In the United Kingdom, a growing movement is challenging the long-standing practices of displaying human remains in museums and selling them at auction houses. This movement, spearheaded by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Afrikan-Reparations (APPG-AR), is calling for significant changes to how human remains are treated and regulated. The APPG-AR, composed of parliamentarians, campaigners, and community members, released a report titled "Laying Ancestors to Rest," which outlines the distress caused to diaspora communities by the retention and display of ancestral remains, many of which were taken during colonial rule.

The Current Legal Framework

The current legal framework in the UK, governed by the Human Tissue Act 2004, only requires consent for acquiring and holding body tissue from individuals who died less than 100 years ago. This act also prohibits the buying, selling, and possession of body parts for transplantation. However, it does not address the broader ethical and cultural issues surrounding the display and sale of human remains, particularly those of historical and cultural significance.

The Historical Context

The report by the APPG-AR highlights the historical context of the trade and display of human remains. It notes that mummified bodies were historically traded among the upper classes of Britain and France as luxurious commodities and were even featured in 19th-century British "mummy unwrapping parties." More recently, Egyptian mummies have been reduced to exoticized figures in Western popular culture, further diminishing their cultural significance and respect.

The Report's Recommendations

The "Laying Ancestors to Rest" report makes 14 recommendations aimed at addressing these issues. These include:

1. Banning the Sale of Human Remains: The report calls for the sale of human remains to be made illegal.

2. Amending the Human Tissue Act 2004: The act should be updated to include the remains of people who died more than 100 years ago.

3. Diverse Representation on Museum Boards: The boards of trustees for national museums should be representative of the diasporas in society.

4. Mapping Ancestral Remains: Funders should dedicate resources to mapping the inventory of ancestral remains in the UK's cultural institutions.

Government and Institutional Responses

The British government published guidance for museums and other institutions on how to care for human remains in 2005. This guidance allows museums to decide on a case-by-case basis whether to return human remains if requested. However, during a debate in the House of Lords, Fiona Twycross, a junior minister in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, acknowledged that the guidance was outdated and that "the world has changed substantially" since then. She noted that incomplete databases and collections make it difficult to track where human remains are being kept but said the report's recommendations would inform the government's consideration of the issues.

Parliamentary Debate and Public Opinion

During the parliamentary debate, Paul Boateng, a peer from the governing Labour party, described the trade of human body parts as an "abomination." He emphasized the need to end the retention and objectification of Indigenous peoples' remains in public collections, against the will of their descendants and originating communities. Boateng praised the "good practice" of the Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford, which removed 120 artifacts, including an Egyptian mummified child and shrunken heads, from display in 2020 as part of its "decolonization process." The museum's director, Professor Laura Van Broekhoven, expressed support for the calls to ban the sale and display of human remains, noting that such actions "rehumanize our museums and our collections in unprecedented ways."

Controversies and Challenges

The debate also highlighted the challenges faced by institutions like the British Museum in London, which holds over 6,000 human remains. Boateng criticized the museum for refusing to hand over several preserved Māori tattooed heads and the skulls of two named individuals from the Torres Strait islands. He described the museum as "forever seemingly on the defensive and on the back foot" and in need of "long-overdue reform." Twycross acknowledged these concerns and said ministers regularly meet with the museum to address such issues.

Global Context

The controversy surrounding the display and auction of human remains is not limited to the UK. In October, the Swan auction house in Oxfordshire was forced to withdraw more than two dozen lots of human remains, including shrunken heads and ancestral skulls, after an outcry in the UK and India. In 2023, the head of the Smithsonian Institution in the United States apologized for amassing a collection of tens of thousands of body parts, largely taken from Black and Indigenous people without their consent, during the first half of the 20th century. The same year, London’s Hunterian Museum stopped exhibiting the skeleton of an 18th-century man known as the "Irish Giant," who had requested to be buried at sea to prevent his body from being seized by anatomists.

The movement to end the display and sale of human remains in the UK reflects a broader global trend towards recognizing and respecting the cultural and ethical significance of ancestral remains. The APPG-AR's report and the subsequent parliamentary debate have brought these issues to the forefront, challenging institutions to reconsider their practices and policies. As the UK grapples with its colonial past and the ethical treatment of human remains, the recommendations put forward offer a path towards greater respect, representation, and healing. The journey towards rehumanizing museums and cultural institutions is ongoing, but the calls for change signal a promising shift towards a more inclusive and ethical future.