Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T02:51:56.564Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Legal Pluralism in the Pacific: Solomon Island's World War II Heritage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2013

Craig Forrest  and
Jennifer Corrin
Craig Forrest
Affiliation:
Reader and Fellow, Centre for Public, International and Comparative Law, TC Beirne School of Law, University of Queensland, Australia. Email: c.forrest@law.uq.edu.au
Jennifer Corrin
Affiliation:
Professor and Director, Centre for Public, International and Comparative Law, TC Beirne School of Law, University of Queensland, Australia. Email: j.corrin@law.uq.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The country of Solomon Islands, like most Pacific island nations, has a legally pluralistic regime. That is, customary law operates in parallel with the common law, a legacy of Solomon Islands' colonial past. Legal pluralism raises significant difficulties, including in the way cultural heritage is protected and managed. To date, the courts have rarely been called on to deal with such issues, but in 2010 the High Court had to examine legislation designed to regulate the recovery and export of World War II relics. This seemingly innocuous case raised a number of issues concerning the rights of different stakeholders to this material. Moreover, it raised a foundational question as to whether these relics might be considered cultural heritage, and if so, just whose heritage it was. A consideration of this case and the legislation that applies to this heritage serves to illustrate some of the difficulties that arise in protecting cultural heritage within pluralistic legal systems.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Cultural Property , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , February 2013 , pp. 1 - 21
Copyright
Copyright © International Cultural Property Society 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allan, C.Customary Land Tenure in the British Solomon Islands Protectorate. Honiara, Solomon Islands: Government Printer, 1957.Google Scholar
Bederman, David. “Rethinking the Legal Status of Sunken Warships.” Ocean Development and International Law 31 (2000): 97–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benton, L.Law and Colonial Cultures: Legal Regimes in World History, 1400–1900. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
Bohannan, P.“Land,” “Tenure,” and “Land Tenure.” In African Agrarian Systems, edited by Biebuyck, D.. London: Oxford University Press: 1963, pp. 110–115.Google Scholar
Brown, K.Reconciling Customary Law and Received Law in Melanesia. Casuarina, Australia: Charles Darwin University Press, 2005.Google Scholar
Chanock, M.Law, Custom and Social Order: The Colonial Experience in Malawi and Zambia. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1985.Google Scholar
Corrin, Jennifer. “Moving Beyond the Hierarchical Approach to Legal Pluralism in the South Pacific.” Journal of Legal Pluralism 59 (2009): 29–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corrin, Jennifer, and Paterson, D.. Introduction to South Pacific Law. Melbourne, Australia: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.Google Scholar
Corrin Care, Jennifer. “Conflict Between Customary Law and Human Rights in the South Pacific.” In Commonwealth Law Conference Papers, Vol. 1. Edited by the Malaysian Bar Council. Kuala Lumpur: Commonwealth Lawyers Association, September 1999. pp. 251–272.Google Scholar
Corrin Care, Jennifer. “Customary Land and the Language of the Common Law.” Common Law World Review 37 (2008): 305–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dromgoole, Sarah, and Forrest, Craig. “The Nairobi Wreck Removal Convention 2007 and Hazardous Historic Shipwrecks.” Lloyds Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly (2011): 92–122.Google Scholar
Forrest, Craig. “An International Perspective on Sunken State Vessels as Underwater Cultural Heritage.” Ocean Development and International Law 34 (2003): 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forrest, Craig. International Law and the Protection of Cultural Heritage. Abingdon: Routledge, 2010.Google Scholar
Griffiths, John. “What Is Legal Pluralism?” Journal of Legal Pluralism 24 (1986): 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle. “Legal Pluralism.” Law & Society Review 22 (1988): 869–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pixa, Rand. “In Defense of Perpetual Title to Sovereign Wrecks.” Department of the Navy. ⟨http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/org12-7m.htm⟩ (2009) accessed 22 March 2012.Google Scholar
Prott, Lyndel, and Srong, Ieng. Background Materials on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. Paris: UNESCO, 1999.Google Scholar
Ross, H. M. “Leadership Styles and Strategies in a Traditional Melanesian Society.” In Rank and Status in Polynesia and Melanesia. Societe des Oceanistes, 1978; pp. 11–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sack, Peter (ed.). “Legal Pluralism: Introductory Comments.” In Legal Pluralism, edited by Sack, Peter and Minchin, Elizabeth. Canberra, Australia: Australian National University, 1985. pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
Scaglion, R. “Chiefly Models in Papua New Guinea.” The Contemporary Pacific 8, no. 1 (1996): 1–31.Google Scholar
Spennemann, Dirk H. R.Apocalypse Now? The Fate of World War II Sites on the Central Pacific Islands. http://marshall.csu.edu.au/Marshalls/html/PDF_Articles_DRS/Apocalypse.pdf (accessed 17 May 2012).Google Scholar
Stearns, P.Encyclopaedia of World History, 6th ed. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin, 2001.Google Scholar
Strathern, M.Official and Unofficial Courts: Legal Assumptions and Expectations in a Highlands Community. Port Moresby: New Guinea Research Unit, Australian National University, 1972.Google Scholar
White, G. M., and Lindstrom, L., eds. Chiefs Today. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 1997.Google Scholar