13 COM - unesco.org · 3. Italy decided to suspend its request for the granting of enhanced...

13 COM

C54/18/13.COM/12 Paris, 16 October 2018

Original: English

SECOND PROTOCOL TO THE HAGUE CONVENTION OF 1954 FOR THE PROTECTION OF CULTURAL PROPERTY

IN THE EVENT OF ARMED CONFLICT

COMMITTEE FOR THE PROTECTION OF CULTURAL PROPERTY IN THE EVENT OF ARMED CONFLICT

THIRTEENTH MEETING

UNESCO Headquarters, Paris

6-7 December 2017

Item 12 of the Provisional Agenda:

Requests for the granting of enhanced protection

This document presents the requests for the granting of enhanced protection submitted for the following cultural properties pursuant to paragraph 44 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the 1999 Second Protocol:

i. Monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley (Armenia)

ii. Tugendhat Villa in Brno (Czech Republic)

iii. Villa Adriana (Italy)

iv. National Central Library of Florence (Italy)

Draft decisions: paragraphs 33, 53, 74 and 97.

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 2

INTRODUCTION

1. Pursuant to paragraph 45 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the 1999 Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention (“the Guidelines”), the Secretariat received four requests for the granting of enhanced protection for the following cultural properties:

Monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley (Armenia);

Tugendhat Villa in Brno (Czech Republic);

Certosa di Padula (Italy);

Villa Adriana (Italy).

2. In conformity with paragraph 46 of the Guidelines, the Secretariat acknowledged the receipt, checked for completeness and registered the requests. It further requested additional information from Armenia, the Czech Republic and Italy. All three States Parties provided the requested additional information within two months of the date of the request from the Secretariat.

3. Italy decided to suspend its request for the granting of enhanced protection to Certosa di Padula on 8 June 2018.

4. In addition, following the request of the Secretariat for additional information on 2 May 2017, Italy provided a revised request for the granting of enhanced protection for the National Central Library of Florence on 13 July 2018.1

5. On 19 September 2018, in accordance with paragraph 46 of the Guidelines, the Secretariat forwarded the complete requests corresponding to the Monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley (Armenia), Tugendhat Villa in Brno (Czech Republic), Villa Adriana (Italy) and the National Central Library of Florence to the Bureau for its prima facie consideration. All Bureau members (Cambodia, Egypt, Czech Republic, El Salvador, Italy and Morocco) agreed on 27 September 2018 with the review of completeness submitted by the Secretariat and proposed the draft decisions reflected in paragraphs 33, 53, 74 and 97 of the present document.

6. On 16 October 2018, in accordance with Article 11 (5) of the 1999 Second Protocol, the Committee sent the request, including its supporting documents to all States Parties to the 1999 Second Protocol.

7. The present document provides a summary of the complete requests for the granting of enhanced protection to be considered by the Committee in accordance with Article 27 (1) (b) of the 1999 Second Protocol.

1 The request for the granting of enhanced protection to the National Central Library of Florence was submitted on 27 February 2017.

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 3

REQUEST 1

MONASTERY OF GEGHARD AND THE UPPER AZAT VALLEY

1. Background

8. The request for the granting of enhanced protection to the monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley was submitted by Armenia on 1 March 2018. The Secretariat requested additional information to complete the file on 17 April 2018 and received the requested information from the relevant Armenian authorities on 16 July 2018.

2. Evaluation

2.A Identification of the cultural property

9. In accordance with paragraphs 55 and 56 of the Guidelines, the boundaries of an immovable cultural property nominated for the International List of Cultural Property under Enhanced Protection and its immediate surroundings must be clearly defined, and the Universal Transverse Mercator (“UTM”) coordinates to identify the property’s boundaries must be marked on the map(s) and attached to the request. Boundaries of a wider property must be indicated by providing a list of coordinates indicating the course of the property boundary.

10. Armenia provided maps of the cultural property (see Annex 2, pages 45 – 49 of the request), as well as the area and photographs.

2.B Article 10 (a): Greatest importance for humanity

11. Pursuant to paragraph 57 of the Guidelines, a description of the monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley, including its state of conservation and historical background, was provided (see part 3.B, pages 9 – 25 of the request).

12. The monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley was inscribed on the World Heritage List at the 24th session of the World Heritage Committee in 2000, acknowledging that it met criterion (ii) as defined in paragraph 77 of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the 1972 World Heritage Convention.

13. Therefore, in accordance with paragraph 36 of the Guidelines, the Committee may consider that, subject to other relevant considerations, the condition of “greatest importance for humanity” has been satisfied as this cultural property was inscribed on the World Heritage List.

2.C Article 10 (b): Adequate domestic legal and administrative measures of protection

2.C (i) Identification and safeguarding in accordance with Article 5 of the Second Protocol and paragraph 39 of the Guidelines

14. In accordance with paragraph 58 of the Guidelines, a list of legal and administrative measures taken to ensure adequate protection and maintenance of the cultural property has been provided (see part 3.C, pages 25 – 40 of the request), as well as corresponding texts or a summary of those texts (Annex 1 to the request and Annexes 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Additional Information).

15. The Constitution of the Republic of Armenia ensures general protection of the cultural property. Article 15 of the Constitution stipulates that “the Armenian language and cultural heritage shall be under the care and protection of the State.”

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 4

16. Furthermore, the National Security Strategy of the Republic of Armenia, adopted on 26 January 2007, provides for fundamental principles for ensuring the protection of cultural heritage.

17. Article 6 of the Law of the Republic of Armenia “On Fundamentals of Cultural Legislation” defines cultural property as “compositions of culture and the arts, works of folk art and crafts, folklore, ethical and aesthetic ideals, rules and forms of conduct, languages, dialects and idioms, national customs and traditions, historical-geographical toponyms, results and methods of scientific research on cultural activities, objects of cultural heritage”. Law of the Republic of Armenia “On Export and Import of Cultural Property” further elaborates this definition and states that cultural property shall be “objects and creations considered as the product of activities of human society which, irrespective of time of creation, are of important archaeological, ethnographic, historical, religious, artistic and scientific significance” (Article 3).

18. Article 95 of the Code on Administrative Offences of the Republic of Armenia requires “imposition of penalty on the citizens in the amount of fifty-fold to eighty-fold, and on officials in the amount of one-hundred-fifty-fold to two-hundred-fold of the prescribed minimum salary” for the violation of rules for the protection or use of historical and cultural monuments.

19. Another normative act protecting cultural property in Armenia is the Land Code of the Republic of Armenia. The Land Code establishes the concept of lands of specially protected areas (Article 19) and prohibits any activity disturbing the targeted use and operational significance of historical and cultural lands (Article 23).

20. Additional information concerning laws and decisions of the Government of Armenia on the protection of cultural property can be found on pages 29 and 30 of the request.

21. The state authority in the sphere of protection and use of the immovable monuments of history and culture to the belongs to the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Armenia by virtue of decision n. 1549 of 27 November 2003 of the Government of Armenia. In addition, the Agency for the Protection of the Historical and Cultural Monuments of the Republic of Armenia, the Scientific Research Center of the Historical and Cultural Heritage, and the Service for the Protection of Historical Environment and Cultural Museum-reservations are other institutions operating under the Ministry of Culture to ensure different aspects of the protection of cultural heritage, including the monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley.

22. It is be noted that the monastery of Geghard is under the ownership of the Mother See of Holy Echmiatsin and issues concerning conservation, rehabilitation and use of this site are discussed at specialized councils (methodological and architectural councils) formed by the Ministry of Culture and the Mother See of Holy Echmiatsin, where representatives of both sides are equally represented.

23. With regard to the safeguarding measures stipulated under Article 5 of the 1999 Second Protocol, the authority of planning of emergency measures for the protection against fire or structural collapse lies on the Ministry of Emergency Situations of the Republic of Armenia. The evacuation plans of the monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley are provided in Annex 3 to the request. No movable cultural property located within the border of the cultural property was signaled in the request.

2.C (ii) Due consideration of the protection of the cultural property in military planning and military training programs

24. The Combat Manual of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia includes provisions on the use of the cultural property for military purposes, as well as prohibiting any hostile act against cultural property under special protection and the use of its surroundings for military purposes (Articles 39 and 40). The Combat Manual also prohibits the destruction of cultural

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 5

property, historical monuments, places of worship, other objects of the cultural or spiritual heritage of peoples, as well as their use for achieving success in military activity (Article 41).

25. The International Humanitarian Law Manual was put into effect in the Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia by the Order of the Minister of Defence of the Republic of Armenia of 19 July 2002. This manual reflects the main provisions of the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict relating to the protection of cultural property, such as the definition of cultural property, the impermissibility of its use for military purposes, the necessity to refrain from any kind of hostile acts against cultural property, the use of the distinctive emblem etc.

26. The excerpts from the Combat Manual and the International Humanitarian Law Manual are provided in Annexes 6 and 7 of the Additional Information.

27. The Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Armenia, in cooperation with the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Armenia and the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Armenia, implements activities aimed at strengthening civil-military cooperation and fostering respect among members of armed forces for the historical and cultural property, monuments, and traditions.

2.C (iii) Appropriate criminal legislation providing the repression of, and jurisdiction over, offenses committed against cultural property under enhanced protection within the meaning of, and in accordance with, Chapter 4 of the Second Protocol

28. The Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia includes provisions aiming to repress offenses committed against cultural property. In this regard, the destruction of or damage to historical and cultural monuments under the protection of the State, as well as destruction of or damage to objects or documents of particular historical or cultural value are considered criminal acts pursuant to Article 264 (Destruction of or damage to the historical and cultural monuments) of the Criminal Code. In addition, Article 390 (Grave breaches of the norms of international humanitarian law in the event of armed conflicts) of the Criminal Code provides sanctions for “making the clearly-recognised historic monuments, works of art, places of worship which constitute the cultural or spiritual heritage of peoples and which are under special protection, an object of attack, and causing extensive damage thereto as a result of the attack, where they are not located in the immediate proximity of military objectives, and where there is no evidence of using such historic monuments, works of art, places of worship by the adversary in support of the military operations”.

29. With regard to the establishment of jurisdiction for crimes committed against cultural property as stipulated under Article 16 of the 1999 Second Protocol, Articles 14 and 15 of the Criminal Code of Armenia defines the rules for the application of the criminal legislation in respect of persons having committed a criminal offence within and outside the territory of the Republic of Armenia (Annex 3 of the Additional Information).

2.D Article 10 (c): Non-military use

30. A non-military use declaration signed by the Minister of Defence on 28 February 2018 was submitted. It declares that the property, as well as its immediate surroundings, will not be used for military purposes or to shield military sites (Annex 4 of the request).

2.E Responsible authority

31. The Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Emergency Situations, as well as the Mother See of Holy Echmiatsin (Holy Armenian Apostolic Church)

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 6

CONCLUSION

32. The Secretariat considers that the request for the granting of enhanced protection to the monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley, submitted by the Republic of Armenia, is complete.

33. The Committee may wish to adopt the following decision:

DRAFT DECISION 13.COM 12.1

The Committee,

1. Having examined Document C54/18/13.COM/12;

2. Recalling that Armenia submitted a request for the granting of enhanced protection for the Monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley in 2018,

3. Considers that the request submitted is complete and meets the three conditions of Article 10 of the 1999 Second Protocol;

4. Decides to grant enhanced protection to the Monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley (Armenia);

5. Adopts the following Statement of Inclusion of the Monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley (Armenia) in the International List of Cultural Property under Enhanced Protection:

By virtue of its inscription on the World Heritage List, and in light of paragraph 36 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention, the Monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley complies with the condition of being of the greatest importance for humanity;

Protection measures have been taken and the cultural property is protected by (i) the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia, (ii) the Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia, (iii) the Code on Administrative Offences of the Republic of Armenia, (iv) the Land Code of the Republic of Armenia, (v) the Law on Fundamentals of Cultural Legislation of the Republic of Armenia, (vi) the Law on Export and Import of Cultural Property of the Republic of Armenia. Furthermore, the Combat Manual of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Armenia and the International Humanitarian Law Manual provides due consideration of the protection of the cultural property in military planning and military training programs. Consequently, the Monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley complies with the condition of being protected by adequate domestic legal and administrative measures recognizing its exceptional cultural and historic value and ensuring the highest level of protection;

By a non-military use declaration issued by the Minister of Defence on 28 February 2018 stating that the Monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley will not be used for military purposes or to shield military sites. Consequently, the Monastery of Geghard and the Upper Azat Valley complies with the condition according to which the Party having control over the cultural property declares that the cultural property will not be used for military purposes or to shield military site.

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 7

REQUEST 2

II. TUGENDHAT VILLA IN BRNO

1. Background

34. The request for the granting of enhanced protection to the Tugendhat Villa in Brno was submitted by the Czech Republic in June 2017. The Secretariat requested additional information to complete the file on 29 March 2018 and received the requested information from the relevant Czech authorities on 11 May 2018.

2. Evaluation



36. The Czech Republic provided maps of the cultural property (see Annex A and B, as well as page 3 of the request), as well as the area and photographs of the property.


37. Pursuant to paragraph 57 of the Guidelines, a description of the Tugendhat Villa in Brno, including its state of conservation and historical background, was provided (see part 3.B, pages 4 – 14 of the request).

38. The Tugendhat Villa in Brno was inscribed on the World Heritage List during the 25th session of the World Heritage Committee in 2001, acknowledging that it met criteria (ii) and (iv) as defined in paragraph 77 of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the 1972 World Heritage Convention.

39. Therefore, in accordance with paragraph 36 of the Guidelines, the Committee may consider that, subject to other relevant considerations, the condition of “greatest importance for humanity” has been satisfied as this cultural property is inscribed on the World Heritage List.


2.C (i) Identification and safeguarding in accordance with Article 5 of the Second Protocol

40. In accordance with paragraph 58 of the Guidelines, a list of legal and administrative measures taken to ensure adequate protection and maintenance of the cultural property has been provided (see part 3.C, pages 15 – 35 of the request), as well as corresponding texts or a summary of those texts (Annexes L, M, N and O).

41. General protection of the cultural property is governed by Act No. 20/1987 Coll., on State Heritage Preservation. The objective of this normative act is “is to create comprehensive conditions for a further enhancement of the political, organizational, cultural and educational functions of the state in the conservation of cultural landmarks, preservation thereof, access thereto and appropriate utilization thereof, so that they could play a role in the development of culture, arts, science and education, in the shaping of traditions and patriotism, and in the

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 8

aesthetic education of working people, thus contributing to a further development of the society”. Act No. 20/1987 also delegates the right to establish the list of cultural property to the Ministry of Culture. In this context, the Tugendhat Villa was registered in the Central Register of Cultural Heritage Properties as a national cultural heritage property. Its importance was underlined through its designation as a national cultural heritage property by Czech governmental statute No. 262/1995 Coll., on 16 August 1995.

42. Furthermore, Constitutional Acts No. 1/1993 Coll, No. 2/1993 Coll, and Act No. 110/1998 aim to further strengthen the protection of heritage. For instance, Article 10 of the Constitutional Act. 1/1993 reflects the supremacy of international treaties, which the Czech Republic is party to, in relation to the national legislation.

43. The list of other legislative acts related to the protection of cultural heritage, such as Act No. 114/1992 Coll., on nature and landscape protection; Act No. 101/2001 Coll., on repatriation of illegally exported cultural property; and Act No. 122/2000 Coll., on the Protection of Museum Collections, are provided on page 25 of the request.

44. With regard to the planning of emergency measures against fire or structural collapse, Act No. 133/1985 Coll., on fire protection, Decree of the Ministry of Interior No. 246/2001 Coll., on establishing conditions of fire safety and execution of state fire inspection (Decree on Fire Prevention) and Decree of the Ministry of Interior No. 23/2008 Coll., on technical conditions for fire protection of buildings regulate fire safety issues. Specific information on fire prevention measures and emergency situations response plans can be found under Annex F of the request.

45. The Ministry of Culture of the Czech Republic is a central authority of the state administration for the arts, cultural and educational activities, cultural monuments, matters relating to churches and religious societies, as well as trade in the cultural property. In addition, the National Heritage Institute (NHI), established under the authority of the Ministry of Culture of the Czech Republic, is in charge the management of over 100 immovable cultural properties located in the Czech Republic. The NHI is also responsible authorities for the preparation of the request for the granting of enhanced protection to the Tugendhat Villa in Brno.

46. Finally, with respect to the other safeguarding measures stipulated under Article 5 of the 1999 Second Protocol, the request for the granting of enhanced protection to the Tugendhat Villa in Brno includes information on the inventory of movable cultural property (Annex C), key management plans (Annex G) and technical map of surveillance cameras within the cultural property (Annex H).

2.C (ii) Due consideration of the protection of the cultural property in military planning and military training programmes

47. The training of the protection of cultural property in times of armed conflict is an integral part of the training of law on armed conflict (LOAC) for the armed forces of the Czech Republic. Such training is provided at strategic, operational and tactical levels. At the strategic level, the International Law Department of the Ministry of Defence, in collaboration with the Military Law Department of the Inspectorate of the Armed Forces of the Czech Republic, provides strategic guidance and develops national standpoints for implementation of LOAC into national laws and regulations. At the operational level, the training of LOAC, including the protection of cultural property, is conducted according to the training plan designed by the commander of each headquarter. In this context, all military professional receives at least two hours of LOAC lectures each year. Finally, at the tactical level, the teaching of LOAC is undertaken by Training Command – Military Academy in Vyškov, which is responsible for providing basic and specialized training for military personnel. Comprehensive information concerning the structure of the military training and defense planning can be found in Annexes D and E of the request.

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 9


48. The Criminal Code of the Czech Republic includes provisions aiming to repress offenses committed against cultural property. In this regard, Section 411 (Use of Forbidden Means and Methods of Combat) prohibits the destruction of or damage to objects designated for humanitarian purposes or internationally recognized cultural or natural monuments. The same provision also prohibits the use of such objects or monuments for military purposes. Sections 358 (Disorderly Conduct), 414 (Pillage in the Area of Military Operations) and 415 (Abuse of Internationally and State Recognized Symbols) also include provisions governing the strengthening the protection of cultural property.

49. With regard to the establishment of jurisdiction for crimes committed against cultural property as stipulated under Article 16 of the 1999 Second Protocol, Sections 4, 6, 7 and 8 define the rules for the application of the criminal legislation in respect of persons having committed a criminal offence within and outside the territory of the Czech Republic.


50. A non-military use declaration signed by the Minister of Defence on 10 October 2013 was submitted. It declares that the property will not be used for military purposes or to shield military sites (Annex I to the request).


51. The Ministry of Culture of the Czech Republic, the National Heritage Institute, Brno City Museum and the Ministry of Defence of the Czech Republic were identified as responsible authorities and their contact information was provided.

CONCLUSION

52. The Secretariat considers that the request for the granting of enhanced protection to the Tugendhat Villa in Brno, submitted by the Czech Republic, is complete.



The Committee,


2. Recalling that the Czech Republic submitted a request for the granting of enhanced protection to the Tugendhat Villa in Brno in 2017,

3. Considers that the request submitted is complete meets the three conditions of Article 10 of the 1999 Second Protocol;

4. Decides to grant enhanced protection to the Tugendhat Villa in Brno (Czech Republic);

5. Adopts the following Statement of Inclusion of the Tugendhat Villa in Brno (Czech Republic) in the International List of Cultural Property under Enhanced Protection:

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 10

By virtue of its inscription on the World Heritage List, and in light of paragraph 36 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention, the Tugendhat Villa in Brno complies with the condition of being of the greatest importance for humanity;

Protection measures have been taken and the cultural property is protected by (i) the National Heritage Act No. 20/1987, on the State Heritage Preservation; (ii) Constitutional Act No. 1/1993 Coll., (iii) Constitutional Act No. 2/1993 Coll.,(iv) Constitutional Act No. 110/1998., (v) the Criminal Code of the Czech Republic. Furthermore, due consideration of the protection of the cultural property in military planning and military training programs is ensured by the Czech Republic. Consequently, the Tugendhat Villa in Brno complies with the condition of being protected by adequate domestic legal and administrative measures recognizing its exceptional cultural and historic value and ensuring the highest level of protection;

By a non-military use declaration issued by the Minister of Defence on 10 October 2013 stating that the Tugendhat Villa in Brno will not be used for military purposes or to shield military sites. Consequently, the Tugendhat Villa in Brno complies with the condition according to which the Party having control over the cultural property declares that the cultural property will not be used for military purposes or to shield military site.

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 11

REQUEST 3

III. VILLA ADRIANA

1. Background

54. The request for the granting of enhanced protection to the Villa Adriana was submitted by Italy on 28 February 2018. The Secretariat requested additional information to complete the file on 15 March 2018 and received the requested information from the relevant Italian authorities on 13 July 2018.

2. Evaluation


55. In accordance with paragraphs 55 and 56 of the Guidelines, the boundaries of an immovable cultural property nominated for the International List of Cultural Property under Enhanced Protection and its immediate surroundings must be clearly defined, and the Universal Transverse Mercator (“UTM”) coordinates of the boundaries of such property must be marked on the map(s) and attached to the request. Boundaries of a wider property must be indicated by providing a list of coordinates indicating the course of the property boundary.

56. Italy provided maps of the cultural property (see pages 1, 2 and 4 of the request) as well as the area and photographs


57. Pursuant to paragraph 57 of the Guidelines, a description of the Villa Adriana, including its state of conservation and historical background, was provided (see part 3.B, pages 3 – 19 of the request).

58. The Villa Adriana was inscribed on the World Heritage List at the 23rd session of the World Heritage Committee in 1999, acknowledging that it met criteria (i), (ii) and (iii) as defined in paragraph 77 of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the 1972 World Heritage Convention.

59. Therefore, in accordance with paragraph 36 of the Guidelines, the Committee may consider that, subject to other relevant considerations, the condition of “greatest importance for humanity” has been satisfied as this cultural property is inscribed on the World Heritage List.



60. In accordance with paragraph 58 of the Guidelines, a list of legal and administrative measures taken to ensure adequate protection and maintenance of the cultural property has been provided (see part 3.C, pages 20 – 23, 25 – 28 of the request), as well as corresponding texts or a summary of those texts (see Attachments 6, 7, 8 and 9 to the request).

61. General protection of the cultural property is ensured through the Constitution of the Republic of Italy. Article 9 of the Constitution stipulates that “the Italian Republic promotes the development of culture and of scientific and technical research. It safeguards its natural landscape as well as the historical and artistic heritage of the nation”.

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 12

62. The implementation of Article 9 of the Constitution is reflected in a number of legislative acts. In this regard, the Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape of the Republic of Italy must be noted. This normative act defines cultural heritage (Article 2), the scope of the protection of cultural heritage (Article 3) and the functions of the State to this end (Article 4).

63. In order to increase the effectiveness of the management of the Villa Adriana, the cultural property was recognized an institute with a special autonomy in 2016 by the Decree of the Minister of Cultural Heritage and Activities and Tourism. In this regard, the Institute developed Risk Assessment Document and the Emergency Plan (see pages 26 – 28 of the request). At the moment, the Institute is in process of the development of the inventories of the archaeological heritage of the site with particular attention to the patrimonial value of the objects and the complex organization of the warehouse spaces.


64. In peacetime, use of cultural property under general protection is not prohibited for the military authorities. In this regard, a number of cultural sites, such as the Ducal Palace of Modena, which houses the Military Academy or Santa Maria Novella in Florence, which houses the Carabinieri warrant officers’ academy, host military units. However, pursuant to the specific declaration of the head of Staff of the Italian Ministry of Defense, cultural properties under special and enhanced protection cannot be used for military purposes even in peacetime.

65. Particular attention is also paid to the civil-military cooperation within Italian armed forces. In this context, within Italy’s General Staff of Defence, a special referent of the Legal Affairs General Office is in charge of liaising with the Italian Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Culture and UNESCO for all matters pertaining to cultural heritage protection. He/She is also responsible for the dissemination of the above-mentioned rules within the Italian armed forces.

66. In 2012, the General Staff of Defence has also issued a specific directive in order to provide all armed forces with a comprehensive legislative overview on the protection of cultural property (see Attachment 3 to the request). The directive provides a detailed overview of the 1954 Hague Convention and its two (1954 and 1999) Protocols, criminal liability for the destruction and damage to cultural property under the international law, as well as military obligations for the protection of cultural property. This document has been presented as a best practice at the 7th meeting of the Committee (Paris, 20-21 December 2012).

67. With regard to the training of the military, it is to be noted that on the basis of directives issued by the Italian General Staff of Defence, military personnel receives a specific training on principles of International Humanitarian Law, as well as on the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflicts.


68. Pursuant to Article 15 of the 1999 Second Protocol, the criminal responsibility for crimes committed against cultural property has been defined under the Law No. 45 on “Ratification and Execution of the Second Protocol to the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, done at the Hague on 26 March 1999, as well as regulations for adjusting internal laws”, adopted on 16 April 2009 (Law n. 45/2009). The law includes, among others, provisions on sanctions vis-à-vis to attacks against cultural property (Article 7), unlawful use of a protected cultural property (Article 8) and prohibition of looting of protected cultural properties (Article 9).

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 13

69. With regard to the implementation of Article 16 of the 1999 Second Protocol, as per Article 6 of the Law n. 45/2009, this normative act applies to anyone who commits the crime against cultural property situated in the territory of Italy during an armed conflict and international missions, as well as to Italian citizens committed these crimes against cultural property situated in a foreign territory. In addition, the Law also applies to offenses, which are committed against cultural property situated in the foreign territory, by foreign nationals when the alleged offender is present in the territory of Italy.

70. In times of armed conflict, the protection of cultural property is also ensured by the Military Criminal Law of War. For instance, Article 187 of this Law provides for sanctions causing serious detriment to historical monuments, works of art or science and premises intended for religious celebrations, educational, artistic or scientific purposes. In accordance with Article 165 of the Military Criminal Law of War - entitled "military criminal law enforcement in relation to armed conflicts” - the provisions of this law apply to military operations carried out by Italian armed forces abroad, regardless of a declaration of war.


71. A non-military use declaration signed by the Chief of Defence General Staff of the Republic of Italy on 23 February 2018 was submitted. It declares that the property, as well as its immediate surroundings, will not be used for military purposes or to shield military sites (see Attachment 10 to the request).


72. The Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities and Tourism and the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Italy were identified as responsible authorities and their contact information was provided.

CONCLUSION

73. The Secretariat considers that the request for the granting of enhanced protection to the Villa Adriana, submitted by the Republic of Italy, is complete.



The Committee,


2. Recalling that Italy submitted a request for the granting of enhanced protection for the Villa Adriana in 2018,


4. Decides to grant enhanced protection to the Villa Adriana (Italy);

5. Adopts the following Statement of Inclusion of the Villa Adriana (Italy) in the International List of Cultural Property under Enhanced Protection:

By virtue of its inscription on the World Heritage List, and in light of paragraph 36 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention, the Villa Adriana (Italy) complies with the condition of being of the greatest importance for humanity;

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 14

Protection measures have been taken and the cultural property is protected by (i) the Constitution of the Republic of Italy, (ii) the Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape of the Republic of Italy, (iii) the Law on Ratification and Execution of the Second Protocol of the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, (iv) the Military Criminal Law of War, (v) the Directive on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, issued by the Italian Defence General Staff. Furthermore, due consideration of the protection of the cultural property in military planning and military training programs is ensured by the Republic of Italy. Consequently, the Villa Adriana complies with the condition of being protected by adequate domestic legal and administrative measures recognizing its exceptional cultural and historic value and ensuring the highest level of protection;

By a non-military use declaration issued by the Chief of Defence General Staff of the Republic of Italy on 23 February 2018 stating that the Villa Adriana will not be used for military purposes or to shield military sites. Consequently, the Villa Adriana complies with the condition according to which the Party having control over the cultural property declares that the cultural property will not be used for military purposes or to shield military site.

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 15

REQUEST 4

IV. NATIONAL CENTRAL LIBRARY OF FLORENCE

1. Background

75. The request for the granting of enhanced protection to the National Central Library of Florence was submitted by Italy on 28 February 2017. The Secretariat requested additional information to complete the file on 2 May 2017 and received the requested information from the relevant Italian authorities on 13 July 2018.

2. Evaluation



77. Italy provided maps of the cultural property. The area of the property was also provided, as were photographs of the property.


78. The National Central Library of Florence is not a cultural property inscribed on the World Heritage List.2 Therefore, the Committee must evaluate its compliance with the criterion of “the greatest importance for humanity”.

79. In this context, in its e-mail of 2 May 2017, the Secretariat asked Italy to provide “additional substantive information related to the compliance of the cultural property with paragraphs 32 – 37 of the Guidelines”. The information provided in response to the Secretariat’s request is included on pages 5 – 13 of the request.

80. Italy addressed a letter to the Secretariat on 15 May 2018, stressing that the Central Library of Florence has an exceptional cultural significance, uniqueness, and therefore, its destruction would represent an irretrievable loss for humanity (a copy of the letter is attached to the request).

81. Taking this into account and in accordance with paragraph 57 of the Guidelines, the Committee shall consider whether the Party requesting enhanced protection provided “the facts needed to support and substantiate the argument that the cultural property meets the criterion of being of greatest importance for humanity under Article 10 (a)” in its request.



82. In accordance with paragraph 58 of the Guidelines, a list of legal and administrative measures taken to ensure adequate protection and maintenance of the cultural property has

2 The National Central Library of Florence is located within the boundaries of the Historic Centre of Florence, a cultural site inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1982.

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 16

been provided (see part 3.C, pages 14 – 24 of the request), as well as corresponding texts or a summary of those texts (Attachments 1, 2 and 3 to the request).

83. General protection of the cultural property is ensured through the Constitution of the Republic of Italy. Article 9 of the Constitution stipulates that “the Italian Republic promotes the development of culture and of scientific and technical research. It safeguards its natural landscape as well as the historical and artistic heritage of the nation”.

84. The implementation of Article 9 of the Constitution is reflected in a number of normative acts. In this regard, the Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape of the Republic of Italy must be stressed. This legislative act defines cultural heritage (Article 2), the scope of the protection of cultural heritage (Article 3) and the functions of the State to this end (Article 4).

85. In order to increase the effectiveness of the management of the National Central Library of Florence, the cultural property was recognized an institute with a special autonomy in 2008 by the Decree of the Minister of Cultural Heritage and Activities and Tourism. The functions of the Library are stated under Article 6 of the Decree.

86. The Rules of Procedure, Emergency Rescue Plan, as well as Coordinate Emergency Plan provide a detailed overview of the safeguarding measures undertaken in accordance with Article 5 of the 1999 Second Protocol (see pages 22 – 24 of the request). Corresponding texts are provided in Attachments 1, 7 and 8 to the request.


87. In peacetime, use of cultural property under general protection is not prohibited for the military authorities. In this regard, a number of cultural sites, such as the Ducal Palace of Modena, which houses the Military Academy or Santa Maria Novella in Florence, which houses the Carabinieri warrant officers’ academy, host military units. However, pursuant to the specific declaration of the head of Staff of the Italian Ministry of Defense, cultural properties under special and enhanced protection cannot be used for military purposes even in peacetime.

88. Particular attention is also paid to the civil-military cooperation within Italian armed forces. In this context, within Italy’s general staff of Defence, a special referent of the Legal Affairs General Office is in charge of liaising with the Italian Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Culture and UNESCO for all matters pertaining to cultural heritage protection. He/She is also responsible for the dissemination of the above-mentioned rules within the Italian armed forces.

89. In 2012, the Italian General Staff of Defence issued a specific directive in order to provide all armed forces with a comprehensive legislative overview on the protection of cultural property (Attachment 4 to the request). The directive provides a detailed overview of the 1954 Hague Convention and its two (1954 and 1999) Protocols, criminal liability for the destruction and damage to cultural property under the international and national law, as well as military obligations for the protection of cultural property.

90. With regard to the training of the military, it is to be noted that on the basis of directives issued by the Italian Defense General Staff, military personnel receives a specific training on principles of International Humanitarian Law, as well as on the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflicts.

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 17


91. Pursuant to Article 15 of the 1999 Second Protocol, the criminal responsibility for crimes committed against cultural property has been defined under the Law No. 45 on “Ratification and Execution of the Second Protocol to the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, done at the Hague on 26 March 1999, as well as regulations for adjusting internal laws”, adopted on 16 April 2009 (Law n. 45/2009). The law includes, among others, provisions on sanctions vis-à-vis to attacks against cultural property (Article 7), unlawful use of a protected cultural property (Article 8) and prohibition of looting of protected cultural properties (Article 9).

92. With regard to the implementation of Article 16 of the 1999 Second Protocol, Article 6 of the Law n. 45/2009, this normative act applies to anyone who commits the crime against cultural property situated in the territory of Italy during an armed conflict and international missions, as well as to Italian citizens committed these crimes against cultural property situated in a foreign territory. In addition, the Law also applies to offences, which are committed against cultural property situated in the foreign territory, by foreign nationals when the alleged offender is present in the territory of Italy.

93. In times of armed conflict, the protection of cultural property is also ensured by the Military Criminal Law of War. For instance, Article 187 of this law provides for sanctions causing serious detriment to historical monuments, works of art or science and premises intended for religious celebrations, educational, artistic or scientific purposes. In accordance with Article 165 of the Military Criminal Law of War - entitled "military criminal law enforcement in relation to armed conflicts” - the provisions of this law apply to military operations carried out by Italian armed forces abroad, regardless of a declaration of war.


94. A non-military use declaration signed by the Chief of Defence General Staff of the Republic of Italy on 27 March 2017 was submitted. It declares that the property, as well as its immediate surroundings, will not be used for military purposes or to shield military sites (Attachment 9 to the request).


95. The Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities and Tourism was identified as responsible authority and its contact information was provided.

CONCLUSION

96. The Secretariat considers that the request for the granting of enhanced protection to the National Central Library of Florence, submitted by the Republic of Italy, is complete.



The Committee,

1. Having examined Document C54/18/13.COM/12,

2. Recalling that Italy submitted a request for the granting of enhanced protection for the National Central Library of Florence in 2017,

C54/18/13.COM/12 – page 18

3. Having favourably considered the information provided in written form by Italy regarding the criterion of Article of 10 (a) of the Second Protocol,

4. Taking note of the positive comments expressed by members of the Bureau as well as other members of the Committee attending the Bureau meeting;


6. Decides to grant enhanced protection to the National Central Library of Florence (Italy);

7. Adopts the following Statement of Inclusion of the National Central Library of Florence (Italy) in the International List of Cultural Property under Enhanced Protection:

In light of paragraph 33 of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention, the National Central Library of Florence (Italy) complies with the condition of being of the greatest importance for humanity;

Protection measures have been taken and the cultural property is protected by (i) the Constitution of the Republic of Italy, (ii) the Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape of the Republic of Italy, (iii) the Law on Ratification and Execution of the Second Protocol of the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, (iv) the Military Criminal Law of War, (v) the Directive on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, issued by the Italian Defence General Staff. Furthermore, due consideration of the protection of the cultural property in military planning and military training programs is ensured by the Republic of Italy. Consequently, the Central National Library of Florence complies with the condition of being protected by adequate domestic legal and administrative measures recognizing its exceptional cultural and historic value and ensuring the highest level of protection;

By a non-military use declaration issued by the Chief of Defence General Staff of the Republic of Italy on 23 March 2017 stating that the National Central Library of Florence will not be used for military purposes or to shield military sites. Consequently, the National Central Library of Florence complies with the condition according to which the Party having control over the cultural property declares that the cultural property will not be used for military purposes or to shield military site.

13 COM - unesco.org · 3. Italy decided to suspend its request for the granting of enhanced...

Documents

Transcript of 13 COM - unesco.org · 3. Italy decided to suspend its request for the granting of enhanced...