SINCE Government revealed that it was considering relocating the Walter Roth Museum of Anthropology, the public has been up in arms over the move. One day after the electorate had made its considerations clear, the electorate was again addressed and told that the Walter Roth Museum would soon be moved to a section in the National Museum, leaving the people with a fait accompli situation, a reality for which the coalition seems to have a new fondness.
Justifications for the move given by President David Granger and other members of the coalition were not only thin, as is seen in the “easier public access” argument; but do not seem to be well-thought-out, as spinoff consequences of the move did not seem to be considered. That aside, from all appearances, Government did not choose to have any consultation with Indigenous representatives, nor did it gain insight from experts in the fields of either anthropology or archaeology to advise it on the move.

We’ve since learnt that the decision is on hold to allow consultations to be had; and one has to wonder why these consultations were not made beforehand, considering the importance of the artifacts housed in the museum, not only to the nine Amerindian tribes, but to our collective Guyanese history and identity. While museums and storage sites for historical and other valuable artifacts have been relocated over the years, several factors point to the whimsical nature of the move; and with the Walter Roth museum being the first Museum of Anthropology in the English-speaking Caribbean, the public has a right to demand that Government does not take the matter lightly.

The public, as was stated in an online petition aiming to stop relocation of the Walter Roth museum, has not yet heard how the governing coalition intends to address these spinoff factors that the move will surely interrupt, such as the archeological and anthropological research; disbandment of the Library, Denis Williams Field School, the junior archaeology program; and even possibly stymieing current efforts being made to sustain indigenous languages.

It was also pointed out that moving the museum from the space it has inhabited for decades is in violation of Article 149G, under the Protection of Fundamental Rights in the Guyana Constitution, which states: “indigenous peoples shall have the right to the protection, preservation and promulgation of their languages, cultural heritage and way of life”. And it is also in violation of the UNESCO Conventions on Cultural Diversity and Intangible Heritage, to which Guyana has signed.
Therefore, the decision to move the museum is not only whimsical, but also lacks a solid vision; and has chosen, whether intentionally or not, to de-prioritize indigenous history and culture in a time when they are grossly neglected.

From an allegorical angle, this move shows us how little mind is paid to the indigenous people of Guyana, and how its planned shuffling to a wing in another building — which has a more national focus and no space — is not in the best interest.

Coupled with the knowledge that the move was spurred on by the decision that the space was needed to be used by Government, the public has a right to wonder whether Government places any paramountcy on indigenous rights and culture.

The Government would be wise to think its plans through, and carry out proper consultations and in-depth research on the possible fallouts of these plans, before dictating to the public. One hopes that consultations currently ongoing will keep the museum right where it is, and not see it being spirited away to another location.