Securing cultural heritage? Understanding the law for our monuments, artworks, and archives today (original) (raw)
Related papers
The International Legal Framework Governing the Protection of Cultural Heritage
The study delves deeply into the historical contexts of the countries involved, examining how the idea of cultural heritage and its protection under international law has changed through the years and in various social, economic, and political climates. When preserving cultural assets under public international law, we also consider the humanitarian aspect of this phenomenon. The study examines whether people and groups limit a state's power to act beyond limitations imposed by other states and international organizations. This research further examines the role of international human rights laws in this setting, the preservation of the individual's connection to cultural products, and whether or not an individual becomes a significant player in international law. The study's findings provide conclusive evidence of the pivotal catalytic role that UNESCO and similar international organizations play in the worldwide preservation of cultural heritage. UNESCO is the principal venue for monitoring whether or not states are adhering to international protection principles. Whether or not UNESCO can be effective without ratification processes for cultural preservation has to be investigated more deeply. The study's findings indicate that protecting cultural assets involves a wide range of aspects, including the rights and responsibilities of governments and the rights of cultures. In addition, our research suggests that the ever-evolving international legal system can improve its framework, which is relevant to preserving cultural treasures.
Heritage protection for the 21st century
Cultural Trends, 2008
This paper assesses the recent Heritage Protection Review (HPR) process, which culminated in the publication of the Heritage White Paper "Heritage protection for the 21st century" (DCMS, 2007). It argues that although the White Paper makes laudable and useful attempts at streamlining and clarifying the management and protection process, many of its proposed changes operate at the rhetorical level only. Indeed, it does little to challenge the dominant and elitist understandings of "heritage" and attendant cultural values and meanings, and thus fails to adequately address social inclusion/exclusion issues in the cultural sector.
Non-State Actors in the Protection of Cultural Heritage (Springer 2021, Front Matter)
Non-State Actors in the Protection of Cultural Heritage , 2021
The international community has witnessed significant developments concerning the status and roles of non-State actors (hereinafter, ‘NSA(s)’) in international law during the last century. Apart from the traditional State-centric international legal system, particularly in consideration of the fact that States hold the sole authority to conclude and enforce international treaties, NSAs have become important participants of inter- national law, with procedural and substantive rights and responsibilities, and with specific roles in the implementation of international law. In this context, this book reviews the status and roles of NSAs in international cultural heritage law, and aims to contribute to the understanding of NSAs in inter- national law in general, while providing a different angle from which to understand the current implementations of international cultural heritage conventions. Indeed, due to the emergence of new ideas on common heritage and cultural rights in the twentieth century, international cultural heritage law has become inconsistent with States’ claim of the sole authority over the protection of cultural heritage. However, the rights, obligations, and roles of NSAs have not yet been clarified; some NSAs are still exposed to the danger of abuse by state power as well as the pressure of globalization, and hence, more attention to ensuring their participation in heritage protection is required. At the same time, it is noteworthy that as the international impact of NSAs’ behavior has increased, more duties to protect cultural heritage have been sought for and by them. This book analyzes the texts of international cultural heritage conventions as well as their operational texts to track the changes in the rights, obligations, and roles of NSAs since the mid-twentieth century. As the operational guidelines for the conven- tions are regularly updated to reflect the changing environment of the conventions, they become an important source for analysis. Practical cases on the status and roles of NSAs are introduced in order to glean empirical ideas concerning the operation of the relevant provisions of the conventions and guidelines, as well as to facilitate in-depth understanding of their effectiveness in reality. In this analysis, diverse forms of cultural heritage such as tangible, intangible, movable, and immovable heritage, all covered by different international conventions, are taken into consideration. The different categories of NSA, including the secretariats of international organizations, experts, NGOs, local communities, and the general public, are also duly accounted for in analyzing their status and roles in each different convention. This book reveals that the NSAs in international cultural heritage law have substan- tive rights, obligations and roles, as prescribed in the legal and operational texts, as well as in practice. At the same time, the operational guidelines of the conventions have imparted more concreteness to the status and roles of NSAs. In the course of those changes, some NSAs have become more vocal than others. At the same time, discrepancies between text and practice, as concerns the status and roles of NSAs, are observed as well, which have occurred for various reasons, one of which is the politicization of conventions’ governance. In general, NSAs do have rights and duties to participate in the implementation of cultural heritage conventions, and their roles have been further recognized. This phenomenon is most prominent in the field of intangible cultural heritage, in that individuals and communities bearing heritage play a pivotal role in safeguarding non-material cultural values of society and transmitting them to future generations. A similar situation can be found with regard to the status and roles of NGOs and local communities in the protection of World Heritage. Pari passu, the international obliga- tion of NSAs to protect cultural heritage, has increased as well, with the increasing dissemination of ideas on common heritage. Destruction of the common cultural heritage of humankind by individuals has become subject to the jurisdiction of inter- national courts, and so too, higher moral and legal standards have been required of NSAs involved in the movement of cultural property. However, the value of cultural heritage is easily ignored in the process of globaliza- tion and development. In addition, the top-down approach of the States in the manage- ment of their cultural heritage often is applied in the implementation processes of cultural heritage conventions. In the process, NSAs and, in particular, local commu- nities, are easily left out. At the same time, technological advancement has enabled freer and less restricted flow of assets and properties, which phenomenon acceler- ates illicit trafficking and destruction of cultural property. These challenges to the protection of cultural heritage cannot be tackled only by the actions of the States; rather, they require the consolidated efforts of various groups of society. Doubtless, to the extent that protection of cultural heritage has become a common concern of the international community, Westphalian-inspired notions of state-centricity are no longer valid in the field of international cultural heritage law. It is time to explore innovative and practical mechanisms to enable NSAs to assume a proper status and take on practical roles to achieve the ultimate goal of international cultural heritage law: sustainable protection of cultural heritage.
Starting from an argument about the relationship between cultural heritage and national and/or community identity, this article considers the different ways in which both the international law regime for the protection of cultural heritage and the international intellectual property regime tend to appropriate cultural heritage. The article argues that, in the post-colonial context, both these forms of appropriation continue to interfere with the demands for justice and for the recognition of historical wrongs made both by Indigenous peoples and by many developing countries. At the same time, the article suggests that these claims are undermined by the misappropriation of the post-colonial discourse with respect to restitution of cultural heritage, particularly in the intra-European context. The article advocates the need for a regime for the protection of cultural heritage that is strong enough to resist its private appropriation through the use of intellectual property rights and nuanced enough to recognise significant differences in the political context of local and national claims to cultural heritage.
Preserving cultural heritage: Shifting paradigms in the face of war, occupation, and identity
Journal of Cultural Heritage, 2020
War is often an amalgamation of various objectives and occupation a realization of one core aim, that is, the suppression of the identity of an occupied population. Thus, warfare not only affects people but also the collective narrative of their environments, history, culture, and identity. Consequently, deliberate destruction of cultural heritage becomes part of any political struggle. Once political struggles infringe on a nation's history, both local and global institutions and entities must take responsibility for preserving the authenticity of the global narrative. Deprioritizing urban conservation policies, especially during times of war, is known to inflict sheer, and sometimes irreversible, damage on a national and global scale. Despite the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization's (UNESCO) regulations on protecting cultural heritage during war, the enforcement of such responsibilities on the ground remains questionable. The Palestinian experience is among the rare existing narratives of cultural heritage and architectural conservation becoming the crux of resistance against loss of land and identity. Lacking a central authority and having only been operational for the last three decades, the conservation movement has nonetheless succeeded in conserving a considerable part of Palestinian architectural heritage. The quality of work produced by these efforts has received international recognition and various accolades, despite ongoing difficulties faced under occupation. This paper highlights the role of non-governmental organizations in Palestine, particularly of Riwaq, and details their internationally recognized conservation efforts in several locations, such as Jerusalem and Hebron. These examples are presented to foster the argument that architecture is intrinsic to preserving historical authenticity and local identity. A dependable future rests on preserving the cultural heritage of all places, requiring universal compliance among nations that transcends physical borders and boundaries to promote the continuity of shared legacy.
The International Law on the Protection of Cultural Heritage
IJASOS- International E-journal of Advances in Social Sciences
We present a comprehensive analysis of the concept of cultural heritage and the institutionalisation of its protection by the international law in various historical contexts of involved states, i.e., during peace, conflict, social and/or political crisis. Furthermore, we discuss the human dimension of the protection of cultural heritage at an international level under the public international law. In particular, we first investigate whether states remain central actors at national and international level as far as the protection of cultural property within their territory is concerned. Subsequently, we examine the limitations imposed on the action range of a state due to primary and secondary legislation of international organizations where the state participates. Apart from this form of external pressure on the state jurisdiction, we also examine whether the action range of a state is further limited by the action of individuals and groups. Furthermore, we discuss on the potential role of international human rights law in such situations, the interdependence between the protection of individuals and cultural goods as well as whether the individual is transformed into an active actor of international law.
Regulating Transnational Heritage: Intro
There is a vast body of international and national law that regulates cultural heritage. However, the current regulation remains quite blind to the so-called "transnational heritage". This is heritage where there is no community recognised in law that it can be directly attributed to and that can be responsible for its safekeeping and preservation. It can also be items of heritage where the claim of ownership is disputed between two or more peoples or communities. Transnational heritage challenges the idea of monolithic, mono-cultural, ethno-national states. There are a number of examples of such cultural heritage, for instance the Buddhist Bamiyan statutes in Afghanistan, Palmyra in Syria, the Jewish heritage of Iraq, or various items that are currently housed in large, often Western, museums, as a result of colonial practices. This book explores the regulation of transnational heritage. By discussing many cases of transnational heritage and the problems that arise owing to the lack of regulation, the book analyses the manifestations of memories and constructions of communities through heritage. It focuses particularly on the concept of community. How are communities constructed in cultural heritage law and what falls outside the definitions of community? The book underlines that the issues surrounding transnational heritage involve more than a communal right to culture. It is argued that transnational heritage also directly affects wider matters of law such as citizenship, human rights, sovereignty, as well as the movement of people and cultural goods.