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.
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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 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
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?
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
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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 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?
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?
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
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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?
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?
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?
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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 Yes
experts for the roster and for actual
deployment, if and when the need arises?
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)?
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
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?
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.
Do you think that any activity should be
taken out? N/A
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?
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.
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share?
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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.
Do you think the proposed overall concept
for the establishment and
operationalization of the roster is
appropriate?
No
If not, how should it be changed?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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
activity should be added?
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
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?
ICOMOS ICCROM ICOM The national
commissions in the states
Are you aware of best practices that you would
like to share? yes
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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)?
the experts and other from INTERPOOL
and from WIPO
[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 12:25:28
Which Member State do you represent? Suisse
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?
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)
Do you think that any activity should be
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.
Do you think that any activity should be
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 ?
Can you suggest any relevant partner, at
inter-governmental, governmental and
non-governmental level, that UNESCO
could work with in implementing
particular activities?
• 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
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share?
• 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
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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
operationalization of the roster is
appropriate?
No
If not, how should it be changed?
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)
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?
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.
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 2016-07-18
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?
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?
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
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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 2016-07-18 20:28:03
Which Member State do you represent? Royaume de Belgique
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?
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.
Do you think that any activity should be
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 ».
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?
- 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.
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share?
- 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.
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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)?
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
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?
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.
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share?
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.
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
If not, how should it be changed?
Do you agree, in particular, with the
proposed approach regarding the possible
deployment of UNESCO experts under the
Yes
Rapid Response Mechanism to be
established, in the framework of UN
Peacekeeping Missions?
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 2016-07-19 12:38:40
Which Member State do you represent? La France
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?
- 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)
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share?
-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
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
If not, how should it be changed?
Do you agree, in particular, with the
proposed approach regarding the possible
deployment of UNESCO experts under the
Rapid Response Mechanism to be
Yes
established, in the framework of UN
Peacekeeping Missions?
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)?
- 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
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?
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.
Do you think that any activity should be
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.
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?
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
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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)?
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)?
NEW RECORD
Completed 2016-07-20 10:58:39
Which Member State do you represent? Argentina
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?
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share?
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.
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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)?
[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)?
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
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?
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”.
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?
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.
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share? Not at this time.
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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.
Do you think the proposed overall concept
for the establishment and operationalization
of the roster is appropriate?
Yes
If not, how should it be changed?
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?
N/A
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?
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.
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
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.
and deployment of the experts, as it is done
by other UN Agencies (e.g. UN OCHA)?
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?
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?
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
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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?
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
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 2016-07-21 13:19:19
Which Member State do you represent? MADAGASCAR
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?
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?
Can you suggest any relevant partner, at inter-
governmental, governmental and non-
governmental level, that UNESCO could work
with in implementing particular activities?
AUCUNE
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share? AUCUNE
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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)?
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.
Can you suggest any relevant partner, at inter-
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
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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?
No
If not, why? The Approach is not really clear.
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)?
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
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?
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.
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share?
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.
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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 2016-07-22 12:33:27
Which Member State do you represent? Espagne
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?
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.
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?
Au niveau national, l’Agence Espagnole de
Coopération Internationale pour le
Développement (AECID) et, au niveau
international, la Croix Rouge et le Croissant-
Rouge.
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share?
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).
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
If not, how should it be changed?
La distinction entre délais est effectivement utile,
mais l’ordre des activités incluses dans chacun
d’eux n’est pas bien systématisé
Do you think the proposed overall concept
for the establishment and operationalization
of the roster is appropriate?
Yes
If not, how should it be changed?
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 Yes
of experts for the roster and for actual
deployment, if and when the need arises?
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)?
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
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?
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share?
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.
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?
No
If not, how should it be changed?
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.
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?
No
If not, why?
Comme il a été indiqué au numéro 13, il
faudrait prévoir aussi un mécanisme de force
d'intervention rapide.
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)?
[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 2016-07-22 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?
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?
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
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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
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
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?
Ministry of Education and Culture, Ministry of
Foreign Affair, Coordinating Ministry for
Human and Culture Development
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 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
If not, how should it be changed?
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 2016-07-22 23:51:25
Which Member State do you represent? COLOMBIA
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? 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.
Can you suggest any relevant partner, at
inter-governmental, governmental and non-
governmental level, that UNESCO could
work with in implementing particular
activities?
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of
Defense and Ministry of Culture.
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share?
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.
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?
No
If not, how should it be changed?
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.
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?
No
If not, why not?
We recommend experts on the Protection of
Cultural Property in the Event of Armed
Conflict.
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)?
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)?
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
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?
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
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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)?
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
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?
Activité 1 Au lieu de « comme les Carabinieri
(Italie) et la Guarda Civil (Espagne) », dire «
toutes les forces de police des Etats parties »
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?
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
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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?
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.
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 2016-08-15 11:41:48
Which Member State do you represent? UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
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?
Governmental-UNESCO National
Commissions since they are aware of UNESCO
plans and activities but also what happens in
their respective countries.
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share? None
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
If not, how should it be changed?
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)?
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
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?
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
Do you think that any activity should be
taken out? Yes
Which one and why? None, if modifications are accepted.
Can you suggest any relevant partner, at
inter-governmental, governmental and non-
governmental level, that UNESCO could
work with in implementing particular
activities?
As per previous answers, UNODC, CCPCH,
INTERPOL, and WCO are prime examples.
Are you aware of best practices that you
would like to share?
As suggested earlier, please do include
examples dealing with Mali.
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?
No
If not, how should it be changed?
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.
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?
No
If not, why not?
We, in fact, do agree with this proposal, but
have text edits that would provide better clarity
regarding roles.
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?
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."
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)?
We would benefit from having this idea fleshed
out and presented to the membership for debate