A recent legal assessment commissioned by M HKA, a renowned contemporary art museum in Antwerp, has declared the Flemish government's proposal to dismantle the institution as unequivocally unlawful. This development further intensifies the ongoing dispute surrounding the museum's future, drawing significant opposition from the art community. The government's plan, which involves transferring M HKA's collection and programming to other entities, has been met with staunch resistance from artists and museum professionals globally, highlighting deep concerns about the potential loss of a vital cultural landmark.
The Flemish government's proposal, first unveiled last October, outlines the effective closure of M HKA. Under this plan, the museum's extensive collection would be moved to Ghent, while its curatorial responsibilities would be absorbed by a reconfigured version of the S.M.A.K. museum, tentatively renamed the Flemish Museum of Contemporary and Current Art, by 2028. The existing M HKA premises would then be repurposed into an arts center, providing space for artists and exhibitions. However, M HKA maintains that treating this proposal as a foregone conclusion, even before official approval, undermines the legal standing of public institutions.
In response to these developments, M HKA collaborated with numerous artists to engage legal experts for a thorough review of the government's intentions. The findings of this review, presented to the press, asserted that the government's scheme contains fundamental legal flaws. Prominent artists, including Luc Tuymans and Otobong Nkanga, were present at the press conference, lending their support to M HKA's stance against the proposed changes. Their involvement underscores the widespread artistic community's rejection of the government's reform agenda, which they argue threatens cultural heritage.
Dieter Vankeirsbilck, the interim director of M HKA, emphasized the precarious situation created by the government's approach. He stated that the treatment of non-binding documents as established policy endangers the legal stability of a public institution, a concern echoed by the legal opinion. While Caroline Gennez, the Flemish culture minister, acknowledged the difficulties and concerns surrounding the transition, she reiterated her commitment to the proposal, indicating that a two-year transition period would soon commence, allowing all stakeholders to participate in the decision-making and implementation processes. This assurance, however, has not placated critics.
The international museum community has also voiced strong objections to the Flemish government's actions. Over a dozen European museum directors, including Maria Balshaw of Tate Modern, Laurent Le Bon of Centre Pompidou, and Taco Dibbets of the Rijksmuseum, collectively wrote to Minister Gennez in October, warning that M HKA's closure would constitute an irreparable loss for the cultural landscape, both locally and internationally. Furthermore, renowned artist Anish Kapoor publicly demanded the removal of his artwork from M HKA's and other Flemish museums' online platforms, citing a need to protect his artistic legacy and uphold institutional integrity. Other artists, like Emilia Kabakov and the estate of Christian Boltanski, have reportedly followed suit, highlighting a growing trend of artists withdrawing their support in protest.
Otobong Nkanga, an Antwerp-based artist whose inaugural Belgian exhibition was held at M HKA, expressed her strong opposition to the relocation plan in a video statement. She passionately argued for M HKA's continued existence as a museum, underscoring its vital role as a community hub for families, artists, and learners. Nkanga stressed that the museum serves as an indispensable space for diverse communities within Antwerp, Belgium, and globally, fostering shared experiences and cultural exchange. Curator Charles Esche, in an op-ed for the Art Newspaper, cautioned that the ramifications of M HKA's potential dissolution could extend far beyond Antwerp, signaling a troubling trend where cultural institutions' foundational principles are eroding in the face of populist and politically driven decisions, posing a warning to cultural heritage worldwide.
The ongoing controversy surrounding M HKA underscores a broader struggle between governmental reforms and the preservation of cultural institutions. The museum's legal challenge, coupled with the unified opposition from artists and international museum organizations, highlights the profound value placed on M HKA as a cornerstone of contemporary art. The final decision by the Flemish government is eagerly awaited, as it will inevitably set a precedent for the future of cultural policy and institutional autonomy.