The unfortunate MOWAA incident poses a severe threat to international confidence in Nigeria’s cultural sector, raising concerns about the safety of repatriated cultural assets and development projects. Yinka Olatunbosun writes
The planned grand opening of the Museum of West African Art (MOWAA) in Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria, was violently aborted last Sunday, November 9, 2025, after protesters stormed the grounds, forcing the cancellation of all official events and the immediate evacuation of international guests and industry professionals.The disrupted a high-profile preview event was intended for foreign journalists, diplomats, tourists as well as industry professionals as a precursor to the grand opening scheduled for the following Tuesday, November 11.
Videos and eyewitness accounts online show how demonstrators stormed the newly built facility in Benin City, shouting at foreign guests and ordering them to vacate the premises. The chaos escalated rapidly, forcing organisers to cancel all planned activities. Guests were subsequently evacuated and “safely escorted to secure locations,” often requiring buses to move them to nearby hotels, after approximately two hours of unrest.
The immediate consequence of the violence was the complete shutdown of the facility’s launch schedule. MOWAA management confirmed the cancellation of all subsequent preview events scheduled for Monday and Tuesday, thereby aborting the grand opening entirely.
MOWAA issued an immediate press statement to cancel the opening ceremony:
Earlier today, a protest took place on the MOWAA campus in Benin City,” the statement reads. “The demonstration appeared to stem from disputes between the previous and current state administrations. While MOWAA was mentioned in the wider context of these grievances- alongside other development projects- we wish to emphasize that MOWAA is an independent, non-profit institution, of which the former governor has no interest, financial or otherwise.
“As a precaution, all guests were safely escorted to secure locations and supported in continuing their travels to hotels, airports or other destinations in the city. The safety and well-being of our staff, visitors and partners remains our highest priority. We are working closely with local authorities to address the situation.
“We are deeply grateful to all our guests- many of whom travelled long distances to be here- for their understanding, patience and resilience. We sincerely apologise for any inconvenience this situation may have caused including interruptions to travel plans or scheduled visits. Your commitment to being with us means a great deal and we regret that your experience today was disrupted.”
This immediate and severe institutional disruption signaled the profound fragility of cultural projects tied to contentious political landscapes.
This incident, targeting the $25 million facility designed to become a global hub for West African art and a major repository for the repatriated Benin Bronzes, was not a random act of civil unrest, but the climax of a protracted political and monarchical feud over cultural custodianship.
Indeed, the central conflict hinges on competing claims between the Benin Royal Palace, led by Oba Ewuare II, and the secular state administration, represented by the preceding government. Protesters, believed by MOWAA leadership to be associated with the Palace, demanded that the institution be renamed the “Benin Royal Museum,” asserting the ancestral right of the traditional authority over the state-backed project.
The security response was reportedly slow, with law enforcement arriving well past the peak of the disturbance, allowing for property destruction and heightened chaos. This lapse, combined with the underlying governance crisis—evidenced by the fact that the actual repatriated Benin Bronzes were absent from the opening and replaced by clay replicas due to unresolved ownership disputes—jeopardizes international restitution efforts. The MOWAA crisis demonstrates that the path to full cultural restoration in Nigeria is currently blocked, not by Western museums, but by internal instability and a profound lack of consensus regarding the legitimate management of national heritage assets.
Methods, Demands, and Damage Assessment
The protests were executed by organised groups, identified in part as the Coalition of Benin social cultural group, the Aiguobasinmwin group, and the Otedo Youth Union, among others. MOWAA’s executive director and chairman, Phillip Ihenacho stated his belief that the demonstrators were “representatives from the palace.” Reports noted that the group, comprising about 20 men, some armed with wooden bats, chanted war songs as they breached security and entered the museum courtyard.
The core motivation behind the siege was the assertion of monarchical authority over the cultural institution. Protesters were recorded demanding that MOWAA be renamed the ‘Benin Royal Museum,’ asserting that the organisers had excluded key local stakeholders, most notably the Benin Royal Palace.
The protestors caused property damage, which was reported by witnesses and MOWAA leadership. Vandalism occurred at the reception pavilion, the area designed to receive visitors, and the front section of the exhibition hall. While one report characterised the damage as “minor,” the destruction of property and the forcible evacuation of high-profile foreign guests transformed the incident from a local dispute into an international diplomatic concern.
The timing of the protest—specifically targeting the international preview event—was a calculated act of symbolic violence. This timing maximised global visibility for the monarchical grievance, effectively declaring MOWAA an illegitimate cultural site in the eyes of the international community. The calculated sabotage ensured that international partners would receive an unmistakable message that the Benin Palace remains the sole legitimate custodian of the heritage, severely undermining MOWAA’s claim to authority. The consequence of these images—foreign guests fleeing armed demonstrators—is the immediate transformation of Benin City’s global perception. Previously listed by The New York Times as a top global destination , the city now carries a significant security risk profile, jeopardizing Nigeria’s broader efforts to leverage cultural assets for economic growth and tourism.
A Vision Violated: The Dual Crisis of Ownership and Artifacts
MOWAA was conceived as a landmark cultural institution, designed by British-Ghanaian architect David Adjaye. The initial phase of construction was estimated to have cost $25 million. The broader campus, which includes the MOWAA Institute, a Rainforest Gallery, an Artisan Hall, a material science lab, and a sculpture park, is expected to require total funding of approximately $100 million for construction and endowment.
The MOWAA Institute, the first building completed, aimed to address the deep deficit in cultural infrastructure following the destruction of indigenous systems by colonial administration. Its mission was explicitly focused on training in archaeology, conservation, heritage management, and museum practice for young West African artists and professionals. Management stressed that the institution was an “independent, non-profit organisation,” operating as a charitable trust with all funds reinvested, thereby distancing itself from state politics or profit motives.
The project successfully attracted significant international sponsorship, including contributions from the Edo State government, the German and Nigerian governments, the Gerda Henkel Foundation, the Open Society Foundation, and a $3 million grant from the Mellon Foundation for training programs. This broad international investment highlights the global community’s stake in the project’s success, and its vulnerability to local political instability.
The Missing Treasures: The Symbolism of Clay Replicas
The fundamental purpose of MOWAA was to house and display the Benin Bronzes, positioning the facility as the crowning moment of the decades-long global restitution effort. Significant progress had been made in recent years, with approximately 150 original bronzes returned to Nigeria by various institutions and governments, including the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Smithsonian, Germany, and the Netherlands.
However, when MOWAA’s doors were due to open, the repatriated Bronzes were notably absent. The primary exhibition, titled Nigeria Imaginary: Homecoming, featured a pyramid-shaped installation by contemporary artist Yinka Shonibare, using clay replicas of the famous artifacts. This exhibition of replicas was a “far cry” from the promised “most comprehensive display” of the Bronzes globally.
The reason for the absence is the enduring, unresolved dispute among the federal government, the state government, and the local community/monarchy over the control and “rightful ownership” of the repatriated artifacts. The inability to display the very objects the museum was built to house signals that international restitution efforts have effectively plateaued into a custodial crisis. Western institutions accomplished the difficult task of returning the objects, but failed to secure a stable, unified governance framework in Nigeria prior to repatriation. The political gridlock means these irreplaceable cultural treasures are likely being held in storage, pending a settlement on who has the legal and ancestral right to curatorial control, thus blocking the final stage of cultural restoration.
MOWAA vs The Palace Feud
The ongoing conflict between MOWAA and The Benin Palace is rooted in a fundamental disagreement over who possesses the ancestral right to custody: the autonomous museum trust or the ancient monarchy. MOWAA management has repeatedly maintained its political and financial distance, stating, “We have never pretended to be anything other than the Museum of West African Art” and asserting its financial independence from the former Edo State Governor, Godwin Obaseki.
Conversely, the Benin Royal Palace, led by Oba Ewuare II, insists on monarchical sovereignty. The Palace maintains that MOWAA should be recognised as the Benin Royal Museum, under direct control of the traditional throne. The Oba alleged that the MOWAA project was fraudulently conceived and lacked transparency, claiming the previous Governor converted the original plan for a Benin Royal Museum into MOWAA. Furthermore, the Oba claimed a former Director General of the National Commission for Museums and Monuments (NCMM) conspired against the Palace by signing documents related to the Royal Museum on the Oba’s behalf. This perceived usurpation of the monarch’s historic authority catalyzed the deep political schism that led to the violence.
The immediate consequence of this governance crisis is the demonstrable threat of cultural object re-looting or damage. Had the irreplaceable Benin Bronzes been housed at MOWAA, the violence that occurred, which included property destruction and security breaches would have placed them at extreme risk.
This vulnerability provides tangible evidence that strengthens the arguments of skeptics in Western museums who previously hesitated to repatriate objects without demonstrably secure facilities and comprehensive governance consensus in place.
A Political and Monarchical Showdown
The establishment of MOWAA is inextricably linked to the tenure of former Edo State Governor Godwin Obaseki, who was instrumental in its launch. The facility’s association with Obaseki has since turned it into a primary target for his political and traditional opponents.
The controversy extends beyond management to the physical site itself. Local reports highlight that the MOWAA building stands on the former site of the Central Hospital. This decision by the previous administration to prioritize a cultural project over a crucial state healthcare facility in the heart of the city has been highly contentious and fueled local resentment.
The Benin Royal Palace’s allegations regarding the project’s genesis center on a perceived breach of trust. Oba Ewuare II recalled carrying forward his ancestors’ struggle for restitution during his diplomatic career. He expressed deep suspicion and a “bad feeling” regarding Obaseki’s sudden involvement, which allegedly converted the original monarchical vision for the Benin Royal Museum into the state-aligned MOWAA. For the Palace, this represented a political attempt to wrest cultural control from the traditional authority.
Assertions of Ancestral Right
The Oba has been uncompromising in asserting the ancestral and historical right of the Benin monarchy to custody of the returned artifacts. The Palace insists that the decades-long diplomatic struggle for restitution should culminate in the assets residing under the control of the traditional throne.
To solidify this claim and create a tangible alternative, the Oba is actively developing his own institution: the Benin Royal Museum (The Royal Collection), located within the Palace grounds and advancing in partnership with the NCMM. This action establishes a direct, competing infrastructure model against MOWAA.
The confrontation over MOWAA is a microcosm of a wider struggle for institutional control, where the monarchical model emphasizes continuity, history, and spiritual custody, while the MOWAA model focused on a modern, philanthropic, and autonomous infrastructure. The Oba’s explicit demand that MOWAA be renamed and placed under palace purview underscores that for the traditional institution, the fight is over sovereignty, not just exhibition space.
Brewing Controversy
The dynamic shifted significantly with the ascension of the current Edo State Governor, Monday Okpebholo, who is perceived as an ally of Oba Ewuare II. Following a royal visit, Governor Okpebholo made public commitments to resolving the controversy, restoring transparency, and, most critically, declaring the restoration of the “Benin Royal Museum Project.”
The new administration views this intervention as a “long-overdue correction” of a controversial policy enacted by its predecessor. The Governor’s office is reportedly considering revoking MOWAA’s license to occupy the site and converting the modern facility back into a state-of-the-art hospital.
This political maneuvering confirms that MOWAA is functioning as a collateral victim in an ongoing inter-administration rivalry. Although MOWAA denies any financial ties to the former governor, its deep association with the Obaseki administration has rendered it politically contaminated. The attack on the museum and the subsequent governmental threat to repurpose it are strategies employed by the Okpebholo administration and the Palace to systematically dismantle the most visible cultural legacy of their political rivals. This reveals an extreme political transition risk, whereby international investments totaling millions of dollars, contributed by governments and foundations, can be summarily invalidated by a change in state leadership.
Delayed Security Response
Analysis of the security arrangements surrounding the MOWAA opening reveals a severe failure of anticipation and execution. Sources confirmed that Edo State authorities possessed intelligence regarding a planned protest but failed to mobilize a swift intervention.
Instead of proactive security measures, law enforcement officers arrived only after the peak of the disturbance had passed. This delayed response allowed the protesters to escalate their activities, transition from a potentially peaceful demonstration to an unruly crowd, vandalize property, and threaten safety standards. Eyewitness reports indicated that police presence was established only after “significant destruction had already taken place,” creating a perception of negligence and failure to safeguard vital cultural infrastructure.
This operational failure points toward a fundamental deficit in governance capacity or, potentially, a lack of political will to secure a site implicated in deep political feuds. The absence of effective security measures during a high-stakes international event severely compromised security protocols in Edo State and undermined public confidence in law enforcement’s ability to protect citizens and assets. When the state authorities fail to protect a $25 million landmark, the perceived risk to the highly valuable and still-disputed repatriated Bronzes skyrockets.
The incident immediately attracted the attention of Nigeria’s federal government. Hannatu Musa Musawa, the Minister of Art, Culture, Tourism, and the Creative Economy, condemned the unrest, describing the situation as a “national issue.”
The Minister warned that the disruption “not only endangers a treasured cultural asset but also threatens the peaceful environment necessary for cultural exchange and the preservation of our artistic patrimony.” She said that the ministry was actively monitoring the “volatile situation,” briefing the presidency, and consulting with the Edo State government and security agencies to ensure an “appropriate and proportionate response”.
MOWAA management also issued an apology to guests, many of whom had traveled great distances, acknowledging the inconvenience and disruption caused to their travel plans. The presence and forced evacuation of foreign diplomats and international visitors elevated the incident from a local dispute to an international diplomatic crisis. The federal government is now challenged to provide immediate reassurances to foreign partners—whose artifacts are currently being held in storage—that their heritage and their citizens can be protected in Nigeria, addressing the pronounced accountability deficit demonstrated by the state police response.
Restitution at Risk
The unfortunate MOWAA incident poses a severe threat to international confidence in Nigeria’s cultural sector, raising questions about the safety of repatriated cultural assets. Donors, including the German government and major foundations such as the Mellon Foundation, who contributed millions of dollars to MOWAA’s infrastructure and training programs, now face extreme uncertainty regarding the long-term sustainability and intended purpose of their investments. The explicit threat by the current state government to potentially revoke the institution’s license and convert the site into a hospital validates fears of high political risk.
The crisis also provides tangible justification for partner museums globally to pause or indefinitely delay future repatriation processes. Citing demonstrable instability, ownership disputes, and severe security risks in Nigeria, institutions holding African artifacts may argue that they cannot, in good faith, return objects to an environment where they could be damaged or caught up in political feuds. This outcome directly jeopardizes the core objective of the restitution movement. Ultimately, the crisis validates skepticism regarding Nigeria’s institutional maturity and political consensus necessary for managing world-class heritage collections independently, damaging the nation’s reputation as a reliable cultural partner.
The Paradigm Shift: From Object Recovery to Infrastructure Control
The conflict over MOWAA highlights a fundamental paradigm shift in the global restitution debate. While the early phase focused on the recovery of physical objects from Western collections, the current, more complex phase centers entirely on the governance and control of the infrastructure built to receive them.
MOWAA represented an independent, contemporary model, focused on infrastructure, conservation, and training, seeking to operate outside the direct control of both the political establishment and the traditional monarchy. Conversely, the Benin Royal Museum project champions the authority of the Oba and ancestral rights.
The fact that the two entities are fighting over the same mandate and the same irreplaceable artifacts leads to a zero-sum outcome. The energy and resources expended in fighting over MOWAA’s governance and legitimacy are detracting entirely from the national mission of utilizing the returned cultural assets for education, scholarship, and national pride. The failure lies in allowing these two critical models to compete rather than collaborate.
Towards a Unified Trust Model
Moving forward, any solution must focus on establishing a unified and legally binding trust model that integrates the three core stakeholders: the Federal Government (represented by the NCMM), the Edo State Government (providing state security and resources), and the Benin Royal Palace (providing traditional, ancestral custodianship).
The necessity of compromise dictates that while the state must ensure physical security and political neutrality, the Palace must be granted ultimate curatorial and custodial authority over the Royal Collection (the Bronzes). Governor Okpebholo’s administration holds the immediate key to de-escalation by facilitating an authoritative agreement. Such an agreement must clarify, with legal certainty, the precise home and management structure for the repatriated Bronzes, regardless of the ultimate use or name of the contested MOWAA building. This foundational clarity is the minimum requirement to restore confidence among international partners and resume the practical work of cultural restoration.
The Cost of Cultural Conflict
The disruption of the MOWAA opening represents a seminal failure in Nigeria’s ability to unify its political and traditional leadership in service of its national cultural heritage. The crisis highlights that the successful physical return of looted artifacts is insufficient without a robust, consensus-backed governance structure in place for their reception and management.
The cost of this conflict is multifaceted: immediate financial damage was sustained; significant reputational damage was incurred through the security lapse and the forced evacuation of foreign diplomats; and, most significantly, the momentum of the broader global restitution movement has been severely stunted. The MOWAA crisis provides a negative case study—a template for Pan-African restitution failure—demonstrating how internal conflicts over prestige, custody, and funding can entirely sabotage the culmination of decades of advocacy.
The international community, which invested heavily in MOWAA’s vision, now requires immediate and legally assured clarity on the custody and location of the Benin Bronzes. Until the deep-seated political and monarchical feud is resolved and codified into a unified governance trust, the return of African heritage risks remaining a symbolic act—a collection of objects held in limbo—rather than a tangible mechanism for cultural restoration and national pride.
– Originally written for THISDAY, a national newspaper in Nigeria.
