This morning I wrote the opening paragraph to my essay entitled ‘Mediating Cultural Heritage Disputes’, which is a work in progress that I am writing on the ‘Mediation of Art & Cultural Heritage Disputes’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk.
‘Introduction

In a dispute about the repatriation and relocation of cultural, historical and sacred material (a ‘Cultural Heritage Dispute’), the P’s assert a moral case and make ethical i.e. value-driven choices which are not about money.  There is also a wider ‘relationship’ dimension in a repatriation dialogue, becuase ‘larger’ issues at play, e.g. righting a historical wrong which took place during colonial times. Mediation may therfore also be an opportunity to transform an acrimonious and long-standing political dispute into a constructive joint-problem solving exercise, by applying ‘fiduciary principles of international relations’ (see my essay a ‘Fiduciary Theory of Art’) to advance the foreign policy agenda and imperatives of each P through a process of Cultural Heritage Diplomacy.

In my experience, there is nearly always a deal to be done. First, however, the P‘s need to find common ground. Then a conversation can begin through a Mediator who has sufficient knowledge of:

(i)  ‘Art and Cultural Heritage Law’; and

(ii)  the wider cultural, social, political, and international relations issues, which underly and are driving the dispute.

However, whereas the mediation of a commercial art dispute may be concluded in the course of a series of one day mediation meetings in person or by Zoom/TEAMS, the process of conducting a repatriation dialogue is more protracted, and may involve a series of meetings and conversations that take place behind closed doors over a period of years. There is rarely a quick fix in the mediation of a moral claim about possession of cultural property. The challenge  for the P‘s is to develop a relationship which enables a deal to be done within the constraints that apply. That takes time, patience and sustained effort.

In this essay I will discuss: (i) the challenges facing Mediators in steering the participants toward resolution in a‘Cultural Heritage’ dispute; (ii) the necessary ‘qualities’ of the Mediator; and (iii) ‘tools’ for overcoming and reconciling: conflicting perspectives; agendas; and imperatives, in order to facilitate a lawful, practical, and sustainable solution to the multi-faceted underlying problem which lies at the heart of a moral claim for the repatriation and relocation of cultural, historical and sacred material.’