A/HRC/45/35 remains, and more broadly the protection of cultural heritage. Examples range from national and federal laws and policies to frameworks adopted by indigenous peoples themselves. 77. One of the most salient national statutes is the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, which has been part of United States federal law since 1990 and has led to the repatriation of the remains of approximately 79,000 individuals and approximately 2 million items from institutions in the United States of America. The Act establishes a mechanism for the Government to work in consultation with Native Americans to repatriate human remains and ceremonial objects. Specifically, it requires federal agencies and museums receiving federal funds to inventory their holdings of Native American sacred objects, objects of cultural patrimony, human remains and funerary objects; to notify and consult with Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations to attempt to reach agreements on the repatriation or other disposition of human remains and objects; and to repatriate items to tribes that have a cultural affiliation with those items. 60 78. The Act is in many ways a laudable example for other States that wish to adopt repatriation legislation. The 30 years of experience under the Act suggest some lessons learned. First, the Act was not fully funded, leaving museums and indigenous peoples to bear the financial burden of inventory, notice, identification, claims and actual return of items to tribes. Some of these issues have been addressed through federal grants. Additionally, some of the language of the Act is ambiguous, leaving the door open for narrow construction by courts. 61 While tribes long struggled to assert “cultural affiliation” under the Act, a new regulation uses a geographic assessment, such that in the cases of culturally unidentifiable human remains, the Government must consult with all Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations from whose tribal or aboriginal lands the remains were removed. This new regulation is thought to reflect indigenous peoples’ sensibilities of stewardship concerning relatives and ancestors in their territories when other methodologies do not reveal affiliation. 79. New Zealand adopted a repatriation policy in 2003 which stipulates that the role of the Government is mainly one of facilitation; it does not claim ownership of human remains. The policy also states that repatriation is by mutual agreement only, that no payment is made to overseas institutions, that the human remains must be identified as originating from New Zealand, and that Māori and Moriori are to be involved in the repatriation of kōiwi/kōimi (Māori and Moriori human remains) and are to determine the final resting place, where possible. Crucially, the Government of New Zealand authorized the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa to be the Crown’s agent in undertaking repatriation work and allocated funding for this purpose of NZ$ 500,000 annually.62 Since July 2013, Te Papa Tongarewa has repatriated 612 Māori and Moriori ancestral remains from over 70 institutions in eight countries. 80. Switzerland has a federal law on the international transfer of cultural property, which reflects the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property. The law seeks to protect world heritage and regulates the import of cultural property, its transit and export, the return of cultural property, and measures to combat illicit trade. The law also contemplates bilateral agreements, which Switzerland has signed with eight countries. Some of these agreements explicitly address human remains.63 81. Australia has supported repatriation for over 30 years, guided since 2011 by the Australian Government Policy on Indigenous Repatriation, covering ancestral remains held overseas, both institutionally and privately, and ancestral remains and secret/sacred objects from collections in Australia. The policy objectives include addressing the injustice of the country’s shared past and supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to develop capacity to maintain their cultural rights, knowledge and practices. The Policy also established an Advisory Committee for Indigenous Repatriation, composed of six indigenous persons appointed by the Minister for the Arts. The Government highlights five lessons learned from its experiences with repatriation: 60 61 62 63 16 Submission from the United States of America. See, e.g., Bonnichsen v. United States, 367 F.3d 864 (9th Cir. 2004). Submission from New Zealand. Submission from Switzerland.