With the increasing number of cases of international repatriation of indigenous cultural collections, relevant discussions have gradually been taking place domestically. Looking
back, there have been instances of the return of Han cultural collections within Taiwan, and
some museums have adjusted their collection policies accordingly. However, to date, there
have been no instances of domestic repatriation of indigenous cultural collections. Even
more concerning is that four indigenous ancestral pillars, held in the collections of museums
in Taiwan, have been designated as national treasures. Repeated pleas by the indigenous
people for their repatriation have been ignored. Reviewing the historical records of indigenous cultural collections held in domestic museums, it is evident that some museums in
Taiwan obtained these collections through unjust procedures. These cases warrant the invocation of transitional justice processes to seek the restoration of deprived rights. At present,
some domestic museums have developed short-term initiatives, such as lending indigenous
cultural collections for temporary exhibitions in their respective communities or replicating
them, but they remain reluctant to consider full repatriation of the original items. In this
article is presented a phased strategy involving legal and political approaches to repatriation.
Actions such as applying for exclusive indigenous intellectual property rights and requesting
co-ownership with museums can serve as part of a multifaceted repatriation strategy or an interim process towards the eventual return of the original collections.