Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 22, Number 5, 1 May 2005 — Tougher burial law close to passage [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Tougher burial law close to passage

Measure woulel impose increased fines and criminal penalties

By Sterling Kini Wong People who knowingly alter or destroy burial sites would face criminal penalties of up to $25,000 per offense and up to a year in jail under a bill that seemed poised to be approved by the Legislature as KWO went to press. The bill would add some muehneeded muscle to the state's burial laws and could encourage people to act more carefully when sites are found. "Often damage and destruction [to burials] is irreparable, and these stronger deterrents are needed to protect these last vestiges of the [Hawaiian] culture," OHA stated in its testimony supporting the hill, called HB 712. The bill specifically targets people who are aware that they are damaging burials. It would make altering a burial site without state approval or failure to immediately stop work and report the discovery of a burial site a misdemeanor. The proposed criminal penalties would be in addition to existing civil and administrative fines of up to $10,000. Currently, if state prosecutors want to seek criminal penalties for burial violations, they would have to pursue it under a separate law, for whieh

convictions are often difficult to obtain and the fines are lighter. If the bill passes, violators of the burial law could also face large penalties if they don't act quickly to rectify their offenses. Provisions in the bill state that eaeh day of a continued violation is deemed a separate offense. The bill also includes penalties for gluing together or labeling iwi with a marking pen without state approval. A state investigation into such alleged desecrations by archaeologists at the Wal-Mart property on Ke'eaumoku $treet has prevented the reburial of 61 sets of remains found there in 2003. OHA expressed eoneem, however, over a provision in the bill that would make it a violation not to rebury remains within a reasonable amount of time as determined by the state. OHA stated that a family or a designated kahu, or guardian, might be considered liable even if their honest attempts at reburial are somehow prevented. "The current proposed language may discourage some from taking on the responsibility to re-inter the remains and others, who may have a kuleana to undertake the re-interment effort, may seek expeditious solutions, whieh may not always be culturally appropriate," OHA testified.

Nū Hon

I I I 3 ^ ^ ■ ■ X f ^