results of the consultation with member statesÀ sa 38e session, la conférence générale a adopté...

Draft Action Plan for the Implementation of the Strategy for the reinforcement of UNESCO’s action for the protection of culture and the promotion of cultural pluralism in the event of

armed conflict

Results of the Consultation with Member States

At its 38th Session, the General Conference adopted 38 C/Resolution 48, concerning a Strategy for the reinforcement of UNESCO’s action for the protection of culture and the promotion of cultural pluralism in the event of armed conflict (see Doc. 38 C/49).

The Resolution invited the Director-General to elaborate, in coordination with Member States and relevant actors, an action plan in order to further refine and implement the Strategy, in accordance with UNESCO’s mandate (paragraph 2); invited Member States to support the elaboration of the action plan for the implementation of the Strategy, by defining mechanisms of rapid response and mobilization of national experts, as well as by contributing to the Heritage Emergency Fund (paragraph 3); and invited the Director-General to explore, in collaboration with Member States, practical ways for implementing such mechanism for the rapid intervention and mobilization of national experts (paragraph 4).

An online consultation of Member States was put in place from 24 June to 22 July 2016. The following provides the full comments submitted by Member States in this timeframe.1

Projet de Plan d’action pour la mise en oeuvre de la Stratégie pour le renforcement des actions de l’UNESCO en matière de protection de la culture et de promotion du pluralism

culturel en cas de conflit armé

Résultats de la consultation avec les Etats membres

À sa 38e session, la Conférence générale a adopté la résolution 38 C/48, concernant une Stratégie pour le renforcement de l’action de l’UNESCO en matière de protection de la culture et de promotion du pluralisme culturel en cas de conflit armé (voir document 38C/49).

La résolution invite la Directrice générale à œuvrer en coordination avec les États membres et les acteurs concernés pour élaborer un plan d’action qui affine davantage et met en œuvre la Stratégie conformément au mandat de l’UNESCO (paragraphe 2). Elle invite également les États membres à soutenir l’élaboration du plan d’action pour la mise en œuvre de la Stratégie, notamment par l’élaboration de mécanismes pour la réponse et la mobilisation rapides d’experts nationaux ainsi que par des contributions au Fonds d’urgence pour le patrimoine (paragraphe 3), et invite la Directrice générale, en outre, à étudier, en collaboration avec les États membres, les modalités pratiques d’une mise en œuvre effective d’un tel mécanisme d’intervention et de mobilisation rapides d’experts nationaux (paragraphe 4).

Une consultation en ligne des Etats membres a été mise en place du 24 juin au 22 juillet 2016. Vous trouverez ci-dessous les commentaires complets soumis par les Etats membres dans cette période.2

1 Out of 25 Member States, two did not wish their comments to be made public. 2 Sur les 25 Etats membres ayant répondu, deux ont souhaité que leurs commentaires ne soient pas rendus publics.

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002351/235186e.pdf

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002351/235186f.pdf

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-13 17:44:33

Which Member State do you represent? Austria

The activities included in the Action Plan are in line with the

priority areas of action as defined by the Strategy adopted by

the General Conference. Each activity is linked to the

corresponding paragraph of the Strategy. Do you think that any

activity should be added?

No

Which one and how?

Do you think that any activity should be amended? No

Which one and how?

Do you think that any activity should be taken out? No

Which one and why?

Can you suggest any relevant partner, at inter-governmental,

governmental and non-governmental level, that UNESCO could

work with in implementing particular activities?

Donau Universität Krems,

Center for Heritage

Protection

Are you aware of best practices that you would like to share?

Cultural Heritage Protection

Officers of the Autrian

Armed Forces

The order of the activities in the Action Plan reflects the order

of priority suggested by the Secretariat: short term, mid-term,

long term. Do you agree with the proposed prioritization?

Yes

If not, how should it be changed?

Do you think the proposed overall concept for the establishment

and operationalization of the roster is appropriate? Yes


Do you agree, in particular, with the proposed approach

regarding the possible deployment of UNESCO experts under

the Rapid Response Mechanism to be established, in the

framework of UN Peacekeeping Missions?

Yes

If not, why not?


regarding the selection of experts for the roster and for actual

deployment, if and when the need arises?

Yes

If not, why?

Do you think that UNESCO should consider using the services

of a Stand-By Partner, to assist in the selection and deployment

of the experts, as it is done by other UN Agencies (e.g. UN

OCHA)?

Yes

[Commentaire] Do you think that UNESCO should consider

using the services of a Stand-By Partner, to assist in the

selection and deployment of the experts, as it is done by other

UN Agencies (e.g. UN OCHA)?

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-15 00:15:32

Which Member State do you represent? Chile

The activities included in the Action Plan are in

line with the priority areas of action as defined by

the Strategy adopted by the General Conference.

Each activity is linked to the corresponding

paragraph of the Strategy. Do you think that any


No

Which one and how?

Do you think that any activity should be

amended? No

Which one and how?

Do you think that any activity should be taken

out? No

Which one and why?

Can you suggest any relevant partner, at inter-

governmental, governmental and non-

governmental level, that UNESCO could work

with in implementing particular activities?

Activity N°4: UNESCO should work in

coordination and with the advice of

ICCROM por Risk Assesment and

creating Emergency Plans in areas at risk.

The ICOMOS Scientific Committe on

Risk Preparedness should also be

considered.

Are you aware of best practices that you would

like to share?

The order of the activities in the Action Plan

reflects the order of priority suggested by the

Secretariat: short term, mid-term, long term. Do

you agree with the proposed prioritization?

Yes


Do you think the proposed overall concept for the

establishment and operationalization of the roster

is appropriate?

Yes


Do you agree, in particular, with the proposed

approach regarding the possible deployment of

UNESCO experts under the Rapid Response

Mechanism to be established, in the framework of

UN Peacekeeping Missions?

Yes

If not, why not?


approach regarding the selection of experts for the

roster and for actual deployment, if and when the

need arises?

Yes

If not, why?

Do you think that UNESCO should consider using

the services of a Stand-By Partner, to assist in the Yes

selection and deployment of the experts, as it is

done by other UN Agencies (e.g. UN OCHA)?

[Commentaire] Do you think that UNESCO

should consider using the services of a Stand-By

Partner, to assist in the selection and deployment

of the experts, as it is done by other UN Agencies

(e.g. UN OCHA)?

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-15 03:41:46

Which Member State do you represent? Japan

The activities included in the Action Plan are in line with the priority

areas of action as defined by the Strategy adopted by the General

Conference. Each activity is linked to the corresponding paragraph of

the Strategy. Do you think that any activity should be added?

No

Which one and how?


Which one and how?


Which one and why?


governmental and non-governmental level, that UNESCO could work



The order of the activities in the Action Plan reflects the order of

priority suggested by the Secretariat: short term, mid-term, long term.

Do you agree with the proposed prioritization?

Yes


Do you think the proposed overall concept for the establishment and

operationalization of the roster is appropriate? Yes


Do you agree, in particular, with the proposed approach regarding the

possible deployment of UNESCO experts under the Rapid Response

Mechanism to be established, in the framework of UN Peacekeeping

Missions?

Yes

If not, why not?

Do you agree, in particular, with the proposed approach regarding the

selection of experts for the roster and for actual deployment, if and

when the need arises?

Yes

If not, why?

Do you think that UNESCO should consider using the services of a

Stand-By Partner, to assist in the selection and deployment of the

experts, as it is done by other UN Agencies (e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes

[Commentaire] Do you think that UNESCO should consider using the

services of a Stand-By Partner, to assist in the selection and

deployment of the experts, as it is done by other UN Agencies (e.g.

UN OCHA)?

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-15 14:47:01

Which Member State do you represent? Czech Republic

The activities included in the Action Plan

are in line with the priority areas of action as

defined by the Strategy adopted by the

General Conference. Each activity is linked

to the corresponding paragraph of the

Strategy. Do you think that any activity

should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? No

Which one and how?


taken out? No

Which one and why?

Can you suggest any relevant partner, at

inter-governmental, governmental and non-

governmental level, that UNESCO could

work with in implementing particular

activities?

The Czech Republic believes that the

cooperation should happen mainly at

governmental level and through National

Commissions. In the Czech Republic important

partners are organizations and institutions

administrated by the Ministry of Culture. As for

NGOs, we suggest to cooperate with the Czech

National Committee of the Blue Shield or any

of the independent experts.

Are you aware of best practices that you

would like to share?



Secretariat: short term, mid-term, long term.

Do you agree with the proposed

prioritization?

Yes


Do you think the proposed overall concept

for the establishment and operationalization

of the roster is appropriate?

Yes


Do you agree, in particular, with the

proposed approach regarding the possible

deployment of UNESCO experts under the

Rapid Response Mechanism to be

established, in the framework of UN

Peacekeeping Missions?

Yes

If not, why not?


proposed approach regarding the selection of Yes

experts for the roster and for actual


If not, why?

Do you think that UNESCO should consider

using the services of a Stand-By Partner, to

assist in the selection and deployment of the

experts, as it is done by other UN Agencies

(e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes


should consider using the services of a

Stand-By Partner, to assist in the selection

and deployment of the experts, as it is done

by other UN Agencies (e.g. UN OCHA)?

The Czech Republic would not oppose the

consideration of such procedure.

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-18 08:14:35

Which Member State do you represent? Finland


are in line with the priority areas of action

as defined by the Strategy adopted by the

General Conference. Each activity is

linked to the corresponding paragraph of

the Strategy. Do you think that any


No

Which one and how?


amended? Yes

Which one and how?

In general, we would recommend focusing on the

first stage of the implementation of the Action

Plan to activities that could swiftly produce

tangible results. For instance, we would suggest

reconsidering the following budget lines under

objective 2 and allowing them more resources: -

Strengthened cooperation in the fight against illicit

trafficking - Integration of the protection of

cultural heritage and diversity in military

including UN Peacekeeping Operations (N.B. the

title of this budget line should rechecked and

amended to make it clear that also police, not only

military, will be included in the activities) -

Integration of culture into humanitarian relief

efforts related to displacement - Integration of

culture into peacebuilding efforts In our view,

these activities could have very concrete and rapid

impact on the ground, and we would, therefore,

consider increasing their funding. Moreover, we

are afraid that some of planned allocations may

not be sufficient to produce sustainable results.

For example, 300 000 USD is a modest budget for

training and sensitization activities for UN

Peacekeeping Operations.


taken out? N/A

Which one and why?


inter-governmental, governmental and

non-governmental level, that UNESCO

could work with in implementing

particular activities?

Yes. The action plan foresees - in general -

surprisingly little cooperation with Civil Society

Organisations. We would welcome to have this

matter to be reconsidered. As regards activities 17

and 25, Unesco may wish to consider cooperation

with Justice Rapid Response (JRR) as well as

sharing best practices with JRR which has a global

roster of experts trained in international

investigations.



Yes. The past and current crisis management

missions and peacekeeping operations have

several cases of protection of cultural heritage,

based on the observations of damage, crime

investigation, organising the safety and security of

the objects with international and local security

services, reporting the progress and following-up

the transition of roles and responsibilities. New

technology as air surveillance, satellite images and

video-shooting from the UAVs has produced

operational material usable also to the monitoring

and protection of cultural and historical objects

from the areas as Iraq, other Middle East

countries, Libya, Afghanistan, Bosnia and

Herzegovina and Kosovo.

The order of the activities in the Action

Plan reflects the order of priority

suggested by the Secretariat: short term,

mid-term, long term. Do you agree with

the proposed prioritization?

No


While we do not see any evident problems in the

order suggested by the Secretariat, we have to note

that the provided documentation does not state

clearly how much of the planned budget of 24,9

Million USD is already secured. From the table,

we can only conclude how much of the activities

are fully funded and which activities are

completely unfunded, but it is not clear to which

degree the activities marked with orange (partially

funded) have been financially secured. This is,

indeed, a major disadvantage in the review

process, and makes it very difficult to assess

whether the action plan is realistic and which

actions should be prioritized.


for the establishment and

operationalization of the roster is

appropriate?

No


While the initiative itself is supportable, it would

be good to learn more on how the

roster/deployment would function and, in

particular, to have more clarity on issues related to

budget. While it is clear that some budget is

reserved for the establishment of the roster, the

proposal is still vague on laying out different

options for funding the trainings and actual

deployments which will demand significant

financial resources. When planning this further, it

needs to be kept in mind that choosing the

modalities of deployment (for example,

secondment/directly contracted by UNESCO or a

stand-by-partner) is a key question as it will have

not only major budgetary consequences but it will

bring along serious legal and procedural

responsibilities for the contracting authority. The

different options need to be defined clearly and in

detail so that the Member States can properly

assess which is the best way forward. Given that

we are discussing deployment of civilian experts

to possible hostile environments, in our view

utmost importance must be given to the security

related questions. Pre-deployment training on

security (such as the standardized HEAT courses)

is the foundation of a safe and successful mission,

and we are concerned by the fact that at this point

the concept mentions only online security training

courses. We would also like to underline that

proper security training is costly and this needs to

be factored in the budget plans. For instance,

training that would deliver sufficient skills,

knowledge and attitude to work in crisis

environment for a group of 25 people would cost

around 60 000 Euro. This in mind, it might be the

most feasible option that the interested Member

States would take responsibility of organizing

basic pre-deployment training for their experts in

the same way as they train their secondees for

civilian crisis management operations. We would

like to note that many countries already keep

rosters of experts specialized in working in

conflict areas - these rosters could possibly share

best practices. Also, we would like remind there

are other rapid response mechanisms that could

serve as examples. For instance, the Geneva-based

Justice Rapid Response, which also originated

from Member States initiative in the UN context,

might be an interesting case to study. In sum, we

would welcome to have the Secretariat to continue

consultations on the matter and to elaborate the

current concept.



deployment of UNESCO experts under

the Rapid Response Mechanism to be



No

If not, why not?

In our view, deployment in the framework of the

UN Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and Special

Political Missions (DPA) would probably be the

most feasible option. Being formally a part of a

Mission would solve several problems as standard

procedures of deployment would be automatically

followed. In addition, possibilities for cooperation

with other international actors and their Missions,

such as the EU, OSCE and NATO, should be

explored.


proposed approach regarding the selection

of experts for the roster and for actual


No

If not, why?

As commented before, we would welcome to have

the concept further elaborated. In order to be able

to produce well defined options for the Member

States' consideration, we would encourage the

Secretariat to map the existing structures for

training and deployment of experts to conflict

situations. The networks of peacekeeping and

civilian crisis management centers - such as the

IAPTC network that has more than more than a

hundred member institutions - would provide a

good starting point.

Do you think that UNESCO should

consider using the services of a Stand-By

Partner, to assist in the selection and

deployment of the experts, as it is done by

other UN Agencies (e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes

[Commentaire] Do you think that

UNESCO should consider using the

services of a Stand-By Partner, to assist in

the selection and deployment of the

experts, as it is done by other UN

Agencies (e.g. UN OCHA)?

The Secretariat should bring forward options on

this based on the mapping of existing structures

and arrangements, as suggested above. As regards

activities 17 and 25, Unesco may wish to consider

cooperation with Justice Rapid Response (JRR) as

well as sharing best practices with JRR which has

a global roster of experts trained in international

investigations.

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-18 12:31:23

Which Member State do you represent? Egypt

The activities included in the Action Plan are in

line with the priority areas of action as defined by

the Strategy adopted by the General Conference.

Each activity is linked to the corresponding

paragraph of the Strategy. Do you think that any


No

Which one and how?

Do you think that any activity should be amended? Yes

Which one and how?

The activity: Helping the developing

countries and encourage them to integrate

into UNESCO agreements for heritage

conservation and recovery of cultural

property. it will be implemented by:

workshops raising the awareness


Which one and why?





ICOMOS ICCROM ICOM The national

commissions in the states

Are you aware of best practices that you would

like to share? yes



Secretariat: short term, mid-term, long term. Do

you agree with the proposed prioritization?

Yes



establishment and operationalization of the roster

is appropriate?

Yes







Yes

If not, why not?




need arises?

Yes

If not, why?


the services of a Stand-By Partner, to assist in the

selection and deployment of the experts, as it is

done by other UN Agencies (e.g. UN OCHA)?

the experts and other from INTERPOOL

and from WIPO


should consider using the services of a Stand-By

Partner, to assist in the selection and deployment

of the experts, as it is done by other UN Agencies

(e.g. UN OCHA)?

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-18 12:25:28

Which Member State do you represent? Suisse


are in line with the priority areas of

action as defined by the Strategy adopted

by the General Conference. Each activity

is linked to the corresponding paragraph

of the Strategy. Do you think that any


Yes

Which one and how?

• Remarques générales : • Il serait

bienvenu de définir une indication précise entre

activités globales et activités terrain/nbre de pays

(par des colonnes supplémentaires) • Il serait

bienvenu de définir les relations entre les

différentes activités par une approche matricielle

plus poussée du plan d’action (p.ex. 3-14-17 qui

sont utiles pour 8, 11, 13, … 24, 25 entre autres)

(13 et 1, 11, 12, 19, 27-30) • Eviter les notions

vagues comme « acteurs pertinents » (3), « tous les

acteurs concernés » (11) -> les indiquer

précisément • Indiquer la devise (USD) •

Remarques spécifiques • Préciser le

rôle de l’UNESCO lors de transfert de biens

culturels dans des refuges hors des zones de

conflits. L’UNESCO devrait avoir un rôle plus

actif de coordination et de contrôle. De tels

transferts doivent avoir lieu sous l’égide de

l’UNESCO. Il y va de la crédibilité des refuges et

du respect des standards internationaux en matière

de maintien et de gestion des refuges. •

Renforcer le cadre institutionnel et législatif

en matière de protection, de gestion et de

promotion des biens culturels. A long terme, les

activités développées par l’UNESCO doivent aussi

garantir la durabilité des politiques de protection et

de gestion du patrimoine culturel. Or, l’expérience

de plusieurs pays le montre, un tel objectif ne peut

être atteint sans une véritable et profonde réforme

institutionnelle et législative. • Nous nous

permettons de noter que la problématique du

financement du terrorisme par le biais du trafic

illicite d’objets culturels bien que mentionnée dans

l’introduction de la stratégie (paragraphe 5), n’est

pas répercutée au niveau du plan d’action. •

Certaines mesures pourraient être vues

comme des mesures PVE de manière globale. Ces

mesures ne s’appliquant pas uniquement dans le

cadre de conflits armés, une telle précision pourrait

être utile. • Développer une activité spécifique

qui se focalise sur le marché de l’art et sur le

marché d’art sur internet pour la lutte contre le

trafic illicite • Quid des paragraphes 31, 32 et

notamment 33 de la stratégie ? • Intégrer une

dimension culturelle dans l’aide au développement

? ou intégrer plus clairement l’aide au

développement dans des initiatives particulières ?

(il y a différents types d’acteurs dans cet esprit :

humanitaire, consolidation paix, développement

humain, développement économique)


amended? Yes

Which one and how?

Remarque initiale : Il nous semble indispensable

de mieux structurer le document : Décliner une

activité selon les points suivants : objectif,

mesures, activités. Mettre les différentes activités

en relation entre elles et les présenter dans une

suite logique. Remarques spécifiques : • 5 : Le

UN Treaty Event de 2017 devrait être utilisé pour

promouvoir l’universalisation des traités pertinents.

La Convention de La Haye pour la protection des

biens culturels en conflit armé et ses deux

Protocoles de 1954 et de 1999 devraient être

mentionnés explicitement à la fin de la phrase

suivante : Particular attention will be given to areas

with low ratification. Le terme « standards »

devrait être supprimé de la dernière phrase. •

5 : quel lien avec le § 39 ? • 6 : Il pourrait

valoir la peine de préciser que le développement de

discours alternatifs pour protéger le patrimoine

culturel de l’extrémisme violent est une stratégie à

échelle globale qui ne se limite pas au contexte de

conflit armé. Par exemple le paragraphe36, qui

propose de renforcer les matériels de

communication et d’information pour « contrer la

propagande incitant à la haine, les idées sectaires et

la violence extrême », est typiquement une mesure

PVE. Il est par ailleurs important de souligner que

les mesures de PVE, tel que le développement

d’alternatives à la rhétorique de l’extrême violence

(« alternative narratives »), ne s’appliquent pas

uniquement dans le cadre de conflits armés. •

7 : ajouter au début « Faire connaître les

institutions existantes et actuellement prêtes à

accueillir temporairement des biens culturels en cas

de conflit, catastrophe et autres situations ». •

7 et 18 : Fusionner et mettre une logique

dans la suite des actions. Mieux définir le rôle de

l’UNESCO dans cette activité. Mentionner le

Fonds de la convention de 1954 comme source

possible de financement pour les activités 7 et 18. •

Fusionner 15, 16 et 6, 10, quid de 20 ? –

danger de multiplication d’activités, de perte d’une

corporate identity ; mieux cibler ce qui est

sensibilisation et ce qui relève de l’éducation, du

grand public, des publics plus spécifiques; •

15 : le lien avec l’activité 25 serait à mieux

définir (finalités du rôle du § 22 de la stratégie

concernent aussi i.e. 12. 19, 26, 28, 29, 30) •

15-16 : sont aussi à considérer avec activité

11 et § 36 de la stratégie. Il serait utile de

mentionner l’implication spécifique du secteur ED

et CI dans ce contexte (p.ex. développement de

curriculum en lien avec le Bureau international

d’éducation BIE ? contribution à l’Agenda 2030 au

sous-objectif 4.7, 16…) Suite des commentaires

sous le point suivant par manque de place.


taken out? Yes

Which one and why?

Suite des commentaires du point précédant Q2a par

manque de place : • 9 : il convient de bien définir

l’utilisation du nom « unite4heritage » qui

commence à être utilisé pour des activités diverses

(début de la campagne à Bagdad, campagne sur les

social media, groupe of friends, database). Parfois

le nom est utilisé pour désigner la campagne de

sensibilisation, parfois il est utilisé pour une

activité pour la protection des biens culturels. •

10 : mieux définir des publics cibles.

(spécialistes vs grand public) et avoir une ligne

éditoriale adaptée aux différents publics. • 14 :

mêmes pays que 4 et 2 ?17 : lien avec 3 ? • 19 :

préciser « un nombre relativement succinct

d’initiatives » ? Faire un lien avec para. 22 de la

stratégie, ainsi que l’activité 12 • 20 : ajouter

une référence à la stratégie (22, 28, autres ?) •

21, 23, 32, 33 : quels monitoring/évaluation

? ? Des évaluations avant la continuation nous

semble indispensable. Sur quoi se basent les

chiffres • 22. La stratégie fait référence à

l’ensemble des instruments -> à reprendre. •

22. La Suisse soutient cette activité qui

pourrait éventuellement être classée sous « mid-

term ». De l’avis de la Suisse, une synergie entre le

Deuxième protocole de 1999 à la Convention de La

Haye de 1954 et la Convention de 1972 pour le

patrimoine mondial pourrait améliorer la protection

des biens culturels dans les conflits armés. Dans ce

sens, la Suisse encourage l’UNESCO et les

secrétariats concernés de permettre aux Etats qui le

souhaitent, et qui sont parties à ces deux

instruments de demander via un dossier unique,

l’inscription d’un bien culturel sur la Liste du

Patrimoine mondial d’une part, et l’octroi de la

protection renforcée d’autre part. En outre, nous

encourageons l’UNESCO et les secrétariats

concernés de travailler sur la révision des Rapports

périodiques du Patrimoine mondial, pour permettre

aux Etats de solliciter la protection renforcée (cf.

paragraphe 9 de la décision 39 COM 11 du Comité

du patrimoine mondial). • 24 : lié à l’activité 1,

mais aussi i.e. 3, 7, 10, 18 • 25 : lié à 17, mais

aussi i.e. à 15 ( ? cf- c-dessus), 1, 26 et ss. • 27 : lié

i.e. à 1, 2, 3, 7, 18. Q3a : Fusionner l’activité 8

avec la 2 et la 9. Pas clair comment le 8 sera mise

en œuvre et ne fait pas partie des mesure de

renforcement des capacités. Qui le fait ?






• Autres programmes de l’UNESCO (i.e.

BIE/PVE, Programme Memory of the World,

transformations sociales), Chaires UNESCO

(Chaire UNESCO en droit international de la

protection des biens culturels à l'Université de

Genève ; Chaire UNESCO pour les droits de

l'homme et la démocratie à l'Université de

Fribourg) plus le monde académique • Getty

Conservation Institute • Shirin • Justice

Rapid Response



• Safe Haven en Suisse avec proposition de

contrat type • Know-how suisse pour les

inventaires • Groupe de coordination

interdépartemental suisse pour la protection des

biens culturels au niveau international • Pool

d’experts ICOMOS






No


Organiser les activités selon la suite logique des

actions : Quelle activité doit impérativement suivre

l’autre ? Mettre en avant les relations entre les

activités. La priorisation doit aller plus loin et être

envisagée de manière plus organique (sous forme

de matrice ?) pour savoir par quoi commencer et où

les fonds sont d’abord nécessaires. L’activité 22

devrait être prioritaire, du fait de sa mise en œuvre

rapide et facile par l’UNESCO. L’UNESCO ne

dépend pas de partenaires externes pour démarrer

cette activité.

Do you think the proposed overall

concept for the establishment and


appropriate?

No


Remarques générales : - Veiller à ne pas créer de

doublons avec des bases de données déjà existantes

(p.ex. ICOMOS, Justice Rapid Response, etc.) -

Faire attention à l’indépendance de cette base de

données et à une gérance non-politisée. - S’agit-il

des mêmes experts que mentionnés sous l’activité

27 ? - Faire attention aux différentes possibilité de

mise à disposition /d’intervention d’experts ( sur

base de : Conseil de Sécurité, UNESCO-

intergouvernemental ; ONG)







Yes

If not, why not?


proposed approach regarding the

selection of experts for the roster and for

actual deployment, if and when the need

arises?

No

If not, why?

• Changer: “Les experts sélectionnés seront

intégrés à la base de données et il leur sera

demandé de garantir leur disponibilité à être

déployés dans un temps limité et à mettre à

disposition leurs services, y compris dans des

zones en situation critique. » Mieux définir ce que

les experts doivent garantir et rester réaliste. •

Introduire un mécanisme d’évaluation des

prestations des experts nationaux. Seuls les experts

qui répondent aux exigences requises doivent être

maintenus dans la banque de données.




deployment of the experts, as it is done


Yes



services of a Stand-By Partner, to assist

in the selection and deployment of the

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-18

15:42:15

Which Member State do you represent? Republic of

Palau

The activities included in the Action Plan are in line with the priority areas of

action as defined by the Strategy adopted by the General Conference. Each

activity is linked to the corresponding paragraph of the Strategy. Do you think

that any activity should be added?

No

Which one and how?


Which one and how?


Which one and why?

Can you suggest any relevant partner, at inter-governmental, governmental and

non-governmental level, that UNESCO could work with in implementing



The order of the activities in the Action Plan reflects the order of priority

suggested by the Secretariat: short term, mid-term, long term. Do you agree with


Yes


Do you think the proposed overall concept for the establishment and

operationalization of the roster is appropriate? Yes


Do you agree, in particular, with the proposed approach regarding the possible

deployment of UNESCO experts under the Rapid Response Mechanism to be

established, in the framework of UN Peacekeeping Missions?

Yes

If not, why not?

Do you agree, in particular, with the proposed approach regarding the selection

of experts for the roster and for actual deployment, if and when the need arises? Yes

If not, why?

Do you think that UNESCO should consider using the services of a Stand-By

Partner, to assist in the selection and deployment of the experts, as it is done by


Yes

[Commentaire] Do you think that UNESCO should consider using the services

of a Stand-By Partner, to assist in the selection and deployment of the experts, as

it is done by other UN Agencies (e.g. UN OCHA)?

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-18 20:28:03

Which Member State do you represent? Royaume de Belgique


are in line with the priority areas of

action as defined by the Strategy adopted

by the General Conference. Each activity

is linked to the corresponding paragraph

of the Strategy. Do you think that any


Yes

Which one and how?

Mise en œuvre concertée des actions avec les

Comités intergouvernementaux établis par les

Conventions culturel de l’UNESCO concernées,

via une consultation préalable des Présidents de ces

Comités sur le plan d’action, ou encore la mise en

œuvre du plan d’action par ces Comités via les

Fonds et ressources dont ils disposent.


amended? Yes

Which one and how?

- Action 5 : ajouter à la dernière phrase après « le

CICR » : « en collaboration avec les Sociétés

nationales de la Croix-Rouge et du Croissant-

Rouge ». - Actions 21 et 23 : ajouter l’action 5

dans les actions de court terme à prolonger à

moyen et long terme - Action 22 : ajouter à la

dernière phrase les mots « et en collaboration avec

le Comité pour la protection des biens culturels en

cas de conflit armé » - Action 27 : ajouter à la

première phrase après le mot « l’UNESCO », « et

le Comité pour la protection des biens culturels en

cas de conflit armé » et après « Comité

international du Bouclier bleu » : « et de l’expertise

du Comité international de la Croix-Rouge en

matière de de diffusion du droit international

humanitaire ».


taken out? No

Which one and why?






- Les Comités intergouvernementaux établis par les

Conventions culturelles de l’UNESCO concernées,

- Les Comités nationaux pour la protection des

biens culturels en cas de conflit armé établis sur la

base de la Résolution II de la Conférence

intergouvernementale de La Haye de 1954, - Le

Bouclier bleu international et ses associations

fondatrices (ICOM, ICOMOS, CIA, IFLA), - Les

Comités nationaux du Bouclier bleu ainsi que les

Comités nationaux des associations fondatrices du

Bouclier bleu - Les Commissions nationales

UNESCO - Le CICR et les Sociétés nationales de

la Croix-Rouge et du Croissant-Rouge - Les

Commissions nationales de mise en œuvre du Droit

international humanitaire (mise en œuvre des

Conventions de Genève et de leurs Protocoles

additionnels) - La Cour pénale internationale (pour

la mise en œuvre de l’action 25) le groupe informel

« Groupe des Amis de Unite4Heritage ». - Le

Conseil de l’Europe - L’Union européenne A noter

qu’il serait intéressant d’identifier les partenaires

potentiels des différentes actions proposées et

d’identifier un pilote ou un responsable de la mise

en œuvre.



- Le Plan d’action intégré de l’UNESCO pour le

Mali (le plan développait une vision cohérente et

articulée des différentes Conventions culture

concernées) - La Plate-forme internationale pour la

protection des biens culturels en cas de conflit armé

(initiée en mars 2014 et présidée par le Président

du Comité pour la protection des biens culturels en

cas de conflit armé, elle regroupe également

l’UNESCO, le CICR et le Bouclier bleu

international, voir la décision 9COM7, point 3) a

pour objectif de faciliter l’échange informel de

enseignements et de faciliter les synergies entre ces

acteurs. Ce type de lieu structuré d’échanges

informels est très important. - Les listes indicatives

des biens culturels qui pourraient être proposé pour

le statut de protection renforcée et l’octroi de ce

statut en lui-même - Les efforts déployés en vue de

renforcer les synergies entre les Conventions

culture de l’UNESCO, tels que le projet avancé par

la Belgique, et endossé par le Comité pour la

protection des biens culturels en cas de conflit

armé, en vue de faciliter l’octroi de la protection

renforcée aux biens culturels qui sont proposés

pour inscription sur la Liste du patrimoine mondial

(via la révision du formulaire de candidature) mais

également à ceux qui sont déjà inscrits sur la Liste

du patrimoine mondial(via la révision des rapports

périodiques). - L’initiative conjointe du Comité

pour la protection des biens culturels en cas de

conflit armé et du CICR en vue d’inciter les

Commissions nationales de mise en œuvre du droit

humanitaire à créer un groupe de travail permanent

(ou de tout autre organe similaire) voué en

particulier à la mise en œuvre de la Convention de

La Haye de 1954 et ses Protocoles.






Yes


Do you think the proposed overall

concept for the establishment and


appropriate?

Yes








Yes

If not, why not?


proposed approach regarding the

selection of experts for the roster and for

actual deployment, if and when the need

arises?

Yes

If not, why?




deployment of the experts, as it is done


Yes



services of a Stand-By Partner, to assist

in the selection and deployment of the



C’est une possibilité, mais des éclaircissements sur

le coût de ce partenariat et sur son financement

seraient utiles.

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-19 11:15:13

Which Member State do you represent? Poland

The activities included in the Action Plan are

in line with the priority areas of action as





should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? No

Which one and how?


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?

Polish Ministry of Culture and National

Heritage can offer specialized experts, ready to

be sent to saveguard cultural heritage in the

framework of civilian or miltary missions. The

Ministry maintain a bank data of 40 experts. It

constanly offers specialized trainings

cooperating with the Ministry of Defence.



The Ministry od Culture and National Heritage

could share its experience concerning the

activities of the experts saving cultural heritage

during the presence of Polish Military contigent

in Iraq and Afghanistan. Polish experts are

ready to share their unique knowledge and

experiences concerning the specificity of work

in conflict and post-conflict areas.





prioritization?

Yes





Yes





Yes




If not, why not?


proposed approach regarding the selection of



Yes

If not, why?





(e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes






NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-19 12:38:40

Which Member State do you represent? La France







should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? No

Which one and how?


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?

- CNRS, pour les laboratoires travaillant sur le

stockage des données, d'inventaires (par ex.

Huma-Num) - Laboratoire CraTerre (Ecole

Nationale Supérieure d'architecture de

Grenoble)



-Loi relative à la liberté de création, à

l'architecture et au patrimoine : création de

refuges temporaires en France pour les œuvres

menacées dans les pays étrangers - Listes

rouges ICOM - Memento sur la protection des

biens culturels en cas de conflit armé (pour les

soldats français) - Passport Mali (Unesco,

Craterre, MCC) - Charte d'Angkor pour la

sauvegarde et la restauration des temples

d'Angkor





prioritization?

Yes





Yes






Yes



If not, why not?





Yes

If not, why?





(e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes






- Le mécanisme de réponse rapide ne doit pas

empêcher la mise en œuvre des autres

conventions. - Les Etats doivent être consultés

sur les profils des experts.

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-19 14:26:58

Which Member State do you represent? Serbia







should be added?

Yes

Which one and how?

A specific activity is needed for safeguarding

intangible cultural heritage because of its

specific nature. Most acitivities in the proposed

draft action plan are focused on monuments and

sites and on moveble heritage which destruction

in the events of armed conflict is more visiable

at the first glance. The process of safeguarding

intangble cultural heritage should involve

working with local communities especially in

the post conflict period since it can be a strong

factor in the peacebuilding process. The resent

migration proceses should also be concidered

and local communities with migrants in

countires that give asylum should also be

involved in the process of safeguarding

intanigible cultural heritage. This activity could

also be cross cutting and included in activity 2. (

practical trainings at the local level) , activity 3.

(inventorying), activity 4. (risk assessment)and

activities 12,13,14,15.


amended? Yes

Which one and how?

Safeguarding intanigible cultural heritage could

also be included in activity 2. ( practical

trainings at the local level) , activity 3.

(inventorying), activity 4. (risk assessment)and

activities 12,13,14,15.


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?




reflects the order of priority suggested by

the Secretariat: short term, mid-term, long

term. Do you agree with the proposed

prioritization?

Yes





Yes








Yes

If not, why not?





Yes

If not, why?





(e.g. UN OCHA)?

No






NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-20 10:58:39

Which Member State do you represent? Argentina







should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? No

Which one and how?


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?



In Argentina, since 2012 there is a Working

Group responsible for developing the

implementation plan for compliance with the

international obligations assumed by the

Argentine State under the Hague Convention for

the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event

of Armed Conflict. It’s composed of experts

representing different Ministries. The Working

Group promotes, inter alia, signaling cultural

property through the emblem of the Convention,

and acts of awareness thus complying with

international obligations. Acts are primarily

addressed to members of the Armed Forces and

special guests, but also to the general public,

since the act of placing the emblem of the Hague

Convention 1954 is open, public and gratuitous.

The selection of Cultural Property is carried out

with the consent of the Members of the Working

Group, taking as a base element that they must

have been previously declared by internal

regulations -Law or presidential decree –

National Historic Monuments. This requirement

also satisfies the request of the Second Protocol,

which establishes that there must be a regulatory

plexus pursuing and punishing those who

eventually commit damage to cultural property

marked with the emblem of the Convention. The

existence of the Working Group meets the

requirement of establishing a Commission for

the implementation of the rules arising from

regulatory plexus linked to the protection of

cultural property during armed conflict.


Plan reflects the order of priority suggested

by the Secretariat: short term, mid-term,

long term. Do you agree with the proposed

prioritization?

Yes





Yes








Yes

If not, why not?





Yes

If not, why?











Seeking advice from Justice Rapid Response

(JRR) could be useful, taking into account that

this mechanism has a large expertise in the

selection, training and rapid deployment of

experts. The JRR provides assistance in

investigating serious crimes against international

law, through the development and maintenance

of a list or roster of experts, and the rapid

deployment of missions for that purpose. Experts

are selected through specific training courses.

These courses, with a uniform curriculum and

trainers who are specialists in several fields, are

vital to the functioning of the JRR, since they

allow leveling the knowledge of the selected

experts to the roster.

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-20 18:08:22

Which Member State do you represent? Canada







should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? Yes

Which one and how?

Activities 7 and 18 (concerning safe havens) -

there is no explicit reference in the Strategy to

safe havens. While many states have expressed

interest in offering safe havens, it is our

understanding that few have expressed interest in

using them. As a result, before embarking on a

complex and expensive effort to pursue the idea,

this activity should include a needs assessment

and examination of why states where property is

endangered are not seeking safe havens abroad,

in order to determine whether the idea is worth

pursuing, and if so, what its parameters may be.

There is no point in expending time, efforts and

resource to develop safe havens if they will not

be used. In Activity 22 (strengthening

Conventions’ operational guidelines and

synergies) the description of this activity is

unclear and its potential ramifications serious.

Strengthening operational guidelines and

creating synergies are relatively straightforward

objectives. On the other hand, a “gap” in a

Convention can only be addressed by amending

the Convention or adding a Protocol to it, and

the potential legal implications of “formalizing

standard operating procedures” are unclear. It is

recommended that the description of this activity

be restricted to the proposed analysis of gaps and

opportunities for possible synergies and

strengthening of implementation, without

presuming that the outcomes will be SOPs – that

will require consideration and decisions by

States Parties to the Conventions. As a result, the

phrase “to be then formalized through a set of

standard operating procedures (SOP) should be

removed from this activity description.

Activities 26 and 29 (cooperation on human and

cultural rights and integration of culture into

humanitarian efforts) as currently written do not

accurately reflect paragraph 34 of the Strategy.

That paragraph focused primarily on protection

of cultural diversity, with an attention to cultural

rights, whereas Activities 26 and 29 suggest the

primary focus has shifted to cultural rights,

which remain largely undefined and a subject of

debate among states in various fora. As written,

these activities also risk appearing to accord

UNESCO a larger than appropriate role in the

area of cultural rights among UN actors. To

address these concerns, in Activity 26 we

recommend removing the phrase “and monitor

violations of cultural rights” and changing the

phrase “this activity will include” to “this

activity could include”. In Activity 29 we

recommend changing the phrase “addressing

access to culture and cultural rights” to

“addressing access to culture” and changing

“early warning of genocidal processes” to “early

warning of possible genocidal processes”.


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?

The Government of Quebec has indicated that it

has developed a solid base of expertise

concerning the compiling of inventories of

heritage that include built, movable and

intangible aspects of heritage in a single

inventory, and has indicated that it is prepared to

potentially partner with UNESCO in this aspect

(Activity 14) of the Action Plan.


would like to share? Not at this time.





prioritization?

No


Canada would view activity 16 (Learning

through heritage: enhancing youth engagement)

to be a long-term priority because, unlike

activity 15 which is specifically referencing

youth in refugee and IDP camps, it has a much

broader focus and longer timeline.




Yes








N/A

If not, why not?





No

If not, why?

The proposed approach appears insufficiently

developed to allow us to fully support it as

described. The proposed approach needs to

more clearly differentiate between participation

of experts from the police or military (or with

such backgrounds) and those who are civilians –

particularly with respect to possible deployment

in connection with conflict situations. More

evidence is also required concerning how the

proposal addresses issues of personal risk,

liability (including potential liability of

governments for their nationals when deployed)

and post-deployment support for participants. It

is also unclear whether UNESCO will pay all

costs associated with training and participation

of individuals. If this is not the case, national

governments should be consulted in some

manner about participation of their nationals,

since in the absence of full funding by

UNESCO, governments will have to manage

expectations concerning potential financial

support. And finally, as this is proposed as an

ongoing mechanism, the term for which

individuals will be asked to commit to be on the

roster, and what the interval will be between

subsequent and future “calls for expression of

interest”, should be specified, otherwise the

roster will become outdated and unmanageable.






Yes




Yes, but partners with relevant expertise in this

area should be involved not just in the selection

and deployment of experts, but in the planning

and design stages of this proposal.

NEW RECORD

Completed 21/07/2016 11:14:34

Which Member State do you represent? ALGERIE

The activities included in the Action Plan are in line with

the priority areas of action as defined by the Strategy

adopted by the General Conference. Each activity is linked

to the corresponding paragraph of the Strategy. Do you

think that any activity should be added?

No

Which one and how?


Which one and how?


Which one and why?


governmental and non-governmental level, that UNESCO

could work with in implementing particular activities?

Ministère de la Culture

Are you aware of best practices that you would like to

share? Non

The order of the activities in the Action Plan reflects the

order of priority suggested by the Secretariat: short term,

mid-term, long term. Do you agree with the proposed

prioritization?

Yes



establishment and operationalization of the roster is

appropriate?

Yes



regarding the possible deployment of UNESCO experts

under the Rapid Response Mechanism to be established, in

the framework of UN Peacekeeping Missions?

No

If not, why not?

La mise en place d'un

mécanisme séparé d'experts de

l'UNESCO dans le domaine de

la culture à crééer pourrait etre

envissagé et discutée


regarding the selection of experts for the roster and for

actual deployment, if and when the need arises?

Yes

If not, why?

Do you think that UNESCO should consider using the

services of a Stand-By Partner, to assist in the selection and

deployment of the experts, as it is done by other UN


Yes

[Commentaire] Do you think that UNESCO should consider

using the services of a Stand-By Partner, to assist in the

selection and deployment of the experts, as it is done by


NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-21 13:19:19

Which Member State do you represent? MADAGASCAR




General Conference. Each activity is linked to

the corresponding paragraph of the Strategy.


added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? Yes

Which one and how?

Activité 1: Ajouter en plus de ces organes : -

les communautés de base qui sont les

détenteurs traditionnels du patrimoine et des

valeurs culturelles, -les ONG accréditées

auprès de l’UNESCO qui travaillent en

collaboration étroite avec les autorités

administratives et les communautés de base.

Activité 10: Ajouter les antiquaires, les

galeries : entités connexes de vente d’objets

d’art. Activité 17 : Prévoir le développement

de registre de bonnes pratiques sur la

documentation, les procédures d’évaluation de

risque et plan d’urgence des zones affectées et

périphériques, les sanctions pénales et civiles

adoptées. Activité 19: Augmenter le coût

prévu car les activités de consolidation de paix,

de réconciliation, de dialogue pour les

communautés affectées nécessitent des efforts

et du travail.

Do you think that any activity should be taken

out? No

Which one and why?





AUCUNE


would like to share? AUCUNE




Do you agree with the proposed prioritization?

Yes


Do you think the proposed overall concept for

the establishment and operationalization of the

roster is appropriate?

Yes



approach regarding the possible deployment

of UNESCO experts under the Rapid

Response Mechanism to be established, in the

framework of UN Peacekeeping Missions?

Yes

If not, why not?


approach regarding the selection of experts for

the roster and for actual deployment, if and

when the need arises?

Yes

If not, why?





(e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes


should consider using the services of a Stand-

By Partner, to assist in the selection and



AUCUN COMMENTAIRE

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-21 16:35:18

Which Member State do you represent? Germany

The activities included in the Action Plan are in line

with the priority areas of action as defined by the

Strategy adopted by the General Conference. Each

activity is linked to the corresponding paragraph of

the Strategy. Do you think that any activity should

be added?

No

Which one and how?

Do you think that any activity should be amended? Yes

Which one and how?

# 5: Add 1954 Hague Convention and

Protocols. # 7: Include assessment if

states want to have "safe havens". Many

states in conflict do not want "safe

havens" abroad. Think about merging #

7 and # 18.

Do you think that any activity should be taken out? Yes

Which one and why?

# 21 and # 23 are too expensive.

Evaluation is needed before

continuation.


governmental, governmental and non-governmental

level, that UNESCO could work with in

implementing particular activities?

ICOM, Interpol, maybe Nato

Are you aware of best practices that you would like

to share?

The order of the activities in the Action Plan reflects

the order of priority suggested by the Secretariat:

short term, mid-term, long term. Do you agree with


Yes




appropriate?

Yes







Yes

If not, why not?




need arises?

No

If not, why? The Approach is not really clear.



selection and deployment of the experts, as it is done


No

[Commentaire] Do you think that UNESCO should

consider using the services of a Stand-By Partner, to

assist in the selection and deployment of the experts,

as it is done by other UN Agencies (e.g. UN

OCHA)?

Not sufficiently clear.

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-22 10:22:35

Which Member State do you represent? Republic of Bulgaria


are in line with the priority areas of action as





should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? No

Which one and how?


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?

It would be appropriate to seek and strengthen

cooperation with regional and local

organizations in order to promote ownership of

the process, and consider regional documents in

the field (Charter for African cultural

renaissance). We would suggest closer

cooperation with the Council of Europe, the EU,

the International Committee of the Red Cross

and the NGO sector. Fully use the protective

power of the 1954 Convention and promotion of

its ratification. The convention requires states to

make preparation in peacetime to safeguard

their heritage against foreseeable damage.



An example from the Balkans is the Cultural

corridors of SEE initiative, which was a

grassroots initiative, supported by the Council of

Europe and EU. As part of the Regional

programme on cultural and natural heritage in

South-East Europe, a joint initiative of the CE

and the EU, a number of monuments which

have been damaged during the armed conflict in

former Yugoslavia were rehabilitated. Another

example that we would like to share is the

Council of ministers of culture in South-East

Europe which discusses issues connected with

the protection and safeguarding of cultural

heritage. A good practice is also the signature of

bilateral agreements concerning the return of

illegally imported cultural properties. The

Republic of Bulgaria has signed such an

agreement with the Republic of Turkey, as well

as memorandums of understanding with the

USA, Italy, Cyprus and France. Finally, the

Regional Centre for the Safeguarding of

Intangible Cultural Heritage in South-Eastern

Europe under the auspices of UNESCO (based

in Sofia) has an expertise in safeguarding

intangible heritage and a potential for

information gathering and consultancy on issues

related to protection and safeguarding of ICH in

times of armed conflict.


reflects the order of priority suggested by

the Secretariat: short term, mid-term, long

term. Do you agree with the proposed

prioritization?

Yes





Yes








Yes

If not, why not?





Yes

If not, why?





(e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes






NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-22 12:33:27

Which Member State do you represent? Espagne







should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? Yes

Which one and how?

Activité 1: La formation et les outils de cette

activité doivent se fonder sur des ateliers de

formation pour le personnel et les fonctionnaires

des secteurs concernés. La mention concernant la

« Guardia Civil » doit être remplacée par: « or

the Spanish specialized security forces (Guardia

Civil and Policía Nacional ) ». Activité 2: La

référence faite à l’ ICCROM, étant données les

compétences de cet organisme relatives à la

Conservation et Restauration, devrait être plutôt

centrée sur l'analyse et évaluation des situations

post-conflit. Activité 3: Il conviendrait de

prévoir l’utilisation des fiches “ID” de ICOM qui

sont fort utiles. Activité 5: L’augmentation du

Nonmbre de ratifications des Conventions est

mieux réalisable à travers des gestions politiques

au cas par cas puisque les circonstances varient

selon les pays. Il ne semble pas que l’on puisse

obtenir l’élan politique correspondant par le niais

de réunions d’experts. Il conviendrait que les

hauts responsables fassent des gestions directes

dans les capitales des Etats Parties. Activité 6:

La campagne #Unite4Heritage est très appréciée

et donc aussi sa continuité et son renfort.

Activités 7 et 18: L’implication de l’UNESCO

dans la mise en place de refuges sûrs pour le le

Patrimoine Culturel serait également importante

et doit être réalisée par le biais de projets

financés par les Etats qui en ont la capacité.

Activité 8: Parmi les premières mesures, il

faudrait inclure la formation du personnel local

en ce qui concerne la mise en place de plans

stratégiques d’intervention rapide. Activités 24,

25 et 26: La coordination, échange d’information

et agissement commun avec le reste des

Organismes des Nations Unies est fondamental

pour l’obtention de résultats. La coopération

avec la Cour Pénale Internationale peut se faire à

travers le futur Observatoire ou directement entre

l’ UNESCO et le ICC. Activités 27, 29 et 30:

L’intégration de l’élément culturel dans les

opérations de maintien de la paix de NNUU,

dans l’aide humanitaire et dans la reconstruction

et consolidation de la paix.


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?

Au niveau national, l’Agence Espagnole de

Coopération Internationale pour le

Développement (AECID) et, au niveau

international, la Croix Rouge et le Croissant-

Rouge.



Oui. - Manuel “Conservación preventiva para

todos. Una guía ilustrada” publié par l’Agence

Espagnole de Coopération Internationale pour le

Développement (AECID) en 2014. -

Interventions réalisées par la Coopération

Espagnole avec d’autres associés dans des zones

touchées par des catastrophes (Nicaragua et

Honduras suite au Mitch; Philippines suite au

typhon; Equateur suite au récent mouvement de

terre).





prioritization?

No


La distinction entre délais est effectivement utile,

mais l’ordre des activités incluses dans chacun

d’eux n’est pas bien systématisé




Yes








Yes

If not, why not?


proposed approach regarding the selection Yes



If not, why?






Yes






La Délégation d’Espagne considère la formule

“Stand-by Partners” la plus adéquate pour le

déploiement d’experts sur le terrain et demande

plus de précision et de détails sur l’idée de

l’UNESCO autour de cette formule.

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-22 15:54:23

Which Member State do you represent? Italie







should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? No

Which one and how?


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?



L'Italie met à la disposition de l'UNESCO la

base de données des Carabinieri (protection du

patrimoine culturel), pour combattre le trafic

illicite de biens culturels, ainsi que des modules

de formation, réalisés eux aussi par les

Carabinieri, pour le personnel employé dans

cette activité.





prioritization?

Yes





No


Il devrait être ajouté au système des listes

d'experts une autre modalité, prévoyant une

force d'intervention rapide, rapidement

opérationnelle, pour des situations d'urgence

qui le requièrent. L'Italie a constitué une force

de ce type et signé avec l'UNESCO un accord

pour la mettre à la disposition de

l'Organisation.







Yes

If not, why not?





No

If not, why?

Comme il a été indiqué au numéro 13, il

faudrait prévoir aussi un mécanisme de force

d'intervention rapide.





(e.g. UN OCHA)?






NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-22 16:50:25

Which Member State do you represent? Malaysia

The activities included in the Action Plan are in line

with the priority areas of action as defined by the

Strategy adopted by the General Conference. Each

activity is linked to the corresponding paragraph of

the Strategy. Do you think that any activity should be

added?

No

Which one and how?


Which one and how?


Which one and why?


governmental, governmental and non-governmental

level, that UNESCO could work with in

implementing particular activities?

ICCROM, ICOMOS, IUCN

Are you aware of best practices that you would like to

share? NO

The order of the activities in the Action Plan reflects

the order of priority suggested by the Secretariat:

short term, mid-term, long term. Do you agree with


Yes




appropriate?

Yes







Yes

If not, why not?




need arises?

Yes

If not, why?



selection and deployment of the experts, as it is done


Yes

[Commentaire] Do you think that UNESCO should

consider using the services of a Stand-By Partner, to

IT IS NECESSARY TO HAVE A

BACK UP PLAN WHERE STANDY-

assist in the selection and deployment of the experts,

as it is done by other UN Agencies (e.g. UN OCHA)?

BY PARTNER IS NEEDED IN

UNFORSEEN CIRCUMSTANCES.

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-22 18:40:24

Which Member State do you represent? Indonesia







should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? No

Which one and how?


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?

Ministry of Education and Culture, Ministry of

Foreign Affair, Coordinating Ministry for

Human and Culture Development


would like to share? No





prioritization?

Yes





Yes








Yes

If not, why not?





Yes

If not, why?





(e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes






NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-22 23:51:25

Which Member State do you represent? COLOMBIA







should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? No

Which one and how?


taken out? Yes

Which one and why?

It is important to revise the Objective 2 on the

protection of cultural heritage and diversity in

military including UNpeace-keepingoperations.

We consider important to verify its implications

and to open a space of dialogue on this specific

matter.





activities?

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of

Defense and Ministry of Culture.



Colombia has advanced regarding The Hague

Convention of 1954 for the Protection of

Cultural Property in the Event of Armed

Conflict and its two Protocols. Additionally,

Colombia has advanced on the construction of a

national instrument: the “Strategy for the

Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of

Armed Conflict”. The main objective of this

instrument is the protection of Cultural Property

without prejudice of the responsibility of the

parties. It should be noted that this protection

works beyond the identification or signaling of

the property, and it assures that the absence of

signaling will not discharge the parties from the

responsibility.





prioritization?

Yes





No


It is important to revise the Objective 2 on the

protection of cultural heritage and diversity,

including the integration of the protection with

military and UN peacekeeping operations. We

consider important to verify its implications and

to open a space for dialogue on these specific

matters. We require more information on the

subject.







No

If not, why not?

We recommend experts on the Protection of

Cultural Property in the Event of Armed

Conflict.





Yes

If not, why?





(e.g. UN OCHA)?

No






It has to be decided on a specific case of study.

Draft Action Plan for the Implementation of the Strategy for the reinforcement of UNESCO’s action for the protection of culture and the promotion of cultural pluralism in the event of

armed conflict

Additional Results of the Consultation with Member States

An online consultation of Member States was put in place from 24 June to 22 July 2016. The following provides the full comments submitted by Member States after this timeframe.

Projet de Plan d’action pour la mise en oeuvre de la Stratégie pour le renforcement des actions de l’UNESCO en matière de protection de la culture et de promotion du pluralism

culturel en cas de conflit armé

Résultats supplémentaires de la consultation avec les Etats membres

Une consultation en ligne des Etats membres a été mise en place du 24 juin au 22 juillet 2016. Vous trouverez ci-dessous les commentaires complets soumis par les Etats membres après cette période.

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-26 12:36:10

Which Member State do you represent? GREECE







should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? No

Which one and how?


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?







prioritization?

Yes





Yes








Yes

If not, why not?





Yes

If not, why?





(e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes






Regarding the previous question on the

proposed approach for the possible deployment

of UNESCO experts under the Rapid Response

Mechanism to be established, in the framework

of UN Peacekeeping Missions, we are of the

view that the modalities of participation of

technical experts within UN Peacekeeping

Missions should be further clarified.

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-07-28 15:08:34

Which Member State do you represent? Madagascar







should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? Yes

Which one and how?

Activité 1 Au lieu de « comme les Carabinieri

(Italie) et la Guarda Civil (Espagne) », dire «

toutes les forces de police des Etats parties »


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?







prioritization?

Yes





Yes








Yes

If not, why not?





No

If not, why?

Nous trouvons qu’il manque à ce document le

mécanisme de sélection de ces experts. Nous

nous permettons d’émettre comme proposition

le recrutement des experts sur la base d’une

proposition des Etats partie.





(e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes






NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-08-15 11:41:48

Which Member State do you represent? UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA







should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? No

Which one and how?


taken out? No

Which one and why?





activities?

Governmental-UNESCO National

Commissions since they are aware of UNESCO

plans and activities but also what happens in

their respective countries.


would like to share? None





prioritization?

Yes





Yes








Yes

If not, why not?





Yes

If not, why?





(e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes






Because, other UN agencies have experiences

in working in the conflict areas. UNESCO if it

has a different approach,it should build on the

existing (other UN agencies approaches) than

reinventing the wheel. Since, UN directs itself

in the approach to delivers as one, why should

UNESCO wish to act independently on this.

NEW RECORD

Completed 2016-09-22 13:23:48

Which Member State do you represent? United States of America







should be added?

No

Which one and how?


amended? Yes

Which one and how?

OBJECTIVE 1 SHORT-TERM

DEVELOPMENT OF TRAINING TOOLS:

recommend highlighting roles of/promotion of

coordination with UNODC, CCPCH,

INTERPOL, WCO and other anti-crime leading

organizations. RISK ASSESSMENT: suggest

inclusion of Mali as a model and further

diversification of examples. CAMPAIGN FOR

GLOBAL RATIFICATION: "development of

policies and models" must be clarified, there is

no "international responsibility to ratify" and

therefore focus should be on UNESCO

promoting ratification; must distinguish

between treaties and other instruments (e.g.,

UDHR). DEVELOPMENT OF …

FRAMEWORK ON SAFE HAVENS:

guidelines should be non-binding and based on

actual state practice; evacuation must be

consistent with international law, which in

some circumstances prohibits removal of

property. FIRST AID AND MITIGATION:

deployments must be based on state consent;

TORs must be framed in terms of assisting

national authorities. AWARENESS-

RAISING: this should link to #unite4heritage

and avoid duplication with UNODC,

INTERPOL, WCO, etc. MID-TERM

PREPARATORY DOCUMENTATION:

work should only be upon request of the

relevant state; placement of areas on no-strike

lists is the responsibility of the military using

that particular list; propriety of military action

is based on the belligerent's legal obligations

rather than a determination by UNESCO.

ESTABLISHMENT OF A GLOBAL

OBSERVATORY: should clarify “attacks” as

“looting or damage” and clarify that activities

occur only with state consent. Activities should

be limited to collection of factual data about

removal or damage. Determining whether

damage caused to cultural property was

unlawful and the parties responsible for such

damage should not be within the competence of

a “Global Observatory.” FACILITATE THE

CREATION OF SAFE HAVENS: A provision

related to moving cultural property during

armed conflict could be inconsistent with

provisions of international law, including the

Hague (1907) and Geneva (1949) Conventions,

as well as the Convention for the Protection of

Cultural Property on the Event of Armed

Conflict. COMMUNITY-BASED RECOVERY

PROJECTS: such requests must be in

coordination with the member state in which

the community is located. LONG-TERM

STRENGTHEN CONVENTIONS’

OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES: Any SOP

should be non-binding and based on actual state

practice. States Parties should be encouraged to

participate in existing mechanisms without

additional outside reporting or implementation

monitoring. OBJECCTIVE 2 (SHORT-TERM)

STRENGTHENED COOPERATION:

articulate coordination mechanisms.

COOPERATION … WITH THE ICC:

UNESCO should support the ICC when

“relevant States have consented.” As the U.S.

is not a party to the Rome Statute, it must

consider ICC support by UNESCO on a case-

by-case basis. COOPERATION…WITH THE

HRC: UENSCO should not request or support

the HRC or UN Special Rapporteur engaging in

work that it not within their respective

mandates or that is government by bodies of

law other than human rights law. Any

guidelines should be non-binding and based on

actual state practice. ANSAs: more clarity is

required regarding which organizations/entities

will manage and conduct outreach and

educations with ANSAs. PROTECTED

CULTURAL ZONES: should be created

through existing legal frameworks by special

agreement; UNESCO should coordinate with

States and UN entities HERITAGE

EMERGENCY FUND: should include public-

private partnerships as a component


taken out? Yes

Which one and why? None, if modifications are accepted.





activities?

As per previous answers, UNODC, CCPCH,

INTERPOL, and WCO are prime examples.



As suggested earlier, please do include

examples dealing with Mali.





prioritization?

Yes





No


As drafted, the plan places heritage protection

in non-hazardous post-natural disaster and

stable post-conflict settings together with

extremely dangerous pre-combat and combat

situations. These two types of environments

require vastly different types of training. Goals

must be more clearly articulated to each type of

security environment. As written, first option

suggests that UNESCO will deploy experts and

take complete responsibility for all aspects of

deployment, including to combat zones -- this

appears unworkable. The mechanism

inadequately deals with deployment in areas

where there is not a UNDPKO mission -- this

would need to be spelled out.







No

If not, why not?

We, in fact, do agree with this proposal, but

have text edits that would provide better clarity

regarding roles.





No

If not, why?

We agree with the selection process and with

deployment options #2 & #3, but question if

UNESCO could or should take "complete

charge of the deployment."





(e.g. UN OCHA)?

Yes






We would benefit from having this idea fleshed

out and presented to the membership for debate

results of the consultation with member statesÀ sa 38e session, la conférence générale a adopté...

Documents