Issues for the Mediator to discuss during a Pre-Mediation Zoom Call about preparatory steps & agreeing ‘criteria’ i.e. applicable ‘Principles of Repatriation.’ – I am devloping a table of Mediator Tools which is set out in my essay ‘Mediating Art & Cultural Heritage Disputes’ on the ‘Mediation of Art & Cultural Heritage Disputes’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk. What follows is an extract. 
1.    Inventory – Has a list and index been made of the artefacts [‘A‘] which an institution e.g. a museum [‘M’] is holding that are being claimed?
2.    When and how were the artefacts acquired? – i.e. how did they get there.
3.    Why is M holding A – i.e. what is A doing in the possession of M? e.g. is A even on display, in what context (e.g. in a cabinet of ‘curiosities’ / ‘spoils of war’), and for what purpose?
4.   What connection does the Claimant [‘C’] have to ‘A’ e.g. ancestral lineage i.e. because A is part of C’s living culture.
5.   Why is possession of A of importance to C? e.g. to keep their culture alive, because they can only record and transmit the sacred and artistic/artisan knowledge manifested in A by visiting M – which may not be accessible.
6.   How important is A to C? e.g. because A is part of C’s identity/genetic ‘cultural’ blueprint, and therefore A is of unique significance to C.
7.   What is the cultural home of A? [‘H’] – which is linked to the concepts of:
7.1  a ‘Lex Originis’;
7.2  the ‘legitimacy’ of a place where A should be located (‘Patrie’ – i.e. the cultural ‘homeland’ of A);
7.3  the sovereignty of indigenous peoples and their human rights; and
7.4  the concept for public display of  a ‘unity of art.’
8.   What is the applicable legal framework.
9.   What Code(s) of Ethics and Museum Guidance apply to M.
10. Is M under a wider moral and possibly ‘fiduciary duty’ under International Humanitarian Law, to strive to be a better ‘collaborative custodian’ of objects of cultural importance to an indigenous people?
11. Is M’s freedom to return A to C contrained by a legal prohibition against alienability?
12. Are there exceptions? – This is connected to the negotiation of an agreement to enter into arrangements which de facto return A to C, e.g. an indefinite loan of C to A.
13. What are M’s counter-arguments?
14. What larger ‘relationship’ issues are in play?
15. What repatriation precedents illustrate how a creative deal can lawfully be done to settle a moral claim, e.g.
15.1 The Constitution of Australia.
15.2 The Derynaflan Treasures.
15.3 The Hebrew Manuscripts in the Vatican Archives.
15.4 The Lakota Ghost Dance Shirt.
15.5 The Lewis Chess Pieces.
15.6 The Lindisfarne Gospels.
15.7 The Stone of Scone.
15.8 The determinations made by the UK Spoliations Committee about looted art during the Holocaust.
15.9 The Treaty of Tolentino – The fruits of war: how Napoleon’s looted art found its way home (theartnewspaper.com)
Legacy of Napoleon‘s artistic plunder on show in Rome (koreaherald.com)