17th June 2007, 06:35 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Simon Collcutt
Many commentators (including Sebastian Payne) seem to be suggesting that there will be no (future) need for "archaeologists and developers" to obtain a licence. It is very difficult to see how such deregulation could be prevented from becoming generalised - nobody would need a licence to disinter human remains. We have to ask ourselves whether we think this would be in the public interest ... I certainly do not.
I agree Simon. At least with the old system it was clear that the remains had to be excavated with due respect (shielding from public gaze, etc.), that they had to be analysed by a qualified osteologist and then either retained for future scientific research or reburied appropriately.
The current situation is that the recommendations are for human remains to be reburied almost immediately with no requirement for analysis - in fact it can be inferred that retention and analysis would be illegal. The worrying aspect from my point of view is that some are interpreting the situation as 'anybody can excavate human remains as long as they're not from an area that still looks like, or is used as, a cemetery'. It is also affecting the way that curators write their briefs: some do not mention human remains at all and others are omitting the requirements for post-excavation analysis. This means that human remains excavated under these conditions may never be analysed as there is no requirement for the developer to pay for it. This could lead to a serious loss of information, particularly if large cemeteries are involved.
The problem as I see it is that the advice and recommendations offered by all parties is unclear. People are interpreting them in a number of different ways, leading to confusion. If the Minstry of Justice, EH, the IFA, etc. could issue step-by-step instructions as to the current situation then I believe that there would be less confusion.
D
I dig dead people