ICHJoint meeting of the Subsidiary Body and

Consultative Body for the 2013 cycle

4 and 5 April 2013Room XI, 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.

ICHTimetable in the ODs

31 March: Nominations

submitted by the States Parties

April to September: Nomination files assessed by the Secretariat and

completed by the States Parties

December to June: Nomination files evaluated by the Subsidiary and

Consultative Bodies

November: Nomination files examined by the

Committee

Inscription decision

ICHEffective timetable for 2013 cycle

31 March: Nominations

submitted by the States Parties

April to September: Nomination files assessed by the Secretariat and

completed by the States Parties

December to June: Nomination files evaluated by the Subsidiary and

Consultative Bodies

November: Nomination files examined by the

Committee

31 March 2012: Nominations

submitted by the States Parties

October 2012 to April 2013: Nomination

files assessed by the Secretariat and

completed by the States Parties

April to July 2013: Nomination files evaluated by the Subsidiary and

Consultative Bodies

December 2013: Nomination files examined by the

Committee

ICHDivision of labour

Secretariat

• Registers files• Assesses technical completeness• Facilitates work of bodies, Committee• Drafts recommendations from evaluators’ comments• Drafts reports of bodies

Evaluating body• Evaluates quality

of nominations• Assesses

compliance with criteria

• Assesses conformity with prior Committee decisions

• Identifies transversal issues

• Addresses recommendations

Committee

• Decides on compliance with criteria

• Decides on conformity with prior Committee decisions

• Addresses considerations to submitting States

• Addresses considerations to States Parties in general

ICH

Secretariat

• Technical assistance

Evaluating body• Evaluates and

recommends

Committee

• Decides on inscription

Division of labour

ICHFunctions of the Secretariat

Registers and uploads the nomination files, proposals and requests (original and revised versions)

Assesses the technical requirements, particularly as provided in Decisions 7.COM 11 and 7.COM 20.2

Establishes a password-protected dedicated website and on-line evaluation system

Prepares a report and draft recommendations

ICHWhat is technical assessment?

The Secretariat assesses the technical requirements established by ODs, forms and instructions, and Committee decisions.Decision 7.COM 11, paragraph 18: ‘…nominations that do not comply strictly with the following technical requirements will be considered incomplete and cannot consequently be transmitted by the Secretariat for evaluation and examination but will be returned to the submitting States that may complete them for a subsequent cycle…:

ICHWhat is technical assessment?

Decision 7.COM 11 paragraph 18, continued (paraphrased):

a. A response is provided in each and every section;

b. Maximum word counts are respected;c. Evidence of free, prior and informed

consent in English or French, as well as the language of the community;

d. Evidence of inclusion in an inventory (may be a functioning hyperlink);

e. Edited video of not more than ten minutes is provided, subtitled in English or French.

ICHWhat is technical assessment?

Decision 7.COM 20.2 cross-references decisions 7.COM 7, 7.COM 8 & 7.COM 11, making each binding on all processes Requirements had already been reflected in

forms and instructions, as well as in initial treatment by Secretariat for 2013 files

Since 2013 was first cycle to apply these decisions, States Parties were informed of technical deficiencies and provided seven days to correct them

ICHWhat requirements are not part of technical assessment?

7.COM and previous Committees also adopted several instructions to States that are not technically disqualifying but are subject to the assessment of CB or SB, e.g.: Avoid inappropriate language Demonstrate mutual respect Avoid copy-and-paste Provide information in proper place Describe nature, characteristics of inventory Etc.See 7.COM INF.7 Rev. (transversal issues) for index to such instructions.

ICHWorking methods of the Secretariat

Registration of original files and technical assessment

First letter to submitting States requesting additional information

Registration of revised files; second technical assessment

Second chance in case of technically incomplete file (one week to complete)

Revised file and supporting documents uploaded on the interface

ICHFunctions of the evaluating bodies

Consultative BodyUrgent

Safeguarding List

Best Safeguarding

Practices

International Assistance

Subsidiary Body

Representative List

ICHComposition of the Subsidiary Body

Electoral group State Member

EG I Spain

EG II Czech Republic

EG III Peru

EG IV Japan

EG V (a) Nigeria

EG V (b) Morocco

ICHComposition of the Consultative Body

Six accredited NGOs Six independent expertsMaison des cultures du monde, France Egil Sigmund Bakka, Norway

International Council for Traditional Music, Slovenia Rusudan Tsurtsumia, Georgia

Centro de Trabalho Indigenista, Brazil

Kris Rampersad, Trinidad and Tobago

Centre for Research, Support and Development of Culture, Viet Nam Rahul Goswami, India

The Cross-cultural Foundation of Uganda (CCFU), Uganda Claudine-Augée Angoué, Gabon

والثقافات للتربية لقاءات / جمعيةAssociation Cont’Act pour l’éducation et les cultures, Morocco Annie Tohme-Tabet, Lebanon

ICHFunctions of the evaluating bodies

Evaluate whether criteria for inscription are satisfied, based on:

• Nominations and supporting documentation• Recommendations (if any) from the former

bodies• Previous decisions of the Committee (if any)

Draft recommendations to the Committee to inscribe, not to inscribe, or (for SB) to refer the nomination to submitting State for additional information

ICHReferral option (SB only)

Opportunity to State to correct problems of technical details lacking, without waiting four years to resubmit

Important to:

Distinguish between NO and referral

Identify clearly where State must improve its nomination

Decision 7.COM 11: SB should make ʻlimited and coherent use of referral so that it is only applied to cases concerning the lack of technical detailʼ

ICHWorking methods of the bodies

Individual evaluations through a password-protected, dedicated website

Two batches, since not all files available at the beginning

Individual evaluations collated by Secretariat

During June/July meeting, collective evaluation of each file resulting in a consensus recommendation

ICHChallenges during evaluation

Important to:

Maintain consistency from year to year, and from one State to another, but also

Evaluate files according to evolving standards and jurisprudence

Provide useful feedback to State (whether positive or negative), rather than generalities

Credibility of the inscription process rests largely on your shoulders

ICHReports of the bodies to the Committee

The report of each body includes:

an overview of files and working methods

general observations on files evaluated and additional recommendations

recurrent and transversal issues

draft decisions

ICHStructure of draft decisions

Summary of the file (drafted by Secretariat)

Criteria (satisfied and/or not satisfied)

Draft decision (standard language to inscribe, not to inscribe, or to refer)

Additional considerations addressed to submitting State (CB only)

ICHFunctions of the Committee

Based on the nominations and draft recommendations of the bodies, the Committee decides:

to inscribe or not to inscribe (USL, RL, BSP), or to refer (RL only)

to grant or not to grant international assistance

Committee bases its decisions on the same information that was available to the bodies, although it may reach a different conclusion

ICHDuring the Committee meeting

Rapporteurs present the working methods used, main results and transversal issues through their reports

Chairpersons present the files evaluated, the main points of the debate on each file and the draft decision

Members speak through reports, Chairpersons and Rapporteurs that present consensus views