Question Bank


When:
November 2, 2018 @ 3:00 am
2018-11-02T03:00:00+05:30
2018-11-02T03:15:00+05:30
Question Bank

2nd November 2018

QUESTION BANK

(1 Question)

Answer questions in NOT MORE than 200 words each. Content of the answer is more important than its length.

Links are provided for reference. You can also use the Internet fruitfully to further enhance and strengthen your answers.

GS II- GOVERNANCE

https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a-catalogue-of-all-thats-valuable/article25394559.ece

Q1. Recently a judgment of the Madras high court directed to maintain a catalogue of antiques. Discuss the importance of such registry.

Ans.

  • Recently, Madras high court passed a momentous order as far as the legal framework on antiquities is concerned. Noting the lack of coordination between departments responsible for custodianship of our cultural heritage and law enforcement agencies, the court observed: “It is their [the HR&CE Department’s] primary duty to protect the temples and safeguard the valuable idols/antiques, which, this Court with great anguish expresses that the department has failed to do…One more important point to be noted is that the department has not computerised the stock, provided adequate ICON Centres with surveillance to keep safe custody of the valuable idols in the Centre and in the temples… It also appears that the Idol wing is interacting with the respective departments of the Central Government only to recover the stolen Idols and antiques, but there seems to be no-coordination between them to curb the crime.”
  • The court also passed detailed directions to be followed by the respondent State actors, including the following: “The stock of Idols maintained in the manual books in the State must be computerised within a period of four weeks, if not already computerised. Similarly, a list of stock of Idols in the temples must be computerised and the same must be reported to this court.” Significantly, this did not come in the course of interpretation of the statute that occupies the field (the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972), but despite it.
  • In the absence of such a searchable catalogue, the risk of antiquities theft and loss of cultural property is multiplied enormously because it becomes that much easier for art criminals to manufacture the provenance of a certain artefact. Without a reliable reference point to confirm the origins and the trail of ownership of a certain antiquity, its sale abroad becomes relatively harder to track. This concern has been voiced by academics and art enthusiasts alike, and was abated to a certain degree by the creation of the National Register on Antiquities.
  • Established in 2007 under the aegis of the National Mission on Monuments and Antiquities (now under the administration of the ASI), the Register is a publicly accessible repository of documented and registered Indian antiquities. There is also the India Pride Project, a volunteer-network of private individuals interested in protecting Indian antiquities, that has been instrumental in the repatriation of several works of incalculable archaeological and aesthetic value.
  • But cause for concern still remains. Though the Register on Antiquities gets diligently populated on the basis of already registered antiquities and objects catalogued in public collections of museums or universities, there are still artefacts yet to be registered or documented. And the problem of non-coordination and lack of information highlighted by the Madras High Court still looms large. One easily identifiable example is that of the quantities of registered antiquities that have found their way into the NMMA’s Register. While the Ministry of Culture’s annual report for 2017-18 states that a mammoth 15.2 lakh registered antiquities have been documented through the NMMA, the Register only provides information for about 4.7 lakh of these. There are questions of how secure these heritage repositories are; whether the public at large can contribute to them or even use them to assist understaffed and underfunded state actors in foiling antiquity thefts.
  • The NMMA fortunately does have a mandate to cultivate public engagement and awareness for the protection of India’s cultural heritage. Its progress towards that realisation seems slower than planned, and much remains to be completed. In the meanwhile, citizen-led initiatives and timely judicial interventions are making up for what already ought to be higher on the list of national priorities.

Leave a comment