Print
See related documents
Resolution 2057 (2015)
Cultural heritage in crisis and post-crisis situations
1. The Parliamentary Assembly notes
with great concern that the deliberate eradication of culture, identity and
existence of the “other” through a systematic destruction of cultural
heritage has become a central component of modern conflicts that
are ethnically driven, featuring the use of paramilitary forces
and rarely preceded by a formal declaration of war. This change
challenges the application of relevant international legal instruments,
including the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property
in the Event of Armed Conflict (1954) and the Geneva Convention
relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (1949) and
its protocols (1977). The Assembly believes that the protection
of cultural heritage during and immediately after a conflict is
a human rights issue and should involve international responsibility.
2. Conflict resolution and reconciliation are complex processes
which may take several generations. They require sensitivity to
engage first in creating tolerance and a peaceful coexistence before
moving towards building trust, acceptance and co-operation. The
Assembly underlines that the restoration and reconstruction of built
cultural heritage and raising awareness of its “common value” (its
intrinsic, cultural and historic value) to all communities in a
society are very important elements in conflict resolution.
3. The process of reconstruction of cultural heritage has a strong
potential for reconciliation and creating social cohesion, but it
can also be misused to reignite division and hatred. The Assembly
therefore asserts that a sound political, legal and judicial framework
is essential to form a basis for confidence-building measures in post-crisis
recovery.
4. Accordingly, the Assembly recommends that the member States
of the Council of Europe concerned by crisis and post-crisis situations:
4.1. sign and ratify the Council
of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage
for Society (CETS No. 199, “Faro Convention”) and the European Landscape
Convention (ETS No. 176), if they have not yet done so, and develop
national strategies for the restoration and reconstruction of cultural
heritage, consistent with the principles laid down in these conventions;
4.2. depoliticise the process of reconstruction of cultural
heritage and create the necessary conditions for independent technical
committees to work without pressure from political and/or religious
authorities, in order to avoid imposing heritage reconstruction
policies based on ethnicity and religion and to ensure instead a
non-discriminatory and impartial heritage protection regime;
4.3. as a first step, during and immediately after a crisis,
integrate cultural heritage into emergency humanitarian programmes,
and in particular:
4.3.1. take ownership of cultural heritage
and its diversity, rather than devolving responsibility to external
aid agencies;
4.3.2. undertake damage assessment of cultural heritage and ensure
coherence between immediate humanitarian aid (for example the standards
of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
(UNHCR) concerning housing and shelter) and heritage requirements;
4.3.3. include damaged built heritage into emergency repair programmes,
especially buildings which can provide shelter for the displaced
population, while making use of appropriate methods (authentic materials
and techniques) for their restoration and reconstruction;
4.3.4. incorporate destroyed built heritage into the recovery
programmes for towns and villages, using all available heritage
records and encouraging local communities to contribute to this
process;
4.3.5. preserve the identity of a place and protect areas where
built heritage has been deliberately targeted and destroyed against
any temporary or permanent construction except restoration of damaged
buildings;
4.3.6. preserve from deterioration, by means of urgent remedial
works, other damaged built heritage which is not suitable for integration
into emergency programmes;
4.4. as a second step, strengthen public institutions and governance
and define the framework for the restoration and reconstruction
of cultural heritage, and in particular:
4.4.1. review
legislation and urban planning control systems, and strengthen monitoring mechanisms
to ensure high technical standards in restoration and reconstruction
and avoid threats from development that is uncontrolled and disrespectful
of local heritage;
4.4.2. link restoration and reconstruction of cultural heritage
with the return of refugees and displaced persons;
4.4.3. develop national programmes for the restoration and reconstruction
of damaged or destroyed cultural heritage as part of a broader national
strategy for cultural heritage; involve international organisations
and donors in this process;
4.4.4. encourage the setting up of participatory structures,
such as local cultural heritage forums, based on the principles
of open dialogue, transparency and accountability, to develop local
cultural heritage plans; and engage in wide public consultation
to identify priorities;
4.4.5. in the assessment of post-crisis areas, include an estimation
of the value and significance of cultural heritage in the production
of inventories, along with technical information on the condition
of a cultural heritage site;
4.4.6. preserve authenticity and respect all layers of history
in the restoration and reconstruction process to maintain the atmosphere
and character of original heritage sites;
4.4.7. in addition to iconic monuments, give due consideration
to other local heritage sites of vernacular architecture, including
their urban or natural landscape context, to avoid the fragmentation
of communities and loss of identity;
4.5. as a third step, consolidate the reconciliation process
and develop the sustainability of projects, and in particular:
4.5.1. ensure that short-term, project-led reconstruction does
not take precedence over a long-term, broad strategy for sustainable
development;
4.5.2. engage in participatory processes and public consultation
to integrate local heritage plans into socio-economic development
plans;
4.5.3. develop local heritage management plans focusing on use,
activities, funding, partnerships and community involvement to ensure
that, where feasible, the site becomes, over time, self-sustaining
“living heritage”;
4.5.4. use the process of restoration and reconstruction of cultural
heritage to build capacity and skills, to build partnerships across
sectors (education, tourism, media, economy) and to raise awareness
of its “common value” (its intrinsic, cultural and historic value)
to all communities;
4.5.5. undertake certification of crafts, training and accreditation
to stimulate local employment.
5. The Assembly urges international and national donor organisations
to assist the institutions of the recipient State at national and
local levels to take ownership of cultural heritage and to establish
together common objectives and priorities based on a non-discriminatory
and impartial cultural heritage protection regime, giving particular
attention to the preservation of local cultural identity and the
diversity of cultural heritage; and abide by those principles.
6. The Assembly invites the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities
of the Council of Europe to promote co-operation, exchange of expertise
and practical experience between local and regional authorities, in
order to successfully manage the restoration and reconstruction
of cultural heritage as a key element in the processes of post-crisis
recovery and reconciliation.
7. The Assembly recommends that all member States of the Council
of Europe, in co-operation with the United Nations and other relevant
organisations:
7.1. consider reviewing
and strengthening the provisions of the Hague Convention for the
Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and
the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons
in Time of War and its protocols, providing for more robust pre-emptive
protective mechanisms and stronger sanctions, including reparations,
for destruction that is unnecessary from a military perspective;
acknowledging that such destruction is not just an assault on built
cultural heritage but also on its significance and on the community
that it serves;
7.2. legally consolidate the notion that systematic, deliberate
and targeted destruction and looting of cultural property can be
considered as a crime against humanity and develop further mechanisms
to bring perpetrators before national and international courts.