La protección del patrimonio indígena en Argentina: debates en torno a los sitios sagrados

The recognition of Indigenous peoples’ rights often clashes with Western legal frameworks, creating multiple points of tension. In Argentina, legislation has acknowledged the existence of Indigenous peoples, albeit with varying objectives. Since the return to democracy in 1983, Indigenous rights have been progressively recognized, beginning with the ratification of the International Labour Organization’s Convention 169 and the enactment of the Indigenous Communities Law in 1985. This law established the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs (INAI), tasked with promoting community development and ensuring the enforcement of Indigenous rights. The 1994 National Constitution also recognized the ethnic preexistence of Indigenous peoples. This article examines the category of sacred sites introduced through an administrative regulation issued by INAI (Resolution 70/22). This designation is grounded in cultural heritage protection laws and applied to burial grounds and other archaeological remains. However, this category was not previously established within Argentina’s legal framework. We seek to explore the tensions that arise regarding the coherence and legitimacy of this legal mechanism in relation to higher-ranking regulations. This analysis serves as a foundation for reflecting on the broader implications of these cultural heritage classifications for Indigenous communities from a decolonial perspective. The study employs a qualitative methodology, conducting a content analysis of a documentary corpus that includes legal regulations and news reports related to restitution cases, complemented by bibliographic sources and secondary analyses. The findings indicate that the category introduced by Resolution 70/22 lacks formal recognition within Argentina’s legal system, and its implementation through an administrative regulation undermines Indigenous communities’ ability to exercise their rights. This reveals the underlying processes of legal coloniality embedded in the current regulatory framework.