Don’t destroy the museum
Mar 10, 2011
AT last a statement has come from the Ministry of Tourism, Trade and Industry regarding its determination to demolish the existing museum building. In the New Vision of March 7, the tourism minister, Maj Gen Kahinda Otafiire stated that the “Museum must go†because those who are opposed to its d
Dr. Ephraim R Kamuhangire
AT last a statement has come from the Ministry of Tourism, Trade and Industry regarding its determination to demolish the existing museum building.
In the New Vision of March 7, the tourism minister, Maj Gen Kahinda Otafiire stated that the “Museum must go†because those who are opposed to its demolition “are backwardâ€.
He did not elaborate how they are backward. His Permanent Secretary, Julius Onen made supporting statements, which are laughable. They show that he does not know what “a museum†is.
This was his statement: what makes a museum is not the building but the content; we shall preserve and transfer whatever is inside the old building to the new one when completed in 2035; there is need to demolish the old building because its current state does not guarantee the safety of the historic belongings housed there.
As a former commissioner and head of the Department of Museums and Monuments, let me add my voice to those of the concerned conservationists, the world over who have raised their protests against the demolition of the only existing national museum for the construction of the trade centre.
Lest I forget, let me inform the Permanent Secretary that the content in a museum should also have a purpose specific building to house it. Secondly, to preserve and transfer whatever is in the old building 25 years from today, will deprive the Ugandans the appreciation and enjoyment of their cultural heritage.
The two floors in the new Trade Centre which will be reserved for the museum may not suit the international standards for a typical museum. Who knows whether those objects will be presentable after those years of storage when the demolition of the museum building will also render its workers jobless?
The Permanent Secretary’s third statement shows that he was not fully briefed about the condition of the Uganda Museum building when he took over office.
From the foregoing, therefore, it is clear that it is the museum land that is being targeted by the ministry.
What justification can the ministry give for the demolition of the Uganda Museum building and the destruction of its priceless artifacts for the construction of a 60-storey sky scraper in the name of the East African Trade Centre?
The ministry is forcing an irrelevant project down the throats of Ugandans. In other countries the world over, museums are treasured institutions.
This is because they house the history, culture and traditions of the respective nationals for perpetuity. A break of 25 years during which the Trade Centre will take to be constructed for the reopening of the museum will create an irreparable gap in the minds of Ugandans for them to remember their cultural heritage.
It is not clear whether the ministry’s position on the Uganda Museum building and the museum land is also the same as the Government position. I have a feeling that the ministry has not consulted widely.
In light of the local and international concerns over this matter, the ministry should reconsider its decision to demolish the museum building. The priceless artifacts which are displayed in the museum galleries and those which are in the stores will be lost once they are removed from situ.
One cannot imagine the only national museum in Uganda knowingly and officially being demolished and its cultural objects being stored away in order to avail room for the construction of an ultra-modern building.
There is plenty of land in and around Kampala where such a trade centre can be constructed, sparing the museum land with its museum building and its cultural treasures for the enjoyment and appreciation of Ugandans and the international community for today and tomorrow.
In conclusion, if the tourism ministry insists that “the museum must goâ€, then the Department of Museums and Monuments should be transferred from the ministry where it is like an orphan.
The writer is a senior presidential adviser on cultural matters
AT last a statement has come from the Ministry of Tourism, Trade and Industry regarding its determination to demolish the existing museum building.
In the New Vision of March 7, the tourism minister, Maj Gen Kahinda Otafiire stated that the “Museum must go†because those who are opposed to its demolition “are backwardâ€.
He did not elaborate how they are backward. His Permanent Secretary, Julius Onen made supporting statements, which are laughable. They show that he does not know what “a museum†is.
This was his statement: what makes a museum is not the building but the content; we shall preserve and transfer whatever is inside the old building to the new one when completed in 2035; there is need to demolish the old building because its current state does not guarantee the safety of the historic belongings housed there.
As a former commissioner and head of the Department of Museums and Monuments, let me add my voice to those of the concerned conservationists, the world over who have raised their protests against the demolition of the only existing national museum for the construction of the trade centre.
Lest I forget, let me inform the Permanent Secretary that the content in a museum should also have a purpose specific building to house it. Secondly, to preserve and transfer whatever is in the old building 25 years from today, will deprive the Ugandans the appreciation and enjoyment of their cultural heritage.
The two floors in the new Trade Centre which will be reserved for the museum may not suit the international standards for a typical museum. Who knows whether those objects will be presentable after those years of storage when the demolition of the museum building will also render its workers jobless?
The Permanent Secretary’s third statement shows that he was not fully briefed about the condition of the Uganda Museum building when he took over office.
From the foregoing, therefore, it is clear that it is the museum land that is being targeted by the ministry.
What justification can the ministry give for the demolition of the Uganda Museum building and the destruction of its priceless artifacts for the construction of a 60-storey sky scraper in the name of the East African Trade Centre?
The ministry is forcing an irrelevant project down the throats of Ugandans. In other countries the world over, museums are treasured institutions.
This is because they house the history, culture and traditions of the respective nationals for perpetuity. A break of 25 years during which the Trade Centre will take to be constructed for the reopening of the museum will create an irreparable gap in the minds of Ugandans for them to remember their cultural heritage.
It is not clear whether the ministry’s position on the Uganda Museum building and the museum land is also the same as the Government position. I have a feeling that the ministry has not consulted widely.
In light of the local and international concerns over this matter, the ministry should reconsider its decision to demolish the museum building. The priceless artifacts which are displayed in the museum galleries and those which are in the stores will be lost once they are removed from situ.
One cannot imagine the only national museum in Uganda knowingly and officially being demolished and its cultural objects being stored away in order to avail room for the construction of an ultra-modern building.
There is plenty of land in and around Kampala where such a trade centre can be constructed, sparing the museum land with its museum building and its cultural treasures for the enjoyment and appreciation of Ugandans and the international community for today and tomorrow.
In conclusion, if the tourism ministry insists that “the museum must goâ€, then the Department of Museums and Monuments should be transferred from the ministry where it is like an orphan.
The writer is a senior presidential adviser on cultural matters