8050 Décisions
146 Résolutions
Par année
Le Bureau a estimé que des informations plus précises devraient être fournies sur le détail du projet, le réalisme des barèmes de salaires proposés et les chances de voir le projet se réaliser dans un proche avenir.
Sites : Parc national du Simien
M. Firouz Basherzadeh (Iran) a été élu par acclamation président du Comité.
Un membre du Comité a proposé de modifier l'article 12 du règlement intérieur provisoire de manière à prévoir l'élection de 4 vice-présidents. Deux autres ont appuyé cette proposition, qui a été adoptée. Le Comité a ensuite élu par acclamation les représentants de la République arabe d'Egypte, de la France, du Nigéria et de la Pologne comme vice-présidents et M. Peter H. Bennett (Canada) comme rapporteur.
7. Le Président a invité les membres du Comité à examiner l'ordre du jour provisoire établi par le Secrétariat. Le représentant du Directeur général a proposé d'y ajouter un point intitulé "Questions diverses" au titre duquel la proposition de collaboration émanant de l'Organisation internationale pour la protection des oeuvres d'art (doc. CC-77/CONF.001/5) et la proposition de donation faite par le professeur Badawy (doc. CC-77/CONF.001/7) seraient étudiées. Il a suggéré en outre que la question des méthodes de travail du Comité soit examinée non pas séparément mais en même temps que les ...
[Uniquement en anglais] In reply to a suggestion that the Rules of Procedure should be examined by a working group which would report back to the Committee at a later plenary meeting, the Legal Adviser stated that, in the absence of a text formally approved by the Committee, the Provisional Rules of Procedure would prevail and he therefore proposed that they be examined at an early plenary meeting; this would not prevent the Committee from amending the Rules of procedure at a later stage, if necessary. He added that the Rules of Procedure would probably only assume their final form after ...
[Uniquement en anglais] Several amendments were proposed to bring greater clarity to the text or to reflect more closely the terms of the Convention. The Rules relating to the election of officers and to the voting procedures gave rise to some comment.
[Uniquement en anglais] With respect to the eligibility for re-election of members of the Bureau, participants considered that, although rotation in the membership of the Bureau was necessary, continuity in the work of the Committee was of paramount importance. Various proposals followed, some providing for re-election of all officers and others for re-election of the Vice-Chairmen and the Rapporteur only. A further proposal which sought to limit the eligibility of all officers for immediate re-election to a second term of office was finally accepted.
[Uniquement en anglais] An explanation was requested on the different weightings required for a majority vote under the terms of paragraphs 2 and 3 of Rule 28. The Legal Adviser referred members to paragraph 8 of Article 13 of the Convention·which stipulated that "Decisions of the Committee shall be taken by a majority of two-thirds of its members present and voting". This provision was included in an Article of the Convention dealing with substantive questions and not with procedural matters. It was therefore considered that a two-thirds majority should be required on substantive ...
[Uniquement en anglais] Participants requested that two points raised in connection with the Rules of Procedure be noted in the summary record. The first related to the meetings of the Committee which, in the opinion of one member, should be given wide publicity. The second concerned the suspension of the Rules of Procedure which, as confirmed by the Legal Adviser, could be initiated by any State member of the Committee.
[Uniquement en anglais] A corrigendum setting cut the modifications made by the Committee, as well as an amendment proposed by the representative of the Director-General to Rule 8.2, was examined at the last meeting of the Committee which then proceeded to adopt unanimously the revised text of its Rules of Procedure. (Annex II)
[Uniquement en anglais] The Chairman invited the members of the Committee to consider the main working document and gave the floor to the representative of the Director-General who introduced the document which had been prepared with the assistance of the Rome Centre, ICOMOS and IUCN.
[Uniquement en anglais] Some discussion ensued on the method to be followed in examining the different points raised in the document and it was decided to establish two working groups with which the Rome Centre, ICOMOS and IUCN would be associated and which would review the proposed criteria for the inclusion of cultural and natural properties in the World Heritage List, and drafting group which would formulate the decisions taken by the Committee on other matters. The Committee proceeded to debate the general principles involved in establishing the World Heritage List and to examine, one ...
De l'avis de plusieurs membres, le Comité devrait faire une déclaration sur les conceptions de base dont s'inspire la Convention et, en particulier sur la nécessité de dresser une liste du patrimoine mondial. D'autres ont estimé que dans le cadre de la discussion sur les critères relatifs à l'inscription des biens sur la liste, on serait nécessairement amené à traiter des concepts généraux mis en jeu.
Plusieurs membres ont exprimé la conviction que la liste du patrimoine mondial devrait avoir un caractère exclusif et que, compte tenu de son impact, il faudrait la mettre au point avec le plus grand soin en cherchant à établir un juste équilibre tant sur le plan géographique qu'entre les biens culturels et naturels. La responsabilité d'assurer ce caractère exclusif incomberait tout d'abord aux Etats qui feront les demandes d'inscription, et en second lieu au Comité lequel aurait le droit de rejeter les demandes ; l'adoption de critères à appliquer pour décider quelles demandes seront ...
La possibilité d'adopter de tels critères a fait l'objet d'un débat, au cours duquel les points ci-après ont été mentionnés : difficultés déjà rencontrées dans ce domaine à l'échelon national, caractère variable et subjectif de l'évaluation des qualités, influence de la pensée occidentale et enfin différence entre les perceptions à l'intérieur d'une culture donnée et à I'extérieur de celle-ci. En réponse, le représentant de l'ICOMOS a reconnu qu'il est malaisé de formuler des critères valables pour l'ensemble des biens culturels dans le monde entier et de traduire des concepts en mots ...
Certains membres du Comité ont exprimé l'espoir que les informations fournies aux Etats membres seront assez précises pour leur permettre de sélectionner des biens vraiment aptes à être inscrits sur la liste, et que les critères retenus les aideront à restreindre leur choix. A cet égard, quelqu'un a proposé qu'un maximum soit fixé au nombre des demandes que chaque Etat pourrait présenter à l'origine, mais à la réflexion cela n'a pas été jugé souhaitable. Il a cependant été décidé de conseiller aux Etats de limiter le nombre des demandes soumises au même moment, étant entendu qu'elles ne ...
[Uniquement en anglais] Questions were raised with respect to the calendar for the submission of nominations to be examined at the second session of the Committee. Many members mentioned difficulties for their own national authorities in meeting the deadline of 1 April 1978, particularly in those countries where complete inventories had not yet been established. Several members strongly urged that technical co-operation should be financed under the Fund for the preparation of these inventories. The representative of the Director-General referred participants in this respect to the ...
[Uniquement en anglais] Several members considered that an independent assessment by experts of the nominations submitted would be essential and it was proposed that the nominations should be transmitted, for comments and evaluation, to the Rome Centre, ICOMOS or IUCN, as appropriate.
[Uniquement en anglais] One member considered that States not Parties to the Convention should be able to have properties nominated by a State Party for inclusion in the List. Other participants inquired about the possibility of nominating properties not situated in national territories, such as international sites, for instance the United Nations building in New York, or regions such as Antarctica. However, it was pointed out that the Convention was very explicit in this respect, Article II referring to the submission by each State Party of inventories of properties situated in its ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee then proceeded to examine the working document paragraph by paragraph and to put forward their comments which would be taken into account by the drafting committee in formulating the decisions taken by the Committee.
1 COM VI.A(b).25
[Uniquement en anglais] General Principles relating to the establishment of the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] Several participants felt that the fundamental notion of the Committee's complete independence in evaluating nominations of States Parties should be more emphatically underlined. Others foresaw that certain properties would be re-evaluated in the light of new discoveries which may lead to the deletion of properties from the List. The "loss of integrity" referred to as a reason for the deletion of property from the List did not appear pertinent in the case of cultural property; for example, monuments in ruins, obviously having lost their integrity, could be eligible ...
1 COM VI.A(b).26
[Uniquement en anglais] General principles relating to the establishment of the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] An emphasis given to properties which combine cultural and natural features demonstrating the interaction between man and nature might, in the opinion of some participants, be confusing in that it might appear to diminish the value of properties outstanding only from the cultural or natural points of view.
1 COM VI.A(b).27
[Uniquement en anglais] General principles relating to the establishment of the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] Another participant suggested that it should be indicated at the site itself that that site is included on the World Heritage List. On this point, the representative of the Director-General informed members that a World Heritage emblem was under preparation and this could well be used inter alia at the sites. It was feared by another participant that sites not included in the List and not marked by the emblem might be neglected by States.
1 COM VI.A(b).28
[Uniquement en anglais] General principles relating to the establishment of the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] The definition of “universal” given in paragraph 17 of the working document was found to be incomplete, in that time also was a factor that modified the appreciation of values.
1 COM VI.A(c).29
[Uniquement en anglais] Criteria for the inclusion of cultural properties in the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] It was proposed by several participants that, in the final text of the criteria, no examples should be cited, in order not to prejudice the decisions of the Committee. There was general agreement on this point.
1 COM VI.A(c).30
[Uniquement en anglais] Criteria for the inclusion of cultural properties in the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] The interpretation given of authenticity was challenged by several members who did not consider that it necessarily entailed maintaining the original function of property which, to ensure its preservation, often had to be adapted to other functions. Another member specified that functions could change but when this different function entailed fundamental and irreversible changes to the original form, authenticity should be considered as lost. The same member went on to plead that due recognition be given to "progressive authenticity", for example, monuments and ...
1 COM VI.A(c).31
[Uniquement en anglais] Criteria for the inclusion of cultural properties in the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] Taking into account the comments made in plenary, a working group under the chairmanship of Mr. Michel Parent (France) reformulated the criteria for cultural property. The Chairman of the working group presented to a later plenary meeting the revised text on which several comments were formulated.
1 COM VI.A(c).32
[Uniquement en anglais] Criteria for the inclusion of cultural properties in the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] On the first criterion, the use of the word "spirit" was questioned and was replaced by "genius". One member requested that the word "scientific" referring to development be reinserted in criterion (iv). Another member proposed that "significant" be added to criterion (v) before the words "traditional style of architecture..". The same member queried the use of the word "site" in the introductory lines and asked that this should be interpreted as covering also groups of sites and large areas. This interpretation was accepted by the Committee. There was some ...
1 COM VI.A(c).33
[Uniquement en anglais] Criteria for the inclusion of cultural properties in the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] With the above modifications and some minor changes in form, the criteria were unanimously adopted by the Committee.
1 COM VI.A(d).34
[Uniquement en anglais] Criteria for the inclusion of cultural properties in the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] Some members questioned several changes made to the original draft text prepared by IUCN. For instance, there had been a change of emphasis from "representative" examples to "outstanding" examples in the different criteria, with which one member did not agree. The same participant found that too much emphasis had been laid on superlative examples (the highest, the largest, etc.). Another member sought to reinsert manageability as a criterion; in reply the IUCN representative considered that this should rather be taken into account at the stage of allocating funds. ...
1 COM VI.A(d).35
[Uniquement en anglais] Criteria for the inclusion of cultural properties in the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] A working group under the chairmanship of Mr. David F. Hales (U.S.A.) then reviewed in detail the criteria and presented a revised text to a later meeting. With some minor changes in form proposed by the Chairman of the working group, the criteria were unanimously adopted by the Committee.
1 COM VI.A(e).36
[Uniquement en anglais] Format and content of the nominations for inclusion in the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] The proposal to prepare one printed form for nominations of cultural and natural properties that would provide brief explanations on the information to be given was endorsed by the Committee which decided that it would be used on a trial basis until changes became necessary. The list of information to be provided by States Parties, which had been modified by one of the working groups, was approved by the Committee.
1 COM VI.A(e).37
[Uniquement en anglais] Format and content of the nominations for inclusion in the World Heritage List
[Uniquement en anglais] On the question of model nomination files, there was some discussion on the organizations to be entrusted with this work, on the feasibility of associating the Bureau, and of the timing of their preparation. Whereas members of the Committee felt that model files would be extremely valuable to States Parties in preparing their nominations, they recognized that it was no easy task to prepare fictitious dossiers. It was finally decided that ICOMOS and IUCN would prepare model files which would be reviewed with the Secretariat before they were dispatched to States ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The very tight calendar proposed was discussed in some detail, with many participants referring once more to the difficulties their own governments would have to face in preparing in time their nominations. The question of limiting the number of nominations to be submitted by States was again raised, and whereas the decision previously taken in plenary not to impose any limit was maintained, it was decided that States would be requested to indicate an order of priority among the nominations submitted. States would, at the same time, be reminded that the process of ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The exact role to be played by the Rome Centre, ICOMOS and IUCN gave rise to some discussion, one member proposing that all nominations should be transmitted automatically by the Secretariat for comments and evaluation to the competent organization. The representative of the Director-General agreed that the organizations had an extremely important role to play in reviewing the dossiers submitted by States Parties, and in particular in putting them into order but he feared that the addition of another step in the already tight calendar might entail delays. It was ...
[Uniquement en anglais] In order to present the Committee at its second session with a set of nominations that would be balanced by category and by geographical and cultural region, it was decided that the Bureau, meeting in June 1978, would review all the nominations received and decide which would be forwarded to the Committee. The following calendar would thus be followed:
November 1977: dispatch to States Parties of Director-General's letter, together with printed nomination form;
1 April 1978: receipt of nominations from States Parties;
April/May 1978: dossiers will be received ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee decided to defer to a later session decisions relating to the form and periodicity of publication of the "World Heritage List".
1 COM VI.B(a).42
[Uniquement en anglais] Format and content of requests for international assistance
[Uniquement en anglais] Although one member found the list of information to be provided by States in making requests for assistance under the Fund to be rather too complicated and sophisticated, the Committee approved the content of requests for small-scale and large-scale projects.
[Uniquement en anglais] The procedure proposed in the working document for the consideration of requests gave rise to few comments and was adopted by the Committee. Following the request by one member that assistance in documentation work should be added, the drafting group felt that there was no need to add a specific reference to documentation which appeared to be covered by the other activities mentioned in Article 22 of the Convention.
[Uniquement en anglais] With respect to the granting of international assistance, it was suggested that, in view of the limited funds available, a fixed maximum sum should be made available for each project. This would be difficult, responded another participant, since each case would have to be considered separately in the light of resources available under the Fund and arrangements for complementary financing. Another proposed that such decisions should be taken on the basis of an annual budget submitted to the Committee at each session.
1 COM VI.B(c).45
[Uniquement en anglais] Order of priorities for the granting of international assistance
[Uniquement en anglais] General agreement was expressed on the factors proposed for consideration in determining an order of priorities but some comments were made on the concepts of "educational value" and "socio-economic benefits".
It was therefore proposed that this question be taken up in depth at a later session. In the meantime, the phrase "consequences from the social and economic points of view" was adopted.
1 COM VI.B(d).46
[Uniquement en anglais] Standard agreement to be concluded with States receiving international assistance
[Uniquement en anglais] It was agreed that a draft text of the standard agreement would be prepared by the Secretariat and sent to members of the Committee well in advance of the second session.
Il a été décidé que seuls les Etats parties pourraient transmettre des demandes d'assistance en cas d'urgence, et seulement pour des biens inscrits sur la liste du patrimoine mondial ou pour lesquels une demande d'inscription a déjà été faite. Si ces deux conditions sont réunies, le Secrétariat soumettra la demande au Président qui, après avoir consulté le Directeur général déterminera la nature et l'importance de l'assistance à fournir.
Le Comité a décidé qu'une telle assistance serait fournie à la demande des Etats parties dans ces deux cas*, conformément aux dispositons de l'article 21 (1) de la Convention et dans les limites du budget approuvé (voir par. 57 ci-après), sous la forme de services d'experts ou de matériel. Le Président sera chargé de fixer en consultation avec le Directeur Général la nature et l'importance de l'assistance préparatoire. * Ces cas sont mentionnés au paragraphe précédent : (i) en vue de la préparation des demandes d'inscription sur la Liste du patrimoine mondial et (ii) des demandes ...
Le Comité n'a pas fait de commentaires sur le texte du Règlement financier établi par le Secrétariat et dont l'Assemblée générale des Etats parties et le Conseil exécutif de l'Unesco avaient déjà pris note.
Le Comité a décidé de renvoyer à une session ultérieure les décisions relatives à l'établissement et à la publication de la liste du patrimoine mondial en péril et de la liste des biens pour lesquels une assistance internationale est fournie d'une part, ainsi qu'à la part que l'Etat bénéficiaire devra prendre dans chaque cas à l'exécution du projet.
Le Comité était saisi des propositions du Directeur général tendant à inviter les organisations ci-après à envoyer des observateurs aux sessions futures du Comité :
Organisation des Nations Unies
Programme des Nations Unies pour l'environnement
Organisation des Nations Unies pour l'alimentation et l'agriculture
Programme alimentaire mondial
Banque internationale pour la reconstruction et le développement
Banque interaméricaine de développement
Organisation arabe pour l'éducation, la culture et la science
Conseil de l'Europe
Organisation des Etats américains
Organisation des ...
[Uniquement en anglais] At the last meeting of the Committee, the Chairman of the Drafting Committee presented his report which, after a statement on the philosophy underlying the Convention, set out the decisions taken by the Committee on the various questions raised in the main working document. He drew the attention of participants to Section IV of the document in which several recommendations addressed to States Parties were formulated. With a certain number of modifications, which are referred to in the appropriate section of this record, the report under the title of "Operational ...
[Uniquement en anglais] On the basis of resources available in the World Heritage Fund, the Secretariat proposed in document CC-77/CONF.001/6, a budget covering (i) the preparation of model nomination files, (ii) technical co-operation to States Parties in preparing their nominations and requests for assistance, and (iii) emergency assistance required before the next session of the Committee.
[Uniquement en anglais] Members found the sums available to be very modest indeed and some felt that additional funds might be required. It was decided that the Bureau should have authority to increase the budget provisions, if necessary in the light of requests received and of funds available. With this provision, the Committee unanimously adopted the proposed budget.
1 COM VII.B.59
[Uniquement en anglais] Proposal by the International Organization for the protection of Works of Art
[Uniquement en anglais] The Scientific Director of the International Organization for the Protection of Works of Art presented the offer of collaboration of that Organization.
1 COM VII.B.60
[Uniquement en anglais] Proposal by the International Organization for the protection of Works of Art
[Uniquement en anglais] While-some members encouraged the Committee to accept the proposed offer which had no financial implications, others were uncertain as to whether the objectives of that Organization were the same as those of the Convention, particularly since the work of the Organization in question appeared to relate to movable cultural objects. This led to an exchange of views on the difficulty of distinguishing clearly between movable and immovable cultural property.
1 COM VII.B.61
[Uniquement en anglais] Proposal by the International Organization for the protection of Works of Art
[Uniquement en anglais] It was subsequently decided that the International Organization for the Protection of the Works of Art would be invited to attend future sessions of the Committee, in an observer capacity. However, a member of the Committee asked that it be noted that this decision was in no way to be interpreted as recognizing a special status for that Organization within the framework of the World Heritage Convention and that there was no commitment on the part of the Committee to grant a special status in the future.
[Uniquement en anglais] The representative of the Director-General introduced document CC-77/CONF.001/7 which, at this stage, was submitted to the Committee for information only. He explained that the offer included a house in Cairo and a capital fund of $240,000 from which the interest could be used to finance a number of fellowships in Egyptian archaeology; he pointed out that the administrative and practical problems involved in the upkeep of the house would make it difficult to accept that part of the donation.
[Uniquement en anglais] The representative of the Arab Republic of Egypt supplemented the information provided, giving further details on Professor Badawy's offer.
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee expressed sincere thanks to Professor Badawy for his offer and authorized the Secretariat to study further the exact conditions of the offer and to report to it at its second session.
[Uniquement en anglais] The representative of the United States of America, on behalf of the Secretary of State invited the Committee to hold its next session in Washington. The Committee expressed its gratitude to the United States for this generous offer, which was accepted by acclamation.
[Uniquement en anglais] It was decided that the exact dates of the next session, which would take place between 15 September and 31 October 1978, would be fixed by the Chairman, in consultation with the Government of the United States of America and the Director-General.
[Uniquement en anglais] It was further decided that the Bureau would meet in Paris on 8 and 9 June 1978. The Rome Centre, ICOMOS and IUCN would be invited to attend.
[Uniquement en anglais] At the last plenary meeting the Rapporteur presented an oral report in which he highlighted the main conclusions and decisions of the Committee. In concluding his report, he referred to one issue that had not been discussed during the session, namely Secretariat assistance to the Committee: in view of the volume and complexity of the administrative work involved both in the preparation of documentation for the sessions of the Committee and in implementing its decisions, which would be particularly heavy as from 1979, he suggested that Unesco should carefully ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The Rapporteur's oral report has been incorporated into the present summary record, of which it forms a substantial part.
5. Le Comité a élu par acclamation la Bulgarie et le Sénégal comme Vice-Présidents.
1 EXT.COM IV.11/14
Proposition d'inscription de la Vieille Ville de Jérusalem et de ses remparts sur la Liste du patrimoine mondial
10. ICOMOS a confirmé que la description du site comprend la Vieille Ville et ses remparts dans sa totalité et englobe la liste des édifices soumise avec la proposition d'inscription originale ainsi que la liste supplémentaire mentionnée ci-dessus.11. Le Comité a enregistré cette confirmation et a été d'accord que la "Vieille Ville de Jérusalem et ses remparts" constituent un ensemble historique qui doit être considéré dans sa globalité comme un tout cohérent dont l'équilibre et le caractère spécifique dépendent de la synthèse des éléments qui le composent, et où la préservation devrait ...
1 GA 6
Election du Président, des Vice-présidents et du Rapporteur de l’Assemblée générale et adoption du Règlement intérieur
6. Après l'ouverture de la réunion par M. John E. Fobes, Directeur général adjoint de l'Unesco, l'Assemblée générale a adopté son règlement intérieur, tel que modifié dans son article 12, paragraphes 3 et 6, par le Corrigendum proposé par le représentant du Directeur général de l'Unesco, Elle a ensuite élu par acclamation, comme président, S. Excellence l'Ambassadeur M. Hamid Rahnema (Iran), comme vice-présidents, les représentants de l'Algérie, de la Bulgarie, de l’Equateur, des États-Unis et du Sénégal, et comme rapporteur, M. Michel Parent ...
15. Les résultats du scrutin, proclamés par le président ont été les suivants :
Nombre d'États parties présents et votant 25
Nombre de bulletins valables 25
France 25 voix
Iran 23 voix
Nigéria 23 ...
1 GA 20
Détermination du montant de la contribution au Fonds du patrimoine mondial prévue à l'article 16 de la Convention
20. En ce qui concerne le montant de la contribution obligatoire ou volontaire que les États parties verseront au "Fonds du patrimoine mondial", les Délégations de la Suisse et de la Pologne ont proposé qu'il soit fixé à 0.75 % de la contribution au budget ordinaire de l'Unesco, tandis que les Délégations du Zaïre, du Nigéria, de l'Algérie, de la Syrie et de l'Australie ont proposé 1. %. Aucune objection n'ayant été formulée lorsque le président a demandé à l’Assemblée générale si elle acceptait ce dernier pourcentage, celui-ci a été adopté sans qu'il soit procédé au vote. La Délégation ...
21. L'Assemblée générale a pris note sans discussion des modalités de paiement énoncées dans le document d'information sur le Fonds du patrimoine mondial et n'a pas formulé d'observations au sujet du projet de règlement financier du Fonds.
Le gouvernement du Guatemala a demandé une assistance d'urgence pour la ville de "La Antigua Guatemala" qui a été endommagée par un tremblement de terre et des pluis diluviennes. Cette assistance, d'un montant de 50.000 dollars des Etats-Unis et destinée à l'achat d'équipement, a été accordée par le Bureau.
Sites : Antigua Guatemala
Le Gouvernement équatorien a demandé 50.000 dollars des Etats-Unis pour acheter l'équipement nécessaire afin d'éliminer la faune, étrangère aux îles Galapagos, qui détruit la faune locale. Le Bureau recommande au Comité d'accorder cette coopération technique pour le site qui est inscrit sur la Liste.
Sites : Îles Galápagos
Le Gouvernement tanzanien a demandé les services d'un architecte-muséologue pour trois semaines afin d'élaborer un projet de conservation et de présentation des sites préhistoriques de Olduvay et Laetolil. Le Bureau recommande au Comité d'accorder cette coopération technique si le bien est admis sur la Liste.
Le Gouvernement égyptien a demandé les services de spécialistes du patrimoine culturel (6 h/m), ainsi qu'un équipement (d'un coût total de 30.000 US$) pour établir un projet de restauration et d'aménagement du Centre islamique ancien du Caire. Le Bureau recommande au Comité que cette demande soit acceptée sir le bien est inscrit sur la Liste.
Sites : Le Caire historique
Le Gouvernement éthiopien a demandé une coopération technique afin d'effectuer un relevé photogrammétrique des monuments de Lalibela (estimation du coût : 144.500 dollars des Etats-Unis). Compte tenu de l'avis de l'ICCROM, le Bureau - en général favorable à une coopération technique pour la préservation des monuments de Lalibela - a jugé bon d'ajourner sa décision.
Le Gouvernement éthiopien a demandé les services de deux experts (36 h/m) et de l'équipement pour deux sites naturels afin d'effectuer une prospection systématique des parcs et d'envisager la réinstallation sur d'autres terres des populations qui vivent sur ces sites. Le Bureau a décidé d'ajourner sa décision jusqu'à ce que les propositions d'inscription - reçues trop tard - aient pu être examinées.
Sites : Parc national des monts Balé
2 BUR V.28
Demandes de coopération technique - République arabe syrienne (demandes n°20.I, 21.I, 22.I et 23.I)
Le Gouvernement syrien a demandé de l'équipement (grues, camions, jeepts, etc...) pour la restauration de Damas (20.I), Alep (21.I), de Bosra (22.I) et de Palmyre (23.I). Cependant, comme les renseignements supplémentaires demandés n'ont pas été reçus et que le site de Damas (20.I) est le seul à être recommandé pour inscription sur la Liste, le Bureau a préféré ajourner sa décision jusqu'à réception des informations requises.
Sites : Ancienne ville de Damas
[Uniquement en anglais] The second session of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (hereinafter referred to as "the Committee") was held in Washington from 5 to 8 September 1978. The session was attended by the following members of the World Heritage Committee: Australia, Canada, Ecuador, Egypt, France, Federal Republic of Germany, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Poland, Tunisia, United States of America and Yugoslavia.
[Uniquement en anglais] Representatives of the International Centre for Conservation, the International Council of Monuments and Sites, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (hereinafter referred to as "ICCROM", "ICOMOS" and "IUCN" respectively) attended the meeting in an advisory capacity.
[Uniquement en anglais] Observers from five States Parties to the Convention not members of the Committee, namely Brazil, Morocco, Panama, Switzerland and the Syrian Arab Republic, also attended the session, as well as observers from ten international governmental and non-governmental organizations and a wider public audience.
[Uniquement en anglais] The full list of participants will be found in Annex III to this report.
[Uniquement en anglais] The second session of the Committee was opened by its Chairman, Mr. Firouz Bagherzadeh. In welcoming members of the Committee, representatives of advisory organizations and all other participants, he recalled the great progress already achieved in the implementation of the Convention thanks to the efforts of the States Parties, Bureau members, the Secretariat and the advisory organizations. He concluded by expressing his confidence that the session would be both fruitful and enjoyable.
[Uniquement en anglais] Mr. David Hales, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Department of the Interior, welcomed delegates to Washington on behalf of the United States of America. He conveyed to the Committee a written message from the President of the United States of America, Jimmy Carter, the text of which is given in Annex I. The Committee greatly appreciated the personal message from the President of the United States of America and requested the Chairman to convey to the President its gratitude for the message with which he had honoured the opening of the ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The Deputy Assistant Director General for Operations (Culture and Communication) responded on behalf of the Director General of UNESCO. Mr. Bolla expressed UNESCO's sincere appreciation for the invitation by the Government of the United States of America to hold the second session in Washington. In greeting members of the Committee and wishing them success in their work, he indicated the important role of international organizations such as UNDP, UNEP, IBRD, IDB, WFP, OAS and ALECSO in providing crucial support to conservation measures. In this context, he also ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The Chairman invited the members of the Committee to examine the provisional agenda prepared by the Secretariat. At the request of members of the Committee, two new items were added to the agenda: "Revision of the Rules of Procedure" and "Review of the Procedure for Nominations to the List of World Heritage in Danger."
[Uniquement en anglais] With the above additions, the agenda was adopted.
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee discussed the need to increase the number of officers constituting the Bureau in view of the greater workload of the Bureau in the future. Committee members also felt that a larger number of officers would be advisable to allow for:
(i) better representation of geographical regions in the Bureau; and,(ii) enhanced expertise for both natural and cultural properties.
Having also in mind that the membership of the Committee itself would be increased from 15 to 21 delegates at the second General Assembly, the Committee agreed to elect henceforth 7 ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee amended Articles 12.1 and 13 of the Rules of Procedure accordingly.
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee elected by acclamation Mr. David Hales (USA) as its Chairman. The Committee then proceeded to elect by acclamation the delegates of Ecuador, Egypt, France, Iran and Nigeria, as Vice-Chairmen, and Professor Krzysztof Pawlowski (Poland), as Rapporteur. The new Chairman then called for a standing ovation to thank Mr. Firouz Bagherzadeh for the excellent leadership he had provided to the Committee during the past year.
2 COM IV.14
[Uniquement en anglais] Consideration of a draft text of a standard agreement between the World Heritage Committee and States receiving technical cooperation
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee, after reviewing and commenting on each article of the draft agreement, asked the Secretariat to take note of the observations made by the delegates and to elaborate a new, less detailed text for consideration by the Committee at its next session. It was also noted that the new text should be formulated in such a way as to accommodate the specific requirements and practice of States Parties. In doing so UNESCO's general principles for the provision of technical cooperation should be retained.
2 COM IV.15
[Uniquement en anglais] Consideration of a draft text of a standard agreement between the World Heritage Committee and States receiving technical cooperation
[Uniquement en anglais] Until the adoption of such an agreement by the Committee, UNESCO's rules and procedures would be followed in the provision of technical cooperation to States Parties.
2 COM IV.16
[Uniquement en anglais] Consideration of a draft text of a standard agreement between the World Heritage Committee and States receiving technical cooperation
[Uniquement en anglais] 16. The Committee expressed the wish that the Secretariat, in the preparation of a new draft agreement, take note of the following observations and recommendations made by delegates during the discussion:
17. With regard to Article 2 paragraph 5: The delegate of Poland recommended rewording to avoid obligation to meet expenses (for instance, for medical treatment) in convertible currency for countries with a non-convertible currency. Several delegates considered that governments should be encouraged to employ the fellow to the extent possible upon his return, in ...
2 COM IV.23
[Uniquement en anglais] Consideration of a draft text of a standard agreement between the World Heritage Committee and States receiving technical cooperation
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee invited other members who wished to comment on the draft text to transmit their observations to the Secretariat by 31 December 1978. These comments would be circulated by the Secretariat to all members of the Committee and would be taken into account in the preparation of a revised text to be considered by the Committee at its third session.
2 COM V.24
[Uniquement en anglais] Examination of the form and Periodicity of Publication of the World Heritage List, the List of World Heritage in danger and the List of Properties for which technical cooperation is granted
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee followed the recommendation of the Bureau and agreed to publish and disseminate annually the World Heritage List, the World Heritage in Danger List and the list of properties for which technical cooperation is granted from the World Heritage Fund as combined lists. (see document CC-78/CONF.010/6). It was pointed out that this arrangement would allow for timely updating of these lists after each annual session of the Committee.
2 COM V.25
[Uniquement en anglais] Examination of the form and Periodicity of Publication of the World Heritage List, the List of World Heritage in danger and the List of Properties for which technical cooperation is granted
[Uniquement en anglais] The representative of ICOMOS and the delegate of France drew the attention of the Committee to the introductory part to the World Heritage List in which some terms used in the French text did not correspond to the English text. In order to overcome this the Committee adopted the following changes in the French text: the criteria against which cultural properties would be evaluated, which are set out in point a) (ii) should read "... sur le développement de l'architecture, de la sculpture monumentale, de la conception des jardins et paysages, des arts connexes, des ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The former Rapporteur presented the views of the Bureau on this matter. He pointed out that the Bureau agreed that consideration should be given urgently to a general ongoing publicity campaign to promote the objectives of the Convention and the work of the Committee. Such a campaign would help to inform the public of the importance of conserving the World heritage, accelerate ratifications by Member States of the Convention, stimulate contributions to the World Heritage Fund, and generally start fulfilling the educational mandate outlined in the Convention.
[Uniquement en anglais] After considerable discussion, the Committee agreed to form a sub-Committee for in-depth study of future public information and educational activities of the Committee.
[Uniquement en anglais] The Chairman then nominated Mr. Peter Bennett as Chairman and appointed the delegates of Ecuador, France, Iran, Iraq, USA and representatives of the advisory organizations as members of the sub-Committee.
[Uniquement en anglais] In reporting on the work of the sub-Committee, its Chairman outlined the objectives of the proposed public information programme, in the following terms. Firstly, the programme should focus upon the aims of the Convention, the work of the Committee, the criteria for the inclusion of sites in the World Heritage List and the types of assistance available to States under the Convention, providing examples of assistance already granted; the World Heritage List should be de-emphasized until such time as there were sufficient sites on the List to make it appear truly ...
[Uniquement en anglais] After discussing the proposed programme, the Committee decided that the following three activities would be undertaken during the forth-coming year and authorized expenditure of up to $30,000 for that purpose :
(a) a brochure in five UNESCO languages (Arabic, English, French,Russian and Spanish) aimed primarily at opinion-makers in States not yet adhering to the Convention, to describe the objectives of the Convention, the criteria for nominations to the World Heritage List, the types of assistance available and the ways of applying for such assistance;(b) a ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The decision to limit the number of activities to be undertaken during the next twelve months stemmed from the Committee's wish to pursue only those which would be of immediate interest in relation to the present stage of its work. The Secretariat was, however, requested to study the feasibility of carrying out at a later stage other activities proposed by the sub-Committee, such as the creation of a photo library of World Heritage sites, the preparation of a radio documentary and of a slide show with audio track, both in five languages and dealing with the ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee recalled Article 20 of the Convention under which international assistance may not only be granted to property already included in the World Heritage List but also to property which had not yet been added to the World Heritage List. International assistance for property which had not yet been included in the World Heritage List, for which the working term "preparatory assistance" had been adopted by the Committee may be granted:
(i) for identifying cultural and natural properties of universal importance and preparatory work with a view to nominating ...
[Uniquement en anglais] After examining the budgetary situation of the World Heritage Fund (see document CC-78/CONF.010/INF.2) and discussing in depth appro- priate use of the Fund, the Committee decided to authorize the Chairman to grant, in consultation with the Director General of UNESCO, preparatory assistance to States Parties up to a total amount of US $140,000 (as shown in document CC-78/CONF.010/8) with a budgetary ceiling of US $15,000 per project. The Committee agreed with the proposal mentioned in paragraph 33 as put forward by the Secretariat and consequently decided that this ...
[Uniquement en anglais] The former Rapporteur presented to the Committee the list of properties which, according to the Bureau, would be eligible for inclusion in the World Heritage List. He then called the attention of the Committee to three properties on this list which would meet the criteria for inclusion in the World Heritage List but which, at the time of the Bureau meeting had lacked the required documentation.
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee examined these three cases first and stated with satisfaction that appropriate documentation for two properties had in the meantime been received. As regards the third case (National Park of Ichkeul) the Committee decided, in agreement with the delegate of Tunisia, to defer its decision to its next session subject to receipt of the requested information.
Sites : Parc national de l'Ichkeul
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee, upon finding itself in full agreement with the list proposed by the Bureau, decided to enter the following 12 properties in the World Heritage List:
NAME OF PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST (STATE PARTY)
L'Anse aux Meadows National Historic Park (Canada)
Nahanni National Park (Canada)
Galapagos Islands (Ecuador)
City of Quito (Ecuador)
Simien National Park (Ethiopia)
Rock Hewn Churches, Lalibela (Ethiopia)
Aachen Cathedral (Federal Republic of Germany)
Cracow's Historic Centre (Poland)
Wieliczka ...
Sites : Cathédrale d'Aix-la-Chapelle Centre historique de Kraków Églises creusées dans le roc de Lalibela Île de Gorée Îles Galápagos Lieu historique national de L’Anse aux Meadows Mines royales de sel de Wieliczka et Bochnia Parc national de Mesa Verde Parc national de Yellowstone Parc national du Simien Parc national Nahanni Ville de Quito
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee further decided to defer consideration of all other nominations listed in document CC-78/CONF.010/7 until its third session. All these nominations, as well as those received after the Bureau meeting and listed in document CC-78/CONF.010/7 Add.1 (for which it had been impossible to complete the technical review, translation and transmission to all States members of the Committee in time before the second session) would be transmitted to the Bureau for examination prior to their consideration by the Committee at its next session.
[Uniquement en anglais] The Chairman then thanked the States Parties for their efforts, which had made it possible to initiate the establishment of the World Heritage List. He also recalled that the time and order of entry of a property in the World Heritage List should by no means be interpreted as an indication of the qualification of a property or judgment on its value in comparison to other properties in the list, as all of them had met the criteria adopted by the Committee.
[Uniquement en anglais] The Committee continued its work by discussing suitable future closing dates for the submission of nominations and agreed that nominations, in order to be examined at the next Bureau meeting, should be with the Secretariat by 1 March 1979 at the latest. Thereafter, however, the deadline for submission of nominations would be 1 January so that more time would be available to the Secretariat, ICOMOS and IUCN for the processing and technical review of the new dominations.
[Uniquement en anglais] There followed considerable discussion as to whether the number of nominations per country and year should be limited or not and how to solve the problem of the increasing workload for all parties involved in the evaluation process, which may become rather time-consuming and may even exceed the capacity of the advisory organizations, the Bureau, the Committee and the UNESCO Secretariat in the future.
[Uniquement en anglais] In this connection, reference was made to Article 11 (1) of the Convention which stipulates no limit for the number of nominations by a single State Party. However, in recognizing this stipulation the Committee, for purely practical reasons, authorized the Chairman to convene, if necessary, a special Bureau meeting after the closing date for submission of nominations in order to examine, together with the advisory organizations and the Secretariat, the possibility of evaluating all new nominations and to adopt a procedure which would take into account the ...
[Uniquement en anglais] Following a proposal made by the delegate of Yugoslavia who underlined the importance of the decisions taken by the Committee for the establishment of the World Heritage List, the Committee decided that a document concerning the nominations of States and presenting the recommendations of the Bureau thereon, would be prepared for the Committee which would examine the nominations one by one and would decide on the inclusion or non-inclusion in the List of each individual site.