Groups lash out at Hui Malama

The fight over the artifacts is heading back to court again

>> Claimants to Kawaihae artifacts

THE ESCALATING battle among native Hawaiian groups over the fate of 83 artifacts that were reburied in two Big Island caves took another bitter turn yesterday when several groups jointly condemned another group.

Their target was Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawaii Nei, a group founded in 1989 to rebury native Hawaiian remains and burial items from museums and construction sites. In February 2001, Hui Malama took the 83 items as a "one-year loan" from the Bishop Museum where they had been held since being taken from the caves in 1905. Hui Malama reburied them. Despite repeated requests from the museum and other claimants, Hui Malama has refused to retrieve the items.

HUI MALAMA FUNDS Summary of annual income for Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawaii Nei: TAX YEAR INCOME 1993 $40,366 1994 $3,548 1995 $62,129 1996 $32,048 1997 $74,712 1998 $165,534 1999 $326,634 2000 $13,384 2001 $178,415 2002 $148,421 TOTAL $1,045,191* Source: Federal 990 tax returns via guidestar.org

"We condemn the shameful, un-Hawaiian behavior of Hui Malama," said Cy Harris, one of the 14 recognized claimants to the Kawaihae, or Forbes Cave, artifacts.

"This is not a cultural issue. It is a legal struggle for fairness and equality for all Hawaiians, and to restore those legal rights that were violated by Hui Malama."

In a joint press conference, Harris and three of the 14 other claimants to the Kawaihae cave artifacts stood in front of the golden statue of Kamehameha I to protest Hui Malama's reburial of the items and demand their retrieval, saying, "This is a fight between Hawaiians resulting from Hui Malama's mistaken attitude that it has the authority to make decisions for all Hawaiians and then shove it down our throats."

Alan Murakami, an attorney for the Native Hawaiian Legal Corp., which represents Hui Malama, said of the other claimants and their statements, "They don't operate on facts or on evidence, but on inflammatory statements."

Murakami noted that at the time of the reburial, there were only four claimants and they did not object.

Hui Malama is scheduled to appear this morning before U.S. District Judge David Ezra for a show-cause hearing to explain why the group violated his court order when it did not meet a deadline last week to provide the specific location of every artifact it reburied in Kawaihae and nearby Mummy Cave.

Hui Malama has argued unsuccessfully in the U.S. District Court in Hawaii and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that fulfilling the court order would violate its constitutional right to freedom of religion.

Hui Malama told the federal court that retrieving the items would be a desecration and that retrieving or giving anyone else information to locate the items is "stealing from the dead, an action that threatens severe spiritual consequences for anyone involved."

Ezra said Hui Malama failed to comply because "it did not include the precise location of each and every item loaned to it by the Bishop Museum as described in the order or names and addresses of each person who has knowledge of the exact location of any of the items." Ezra said that noncompliance would result in substantial fines and even imprisonment.

Harris said that he and the other three claimants "applaud Judge Ezra's fairness and implore him to protect our rights."

Under the rules governing the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, a federal law enacted to oversee the reclamation of native Hawaiian and American Indian remains and burial items from museums, there are 14 claimants recognized specifically to the Forbes Cave collection.

Two of those claimants, La'akea Suganuma of the Royal Academy of Traditional Arts and Campbell Estate heiress Abigail Kawananakoa of Na Lei Alii Kawananakoa filed a federal lawsuit in August against Hui Malama. They demanded the retrieval of the items so that all of the claimants could review them and have an equal voice in their final disposition.

"Hui Malama's leaders are not martyrs; they are liars," said Harris of the Kekumano Ohana yesterday, reading from a statement signed by three other claimants: Keohokalole Ohana, Na Papa Kanaka o Pu'ukohola Heiau and the Van Horn Diamond Ohana.

"How can we be lying?" said Murakami, Hui Malama's attorney, adding, "It's a sad day when Hawaiians accuse other Hawaiians of being liars without any basis. By this press statement, I'm not sure who is being un-Hawaiian."

Reading from the joint statement, Harris said that "Hui Malama's leaders have lied from the very beginning and continue to lie. They lied about having permission from the other claimants to take possession of the 83 objects; they lied about it being a loan; they lied about who supports them."

Yesterday, the Harris group said that eight of the 14 claimants support retrieval of the artifacts. By contrast, Hui Malama says that seven of 13 claimants support it and do not want the items retrieved. (Hui Malama does not recognize Kawananakoa's group.)

But yesterday, Mel Kalahiki, representing Na Papa Kanaka, said that his group did not support Hui Malama as Hui Malama reported. He and the others said they support Suganuma and Kawananakoa.

Kalahiki said he was glad that the ancestral bones were reburied but that the artifacts should be preserved for future generations. Unlike Hui Malama, which believes the items are funerary objects that ancestors wanted buried with them, Kalahiki and others believe they are religious items that were hidden in the cave for safekeeping after 1819 when the traditional religion was outlawed and such religious items were destroyed.

The groups attacked Hui Malama, saying its "hidden agenda is to make money and own title to as many Hawaiian artifacts as possible."

In court papers, Hui Malama has said that it is a grass-roots organization that depends on volunteers and could not afford to pay fees for structural engineers the court might require to investigate the safety of the caves.

But yesterday, Harris and his group said that according to the nonprofit's federal tax returns, it has received more than $1.045 million over the past 10 years, mostly in the form of grants.

Harris said "Hui Malama charges heavily for its so-called 'traditional services' (to rebury ancestral bones and artifacts) and has a history of cutting out families to get their way and payment from governmental sources."

Murakami countered that he did not know where they got the financial figures, but that they "have no understanding of how much it costs to reclaim and rebury iwi (bones) and moepu (burial items) from all around the world."

Murakami said "Hui Malama does not have paid staff or directors. It has in no way enriched itself over their 16-year proven track record that has resulted in thousands of iwi and moepu being returned to their ancient resting places."

Harris said that if the artifacts are not found in the two caves, as some claimants fear, "we will also know them (Hui Malama) to be thieves who have stolen 83 precious treasures not just from us, but from future generations of our people."

CLAIMANTS TO KAWAIHAE ARTIFACTS There are 14 claimants recognized under the guidelines of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act with regards to the Kawaihae cave artifacts. They are divided into groups. Groups that support the recovery of the artifacts: » Office of Hawaiian Affairs » Kekumano Ohana » Keohokalole Ohana » Na Papa Kanaka o Pu'ukohola Heiau » Van Horn Diamond Ohana » Hawaii Genealogy Society » Royal Hawaiian Academy of Traditional Arts » Na Lei Alii Kawananakoa Groups that oppose recovery of the artifacts: » Department of Hawaiian Homelands » Hawaii Island Burial Council » Nation of Hawaii » Pu'uhonua O Waimanalo » Native Hawaiian Advisory Council » Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawaii Nei Source: Keohokalole Ohana, Na Papa Kanaka o Pu'ukohola Heiau and the Van Horn Diamond Ohana

CORRECTION Wednesday, December 28, 2005 » The native Hawaiian group Hui Malama I Na Kupuna O Hawaii Nei reported income of $1,045,191 in the 10 years from 1993 to 2002, according to federal 990 tax returns. A graphic on Page A6 in yesterday's early edition incorrectly indicated that group had income of $1,045,191 in 2003 alone. Please see the applicable Corrections Page for more information.