CORRESPONDENCE WITH MEXICAN AUTHORITIES REGARDING ANCESTRAL SKULL REPATRIATION This PDF document outlines the correspondence we have had with Mexican authorities concerning the repatriation of an ancestral skull.
First Letter: Daniel Aguilar Ruvalcaba to Ambassador Carmen Moreno Toscano The initial letter was written by Daniel Aguilar Ruvalcaba to Carmen Moreno Toscano, the Mexican Ambassador to the Netherlands. The letter referenced three attachments: Project Portfolio (not included here). Dutch Newspaper Article (included): An article published in Trouw, featuring an interview with two academics, was conducted without Daniel Aguilar Ruvalcaba’s consent. Though they had no prior experience with the subject matter and initially claimed to seek collaboration, their approach ultimately reflected a desire for protagonism. Aguilar Ruvalcaba characterizes their actions as stemming from “decolonial FOMO and a need for public recognition.” The article includes problematic imagery that perpetuates colonial epistemic extractivism—reproduced here in its original Dutch version, along with the accompanying photographs. Aguilar Ruvalcaba sent the academics a personal letter (not included) expressing his objections to their conduct. Their opportunistic involvement inadvertently alerted the Mexican Embassy to the community-led repatriation initiative. In an attempt to mitigate the harm caused, Aguilar Ruvalcaba offered to fund travel expenses for representatives of the Yuku Saa Community Museum to join the opening of Onvoltooid verleden. However, one representative declined, and the other did not respond. Embassy Website Article (included): A translated article from the Mexican Embassy in the Netherlands’ website, detailing their 2022 visit to the Rijksakademie, where they met Aguilar Ruvalcaba. Second Letter: Ambassador Carmen Moreno Toscano’s Response The Ambassador replied to Aguilar Ruvalcaba’s letter. Though the contents of her response are not detailed here, a close reading reveals how the response diplomatically sidestepped the substantive concerns raised in Aguilar Ruvalcaba’s remarks.
Third Letter: Working Group’s Collective Statement This letter was written by members of the Working Group for the Ethnic Repatriation of the Ancestral Skull (Nchivi Ñuu Savi Collective, Yuku Saa Community Museum representatives and Visionary Archeology Workshop). It serves as an ethical statement and position on the flawed repatriation process, which excluded Indigenous participation. The letter includes: A proposal from the Yuku Saa Community Museum (addressed to Diego Prieto, Director of INAH – Mexico’s National Institute of Anthropology and History) to host the ancestral skull in their territory. On Current Status & Next Steps 1. No formal response has been received from the Ambassador regarding the third letter. We were only notified via email that our proposal would be forwarded to INAH and that the repatriation petition itself could not be shared with us (access may be easier through Dutch authorities).
2. In January 2025, by phone we contacted INAH, who confirmed that while the skull is already at the Mexican Embassy, there is no set date for its return to Mexico. And no formal written answer. They indicated it would likely be placed in an official INAH museum rather than the Yuku Saa Community Museum. INAH stated they would “consider” our proposal but first required an evaluation of the community museum’s conditions. If necessary, we are prepared to launch an international fundraising campaign to meet any governmental requirements. 3, Upcoming Action: We are organizing a second Repair Lab in 2025 in Oaxaca, Mexico, to: a) Develop an ancestral human remains protocol, using this case as a study. b) Pressure local authorities to support the Yuku Saa Community Museum’s proposal. c) Garner national and international backing from renowned individuals, collectives, institutions, and museums.
FIRST LETTER
SECOND LETTER
THIRD LETTER