Transcript Ethical Arguments in Re-studying the Human Remains: the

Ethical Perspectives on Re-study
of Human Remains
Rights of the dead vs. scientific needs of the living
Claudia Surjadjaja
SBS Meeting, EIMB, Jakarta 17 Jan 2011
“Indonesian” HR in Tropen Museum
collected between 1800 to early 1900
 entire archipelago, then NOI
 until 1960 used for physical anthropology study
 loaned to the Vrolik Museum UoA for 3 decades
 forgotten, 7 years ago found, returned to Tropen
 documented and categorized
 2007 discussions with experts, a report produced
 unclaimed, less scientific value, space problem
(Category C)
 Tropen through KITLV contacted EIMB

Collections and Issues to Re-study
Three categories:
1. “Japanese” soldiers found in Biak, Papua
2. Remains from community cemetery in Surabaya
3. Other remains from all over the archipelago
Medico-legal and ethical issues:
- “Permission” to re-study the remains: who owns the
remains?
- Repatriation: is this morally just? what are the
bases?
- Indonesia: play what role? who plays a role? What
consideration to Indonesian ethics?
Study aim and objectives
Study aim
investigate dynamic cultural ethics in treating HR 
ethical grounds
Specific objectives
1. Document prevailing attitudes and debates, especially
in Indonesian context
2. Analyze current global ethics on scientific study and
repatriation of human remains
3. Assess the extent to which policy exists (mostly on
legality and ethics)
4. Assess the likelihood for Indonesian CoE
Conceptual Framework
beliefs/
religious
perspectives
scientific/
medical
perspectives
human value/
moral
perspectives
Specific
Objectives
Research
questions
European past fascination and current debate
HR = once living people
 ethics = conduct for living
 ethics = not BW, HR = not a neutral object
 rights of the dead vs scientific needs of the living
 continuum: repatriation/restitution --- DNA study
 re-dress the historic imbalance
 cleanse past evil deeds, even if entail a loss to
science
 correct past wrong doings, making the most, heal
the open festering wounds
 ethical reasoning: beliefs/religious ground, scientific
ground, or moral philosophical ground.

1. Beliefs/religious perspectives
1. Beliefs/religious perspectives
 Islam: where one dies is where one should be
buried, human body is sacred even after death.
“Breaking the bone of a dead person is similar (in
sin) to breaking the bone of a living person”
(Sunan Abu Dawud, SunanIbnMajah, Musnad
Ahmad).
 Hindu and Buddhist: cremation is more than
disposing of the body, it symbolizes a sense of
detachment, the soul is set free from bondage
 Christian: burial versus cremation, resurrection of
bodies at the end times
2. Science/Medical Perspectives




HR values: scientific study, not archeological
benefitting the living by studying past health
diseases evolve as do all organisms
what we can do TODAY to have better health &
improve our lives
 disagreement: information from HR provides insights
that can only be obtained from HR
 rationalist science-based view
 Jenkins (2003): “…the return of HR to indigenous
communities is not just an assault on scientific
research, but a faltering belief in human progress
itself”
3. Human Values/Moral Perspectives






the dead is a means to the living
your end is my beginning?
human remains are not neutral objects
sanctity of human body, what constitutes
respectful treatment (philosophical,
cultural, & ethical framework)
Jim Bowler: “The science isn't as important
as the descendants' rights."
Socrates put it in Plato’s Republic, “We are
discussing no small matter, but how we
ought to live”.
Cultural and Legal Framework






Uti possidetis juris principle: as you possessed,
you shall possess henceforth
newly formed sovereign states should have the
same borders that they had before their
independence
HR issue is thus a matter of foreign policy
“origin” country/communities?
Law on Regional Autonomy: foreign policy is the
domain of Central Government
involving various technical ministries, DG of
Consular Affairs at the Foreign Ministry as
coordinator (Law on Foreign Relations)
Arguments on “Indonesian” collection





who “owns” these HR? HR is cultural property?
re-study: the dead right, infringe of privacy, not an
artifact for experiments
“ownership”  politicization
Dutch (Western) perspective vs Indonesian
Japanese” soldiers remains: violation of Geneva
Convention (skulls from Saipan at UC Berkeley)
Ethical Principles
 Non-maleficence: risk of misidentification
 Beneficence: body of knowledge
 Justice: the dead, the livings, society at large,
value of science
 Autonomy: informed consent from relatives for
biological samples
Common ground  a shared humanity
How remains relate to research framework:
 resource assessment (current state of knowledge)
 research agenda (potential area)
 research strategy (identify priorities & methods)
Conclusion and recommendations





there is no global ethics
Tropen’s research policy  umbrella policy
applied ethics: moral outcomes in specific situations
casuistry: case-based reasoning, used for juridical and
ethical discussions of law & ethics
instead of rule-based/principle-based reasoning
Recommendations
1. “Japanese” soldiers remains: shall be repatriated,
burry (Memorial War), abide by ICRC Guideline
2. community remains: research plan, burry
3. untracked, incl. Papuan remains: museum is a
graveyard? Kept until when?  burry
Communities tend to be guided less than individuals by
conscience and a sense of responsibility. How much
misery does this fact cause mankind! It is the source of
wars and every kind of oppression, which fill the earth
with pain, sighs and bitterness – Albert Einstein, 1934
Requiescat in pace