There couldn't be a more glaring example of the state's failure to oversee the respectful treatment of remains than the uproar over a development on the grounds of Kawaiaha'o Church, one of Hawai'i's pre-eminent historic and religious landmarks.

This failure must be corrected. The state now must steer the project back on course, ensuring that legal burial protections are followed. That means requiring surveys to avoid unearthing burials wherever possible and ensuring consultation with family descendants.

And for future projects, a clearer set of policies needs to be in place and enforced consistently, so that developers are held to the same rules.

Advertiser Staff writer Rick Daysog has covered the troubled plans to erect a multipurpose center to replace Likeke Hall, demolished in 2007.

The essence of what's happened since: The church, with the state's acquiescence, opted against conducting a subsurface archaeological study for remains. Church leaders asserted that building within the footprint of Likeke would likely avoid remains that would have been relocated 70 years ago.

This decision was made despite the recommendation of an archaeological consultant to do the survey. The church argues that the risk of disturbing remains was lowered when planners decided against excavating for an underground garage.

The error of their ways became apparent: A total of 63 sets of iwi (bones) have been unearthed, and a second consultant estimated that another 83 burials may remain beneath the site.

First, this seemed more clearly to be the bailiwick of the Department of Health, which oversees cemetery disinterments. But officials said the church lacked names for the deceased; DOH policy is to require identities in a permit application.

That's a policy that may not be realistic where some church graveyards are concerned. Kawaiaha'o, like other historic Hawaiian churches, has incomplete records, and the state ought to have rules in place to deal with these cases.

The Department of Land and Natural Resources, which ordinarily deals with Hawaiian remains not in marked cemeteries, then took over the proposal. That part was fine: The Kawaiaha'o area is known to have included ancient burials as well, so DLNR shares some jurisdiction over the case.

The grievous mistake was to waive the survey amid such a concentration of burials, when the law so clearly supports a more cautious approach.

DLNR officials have been meeting with church leaders to devise a course correction, a welcome, albeit late intervention. A plan is due to be issued this week, a blueprint that needs to ensure the oversight of the O'ahu Island Burial Council in the project completion, which will cast a wider net to find descendants to consult about treatment of remains.

Beyond that, DOH and DLNR need to confer on a clearer policy going forward. It does no good to have burial protections on the books if they're applied as unevenly as they were here.