
This common position paper builds on the AU Charter for African Cultural Renaissance and AU Model Law on Cultural Property Protection, outlining nine priority areas with recommendations for national, continental, pan-African, and international action levels.
Restitution Measures:
The framework establishes comprehensive priorities including heritage resource restitution, identification and inventories, management systems, education and awareness programs, engagement with regional parliaments and national assemblies, youth and diaspora involvement, media and civil society participation, cooperation and partnership development, and arts/culture/creative industries support. The 9 areas outlined for restitution are as follows: – Priority 1: Restitution of Heritage Resources – Priority 2: Identification and Inventories – Priority 3: Management of Heritage Resources – Priority 4: Education and Awareness – Priority 5: African Regional Parliaments and National Assemblies – Priority 6: Youth and Diaspora – Priority 7: Media and Civil Society – Priority 8: Cooperation and Partnership – Priority 9: Arts, Culture and Creative Industries. These priorities create systematic approaches for addressing restitution across multiple sectors and stakeholder groups.
Framework Limitations:
The document explicitly lacks binding authority and legal power, functioning purely as policy guidance. It cannot compel state action or enforce compliance with its recommendations. Implementation depends entirely on voluntary adoption by individual African states and regional bodies. Without legal mechanisms or enforcement powers, the framework’s effectiveness relies solely on political commitment and available resources. The broad scope across nine priority areas may also create implementation challenges for countries with limited capacity or competing development priorities.
African Union Model Law on the Protection of Cultural Property and Heritage (2022)
Objectives:
This framework supports protection and restitution of Africa’s illicitly acquired and stolen heritage resources by providing guidance for developing or strengthening national legislation on cultural property protection. It serves as a reference document for African states seeking to establish comprehensive heritage protection frameworks.
Restitution Measures:
Article 27 specifically addresses restitution provisions within cultural property protection instruments. The Model Law provides standardized approaches for incorporating restitution mechanisms into national legislation, establishing legal foundations for recovery claims. It was referenced in ECOWAS’s 2019-2023 Regional Action Plan for Cultural Property Return, demonstrating practical application across regional frameworks.
Framework Limitations:
As a model law, it lacks binding legal authority and requires individual state adoption through domestic legislation. Countries and regional communities must independently source all resources needed for implementation, creating significant capacity and funding challenges. The framework cannot enforce compliance or guarantee implementation consistency across different African states. Its effectiveness depends entirely on political will, available resources, and each nation’s legal system capacity to transform model provisions into enforceable domestic laws with practical restitution mechanisms.
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007)
Objectives:
It establishes a universal framework of minimum standards for the survival, dignity and well-being of the Indigenous peoples of the world and it elaborates on existing human rights standards and fundamental freedoms as they apply to Indigenous peoples. Article 34 of the framework endorses the freedom of Indigenous Peoples to determine their institutional structures and their distinctive customs.
Restitution Measures:
Article 11(2) states that States shall provide redress through effective mechanisms, which may include restitution, developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples, with respect to their cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property taken without their free, prior and informed consent or in violation of their laws, traditions and customs. The UNDRIP was adopted by the UN General Assembly on September 13, 2007.
Framework Limitations:
Implementation has been challenging, due to discrimination, incompatibility with national laws, lack of involvement in decision-making. The primary limitation is that It is not legally enforceable through international courts.
