Click here to get the PDF file of this report PDF version (1370K)
FRENCH VERSION


World Heritage

25 BUR

Distribution limited

WHC-2001/CONF.205/10
Paris, 17 August 2001
Original: English/French




UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL,
SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION

CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE
WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE

BUREAU OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Twenty-fifth session

Paris, UNESCO Headquarters (Room X)

25 - 30 June 2001

REPORT OF THE RAPPORTEUR









Table of Contents

  1. OPENING SESSION

  2. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND THE TIMETABLE

  3. REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN BY THE SECRETARIAT SINCE THE TWENTY-FOURTH SESSION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

  4. PREPARATION OF THE THIRTEENTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES (OCTOBER 2001)

  5. STATE OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES INSCRIBED ON THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER AND THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST

  6. INFORMATION ON TENTATIVE LISTS AND EXAMINATION OF NOMINATIONS OF CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES TO THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER AND THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST

  7. REQUESTS FOR INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE

  8. DATE, PLACE AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH EXTRAORDINARY SESSION OF THE BUREAU (7-8 DECEMBER 2001, HELSINKI, FINLAND

  9. DATE, PLACE AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE (11-16 DECEMBER 2001, HELSINKI, FINLAND)

  10. OTHER BUSINESS

  11. ADOPTION OF THE REPORT

  12. CLOSURE OF THE SESSION

List of Annexes

  1. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

  2. SPEECH OF THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF UNESCO, MR MOUNIR BOUCHENAKI, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR-GENERAL FOR CULTURE

  3. KAKADU NATIONAL PARK (AUSTRALIA) - LETTER CONCERNING THE KAKADU REGION SOCIAL IMPACT STUDY (KRSIS)

  4. KAKADU NATIONAL PARK (AUSTRALIA) - LETTER FROM YVONNE MARGARULA, MIRRAR SENIOR TRADITIONAL OWNER, CHAIRPERSON GUNDJEHMI ABORIGINAL CORPORATION

  5. KAKADU NATIONAL PARK (AUSTRALIA) - LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY ENVIRONMENT AUSTRALIA, DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND HERITAGE

  6. BIRKENAU, EXTRACT FROM THE NOMINATION DOSSIER SUBMITTED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF POLAND ON 6 JUNE 1978

  7. JUNGFRAU-ALETSCH-BIETSCHHORN (SWITZERLAND) - LETTER FROM THE AMBASSADOR OF ITALY TO UNESCO TO THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

  8. JUNGFRAU-ALETSCH-BIETSCHHORN (SWITZERLAND) - LETTER FROM THE AMBASSADOR OF SWITZERLAND TO UNESCO TO THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

  9. PROPOSAL FOR THE BING LUCAS ANNUAL WORLD HERITAGE SCHOLARSHIP AND WORLD HERITAGE MANAGERS AWARD, PRESENTED BY IUCN

  10. PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH EXTRAORDINARY SESSION OF THE BUREAU OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE (HELSINKI, FINLAND, 7-8 DECEMBER 2001)

  11. PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH SESSION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE (HELSINKI, FINLAND, 11-16 DECEMBER 2001)

  12. LETTER FROM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE CONCERNING A PROPOSAL FOR ADDITIONAL VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE WORLD HERITAGE FUND





I. OPENING SESSION

I.1 The twenty-fifth session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee was held at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris, France, from 25 to 30 June 2001. It was attended by the following members of the Bureau: Mr Peter King (Australia) as Chairperson of the Committee, Mr Dawson Munjeri (Zimbabwe) as the Rapporteur and Canada, Ecuador, Finland, Morocco and Thailand as Vice- Chairpersons.

I.2 The following States Parties to the World Heritage Convention who are not members of the Bureau, were represented as observers: Albania, Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, El Salvador, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, India, Iraq, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malta, Mexico, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, United Republic of Tanzania, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela and Yemen. The Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to UNESCO and the United Arab Emirates attended the session as observers. The complete List of Participants is attached as Annex I of the Report.

1.3 Representatives of the Advisory Bodies to the Committee: the International Centre for Study of the Preservation and the Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and the World Conservation Union (IUCN) attended the session.

I.4 The Chairperson, Mr Peter King, opened the session by welcoming the members of the Bureau, the Advisory Bodies, observers, the members of the press and all participants to the meeting. He recalled that due to the recent events relating to the wilful destruction of heritage in Afghanistan, it was decided to extend the opening session to include a discussion on this issue.

I.5 The Chairperson then invited the Representative of the Director-General, Mr Mounir Bouchenaki, Assistant Director-General for Culture, to deliver his opening speech to the Bureau. In his introduction, Mr Bouchenaki drew the attention of the Bureau to an earthquake that hit the site of Arequipa, in Peru, on 24 June 2001 and informed the Bureau that the Secretariat had already been in contact with the national authorities. He then recalled the actions taken by UNESCO concerning the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamyan in Afghanistan. Regarding this issue, described by the Director-General of UNESCO as a "crime against culture", he informed the Bureau that a resolution had been adopted by the Executive Board of UNESCO at its 161st session concerning the protection of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan. That decision "invites Member States (...) to pursue their efforts to ensure the full application of the principles of the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (The Hague, 1954), the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (1970) and the Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972)". Mr Bouchenaki's speech is included as Annex II of this report. The Chairperson thanked Mr Bouchenaki on behalf of the Bureau members.

I.6 At the invitation of the Chairperson, the Special Envoy of the Director-General of UNESCO, Ambassador Pierre Lafrance informed the Bureau of his mission to Kabul, Khandahar and Islamabad in March 2001 undertaken at the request of the Director- General. The thrust of his presentation was on the purpose of the mission and why the objectives were not achieved. He narrated the events leading to the fateful destruction of the Buddhas on 12 March 2001. Discussions with representatives of the Taliban forces, who control the major part of Afghanistan, had been held. Referring to the Declaration for the Protection of Afghan Cultural Heritage signed by the Supreme Leader of the Taliban in 1999 specifically referring to the Bamyan statues, and underlining the unanimous opinion of the leaders of Islamic theology against such iconoclastic acts, Mr Lafrance described in detail the efforts made to convince the Taliban leaders to reverse their decision to destroy the ancient statues of Bamyan and Afghan's rich pre-Islamic cultural heritage. In the last analysis the problem was that the Taliban viewed the issue as theological "creation of a creature : to create a creature is a sin" ran the argument. The context was put in "licit and illicit" terms. Some proposals from Iran and Japan to negotiate the safeguarding of this heritage which had been briskly rejected by the Taliban leaders were highlighted. So there was determination by the Taliban leaders to destroy the cultural heritage representing the ancient civilizations of the South and Central Asian Region. In spite of these efforts made by the international community to reverse the decision and regardless of the support from some individuals within the Taliban forces, the statues of Bamyan and the Kabul Museum collection were destroyed on 12 March 2001. In Mr Lafrance's words, "We were dealing with a force which could not be swayed by any argument."

I.7 The advice of the Ulemas and other religious leaders from Egypt, Pakistan and the Organisation of Islamic States, were all ignored, as was the intervention of Mr Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the United Nations.

I.8 Urging the Bureau not to "throw in the towel", the Bureau's attention was drawn to the continued efforts being made by UNESCO, various Governments and NGO's, to maintain and strengthen dialogue with the Taliban forces to protect what remains of Afghan's cultural heritage. Mr Lafrance underlined the importance of persistent efforts at national and international levels to promote tolerance for world heritage. The need for the World Heritage Committee to take appropriate actions to ban iconoclastic acts of was also emphasized. Mr Lafrance emphasized the need to strengthen existing mechanisms within the three UNESCO Conventions concerning the protection of cultural heritage to respond to situations such as the Afghan case. Citing as a good example the conservation work carried out on the Minaret of Jam, under difficult circumstances, he noted that if conservation work had been in process in Bamyan, it might have deterred the destructive actions by the Taliban forces. Mr Lafrance underscored the importance and urgency of examining all possible legal and operational actions that can be taken by the World Heritage Committee and UNESCO in such cases in the future. Finally, recalling the articles of the World Heritage Convention, Mr Lafrance stressed that world heritage belonged to humanity, and urged the World Heritage Committee to examine possibilities of protecting world heritage properties even where there was no formal request from responsible Governments and authorities.

I.9 The Director of the Division of Cultural Heritage, Sector for Culture, Dr Lyndel Prott, informed the Bureau that Afghanistan was not State Party to the Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict 1954 and its Protocols, which applies to situations of civil conflict and places obligations on occupying forces. Afghanistan is a State Party to the World Heritage Convention 1972, however this Convention does not apply to civil conflicts. Therefore, the responsibility to prevent destruction is on the recognized Government, which is in fact unable to physically prevent such destruction. The Taliban forces cannot be held liable under the 1972 Convention for the destruction of Afghan cultural heritage, as they are not the recognized Government of Afghanistan.

I.10 The Director of the Division of Cultural Heritage further informed the Bureau that even if the 1954 or 1972 Conventions were to be directly applied to the Taliban forces, there is no general sanction which can be applied by any State other than the State where the cultural heritage offence has occurred. To date, Governments have been reluctant to include in any international instrument, a general offence against international law in respect of cultural property that can be sanctioned by any State. Although destruction of cultural property is included as an international crime in the Statute of the International Criminal Court, that Statute has not yet come into force. Furthermore, such Statute could not bind the Taliban forces, who are not recognized as the legitimate Government of the country and therefore would not be able to accede to the Statute even were they willing to do so. Moreover, the Statute cannot apply to events occurring before it enters into force.

I.11 The Bureau's attention was drawn to the fact that out of 164 States Parties to the World Heritage Convention, only 100 Governments are States Parties to the 1954 Convention, and 83 States Parties to the First Protocol. As far as the Second Protocol (1999) of the 1954 Convention is concerned, there are 39 signatories. Out of 20 signatories required to bring the Second Protocol into force, only six ratifications have been made. As to the 1970 Convention on illicit traffic, there are only 91 States Parties. These gaps are caused by some of the most active and influential Governments not yet signatory to the 1954 and 1970 Conventions, and are therefore not only due to the absence of developing States or of a State such as Afghanistan that has faced severe difficulties for decades.

I.12 Finally, the Director of the Division of Cultural Heritage stated that even if these international legal instruments had been applicable, in the case of the Taliban forces, UNESCO would not have been able to enforce the legal instruments by means other than seeking to prevent destruction by moral and political persuasion. UNESCO does not have other means of implementation and so there is a need to develop other mechanisms, perhaps through the concept of "cultural rights" or standard-setting Declarations, non- binding Recommendations or "soft laws".

I.13 Characterizing the destruction of the non-Islamic cultural heritage of Afghanistan by the Taliban forces as a "cultural tragedy for the world", the Chairperson expressed his grave concern for the irretrievable loss of the Bamyan statues. The Chairperson commended the resolute, passionate, and determined efforts of the Director-General of UNESCO and his Special Envoy, Mr Pierre Lafrance, to prevent the tragic destruction.

I.14 The Chairperson drew the attention of the Bureau to the Committee's deferral of four cultural heritage nominations for inscription on the World Heritage List, including the Monuments of Bamyan, submitted by the Government of Afghanistan in 1983. Reasserting the spirit of the World Heritage Convention, which calls upon States Parties to protect the global heritage through co-operation, consensus and accord, the Chairperson underscored the need to prevent future tragedies through enhanced mechanisms for implementing the Convention and the stewardship of the World Heritage Committee. Referring to the March 2001 indictment by the International Criminal Tribunal of the former Yugoslavia that included the destruction of historic monuments within the World Heritage site of Dubrovnik, Croatia, the Chairperson recalled that crime against cultural property could be sanctioned by an international tribunal. He also called upon UNESCO to reflect further on the relationship between the World Heritage Convention and other international legal instruments to identify ways of informing the Security Council of the United Nations so that it may consider the possibility of sanctions for the protection of cultural property, should this be productive in addressing situations such as the destruction of Afghan cultural heritage. Inviting the Director-General of UNESCO and the World Heritage Centre to analyze comprehensively all mechanisms to strengthen the implementation of the World Heritage Convention, the Chairperson suggested that the World Heritage Committee discuss this issue at its twenty-fifth session.

I.15 Highlighting, however, the insufficiency of relying solely on UN organizations to protect the heritage of humankind, the Chairperson also called upon all States Parties to the World Heritage Convention to continue to appeal to the Taliban forces to deter further destruction of the Afghan cultural heritage. Finally, the Chairperson expressed his gratitude to the Governments who joined the global mobilization of efforts in the protection of Afghan cultural heritage, which transcended the boundaries between nationalities and religion.

I.16 Members of the Bureau and observer States Parties (Belgium, Benin, Greece, India, Italy, Japan, Pakistan, U.S.A.) expressed their sincere gratitude to the Director-General of UNESCO for his extraordinary efforts in attempting to deter the Taliban forces from destroying the Bamyan statues. Profoundly shocked by the deliberate destruction by the Taliban forces of the unique cultural heritage of Bamyan in March 2001, the Bureau members and observer States Parties underscored the importance of examining all possible legal and operational actions which can be taken by the World Heritage Committee and UNESCO in such cases. Moreover, the members of the Bureau and some observers stressed that efforts must be continued to increase awareness of the universal World Heritage value of properties representing the diverse heritage of humanity through education and communication, and not through military force.

I.17 The Delegate of Morocco expressed his Government's profound dismay regarding the decision taken by the Taliban forces, in spite of the unanimous appeal by Islamic Leaders and Governments who called for tolerance and respect by the Taliban forces of pre- Islamic cultural heritage. The Delegate of Zimbabwe thanked the Organization of Islamic States, the Governments of Pakistan and Qatar, as well as all other Member States of UNESCO that took all possible measures in trying to convince the Taliban forces to protect the Bamyan statues.

I.18 Referring to the recent decision of the Executive Board of UNESCO at its 161st session, the Observer of Greece underlined the need to further reflect upon the notion of "crime against culture". Referring to the deferral of inscription on the World Heritage List of Afghan cultural heritage in 1983 by the Committee, and recalling Article 6.1 of the World Heritage Convention which affirms the duty of the international community as a whole to co-operate for protecting the World Heritage while fully respecting the sovereignty of the States on whose territory the heritage is situated, the Observer of Greece stressed the responsibility of the Committee to recognize the World Heritage values of heritage located in territories experiencing civil conflict. Reasserting the view by some Committee Members and observer States Parties that Article 11.4 of the Convention and the paragraph 67 of the Operational Guidelines allowed the Committee to inscribe a property on the List of World Heritage in Danger without the consent of the State Party concerned, the Observer of Greece expressed her Government's interest in a serious examination of inscribing threatened heritage properties of World Heritage significance on the List of World Heritage in Danger, as provided for in the Convention. The Observer of Greece expressed her expectation that this important issue to strengthen the World Heritage Convention be discussed at the meeting proposed by the Government of Morocco, aimed at discussing the application of certain key articles within this powerful international legal instrument.

I.19 The Observer of Belgium, also expressing dismay, extended his Government's invitation to the Committee to host a meeting to specifically identify the means of ensuring better protection of the common heritage of humanity, notably through the development of new mechanisms within the framework of the World Heritage Convention. This meeting could explore ways and means of better enforcing the provisions of the World Heritage Convention, to respond to the invitation from the Executive Board of UNESCO at its 161st session to the World Heritage Committee.

I.20 Expressing her Government's support for the proposals raised by previous speakers, the Observer of India underscored the tragedy of the loss of the Bamyan statues which represent the length and breadth of the ancient civilization cradled within the territory of Afghanistan. She recalled that the actions taken by the Taliban forces were premeditated and represents their policy of cultural nihilism, which should not have occurred in the 21st century. The Observer of India expressed her Government's conviction that the Committee must seize the moment of this irreversible loss to humanity to strengthen the application of the Convention by reflecting upon the mandate and procedures of the Committee. The Observer of Italy also stressed the need for a thorough reflection by the Committee to elaborate new legal mechanisms to address such situations.

I.21 Responding to the appeal made by the Representative of the Director-General of UNESCO to States Parties of the World Heritage Convention who have not yet ratified the 1954 and 1970 Conventions, the Delegate of Thailand highlighted the fact that his Government has expressed, in writing, the condemnation of the destruction of the Bamyan statues. He invited all States Parties to the World Heritage Convention to join forces with other Conventions related to the protection of cultural properties. He also pointed out that his Government has already taken the necessary steps to ratify the Convention concerning the protection of cultural properties in times of conflict. The Observer of Japan stated that his country appreciates the principles of these Conventions and that Japan is considering the possibility of ratifying the 1970 Convention. The Observer of the United States of America expressed his Government's appreciation for the special efforts made by the Government of Japan to safeguard the Afghan cultural heritage.

I.22 The Representative of ICCROM emphasized the importance of scientific documentation of cultural heritage, especially those at risk. Paying tribute to the restoration work and documentation undertaken for the Bamyan statues by the Archaeological Survey of India during the period 1969-1973, the Representative of ICCROM underlined that the 147 photographs in possession of ICCROM now remain as one of the few evidences of the now destroyed heritage. He paid tribute to the late Dr Sengupta who had spearheaded the documentation and restoration exercise.

I.23 The Assistant Director-General for Culture, Mr Mounir Bouchenaki, informed the Bureau that UNESCO had succeeded in dissuading the Taliban forces from destroying the Bamyan statues in 1997 with the full co-operation of the international community, the Government of Pakistan, active NGOs such as the Society for the Protection of Afghan Cultural Heritage (SPACH), the media and other mediators. In February 2001 after the issuance of the recent edict by the Supreme Leader of the Taliban forces, UNESCO also held two meetings with the Representatives of the Islamic State of Afghanistan in exile in an attempt to identify legal means of protecting the threatened non-Islamic heritage of Afghanistan. He informed the Bureau that following the lamentable destruction carried out by the Taliban forces, the Director-General of UNESCO requested the former Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, Professor Francesco Francioni, to examine the legal mechanisms for strengthening the protection of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan.

I.24 The Observer of Pakistan stated that her Government remained committed to the provisions of the World Heritage Convention and to the preservation of all World Heritage of humankind. She affirmed her Government's solidarity with the other States Parties to the Convention in expressing deep concern for the status of Afghan cultural heritage in the aftermath of the destruction of the Bamyan Buddhist statues. The Bureau was informed of the three public appeals made by the Government of Pakistan at the highest levels to dissuade the Taliban authorities from carrying out the decree to destroy the statues. In particular, the Bureau's attention was drawn to the visit by the Minister of Interior of Pakistan to the Supreme Leader of the Taliban authorities, Mullah Omar.

I.25 The Observer of Pakistan underscored the importance of addressing this matter of international sensitivity at a wider forum, such as the General Assembly of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention at its thirteenth session.

I.26 While recognizing the importance of designating Afghan cultural heritage of universal significance as World Heritage, the Observer of Pakistan recalled that the inscription of properties on the World Heritage List was not a goal in itself. In the case of Afghanistan, the Observer of Pakistan expressed her Government's conviction that the preservation of Afghan cultural heritage can be best achieved through a spirit of engagement and joint effort by the national and international authorities. Drawing the Bureau's attention to the statement of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr Kofi Annan, which ruled out punitive action against the Taliban and recognition that future prevention of destruction of non-Islamic heritage would be best achieved through education and promotion of tolerance, the Observer of Pakistan requested clarification on the nature of the possible sanctions reflected in the draft resolution to be examined by the General Assembly. The Observer of Pakistan, affirming her Government's continued respect of UN sanctions already in place against Afghanistan, cautioned the Bureau that discussion of sanctions to be imposed upon a people who have nothing left to lose would be counterproductive.

I.27 Finally, the Observer of Pakistan informed the Bureau that her Government continues its efforts to draw the attention of the Taliban authorities on the importance of preserving Afghanistan's cultural heritage. She informed the Bureau that UNESCO and her Government is currently engaged in elaborating a mechanism for continued collaboration for the conservation of both non-Islamic and Islamic cultural heritage in Afghanistan.

I.28 At the suggestion of the Bureau members and observer States, the Chairperson established a Drafting Group to draft a recommendation concerning the Afghan cultural heritage by the Bureau for consideration by the General Assembly of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention at its thirteenth session (30-31 October 2001). This Drafting Group was initially comprised Mr Kevin Keeffe (Australia), Mr Rodolfo Rendón (Ecuador), Dr Nicholas Stanley-Price (ICCROM), Dr Adul Wichiencharoen (Thailand) and H.E. Ms Taina Kiekko (Finland). < p> I.29 The Group was chaired by Mr Kevin Keeffe (Australia) and upon consultations with the Senior Legal Officer of the UNESCO Division of General Legal Affairs and the Director of the Division of Cultural Heritage of the Sector for Culture, two draft recommendations were presented to the Bureau. Upon examination of the final draft recommendation, the Bureau adopted the following decision:

"The Bureau of the World Heritage Committee, at its twenty-fifth session, recommended that the General Assembly of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention, at its thirteenth session (30-31 October 2001), adopt the following draft resolution:

Recalling the invitation of the Executive Board of UNESCO at its 161st session to the World Heritage Committee to identify the means of ensuring better protection of the common heritage of humanity;

Noting the provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (The Hague, 1954) and its Protocols, the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (1970), the World Heritage Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972), the UNIDROIT Convention and other relevant international legal instruments;

Appreciating the attempts made by the Director-General of UNESCO, UNESCO Member States and various organizations and individuals to convince the Taliban forces to protect the cultural heritage of Afghanistan;

Condemns the wilful destruction of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan by the Taliban forces, particularly the statues of Bamyan, as a crime against the common heritage of humanity;

Appeals to all States Parties to the World Heritage Convention to become signatories to the Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, its Protocols, the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, the UNIDROIT Convention and other international legal instruments protecting cultural heritage, if they have not yet done so;

Invites the Director-General of UNESCO to inform the World Heritage Committee, at its twenty-fifth session, on the chronology of events related to the nomination for inclusion on the World Heritage List of the statues of Bamyan and other Afghan cultural heritage properties by the Government of the Islamic State of Afghanistan currently in exile;

Invites the World Heritage Committee, at its twenty-fifth session, to consider:

  1. ways and means by which the implementation of the World Heritage Convention can be reinforced, especially in relation to the other relevant UNESCO Conventions for the protection of cultural heritage;

  2. measures for enhancing the promotion of education, awareness raising activities and communication concerning the irreplaceable values of the cultural heritage of humanity;

  3. improved mechanisms for promoting the scientific documentation of potential and existing world cultural heritage properties;

Invites States Parties to inform the World Heritage Committee, at its twenty-fifth session, on any steps they have taken to encourage the Taliban forces to respect and protect all evidence of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan.

Invites the Director-General of UNESCO to inform the World Heritage Committee at its twenty-fifth session on mechanisms to inform, when necessary, the Secretary General of the United Nations of threats to global heritage so that the Security Council may have at its disposal information to enable it to decide on the possible use of sanctions to protect the cultural heritage of humanity."


II. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND THE TIMETABLE

II.1 The Bureau observed a minute of silence for the four distinguished members of the World Heritage community who have passed away since the twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee: Mr P.H.C. (Bing) Lucas (IUCN), Mr Toni Tjamiwa (Uluru- Kata Tjuta, Australia), Mr Hemi Kingi (Tongariro National Park, New Zealand), and His Excellency Ambassador Vrioni, Permanent Delegate of Albania to UNESCO.

II.2 The following non-governmental organisations were authorized to participate in the session: The Organization of World Heritage Cities, The Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation (Australia), The International Union of Technical Associations and Organizations, The Kishkinda Trust (India) and the Getty Conservation Institute.

II.3 The Bureau adopted the proposed agenda and timetable (WHC-2001/CONF.205.2/Rev.2) without any amendments.

II.4 The Chairperson then made a brief presentation of the issues he had been dealing with since his appointment in December 2000. He particularly stressed the interest he has taken in addressing important administrative and budgetary matters for the improvement of the work of the Centre and the positive response received from the UNESCO administration. He also referred to the initiative he has launched among the Committee members for the States Parties to the Convention to voluntarily double their contribution to the World Heritage Fund, a matter which will be brought forward to the 13th General Assembly in October. As one of his priorities during the last six months, he mentioned the work undertaken together with the Centre on the revision of the Operational Guidelines, a draft of which will be presented for discussion to the twenty-fifth session of the Committee in December 2001. He stressed that he particularly appreciated the important steps made by a working group of indigenous peoples' leaders from Canada, Australia and New Zealand towards the establishment of a World Heritage Indigenous Council of Experts (WHIPCOE). He highlighted the efforts made in developing interest in World Heritage among the countries from the Pacific Region, and encouraged further support being provided to these countries. He also mentioned how important it has been for the young people from the Pacific Region to have met at the World Heritage Youth Forum held in Cairns last December. The Chairperson finally thanked France, as the host country of the Bureau session, for having organized, during the weekend preceding this session, an extremely interesting visit to the World Heritage site of the Loire Valley for the Bureau members.


III. REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN BY THE SECRETARIAT SINCE THE TWENTY-FOURTH SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE

III.1 The Director of the World Heritage Centre, Mr Francesco Bandarin, presented the report on activities that the Secretariat had undertaken since the last session of the Committee. He used a power point presentation to highlight the main issues, while referring to Information Document WHC-2001/CONF.205/INF.3.

III.2 He indicated that three countries had newly ratified the Convention (Niue, Rwanda and the United Arab Emirates) thus bringing the number of States Parties to 164 out of 185 Member States of UNESCO. Efforts would be continued to bring in the remaining countries. He stressed that the success of the Convention was also evident through the high number of sites inscribed in the World Heritage List (690). He graphically showed a steady increase in nominations averaging 10 per cent per annum. The Director indicated that for the year 2001 the Bureau would consider fifty cultural, natural and mixed properties for nomination. He also referred to the decision of the last session of the Committee concerning the need for an analysis of the World Heritage List and tentative lists. Due to a lack of funds there had been no possibility to undertake a complete analysis. The exercise still needed to be carried out. Currently, there were 1,817 properties on the tentative lists but many of these tentative lists were outdated. Fifty countries did not have tentative lists. It was important to have tentative lists as a tool for the nomination of sites. The proposal was thus to do a preliminary analysis and define an initial set of categories to be presented to the twenty- fifth session of the Committee to be used for the selection of the 30 sites to be examined in 2003. The results of the study would be circulated among the States Parties and finalized in 2002 with financial assistance to be requested from the World Heritage Fund.

III.3 Among the activities concerning the implementation of the Global Strategy for a balanced and representative World Heritage List, the Director highlighted two recently held regional meetings: "Global Strategy and Periodic Reporting for World Heritage Cultural Properties in Southeast Asia" (Tana Toraja, Indonesia, April 2001) and "Drafting Meeting for Management Guidelines for Cultural Landscapes" (Cinque Terre, Italy, March 2001) and announced several forthcoming Global Strategy meetings planned for the period July - September 2001.

III.4 Concerning the format for periodic reporting adopted by the twenty-second session of the Committee in 1998, the Director indicated that an Action Plan was being developed for the follow-up to the Arab States periodic reporting exercise. For Africa, he mentioned two meetings held in February and March 2001, in Nakuru (Kenya) and Addis Ababa (Ethiopia). At the periodic reporting meeting for World Heritage cultural sites in Southeast Asia, held in Tana Toraja, Indonesia in April 2001, representatives from 10 States Parties requested that the deadline for submission of the national periodic reports be extended, in view of the change in the schedule of the World Heritage Committee. This led to the following proposal: Asia and the Pacific to be presented in June 2003 instead of December 2002, Latin America and the Caribbean to be presented in June 2004 instead of December 2003, and Europe and North America, June 2005/2006 instead of December 2004/2005.

III.5 The Director highlighted the close co-operation with the Advisory Bodies, who he described as "daily partners" and the meetings that have been held particularly in order to find ways to improve the quality of the nomination process. He stressed the new joint initiatives undertaken with ICOMOS on Modern Heritage, a category poorly represented on the World Heritage List, the successful co-operation with ICCROM and IUCN in the preparations for marking the 30th anniversary of the Convention.

III.6 He also informed the Bureau about progress made in the establishment of the Information Management System (IMS), particularly noting the recruitment of a senior IMS consultant and the steps taken to improve the Centre's equipment, on-going work on electronic capture of information and the integration of several existing data bases. An overall strategy has been prepared which actively involves all States Parties in data acquisition and dissemination.

III.7 The Director then presented issues concerning the follow-up to specific decisions discussed at the last Committee session, notably the revision of the Operational Guidelines, informing the Bureau that the draft prepared by the Centre will be circulated to the States Parties for comments. A drafting group will meet after the summer at UNESCO Headquarters, and its results will be presented for discussion at the next Committee session. The final adoption of the revised Guidelines is expected at the Committee session in 2001 or 2002.

III.8 Concerning the Global Training Strategy document, currently being finalized by the Advisory Bodies and the Centre, a document containing the basic principles and concrete actions for both cultural and natural heritage, will be presented to the Committee in December 2001.

III.9 As follow-up to the World Heritage Indigenous Peoples Forum held in Cairns, 2000, the Director indicated that a proposal, developed by a working group including representatives of Indigenous Peoples from Australia, Canada and New Zealand, was received beginning June (WHC-2001/CONF.205/WEB.3). He welcomed the presence at this session of two representatives of this Working Group, Ms Jo Willmot, the Indigenous Chairperson of Uluru Kata- Tjuta National Park, Australia and Ms Josie Weninger of Parks Canada.

III.10 Concerning the follow-up to the Pacific World Heritage Youth Forum, the Director informed the Bureau that an Action Plan for 2001-2004 has been prepared by the World Heritage Centre, in co-operation with the Education Sector (ED/UCQ), UNESCO Office in Apia (Samoa) and a working group of teachers and curriculum development officers from Samoa, Fiji, Solomon Islands, Australia and New Zealand.

III.11 The Director then informed the Bureau about strategic issues concerning the functioning of the World Heritage Centre, with regard to the main roles of the Centre as Secretariat to the Committee, i.e. organization of statutory meetings, archiving and providing documentation, assistance to the nomination and inscription process, monitoring of state of conservation and providing information to the public. He particularly drew the attention of the Bureau to the problems that the Centre was facing in terms of office space, including lack of public information space. He indicated however that World Heritage was designated as one of UNESCO's two flagship programmes in the Draft 31C/4 (UNESCO Medium Term Strategy 2002-2007), and that improvements in office space have been announced for the last quarter of this year. He informed the Bureau about staff changes for several regional desks within the Centre, as well as about the creation of a new Policy and Statutory Implementation Section. He announced reinforcement to the staff of the Centre (a specialist in communication) provided by Belgian FIT, by UNF to the Administration and the Natural Section, as well as a new team to work on the organization of the 30th anniversary of the Convention.

III.12 Concerning administration issues, the Director highlighted the continued implementation of the 1997 Audit Report recommendations. He drew the attention of the Bureau to the need to prepare a new biennial budget for the World Heritage Fund, and stressed that, within the UNESCO reform, the goals of the Centre were to obtain a higher delegation of authority and greater budgetary control, as well as access to the full amount of overhead costs and the creation of a separate bank account for the World Heritage Fund. He presented the various funding sources for World Heritage, notably the UNESCO Regular Budget, the World Heritage Fund, the extrabudgetary resources provided through partnerships and the Funds-in- Trust provided by a certain number of countries. He showed a diagram representing the evolution of the World Heritage Fund and extrabudgetary funds, as well as provisions for evolution during the period up to 2003, which indicate that chances are that there will be a decrease of over 30% within the World Heritage Fund, as well as a clear decrease in the funding provided through current partnerships. He indicated that an important source for funding in the future would be through bilateral arrangements, such as the France-UNESCO Co-operation agreements (with Italy, The Netherlands, Germany, Spain, etc) and other partnerships, such as those developed with the UNF, the World Bank, the OWHC, the World Monuments Fund, etc.

III.13 With respect to international technical assistance funds, the Director stressed that he was of the view that these funds should be managed more strategically. In particular, there was need for more flexibility, focusing on long-term impact and programmes that are coherent and preferably co-financed.

III.14 In the area of communication and information, he highlighted the achievements of the past few months, notably the redesign of the World Heritage Newsletter and the design of a cover for the World Heritage Papers, a series of publications featuring different reports and proceedings from workshops and meetings concerning World Heritage. The efforts to continue the publication and improve the quality of the World Heritage Review were also stressed. An important initiative launched in this period is the Users' Manual for the World Heritage emblem, intended to provide national and local authorities with a clearer visual identity of World Heritage through the use of its emblem. It also aims to ensure high standards for all materials published on World Heritage.

III.15 He evoked the continuous co-operation with 305 universities throughout the world, linked through the Forum UNESCO Universities and Heritage Programme, partnerships established with the tourism industries, as well as exhibits and colloquium on heritage organized in some States Parties and at UNESCO Headquarters.

III.16 The Director made a short presentation on the events linked to the 30th anniversary of the World Heritage Convention, stressing that this was an opportunity to evaluate the past achievements of the Convention and look towards the future, as well as to launch partnerships and new programmes.

III.17 The Chairman thanked the Director of the Centre for his clear and informative presentation and invited the representatives of the Working Group of Indigenous Peoples' Leaders from Australia and Canada to take the floor.

III.18 Ms Jo Willmot of Uluru Kata Tjuta, Australia, expressed the gratitude of the representatives of the indigenous peoples for the opportunity given to speak at this session. She explained how this Working Group had functioned since December. According to the traditions of her people she presented gifts to the Chairperson and the Bureau.

III.19 Ms Josie Weninger, Representative of Canada to the Working Group of Indigenous Peoples' Leaders, explained the terms of the Proposal for the establishment of a World Heritage Indigenous Peoples' Council of Experts (WHC-2001/CONF.205/WEB.3), WHIPCOE.

III.20 She suggested that the Proposal be circulated to States Parties and the Advisory Bodies for providing comments and for presentation to the next Committee session.

III.21 The Director of the Centre made a power point presentation entitled "Putting Reform into Action".

III.22 He began by recalling the major decision of the twenty-fourth session of the Committee (Cairns, 2000) to change the schedule of World Heritage Bureau and Committee meetings from a June/November cycle to an April/June cycle. He also recalled that the Committee had decided to abolish extraordinary sessions of the Bureau as of 2002.

III.23 The Director of the Centre summarized a number of issues that will need to be taken into account during a period of transition. He noted that the first biennial budget (2002-2003) needs to be presented to the Committee in Helsinki (2001). The agenda for future Bureau and Committee meetings will need to be arranged by topics.

III.24 The Director recalled that the Committee had decided (in Cairns, 2000) to defer a decision on the introduction of a sub- committee system. He reminded the Bureau that in fact Paragraph 131 of the Operational Guidelines already foresees the constitution of sub-committees during its regular sessions.

III.25 The Director of the Centre informed the Bureau that the venue of the June 2002 Committee session needed to be confirmed. He suggested that the agenda for the Committee in June 2002 could include strategic reflection on the development of the Information Management System, training and education for World Heritage, effective technical assistance to sites, monitoring technologies for World Heritage sites and a 2002 Declaration.

III.26 With only 8 weeks between the Bureau and the Committee as of 2002, the Director of the Centre suggested that there was a need to better differentiate between the role of the Bureau and the Committee. The same documents will go to the Bureau and the Committee with the only new document for the Committee being the Report of the Rapporteur of the Bureau. He queried whether all nominations should go straight to the Committee. He recalled that the Committee had requested that an Item A and B system of decision-making be introduced (A: items which are the subject of consensus for adoption and B: items requiring discussion by the Committee).

The Director reminded the Bureau of the following nomination schedule for year 2002:

Schedule of nominations for year 2000 and conditions for acceptance:

III.27 The Director also indicated concern that with the Bureau and Committee meetings taking place in April and June and with extraordinary sessions of the Bureau having been abolished as of 2002, there was a potential 10-month lag on decision-making for International Assistance requests that is currently approved by Bureau. He also noted the need to adjust the timetable for Periodic Reporting, as requested by Asian States Parties at the recent Periodic Reporting meeting in Indonesia.

III.28 The Director then made comments concerning documentation and communication. He acknowledged that for the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau, the first dispatch of documents was 8 days late. He however referred to progress with documentation reform, noting that there had been a reduction in the number of working documents for the Bureau session compared to the Bureau session in June 2000. He drew the attention of the Bureau to the new category of WEB documents. The first decision-making guide available to the Bureau for the first time was on an experimental basis and he welcomed comments on this experiment. He also informed the Bureau that the nomination and international assistance documents had been redesigned.

III.29 With reference to communication with the Committee and States Parties, the Director of the Centre suggested that it was necessary to re-think the purpose, structure and content of the Secretariat's report and to decide whether some other form of regular report was necessary. He also informed the Bureau that he would continue to hold regular information meetings with the Permanent Delegations to UNESCO of States Parties. The first meeting had been held on 16 February 2001 and the second would take place in the last quarter of 2001.

III.30 The Director of the Centre completed his presentation by referring to Rule 13 of the Rules of Procedure that defines the composition and role of the Bureau. He commented that this Rule indicated a limited role for the Bureau as being to co- ordinate the work of the Committee. In contrast Bureau meetings are being attended by more than 200 people with substantial debate and there are no separate Rules of Procedure. He referred to legal advice from the UNESCO Office for Legal Affairs that had stated that from a legal point of view, neither the World Heritage Convention nor the Rules of Procedure provide for the Bureau to deal with policy matters.

III.31 In conclusion, the Director underscored the fact that these grey areas arising from the reform programme agreed to in Cairns would be gradually addressed.

III.32 In addition, he stressed the need to have a decision made with respect to the holding of the World Heritage Committee in Budapest to allow the Hungarian hosts to commence preparations for the Committee meeting in June 2002.


III.33 Invited by the Chairman to comment on the two presentations made by the Director of the Centre and the interventions by the representatives of the Indigenous Peoples' Working Group, several Bureau members congratulated the Director on the clarity of his presentation and on the work accomplished during this transitional phase of the implementation of the Convention.

III.34 The Delegates of Thailand and Zimbabwe congratulated the Indigenous Peoples' Working Group on their work, but at the same time expressed their concern about the implications the work of WHIPCOE would have to the World Heritage inscription and conservation process, and if this would not lead to a permanent mechanism being established as another advisory body to the Committee. The Delegate of Thailand felt that there were only a few countries in the world where interventions by such a Council may be needed, and that internal agreements among the heritage authorities and the indigenous communities themselves would be more appropriate in such cases.

III.35 The Delegate of Zimbabwe, while endorsing statements by the Delegate of Thailand, raised the question of the work done on the definition of the term "indigenous". He also questioned if it was realistic to expect that the States Parties would have a chance to undertake a serious study of this proposal and provide comments by the time of the next Committee session.

III.36 The Delegate of Canada fully supported the work done by the Working Group, which she felt should be enlarged in order to allow more voices to be heard. Ways had to be found to involve Advisory Bodies and States Parties.

III.37 The Observer of the United States commented on two points: the revision of the Operational Guidelines, suggesting the participation of a representative from his State Party to the drafting group, and on WHIPCOE, thanking the Working Group for their proposal. He stressed that the full variety of States Parties and sites (in particular the properties inscribed according to cultural criterion (vi)) that may be affected by this issue has not yet been fully realized. He also underlined the importance of defining the term "indigenous". He stated that this was a critical issue which should be given due consideration and which may lead to one of the most important developments in the application of the Convention. He expressed the wish of the United States to be part of this process.

III.38 The Delegate of Australia suggested that support in principle should be expressed, allowing for further work on the definition of the term "indigenous" and for the issue to go forward to the Committee for discussion as a policy matter.

III.39 The Delegate of Ecuador expressed the wish of his country to participate in the enlarged Working Group, as did IUCN and the Observer of Belize who strongly supported the proposal for the establishment of WHIPCOE.

III.40 The working group which was created included representatives of Australia, Belize, Canada, Ecuador, the United States of America, ICOMOS, IUCN and ICCROM. It met twice during the Bureau session to prepare the recommendation of the Bureau to the twenty-fifth session of the World Heritage Committee (Helsinki, 2001).

III.41 Ms Josie Weninger (Canada) and Ms Jo Willmot (Uluru Kata-Tjuta National Park, Australia) presented the outcomes of the working group to the Bureau. They proposed that a workshop be held to further develop the concept of WHIPCOE in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada from 17 to 19 September 2001. The workshop would include a working group of indigenous representatives from Australia, Belize, Canada, Ecuador, New Zealand, the United States of America and the Secretariat for the Convention on Biological Diversity along with representatives from ICOMOS, IUCN, ICCROM, the United Nations Indigenous Peoples Working Group, the World Heritage Centre and other interested parties. Their work will be facilitated by the World Heritage Centre. Ms Weninger (Canada) will act as the interim co-ordinator of the working group until a Chair is chosen at the Workshop in September. A request for the Workshop to be funded from the World Heritage Fund will be submitted to the World Heritage Centre.

III.42 The Bureau agreed to the proposals of the working group and adopted the following recommendation to the twenty-fifth session of the World Heritage Committee:

With reference to the recommendations of the Indigenous Peoples Forum (Cairns, 2000) and the decision of the twenty- fourth session of the World Heritage Committee (Cairns, 2000), the Bureau,
  1. Notes the progress to date in the development of the concept of a World Heritage Indigenous Peoples Council of Experts (WHIPCOE) to ensure indigenous voices are heard in efforts to protect and promote the world's natural and cultural heritage.

  2. Expresses its support in principle for the concept of a World Heritage Indigenous Peoples Council of Experts (WHIPCOE) to be discussed at the 25th session of the World Heritage Committee which will meet in Helsinki, Finland in December 2001.

  3. Agrees that further development of the concept should be undertaken (before the 25th session of the World Heritage Committee), including consultation with other indigenous peoples, regional organizations and the UN Working Group of Indigenous Peoples, other States Parties and the Advisory Bodies (IUCN, ICOMOS and ICCROM). To achieve this, the Bureau recommends that a representative workshop be convened by the World Heritage Centre in partnership with the Indigenous Working Group, which would receive assistance from the World Heritage Fund and other appropriate sources.

  4. Establishes a WHIPCOE Working Group comprised of indigenous peoples and State Party representatives from Australia, Belize, Canada, Ecuador, New Zealand, United States of America, as well as representatives of ICOMOS, IUCN, ICCROM and any other indigenous peoples and State Party representatives who may wish to participate.

  5. Requests the World Heritage Centre to circulate document WHC-2001/CONF.205/WEB.3 by Circular Letter and a summary of interventions made on this subject at the June 2001 Bureau meeting to all State Parties to the Convention and to the World Heritage Advisory Bodies and to invite them to comment on the proposal.

  6. Requests the World Heritage Centre, to the extent possible and in consultation with States Parties, to compile a list of properties on the World Heritage List and the tentative lists which are likely to have indigenous peoples' issues which may relate to the management of these sites.

  7. Invites the Working Group to further develop the WHIPCOE proposal in consultation with the World Heritage Centre, taking into account comments from State Parties and the Advisory Bodies, and to deliver a progress report to the twenty-fifth session of the World Heritage Committee to be held in Finland in December 2001, including the results of the Workshop.

III.43 The Delegate of Australia commented that the WHIPCOE proposal could be regarded as the most important initiative to have derived from the twenty-fourth session of the Committee (Cairns, 2000). He said that the issues being addressed were of importance to Australia as a nation and to all people working to protect the treasury of our global heritage.

III.44 The Chairperson closed the discussion on the WHIPCOE proposal by noting that it represented a very important moment for the World Heritage movement.

III.45 The Delegate of Australia commented on the composition of the drafting group for the revised Operational Guidelines, stressing that participants should include: members of the Bureau, experts invited by the Centre, Advisory Bodies and individual experts in their personal capacity.

III.46 On funding, the Delegate of Canada pointed out that the World Heritage Fund would never be sufficient but should be seen as a catalyst to bring in other players. It was also important to adopt a re-tooling approach to address the issue of insufficient funding. She suggested that all the questions raised by the Secretariat in its presentation of reform issues needed to be clarified, in order to have a clear idea of all the implications these changes would have in the implementation of the Convention. Concerning the revision of the Operational Guidelines, she stressed the need to ensure that there be an adequate balance from different regions of the world among the participants in the drafting group. She commended the Secretariat for initiating the Users' Guide Manual project, which she felt would be a very useful tool in promoting World Heritage Corporate identity.

III.47 The Delegate of Morocco congratulated the Working Group of Indigenous Peoples' Leaders for the work accomplished. Commenting on the Secretariat's report, he sought clarification on the various sources of the budget handled by the Centre and the timing of the decisions concerning the use of these budgetary sources - the UNESCO Regular Programme budget, the World Heritage Fund and extrabudgetary sources. The Director explained that these were three independent sources, and the UNESCO General Conference had no influence on the World Heritage Fund, while the allocation of extrabudgetary funds was in most cases decided upon by the donors themselves. The Delegate of Morocco also made some personal reflections on the work of the Centre over the last three years, and commended their efficiency and dedication. He expressed however his concern with the developments since the last Committee session in Cairns some of which could be termed "too fast".

III.48 The Chairperson called upon the States Parties who had not yet paid their dues to the World Heritage Fund, urging them to fulfil their duty in order to be able to fully participate in the World Heritage conservation process.

III.49 Returning to this agenda item on the last day of the session, the Delegate of Australia recalled the need to prepare clear draft revised Operational Guidelines for the Committee to examine in Helsinki. He highlighted the need for a transparent and efficient process to be established for the preparation of the draft.

III.50 The Secretariat informed the Bureau of the full agenda of World Heritage and UNESCO statutory meetings to be organized up until June 2002.

III.51 The Bureau agreed that the first compilation of the Operational Guidelines that has been prepared by the Centre would be posted on the Centre's web site (http://www.unesco.org/whc/opgu/) and distributed to States Parties for comment in July 2001. Comments from States Parties (to be provided in writing in English or French) should be submitted to the Centre by 7 September 2001. An information meeting will be organized at UNESCO Headquarters by the Centre in September/October to inform States Parties of issues to be discussed at the forthcoming sessions of the General Assembly and World Heritage Committee. The Centre will inform the information meeting of progress with the preparation of the revised Operational Guidelines and provide a brief overview of the comments received from the States Parties.

III.52 A meeting of a small Drafting Group to prepare the revision of the Operational Guidelines will be held at UNESCO Headquarters from 8 to 12 October 2001 instead of 10-14 September 2001 as originally arranged. The Drafting Group will include an expert nominated by each of the seven members of the Bureau, a representative from each of the Advisory Bodies and depending on the other expertise required, three additional experts to be defined by the Director of the World Heritage Centre in consultation with the Chair and at least two representatives of the Centre. The revised Operational Guidelines will be submitted for discussion and decision to the twenty-fifth session of the Committee in Helsinki (2001). If necessary an additional meeting to prepare the revised Operational Guidelines for publication could be held either before or after the Bureau session in April 2002 and, if necessary, at the twenty-sixth session of the Committee in Budapest, Hungary. On an exceptional basis, the Bureau decided to allocate the sum of US$30,000 from the World Heritage Fund in 2001 (Chapter III - International Assistance) for the organisation of the meeting of the Drafting Group.

III.53 The Director of the Centre informed the Bureau of three items relating to the reform agenda: (1) the change in the schedule of the Periodic Reporting; (2) the ceiling of International Assistance and (3) the differentiation between the Bureau and the Committee. The Delegate of Morocco stated that the latter was not a point of discussion as the division of labour is clear - as the Bureau prepares the work of the Committee. Concerning international assistance, the Chairperson suggested that the ceilings be raised for international assistance requests, for preparatory assistance from US$ 20,000 to US$ 25,000 (Chair), and from US$ 30,000 to US$ 40,000 (Bureau), and for emergency assistance from US$ 50,000 to US$ 60,000 (Chair), and from US$ 75,000 to US$ 100,000 (Bureau). The Delegate of Canada suggested that requests could be approved during the 10-month period from the Committee to the next Bureau through consultation process among the Bureau members, and hence it is not necessary to modify the ceilings. The Bureau nevertheless recommends to the Committee to approve the changes in the schedule of Periodic Reporting and the new ceilings proposed for international assistance.


IV. PREPARATION OF THE THIRTEENTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION (OCTOBER 2001)

A. INFORMATION CONCERNING THE THIRTEENTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES (OCTOBER 2001).

IV.1 The Chairperson informed the Bureau that the thirteenth General Assembly of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention would take place at UNESCO Headquarters from 30 - 31 October 2001.

IV.2 The Chairperson referred the Bureau to document WHC- 2001/CONF.205/3A that provides general background information on the preparation of the working documents for the thirteenth General Assembly.

IV.3 The Bureau examined and approved the following documents (included as Annexes in WHC-2001/CONF.205/3A) for submission to the General Assembly:

Provisional Agenda (Annex 1) WHC-2001/CONF.206/1

The draft agenda includes all the agenda items which are submitted to the General Assembly meetings and includes:

Item 8 Representivity of the World Heritage List (follow-up to the Resolution adopted by the twelfth General Assembly of States Parties); and,

Item 9 Equitable Representation in the World Heritage Committee (follow-up to the Resolution adopted by the twelfth General Assembly of States Parties, including amendments to Rules of Procedure 13.1 and 13. 8).

Provisional List of Documents (Annex II) WHC-2001/CONF.206/INF.1

Representivity of the World Heritage List (follow-up to the Resolution adopted by the twelfth General Assembly of States Parties) (Annex III) WHC-2001/CONF.206/5.

An important section of the document is the decision of the twenty-fourth session of the Committee (Cairns, 2000) on representivity of the List. No new text, other than the Committee decision is included in this document for the General Assembly.

Equitable representation in the World Heritage Committee (follow-up to the Resolution adopted by the twelfth General Assembly of States Parties, including amendments to the Rules of Procedure 13.1 and 13.8) (Annex IV) WHC-2001/CONF.206/6.

The document includes a proposal from the twenty-fourth session of the Committee to change Rule 13.1 and Rule 13.8 of the Rules of Procedure. The Committee's decision is made in an attempt to ensure equitable representation in the World Heritage Committee. The Committee decision calls for the resolution, if adopted by the General Assembly, to be implemented immediately. No new text, other than the Committee decision is included in the document for the General Assembly.

Elections to the World Heritage Committee (Annex V) WHC-2001/CONF.206/7.

The purpose of the document is to outline the election procedures, which could be changed if the proposals to amend the Rules of Procedure 13.1 and 13.8.

IV.4 The Bureau requested the World Heritage Centre to circulate a note to all States Parties to explain the proposed new election procedures, particularly in relation to the proposed revision to Rule 13.8 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly.

B. COMMITTEE'S REPORT ON ITS ACTIVITIES FOR 2000-2001 TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE THIRTY-FIRST SESSION OF THE GENERAL CONFERENCE OF UNESCO

IV.5 The Chairperson presented to the Bureau the draft text of the Committee's report on its activities for 2000-2001 (WHC-2001/CONF.205/3B) to be submitted to the thirty-first session of the General Conference of UNESCO.

IV.6 The Bureau approved the draft report for submission to the thirty-first session of the General Conference of UNESCO (13 October - 3 November 2001). The Chairperson informed the Bureau that the report would be updated and finalized by the Secretariat and submitted to the General Assembly and the General Conference.


V. STATE OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES INSCRIBED ON THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER AND ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST

State of conservation of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger

V.I The Bureau reviewed state of conservation reports of nineteen natural and five cultural properties inscribed in the List of World Heritage in Danger and included in the Document WHC-2001/CONF.205/4. Updates of actions for consideration by the Bureau for a selected number of the twenty-four properties were provided in WHC-2001/CONF.205/1. In addition, the Secretariat, representatives of IUCN and ICOMOS and delegates of concerned States Parties orally reported new information that had become available since the finalisation of the two documents mentioned above. The Bureau reviewed information provided for each of the 24 sites.

A. Natural Heritage

Iguaçu National Park (Brazil)

V.2 The Bureau was informed that the Minister of State for the Environment, by letter of 19 June 2001, notified the Centre that the Colon Road had been definitively closed as of 13 June 2001. Nearly 300 cadres belonging to the Brazilian Federal Police took part in the operation, sinking the raft used as transport and scarifying the 17 km road. Replanting of the impacted area with native species is now completed. The local people are not happy about the closure of the road and the Government of Brazil is seeking the co-operation of all concerned, including the World Heritage Centre, to improve relations with the people. The Minister has requested that since the legal order to close the Colon Road is now effectively enforced the Committee consider removing Iguacu from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

V.3 The Delegate of Brazil noted that a guard-post is being established at a point where the entrance to the road was located to prevent any illegal entry. A new management plan for Iguaçu is ready for implementation and includes measures to improve relations with local communities affected by the road closure. The Delegate noted that the declaration of Iguaçu as a World Heritage site in Danger by the Committee played an important role in his Government's decision to enforce the legal mandate to close the road, despite opposition from local people, and thanked the Bureau, the Centre and IUCN for their support and co-operation to preserve the World Heritage values of the site.

V.4 Visitor facilities in the site have improved; introduction of bus transport in the Park is expected to reduce visitor traffic by 70% by the end of 2001 and an environmental impact assessment of helicopter flights over the waterfalls is proposed. In October 2000, the first workshop on the Management of Natural World Heritage sites in South America was convened in Foz do Iguaçu. Since then, staff of Iguacu of Brazil and Iguazu National Park of Argentina meet on a monthly basis for transborder co-ordination of management activities.

V.5 The Bureau commended the Government's courageous and decisive action in closing the Colon road. The Bureau noted that the closure of the road has alienated the local communities and invited the State Party, IUCN and the Centre to co-operate to build goodwill and support of the people for the conservation of Iguacu. The Bureau noted with satisfaction the efforts taken by the State Party to improve visitor flow and management in the Park and welcomed the increasing transborder co-operation with the Iguazu National Park of Argentina. The Bureau recommended that, subject to continued positive developments, the Committee, at its forthcoming session, would consider the removal of Iguacu from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria)

V.6 The Bureau noted that the State Party has yet to respond to the recommendations of the twenty-fourth session of the Committee (Cairns, 2000). The Bureau learnt that the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences prepared, with financial support from the Ramsar Small Grants Fund for Wetlands Conservation and Wise Use, a management plan for Srebarna. The Ramsar Bureau has recommended the establishment of an indicator system with several simple, specific and easily measurable parameters to systematically monitor and rapidly detect changes in the state of conservation of Srebarna. In addition, the Ramsar Bureau has suggested that the Bulgarian authorities:

V.7 The Bureau commended the State Party and the Ramsar Secretariat for the preparation of the management plan and invited the State Party to consider the above-mentioned recommendations of Ramsar for further refining the plan. The Bureau urged the Centre and IUCN to consult with the State Party and determine an early date for a Centre/Ramsar/IUCN mission to the site in 2001 in order to submit a detailed report to the twenty-fifth session of the Committee in December 2001. The proposed mission should study issues such as: plans and processes for the preparation of a project to establish a bilateral Ramsar site with Romania to promote transboundary co-operation; long-term water management regimes; links and water-flows between the Danube and Srebarna; specific management needs in the short-to-medium term, including technical and financial support from external sources; and indicators for the systematic monitoring of the state of conservation of the site. In accordance with the wish of the last session of the Committee (Cairns, 2000), the Bureau also recommended that the mission review the sustainability of the rehabilitation efforts undertaken; and determine whether the twenty-fifth session of the Committee should consider removing Srebarna from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

Manovo Gounda-St.Floris National Park (Central African Republic (CAR))

V.8 The Bureau noted that representatives of the Centre, IUCN, the State Party and the Earth Conservancy, a conservation NGO working closely with the State Party to protect the site, undertook a site visit from 5 to 13 May 2001 to assess the state of conservation and prepare a rehabilitation plan for the site. The Bureau took note of the detailed conclusions and recommendations of the mission report, including description of urgent actions needed for the rehabilitation of the site, outlined in WHC-2001/CONF.205/INF.6.

V.9 The Bureau learnt that the primary threat to this site, as reported in the Bureau and Committee sessions of the last two years, originates from poachers coming from outside the borders of the CAR. The mission had received direct support from the President of the CAR who had met the mission team and made public his Government's strong commitment to the conservation of the site. Despite the transborder poaching threats, the site still contains substantial numbers of key wildlife species. Given adequate protection, in combination with efforts to promote sustainable economic development in the broader region and promote co-operation with neighbouring countries to control poaching, the site could be rehabilitated within a reasonable period of time.

V.10 The Bureau thanked the President and the Government of the CAR for assisting the Centre, IUCN and the Earth Conservancy to field a successful mission to the site and identify urgent rehabilitation measures. The Bureau noted with satisfaction the conclusions and recommendations of the mission, including urgent rehabilitation measures and the costs of their implementation, described in document WHC-2001/CONF.205/INF.6. The Bureau agreed with the mission team that rehabilitation and conservation of the site must be linked to socio-economic development of local communities in and around the site. The Bureau invited the Director-General of UNESCO to write to all the neighbouring countries around the CAR to seek their full co-operation in curbing trans-border poaching which is threatening wildlife populations in and around the site. The Bureau invited the Centre and IUCN to work together with all parties concerned to prepare a fund-raising plan for the implementation of the urgent rehabilitation measures, a realistic workplan including institutional responsibilities for the implementation of those measures, and a time frame for the effective rehabilitation of the site and benchmarks that could signal improvements in the state of conservation of the site and assist the Committee's decision concerning the eventual removal of the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau requested that the fund-raising plan and the workplan be submitted to the Committee session in Finland in December 2001.

World Heritage sites of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC):

V.11 The Bureau reviewed the state of conservation of each of the five sites and observed the following:

Virunga National Park

V.12 In Virunga a joint monitoring exercise carried out by the International Gorilla Conservation Programme (IGCP), Fauna and Flora International (FFI), WWF-International and the Diane Fossey Gorilla Fund International (DFGF-I) revealed that the population of the mountain gorillas has increased from 320 before the war (1989) to 355 in 2001. Control of illegal activities in the southern sector has been more effective due to co-operation between staff and military forces. However, many other indicators of the site's integrity are showing negative trends: for example, 45% of the central sector of the Park is cultivated and nearly 2500 villagers reside along the Park's boundaries in the central sector and are decimating the tree cover along the Kabasha escarpment. Cultivation of food crops, including export crops like tea and coffee, is rising in the eastern sectors of the Park. A large part of the Rutshuru hunting area is occupied by illegal settlements and plantations. In the northern sector, the 67,700 ha forest from Lubilia to Kasindi is invaded by logging groups and others who are illegally constructing houses with authorisation from local politicians. In 2000, more than 1500 animals of various species were killed using automatic weapons. The guards were not paid for several months and do not have weapons.

Garamba National Park

V.13 Among the five DRC sites, conditions for the conservation of wildlife are more stable in Garamba. The staff appear to have established good relations with other stakeholders in the area and minimised poaching threats; the number of the northern white rhino population is estimated to be similar to pre-war levels, i.e. 25 - 35 individuals. The need to sustain this relative stability in the conservation status of Garamba is however a continuing concern for all stakeholders.

Kahuzi-Biega National Park

V.14 Reports received by IUCN point to extensive poaching on wildlife, including on the endangered lowland gorillas and elephants. 90% of the Park is still inaccessible to the staff, the status of the lowland gorillas and the elephants is of serious concern. The Diane Fossey Gorilla Fund estimates that the population of the endangered lowland gorilla, about 8000 before the war, may have dropped to around 1000; elephants have become a rare sight in Kahuzi-Biega and most of the decline in the populations of these two flagship species is attributed to poaching by "coltan miners" and other illegal residents in the Park. Kahuzi-Biega has become the prime site in DRC for coltan mining. Coltan is a mixture of columbite and tantalite and is in high demand in its processed form by high-technology firms dealing with: nuclear medicine, electronic circuitry and computer chips, superconductivity research, mobile phones and synthesis of corrosion-resistant alloys for use in jet engines. More than 10,000 people entered Kahuzi- Biega for coltan mining and related activities over the last twelve months.

Okapi Wildlife Reserve

V.15 This site too has been threatened by coltan miners. Efforts to control poaching and mining have been somewhat more successful in Okapi than in Kahuzi Biega. The armed forces of Uganda assisted the staff to evict several poachers from Okapi in late 2000. The leader of the rebel group in control of this part of the DRC territory had ordered the removal of all miners from the site. Effective action is being taken by the staff and the rebel forces in the area and the threat to this site from miners and poachers has been brought under some degree of control relative to the situation in Kahuzi Biega. The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) of USA had written to concerned authorities in Uganda appreciating their support for the conservation of Okapi. However, WCS had expressed its strong objection to an incident where some Ugandan soldiers had allegedly assaulted a staff member of Okapi. WCS requested the Ugandan authorities to investigate the matter and take measures to prevent the recurrence of such incidents. The Ugandan forces have withdrawn from the area in response to recent peace initiatives encouraged by the new President of the DRC. Coltan miners appear to be returning to the area. WCS has reported that the miners' activity in the periphery of the Reserve has increased and that staff capacity needs to be urgently strengthened in order to stabilise the state of conservation of the site.

V.16 The Tantalum-Niobium International Study Centre (T.I.C.) located in Brussels, Belgium, estimates that less than 15% of the world's tantalum supply comes from Africa. T.I.C. in Brussels, Belgium, has issued a press statement condemning the illegal mining in Kahuzi Biega and Okapi and in other protected areas of DRC. The T.I.C. has agreed to:

V.17 An appeal was made by the Director General of IUCN in March 2001 to the Heads of States in the DRC, Uganda and Rwanda and to world-wide media and interest groups, calling upon buyers of coltan to ensure that they are purchasing the product from lawful sources outside of World Heritage sites. The IUCN appeal called on the Governments of the DRC, Uganda and Rwanda to help enforce the immediate removal of miners from within the boundaries of both affected sites, and invited the three Governments concerned and the buyers of coltan to take necessary steps to find alternative livelihoods for all miners evicted from World Heritage sites of the DRC.

Salonga National Park

V.18 This was the only site under direct control of ICCN- Kinshasa. In Salonga, the Director General of ICCN has developed a number of small projects supporting the conservation of key wildlife species in co-operation with NGO partners like the Zoological Society of Milwaukee (ZSM) and the Max Plank Institute (MPI) of Germany. IUCN has been informed by ICCN that uncontrolled poaching of elephants and the bonobos, lack of equipment for staff for anti-poaching work, insufficient numbers of guards and inadequate training available for guards are some of the major constraints to the effective protection of this site. The plight of the bonobos has attracted particular attention of specialised NGOs such as the Bonobo Conservation Initiative (Washington, D.C., USA). UNEP has launched a Great Apes Initiative to protect the gorillas, chimpanzees, the bonobos and other related species; the most important habitats of several of these ape species are concentrated in the World Heritage sites of the DRC and protected areas of neighbouring countries like Rwanda and Uganda.

V.19 The UNESCO/DRC/UNF-UNFIP Project - Biodiversity Conservation in Regions of Armed Conflict - conservation of the World Heritage sites in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - was designed and launched in 2000 as a step to build the morale of the staff who demonstrated dedication to conservation of the sites in the DRC by continuing to remain and work in a region where risks to their lives and property are significant. Paying monthly support payments, performance related bonuses and other remuneration to site staff as a way of stabilising the conservation situation in each site was considered a priority. Despite legal and administrative delays during late 2000/early 2001, contracts have now been finalised with NGO partners to deliver support payments to site staff of all five sites.

V.20 Monthly support payments, performance related bonuses and other remuneration to more than 500 staff in Virunga, about 230 in Garamba and about 60 in Okapi had begun to reach the sites and will cover a period backdated to October 2000. In the case of Salonga, the Zoological Society of Milwaukee (ZSM) has begun transferring payments to the site with the help of several partners in Kinshasa including the UN Organisation Mission in DRC (MONUC). In Kahuzi Biega too, the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), in co-operation with the GTZ (Germany) project for the site is assisting the Centre in transferring funds for the benefit of this site staff. In Salonga and Kahuzi Biega payment to staff will be backdated as of February-March 2001. The delays incurred in establishing contracts with NGOs for transferring year 1 payments to site staff were regretted by all concerned but will help to prevent such delays in establishing similar contracts at the beginning of the subsequent years of the 4-year project. Hence the path for effective delivery of assistance to site staff on a continuous basis for the period 2001-2004 has now been cleared.

V.21 Other arrangements for the execution of site-specific and joint activities, e.g. biodiversity monitoring, training for site staff in law enforcement monitoring, purchase and delivery of equipment essential for staff performance of duties etc., are being negotiated with selected NGO partners and will be finalised soon. Possible dates for a high level diplomatic mission to the DRC, Uganda and Rwanda, and the possibilities for the Director-General of UNESCO leading such a mission, are also under study.

V.22 The Bureau was pleased to note that the Belgium Government has approved a 4-year project (for 300,000 Euros) to support community-based activities for the conservation of the DRC sites. This project brings in essential benefits to the sites through the work of local communities who must support the work of site staff for effective conservation. UNESCO and the DRC Government are about to finalise the Operational Plan for the execution of the UNESCO/Belgium/DRC Project. Project execution will commence soon and run parallel to the UNESCO/DRC/UNF-UNFIP Project.

V.23 A UN Panel Report on the "Illegal exploitation of mineral and forest resources in the DRC", released in April 2001 holds many of the African countries implicated in the war in the DRC responsible for unsustainable and often illegal resource extraction practices in DRC. Most of those countries are States Parties to the World Heritage Convention. In respect of the coltan mining threat reported earlier, IUCN pointed out that the UN Panel has recommended that the "Security Council should immediately declare a temporary embargo on the import or export of coltan (and other resources)....." and that "UNESCO in collaboration with UNEP, the Secretariat of CITES and non-governmental organisations working in the DRC, should assess the extent of damage to wildlife in Garamba National Park, Kahuzi Biega National Park, the Okapi Reserve and Virunga National Park, and propose sanctions to be taken against those countries whose Governments were involved in the mass killings of endangered species". The report's findings imply that many African States Parties involved in the war in the DRC may have failed to comply with Article 6, paragraph 3 of the Convention that calls upon States Parties to refrain from actions that may directly or indirectly damage the Heritage situated in the territory of another State Party to the Convention.

V.24 Pointing out the historical responsibilities of Belgium to the DRC, the Delegate of Belgium expressed his country's satisfaction at being able to support conservation of World Heritage sites in the DRC. He, however, emphasised that poverty is the prime cause driving unsustainable exploitation of resources in the DRC, including the illegal exploitation of coltan. He called for the Convention's emphasis on international co-operation, as highlighted in Article 11 of the Convention, as the best approach to appeal to other States Parties, including the closest neighbours of the DRC, to support the conservation of World Heritage sites in the DRC.

V.25 The Delegate of Thailand expressed concern with the situation in Kahuzi Biega, as 90% of the area was inaccessible and there were 10,000 mines. In such a situation he wondered whether de-listing of the property was not advisable. In response to that, the Centre and IUCN, noted that considerations for de-listing of any one of the DRC sites, including the worst-affected Kahuzi Biega National Park, are premature at present. It was not possible to quantify the problem in the absence of research. The area had lowland gorillas, a "flagship" species. In addition, there were positive developments indicating that peace would return to the DRC. The Delegate of Morocco observed that ecosystem rehabilitation will have to figure prominently in the future management of the sites in the DRC in order to revive wildlife populations that are being decimated during the current period of conflict and restore other World Heritage values which are under severe pressure.

V.26 The Bureau invited the Director-General of UNESCO to write, quoting appropriate texts from the UN report on the illegal exploitation of natural resources in the DRC, to Heads of concerned African States Parties to the Convention, recalling their obligations to comply with Article 6, paragraph 3 of the Convention and inviting them to ensure that their representatives and agents in the DRC refrain from taking actions that may directly or indirectly threaten the integrity of the World Heritage sites in the DRC. The Bureau urged the Centre and IUCN to liaise with T.I.C. to explore ways and means to initiate a dialogue between the member companies of T.I.C. and their respective Governments, States Parties to the Convention. Such a dialogue should make the T.I.C. membership fully aware of their countries' obligations under the World Heritage Convention to protect the heritage of all States Parties to the Convention, including that of the DRC. The Bureau noted with satisfaction that monthly support and other payments are now reaching the site staff and thanked the UNF for providing this timely assistance that will continue until 2004. The Bureau stressed, however, the need for the Centre and its project partners to ensure effective and timely execution of the 4-year UNESCO/DRC/UNF-UNFIP Project and requested the Centre to submit a report on the progress achieved by the project to the twenty-fifth session of the Committee in December 2001.

V.27 The Bureau also thanked the Government of Belgium for approving, within the framework of its co-operation agreement with Belgium, a project to support local community activities for conserving the World Heritage sites of the DRC. The Bureau recalled its discussions during the special opening session on the morning of 25 June 2001 on heritage conservation in regions of civil unrest and armed conflict, and noted that the implementation of UNESCO/DRC/UNF-UNFIP and the UNESCO/DRC/Belgium Projects in the DRC could provide valuable lessons on the subject. Any future discussions on this theme should henceforth include both World Cultural as well as Natural Heritage.

Sangay National Park (Ecuador)

V.28 The Bureau noted that following the recommendation of the Committee made at its last session (Cairns, Australia, November - December 2000), Sangay National Park has been included as one of the ten pilot sites in a UNESCO/IUCN/UNF-UNFIP Project entitled: "Enhancing our heritage: monitoring and managing for success in World Natural Heritage sites". The 4-year project financed at a total cost of US$ 2 million by UNF-UNFIP will elaborate and test a monitoring regime for Sangay National Park with indicators and benchmarks, including those that could signal the timing of the removal of the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger. This project will promote and assess implementation of the recommendations from the UNESCO/IUCN mission to this site. Project activities specific to Sangay and two other Latin American pilot sites will commence in the second half of 2001. The Bureau invited the Centre to submit a brief update on the progress achieved in initiating project activities in Sangay to the twenty-fifth session of the Committee to be convened in Helsinki, Finland, in December 2001.

Simen National Park (Ethiopia)

V.29 The Bureau learned that a Centre/IUCN mission was fielded to the site from 8 to 13 April 2001 and noted the detailed report on the conclusions and recommendations of the mission submitted as WHC-2001/CONF.205/INF.7.

V.30 The Bureau was informed that a high-level mission to the site had been fielded in March 2000 by the Amhara Regional Government which is now directly responsible for the Park. As a result of that mission, a high-level Simen Mountains Development and Conservation Co-ordination Committee, chaired by the Vice- President of the Regional Government, has been set up to consider the recommendations of the mission that relate to: (a) Park boundary adjustment; (b) re-alignment of the road; (c) development in the buffer zone and beyond; (d) relocation of some villages from the centre of the Park; and (e) integration of tourism into management.

V.31 There are an estimated 1,450 households inside the Park and the human population growth in the Park is around 1.5 - 2.0%. The total cultivated area in the Park, about 24%, has not increased significantly since the time of its establishment in 1969, but grazing pressure from livestock on forests and grasslands has intensified and is particularly heavy near human settlements. The endangered Walia Ibex tends to have some natural protection in the steep escarpments in the eastern boundary of the Park. Large areas of the unique afro-alpine habitat in the region, which are the main stronghold for the Ethiopian wolf, remain outside the boundaries of the Park and some efforts are underway to protect them by modifying the boundaries of the Park and to reduce poaching on the ibex. However, a systematic monitoring regime to track wildlife population trends is not yet in place.

V.32 A road that has been built through the Park to Chennek Camp and extending southwards has had erosion impacts and has provided greater access to the Park's resources, including for tourism development. Enforcement of regulations is weak; livestock grazing, which poses significant threats to natural habitats in the Park, needs to be controlled in order to preserve the World Heritage values of the site.

V.33 The Bureau thanked the Government of Ethiopia, and in particular the Government of the Amhara National Regional State, for inviting the mission and assisting the work of the mission team. The Bureau noted with satisfaction that the declaration of Simen as a World Heritage site in Danger has probably encouraged donors such as GEF (Global Environmental Facility), initiating negotiations with the Bureau of Agriculture of the Amhara Regional State for designing and developing conservation projects. The Bureau recommended that the Committee adopt the benchmarks established by the mission team for the Committee's consideration of the eventual removal of Simen from the List of World Heritage in Danger, as follows: i.e. (i) re-alignment of the boundary and acceptance of the new boundaries and the associated conservation laws by local communities; (ii) exclusion of villages along the boundary of the Park from within the World Heritage site, as proposed by the management plan; (iii) extension of the Park to include the Mesarerya and Lemalino Wildlife Reserves, and initiation of steps to include the Ras Dejen Wildlife Reserve; (iv) resettlement of all human populations from the core zone of the Park and recent villages like Muchilla and Kewa, and significant and sustainable reduction of the population and environmental impacts of the extended Gich village in co-ordination with the indigenous communities; and (v) effective conservation and demonstration of increases in the numbers of populations of Walia Ibex and Simien Fox within the extended boundaries of the Park/World Heritage area.

Mount Nimba Nature Reserve (Guinea/Côte d'Ivoire)

V.34 The Bureau learned that the Centre has been co- operating with the Fauna and Flora International (FFI), a conservation NGO working with the Governments of the two States Parties, and with Liberia which embraces parts of the Mt Nimba ecosystem. Two meetings to promote dialogue among the three countries, FFI, the Centre and other stakeholders were planned for 2001. The meetings were intended to contribute to the long-term conservation of Mt Nimba by: establishing and encouraging contacts between technical staff, site managers, decision-makers and local community representatives to share information and experience; and increasing harmonised management planning and practices among the three countries sharing the Mt Nimba ecosystem. The two meetings planned for 2001 were seen as forums to bring together various stakeholders, including the private sector, and for promoting international co-operation for the conservation of Mt Nimba. These meetings were also to be linked to the GEF Project that is being elaborated for the conservation of the site with the participation of FFI. Unfortunately, the first meeting, scheduled for the first half of 2001 had to be indefinitely postponed because of instability in the border regions between the three countries. Considerable numbers of refugees fleeing the war in Liberia have entered the ecosystem in Côte d'Ivoire and Guinea and have had direct negative impacts on the biodiversity of Mt Nimba.

V.35 The Bureau expressed serious concerns over the resurgence of a refugee influx into the Mt Nimba Nature Reserve and requested the Centre and IUCN to contact the States Parties, FFI and other partners to ascertain the impacts of refugee activities on the values of the site and ways and means by which those impacts could be mitigated. The Bureau asked the Centre and IUCN to submit a report, based on their findings, to the twenty-fifth session of the Committee in December 2001. In addition, the Bureau requested the Centre to report to the forthcoming session of the Committee on the plans for the organisation of the two stakeholders' meetings in 2001, and the progress achieved in the design and development of the GEF project.

Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve (Honduras)

V.36 The Bureau was informed that the State Party has not yet responded to the conclusions and recommendations of the UNESCO/IUCN mission undertaken to the site in October 2000. The Bureau noted that Rio Platano has been included as a pilot site in two projects approved by the UN Foundation for execution by the Centre in July 2000. They are: UNESCO/UNEP/RARE Center for Tropical Conservation project on "Linking Conservation of Biological Diversity with Sustainable Tourism Development at World Heritage sites"; and the UNESCO/IUCN project on: "Enhancing our heritage: monitoring and managing for success in World Natural Heritage sites". Both projects are of 4-year duration and are expected to generate new information that will aid the systematic monitoring of the state of conservation of the site, while also promoting the implementation of recommendations from the 2000 UNESCO/IUCN mission. The project, aiming to link biodiversity conservation and sustainable tourism development, could generate income and employment opportunities to the local communities resident near the site.

V.37 The Bureau, once again, invited the State Party to submit its responses on the conclusions and recommendations of the IUCN/Centre mission to the site in October 2000. The Bureau urged the Centre, IUCN and other partners to ensure effective execution of the two UNF-financed projects where Rio Platano is included as a pilot site and submit a brief update on the progress achieved in initiating project activities to the twenty-fifth session of the Committee in December 2001.

Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (India)

V.38 The Bureau was informed that the IUCN/Centre mission to the site, foreseen for May 2001, is now postponed until October/November 2001 due to climatic and security related reasons. IUCN has received reports that indicate continuing insurgency in the area. Alleged in-fighting within the United Liberation Front of Assam is speculated to have caused a movement of insurgents into the Sanctuary in December 2000 from the Bhutan side of the transborder Manas ecosystem. The Chief Minister of Assam has informed the State Assembly that offensive operations were underway against 35 insurgents suspected to have entered the Barpeta District.

V.39 The Bureau noted the view of IUCN that poaching continues to be a significant threat to key wildlife species in the Sanctuary, e.g. populations of rhino, elephants and swamp deer. The construction of a road through the Bhutan side of the Manas ecosystem has significantly increased traffic and access to the core areas of Manas World Heritage site of India. However, IUCN also noted that the efforts of the Forest Department and village communities have led to the establishment of 25 "Manas Bandhu" ("Friends of Manas") groups. These groups of young volunteers from the villages around the Sanctuary have been conducting awareness campaigns and contributing to conservation work. A Forest Department Workshop on Wildlife Conservation conducted in September 2000 at Bansbari Range to explore possibilities of co-operation between these volunteer groups and NGOs, generated self-employment opportunities for some local villagers and increased people's support for the conservation of Manas.

V.40 The Bureau learnt that Manas is also a pilot site included in the UNESCO/IUCN/UNF-UNFIP project entitled: "Enhancing our heritage: monitoring and managing for success in World Natural Heritage sites". As part of the project a site-specific monitoring regime, including indicators and benchmarks tracking the state of conservation of the site and which could signal the time of removal of the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger, will be elaborated and tested over a 4-year time frame.

V.41 The Bureau urged the State Party, Centre and IUCN to organize the field visit as early as possible and submit a detailed report to the twenty-fifth session of the Committee in December 2001. The Bureau welcomed the co-operative approach of the Forest Department to solicit the support of local communities for conservation and encouraged the work of the "Manas Bandhu" groups. The Bureau encouraged the site authorities to co-operate with their counterparts in the Royal Manas National Park in Bhutan to curtail illegal activities threatening wildlife populations within the World Heritage site. The Bureau however, reiterated the urgent need for Bhutan's ratification of the Convention and requested the Director-General of UNESCO to invite His Majesty, the King of Bhutan to ratify the World Heritage Convention as early as possible.

Aïr and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Niger)

V.42 The Bureau was informed that since the end of the rebellion in the area, a number of visits to the Reserves have been fielded by the national agency responsible for the management of the site. Local people have regained their confidence and are actively participating in development activities. The Programme of Support for the Management of the Natural Reserves held an extraordinary session of its Pilot Committee on 7 February 2001 and a new phase of project activities is due to be in place before the end of 2001 or early 2002. Danish and Swiss bilateral aid agencies are committed to financing the new phase. The outcome of the donor mission concluded during 9-16 February 2001 is awaited. The GEF Project for the site is also still under negotiation. The Fonds Francais pour l'Environment Mondial (FFEM) is providing financial assistance to the conservation of the Sahelo-saharan antelopes in the framework of the Convention of Migratory Species (CMS) and that assistance will benefit conservation activities in some parts of the Reserves. The population status of addax, gazelles and wild sheep is improving and Reserve staff undertakes regular anti- poaching patrols.

V.43 Unfortunately, the ostrich population appears to have been completely wiped out during the rebellion. US$ 25,000 from the World Heritage Fund to implement the rehabilitation plan will enable the State Party to experiment with an ostrich re- introduction programme. Implementation of other aspects of the rehabilitation programme approved by the Committee in 1999 is also progressing. A new request for US$ 20,000 to organise a workshop for members of the local Committee for the development and the management of the site has also been approved by the Chairperson of the Committee.

V.44 The Bureau recalled the fact that the State Party had informed the last session of the Committee of its wish to complete the implementation of all activities of the rehabilitation programme before inviting the Committee to consider removal of the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau noted with satisfaction the improving conservation status of the Reserves and requested the Centre and IUCN to find ways and means to expedite the design and development of the GEF project for the conservation of the Reserves. The Bureau requested the Centre to transmit the Bureau's appreciation of the efforts of the Danish and Swiss Governments and the FFEM for the conservation of the site and urged those donor States Parties to the Convention to make long- term commitments for the protection of the Reserves. The Bureau recommended that the IUCN/Centre mission to evaluate the outcome of the rehabilitation programme be delayed until 2002 to allow time for the completion of all planned activities to be undertaken as part of the rehabilitation programme.

Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary (Senegal)

V.45 The Bureau recalled that at its last session (Cairns, 2000), the Committee approved a sum of US$ 130,475 for a project on the "Fight against Salvinia molesta in the Delta of the Senegal River at Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary". Since then, the Centre and IUCN, together with the Ramsar Secretariat and the State Party, have been developing a plan to eradicate and control invasive species in the Wetlands of the Senegal River Delta and the Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary.

V.46 A two-person expert mission to the site was fielded from 31 March to 10 April 2001 to start work on the development of the plan, to be incorporated as part of the management plan of the Sanctuary. The mission reviewed the following issues: (a) role and functions of relevant Government agencies and the interests of major donors and partners; (b) co-ordination mechanisms to promote synergies between the major stakeholders and for integrating the invasive species plan as part of the long-term management of the site and the Delta; (c) evaluation of the need for further studies to better understand the ecology of the Delta; and (d) development of the institutional, organisational and budgetary aspects of the plan and the identification of indicators and actions for implementing monitoring activities. The Bureau noted the conclusions and recommendations of the mission outlined in the Document WHC-2001/CONF.205/WEB.2.

V.47 The State Party has mobilised Government authorities, armed forces and the local population during the last six months to manually clear Salvinia molesta and protect key sites, notably those located at the entrance to the Sanctuary. Mechanical and manual removal of the invasive species are essential steps during a 2-3 year period when biological control measures will play a key role in invasive species control. The insect Cyrtobagus salvinae has been identified as the biological predator to control Salvinia molesta and about 1,200 insects have been imported and are presently being bred at the Djoudj Biological Station to increase their numbers. The Senegal Delta is threatened by other invasive plants too, e.g. Typha australis, and a comprehensive approach to mitigate the spread of invasive species throughout the Delta is needed. Biological control measures are being implemented on the Mauritanian side of the Delta as well, and co-ordination mechanisms for the work of the two Governments are in place.

V.48 The Bureau was informed that a 2-year European Union project on "Policy research to identify conditions for optimal functioning of the Senegal River Ecosystem in Mali, Mauritania and Senegal" has begun. The Bureau agreed with IUCN's view that the work of the different projects attempting to control the spread of invasive species in the Senegal River Delta needs to be co- ordinated and that the Centre should attempt to do all possible in this regard.

V.49 The Directorate of the National Parks of Senegal has been designated by the Ministry of Environment as the lead agency for implementing the biological control measures. The Directorate is seeking support, both at the national and local levels, to: (a) improve staff presence in the Delta; (b) implement and monitor progress of the biological control measures; (c) co-ordinate and co-operate with national, regional and local institutions; and (d) access up-to-date information and knowledge in invasive species mitigation, particularly in respect to Salvinia molesta, and disseminate such information and knowledge to stakeholders and partners by means of technical meetings and training acitivities.

V.50 The Bureau noted that the report of the experts' mission to the site describes several measures, including manual removal of Salvinia, and biological control programmes, awareness- raising and co-ordination activities etc., that are being implemented by the Department of National Parks and the Ministry of Environment of Senegal to control and eradicate the spread of Salvinia. The Bureau agreed with the position of the authorities and experts against using chemical control methods; and recognised that programmes integrating manual removal with biological control programmes based on Cyrtobagus salvinae are likely to be the best option for control and eradication of Salvinia. The Bureau noted that the results of the biological control programme will only be known over time when sufficient numbers of Cyrtobagus salvinae are bred and released into Salvinia infested areas. The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to co-operate with the State Party and other international partners such as FAO and EU working with the State Party to establish a regime, including the identification of financial mechanisms, for monitoring the outcome of programmes to control and eradicate Salvinia. The monitoring regime needs to include measurable benchmarks and indicators that could signal to the Committee when it could consider that the control of Salvinia infestation in Djoudj and nearby areas is both effective and sustainable and hence would allow removing the site from the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau also noted with satisfaction the positive response from donors.

Ichkeul National Park (Tunisia)

V.51 The Bureau was informed that the total rainfall during the years 1999 and 2000 has been below average and insufficient to trigger the closing of the sluice gates at Oued Tinja, resulting in sea water flowing into the Lake. No release of water from other sources has been made in an effective manner during the years 2000 and 2001. Salinity of the Lake water has increased during this period, the composition of water birds has become dominated by salt tolerant species such as shelducks and shovelers.

V.52 At its twenty-third session, the Bureau noted that the rehabilitation of Ichkeul had to be based on a reasonable time frame since: "Inter-linked indicators such as salinity, availability of preferred species of food plants for birds and the number of wintering birds arriving at Ichkeul could fluctuate significantly, based on annual variations in rainfall and evapo- transpiration which affect water levels in the Lake" (quoted from the Rapporteur's Report of the twenty-third session of the Bureau, 5-10 July 1999). At that time, the Bureau had noted that plans for the provision of fresh water to the Lake would become operational by 2001. The Bureau noted that the Sidi Barrak Dam has been built and is now linked to the Tunisian water grid.

V.53 A high-level meeting was held in 2000 with the participation of the Minister of Environment and the Secretary of State for Agriculture in charge of water issues to discuss the situation at Ichkeul. The meeting had formally recognised the ecological need for providing the Lake with adequate freshwater. A GEF project has approved the first stage for preparing the management plans for three of Tunisia's national parks, one of which is Ichkeul. In the work for elaborating a management plan for Ichkeul, the GEF consultants have informed the State Party that unless adequate volumes of fresh water are provided for the Lake, GEF does not consider it feasible to conserve the wetland biodiversity values of the Park. The consultants have therefore asked the Tunisian authorities, inter alia, to clarify urgently whether additional water can be provided.

V.54 The Delegate of Tunisia informed the Bureau that an Interdepartmental Executive Committee, with the participation of concerned ministries such as planning, agriculture, tourism etc., will be established to co-ordinate actions needed for the conservation of Ichkeul. In addition, a high-level multi- disciplinary scientific council will provide support to the Executive Committee on follow up on the implementation of all recommendations concerning the provision of adequate freshwater to the Ichkeul Lake. He confirmed that the construction of the Sidi Barak Dam has been completed and will serve the role of an ecological stabiliser of the Ichkeul Lake National Park. The Delegate observed that the Lake needs about 280 million cubic metres of water in total annually and any shortfalls in the future caused by low rainfall/high evapo-transpiration rates will be compensated by the waters from the Sidi Barak Dam. He wished that the Bureau and the Committee provide adequate time for determining the efforts of the State Party to rehabilitate Ichkeul and support the extension and strengthening of the scientific monitoring programme that has been established.

V.55 The Delegate of Canada stressed the need for the Centre and IUCN to work with the State Party to establish benchmarks and indicators for the Committee's future monitoring of the state of conservation of Ichkeul.

V.56 The Bureau expressed its concerns over the deterioration in the ecology of the Lake during 1999-2000 due to lower than average rainfall. The Bureau invited the State Party to expand and strengthen the scientific monitoring programme for the site and ensure that sufficient amounts of freshwater are released, as and when needed, from the Sidi Barak Dam and other sources, in order to restore, preserve and maintain the integrity of the Ichkeul National Park. The Bureau recommended that the State Party consults with the Centre and IUCN, concerned national authorities, as well as Ramsar, GEF and suitable international and regional partners to establish a set of benchmarks and a suitable timeframe to guide the Committee's future monitoring of the state of conservation of Ichkeul. The Bureau invited the Centre, IUCN and the State Party to work together to prepare a progress report on benchmarks and related timetable for monitoring of Ichkeul to the consideration at the forthcoming session of the Committee in Finland in December 2001.

Rwenzori Mountains (Uganda)

V.57 The Bureau was pleased to learn that security conditions in the Park have improved and that this Park will be re- opened to visitors in July 2001. Security has been improving since the beginning of 2000 through the efforts of the Uganda Police Department Force (UPDF). The Central Tourist Circuit has been opened and maintained as of March 2000. In preparing the Park for renewed visitation, the Ugandan Wildlife Authority (UAW) intends to (a) equip the site with a VHF Radio System or other communication network; (b) repair the Kurt Shafer Bridge; (c) construct a Ranger Base at Nyabitaba; and (d) secure field equipment and gear, warm clothing and rescue equipment. The Bureau noted that the State Party has submitted an emergency assistance request for financing the purchase of this equipment and the proposed construction and repair work and that the request will be reviewed by the Bureau under agenda item 7.

V.58 Based on a report submitted on 15 April 2001, by the Executive Director of UAW, the Bureau noted that encroachment in the Mbuta, Kibwa and Musandama areas has been curtailed but requires constant surveillance. Illegal pit-sawing in the Bundibugyo District is on the increase; poaching by some Local Defence Units and individuals belonging to the Special Police, of monkeys and other small mammals is rampant. Chimpanzee poaching and trafficking is very common. The Park plans to conduct an assessment on the effect of war on wildlife and on the ecosystem. The Bureau expressed its concerns about the situation with regard to poaching on small mammals and chimpanzees and encroachment and requested IUCN and the Centre to continue to explore ways and means to assist the State Party in its assessment of the effects of war on wildlife and the ecosystem and efforts to rehabilitate the Park.

V.59 The Bureau noted that the Park area has been increased by a donation of land by the Rwenzori Mountaineering Services, and an additional 60 acres purchased by Ecotrust Uganda. The former land parcel needs to be surveyed and the payment for the latter finalized. The Park has no infrastructure such as Headquarters and outposts for Park monitoring. The Park authorities envisage undertaking new policies for Community Protected Area Institutions and for revenue sharing, and to focus on collaborative institutions to fill the vacuum created by the departure, more than three years ago, of foreign NGOs and inaction of the local ones.

World Heritage sites of the United States of America:

Everglades National Park

V.60 The Bureau was informed that the State Party has provided a detailed report on the state of conservation of this site, updating actions taken during the first half of 2001. The salient features of the report are:

V.61 The Bureau thanked the Government of the United States of America for the comprehensive report submitted and the human and technical resources reserved for the implementation of the CERP. The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to undertake a detailed review of the report and discuss with the State Party future steps for the consideration of the Committee with regard to the monitoring of the state of conservation of the Everglades and the possible timing of the removal of the Everglades from the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau recommended that the Centre, IUCN and the State Party submit a progress report on the outcome of the full review of the report and the associated discussions to the December 2001 session of the Committee in Finland.

Yellowstone National Park

V.62 The Bureau learnt that the State Party has provided a detailed report on the state of conservation of Yellowstone; the salient features of the report are:

V.63 The Bureau thanked the Government of the United States of America for the comprehensive report submitted and commended the Park's decision to replace snowmobiles with multi- passenger snow-coaches to serve winter visitors. The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to undertake a detailed review of the report and discuss with the State Party future steps in the considerations of the Committee with regard to the monitoring of the state of conservation of Yellowstone and the possible timing of the removal of Yellowstone from the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau recommended that the Centre, IUCN and the State Party submit a progress report on the outcome of the full review of the report and the associated discussions to the December 2001 session of the Committee in Finland.

Cultural Heritage

Butrint (Albania)

V.64 The Secretariat informed the Bureau of the joint mission of UNESCO-ICOMOS-Butrint Foundation to Albania that was undertaken from 19 to 25 April 2001 at the request of the World Heritage Committee to assess the implementation of the programme of corrective measures that was adopted at the time of the inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1997.

V.65 The mission concluded that very important measures had been taken by the Government of Albania in establishing the appropriate legal and institutional framework for the site. It noted, however, that there is still illegal construction taking place within the boundaries of the Park, that the site museum had not been re-installed as of yet and that the authority of the Park administration still needs to be strengthened. The mission concluded that the progress made to date needed to be consolidated and institutionalised by implementing the following actions:

V.66 The Bureau took note of the report of the joint UNESCO-ICOMOS-Butrint Foundation mission to Butrint. It commended the Government of Albania for the actions it had taken in response to the mission of October 1997, particularly the establishment of the Butrint National Park, the extension of the World Heritage site and the creation of the Butrint National Park Office. It endorsed the mission's conclusion that it is necessary to further strengthen and institutionalise the Park and its management structure and that particular attention should be given to regional co-ordination in order to prevent developments within and outside the Park that might affect the integrity of the site.

V.67 With regard to the World Heritage Fund Emergency Assistance, approved by the Committee in December 1997, the Bureau regretted that serious delays had occurred in its implementation. It requested the Government to take the necessary administrative measures and requested the Secretariat to work closely with the Government for the smooth completion of the assistance by the time of the twenty-sixth session of the Committee.

V.68 The Bureau requested the Secretariat to transmit the mission report to the Government of Albania for consideration and comments and requested the Government to submit a report by 15 September 2001 on its proposals for the implementation of its recommendations.

V.69 The Bureau recommended the World Heritage Committee to retain the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger and to field another assessment mission to the site in October 2003 in order to allow the World Heritage Committee to review the progress made and in order to assess if the site can be deleted from the List of World Heritage in Danger at its twenty-eighth session (June 2004).

Group of Monuments of Hampi (India)

V.70 The Bureau recalled that the inscription of this site on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 1999 was prompted by the construction of two intrusive suspension bridges that dominate the extraordinary natural environment of the site. Noting that a large area of over 30 km2, including numerous archaeological ruins, fortifications, palatial complexes, and active religious centres of pilgrimage, are designated as World Heritage, the Bureau recalled that the Committee had requested the Indian authorities to elaborate, adopt and implement a comprehensive management plan in 1986. This request was again made at the time of the site's inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

V.71 The Bureau was informed that consultations had taken place between national, state and local authorities, representatives and NGOs of the local communities of Anegundi, Hampi and Virapapura Gada Island since January 2001. These consultations had resulted in plans for the establishment of a special administrative body whose primary objective would be to co- ordinate the various development and cultural and natural heritage conservation activities within the protected areas of Hampi. The establishment of this "Hampi Development Authority" would assist in facilitating site management by bringing together the numerous local bodies with overlapping jurisdiction and varying functions. According to information received by the Centre, the Hampi Development Authority, to be chaired by the District Commissioner of Bellary, would (a) elaborate a comprehensive management plan together with UNESCO and other agencies concerned; (b) adopt and implement such a plan; and (c) ensure co-ordinated heritage conservation and sustainable development activities.

V.72 The Bureau was informed that the Centre, at the invitation of the concerned authorities, was organizing a mission led by an international rural development planner with experience in cultural heritage areas. The mission would take place in August 2001. The expert is expected to work closely with the authorities to prepare and complete the needs and impact analysis of the two bridges; feasibility studies for possible alternative locations of the bridges; and possible solutions for removing the threats facing the site. The result of these activities will serve in the elaboration of the comprehensive management plan. Finally, the Bureau was informed that a mission by Centre staff is planned in July 2001 to discuss with the concerned authorities, a draft action plan to implement the 4-point recommendations for corrective measures drafted by the Centre.

V.73 The Bureau expressed its appreciation for the positive actions taken by the State Party to ensure the conservation of the World Heritage values of the site, in particular, its plans to establish the "Hampi Development Authority" involving the various authorities and stakeholders representing the local communities. This action directly responds to the Committee's request for the establishment of a special administrative body, empowered to ensure integrated development and conservation of the whole World Heritage area. The Bureau requested that the State Party and the Centre continue to co-operate closely to complete the needs assessment and impact assessment of the two bridges, and to ensure the elaboration, adoption and implementation of the integrated conservation and management plan.

V.74 Finally, recalling the Committee's request at its twenty-fourth session, the Bureau requested the State Party, with the assistance of the Centre, to report on the progress made in:

  1. relocating the two intrusive bridges outside the World Heritage site;
  2. implementing the 4-point recommendations for corrective measures of the UNESCO-ICOMOS mission in February 2000;
  3. preparing a comprehensive management plan for the site;

for examination by the Committee at its twenty-fifth session.

Bahla Fort (Oman)

V.75 The Secretariat informed the Bureau of the results of the mission to Oman, recently carried out by the Centre, with particular regard to the good prospect for the restoration of the Fort and the scope and objectives of the Management Plan to be prepared for the conservation and presentation of the site. The Bureau was informed of the decision made by the Omani authorities to entrust the preparation of the Management Plan to a British consulting firm, based in Oman. The Secretariat reported that the consulting firm is to ensure that the Management Plan be used to develop long-term management and conservation policies at the site, and not be limited to a series of projects. The Delegate of Morocco pointed out that Oman insisted on local experts but in this case there were no locals able to handle the conservation problems at hand. The Secretariat addressed the concerns of the Delegate of Morocco, confirming that the Centre will closely supervise the team preparing the Plan, directly and through its experts. A British consultant firm had actually been engaged and the Centre had discussed with this firm the issue and was satisfied they were capable. The matter would continue to be monitored. Further information was provided on the intention of the Omani authorities to organize a Regional Seminar on the Conservation of Earthen Structures, and the assistance provided by the Centre experts for the elaboration of its concept and modalities.

V.76 The Secretariat suggested that the removal of Bahla Fort from the List of World Heritage in Danger might be considered if and when the Management Plan is completed and adopted. The Delegate of Zimbabwe pointed out that the completion of the Management Plan should not be considered as an end in itself, and that its implementation should be monitored for some years before de listing could be considered. ICOMOS strongly supported the idea of holding a Regional Seminar on the Conservation of Earthen Structures, given the large number of sites built with this technology in the area.

V.77 The Bureau thanked and congratulated the Omani authorities on the efforts made which have resulted in a considerable improvement to the state of conservation of the Bahla Fort. The Bureau encouraged the Omani authorities to continue supporting the conservation of the Fort and the preparation of a Management Plan, with a view to the establishment of a permanent management structure on the site.

V.78 The Bureau further recommended that a request of assistance for training activities be submitted by the State Party under the World Heritage Fund, to ensure the highest scientific level for the Regional Seminar on Conservation of Earthen Structures, and enable the participation of experts from less advantaged countries within the Region.

Fort and Shalamar Gardens in Lahore (Pakistan)

V.79 The Bureau examined the report on the state of conservation as presented within WHC-2001/CONF.205/4 concerning the Shalamar Gardens. The Bureau recalled that the property faced threats caused by the lack of a comprehensive management strategy and plan, urban encroachment and ad-hoc public works. The need for enhancing the capacity of site management authorities in conservation techniques, project elaboration, and site presentation was also noted. The Centre informed the Bureau that the reformulated international assistance request had been received for utilizing the US$ 50,000 emergency assistance granted to the State Party, This new information would be transmitted to the Advisory Bodies and the Chairperson for their evaluation.

V.80 The Observer of Pakistan expressed her Government's appreciation to the World Heritage Committee and the World Heritage Centre for the special support being provided following the inscription of the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger. In particular, the Bureau was informed that her Government welcomed the initiatives being taken by the Centre to mobilize international technical and financial assistance through the European Union Asia- Urbs Programme. Finally, the Observer of Pakistan reassured the Bureau of her Government's firm commitment to conserve the world heritage values of the Shalamar Gardens and to continue co- operating with the Committee and the Centre for enhancing the management and development of this property.

V.81 The Bureau welcomed the positive actions taken and being planned by the State Party and the World Heritage Centre for the rehabilitation of the Shalamar Gardens and for elaborating a comprehensive management plan for the site. The Bureau requested the State Party and the Centre to continue its close co-operation to ensure that an integrated conservation, management and development plan be elaborated, adopted and implemented as soon as possible. The Bureau requested the State Party and the Centre to report on the progress made in removing the threats facing the site for examination by the Committee at its twenty-fifth session.

Historic Town of Zabid (Yemen)

V.82 The Secretariat reported on the findings of the joint multidisciplinary mission carried out by ICOMOS to Zabid, confirming the extremely serious conditions of the site. According to the mission's report, 35% of the urban texture of Zabid has disappeared or has been replaced with modern constructions since the time of inscription. 20% of the old houses have been vacated by their former habitants, and the city market has been almost completely abandoned. Mention was made of the main qualifying points of the Action Plan envisaged by the joint WHC-ICOMOS report, including as a preliminary measure, the preparation of a detailed urban conservation Plan focusing in terms of strategy on the social and economic revitalization of Zabid as the only means to ensure its long-term conservation.

V.83 ICOMOS supported the analysis of the Secretariat, drawing the attention of the Bureau to the catastrophic situation of Zabid, and supported the Action Plan devised by the joint WHC- ICOMOS mission. The Action Plan includes the proposal for an emergency assistance request to be immediately submitted by the State Party for the preparation of an urban conservation and revitalization Plan.

V.84 The Delegate of Morocco asked that the recommended action not be limited to a request of assistance, and called for a broader appeal to be launched by UNESCO for an international campaign towards safeguarding this outstanding city, that is important in the context of the South-Arabic civilization. The Delegate of Australia supported the call made by the Delegate of Morocco for an extraordinary effort involving a wide range of international actors. The Director of the World Heritage Centre reported on his efforts to secure World Bank funding. The Secretariat further explained that the Action Plan formulated by the Centre and ICOMOS experts took into account, and integrated in its proposal, all the various actors involved or potentially involved in initiatives for the conservation of the cultural heritage of Yemen, such as the World Bank and others.

V.85 The Bureau took note of the report prepared by the WHC/ICOMOS mission, as well as the will manifested by the Yemeni authorities to take immediate steps to carry out corrective measures to safeguard Zabid. The Bureau hoped there would be international donors to contribute to the major effort required from the State Party for the safeguarding of this World Heritage site. The Bureau recommended to the State Party to take all necessary measures to immediately stop all new constructions within the Old City of Zabid.

V.86 The Bureau approved the Action Plan presented in the experts' report, and recommended the State Party that a request of emergency assistance be immediately submitted to start its implementation.

State of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List

Mining and World Heritage

V.87 The Bureau noted that, following the review of the results of the technical workshop on World Heritage and Mining by the last session of the Committee, the proceedings of the workshop were prepared. The Bureau furthermore noted that a number of activities took place, including a Workshop on "No go areas" with one gold mining company (Placer Dome), (Washington DC, USA, 25 to 26 January 2001). The Workshop was organized by the World Resources Institute as a follow-up to on-going discussions on Protected Areas and mining and in particular to the recommendations of the twenty- fourth session of the World Heritage Committee. Another Workshop was organized on "Dams, Mining and Indigenous Culture" at the Institute of Archaeology, University College London (UCL) on 19 March 2001.

V.88 The Bureau also noted that a meeting between the International Council on Metals and the Environment (ICME) representatives and the Director of the Centre took place on 25 April 2001 informing the Centre of the change in the organization of the mining industry. The Secretariat continues to follow-up on the issue "World Heritage and Mining" and will prepare a report concerning the Global Mining Initiative's (GMI) decision to put in place a new organization to be presented at the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau in December 2001.

Natural disasters and World Heritage in the Caribbean, Central America and South America

V.89 The Bureau noted information provided in the working document on natural disasters and World Heritage in the Caribbean, Central America and South America and that there is a need to further integrate disaster preparedness planning in the management of World Heritage and other cultural and natural heritage sites. It noted that the Secretariat, in collaboration with the Advisory Bodies, would present proposals to this effect to the next session of the World Heritage Committee.

V.90 The Secretariat reported on the earthquake that occurred in the south of Peru on 23 June 2001 and caused the loss of life of seventy people, made more than 20,000 people homeless and seriously affected the infrastructure in the region. It also reported that the World Heritage site of Arequipa suffered damage, most particularly the cathedral. The Secretariat noted that the inscription of the site on the World Heritage List in 2000 was the culmination of a great effort of the national and municipal authorities in establishing adequate protection and management arrangements for the site. A more detailed report on the state of conservation of the city is included under paragraphs V.250 to V.253 below.

REPORTS ON THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES INSCRIBED ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST EXAMINED BY THE BUREAU

NATURAL HERITAGE

Africa

Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest (Kenya)

V.91 The Bureau noted that the State Party has had some delay in preparing a management plan from the international assistance approved by the twenty- fourth session of the Bureau. IUCN was concerned about the ongoing illegal activities in the Mt. Kenya Forest, despite the Kenya Wildlife Service taking over responsibility last year for a larger part of the Mt. Kenya Forest. Forest excisions still take place on the ground, in particular in the Mt. Hombe and Ragati blocks of Mt Kenya Forest, outside the World Heritage site. In February 2001, the Environment Minister gave a 28-day notice of intent to allocate 68,000 hectares of forest land, including locations around Mt. Kenya, for settlement, and there are reports that surveyors are working in the Hombe and Ragati blocks in an attempt to start land demarcation before the implementation of the Forest Bill. However, on 16 March 2001 it was reported that the Kenyan High Court granted an injunction to prevent authorities allowing forests to be cleared. These forests will now remain state property until a case filed against the Minister for the Environment is heard. Cannabis plantations continue to pose a threat to conservation of the Mt. Kenya. Plantations range in size from 2 to 3 acres and are located on the Embu and Meru South slopes of Mt. Kenya. When plantations are destroyed by anti-narcotics police, growers simply move deeper into the forest. Despite the arrest of some plantation guards, the authorities have not been able to identify plantation owners. The police and Kenya Wildlife Service do not currently have adequate resources to eliminate the plantations.

V.92 The Bureau welcomed the IUCN recommendations and requested the Centre and IUCN to co-operate with the State Party with a view to undertaking a monitoring mission to the site to ascertain its state of conservation. The Bureau further requested the State Party to co-operate with the Centre and IUCN in order to complete the management plan and a programme for the rehabilitation of the site and to provide information on its actions to combat deforestation, to be submitted to the Centre by 15 September 2001 for consideration by the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau.

Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal)

V.93 The Bureau noted that the State Party had not responded to the concerns expressed by the twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the Bureau over the reported proposals to transfer animals, including the Derby Eland, from the World Heritage site. It also had not invited a monitoring mission to the site as requested by the Bureau. IUCN reported the concern about the capture and removal of wildlife from Niokolo-Koba National Park. For example, from April to July 1999, a South African team captured 74 roan antelope, 10 buffalo and 23 Buffon's kob. These animals were moved to the small, privately-owned Bandia Reserve and ultimately translocated to the 6,000 hectare Fathala Forest where the SPEFS is planning to establish a wildlife park for tourists. A further capture operation was conducted in Niokolo-Koba in May 2000, when 9 western giant eland and 10 waterbuck were captured and translocated to Bandia. IUCN reported that these game captures were conducted under an agreement signed by Senegal's former Minister of Environment with the "Société pour la Protection de l'Environnement et de la Faune au Senegal" (SPEFS) in June 1999, and a second agreement signed by Senegal's current Minister of Environment with SPEFS in April 2000. The latter agreement specified that the Government of Senegal will donate 70 roan antelope, 50 kob, 10 buffalo, 20 bushbuck, 10 grey duiker, 10 waterbuck, 10 western giant eland and 30 western hartebeest to SPEFS. IUCN further reported that an article of the Agreement states that 45 roan antelope will be transferred to South Africa, as "payment in kind" for the logistics and expertise provided by the South Africans. 35 of the captured roan antelope were transported from Senegal to Sable Ranch in South Africa in July 2000.

V.94 IUCN and the Centre expressed great concern about several aspects of these recent captures and translocations. The site where the animals are to be relocated is known to be completely unsuitable for some species such as the giant eland. IUCN's position is that translocation should not occur unless it is clearly demonstrated that it will: 1) benefit the conservation of the endangered species; 2) cause no significant harm to conservation in Niokolo-Koba National Park; and 3) result from a clear decision taken by the Senegalese authorities and be publicised as such.

V.95 The Centre informed the Bureau that new information was received from the Director of the Department of National Parks of Senegal concerning the operation to translocate elephants from Burkina Faso into the site at the end of 2001 or early 2002. This would be during the colder season when the vegetation is available. The operation is supported by the French Funds for Co-operation, the French Global Environmental Facility, the European Union and the Cap-Vert French Forces. Senegal is calling for additional international assistance for capture, transportation and release of the animals.

V.96 The Bureau noted with concern the reports concerning Niokolo- Koba National Park, and requested the State Party to provide by 15 September 2001, a report on the state of conservation of this site, including a detailed update on the current situation of the animals removed from the Park. The Bureau welcomed the recommendations of the Centre and IUCN and urged the State Party to invite a monitoring mission to the site in 2001, as suggested by the twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the World Heritage Bureau.

Bwindi Impenetrable Forest (Uganda)

V.97 The Bureau recalled its earlier requests concerning the situation at the site. It requested that the Centre and IUCN continue efforts to verify with the Ugandan authorities, the needs for support for purchase of vehicles and staff training, and to continue assisting the Ugandan authorities to obtain financial support from suitable sources including the World Heritage Fund.

Ngorongoro Conservation Area (United Republic of Tanzania)

V.98 The Bureau noted that the Centre received a "Draft Plan to Control Vehicle Congestion in the Ngorongoro Crater". Through a letter from the UNESCO Office, the State Party requested assistance to undertake a study to evaluate the environmental impact of vehicle pressure in the Ngorongoro Crater and to examine ways of managing vehicle numbers with a view to keeping a balance between protecting the ecosystem and maintaining tourism. There has been a 7% annual increase in tourists to Ngorongoro Crater since 1991, and the Crater attracts over 75% of the visitors with vehicles to Ngorongoro. The State Party is concerned that the number of vehicles on the Crater floor has reached excessive levels with recordings of 140 vehicles at one time, and that continuous and excessive vehicle traffic is taking a perceptible toll on the environment. Measures have been proposed in the Draft Plan including: encouraging medium sized vehicles; cutting down the number of stay hours by introducing a shift system; reviewing the pricing system; diversification of attractions outside the Crater; and training of tour drivers and guides.

V.99 IUCN furthermore received reports of the extensive spread of an invasive alien species, the "Mexican poppy" (Argemone mexicana, Family Papaveraceae) in the wheat fields around Karatu, inside the Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA). The invasive species is a potential threat to the Serengeti ecosystem, which is contiguous with the Ngorongoro Conservation Area, and to the vegetation in the Crater floor. In the worst case scenario, it could spread through the grass plains, competing with local species and therefore taking away an important food source of the ungulates. This species is highly toxic to humans and animals. It is important to avoid the spread of this aggressive alien by carefully monitoring all areas, especially the roadsides and by collecting and burning the plants before they set seeds. There have also been reports of other invasive species Gutenbergia (Erlangea) cordifolia and Bidens spp., which have infested up to one-quarter of the Crater floor.

V.100 The State Party has noted that it is aware of the situation with regard to these invasive species and has been carrying out some initiatives to eradicate the weeds. It has also indicated its willingness to accept assistance in identifying invasive species and setting up an eradication programme. IUCN has been involved in discussions with various parties on the eradication of these species, including the IUCN Invasive Species Specialist Group and is willing to provide technical assistance as required. IUCN also remains concerned about the ecological impact of the canal and road works.

V.101 The Observer of Tanzania expressed his appreciation concerning the details of the report and notes that an in-depth analysis of the problems is required. He stated that the State Party would need technical assistance to carry out such information gathering and rapid analysis to be available by September 2001.

V.102 The Bureau requested the State Party to undertake a study on the impact of vehicles in Ngorongoro Conservation Area with view to examining ways for vehicle management. Furthermore, the Bureau welcomed the recommendations made by IUCN and requested a detailed state of conservation report from the State Party by 15 September, on the extent and impact of the invasive species, as well as on methods for their control and eradication, to be reported to the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau. The technical request was drawn to the attention of the Centre.

Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls (Zambia/Zimbabwe)

V.103 The Bureau noted that the Centre received International Assistance requests amounting to less than US$20,000 each from both Zambia and Zimbabwe for the organization of national meetings leading to a bilateral meeting. The contracts for the organization of the meetings are under preparation and it is expected that the national meetings will take place during 2001.

V.104 The Delegate of Zimbabwe endorsed the reports presented and underscored the urgency of the organization of such a bilateral meeting. He noted that constructions are taking place within or in the proximity of the World Heritage area in addition to the hotel development that was reported earlier. Therefore, the meeting is crucial for the preservation and the future of this World Heritage site.

V.105 The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to continue their collaboration with the two States Parties to ensure the organization as soon as possible of both national and bilateral meetings to report to the twenty- sixth session of the Bureau in April 2002.

Asia and the Pacific

Great Barrier Reef (Australia)

V.106 The Bureau recalled that at the twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Bureau, the State Party was requested to submit a report on the grounding of a vessel in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area on 9 November 2000. The State Party transmitted a report to the Centre via letter of 19 April 2001, which was sent to IUCN for review and comments.

V.107 The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) noted that the vessel caused severe but localised damage to the Sudbury Reef. The ship ploughed a path through the reef, destroying an area of approximately 1500 m2. Rubble and blocks of reef rock pushed up on either side of the hull scar have created a ridge of 5-10m wide and 1m high. Subsequently, an area of 30,000 m2 was affected by relatively low levels of contamination as a result of the dispersal of flakes of paint from the propeller work of the ship during an attempt to refloat it. GBRMPA staff and independent representatives of the Malaysian International Shipping Company (MISC) implemented a clean-up programme based on a mutually agreed upon methodology, whose primary goals were to remove the antifoulant from the marine environment to a level where it will not have long-term effects on the benthic communities (especially corals); and to partially stabilise the reef substrate at the primary impact site to facilitate the natural recovery of the area.

V.108 The clean-up effort began on 9 January 2001 and was completed on 27 March 2001. It was carried out in two phases. The operation took longer than expected to complete due to the large amount of TBT-containing anti-fouling paint buried deep in the sediment and delays due to bad weather. A long-term site-monitoring programme is under review by GBRMPA and interested parties.

V.109 The State Party informed IUCN that a review of actions to improve ship safety and pollution prevention in the Great Barrier Reef is being conducted by a steering committee comprising the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, Commonwealth Department of Transport and Regional Services, GBRMPA and the Queensland Department of Transport. Public consultation sessions started in February 2001. The steering committee is due to report to the Minister for Transport and Regional Services on 29 June 2001. GBRMPA has initiated a number of legislative changes to improve ship safety within the Great Barrier Reef as a result of this accident.

V.110 IUCN noted a report by the Brisbane Institute on the outbreaks of Crown of Thorns starfish on the Great Barrier Reef. The tourism industry is said to be spending AUS$2 million a year in trying to keep their dive sites clear of the starfish, mainly by injecting them with wine bottle sterilising solution. There was also some evidence that major flood events have a correlation with the outbreaks, as well as the general increase in the sediment load of Queensland rivers flowing into the Great Barrier Reef. Nitrogen-polluted waters that flow into the Reef may be a significant factor in the growth of the phytoplankton that forms the food of the Crown of Thorns. No effective legislation is in place in Queensland to manage this agricultural pollution. In early 2001, Queensland Premier, Mr. Beattie, announced that his Government would take an active role in protecting the Reef, starting with a Crown of Thorns research and eradication programme. Reef researchers are keen for more work to be done on the links between river outflows, pollution levels and the Crown of Thorns.

V.111 The Delegate of Australia stated that his Government had committed to a range of reporting requirements on this World Heritage Area. The State Party had agreed to report on these issues to the twenty-sixth session of the Bureau in 2002 on priority action areas of the ACIUCN Focused Recommendations in the context of Periodic Reporting. In addition, the Delegate of Australia informed the Bureau that the Australian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Transport and Regional Services would shortly receive a report from a high-level Steering Committee on actions to improve shipping safety and pollution strategies.

V.112 The Bureau commended the rapid action taken by the State Party for cleaning up impacts of the accident on the Sudbury Reef and its efforts to revise legislation, based on lessons learned from the clean-up operations, in order to improve the safety of shipping within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. In the light of this accident, the Bureau stressed the importance of compulsory pilotage of large vessels, especially those carrying hazardous materials, throughout the World Heritage area. The Bureau noted the need for effective response strategies to minimize environmental impacts in the case of marine accidents through consultations with key stakeholders, including traditional owners. The Bureau expressed concern over the possible impacts that remaining pieces of TBT could have on larval coral in the impacted area and urges the State Party to finalize the long- term site-monitoring programme that is currently under review. The Bureau invited the State Party to keep the Centre informed on progress on these issues in the context of the Periodic Reports by the State Party in 2002/2003.

Greater Blue Mountains Area (Australia)

V.113 It has been reported to IUCN that a mining company, Centennial Coal, has lodged a development application with an environment impact statement for a major mining lease extension for the Clarence Colliery. The Clarence Colliery is located on Newnes Plateau that adjoins the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area to the east. The report received by IUCN notes three environmental concerns related to this proposal which are likely to directly affect the World Heritage values of the Greater Blue Mountains Area. These are: water pollution, water conservation (loss of water to the mine pit) and the protection of the World Heritage area by an adequate buffer zone.

V.114 The Delegate of Australia informed the Bureau that the proposed mining lease had been referred to the Australian Government under the World Heritage protection regime of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Protection Act. It would assess any potential significant impacts on World Heritage values before any project approval could be given.

V.115 The Bureau requested the State Party to provide information on the reported lease extension for the Clarence Colliery and its potential impacts on the World Heritage values, before 15 September 2001, to enable the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau to assess the potential threats to the integrity of the site.

Wet Tropics of Queensland (Australia)

V.116 The Bureau noted that the State Party, via a letter dated 18 April 2001, has transmitted to the Centre its response to the priority action areas described in the ACIUCN Report that was reviewed by the twenty- fourth extraordinary session of the Bureau. The State Party response has been transmitted to IUCN for review.

V.117 The Delegate of Australia informed the Bureau that it was developing a proposal for the information of the Committee in Helsinki in December, 2001, that would rename the property Australia's Tropical Rainforests.

V.118 The Bureau thanked the Government of Australia for responding to the recommendations of the ACIUCN Report on the state of conservation of the Wet Tropics of Queensland, reviewed by the Bureau in Cairns, Australia, in November 2000. The Bureau noted the achievements and the commitments of the State Party and invites the State Party to finalise its on-going consideration of the implementation of some activities by the Commonwealth and the Wet Tropics Ministerial Council. The Bureau invited the State Party to consider linking monitoring activities in the Wet Tropics of Queensland to the UNESCO/IUCN/UNF-UNFR project testing the application of tools for evaluating management effectiveness in 10 other World Natural Heritage sites of the world. The Bureau requested that the State Party and IUCN continue to collaborate to develop a Framework for Management as a basis for monitoring annual progress in the implementation of the five Focused Recommendations outlined in the ACIUCN Report. The Bureau recommended that the first report on progress in the implementation of the five Focused Recommendations be compiled within the context of the periodic reporting on Asia Pacific World Heritage sites scheduled for 2002/2003.

The Sundarbans (Bangladesh)

V.119 The Bureau noted that the Government of Bangladesh has approved a plan for Shell to explore blocks of the Sundarbans for oil and gas. The block known as 'Block 5' contains the Sundarbans Reserved Forest, which includes the World Heritage site. 40% of this Block constitutes the Sundarbans Reserved Forest. The IUCN Office in Bangladesh is maintaining contact with Shell who have advised that they intend to conduct aero- magnetic and seismic surveys in Block-5. Aero-magnetic surveys will involve low flights by specialized aircraft. Activities related to seismic surveys will be conducted in areas outside of the Sundarbans World Heritage site. Shell has assured IUCN Bangladesh in letters of August and December 2000, that they do not plan to survey the Sundarbans World Heritage site and that all their activities will be conducted outside the Reserved Forest.

V.120 Following the declaration of the Sundarbans as a World Heritage site in 1999, the Bangladesh Government launched a six-year Sundarbans Biodiversity Conservation Project (SBCP) at a cost of US$ 77 million. The project, which began on 1 April 2000, will develop a system for the conservation of biodiversity in the Sundarbans Reserved Forest, including a marine zone of 20km off the coast. The project will also attempt to reduce pressures on the forests arising from local people, and will promote environmental awareness and support for the conservation of the Sundarbans Reserved Forest.

V.121 The Bureau requested the State Party to provide a report to the Centre, before 15 September 2001, on the activities of Shell in relation to oil and gas exploration and the potential impacts on the World Heritage site to enable the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau to undertake a review of the state of conservation of the site. The Bureau commended the State Party for its ongoing work, in particular through the Sundarbans Biodiversity Action Project, to protect this site.

Kaziranga National Park (India)

V.122 The Bureau noted that IUCN informed the Centre that a severe shortage of funds is impeding the anti-poaching operations and affecting the management of Kaziranga National Park. It is estimated that more than 200 rhinos have been poached and 60 poachers have been killed in the Park in the last decade. More resources are needed to improve the protection of the Park. However, it has been reported that there have been problems with designated funding provided to the Regional Government actually reaching the Park. Consequently, few of the patrol vehicles are in running condition and boats have not been repaired for a long time.

V.123 It has also been reported that during the winter, the local people enter the Park for community fishing, which is sometimes associated with illegal activities, such as stealing rifles from forest guards and damaging river boats. Fishing inside the Kaziranga National Park has now been banned. The State Party has issued a prohibition order to ban fishing from the wetlands of the National Park and has stated that stern action will be initiated against any violation. The Park presently has more than 1500 endangered one-horn rhinoceros, which are subject to poaching.

V.124 IUCN has also received reports of large herds of elephants going on the rampage in areas in and around Kaziranga National Park. In June 2000, elephants killed more than 15 people in the Golaghat District of Assam. Numaligarh is the location of a new oil refinery and according to experts this has been one of the major reasons for the increased intensity of animal/people conflicts. It has been estimated that rampaging elephants have killed at least 300 people in Assam, in the last three years. Assam Wildlife authorities have urged the Central Government to allow them to capture the wild elephants to minimise damage. IUCN was concerned that the wildlife/people conflict may result in resentment towards the National Park.

V.125 The Bureau requested that, in order to enable the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau to review the information and suggest appropriate measures, the State Party submit to the Centre, before 15 September 2001, a report on the major management issues of the site, particularly those related to financing of anti-poaching operations and minimising conflicts between elephant herds and human habitations.

Royal Chitwan National Park (Nepal)

V.126 The Bureau noted that IUCN has been alerted to the planned construction of a road through the centre of Royal Chitwan National Park. A bridge is apparently already under construction at Kasara, over the Rapti River, and is high enough to provide access across the River during the monsoon season. The road is being constructed to provide access to the area south of the Park, especially the Madi Village area. Given the large scale of the bridge, it is expected that the road will also be a substantial one. The road will effectively cut the Park in half and may eventually link with India. This would lead to a heavy flow of traffic and better access to the Park, thus leading to illegal use of its resources and the disruption of the ecological integrity of this site. It has also been reported that there is a proposal to put a power-line through the Park to Madi Village along the line of the road. IUCN understands that an EIA was prepared for the electricity line but not for the road and bridge. There is clearly the potential for these developments to threaten the integrity of the World Heritage site.

V.127 The Bureau requested the State Party to provide a report to the Centre, before 15 September 2001, on the status of the development of the road and the power-line construction projects, including information on all environmental impact assessments undertaken, to enable the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau to review the potential threats to the integrity of the Park.

Latin America and the Caribbean

Los Katios National Park (Colombia)

V.128 The Bureau noted that no information was received from the State Party concerning the proposed IUCN/UNESCO monitoring mission. IUCN informed the Bureau that an IUCN representative would visit Colombia in November 2001 that would be an opportunity to obtain more information to be made available for the Committee meeting in December in Finland.

V.129 The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to collaborate with the State Party to schedule the mission to the site. The programme of a field visit should review the state of conservation of the site, and investigate co-operation possibilities for a World Heritage nomination of the Meso-American biological corridor project and transboundary collaboration with the adjacent Darien National Park (Panama).

Galapagos Islands (Ecuador)

V.130 The Bureau was informed that on 16 January 2001, the Ecuadorian oil tanker Jessica ran aground at the entry to the port of Baquerizo Moreno on San Cristobal Island. It was carrying 160,000 gallons of diesel oil and 80,000 gallons of bunker fuel. Most of the oil leaked into the sea covering an area of 3,000 km2 reaching the shores of the Islands of Santa Fe, Santa Cruz, Floreana and Isabela. Species affected by the oil include sea lions, marine birds, sea turtles and iguanas. Given the quantity of fuel spilled, the immediate impacts could have been far worse, but the currents and winds carried most of the oil into deeper offshore waters where it was dispersed. Nevertheless, continuous monitoring is needed in order to determine the possible medium- and long-term impacts to the ecosystem, although the damage to date appears to be minimal. The accident, that has proved to be caused by negligence, triggered the preparation of work on a contingency plan for future emergencies and has led to efforts to improve the regulatory framework to minimise future hazards. Handling of the spill costs the Ecuador Government several million dollars, part of which was covered by external assistance.

V.131 The Jessica remains grounded, the Captain has been charged, and insurance compensation is being sought. Suggestions have been made by WWF and others that the Ecuadorian Government should designate the Galapagos Marine Reserve as a "particularly sensitive sea area" (PSSA) under the International Maritime Organisation (IMO). The benefits of such an initiative are being studied by INGALA and the Ecuador Maritime authorities. IUCN noted similarities between this situation and that of the Great Barrier Reef. IUCN emphasised the importance of compulsory pilotage in environmentally sensitive areas such as World Heritage sites and also the importance of having effective emergency response strategies in place to enable prompt and effective action to issues such as the oil spill in Galapagos.

V.132 IUCN noted that the specific regulations under the Special Law, including fisheries, tourism, environmental control, and introduced species/agriculture, are still awaited and views this as a very high priority matter. Drafts of the regulations are in an advanced stage and should be approved before July 2001. Without the regulations in place, progress has been limited in controlling immigration, limiting fishery seasons and catches, and preventing illegal commercial fishing. Both the Navy and the marine unit of the GNP have intercepted a number of vessels and discouraged others, but prosecutions have been few and illegal fishing continues. Even worse, the Navy has allowed the release of several seized vessels which has implicated them in the illegal fishing business and reduced the Government's credibility in enforcing the law. This was further weakened during the fishermen's strike of November 2000 where intimidation of Park staff and violent action led to the Government backing down on quota limits.

V.133 Annual monitoring reports on the illegal commercial fisheries in the Marine Reserve show that many thousands of sharks have been taken out of Galapagos waters and that long-lining for other finfish has had severe effects on many other species. Moreover, the loosely regulated controls on sea cucumber harvesting have led to a precipitous decline in the population, which may never recover to sustainable levels. Despite areas of progress, the lack of sufficient enforcement has led to a continued over-fishing which is a major threat to the Galapagos marine environment.

V.134 On the positive side, the Bureau noted two key actions are expected that will set a much firmer basis for addressing the issues. First, is the passage of the regulations that will clearly specify what limits are on fisheries, immigration, etc., and will allow more effective application of the Special Law. Second, is the IDB loan for implementing the Galapagos Marine Reserve Plan that devotes US$4 million to strengthening the control and security system. There is also a growing public feeling within Ecuador to address illegal fishing activities more firmly, which, with the added resources and resolve of the State Party, could lead to a reduction in further damage. Commitment at the central political level, however, is a fundamental prerequisite. Any revisions to the Special Law that would weaken it would be very detrimental to the participatory process that agreed to it.

V.135 The Bureau was informed of details about the international assistance received from private organizations, bilateral co-operation and in-kind donations from Governments to assist the Ecuadorian authorities. The donations amounted to a total of US$ 666,187; additional without the contributions from UNESCO (US$ 25,000) and the World Heritage Fund (US$ 50,000) were also provided.

V.136 The Delegate of Ecuador stated that consequences of the oil spill are no longer visible in the Galapagos Islands. He also thanked the Committee for the emergency assistance of US$ 50,000 provided after the oil spill.

V.137 The Bureau, while concerned with the impacts of the oil spill of the tanker Jessica, acknowledged with appreciation the efforts of the State Party and the International Community in relation to the clean-up and rescue activities following the oil spill caused by the tanker. The Bureau encouraged the State Party to expedite regulations to implement the Special Law for Galapagos and to enforce their implementation as soon as possible.

Canaima National Park (Venezuela)

V.138 The Bureau noted a progress report received for the development of the Action Plan for Canaima National Park from the Venezuelan authorities in December 2000. The aim of the Action Plan is to promote dialogue between all the stakeholders of the National Park in order to create favourable collaboration for the protection of the Park. To this end, three workshops were held in 2000 for the Pemon Communities living within or near the National Park. The themes discussed included community participation, environmental education, ecotourism and protection of flora and fauna. More meetings with the local communities in different parts of the Park will be needed in order to get the full participation of the communities for guaranteeing the viability of the Action Plan.

V.139 IUCN has received a number of reports on the situation in the Canaima National Park. There is ongoing and increasing concern and opposition to the construction of a power-line, which cuts through a limited portion of the Park. Indigenous people from the Pemon Communities continue to oppose the power line due to the long-term consequences that the project will have on both the territories they occupy and their cultural integrity. They have been responsible for toppling over thirty power line towers. The National Guard now has a permanent presence in the Park in order to guarantee the continuation of the project. Although the main objective of the power line is to sell electricity to the Brazilian city of Boa Vista, electricity is also required to exploit the mineral resources in the Venezuelan Guyana Shield area. Apart from existing traditional mining operations, it is expected that the power line will fuel new mining developments in six important buffer zones adjacent to the World Heritage site. Several international mining corporations have started a programme of land acquisition and identification, including Crystallex International and Placer Dome. There are concerns about potential impacts associated with mining around the Canaima National Park. On several occasions, indigenous people have reported an influx of small-scale miners heading towards the headwaters of the Caroni River inside the National Park. Although illegal, these violations have not been persecuted. Without due ecological consideration, the potential industrial development of the region adjacent to Canaima National Park and the advance of mining threaten to isolate the Park within a few years, thus putting in jeopardy its long-term integrity.

V.140 IUCN requested the State Party to provide detailed information on what has been implemented after the 1999 IUCN mission. The IUCN Representative also informed the Bureau that Canaima National Park is one of the sites included in the UNESCO/IUCN/UNF-UNFIP project on management effectiveness for World Heritage natural sites. This project may help to provide some possible solutions for the problems existing at the site. The IUCN Representative furthermore recommended that the proposed World Heritage Indigenous Peoples' Council of Experts (WHIPCOE) may consider inviting participants from this site to the Council.

V.141 The Bureau recalled the recommendations made by the 1999 IUCN mission report, in particular the urgent need to create mechanisms to promote dialogue between all relevant stakeholders on the conservation and management of the area. This should include the indigenous Pemon Communities, mining interests, and relevant government agencies. This mission also recommended that an Action Plan be developed by the State Party as soon as possible to follow up recommendations of the mission. The Bureau urged the State Party to report on the implementation of these recommendations and requested the State Party for a report on this situation and possible impacts on the site by 15 September 2001.

Europe and North America

Belovezhskaya Pushcha/Bialowieza Forest (Belarus/Poland)

V.142 IUCN received reports in relation to the Bialowieza Forest, Poland, which state that the Government has abandoned its plans to enlarge the Park due to the lack of funds, and that funding for the existing Park remains at minimal levels. There are also disturbing reports about a doubling of cutting rates in the commercially-managed part of the Forest outside the World Heritage site, and lobbying to cut areas of old growth forest. While this information does not pertain to the part of the Forest designated as the World Heritage site, it can be expected that the integrity of the site may be affected should much of the surrounding Forest be cut.

V.143 While there are no plans to change the current status of Bialowieza Forest World Heritage site as a strictly protected area, IUCN and the World Heritage Bureau have urged the State Party to expedite the enlargement of the National Park to include the entire Polish side of the Bialowieza National Park. This option will be lost if the logging goes ahead.

V.144 The Centre informed the Bureau that a meeting with the site manager had taken place on 21 June 2001 which confirmed that logging was taking place only outside the World Heritage area.

V.145 The Bureau noted with concern the information regarding the cutting rates in the Forest outside the World Heritage area and requested the authorities to provide a report on these issues by 15 September 2001.

Pirin National Park (Bulgaria)

V.146 The Bureau noted that IUCN reviewed the information from the Minister of Environment and Water (MOEW) of Bulgaria dated 20 October 2000 and that no further information had been provided by the State Party. IUCN noted that the ski developments of 1985/86 were in compliance with the then existing Nature Protection Act and occupy an area of 48 ha. On 18 ha of this area, however, two ski runs and one chair lift do not function properly and there are consequent problems of overcrowding and traffic congestion on narrow roads. The Territorial Development Plan (TDP) submitted to the MOEW in 1999 proposes five new ski runs totalling 30 ha, plus their facilities, car parks and a cable car joining the zone with the town of Bansko. The proposed new ski runs are all within the World Heritage site. The State Party reports that the local population supported the project while NGOs rejected it completely. Following a positive Evaluation Impact Assessment (EIA), a public hearing and an assessment by the Senior Environment Council to the MOEW, part of the TDP has been given approval.

V.147 IUCN has also received for review a letter from Bulgarian NGOs dated 14 February 2001 in response to the State Party letter. This letter notes that: The Bulgarian National Parks Act emphasises nature conservation before the provisions of developments for tourism and recreation; a national conference was held in January 2001 attended by 180 environmental NGOs. Participants supported an appeal to the Ministry of Environment and Water, Bulgarian Prime Minister and the President to repeal the decision of allowing construction of new ski runs in the Park; no alternative solutions to the proposal have been considered; the EIA report notes that the forest to be clear-cut in the area of the planned ski zone is between 50 and 200 years old; the territorial management plan of the ski zone is in violation of a number of laws and Conventions, as well as the Park Management Plan; the plan to bring a further 1400 people to this area of the Park is contradictory to the principle of the management plan for the decentralisation of tourism; and conflict between the number of beds in the town and the capacity of the ski area is only an issue on weekends and holidays.

V.148 The BALKANI Wildlife Society recommended the promotion of soft tourism and the improvement of the capacity of existing ski facilities.

V.149 The Bureau commended the State Party for the efforts to protect the natural values of this site particularly through rehabilitation efforts and measures to alleviate current problems of overcrowding and traffic congestion. However, the Bureau expressed concerns about a number of aspects of the proposals, and stressed the importance of a full EIA and public hearings. Particular attention should be given in the EIA to the location of any new ski runs and facilities as well as possible alternative solutions. The Bureau requested the State Party to submit a detailed update on the proposal to develop five new ski runs by 15 September 2001 and to invite an IUCN/UNESCO mission to the site.

Gros Morne National Park (Canada)

V.150 The Bureau was informed that on 9 May 2001 a fax was received from Parks Canada providing new information on a number of developments since November 2000, which was transmitted to IUCN for review.

V.151 The Delegate of Canada informed the Bureau that staff from Gros Morne continue to work directly with the forestry company and the provincial government to ensure that the ecological integrity and the World Heritage values of the national park are recognized, taken into account and maintained in the context of forest operations. Canada would be pleased to provide additional information about this issue prior to the next Committee session.

V.152 The Bureau commended the State Party for the efforts to enhance the protection of the site and particularly through the development of suitable solutions to address the effect of logging outside the World Heritage site on the aesthetic values that justified inscription of the site under criterion (iii). The Bureau acknowledged the commitment by the logging company to the conservation of this site by deciding to cease clear cutting in the entire Main River watershed. The Bureau however requested the State Party to keep the Centre informed on progress towards ensuring that proposed alternative harvesting regimes take into full consideration any potential impacts to the ecological integrity of this site.

Nahanni National Park (Canada)

V.153 IUCN received reports by the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society - Northwest Territories Chapter (CPAWS-NWT), and confirmed by the State Party, that the Canadian Zinc Corporation has submitted land use applications to the MacKenzie Valley Land and Water Board, in order to support future production at the Prairie Creek mine site. The mine is located immediately upstream from Nahanni National Park, in the South Nahanni watershed, about 15km north of the World Heritage site boundary. Although the mine infrastructure has been in place since the early 1980s, the mine has never operated.  The Canadian Zinc Corporation has applied for a land use permit to conduct a six or seven-hole mineral exploration drilling programme, and re-establish an access road to remove a cache of diesel fuel stored 40 km from the mine site.

V.154 Both the mine site and the Nahanni National Park are situated in the South Nahanni watershed, traditional territory of the Dene People of the Deh Cho First Nations (DCFN), and a proposed protected area.  The Nahanni Butte Dene Band and the DCFN have expressed their wish to protect the entire South Nahanni watershed.  The DCFN will be negotiating with the Government to withdraw the land in the watershed from further industrial development. In the autumn 2000, supporters of Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society - Northwest Territories Chapter (CPAWS-NWT) submitted over 60 letters. As a result, the Canadian Zinc application was referred for an environmental assessment. There will be two separate assessments, one for the drilling programme, and one for the access road and fuel removal.  CPAWS-NWT believes that the establishment of a major industrial development within the watershed and adjacent to the Park is not consistent with the conservation values of the area.  They agree that the fuel cache, which has leaked an undetermined amount of fuel, should be removed from its present location. However, they argue that rather than re-establishing a 40- kilometre road as proposed by Canadian Zinc, alternative, environmentally responsible methods should be investigated for removing the fuel.

V.155 The State Party has also informed IUCN that the company North American Tungsten Ltd. is assessing plans for re-opening the Cantung mine (a tungsten mine) in response to changes in the global tungsten market. This mine was closed in 1986 and is located on the Flat River, a tributary of the South Nahanni River, about 45 km upstream from the boundary of the World Heritage site. A further 139 claims have recently been staked by the company. An all-weather road has been reopened to the mine site. A major seismic exploration programme is also being developed and may be proposed for the South Nahanni watershed in the very near future. The State Party notes that these mining proposals are of concern to them and with respect to its mandate to protect ecological integrity. It will continue to monitor developments and make interventions to the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board. It also intends to seek a final boundary for the Park that has a better ability to maintain ecological integrity. This will be sought through the Deh Cho land claims process.

V.156 The Delegate of Canada informed the Bureau that five permit applications from the Canadian Zinc mine were received by the MacKenzie Valley Resource Management Board. One is specifically for up to an additional 60 drill sites and another relates to tailing ponds. Parks Canada referred the first two permit applications to second level environmental assessment, to the Environmental Impact Review Board. Parks Canada has also undertaken to create stronger relationships with other federal government departments and with the government of the Northern Territories. This has led to a broader support for the referral of the total permit applications to be assessed as a package and examination of cumulative impacts. It was noted that with other applications, open discussion with companies such as ARCIS has led to amendments to sensitive activities. The staff continues to work co-operatively with the DFCN and discussion has been initiated internally to move towards more permanent boundary definition.

V.157 The Bureau requested the State Party to submit a detailed report on the potential impacts these proposals may have on the World Heritage site by 15 September 2001.

Volcanoes of Kamchatka (Russian Federation)

V.158 The Bureau was informed that IUCN received a recent report, which again highlights the threats to the site, including lack of management, hunting and gold mining. Bystrinsky Nature Park, one of the five components of this site, continues to be the area most significantly threatened. The Park has no staff. Forest fires are reported to consume significant parts of the Park each year. The Park has been divided into 24 hunting leases, half of which are owned by large businesses outside of the region, and permitted by local authorities and not by the Park's administration or by local indigenous peoples. Major changes to the boundaries of the site are also under discussion to allow gold mining.

V.159 This recent report also highlighted a new and significant threat to the natural values of the site. A year ago work began on a road to connect Esso, a village inside the Bystrinsky Nature Park, with Palana in the northern half of the Kamchatka region. This road will bisect the Park and will open up large areas to poaching and hunting. It is doubtful that the Parks Service and Forest Service have the capacity to control activities along this road.

V.160 IUCN notes that Bystrinsky Nature Park is one of the four parks in the UNDP/GEF project entitled "Demonstrating sustainable conservation of biological diversity in four protected areas in Russia'a Kamchatka Oblast". UNDP/GEF has undertaken a one-and-a-half year project development phase, involving many stakeholders, and the project itself, worth US$13 million, is expected to be operational by September 2001. One of the objectives of the project is to assist with the establishment of Bystrinsky Nature Park as a sustainable natural park. IUCN is also working on a project entitled "World Natural Heritage Territories in Russia and Ecological Tourism".

V.161 A staff member of the UNESCO Office, Moscow, participated in an intersectoral mission to the Kamchatka Peninsula concerning the UNDP/GEF project, which took place from 9 to 19 February 2001. The report points out the urgent need for awareness building among the local government and local populations about World Heritage obligations. It furthermore notes that the newly elected Governor of Kamchatka promotes mining activities as a motor for the Kamchatka economy.

V.162 The Bureau requested the State Party to provide a state of conservation report with particular reference to the problems in the Bystrinsky Nature Park by 15 September 2001. The Bureau noted that any change to the boundaries of this site requires a full analysis of biodiversity issues, ecosystems, migration routes and indigenous people issues. The Bureau requested the Centre to contact the State Party to obtain such an analysis and to make it available for review by IUCN as it may have important implications for the integrity of this site.

Golden Mountains of Altai (Russian Federation)

V.163 The Bureau noted that no new information on the road proposal was received from the State Party. The Director of the UNESCO Office, Moscow, attended the meeting "The socio-economic development of the Altai Republic and the perspectives of the development of the transport system in the South of Siberia", which was held on 15 to 16 December 2000 in Gorno Altaisk. He noted that awareness building must be raised among the decision- makers in the Altai Government with regard to the obligations under the World Heritage Convention. He furthermore pointed out that the road proposals are linked with a gas pipeline project and that all proposals need careful review by IUCN.

V.164 During a meeting between the Director of the UNESCO Office, Moscow, and Centre staff on 19 June 2001, the Centre was informed that the Governor of the Altai Republic envisages a feasibility study of the road and gas pipeline proposals.

V.165 The Bureau reiterated its request that the State Party provide a state of conservation report with particular reference to the road proposal and any other projects that may be under consideration by 15 September 2001.

Doñana National Park (Spain)

V.166 The Observer of Spain informed the Bureau that the follow-up to the "Donana 2005" Conference was foreseen to be organized in Huelva from 26 to 28 November 2001 and that invitations have already been issued. He also provided documentation on the project that was made available to all Bureau members. He stated that the Donana 2005 project was the most ambitious environmental project in Spain to ameliorate the situation of the site following the mining spill, and that a technical group and a scientific committee had been established.

V.167 The Bureau commended the State Party for organizing a follow- up Conference for the Doñana 2005 Conference from 26 to 28 November 2001 with the participation of the Ramsar Convention, IUCN and UNESCO. The Bureau recommended the State Party to give particular importance to this follow-up Conference to finalize the agreements on the administrative and scientific co-ordination required to implement the Doñana 2005 Project. The finalization of the agreement at the 3 May 2001 meeting of the Patronato of Doñana was recognized as an important step for the implementation of this Project.

St Kilda (United Kingdom)

V.168 The Bureau recalled the World Heritage Committee recommendations to expand the boundaries of the World Heritage site to include the surrounding marine area and to revise the management plan. IUCN reviewed a letter from the State Party dated 26 October 2000, updating progress on these recommendations as follows: boundary extension: A marine survey has been carried out to obtain the necessary data to inform on the issue of the extension of the site. The UK Government seeks to bring forward proposals for an extension to the site by June 2002. Management Plan: It is not possible to start work on a new management plan before the determination of new boundaries. This work was expected to begin in early 2001 and is not likely to be completed in time to report to the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau. If the new boundaries extend beyond the nautical six-mile limit, this will raise issues related to the law of the sea administered by the International Maritime Organisation and the State Party may require the assistance of the World Heritage Centre. The UK Government has also placed a moratorium on all new oil licences nearer to St Kilda than those already granted.

V.169 The Bureau commended the State Party on progress made in addressing the Committee's recommendations and requests the State Party to provide a further progress report on the implementation of recommendations from the twenty-third session of the Committee by 15 September 2001.

MIXED (NATURAL AND CULTURAL) HERITAGE

Kakadu National Park (Australia)

V.170 In noting that the Jabiluka uranium mine site (on a mineral lease surrounded by Kakadu National Park) remains on a stand-by and in an environmental management phase, the Bureau examined reports received from the State Party, IUCN, the Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation and environmental groups.

V.171 The State Party informed the Bureau that the Jabiluka Mineral Lease was granted under Northern Territory legislation in 1982 for a period of 42 years. The operating company has approvals under Australian law to develop the Jabiluka project subject to a number of legislatively binding conditions. Mining at Jabiluka will only commence after mining activities at Ranger start to be scaled down such that both Jabiluka and Ranger will not be in full scale production at the same time. Current estimates of the remaining life of Ranger indicate that mining at Jabiluka could commence between 2008 and 2010. The Company has confirmed that mining will not proceed until there is consent from traditional owners, and not before 2008. In the meantime, the Australian Government continues to monitor the adequacy of environmental protection. Furthermore, the Australian Government has accepted the recommendation of the Independent Scientific Panel (ISP) of ICSU for a formal review to be conducted no less than once every five years.

V.172 The Bureau noted the reports on the first sighting of cane toads (Bufo marinus, an invasive species) in Kakadu National Park on 12 March 2001 and on the development of cane toad mitigation strategies based on a risk assessment.

V.173 The Bureau noted that with higher than average rainfall in early 2001, the mining company has instigated a number of measures to enhance the Interim Water Management Pond (IWMP) to ensure that no contaminated water from the Jabiluka site enters Kakadu National Park. These measures include reducing the catchment of the IWMP to as small an area as practical, storing water in the underground workings, and implementing the reverse osmosis process to purify water in the IWMP to allow irrigation of revegetation areas on site.

V.174 The Bureau recalled that the Committee at its twenty-fourth session in Cairns (2000) requested "the Australian Government allocate resources as soon as possible to enable the implementation of the landscape and ecosystem analysis and monitoring program recommended by the ISP and IUCN and the appointment of a water resource specialist to the Office of the Supervising Scientist". The Committee also requested the Australian Government to establish an Independent Science Advisory Committee (ISAC), which would "... be able to report openly, independently and without restriction".

V.175 IUCN stated that while there does not now appear to be any likelihood of mining at Jabiluka for many years to come, many conservation and Aboriginal interests remain concerned about the situation at Kakadu. There is special concern over the treatment of wastewater at Jabiluka. IUCN commented that the State Party should move quickly to fulfil its undertakings given in Cairns.

V.176 The Delegate of Australia reported that all their commitments to the Committee in relation to Kakadu National Park are being implemented. He informed the Bureau that resources had been allocated for the implementation of a landscape and ecosystem analysis and monitoring programme. The Supervising Scientist has been conducting discussions with stakeholders including traditional owners on the Kakadu National Park Board of Management, the Environmental Research Institute of the Supervising Scientist (ERISS) and the Kakadu Research Advisory Committee on the scope and content of the program which will:

V.177 The Delegate of Australia informed the Bureau that it is planned for the full programme to commence by the 2001-2002 wet season. Furthermore, the Supervising Scientist, with the support of the principal stakeholders, commenced in March 2001 the first project in the programme whose aim is to describe the distribution and map the extent of major ecosystems within the Alligator Rivers Region.

V.178 The Delegate of Australia also informed the Bureau that the recruitment of a water resource specialist to the Office of the Supervising Scientist is underway. He also noted changes to the membership and role of the existing Alligator Rivers Region Technical Committee (ARRTC) to meet the needs identified by the ISP of ICSU in its recommendation on the establishment of an Independent Science Advisory Committee (ISAC). The Chair and the majority of the voting members will be appointed following selection by the most appropriate body representing Australian scientists and engineers, possibly the Australian Academy of Science.

V.179 He also informed the Bureau that the Supervising Scientist has sought the advice from the existing ARRTC members, which includes representatives of the Aboriginal people of the region, on the fields of expertise that should be covered by the new members to be appointed to meet the recommendations of the ISP of ICSU. This advice has been provided to the Minister for Environment and Heritage.

V.180 The Supervising Scientist has also consulted with scientific colleagues in Australia and with the Secretariats of several possible institutions on the most appropriate body to select the independently appointed members of ARRTC. He recommended to the Minister that the most appropriate body was the Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies (FASTS).

V.181 Following a request from the Minister, FASTS conducted a wide- ranging consultation of its member societies to select suitable scientists and engineers as members of the revised ARRTC. FASTS advised the Minister of the names of the 7 persons that it recommends for appointment to ARRTC on 30 May 2001. These recommendations have been accepted unchanged. Letters of appointment are in the process of finalisation and the first meeting of the new committee is expected to take place in September 2001.

V.182 The Bureau recalled that the Committee at its twenty-fourth session in Cairns (2000) "encouraged the State Party and the Mirrar Traditional Owners to resume and continue their efforts in a constructive dialogue, in order to develop together a process leading towards the protection of Kakadu's cultural heritage".

V.183 ICOMOS emphasized the importance of utilizing the postponement of mining operations at the Jabiluka site to deepen the discussion between the Mirrar Traditional Owners and the State Party.

V.184 The Bureau noted information received from the State Party concerning the re-commencement and continuation of the dialogue with the Mirrar Traditional Owners of the mine site and other stakeholders.

V.185 The dialogue between the State Party and traditional owners of the mine area continues, but successful dialogue is a two way process that requires both parties to be willing to communicate. There is ongoing and broader dialogue on the protection of the overall cultural values of Kakadu National Park that continues successfully in the context of the Board of Management of Kakadu National Park, involving traditional owners from all major clan groups. This process is exploring the best means of ensuring the management and protection of the cultural values of Kakadu National Park.

V.186 Five days of productive dialogue with traditional owners from the Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation, their executive and staff took place during March and April. There was also substantive discussion with other key stakeholders such as the Northern Land Council, the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority, the Company and the Northern Territory Government. The senior traditional owner and her staff then met with the Minister for Environment and Heritage and held constructive talks, in which the Minister agreed to follow up talks by officials.

V.187 The Delegate of Australia stated that his State Party will continue to report openly and transparently on the dialogue with the Traditional Owners. The State Party stressed that this renewed domestic dialogue and co-operation by all parties is the best means to facilitate agreement for the ongoing protection of Kakadu's cultural values.

V.188 The Bureau also noted details from the State Party of continuing progress, under the Kakadu Regional Social Impact Study (KRSIS), to ensure improvement in the social and economic circumstances (housing, essential services, indigenous education and health care) of Aboriginal people living in the Kakadu region (Annex III) - letter from Environment Australia dated 26 June 2001).

V.189 The Bureau noted the report of the State Party concerning the first sightings of cane toads (Bufo marinus) in Kakadu National Park and commends it for its approach.

V.190 The Bureau requested the State Party to report regularly to the World Heritage Centre on results of monitoring programmes and research activities concerning this issue.

V.191 The Bureau requested that the State Party provide a report by 15 September 2001 for consideration by the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau, on the progress with the landscape and ecosystem analysis, the recruitment of the water resource specialist and the establishment of the Independent Science Advisory Committee.

V.192 With reference to the decision of the twenty-fourth session of the Committee encouraging the State Party and the Mirrar Traditional Owners to resume and continue their efforts in a constructive dialogue, the Bureau requested the State Party to keep the World Heritage Centre regularly informed of progress.

V.193 Following the adoption of the recommendation by the Bureau, a representative of the Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation read a letter signed by the Senior Traditional Owner, Ms Yvonne Margarula (see Annex IV).

V.194 A response from Environment Australia to the letter of the Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation was circulated and the Bureau agreed that it be incorporated into the record of the meeting (see Annex V - letter from Mr Roger Beale dated 27 June 2001).

Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (Peru)

V.195 The Bureau was informed that no substantive report on the state of conservation of the property was submitted by the State Party as requested at the twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the Bureau. However, the Bureau was informed that the Peruvian Government had suspended the cable car project, although final confirmation from the Government was still pending.

V.196 The Bureau stressed once again the need to implement the recommendations made by the UNESCO-IUCN-ICOMOS mission of 1999 that were fully endorsed by the Committee at its twenty-third session. It recognised that progress has been made on the implementation of some recommendations and welcomed, in particular, the decision of the Government of Peru to suspend the cable car project. This decision should, according to the Bureau, facilitate the undertaking of studies to define the carrying capacity of the site and develop a well-considered approach to the management of an ever-increasing flow of visitors.

V.197 The Bureau requested UNESCO-IUCN-ICOMOS to field a mission to the site in order to obtain a clear view of the level of implementation of all the recommendations of the 1999 mission. The mission should also look into (a) the policy for the use of the site for commercial purposes, (b) the restoration of the Intihuantana sundial, and (c) the research that is being or is to be undertaken on the landslide risks. The report of the mission should be submitted to the twenty-sixth session of the Bureau.

CULTURAL HERITAGE

Arab States

Islamic Cairo (Egypt)

V.198 The Secretariat informed the Bureau of the content of the reports received since the last session of the Committee (Cairns, 2000) from the two consultants contracted by the Centre over the past year to co- ordinate and advise on the activities for the rehabilitation of Islamic Cairo.

V.199 On the issue of urban rehabilitation, the Bureau noted the intention of the Egyptian authorities to organize, in collaboration with the Centre, a seminar in Cairo to review and discuss current projects, strategies and on-going studies, particularly concerning the central area of the Al Muaiz Street. Among these studies are a comprehensive Project for the Rehabilitation of Islamic Cairo, undertaken by the General Organization for Physical Planning (GOPP)- Ministry of Housing, and a rehabilitation plan for the monuments of the city, being developed by the newly established Centre of Studies and Development for Historic Cairo (CSDHC) - Ministry of Culture.

V.200 The World Heritage Centre's consultants reported that a large number of restoration projects are being implemented by the Supreme Council of Antiquities. The Bureau noted the concern of ICOMOS with respect to the need to ensure that recognized standards of conservation are fully respected, given the special importance of many of these monuments.

V.201 The Bureau recommended that, as soon as the two studies to be prepared by GOPP and CSDHC are available, the Egyptian authorities organize, in close co-ordination with the Centre, a seminar to review all existing proposals and establish clear and concrete guidelines for a rehabilitation plan of the Al Muaiz Street area.

V.202 The Bureau also recommended that the mission foreseen by an ICOMOS expert be dispatched as soon as possible, to monitor the implementation of the conservation works occurring within the historic city.

Memphis and its Necropolis - the Pyramid Fields from Giza to Dahshur (Egypt)

V.203 The Secretariat reported to the Bureau on information received, that certain local authorities were still considering having a new section of the Greater Cairo Ring Road built to cross the plateau of the Pyramids, despite the existence of a recently built by-pass linking the Ring Road to the road to Alexandria. The Bureau's attention was also drawn to the need to regulate the use of the area surrounding the pyramids, currently encroached by settlements and commercial activities.

V.204 The Delegate of Thailand expressed his surprise at the news that, despite the Agreement reached between UNESCO and the Egyptian Government in 1998, the question was still a matter of discussion.

V.205 The Bureau, recalling the Agreement signed between UNESCO and the Egyptian Government in 1998, reaffirmed the importance of preventing any encroachment upon the site, such as highways, roads, water supply pipes and buildings within the World Heritage protected area. The Bureau invited the Egyptian authorities to develop and adopt, in consultation with the World Heritage Centre, a comprehensive Management Plan, with appropriate measures to protect the World Heritage site of Memphis Necropolis from unwanted urban developments and inappropriate uses.

Ancient Thebes with is Necropolis (Egypt)

V.206 The Secretariat reported to the Bureau on the findings of the recent mission to Thebes/Qurnah by an ICOMOS expert to investigate on the on-going relocation of the inhabitants of the village, and subsequent demolition of their houses. It was pointed out that the issues in Qurnah were of a twofold nature. On the one hand, ICOMOS was requested to clarify the extent of the threats posed by the village to the exceptional archaeological heritage of the site, which justified its inscription in the first place; and on the other hand, to assess the cultural and ethnological value of the village.

V.207 ICOMOS recalled the fact that extensive looting had been carried out on the site in previous years by the local inhabitants. It stressed that the current demolitions were carried out in a piecemeal way, without any consideration for the quality of the buildings. ICOMOS equally stressed the sociological nature of the problem and recommended a solution whereby residents in the area were entrusted as custodians of the buildings.

V.208 The Bureau took note of the report prepared by the ICOMOS expert, and stressed the need to reduce the overall population of the village of Qurnah; to ensure a decent standard of life to inhabitants who wish to stay as the official wardens of the site; to enhance and protect the traditional character of the built environment from the present chaotic development; and to record and preserve the potential archaeological remains lying under the soil from damage resulting from urban waste and infrastructure.

V.209 The Bureau recommended that the Egyptian authorities freeze the on-going unplanned demolitions of houses at the village of Qurnah and to request technical assistance from the World Heritage Fund to prepare a Management Plan for the site, according to the terms of reference outlined in the ICOMOS report.

V.210 The Plan should determine: 1) the archaeological areas which must be explored and protected; 2) the houses which should be conserved and the conditions required (building materials, management of water, etc.) to allow some residents to continue living in the village; 3) visiting trails and the use of those constructions which would be left vacant further to the assessment of the potential for important archaeological strata; and 4) the appropriate location of functions and activities which are not compatible with the safeguarding of the site (commerce etc.).

V.211 Furthermore, the Bureau recommended that the preparation of this Plan be an opportunity to improve local capacity in site management and urban conservation.

Petra (Jordan)

V.212 The Secretariat informed the Bureau on the contents of the Draft Petra Park Operational Plan for the management of the site, prepared by a U.S. National Park Service team with funding from a World Bank Project. This Operational Plan was presented to a group of stakeholders, including UNESCO, during a Workshop held in Amman in January 2001. A copy of this Operational Plan was requested and obtained by ICOMOS for consultation.

V.213 The Bureau noted that this Operational Plan does not constitute a duplication of the Master Plan prepared by UNESCO in 1996 for Petra, but rather aims to provide an operational framework for its implementation.

V.214 The Bureau took note of the observations of the Secretariat and recommended that the present Draft be further improved to ensure the feasibility of the Plan. In particular, the Bureau found that three aspects of the Operational Plan needed to be addressed: 1) the institutional/legislative framework; 2) the financial sustainability of the Petra Park; and 3) the need to develop a local capacity and adequate human resources for the implementation of the Plan.

V.215 The Bureau thanked and commended the Jordanian authorities for elaborating an Operational Plan for Petra, whose implementation will constitute an essential step towards a sound management and conservation policy for this World Heritage site. The Bureau recommended that the Jordanian authorities work closely with the World Heritage Centre to ensure that the final version of the Petra Park Operational Plan takes into account the above observations, prior to its adoption by the State Party.

Byblos (Lebanon)

V.216 The Secretariat informed the Bureau on the recommendations made during the Workshop organized in November 1999 by the Centre, the Delft University and the Lebanese American University. This Workshop was held further to another workshop organized by the same bodies and held in April 1999, and its proceedings were made public only recently (April 2001).

V.217 The attention of the Bureau was drawn to the need that these recommendations be carefully evaluated and taken into account by the concerned Lebanese authorities in view of the safeguarding of the site, with special regard to the possibility of expanding the buffer zone of the World Heritage site, including the two beaches to the North and South of the historic city, thus preventing any unwanted urban developments.

V.218 The Bureau noted that a large cultural heritage project is being implemented by the World Bank, which should be considered as an extraordinary opportunity to implement a coherent and sustainable management policy at the site.

V.219 ICOMOS supported the recommendations made by the two workshops and informed the Bureau that a technical mission is due to visit Byblos in August 2001. The Bureau recommended that the results of both workshops organized in 1999 be disseminated and discussed among the concerned parties (DGA, MOT, the Municipality of Byblos, World Bank Project). The Bureau stressed the importance of considering the findings of the above-mentioned workshops when defining the scope of the World Bank project's activities.

Ancient Ksour of Ouadane, Chinguetti, Tichitt and Oualata (Mauritania)

V.220 The Secretariat informed the Bureau on the findings of the mission carried out by a Centre staff to Ouadane and Chinguetti in April 2001 to assess the state of conservation and discuss with the national authorities possible measures to be taken for their safeguarding. The Bureau noted that the restoration works of the Mosque of Ouadane, funded under the World Heritage Convention, are proceeding according to schedule and should be completed by the end of the summer.

V.221 The Bureau noted the various problems gravely affecting these ancient cities despite the commendable efforts of the competent national authorities. These range from big climatic and socio-economic changes to lack of funds and trained human resources. The Secretariat informed the Bureau of its intention to develop a large project for the rehabilitation of the four ancient ksour, and to seek extrabudgetary funds for that purpose. The urgency of an intervention was further explained by the risk of adverse effects on the conservation of the ancient ksour caused by the rapidly growing tourism industry in this fragile area. The Bureau and ICOMOS supported the strategy proposed by the Secretariat, notably to elaborate urban conservation and development plans for the cities, including technical and juridical instruments to facilitate a policy of rehabilitation and re-appropriation of the old abandoned houses.

V.222 The Bureau recommended that urgent action be undertaken by the Mauritanian authorities, in close co-ordination with the Centre, to provide the ancient ksour of Ouadane, Chinguetti, Tichitt and Oualata with a technical and institutional framework for the implementation of appropriate management and conservation policies. This framework should integrate the various national and international efforts into a single coherent strategy to safeguard these unique sites and strengthening the capacity of the responsible national and local authorities.

Asia and the Pacific

Peking Man Site at Zhoukoudian (China)

V.223 The Bureau, recalling the recommendations of the Joint ICOMOS- ICCROM Reactive Monitoring Mission undertaken in September 1999, adopted by the Bureau at its twenty-third extraordinary session, noted that the State Party had not transmitted information concerning the implementation of the short and long-term actions for the sustainable conservation and development of the site. The Centre has since received numerous independent reports expressing alarm over the state of conservation of the site, particularly in Locality 1 and other excavated caves. Recently, the Centre was informed that the site-museum had been temporarily closed due to financial constraints.

V.224 The Delegate of Morocco underscored the importance of recognizing both the natural and cultural heritage values of the site and suggested that further scientific examination of the human remains and geological strata be undertaken. The site represented important quartenary periods and so it was important to look at the human remains in relation to the geomorphology of the site. The Delegate of Australia, emphasizing the cultural significance of the property, expressed his Government's willingness to strengthen regional co-operation through joint efforts within the framework of the Asia-Pacific Focal Point to enhance conservation of the site.

V.225 ICOMOS reported on an e-mail message just received from the State Party. This reported on a recent appeal launched by the Chinese Academy of Sciences that has resulted in a private-donor contribution of approximately US$122,000 for the conservation and development of this site. Moreover, ICOMOS was informed that the State Administration of Cultural Heritage has announced its commitment to make available financial resources for the conservation and management of this World Heritage site.

V.226 In light of the information just received by ICOMOS, the Bureau commended the State Party for taking efforts to safeguard the site.

The Potala Palace and Jokhang Temple Monastery, Lhasa (China)

V.227 The findings of the ICOMOS Mission undertaken to the Potala Palace and Jokhang Monastery (26 February - 6 March 2001) were examined by the Bureau, following its request for the mission at its twenty-fourth extraordinary session. The ICOMOS Mission had been undertaken in conjunction with the evaluation mission for the nomination of the extension of the site to include the Norbulingka Palace.

V.228 The Bureau's attention was drawn to the uncontrolled urban development and expansion of tourism related facilities which are reportedly continuing both within the World Heritage areas and in the immediate surroundings. The Bureau recalled that the protected area of Shöl is composed of a large number of historic buildings that serve to illustrate the once integrated functions of the Potala Palace and that many incompatible additions and alterations had taken place in different epochs of the recent past. The Bureau was informed that the Shöl area, occupied previously by private institutions and persons, is now administered by the Administration of Cultural Heritage of the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) which has started providing alternative accommodation to the inhabitants prior to the rehabilitation of the buildings.

V.229 Referring to the recent transportation of some 40 artifacts from the Potala Palace including a 3-metre bronze and gold statue of Maitriya, the Observer of China confirmed that these treasures were temporarily removed to be displayed at the exhibition "Cultural Treasures of Tibet" in Shanghai until 25 October 2001. Upon closure of this exhibition, these artifacts would be returned to the Potala Palace, following national policies pertaining to movable cultural heritage.

V.230 In response to the concern expressed by international experts regarding the poor condition of the mural paintings of the Potala Palace, as well as insufficient storage facilities for the protection of the thousands of 7th century Mahayana Buddhist scriptures and 11th century Thanka silk paintings, the Bureau was informed by the Observer of China that the State Administration of Cultural Heritage of China would fully support the organization of a Mural Painting Conservation Training Workshop, subject to the formal request from the Government of the Tibetan Autonomous Region.

V.231 The Bureau, expressed appreciation for the efforts made by the national and local authorities in elaborating the Potala Palace and Jokhang Monastery Protection Plans which focus on the conservation, maintenance and monitoring of the site, as well as on annual programmes to enhance religious activities, and on optimum utilization of available staff and funding from various sources including income received from visitor fees.

V.232 The Bureau also thanked the Chinese authorities for facilitating the ICOMOS Monitoring Mission to the Potala Palace and Jokhang Temple in Lhasa. The Bureau, in noting its concern over the state of conservation of the various elements of this World Heritage site, reiterated its readiness to favourably consider an international assistance request from China for the organization of a Mural Paintings Conservation Training Workshop with support from UNESCO and the Advisory Bodies as well as other activities to support the national and local efforts in safeguarding the World Heritage areas of Lhasa. The Bureau requested the World Heritage Centre to work in close collaboration with the State Party to prepare a plan of action within the context of the Periodic Reporting exercise to address the conservation and management issues examined by the Bureau, and to report to the Bureau in due course.

Itsukushima Shinto Shrine (Japan)

V.233 The Bureau examined further information transmitted by the State Party to the Centre concerning the destruction caused by the 24 March 2001 Geiyo Earthquake, which resulted in minor damage to the Honsha- Haraiden, Sessha-Marodo-Jinja, Higashi-Kairou, Massha-Hokoku-jinja-Honden and Sessha Omotojinja-Honden. The damaged parts of these buildings were restored in May 2001 by the responsible authorities, following international conservation norms. Minor damage to stone walls observed in certain areas have been recorded and preparation is underway to financially and technically support the rehabilitation of these areas within the fiscal year of 2001. The Centre informed the Bureau that, upon evaluation of the minor damage caused by the Geiyo Earthquake and the swift conservation measures undertaken by the authorities concerned, the World Heritage values of the site have not been affected.

V.234 The Bureau expressed deep sympathy for the citizens who suffered from loss of property caused by the large-scale earthquake of 24 March 2001 in the Hiroshima and Itsukushima areas. The Bureau took note with appreciation, of the report on the state of conservation of the Itsukushima Shinto Shrine submitted by the State Party. Congratulating the authorities on the rapid measures taken to rehabilitate the damaged buildings within the Shrine, the Bureau requested the authorities to inform the Centre when restoration is completed.

Lumbini, Birthplace of the Lord Buddha (Nepal)

V.235 The Bureau examined the state of conservation of the site and noted with appreciation, the recent measures taken by the national authorities in close co-operation with the World Heritage Centre and the UNESCO Kathmandu Office, to address the recommendations of the World Heritage Committee, its Bureau, ICOMOS and the Centre. The Bureau commended the national authorities for taking the necessary actions to temporarily suspend the development of the fragile Maya Devi Temple remains until the elaboration of the guiding principles for its conservation, presentation and development. The Bureau took note of the concluding recommendations of the International Technical Meeting (April 2001) and urged the State Party to continue the implementation of these recommendations. The Bureau requested the World Heritage Centre to continue its efforts in mobilizing international technical and financial support to increase the capacity of the national authorities in carrying out the recommended actions. Finally, the Bureau requested the State Party and the World Heritage Centre to report to the twenty-fifth session of the World Heritage Committee on the progress made in their efforts to ensure long-term conservation, presentation and development of the site.

Ancient City of Sigiriya (Sri Lanka)

V.236 The Bureau noted the information received from the State Party in February 2001 concerning proposed plans for the expansion of a military airport within 2 km of Sigiriya. The national authorities had stated that the airport, if and when constructed, would negatively impact upon the site through:

V.237 The Centre informed the Bureau of the findings of the Reactive Monitoring Mission to the site in March 2001, which had been urgently organised at the request of the national authorities. The mission undertaken by the Deputy Director of the Centre together with an international airport planning engineer seconded from the Aeroports de Paris under the France- UNESCO Agreement, held detailed discussions with the national and military officials concerned. ICOMOS had been invited to participate but was unable to do so due to the very short notice of the mission. However, ICOMOS-Sri Lanka was consulted during the mission.

V.238 The Bureau noted with deep concern, the findings of the UNESCO Reactive Monitoring Mission, which concluded that:

  1. the proposed extension of the Sigiriya airport to serve as the principal base for fighter jets would undermine the character of the World Heritage site, notably due to security risks of enemy attack and air and noise pollution which will not only impact negatively on the fragile structure of the monuments and the wall paintings, but also on the flora and fauna of the natural reserves located along the flight path, and;
  2. the technical study prepared by the airport planner recommended that the national authorities consider the expansion of the Hingurakgoda airstrip which is in better condition, hence less costly to upgrade and more appropriate for eventual use as a commercial airport.

V.239 The Bureau expressed appreciation for the rapid deployment of the Reactive Monitoring Mission to Sigiriya. While noting the national security concerns of the Government of Sri Lanka, the Bureau requested the State Party to reconsider the proposed expansion of the Sigiriya airport and to provide a report on decisions taken by the Government in this regard, by 15 September 2001, to the Secretariat for consideration by the Committee at its twenty-fifth session.

V.240 The Observer of Sri Lanka expressed his Government's deep gratitude to the Director and Deputy Director of the World Heritage Centre, and the French Government, for swiftly responding to the request for an urgent mission to be undertaken to examine the proposed plans for expanding the military airport of Sigiriya. The Bureau was informed that the Recommendations of the UNESCO Mission have been placed before the Government for its consideration.

Old Town of Galle and its Fortifications (Sri Lanka)

V.241 The Bureau was informed that the Deputy Director of the Centre, who visited the site in April 2001, observed the urgently required conservation needs of the main historic building, the 17th century Dutch Reformed Church, notably the need to repair the roof and stain-glass windows to prevent rainwater infiltration. Moreover, the Bureau took note with concern, of the extent of deformation to the urban historic fabric which undermines the authenticity of this town, characterized by the Portuguese, Dutch, English, Chinese and Indian building traditions. ICOMOS expressed its full agreement with the observations of the Deputy Director of the Centre. It added that there was now a Centre for urban studies in Galle directed by the President of ICOMOS Sri Lanka which was addressing the problems of Galle as a matter of urgency.

V.242 The Bureau examined the state of conservation of the site, noting that the historic centre suffered serious deterioration and deformation of the existing cultural-historic fabric due to lack of maintenance of the historic buildings and lack of control on building activities. The Bureau requested the Sri Lankan authorities to strengthen control on building permits and activities in the City and allocate funds for the maintenance of the historic monuments. The Bureau invited the State Party to submit an international assistance request to elaborate a programme of corrective measures.

V.243 The Observer of Sri Lanka, drawing the attention of the Bureau to the challenges facing the authorities in conserving and managing changes within a "living" City of Galle, underscored the importance of elaborating a specific conservation and development plan for this World Heritage site.

Latin America and the Caribbean

Brasilia (Brazil)

V.244 The World Heritage Centre informed the Bureau that the State Party had submitted a substantive report answering the concerns regarding perceived demographic pressures and their impact on the World Heritage values.

V.245 The Bureau congratulated the State Party on its clear vision of the problems facing the site, as well as on the far-reaching actions taken or being planned to mitigate them. The Bureau requested ICOMOS to study the report in the context of the ICOMOS/UNESCO monitoring mission, which the twenty-fourth session of the extraordinary Bureau requested to be undertaken. The results of the mission should be reported to the twenty- fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau.

Antigua Guatemala (Guatemala)

V.246 The World Heritage Centre informed the Bureau that it had received a report on the damage caused by the earthquake that struck Central America on 13 January 2001. The tremors aggravated damage already experienced in 1976 and caused moderate damage but heightened the danger of collapse for some of the buildings. The Centre is currently discussing an emergency assistance request with the State Party.

V.247 ICOMOS reported on the results of an expert mission, which evaluated the impacts of the construction of a shopping centre on the property's universal values, as well as its general state of conservation. The Advisory Body informed the Bureau that the building project was definitely suspended, but indicated that there were more general legislative problems, as well as pressures due to tourism and development. The lack of a buffer zone was also highlighted. The efforts of the State Party to address these problems were commended. The complete report will be submitted to the State Party for comment by the 15 September 2001 to be reported to the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau.

Fortifications on the Caribbean side of Panama: Portobelo - San Lorenzo (Panama)

V.248 The Bureau noted that the authorities had submitted, during its session, reports on the state of conservation and management of the site. It requested the Secretariat and ICOMOS to study the reports and to consider them in the context of a joint UNESCO-ICOMOS mission that should be undertaken in order to assess the state of conservation and management of the site. The mission report should be submitted to the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau for examination.

Archaeological Site of Chavin (Peru)

V.249 The Bureau noted with concern the very slow progress being made in the elaboration of a Master Plan for the site. It stressed the importance of having a plan to ensure co-ordination of any type of intervention or protective measure. The Bureau encouraged the national authorities to formulate clear objectives for the future protection of the site and incorporate them into a detailed Master Plan at the earliest possible date. Furthermore, it suggested that the international assistance request, that is currently being revised, concentrate on the activities most needed to initiate this process. The Bureau requested that a progress report be submitted by 15 September 2001 for examination by the Bureau at its twenty-fifth extraordinary session.

Historical Centre of the City of Arequipa (Peru)

V.250 The Secretariat informed the Bureau that it had received through the Permanent Delegation of Peru a report from the Mayor of Arequipa on the damages that the earthquake of 23 June 2001 caused to the Historical Centre of Arequipa. It was reported that:

V.251 The report also stated that the Master Plan, in its final phase of preparation, would have to be amended in view of the new situation.

V.252 The Bureau expressed its regret about the loss of human life and the damage caused by the earthquake to housing and infrastructure. It expressed concern about the damage to the Historical Centre of Arequipa that was inscribed on the World Heritage List only some six months' ago. The Bureau offered its support and assistance to the Government of Peru, the Municipality and the people of Arequipa in the undertaking of immediate stabilization works, the assessment of the damage and the drawing up of a conservation and restoration programme.

V.253 The Bureau requested the Peruvian authorities to submit, if possible by 15 September 2001, a detailed report on the damage, the response given to avoid further deterioration and the restoration programme that is foreseen.

Europe and North America

Historic District of Quebec (Canada)

V.254 The Secretariat informed the Bureau that during the course of last year, it had received information informing of concern over the planned cruise-ship landing at Pointe-à-Carcy and its possible impact on the universal values of the Historic District of Quebec. In response, the Government of Canada, through Parks Canada, provided information on the process of consultation and assessment of the project and submitted substantive documentation on the project, on the results of the public consultations and on the cultural resource assessment that had been prepared under its leadership for the area concerned.

V.255 From the documentation received by the Secretariat, it became evident that there is a considerable difference of opinion on the potential impact of the terminal, both visually and in terms of increased traffic in a neighboring residential area, as well as on the reversible and possibly temporary character of the terminal.

V.256 In view of this, the Bureau requested ICOMOS to undertake an assessment mission to the site and prepare a report for examination by the Bureau at its twenty-fifth extraordinary session.

V.257 The Delegate of Canada stated that Canada is prepared to receive such a mission and will do all that is necessary to facilitate its undertaking.

Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin (Germany)

V.258 No information was made available to the Bureau for further examination of the impact of the Havel waterway improvement project on the cultural landscape of Potsdam. Therefore, the Bureau requested the German authorities to collaborate with ICOMOS in the assessment of the impact of the Havel project and requested the German authorities to submit a report by 15 September 2001 for examination by the Bureau at its twenty-fifth extraordinary session.

Classical Weimar (Germany)

V.259 An ICOMOS expert mission was undertaken to the site in order to assess the impact of a road construction project on the universal values of the site. ICOMOS presented the conclusions of the mission.

V.260 The Bureau notes the conclusion of the ICOMOS expert mission to Weimar, that the proposed bypass road (Variant 1): (i) will bring relief to the centre of the city of Weimar, (ii) will not have a negative impact on the fabric of the Tiefurt Schloss and its grounds and (iii) that mitigation measures will be able to conceal the road and will mitigate the effects of traffic on the road from possible viewpoints in Tiefurt Park. It requests the Secretariat to transmit the report to the German authorities for consideration, requesting them to prepare a progress report on the project and mitigation measures by 15 September 2001 for examination by the Bureau at its twenty-fifth extraordinary session.

Megalithic Temples of Malta (Malta)

V.261 The Secretariat informed the Bureau that an ICOMOS mission visited the site on 11 and 12 May 2001 to evaluate the damage caused by acts of vandalism that occurred between 12 and 13 April 2001 at Mnajdra, a part of the World Heritage site.

V.262 During his intervention, the ICOMOS Representative indicated that this report comprises several recommendations and in particular:

V.263 Furthermore, in the report ICOMOS congratulates the State Party for its swift and efficient action in response to these events as well as for actions taken in the framework of the updating of the legal, administrative and scientific structures of the management programme for cultural heritage.

V.264 However, during his intervention, the ICOMOS Representative underlined that, already, during an expert meeting held in 1999, the issue of strengthening security at the site had been discussed. In conclusion, he mentioned that during his recent mission to the site, he had met with the Minister for Culture who had assured him of the concern of his Government with regard to all these questions.

V.265 The Observer of Malta thanked the Centre and UNESCO for the interest shown following these events. He indicated that this incident had given rise to an important debate in Parliament and public opinion and that major campaigns for the collection of funds had been initiated to assist in the restoration of the site. The Observer of Malta furthermore informed the Bureau that immediate action had been taken by the Government on the days following the acts of vandalism. He emphasised that significant efforts had been made to rehabilitate the site to its former state, that security at the site had been greatly strengthened, notably through the installation of projectors to illuminate the site at night and that they were linked by radio 24h/24h to the police post. Moreover, he indicated that the fences surrounding the site were being reinforced. He also mentioned to the Bureau that among the actions to improve the management and the protection of Maltese cultural heritage, a draft law would be submitted very shortly to Parliament. In concluding, the Observer of Malta notified that an investigation to discover the culprits was underway.

V.266 The Rapporteur informed the Bureau that during a visit to Malta following the events, he had noted that the security at the site was considerably strengthened. He did however underline that the general state of conservation of the site remained an issue of concern and that this problem should be studied, in particular the problem of erosion.

V.267 The Bureau took note of the information provided by the Observer of Malta and congratulated the State Party for its rapid and efficient reaction to the events as well as for the strengthening of security at the site and invited the State Party to inform the Committee on the progress of these actions. The Bureau warmly welcomed the State Party's undertaking to review and update the legal, administrative and scientific structure of its management programme for cultural heritage. The Bureau moreover, indicated its firm wish that close co-operation between the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and the State Party be established, in particular with regard to the evaluation of measures already undertaken for the rehabilitation and conservation of the site as well as for future ones.

Auschwitz Concentration Camp (Poland)

V.268 The Secretariat introduced this item by summarising the report that had been received from the Polish Minister of Internal Affairs and Administration on the Government Strategic Programme Oswiecim, the International Group of Experts and the matter of the buffer zone around the World Heritage site. In this context the Secretariat referred to and projected on the screen the delimitation of the site and its buffer zone as proposed in the nomination that was submitted by Poland in 1978. Furthermore, the Secretariat informed the Bureau that it had received a letter of invitation from the Chairman of the International Auschwitz Council for a working visit to Warsaw and to the site.

V.269 The Observer of Israel highlighted that the linking of the sites of Auschwitz and Birkenau is of the utmost importance.

V.270 The Observer of Poland pointed out that the International Auschwitz Council had been set up to consider all the issues pertaining not only to the site of Auschwitz, but also to other Holocaust sites in Poland. With regard to the 100m-zone established around these sites, the Observer of Poland explained that the 100m-zone is a minimum zone and that the linking of the sites of Auschwitz and Birkenau is under discussion. However, the town of Oswiecim with around 50,000 inhabitants is suffering from an economic crisis that needs to be considered in the overall planning for the site. He stressed that the discussion on the issue of the buffer zone can best be discussed during a visit to the site itself. The Observer of Poland, furthermore, stressed the educational value of the concentration camps, and informed the Bureau that Poland is currently preparing a series of educational projects to be presented to UNESCO in this respect.

V.271 Following these interventions, the Chairperson established a drafting group, chaired by himself and with the participation of ICOMOS, the observers of Germany, Israel and Poland and the World Heritage Centre. Following the recommendation of the drafting group, the Bureau adopted the following decision:

"The Bureau takes note of the report of the Minister of Internal Affairs and Administration on the Government Strategic Programme Oswiecim, the International Group of Experts and the matter of the buffer zone around the World Heritage site. It welcomes the decision of the Government to extend the Strategic Programme for another five years until 2007. It regrets that the International Group of Experts has not met since March 1999. It expresses the hope that under the aegis of the International Auschwitz Council, its terms of reference will be agreed upon and that the Group will be able to effectively meet and contribute to the development of a Management Plan for the area of the State Museum and its surroundings as referred to in the Declaration Concerning Principles for Implementation of Programme Oswiecimski that was signed on 5 March 1997.

V.272 The Bureau recalls that the area inscribed on the World Heritage List coincides with the area of the State Museum of Auschwitz- Birkenau and that, on the matter of the buffer zone, the nomination dossier for the site, submitted by the Polish authorities on 6 June 1978, refers to the zone of protection being expanded from 300 to 1000 metres and that a map was attached (see Annex VI) with an indication of a silence and a protection zone. Noting that the matter of the buffer zone and the need for a preservation plan for the site and its surroundings had been under discussion at sessions of the Bureau and the Committee since 1996, the Bureau recalls that the World Heritage Committee at its twenty-second session (1998) confirmed its support for the principles laid out in the Declaration of March 1997 and also confirmed its support that this process continues in a consensual manner among all parties involved and that it expressed the belief that no steps should be made unless consensus is reached. It notes with regret that a consensus on the planning and protection of the surroundings of the Auschwitz and Birkenau Concentration Camps has not been reached and that the Minister in his report states that the effective legal buffer zone is a strip of land not wider than 100 metres from the boundaries of the Holocaust Monument and that how land outside this zone be used is decided exclusively by the officials of the township council. The Bureau notes that no information has been made available to it on the plans that have been or may be in the process of preparation by the local authorities.

V.273 The Bureau commends the State Party for the establishment of the 100-metre zone as a zone with strict regulations and control, for the substantive study that has been undertaken by the State Museum on the situation of the area before, during and after the war and on the importance it attaches to the education of young people.

V.274 However, the Bureau is of the opinion that the 100 metres zone cannot be considered as equivalent to a buffer zone and that there is an urgent need to:

  1. confirm the buffer zone that is specific to the site and that was submitted at the time of the nomination of the site for inscription on the World Heritage List and implement appropriate management practices in this zone under the responsibility of the national authorities;

  2. establish a Management Plan for the area that is under the authority of the State Museum and for the buffer zone.

V.275 The Management Plan for the State Museum and the buffer zone should:

V.276 The Bureau acknowledges with appreciation the invitation for a working visit that the Chairman of the International Auschwitz Council extended by letter dated 25 May 2001 and requested the Secretariat to make the necessary arrangements for the visit of a UNESCO-ICOMOS mission. It expresses the sincere hope and expectation that such a mission will contribute to an effective and constructive co-operation between all parties concerned and will result in a common understanding of and agreement on the ways and means to adequately protect and manage the Concentration Camps and their surroundings.

V.277 The Bureau decides to defer further examination of this issue to its twenty-fifth extraordinary session and to the twenty-fifth session of the World Heritage Committee."

V.278 The Chairperson then informed the Bureau that at the invitation of the State Party, he would undertake a mission to Auschwitz- Birkenau on 1 and 2 July 2001 together with representatives of the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and the International Group of Experts.

Kizhi Pogost (Russian Federation)

V.279 The Bureau requested the Russian authorities to submit a report on the state of conservation of the site by 15 September 2001 to assess, at its twenty-fifth extraordinary session, the ways in which the Bureau may be able to collaborate with the Russian authorities to ensure proper conservation of the site.

Route de Santiago de Compostela (Spain)

V.280 The Bureau noted and endorsed the opinion expressed by ICOMOS that the proposed increase of the dam and water level of a barrage in the regions of Aragon and Navarra (the Embalse de Yesa) would seriously affect the values of the Route of Santiago in the area concerned, as well as the values of several related historical monuments. The Bureau requested ICOMOS to continue its dialogue with the Spanish authorities to assess the impact of the enlargement of the barrage and to discuss if proposed mitigation measures (such as the relocation of monuments or the relocation of the pathways of the Route of Santiago) could be accepted. It requested ICOMOS and the Spanish authorities to report on the results of these consultations by 15 September 2001 for examination by the Bureau at its twenty-fifth extraordinary session.

REPORTS ON THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES INSCRIBED ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST FOR NOTING

V.281 The Bureau took note of information that the Secretariat had provided in the working document on the state of conservation of the following properties:

NATURAL HERITAGE

Latin America and the Caribbean

Noel Kempff Mercado National Park (Bolivia)
Morne Trois Pitons National Park (Dominica)
Huascaran National Park (Peru)

Europe and North America
Lake Baikal (Russian Federation)

CULTURAL HERITAGE

Arab States
Hatra (Iraq)

Asia and the Pacific
Hiroshima Peace Memorial (Genbaku Dome) (Japan)

Latin America and the Caribbean
Joya de Ceren Archaeological Site (El Salvador)

Europe and North America
Cultural Landscape of Sintra (Portugal)


VI. INFORMATION ON TENTATIVE LISTS AND EXAMINATION OF NOMINATIONS OF CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES TO THE LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER AND THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST

Tentative Lists

VI.1 The Chairperson informed the Bureau that all cultural and mixed sites under consideration are included on the Tentative Lists of the States Parties concerned.

Nominations

VI.2 The Bureau examined a total of 50 nominations, of which 32 are cultural, five extensions to cultural sites, four mixed properties and 14 natural nominations, two extensions to natural sites, and, received for review by IUCN and ICOMOS.

VI.3 Concerning cultural heritage, the Centre informed the Bureau that Indonesia had withdrawn the nomination of Tana Toraja Traditional Settlement by letter of 9 May 2001.

VI.4 At the request of the French authorities, the site of the Group of Caves containing Speleotherms in Southern France was withdrawn by letter to the World Heritage Centre dated 26 June 2001.

V1.5 The Observer of France informed the Bureau that an expert meeting would be organised to review the interpretation of karst systems in temperate regions (Europe) to assist States Parties considering nominating such sites for World Heritage listing. This meeting will take place in Paris in October 2001.

CULTURAL HERITAGE

VI.6 Prefacing the ICOMOS presentation, the ICOMOS World Heritage Co- ordinator informed the Bureau of the changed format. Cultural heritage was now divided along thematic lines : archaeological, historic towns, religious properties, architectural monuments, technological ensembles and cultural landscapes. A. Nominations of Cultural properties to the World Heritage List

A.1 Archaeological site

Property

Ephesus

Id. N

1018

State Party

Turkey

Criteria

DEFERRED

The Bureau decided that further consideration of this nomination be deferred, in order to enable the State Party to prepare and implement a comprehensive management plan; this should be accompanied by a map that clearly indicates the areas nominated for inscription and the buffer zone.




A.2 Historic Towns


Property

Historic Centre of Vienna

Id. N

1033

State Party

Austria

Criteria

C (ii) (iv) (vi)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iv), and (vi):

The Historic Centre of Vienna, in its architectural and urban qualities, bears an exceptional testimony to an important interchange of values related to the history of architecture, art, music, and literature. In its urban and architectural layout, the historic centre mirrors three major phases of development - medieval, Baroque, and the Gründerzeit - which have become a symbol of Austrian and central European history. Vienna has been directly and tangibly associated with the fundamental development of the history of music from the 16th to the 20th centuries, particularly the Viennese Classicism and Romanticism, consolidating Vienna's reputation as the "musical capital" of Europe.

Several delegates commented on the application of criterion (vi) to this site, and noted that the use of this criterion would be discussed in a separate session.

There was also discussion concerning the value of consolidated or separate criterion statements justifying the use of a particular criterion. While most States Parties accepted the importance of a cumulative statement of value, the Bureau accepted the suggestion by the Director of the World Heritage Centre that separate statements were also useful, as had been prepared in the past.


Property

Historic Centre of the Town of Gois

Id. N

993 Rev

State Party

Brazil

Criteria

C (ii) (iv)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv).

The historic town of Goiás constitutes an important testimony of the occupation and colonization of central Brazil. The urban layout of Goiás is an example of an organically developed colonial town, adapted to the conditions of the site. The architecture is plain and severe in character, and the whole is harmonious, resulting also from continuity in the coherent use of local materials and vernacular techniques, as interpreted by local craftsmen. The site has retained its remarkable setting intact.


Property

Provins, a Medieval Fair Town

Id. N

873 Rev

State Party

France

Criteria

C (ii) (iv)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

The historic fortified town of Provins is an outstanding and authentic example of a medieval fair town in the territories of the Counts of Champagne. It represents an important interchange of human values that led to the early development of international fairs in central Europe. The institution of fairs guaranteed the protection of long-distance transport of merchandise between Europe and the Orient, and led to the development of activities such as banking and exchange, tanning, dyeing and weaving of textiles, etc, through which handicrafts evolved into an industrial process. The existing medieval urban layout and houses of Provins represent an outstanding example of an architectural ensemble specifically built to fulfil such functions, including merchants' houses, storage spaces, mills, water management systems, open spaces for treatment of textiles, farmhouses, and religious ensembles. Recognition has also been given to the town for its well- preserved defence systems, built for the protection of the fairs.

The Observer of Greece indicated that nothing remained of the installations (except some destroyed caves) relating to the trade fair in the medieval town of Provins, while other cities (Troyes, Logny, Bar-sur-Aube) in the territories of the Counts of Champagne preserved better examples of such remains. She also was of the opinion that the City of Torun in Poland represented an outstanding and authentic example of a medieval fair town. The Observer of Greece requested ICOMOS to explain the reason why this Fair Town was being recommended given the existence of other Fair Towns. ICOMOS explained that research had been carried out thoroughly and on that basis recommended inscription of Provins.


Property

Vardzia-Khertvisi Historical Area

Id. N

1019

State Party

Georgia

Criteria

DEFERRED

The Bureau, while recognising the outstanding universal value of the nominated area, decided that the nomination be deferred to allow the State Party to prepare a comprehensive management plan. Recalling discussions during reports on the state of conservation, several delegates emphasised the importance of management plans to ensure better conservation.. The Delegate of Canada and the Director of the Centre encouraged the State Party to apply for preparatory assistance for the preparation of this plan. Responding to a question by the Delegate of Thailand on the use of criterion (v), ICOMOS explained that the use of the criterion was appropriate bearing in mind the long continuous land use that this area had experienced.

Since the inscription was deferred, ICOMOS indicated that it would also look into the issue of application of criterion (v).


Property

Tbilisi Historic District

Id. N

1020

State Party

Georgia

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau decided that the nomination of the Tbilisi Historic District be referred back, to allow ICOMOS time to study the recently received additional information, including a comparative study for the historic district. Should this study meet the requirements of the Operational Guidelines, in the view of ICOMOS, the Advisory Body will then formulate its recommendation for the extraordinary Bureau in December 2001.


Property

The Old City of Acre

Id. N

1042

State Party

Israel

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau decided that this nomination be referred back to the State Party, requesting the definition and regulatory protection of an appropriate buffer zone. The State Party should also supply information regarding existing and proposed educational and socialprojects relating to heritage protection and conservation. In the event that this information is provided by the State Party, ICOMOS recommends that the Committee inscribe this property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria(ii),(iii), and(v):

Acre is exceptional in that beneath its present-day appearance as a typical Moslem fortified city, lie the remains of an almost intact medieval city on the European model. It bears exceptional material testimony to the Crusader Kingdom established in the Holy Land in the 12th-14th centuries, and also to the Ottoman Empire in the 18th and 19th centuries.

The Observer of Israel welcomed this recommendation, noting that this would be Israel's first site on the World Heritage List. He underlined the commitment given by the Mayor of Acre to new social education programmes for the populace that will introduce an awareness of the importance of the heritage of Acre.

The Delegate of Thailand commented that this was a case where application of criterion (v) was justified.


Property

Noto and Late Baroque Architecture in South-eastern Sicily

Id. N

1024

State Party

Italy

Criteria

DEFERRED

The Bureau decided that further consideration of this nomination be deferred, inviting the State Party to reconsider the nature, size and structure of a renewed nomination including a Management Plan.


Property

Lamu Old Town

Id. N

1055

State Party

Kenya

Criteria

C (ii) (iv) (vi)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee the inscription of this property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iv), and (vi):

Lamu Old Town is the oldest and best-preserved example of Swahili settlement in East Africa. It has maintained its social and cultural integrity, as well as retaining its authentic building fabric until the present day. While built using traditional Swahili techniques, the unique character of the town is reflected in the architectural forms and spatial articulation. Once the most important trade centre in East Africa, Lamu has exercised important influence in cultural as well as technical aspects. It has retained an important religious function and is a significant centre for education in Islamic and Swahili culture.

The Delegate of Canada supported the nomination but noted the importance of protecting the "viewscape". Recalling the nomination of Angkor (Cambodia) in 1992, she urged the State Party to make all efforts to ensure that development within the buffer zone would not impact the historic centre.


Property

Médina of Essaouira (Former Mogador)

Id. N

753 Rev

State Party

Morocco

Criteria

C (ii) (iv)

In 1997, the inscription of Essaouira had been deferred due to the lack of an appropriate management plan. During a third mission carried out by an ICOMOS team of experts in May 2001, it was found that the city had acquired adequate legal protection and that a management plan was in course of implementation.

The Bureau, therefore, decided to endorse the proposal made by ICOMOS and recommended to the Committee to inscribe the Medina of Essaouira on the World Heritage List under criteria (ii) and (iv).

Essaouira is an exceptional example of a late 18th century fortified town, constructed according to the principles of contemporary European military architecture, in a North African context. Since its foundation it has been a major international trading seaport, linking Morocco and its Saharan hinterland with Europe and the rest of the world.


Property

Historic Centre of Guimarães

Id. N

1031

State Party

Portugal

Criteria

C (ii) (iii) (iv)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee the inscription of this property on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iii), and (iv):

The historic town of Guimarães is associated with the definition of the Portuguese national identity and language in the 12th century. The town is exceptionally well preserved, illustrating the different phases of the evolution of particular building types from the medieval settlement to a modern township, and particularly from the 15th to the 19th centuries, and consistently built in traditional building materials and techniques. Because of the role of Guimarães in the exploration of new territories, the specialized building techniques developed there in the Middle Ages were introduced to Portuguese colonies, becoming their characteristic feature.


Property

Samarkand - The Place of Crossing and Synthesis of World Cultures

Id. N

603 Rev

State Party

Uzbekistan

Criteria

C (i) (ii) (iv)

The Bureau, commending the State Party for the work undertaken to prepare the nomination of this site, recommended to the Committee the inscription of the site on the basis of criteria (i), (ii), and (iv).

The historic town of Samarkand has been considered a symbol of ancient oriental cultures. It has been an important crossroads of ancient civilizations, documented in the archaeological area of Afrosiab and the Timurid city. The principal development of the city coincides with the 14th and 15th centuries, when it was the capital of the powerful Timurid realm. The contribution of the Timurid masters to the design and construction of the Islamic ensembles, such as Bibi Khanum Mosque and Registan Square, have been crucial for the development of Islamic architecture, exercising an important influence in the entire region, from the Near and Middle East to India.

Considering that Samarkand is a historic place related to the crossing and synthesis of world cultures, the State Party is strongly urged to extend the nominated site and its buffer zone to include the whole Timurid town, the archaeological area, Ulugh-Bek's Observatory, and the 19th century development. The Bureau further recommended that the State Party provide protection and a coherent conservation master plan for the historic town as a whole, as well as prepare a strategy for the restoration of historic buildings, consistent with the principles guiding the implementation of the World Heritage Convention.

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that, with the approval of the State Party, the name be changed to "Samarkand - Crossroads of Culture."




A.3 Religious properties

Property

Churches of Chiloé [Amendment]

Id. N

971

State Party

Chile

Criteria

C (ii) (iii)

The Churches of Chiloé was inscribed on the World Heritage List at the twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee in Cairns (Australia) in December 2000. The Bureau approved the amendment to the inscribed property of the Churches of Chiloé, to include the Churches of Caguach and Chelín.


Property

Yungang Grottoes

Id. N

1039

State Party

China

Criteria

C (i) (ii) (iii)(iv)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv):

The Yungang Grottoes were built in a relatively short time (460-525 CE) and constitute a classical masterpiece of the first peak of Buddhist cave art in China. The site integrates influences from southern and central Asian regions with Chinese culture. It is distinguished by being the first Imperial commission in China, reflecting the political ambitions of the time. Yungang also gives this art a clearly Chinese and local spirit, which was important for the later artistic developments in the country.

Property

Norbulingka [Extension to the Potala Palace and the Jokhang Temple Monastery, Lhasa]

Id. N

707 Ter

State Party

China

Criteria

C (i) (iv) (vi)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that the extension of the inscribed property, Potala Palace and the Jokhang Temple Monastery, Lhasa to include the Norbulingka area, be approved, maintaining the existing criteria (i), (iv), and (vi).

The Bureau took note of the ICOMOS observation that, because of development pressures in the city of Lhasa, particular attention be given to the mitigation of the changes in the areas surrounding the World Heritage properties.

The Bureau recommended that, with the approval of the State Party, the name be changed to the "Historic Ensemble of the Potala Palace, Lhasa."


Property

Painted Churches in the Troodos Region [ Extension ]

Id. N

351 Bis

State Party

Cyprus

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau is prepared to recommend approval of the extension of the Painted Churches in the Troodos Region to the Committee, maintaining the existing criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv). In response to a question from the Chairperson, ICOMOS confirmed that the Church being added to this inscription possessed outstanding universal value. However, the Bureau decided to refer back the nomination to the State Party, asking whether they intend to submit other extensions of this site in the future. In that eventuality, the State Party will be encouraged to provide a comparative study.


Property

Mahabodhi Temple Complex

Id. N

1056

State Party

India

Criteria

DEFERRED

While recognizing the outstanding universal significance of the Mahabodhi Temple, the Bureau decided that further consideration of this nomination be deferred. The State Party should be requested to provide precise maps of the Temple site and the surrounding built environment, with a clear indication of the proposed perimeters of the core area and the buffer zone. Furthermore, the State Party should be requested to provide more details of the suggested plans for development and presentation, indicating the expected impact on the spiritual and historical values of the site.


Property

Wooden Churches of Southern Little Poland

Id. N

1053

State Party

Poland

Criteria

DEFERRED

While recognizing the great interest of the heritage concerned, the Bureau recognized the need to evaluate the nomination in the larger regional context. Therefore, the Bureau decided that the nomination be deferred to await the outcome of a comparative study.


Property

Churches of Peace in Jawor and Swidnica

Id. N

1054

State Party

Poland

Criteria

C (iii) (iv) (vi)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii), (iv), and (vi):

The Churches of Peace bear exceptional witness to a particular political and spiritual development in Europe and represent outstanding technical and architectural solutions to meet the difficult conditions imposed on the builders and the community, using age-old traditional techniques. They represent architectural and artistic evidence of the faith of a religious community and its will to survive. Under difficult circumstances this community created, in an unparalleled tour de force, the spaces it needed to exercise its faith up to the present day. The Churches of Peace are masterpieces of skilled handicraft, demonstrating what men are capable of when the utmost is demanded from them.


Property

Mudéjar de Aragon [Extension of Mudéjar de Teruel]

Id. N

378 Bis

State Party

Spain

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau decided to refer this nomination back to allow ICOMOS an opportunity to examine the revised version of the nomination recently submitted by the State Party. Assuming that the ICOMOS review panel gives a favourable opinion on the nomination, the Bureau would recommend to the Committee that the extension be approved under the existing criterion (iv). It is further recommended that, with the agreement of the State Party, the name of the site be revised to: Mudéjar of Aragon.

The Delegate of Morocco considered that, bearing in mind the effort that the Spanish authorities had made to prepare it, the revised nomination should illustrate the most representative of cases and serve as a model for future nominations of a similar type.




A. 4 Architectural Monuments and Ensembles

Property

Tugendhat Villa in Brno

Id. N

1052

State Party

Czech Republic

Criteria

C (i) (ii) (iv)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (ii), and (iv):

The Tugendhat Villa in Brno, designed by the architect Mies van der Rohe, is an outstanding example of the international style in the Modern Movement in Architecture as it developed in Europe in the 1920s. Its particular value lies in the search for ways to implement innovative spatial and aesthetic concepts satisfying the emerging new needs in living standards as well as implementing the opportunities offered by modern industrial production. The Tugendhat Villa established a prototype for 20th century residential housing and became extremely influential in later designs.

Discussion of this nomination elicited several comments on the application of criterion (i). The Delegate of Thailand expressed his reservation concerning applicability of this criterion in this instance. He questioned whether, in terms of the Operational Guidelines, the Tugendhat Villa was an example of a "masterpiece of human creative genius".


Property

Jurmala Wooden Construction (Dzintari District of Summer Cottages)

Id. N

1036

State Party

Latvia

Criteria

NOT RECOMMENDED

The Bureau did not recommend this property for inscription on the World Heritage List.




A.5 Technological Ensembles

Property

The Cultural Industrial Landscape of the "Zollverein Mine"

Id. N

975

State Party

Germany

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau decided to refer this nomination back, to allow ICOMOS time to review the requested management plan received only recently from the State Party.

In the event of a favourable review by the ICOMOS review panel, the Advisory Body will recommend that the property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iii):

The Zollverein Landscape is an important example of a European industrial region of great economic significance in the 19th and 20th centuries. The installations of the Zollverein XII coal mine, which forms the nucleus of the site, is especially noteworthy for the high architectural quality of its buildings.

Noting that the scope of the nomination had changed since it was originally proposed in 2000, the Observer of Germany indicated his agreement with the title "The Zollverein Coal Mine Industrial Complex."

The Delegate of Canada queried whether the property was considered in comparative terms. ICOMOS confirmed that a study by TICCIH had been carried out on collieries and Zollverein was one of the most outstanding examples.


Property

The Historical Industrial Landscape of the Great Copper Mountain in Falun

Id. N

1027

State Party

Sweden

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau decided to refer this nomination back to the State Party, requesting the provision of a co-ordinating management plan.

In the event of this request being complied with and found to be satisfactory, ICOMOS recommended that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iii), and (v):

The Great Copper Mountain and its cultural landscape at Falun graphically illustrate one of the most significant areas of mining and metals production. Mining ceased at the end of the 20th century, but over many centuries it had exerted a strong influence on the technological, economic, social, and political development of Sweden and Europe. The history of the mining industry can be seen in the abundant industrial and domestic remains characteristic of this industry that still survive in the natural landscape around Falun which has been moulded and transformed by human ingenuity and resourcefulness.

The Delegate of Australia asked whether the nomination had been examined in a global or in a regional mining context. ICOMOS responded that the site had been evaluated in the context of early mining in Central Europe, but that the techniques employed were utilized globally. As an example, he cited the silver mines in South America.


Property

Derwent Valley Mills

Id. N

1030

State Party

United Kingdom

Criteria

C (ii) (iv)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

The cultural landscape of the Derwent Valley is of outstanding significance because it was here that the modern factory system was established, to accommodate the new technology for spinning cotton developed by Richard Arkwright. The insertion of industrial establishments into a rural landscape necessitated the construction of housing for the workers in the mills, and the resulting settlements created an exceptional industrial landscape that has retained its qualities over two centuries.

Property

New Lanark

Id. N

429 Rev

State Party

United Kingdom

Criteria

C (ii) (iv) (vi)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iv), and (vi):

The creation of the model industrial settlement at New Lanark, in which good quality planning and architecture were integrated with a humane concern on the part of the employers for the well being and lifestyle of the workers, is a milestone in social and industrial history. The moral and social beliefs that underlay Robert Owen's work there provided the basis for seminal material and intangible developments that have had lasting influences on human society over the past two hundred years.


Property

Saltaire

Id. N

1028

State Party

United Kingdom

Criteria

C (ii) (iv)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

The industrial village of Saltaire is an outstanding example of mid- 19th century philanthropic paternalism that had a profound influence on developments in industrial and urban planning in the United Kingdom and beyond. It survives in a complete and well-preserved form as testimony to the pride and power of basic industries such as textiles for the economy of Great Britain and the world in the 19th and earlier 20th centuries.
The State Party should be requested to supply a map showing a revised buffer zone as suggested by ICOMOS.




A.6 Cultural Landscapes

Property

Tsodilo

Id. N

1021

State Party

Botswana

Criteria

C (i) (iii) (vi)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (iii), and (vi).

The significance of the place lies in its visual prominence, its geological and archaeological character as scientific resources, its use over tens of thousands of years as an area of settlement and nourishment, its outstanding rock art, and its long-term sanctity. All of those elements individually bear witness to different universal significances; collectively they combine to create a veritable "node of universal significance" on the surface of the earth. Furthermore, the symbiotic relationship between nature and culture, the very essence of Tsodilo, is, in itself, universally significant.

The Delegate of Morocco, while supporting the nomination, recommended that to ensure greater integrity of the site, the buffer zone should be better defined, using the erosion zone as a determining factor. He went on to single out the site as a true associative cultural landscape, displaying symbiosis between the morphological transformation of the landscape and human memory.

The Delegate of Thailand, while supporting the inscription of the site, questioned the application of criterion (i), asking whether the rock art itself or the entire property was a "masterpiece of human creative genius".


Property

Val d'Orcia

Id. N

1026

State Party

Italy

Criteria

DEFERRED

The Bureau decided that the nomination be deferred, with a request to the State Party to reformulate it. The revised nomination should focus on exactly what is in mind as a cultural landscape in this case, with reasons for the criteria chosen. It should be based on and include evidence of research in landscape history, and it should include a comparative analysis of its significance in relation to similar landscapes, certainly in Italy but ideally further afield, which illustrate significant stages in human history.


Property

Mid Adda Valley [Extension of "Crespi d'Adda"]

Id. N

730 Bis

State Party

Italy

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau decided to refer this extension back to the State Party to allow it time to supply additional information, so that the extension may be reviewed at the extraordinary Bureau of the World Heritage Committee in Helsinki.


Property

Villa d'Este

Id. N

1025

State Party

Italy

Criteria

C (i) (ii) (iii) (iv)

The Bureau recommended the Committee to inscribe the Villa d'Este on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv):

The Villa d'Este in Tivoli, with its palace and garden, is one of the most remarkable and comprehensive illustrations of Renaissance culture at its most refined. Owing to its innovative design and the creativity and ingenuity of the architectural components in the garden (fountains, ornamental basins, etc), is a true water garden and a unique example of an Italian 16th century garden. The Villa d'Este, one of the first giardini delle meraviglie, served as a model for and had a decisive influence on the development of gardens in Europe.


Property

Vat Phou and Associated Ancient Settlements within the Champasak Cultural Landscape

Id. N

481

State Party

Lao People's Democratic Republic

Criteria

C (iii) (iv) (vi)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii), (iv) and (vi):

The outstanding significance of the Champasak cultural landscape lies in the broad scientific perspective of the powerful Khmer culture of the 10th-14th centuries AD as a whole. In particular, the Temple Complex of Vat Phou is outstanding by virtue of the high quality of its artistic work and the integration of its symbolic plan with the natural landscape to create a physical manifestation of a Hindu mental template of the perfect universe. The resulting expression of these ideas, not only on the ground but also in architecture and art was a unique fusion of indigenous nature symbols, religious inspiration, and technical prowess.

Several observers expressed serious concern regarding the threats facing the site, such as erosion, illegal pillaging of the stone monuments and development pressure caused by tourism activities. Noting that the site's management and development plan addresses these issues, the Bureau, nevertheless, recommended that the State Party be urged to take all measures to mitigate negative impact caused by these threats, particularly placing emphasis on long-term conservation of the site to ensure that its authenticity and integrity is protected.

Several members of the Bureau expressed concern about the impact of high-density tourism. The Observer of the United Kingdom informed the Bureau that the Management Plan of Vat Phou provided guidelines to encourage sustainable tourism.


Property

The Entire Natural Site of the Region of the Chouf with its Monuments and Sites

Id. N

1032

State Party

Lebanon

Criteria

DEFERRED

The Bureau decided that the nomination of this property be deferred to enable the State Party to prepare a justification of the outstanding universal value of the ensemble formed by the two properties, and to finalize the master plan for Deir el-Qamar. The State Party should also provide detailed information on the management plan and state of conservation of the Beiteddine Palace, and draw up a boundary plan for the areas proposed for inscription on the World Heritage List, as well as the buffer zones for the two properties.

The Delegate of Morocco recalled that, in this particular case, the outstanding universal value of the site was strictly linked to the exemplary manner in which architecture had been integrated into the mountainous terrain. He urged that the name of the "Chouf", better reflecting the character of cultural landscape, be retained in the name of the site, rather than reverting to the original name as proposed by ICOMOS.

The Observer of Lebanon stated the State Party's commitment to responding fully to the concerns expressed by ICOMOS and the Bureau.


Property

Royal Hill of Ambohimanga

Id. N

950

State Party

Madagascar

Criteria

C (iii) (iv) (vi)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii), (iv), and (vi):

The Royal Hill of Ambohimanga is of great significance to the people of Madagascar as a place vital in their political development yet at the same time of great religious meaning. As such, the Royal Hill of Ambohimanga is also of global significance as an excellent example of a place where, over centuries, so much of the common human experience comes to be focused in memory and aspiration, in ritual and prayer.
Several delegates spoke in support of the nomination. The Delegate of Zimbabwe noted that in his opinion this was a textbook case on the application of criterion (vi) and the nomination would be useful in discussions on this subject.


Property

Alto Douro Wine Region

Id. N

1046

State Party

Portugal

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau decided to refer this nomination back, to allow ICOMOS time to review the recently received integrated management plan for the Alto Douro Wine Region. If this review is favourable, ICOMOS recommended that this property should be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii), (iv), and (v):

Wine has been produced in the Alto Douro for some two thousand years, and since the 18th century its main product, port wine, has been famous for its quality throughout the world. This long tradition has produced a cultural landscape of outstanding beauty that is at the same time a reflection of its technological, social, and economic evolution.

Property

Aranjuez Cultural Landscape

Id. N

1044

State Party

Spain

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau decided to refer this nomination back, to allow ICOMOS an opportunity to review the recently received integrated management plan for the Aranjuez Cultural Landscape. If this review is favourable, ICOMOS recommended that this property should be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv).

Aranjuez represents the coming together of diverse cultural influences to create a cultural landscape that had a formative influence on further developments in this field. Its components illustrate seminal advances in landscape design.
The Delegate of Morocco expressed his satisfaction with the nomination and the ICOMOS evaluation, as a true expression of the meeting of two agricultures: the earlier substratum of the huerta from Andalucia, and the ultimately triumphant parque from the north. This melding of the two landscapes gave the site its present form.


Property

Tombs of Buganda Kings at Kasubi

Id. N

1022

State Party

Uganda

Criteria

C (i) (iii) (iv) (vi)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (iii), (iv), and (vi):

The most important value associated with the Kasubi Tombs site is the strong elements of intangible heritage. The built and natural elements of the site, which is an outstanding example of traditional Ganda architecture and palace design, are charged with historical, traditional, and spiritual values. The site is regarded as the major spiritual centre for the Baganda. It also serves as an important historical and cultural symbol for Uganda and East Africa as a whole.

The Delegates of Thailand and Zimbabwe both expressed their strong support for this nomination, highlighting, in terms of the criteria discussions that had taken place, the appropriateness of both criteria (i) and (vi).




B. MIXED PROPERTIES

Palaearctic Realm

Property

Cultural Landscape of Fertö-Neusiedler Lake

Id. N

772 Rev

State Party

Austria/ Hungary

Criteria

REFERRED

Concerning natural criteria, the Bureau did not recommend the inscription of the Fertö-Neusiedler Lake on the World Heritage List under natural criteria.

The Bureau congratulated the Austrian and Hungarian authorities for the collaborative work that they have already undertaken in setting up and managing the adjoining national parks, and in preparing this joint nomination. It recommended that the Committee encourage this collaboration to continue in future, particularly through the framework of the requirements of Natura 2000.

Concerning cultural criteria, the Bureau decided to refer the nomination back to the two States Parties, requesting them to revise it as proposed in the ICOMOS recommendations. In the event that the revised text is submitted in time and found to be satisfactory, ICOMOS recommended that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of cultural criterion (v):

The Fertö-Neusiedler Lake area is the meeting place of peoples arriving as migrants or conquerors. The dynamism of the Lake itself has presented people with both challenges to face and a resource to exploit since their arrival here some eight thousand years ago. The diverse cultural landscape of which it is the core has been created by an organic process of evolution, by the work of man living in symbiosis with the natural environment.

The Bureau debated the option of deferral or referral of the site. The Delegate of Canada suggested referral, as the Hungarian part of the nomination seemed to be appropriate for a cultural landscape nomination.

The Observer of Austria informed the Bureau that the Austrian experts would prepare the required information in time for the extraordinary session of the Bureau.


Property

Masada National Park

Id. N

1040

State Party

Israel

Criteria

C (iii) (iv) (vi)

Concerning natural criteria, the Bureau did not recommend the inscription of Masada National Park on the World Heritage List under natural criteria.

Concerning cultural values, the Bureau recommended to the Committee that this property be inscribed on the World Heritage List on the basis of cultural criteria (iii), (iv), and (vi):

The palace complex built by Herod the Great, King of Judaea, on the summit of the dramatic mountain site of Masada in the 1st century BCE consists of an exceptional group of classical Roman Imperial buildings. When this natural defensive site, further strengthened by massive walls, was occupied by survivors of the Jewish Revolt against Roman rule, it was successfully besieged by a massive Roman army. The group of military camps and siege works at Masada are the most complete anywhere in the Roman world. Masada is a poignant symbol of the continuing human struggle between oppression and liberty.

The Bureau discussed the possibility of a larger natural site, potentially involving other countries, which would have to be presented as a new natural nomination.


Property

Natural Complex "Central Sikhote-Alin"

Id. N

766 Rev

State Party

Russian Federation

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau decided that further consideration of this nomination be referred to the extraordinary session of the Bureau in December 2001 to await the report of the joint IUCN/ICOMOS mission in July 2001.


Property

Karain Caves and Surroundings

Id. N

1059

State Party

Turkey

Criteria

DEFERRED

Concerning natural values, the Bureau did not recommend the inscription of Karain Cave and Surroundings on the World Heritage List under natural criterion (i). The Bureau recommended that the Turkish Government review their Tentative List with a view to identifying alternative natural sites, which could eventually be brought forward for nomination.

Concerning cultural values, the Bureau decided that further consideration of this nomination be deferred, so that the State Party may prepare and present both a more comprehensive and scientifically well documented justification for inscription and an adequate management plan for the site.




C. NATURAL HERITAGE

Palaearctic Realm

Property

Makhteshim Country

Id. N

1041

State Party

Israel

Criteria

DEFERRED

The Bureau decided that further consideration of this nomination be deferred.

Referring to the IUCN recommendation, the Delegate of Finland noted that the site may contain cultural values and would have potential for a cultural nomination, and this was reinforced by ICOMOS.

The Observer of Israel emphazised the importance of the whole Rift Valley from Syria to the Indian Ocean, as the cradle of civilization, and underlined the idea of international collaboration in this regard. IUCN recalled that a workshop was discussed under international assistance at the last session of the World Heritage Committee, a proposal supported by IUCN. Such a workshop would be crucial in assisting in the development of potential proposals for new nominations within the Rift Valley. The Observer of Israel indicated efforts being made to bring this about.

The Bureau encouraged the State Party to review these suggestions.


Property

Natural System of "Wrangel Island" Sanctuary

Id. N

1023

State Party

Russian Federation

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau decided to refer further consideration of this nomination to the extraordinary session of the Bureau in December 2001 to await the report of the IUCN mission in July or August 2001.


Property

Volcanoes of Kamchatka [Extension]

Id. N

765 Bis

State Party

Russian Federation

Criteria

N (i) (ii) (iii) (iv)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that Kluchevskoy Nature Park be added as the sixth component of the Volcanoes of Kamchatka's World Heritage site. In addition to the 1996 inscription under criteria (i), (ii), and (iii), the expanded site also qualifies under criterion (iv).

Criterion (iv)The site contains an especially diverse range of palearctic flora, including a number of nationally threatened species and at least 16 endemics, and 33 mammal species, including internationally significant populations of sea lions and sea otter and a thriving population of brown bear, as well as 145 bird species. The rivers inside and adjacent contain the world's greatest known diversity of salmonid fish.

The Bureau also recommended that authorities in Kamchatka be commended for their efforts to compile management plans and to implement them with assistance from donors. UNDP/GEF should also be recognised for providing material support to the site.


Property

Jungfrau-Aletsch-Bietschhorn

Id. N

1037

State Party

Switzerland

Criteria

N (i)(ii)(iii)

The Observer of Italy informed the Bureau that all Alpine States meet in Turin from 5 to 8 July 2001 to discuss joint nomination proposals from the Alps following the expert meeting in Hallstatt (June 2000). He noted that the Swiss nomination had been presented ignoring this process. The Observer of Switzerland informed the Bureau that the experts in Hallstatt were informed that Switzerland was in the process of nominating the Jungfrau- Aletsch-Bietschhorn and that all procedures had been respected. The Chairperson, after consulting all members of the Bureau and selected Observer States with potential World Heritage sites in the Alps, decided to proceed with the review of this nomination. The Chairperson decided that the letters by Italy and Switzerland addressed to him in this regard be included in Annexes VII and VIII of this report.

The Director of the Centre informed the Bureau that the process started in Hallstatt last year, namely the collective co-operation of six States Parties for preparing nominations of potential sites in the Alps, is an extremely important model that could serve as a basis for future co- operation and contribute to the success of the Convention.

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that the Jungfrau-Aletsch-Bietschhorn be inscribed on the World Heritage List under criteria (i), (ii), and (iii).

Criterion (i) The Jungfrau-Aletsch-Bietschhorn region is the most glaciated area in the Alps and incorporates the Aletsch glacier, the largest and longest in western Eurasia. It is thus of significant scientific interest in the context of glacial history and ongoing processes, particularly related to climate change.

Criterion (ii) The Jungfrau-Aletsch-Bietschhorn region provides a wide range of alpine and sub-alpine habitats. Superb examples of ecological succession exist, including the distinctive upper and lower tree-line of the Aletsch forest. The global phenomenon of climatic change is particularly well illustrated in the region, as reflected in the varying rates of retreat of the different glaciers, in turn providing new substrates for ongoing ecological succession.

Criterion (iii) The impressive landscape of the Jungfrau-Aletsch- Bietschhorn region has played an important role in European literature, art, mountaineering and alpine tourism. The aesthetics of the area have attracted an international clientele and it is globally recognised as one of the most spectacular mountain regions to visit.


Property

Holy Tops (Svyati Gory)

Id. N

1047

State Party

Ukraine

Criteria

NOT RECOMMENDED

The Bureau did not recommend the inscription of the property on the World Heritage List.


Property

Polissian Swamps and Slovechno-Ovruch Ridge

Id. N

1048

State Party

Ukraine

Criteria

NOT RECOMMENDED

The Bureau did not recommend the inscription of the property on the World Heritage List.


Property

Kaniv's Hills (Kanivski Gory)

Id. N

1049

State Party

Ukraine

Criteria

NOT RECOMMENDED

The Bureau did not recommend the inscription of the property on the World Heritage List.


Property

Karadag

Id. N

1050

State Party

Ukraine

Criteria

NOT RECOMMENDED

The Bureau did not recommend the inscription of the property on the World Heritage List.


Property

Podillian Ridge

Id. N

1051

State Party

Ukraine

Criteria

NOT RECOMMENDED

The Bureau did not recommend the inscription of the property on the World Heritage List.

Following the review of the five nominations from Ukraine, the Bureau noted that IUCN indicated that other sites in Ukraine, including sites shared by Ukraine and neighbouring States Parties, may have greater potential to meet natural criteria than the five sites nominated. The Bureau noted that potential sites for nomination could be identified by means of a World Heritage expert workshop, organised by the World Heritage Centre and the Ukrainian authorities. Such a workshop could develop an understanding of World Heritage requirements, help in the selection of appropriate sites and set the required standards for their management. Ideally, the workshop would involve natural heritage specialists from neighbouring countries as well as Ukrainian specialists. Cultural interests should also be involved, because several sites reviewed by IUCN have important cultural components. It was noted that financial support for the organisation of such a workshop had already been offered by UNDP.

The Bureau invited Ukraine to discuss this matter with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre.


Property

Dorset and East Devon Coast

Id. N

1029

State Party

United Kingdom

Criteria

N (i)

The Bureau recommended to the Committee that the Dorset and East Devon Coast be inscribed on the World Heritage List under criterion (i).

Criterion (i) The Dorset and East Devon Coast provides an almost continuous sequence of Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous rock formations spanning the Mesozoic Era, documenting approximately 185 million years of Earth history. It also includes a range of internationally important fossil localities - vertebrate and invertebrate, marine and terrestrial - which have produced well- preserved and diverse evidence of life during Mesozoic times.

The Observer of the United Kingdom informed the Bureau that the management plan had been prepared through a long consultation process with owners and stakeholders of the site.

Afrotropical Realm

Property

Great Rift Valley Ecosystem Sites

Id. N

1060

State Party

Kenya

Criteria

 

The Bureau noted that following the request of the Kenya Wildlife Service dated 26 February 2001, the nomination of the Great Rift Valley Ecosystem Sites had been reviewed by IUCN as two separate nominations:


Property

Sibiloi/Central Island National Parks {Extension to include South Island National Park]

Id. N

801 Bis

State Party

Kenya

Criteria

RECOMMENDED

The Bureau recommended to the Committee the extension of Sibiloi/Central Island by adding of South Island National Park. As requested by the State Party, the new name of the site would be "Lake Turkana National Parks".

The Bureau strongly encouraged the Kenyan authorities to complete the management plan for the three parks as an integrated unit. The State Party is requested to separate the documentation for the extension of Lake Turkana National Park and provide it as a distinct document from the nominated property of Great Rift Valley Ecosystem Sites (March 2001) by 15 September 2001.


Property

Rift Valley Lakes Reserve

Id. N

1060 Rev

State Party

Kenya

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau noted that the three Rift Valley Lakes - Bogoria, Nakuru and Elmenteita - are internationally important.

IUCN noted that in terms of the Conditions of Integrity there are three issues of concern: (1) The three Lakes do not contain the seasonal breeding and nesting sites for the millions of flamingos that spend most of the year in the nominated site. The breeding area is Lake Natron in Tanzania which, although unprotected, is fortunately not threatened. Discussions between Kenya and Tanzania on protection measures have been initiated. (2) One of the three reserves - Lake Nakuru - is under threat from pollution and de-forestation in its catchment basin. This situation needs to be carefully monitored. (3) The gazetting process in one of the three reserves in the nomination - Elmenteita - is not yet complete. Gazetting is expected soon but the Kenyan authorities still need to clarify the controls this designation has over private land and the adequacy of the legislation. Inscribing the site without including Elmenteita would not be sufficient, as it is a key part of the three-lake system.

The Bureau decided to refer this nomination back to the State Party for confirmation from the Kenyan authorities of the timing and effectiveness of the Wildlife Sanctuary status for Lake Elmenteita. If this was done expeditiously, the site would be considered by the Committee in Helsinki. The Bureau requested the Centre to contact the Kenya Wildlife Service to urge them to complete the process of preparing management plans for each of the three reserves, to underline concerns over threats to Lake Nakuru.

The Delegate of Morocco underscored the importance of the Rift Valley as a whole from the Middle East to eastern Africa and the possibilities it offered as a nomination covering different biological and cultural spheres.

The Bureau furthermore encouraged the Tanzanian authorities to ensure that Lake Natron receives adequate protection. Lake Natron could in the future be considered as an extension as the site is important for the integrity of the nominated area.

The Bureau noted that the site fulfils criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv).

Criterion (ii) The shallow alkaline endorheic lakes of the Rift Valley are of great scientific interest to limnologists studying the high productivity of these distinct ecosystems. The low species diversity and abundant resident population make soda lakes especially appealing environments in which to conduct investigations of trophic dynamics and ecosystem processes. The production of huge biomass quantities in these distinctive soda lakes, and the food chain that this green algae supports, are also of international scientific value.

Criterion (iii) The presence of up to 4 million lesser flamingos which move between the three lakes is an outstanding wildlife spectacle. The natural setting of all three lakes surrounded by the steep escarpment of the Rift Valley and associated volcanic features provides an exceptional scenic backdrop.

Criterion (iv) Within the relatively small size of each of the Reserves some of the highest levels of bird diversity in the world are recorded. Although the soda lakes themselves do not support an especially diverse fauna, the woodlands and freshwater habitats surrounding them do. Along with the high populations of flamingos that the three lakes support, the site is a critical habitat for a diverse assemblage of other avifauna.

Indomalayan Realm

Property

Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park

Id. N

951 Rev

State Party

Viet Nam

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau decided to refer further consideration of this nomination to the extraordinary session of the Bureau in December 2001 to await the report of the IUCN mission.

Neotropical Realm

Property

Chapada dos Veadeiros National Park

Id. N

1035

State Party

Brazil

Criteria

REFERRED

The Bureau noted the high importance of the Cerrado ecoregion for the conservation of biological diversity and the need to enhance representation of this ecoregion in the World Heritage List.

The Bureau decided to refer the nomination back to the State Party to prepare a serial nomination including Chapada dos Veadeiros National Park, which more adequately addresses World Heritage criteria.

The Observer of Brazil informed the Bureau that this serial nomination would be provided by 15 August 2001 for evaluation by IUCN.


Property

Gálapagos Marine Reserve [Extension of the Gálapagos Islands

Id. N

1 Bis

State Party

Ecuador

Criteria

RECOMMENDED

The Bureau noted that the Gálapagos Marine Reserve, as an extension of the Gálapagos Islands World Heritage site, meets natural criteria (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv). The addition of the Marine Reserve is thus complementary and adds substantially to the justification of the existing World Heritage site as one of the premier nature reserves on the Planet. However, until the essential legal work is completed (i.e. passage of the Regulations to allow enforcement of the Special Law for the Galapagos) and fully enforced with strong Government support, threats to the integrity of the Marine Reserve continue to prevail.

The Bureau recognized all the efforts made over the past seven years by the Ecuadorian authorities to extend protection to the marine environment. Noting that there are even greater pressures on the Marine Reserve resources today than that there were when the Committee deferred a decision in 1994 to inscribe it on the World Heritage List. The Bureau expressed the urgency for further strengthening of management, particularly with regard to law enforcement activities.

The Delegate of Thailand, while agreeing that the extension would give added value for the protection of the whole area, expressed concern over the additional burden the extension will place on the State Party in terms of resources.

The Delegate of Ecuador presented major achievements of Ecuador since the IUCN mission took place in March 2001. He stated that the IUCN mission report was used as a guideline to what has been done in Galapagos during the past few months. He emphasized that the marine and terrestrial areas are strongly interlinked and form together the outstanding natural site of Galapagos Islands. The Delegate informed the Bureau that they have finished the comprehensive strategic plan for the protection of the site. Three programmes are in place and one of them deals with the management of the Marine Reserve. This programme includes a component for establishing a control system for the Marine area. He also informed the Bureau of a loan of US$ 20 million from the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) for the protection of the Galapagos Islands and a grant from GEF of US$ 18 million for a project for the eradication of invasive species. He informed the Bureau that the passage of regulations and bylaws, which IUCN recommends to be passed before the Marine Reserve could be inscribed as an extension to the existing terrestrial World Heritage site, has advanced considerably and are likely to be finalized in the near future. He stressed the importance of the Marine Reserve to be included in the Galapagos National Park World Heritage site for the conservation of the entire Galapagos ecosystem. The Representative of IUCN emphasised the difficulty of managing marine protected areas and acknowledged that the management of the GMR is a huge challenge due to the pressures posed by commercial fishing within the area. Nevertheless he stressed the absolute necessity of integrating the terrestrial and marine areas into a single World Heritage site due to the great importance and outstanding values of the Galapagos Islands and the Marine Reserve.

The Delegate of Canada expressed her deep satisfaction of the work Ecuador has done so far. She highlighted the interconnection between marine and terrestrial area. She supported the view of IUCN, as did the Delegates of Australia, Finland, Zimbabwe and Morocco, that the Bureau should recommend inscription of the site requesting the Government of Ecuador to complete all steps to finalize the adoption of regulations deriving from the Special Law for Galapagos before the December session of Committee in Finland. All other members of Bureau accepted this proposal.

The Observer of Belize expressed her appreciation to the Bureau, IUCN and the State Party on the decision of the Bureau to recommend the inclusion of the GMR as an extension to the Galapagos World Heritage site.


Property

Kaieteur National Park

Id. N

1057

State Party

Guyana

Criteria

NOT RECOMMENDED

The Bureau did not recommend inscription of the property on the World Heritage List.

The Bureau encouraged the State Party to initiate management planning in the Park and encouraged the development of a national protected area system for Guyana.

The Bureau also noted that important forests exist in the Guyana Shield region and encouraged the State Party to explore the possibilities of a larger World Heritage nomination.

D. Nomination not examined by the Advisory Body

Property

Extension of the inscribed site of Jerusalem - The Old City and Ramparts to include Mount Zion

Id. N

148 Bis

State Party

Israel

After careful analysis of the nomination proposal and of the positions expressed by the parties concerned during the Committee meeting in Cairns (December 2000), the Bureau recommended to the twenty-fifth session of the Committee to postpone further consideration of this nomination proposal until an agreement on the status of the City of Jerusalem in conformity with International Law is reached, or until the parties concerned submit a joint nomination.

The Bureau further recommended that the Committee encourage technical co-operation on the preservation of the outstanding universal values of the site and its surroundings among the parties concerned.

Legal advice has been requested from the General Secretary of the United Nations. UNESCO has been informed that the advice has been prepared but not yet transmitted, pending final approval.

This advice will be examined by the twenty-fifth session of the Committee in Helsinki.

________________________



THE APPLICATION OF CULTURAL CRITERION (VI)

VI.7 The Chairperson welcomed the Bureau to the evening session on the application of cultural criterion (vi). The Chairperson recalled that at the twenty-fourth session of the Committee (Cairns 2000), he had informed the Committee, that given the various issues relating to the application of cultural criterion (vi), a meeting to discuss all cultural criteria would be held during the next Bureau session.

VI.8 The Chairperson noted that from the discussion in Cairns and at the current session of the Bureau, there was a need for an analysis of the use of all the criteria for World Heritage listing. He stated that, as a first step, it would be useful to start with a discussion on cultural criterion (vi). He referred to the relevant document, WHC- 2001/CONF.205/INF.8.

VI.9 The Chairperson stated that the purpose of the meeting was to examine the document and if necessary, make recommendations to the twenty- fifth session of the Committee (Helsinki, December 2001). He suggested that the Bureau:

  1. clarify the use of cultural criterion (vi) with reference to the implementation of the Global Strategy for a Balanced and Representative List;
  2. obtain agreement as to the final wording of cultural criterion (vi) to be suggested to the Committee for inclusion in the revised Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, and
  3. establish a clear framework for the strict application of cultural criterion (vi).

VI.10 The Director of the World Heritage Centre noted that the important debate to follow should not be confined only to the implementation of the World Heritage Convention, as it is also relevant to the issue of intangible heritage that has been addressed in recent months by the UNESCO Executive Board and in other fora.

VI.11 A member of the Secretariat presented a power-point presentation, which was an overview of the elements of the debate concerning the application of cultural criterion (vi). She noted that since 1977, there have been many significant changes to the wording of the cultural and natural criteria that have been developed by the Committee to assess "outstanding universal value". She drew the attention of the Bureau to Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention which define what is natural and cultural heritage and referred to Table A of document WHC-2001/CONF.205/INF.8 that indicates the evolution in the wording of cultural criterion (vi) over time.

VI.12 The current wording of cultural criterion (vi) in the Operational Guidelines is as follows:

24(a)(vi)   be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance (the Committee considers that this criterion should justify inclusion in the List only in exceptional circumstances and in conjunction with other criteria cultural or natural).

VI.13 She drew the attention to the subtle change in the wording between 1995 and 1999 whereby "or in conjunction with other criteria cultural or natural " had been changed to "and in conjunction with other criteria cultural or natural". She then referred to a table listing the 146 properties inscribed on the basis of criterion (vi) and other cultural or natural criteria.

VI.14 Nine of these properties have been inscribed solely on the basis of cultural criterion (vi) and one site has been inscribed solely under cultural criterion (vi) and natural criteria.

VI.15 The Secretariat recalled that at the twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee in Cairns, cultural criterion (vi) was actively discussed in relation to the nomination of a number of properties with, for example, symbolic values and associations with outstanding artistic traditions.

VI.16 She referred to four key issues that emerged from an analysis of the application of cultural criterion (vi) over time:

  1. lack of consistency of application due to different perceptions of its role and application;
  2. concern that restrictions to its application create a bias in favour of monumental heritage;
  3. a desire to protect against political and nationalistic uses of the criterion; and
  4. concern that there will be too many inscriptions using cultural criterion (vi) if restrictive wording is not adopted.

VI.17 She then referred to the recent proposals for changes to the wording of cultural criterion (vi) discussed at three meetings in 2000 and 2001 as indicated below:

A meeting on "Authenticity and Integrity within an African Context" at the Great Zimbabwe National Monument, Zimbabwe, May 2000From an African point of view, there is a strong preference to revise the existing criterion (vi) to the form it was before 1996. This would mean that this criterion could be used alone without any other criteria.

The second meeting of the Scientific Committee - "Authenticity and Integrity in an African Context", held at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris, September 2000It was suggested that the wording of criterion (vi) be altered as follows:

"be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance (except in the case of living traditions, the Committee considers that this criterion should justify inclusion in the List only in exceptional circumstances and preferably in conjunction with other criteria cultural or natural).

A meeting of the Advisory Bodies (ICOMOS, IUCN, ICCROM) and the World Heritage Centre in Rome, March 2001It was agreed that the wording of criterion (vi) should be altered as follows:

"be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance (the Committee considers that this criterion should justify inclusion in the List only in exceptional circumstances and preferably in conjunction with other criteria cultural or natural).

VI.18 She concluded by suggesting that five issues needed to be considered by the Bureau:

  1. When the World Heritage criteria were established, it was understood that no criterion was of a higher order than another. However, according to the current wording, cultural criterion (vi) cannot be used by itself. This implied that the values it is assessing are not at the same level or threshold as the other outstanding universal values implied by the application of the other criteria;

  2. The exact meaning of "exceptional circumstances" in cultural criterion (vi) is not defined;

  3. If the application of criterion (vi) is restricted to being used only in conjunction with other cultural or natural criteria, it is not apparent how outstanding "places of memory" will be inscribed on the World Heritage List in the future:

  4. The restricted use of criterion (vi) could continue the bias of the World Heritage List in favour of monumental heritage and restrict the recognition of outstanding intangible values (including spiritual, indigenous and artistic values) associated with a place; and

  5. The implementation of the World Heritage Convention, and in particular the application of cultural criterion (vi) to recognise intangible or associative values, could be examined to ensure complementarity with the new intangible cultural heritage list and possible international instrument.

VI.19 The Chairperson invited comments from the Bureau and asked that the Bureau focus on the three actions required, as described in his introduction above.

VI.20 The Delegate of Canada noted that cultural criterion (vi) had been applied to sites before the definition of associative cultural landscapes had been included in paragraph 39(iii) of the Operational Guidelines. She then made the following points:

  1. For intangible cultural heritage values to be relevant to the World Heritage List, there needs to be association with a place. In this regard she referred to Article 3 of the Convention, which is how the Bureau and the World Heritage Committee implement the Convention in relation to the "territory" of States Parties.

    The change of wording of cultural criterion (vi) in 1996 had introduced a bias that was not intended. She said that to subordinate one criterion to others was not the purpose nor was it appropriate.

  2. The revised wording of cultural criterion (vi) proposed at the Zimbabwe meeting in May 2000 and the March 2001 meeting of the Advisory Bodies, which would add the word "preferably" and allow criterion (vi) to be used on its own was useful.

  3. The meaning of "exceptional circumstances" was a judgement to be made by the World Heritage Committee for each individual case. There could be no "rule book": "outstanding universal significance" was an appropriate and adequate benchmark.

  4. By limiting the application of cultural criterion (vi) and making it adjunct to other criteria, a prejudice towards monumental heritage has developed. In light of the Global Strategy and proposals for the formulation of a World Heritage Indigenous Peoples Council of Experts (WHIPCOE), she said that the current wording is inappropriate.

VI.21 The Rapporteur noted that the observations made at the meeting in Zimbabwe in May 2000, which he had attended, were made with practical considerations in mind. He also referred to the limited number of nominations from Africa in the last three years and the imbalance of the World Heritage List. He noted that most African properties inscribed on the World Heritage List in recent years had relied on an application of cultural criterion (vi). He cited the Sukur Cultural Landscape, Robben Island, Zanzibar Stone Town and the just recommended sites of the Royal Hill of Ambohinga, Tsodilo and Buganda Tombs as evidence of positive inscriptions in the context of redressing the imbalances on the World Heritage List.

VI.22 The Rapporteur noted that the tangible and intangible were inseparable in relation to African cultural traditions and by devaluing the spiritual aspects of cultural criterion (vi), the heritage of a good part of the globe was being reduced.

VI.23 He noted that at the Zimbabwe meeting, it was decided that the fear of "opening the flood gates" if cultural criterion (vi) was applied on its own was not justifiable, as other cultural criterion could be abused in the same way.

VI.24 He said that he favoured retaining much of the current wording of the criterion, but supported the removal of the discriminative clause. He noted that the addition of "preferably" is a good compromise and that cultural criterion (vi) should stand on its own. These changes, it was added, would reflect the intention of the Global Strategy.

VI.25 The Delegate of Australia recalled the Committee meeting in Kyoto in relation to discussions on the application of cultural criteria (i) and (vi) and the emotion of the inscription of Robben Island at the Committee meeting in Marrakesh. He suggested that the wording in parenthesis in cultural criterion (vi) be deleted to allow it to be used on its own.

VI.26 He raised the need for a definition of "outstanding universal value" to avoid an excessive number of inscriptions. Furthermore, he noted that cultural criterion (vi) is the best way that World Heritage indigenous values could be satisfactorily recognised.

VI.27 Ms Jo Wilmott of Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park addressed the Bureau saying that the mechanisms of cultural heritage assessment must identify the values of indigenous culture and that it is necessary to monitor those values and find ways to ensure culture is protected knowing that it does not remain unchanged.

VI.28 The Observer of the United States of America noted that to date, the current criteria contain unintended but inherent bias in favour of western culture and this needed to be redressed. He supported the comments of the Rapporteur and cautioned the reliance on the decision of the Committee to determine what are "exceptional circumstances". He stated that openness needs to be based on an expectation that each of us agrees and commits to the most thoughtful consideration and openness to the ideas and ideals of other people. He supported the deletion of the words in parentheses in the criterion. To address the question of opening "floodgates", he stressed that it was the responsibility of the Committee to apply the relevant provisions because strict definitions in themselves could not be the answer.

VI.29 The Observer of Israel asked the Chairperson if during the period between now and the next session of the Bureau, States Parties could be asked to propose ideas on the role of cultural criterion (vi) and that the World Heritage Centre could make an analysis on the findings. He agreed with the proposal to delete the words in parenthesis, stressing the point that it was people who sanctify space and space sanctifying people. A judicious use of tentative lists as a tool would ensure that floodgates were not opened.

VI.30 The Observer of Belgium congratulated the World Heritage Centre for preparing the document, however she requested that it be translated into French for the Committee meeting in Helsinki. She advised that the document should be considered as a reference document and should be regularly updated.

VI.31 The Director of the World Heritage Centre confirmed that the document would be translated for the Committee session in Helsinki.

VI.32 The Observer of Belgium questioned why some sites listed to date with intangible values had not been inscribed on the basis of cultural criterion (vi). She also asked for an analysis of sites inscribed according to cultural criteria (iv) and (vi).

VI.33 Noting that his could be a minority view, the Delegate of Thailand stated that the Convention is not biased and does not discriminate against other cultures. To apply cultural criterion (vi) as a stand-alone clause, would be to disregard the provision of Article 1 of the Convention. He expressed the view that intangible cultural heritage should not come under the World Heritage Convention. He said that criterion (vi) should continue to be applied with other criteria.

VI.34 The Delegate of Ecuador noted the change over time in the definition of Cultural Heritage from monumentalism to anthropological perspectives. He agreed with the proposal to delete the wording in parenthesis.

VI.35 The Observer of Benin stated that there was an unintentional bias towards monumentalism that should be corrected. He questioned what was "universal value" and raised the need to define it to avoid "opening the flood gates".

VI.36 The Observer of Greece expressed the need to analyse all criteria. She noted that the conception of the tangible and intangible will be discussed at the thirteenth General Assembly of ICOMOS in Zimbabwe and noted that steps were being taken for the preparation of a new international instrument for protecting intangible culture.

VI.37 The Observer of the United Kingdom noted the need to distinguish between intangible culture related to a place and those intangible values not associated with a place. He stated that cultural criterion (vi) should be able to be used on its own. While a place may not have outstanding universal significance, the spirit of the place could have that significance.

VI.38 The Observer of Italy considered that cultural criterion (vi) has an autonomous function and it fills a gap. She proposed that the words "with universal ethical and symbolic significance" replace "outstanding universal significance" in the wording of cultural criterion (vi).

VI.39 Ms Josie Weninger from Parks Canada addressed the Bureau. She said that the current definition of culture misses the link between humanity and the earth. The challenge is to recognise a more holistic perspective as expressed in the tradition of indigenous people through language, religion, events, behaviour and spirituality.

VI.40 The Representative of the Assistant Director-General for Science advised that the project Man and the Biosphere (MAB) addresses cultural biodiversity. He noted that studies demonstrate that places with high biological diversity have high associative values. He also informed the Bureau that he recently attended a meeting in Mexico on the importance of Natural Sacred sites for the protection of biological diversity and noted that a new partnership had evolved from this meeting between IUCN, WWF International and MAB.

VI.41 The Representative of IUCN noted that there are very few sites listed under cultural criterion (vi) and natural criteria. IUCN considers that there is much greater potential for application of cultural criterion (vi) in association with natural criteria, particularly in relation to under-represented regions such as Oceania where living traditions cannot be separated from nature and natural values. He considered that all sites inscribed on the World Heritage List must be of outstanding universal value. In reaching decisions, the inputs of indigenous people are of high importance and must be heard.

VI.42 The Chairperson then addressed the three actions required by the Bureau.

  1. Clarify the use of cultural criterion (vi) with reference to the implementation of the Global Strategy for a Balanced and Representative List.

VI.43 The Delegates of Australia, Finland, Zimbabwe and Ecuador responded positively that cultural criterion (vi) has a role to play in ensuring balance and representivity of the World Heritage List.

  1. Obtain agreement as to the final wording of cultural criterion (vi) to be suggested to the Committee for inclusion in the revised Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Committee.

VI.44 Four possible options for the revised wording of cultural criterion (vi) were proposed by the Chairman as follows:

1. delete the words within parentheses after "exceptional circumstances":

24(a)(vi)   be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance (the Committee considers that this criterion should justify inclusion in the List only in exceptional circumstances and in conjunction with other criteria cultural or natural).

2. make all the words in parentheses only relevant to "living traditions":

24(a)(vi)   be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance (except in the case of living traditions, the Committee considers that this criterion should justify inclusion in the List only in exceptional circumstances and in conjunction with other criteria cultural or natural).

3. add the word "preferably" after "exceptional circumstances and . . ." in parentheses:

24(a)(vi)   be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance (the Committee considers that this criterion should justify inclusion in the List only in exceptional circumstances and preferably in conjunction with other criteria cultural or natural).

4. delete all the wording within parentheses:

24(a)(vi)   be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance (the Committee considers that this criterion should justify inclusion in the List only in exceptional circumstances and in conjunction with other criteria cultural or natural).

VI.45 Most members of the Bureau were in favour of the fourth option. The Delegates of Canada and Thailand expressed their preference for the third option. The Delegate of Australia noted the need to give weight to the views of Canada and Thailand in the Working Document to be prepared for the next Committee session.

  1. Establish a clear framework for strict application of cultural criterion (vi).

VI.46 The Chairperson stressed the importance of applying the standards of "outstanding universal value" when applying cultural criterion (vi).

VI.47 The Representative of ICOMOS was heartened by the decision of the Bureau, noting that cultural criterion (vi) is of immense importance to recognize non-monumental heritage and values related to place.

VI.48 The Representative of ICCROM said that he was very heartened by the discussion of the Bureau. He noted that the discussion was in line with the three meetings held in 2000 and 2001.

VI.49 The Observer of Italy asked whether an observer had the right to propose modifications to a text that the Bureau was in the process of examining and whether these modifications would be taken into account.

VI.50 The Observer of the United States of America called for a common understanding in the application of the words in the criterion and requested that the discussion of the Bureau be memorialized.

VI.51 The Chairperson requested that document WHC- 2001/CONF.205/INF.8 be updated, to incorporate the observations made by the Bureau for submission to the World Heritage Committee and to be used as a resource document in the future.




VII. REQUESTS FOR INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE

VII.1 The Chairperson introduced the agenda item on International Assistance indicating that prior to examining the individual international assistance requests, the Secretariat will inform the Bureau on the on-going reflections concerning the optimum use of international assistance allocations under the World Heritage Fund in order to seek the guidance of the Bureau.

Analysis of the utilization of International Assistance and a Proposal for a Strategic, Thematic and Regional Approach

VII.2 The Director of the Centre stated that the review being carried out was to follow-up on the recommendations of the report on the evaluation of international assistance under the World Heritage Fund carried out by C3E, a French consultancy firm, commissioned by the UNESCO Central Evaluation Unit in response to the request of the Committee at its twenty- third session. He recalled that the Committee at its twenty-fourth session did not have time to examine this report thoroughly and its decision to cover this outstanding issue within the context of the revision of the Operational Guidelines.

VII.3 The Director informed the Bureau that in reviewing the numerous requests, he observed that the assistance being requested and even those being approved seem to lack overall coherence and in general is of short-term benefit. A fundamental reappraisal of what the Committee aims to achieve through these assistance activities was warranted. Regarding the C3E's recommendation, inter alia, to develop better criteria in the selection of requests to approve, he stated that in view of the different nature of the needs, the standardization of selection criteria may not result in the development of a strategic vision. At the request of the Chair, the Deputy Director of the Centre, Ms Minja Yang, responsible in overseeing programme matters at the Centre, made a power point presentation summarizing the findings of the internal review and an initial proposal for a new programming approach.

VII.4 The Deputy Director drew the attention of the Bureau to Articles 7 and 21 of the Convention related to international co-operation and assistance, and to Article 13 entrusting the Committee to define policies and priorities for international assistance, noted that the Convention, and its Operational Guidelines, calls upon the promotion of international co-operation and assistance beyond the scope of what is possible within the limited means currently available under the World Heritage Fund. Reiterating the observations by the Director in his presentation of the Secretariat's report, she indicated that it is improbable that the international assistance chapter of the World Heritage Fund can increase beyond the current US$ 3 million level. Referring moreover, to the observation advanced in the C3E report concerning the lack of clarity in the use of the five categories of international assistance, ie. Preparatory Assistance, Training, Technical Co-operation, Emergency and Promotional Assistance, the Deputy Director stated that the review of the 142 activities approved in 1999 and the 121 approved in 2000 can better be defined as (1) pre-inscription activities, (2) activities to enhance World Heritage site management, and (3) technical interventions.

VII.5 The Deputy Director indicated that international assistance for pre-inscription activities is in increasing demand, especially from States Parties of the developing world, particularly in view of the on-going activities for the promotion of the global strategy for a representative World Heritage List and the reassessment of the national tentative list. She also underscored the growing expectations of the Committee for States Parties to prepare nomination files of higher quality with better baseline data and proof of adequate legal and management frameworks to enable the protection of the world heritage values of the sites.

VII.6 With regard to enhancing the management of sites already inscribed on the World Heritage List, she indicated that the reactive monitoring missions as well as the Periodic Reporting exercise, are enabling the Centre to have a much better understanding of the protection and conservation needs of the States Parties and of the individual sites. This has led the Centre to adopt an increasingly proactive stance in addressing the problems, notably by assisting the States Parties and their site managers in preparing the international assistance requests to be financed from the World Heritage Fund. However, the time-consuming process of preparing the request forms, transmitting them to the States Parties concerned to solicit their approval, then awaiting formal submission to the Centre, transmittal to the Advisory Bodies for comments, and finally seeking approval by the Chair, Bureau or Committee, result in delays and multiplication of work for the Secretariat. She stated that a better mechanism might be worth exploring.

VII.7 Referring to the magnitude and the complexity of the conservation issues being faced by the sites, as depicted through the varied international assistance requests submitted by the States Parties, she indicated that the level of assistance made available under the World Heritage Fund, especially for technical interventions, is woefully inadequate. Thus, in order for the World Heritage Fund's international assistance to be invested in a more strategic manner and more proactively to mitigate risks and to address major conservation issues, she drew the attention of the Bureau to a new programming approach. This approach would enable greater synergy with other sources made available to UNESCO such as the Funds-in-Trusts of Belgium, Italy, Japan, etc, or through mechanisms of multilateral and bilateral developing co-operation agencies outside the UNESCO cadre.

VII.8 The programming approach proposed by the Centre consists of developing national, sub-regional, regional, as well as thematic programmes, such as the existing framework for World Heritage in Young Hands and Africa 2009 which benefit from multi-year co-financing support from the World Heritage Fund, or the Programme for the Safeguarding and Development of World Heritage Cities supported from many different funding sources. The Deputy Director stated that activities for tourism management already receives important contributions from the United Nations Foundation which are already packaged as a programme consisting of numerous activities for different sites. Citing tropical forests as another subject of a programme, or a regional programme for the Arab States to enable a more systematic follow-up to the Period Reporting exercise completed at the end of 2000; or even one at the national level to address conservation issues pertinent to all World Heritage sites which could include projects to address training needs; she stated that the programme approach, rather than a project approach could facilitate the solicitation of complementary funding by other donors, and above all, a more comprehensive framework for long-term, sustained assistance which can be designed from the onset to promote sustainability.

VII.9 Stressing that this programme approach will not close opportunities for States Parties to continue submitting international assistance requests identified by them, she concluded her presentation by stating that the Centre will be pleased to develop a number of programmes in collaboration with the States Parties and Advisory Bodies, which can be examined by the Committee at its twenty-fifth session in Helsinki, if requested by the Bureau.

VII.10 In the discussions which followed, the Bureau members (Australia, Canada, Zimbabwe, Morocco, Thailand, Ecuador) and the Observer Delegates (Belize, Belgium and St Lucia), expressed support for the programming approach advanced by the Secretariat, stressing the importance of the Committee adopting a proactive strategy rather than to disperse the limited financial means of the World Heritage Fund to many activities despite them all having their own merits. The Delegate of Ecuador emphasised that the programming approach should incorporate economic and financial analyses of the distribution of benefits to States Parties and sites.

VII.11 The Delegate of Australia, with reference to the example of the idea on a tropical forest programme noted that global warming would affect many World Heritage forest areas, but also coastal, alpine and sub- polar areas and suggested that the Convention should work on these issues in consultation with the UNFCCC. The Delegate asked that the current proposals of a more thematic programme be reflected in the on-going process in revising the Operational Guidelines.

VII.12 The Delegate of Canada, agreeing to the diagnosis of the World Heritage Fund international assistance not being coherent stressed that the impact of these activities are not measurable. She reiterated her comments of earlier years that the Committee should focus on sites on the World Heritage List in Danger and those requiring emergency assistance but set within a more comprehensive programme framework. She suggested that States Parties requests should be accepted within the scope of programmes to be determined.

VII.13 The Delegate of Zimbabwe stated that the programme approach will also enable the States Parties concerned to trigger their own result- oriented activities within a longer-term programme with established priorities and bench marks for achievements.

VII.14 The Delegate of Morocco said that a common definition of "assistance" is needed. Sites on the World Heritage List in Danger must clearly be the priority but preventive actions and the raising of awareness of the local community are equally important. The particular problem of conserving earthen architecture, for example, requires a long-term comprehensive programme of assistance.

VII.15 The Delegate of Thailand stated that while sharing the views of Canada and Australia, there is a need to decide on the basis of a thorough analyses of the cases. The programme approach merits support but initiatives taken by the Secretariat must conform to the priorities established by the States Parties, since in some cases in the past, the Secretariat has pushed for the endorsement of activities that were not of priority to the States Parties.

VII.16 The Observer of Belgium stated that the Committee must establish the priorities to enable the proactive approach and that these decisions need to be reflected in section IV of the Operational Guidelines as well as in the budget which will now be prepared for the biennium.

VII.17 The Observer of St Lucia, in expressing support said that the programme approach addressing critical issues of conservation should also enable the preparation of publications on "lessons learned" which should be widely distributed for the benefit of those who are faced with similar problems. He further stated that the Tourism Thematic Area should be changed to sustainable livelihoods, under which tourism can be subsumed. Such a change, he concluded, would be more encompassing and, therefore, more relevant to Small Islands Developing States (SIDS).

VII.18 ICCROM, ICOMOS and IUCN all expressed their support and willingness to participate actively in the elaboration and implementation of such programmes. The Delegate of ICCROM expressed his support for a more strategic approach to the use of international assistance funds. He noted the need for clarification of the relationship between categories for international assistance and the programme approach outlined in the presentation. Finally, given the schedule discussed for the process of revision of the Operational Guidelines, he asked that a clear framework be developed for consultation between the Secretariat and the Advisory Bodies so that possible changes could be put forward as part of that process.

VII.19 The Chair concluded by requesting the Secretariat to continue its review and to prepare a proposal for examination by the Committee at its twenty-fifth session in Helsinki.

VII.20 As a general observation, the Observer of Greece noted that the ICCROM capacity-building project was not on this Bureau's agenda although it was on the agenda of the twenty-fifth session of the Committee. ICCROM explained that the document which, for the first time, will be looking at both cultural and natural issues, was being prepared in collaboration with the Centre and the other Advisory Bodies and would be ready for examination by the Committee at its twenty-fifth session.

Examination of individual Requests

VII.21 The Bureau examined ten international assistance requests presented within working document WHC-2001/CONF.205/7, 7Add, and 7Add1, following paragraphs 94-121 of the Operational Guidelines. The Bureau took the following decisions:

(i) Preparatory Assistance

Cultural

Indonesia "Preparation of a Tentative List and a nomination dossier of potential Cultural Heritage properties in Bali"

VII.22 The Bureau approved this request for US$ 30,000. In view of the limited Preparatory Assistance budget remaining for 2001, the Bureau decided to utilize the budget allocated to Technical Co-operation for financing this activity.

Togo "Preparation of a nomination dossier for the inscription on the World Heritage List of the Vernacular Settlement of Betammaribé"

VII.23 The Bureau approved this request for US$ 27,043. In view of the limited Preparatory Assistance budget remaining for 2001, the Bureau decided to utilize the budget allocated to Technical Co-operation for financing this activity.

(ii) Technical Co-operation

Natural

Philippines "Community based sustainable tourism in Puerto Princessa subterranean River National Park World Heritage Site"

VII.24 The Bureau approved an amount of US$23,000 to support the Community Based Sustainable Tourism activities for the conservation of Puerto Princessa National Park of the Philippines, subject to the receipt of the US$ 194 arrears from 2000 contribution to the World Heritage Fund. The Bureau also recommended that the State Party and the Centre discuss the suggestion of IUCN concerning the possible elaboration of a marketing strategy, and, if necessary, request further assistance as appropriate.

VII.25 Responding to the question on whether or not the Philippines was eligible for receiving international assistance, the Observer of the Philippines clarified that only US$194 was outstanding. These arrears were due to a technical problem, which would be solved when the State Party paid its 2001 contributions.

Indonesia "For the preparation of a Strategic Planning for the Conservation and Effective Management of Lorentz National Park"

VII.26 The Delegate of Australia confirmed that Indonesia and Australia are submitting a project for strengthening the training and capacity building for Park staff and community-based organisations currently under consideration for Australian AID in the order of Aus$200,000. The execution of the World Heritage financed projects will be complementary with that of the AusAID project.

VII.27 The Secretariat and IUCN supported the AusAID project and welcomed the Indonesian authorities for committing to prepare a strategic plan for Lorentz National Park to be ready in time for the mission to the site at the end of 2002 in accordance with the recommendation of the Committee made at the time of inscription of this site in the World Heritage List. In responding to the comments of the Delegate of Australia on the relationships between World Heritage and Climate Change Conventions, the Centre observed that though the Centre has working relationships with Secretariats of biodiversity related global treaties, communications with the Climate Change Convention have been infrequent. An exploration of the implications of the global climate change for World Heritage site management may help to improve co-operation between the two Conventions. On the importance of marine biodiversity highlighted by the Observer of Belize, the Bureau was informed of the Centre's co-operation with NOAA (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, USA - the IUCN/WCPA Vice-Chair for Marine Protected Areas) to organize a global experts workshop in the Philippines in September 2001 to review protected areas in tropical coastal, marine and small island ecosystems and identify potential sites that may be nominated by States Parties as World Heritage. The Centre agreed with the Delegate of Canada concerning the need to give special consideration to World Heritage sites in Danger in programme development.

VII.28 The Bureau approved an amount of US$30,000, requesting the State Party to work in collaboration with other potential donors, conservation NGOs and the private sector, and in particular the local communities, for the preparation of the strategic plan and seek their full support for the long-term conservation of the Lorentz National Park.

Cultural

Mozambique "Preparation of a management and conservation plan for the Island of Mozambique"

VII.29 The Bureau approved this request for US$ 29,980, requesting the State Party to consider increasing its national contribution for the proposed activity through the mobilization of the National Consultant who benefits from the Africa 2009 course taking place in 2001.

Vietnam "Strategic development of management capacity of Hoi An Ancient Town"

VII.30 The Bureau approved this request for US$ 28,290, requesting the World Heritage Centre to co-ordinate the implementation of the activity in close collaboration with the State Party and the Regional Advisor for Culture in the Asia-Pacific Region (UNESCO Bangkok Office).

(iii) Training

Cultural

India "Darjeeling Himalayan Railway World Heritage Area Workshop"

VII.31 The Bureau was informed that ICOMOS and ICCROM supported this request. ICCROM recommended that the State Party be requested to ensure the involvement of immovable cultural heritage professionals in the continued development and implementation of the training activity proposed.

VII.32 The Bureau approved a reduced amount of US$28,000, recommending to the State Party that the costs indicated for invitation cards, daily newsletters, and folders be economized. The Bureau furthermore requested that the State Party ensure the involvement of immovable cultural heritage professionals in the continued development and implementation of training activities.

(iv) Emergency Assistance

VII.33 The Bureau's attention was drawn to the constraints paragraph 96 of the Operational Guidelines posed for the allocation of funds for World Heritage sites and those inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Centre informed the Bureau that some States Parties with World Heritage properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger or under examination for inscription on this List, expressed their expectation to receive significant assistance from the World Heritage Fund to remove the threats facing their properties, in accordance with paragraph 91 of the Operational Guidelines. The Director of the World Heritage Centre highlighted that States Parties faced difficulties in receiving assistance in a timely manner, due to the schedule of the statutory meetings and the approval budget ceilings for each statutory body (Committee, Bureau, Chairperson) stipulated within the Operational Guidelines.

VII.34 In examining the three Emergency Assistance requests, the Bureau decided to exceptionally waiver the application of paragraph 96 of the Operational Guidelines to provide Emergency Assistance to two World Heritage properties that clearly required special and urgent attention. The Bureau noted the constraint in the allocation of Emergency Assistance caused by the distinction made between "unexpected phenomena" and "gradual phenomena" of paragraph 96 of the Operational Guidelines, and requested the Centre and the Advisory Bodies to consider the relevance of such a distinction for providing Emergency Assistance, particularly for the World Heritage properties in Danger, for consideration during the process of revising the Operational Guidelines.

Natural

Uganda "Emergency Assistance for Rwenzori Mountains National Park"

VII.35 The Bureau approved this request for US$64,500 asEmergency Assistance on an exceptional basis and recommended that the Centre and IUCN co-operate with the State Party to obtain necessary information to ensure rapid and effective implementation of the project. The Bureau noted that should the State Party find that the US$ 64,500 is insufficient to purchase the necessary equipment and undertake the construction and repair activities foreseen, the State Party may consider requesting supplementary funds for consideration by the twenty-fifth session of the Committee.

Cultural

Algeria "Elaboration of an emergency plan and implementation of corrective measures for the Archaeological site of Tipasa"

VII.36 The Bureau approved this request for an amount of US$ 35,500 on an exceptional basis as Emergency Assistance.

Peru "Consolidation and restoration of the Cathedral of Arequipa"

VII.37 The Bureau approved this request for an amount of US$ 75,000, and requested the Secretariat that the assistance be implemented through the UNESCO Representative in Lima who should be requested to release funds on the basis of detailed budget and work-plans and who should carefully monitor and report on the execution of the works. The Observer of Peru expressed his Government's appreciation to the Bureau for its swift response following the large-scale earthquake that caused significant damage to the Cathedral of Arequipa. He stated the keen interest of his Government to further co-operate with the World Heritage Centre for the rehabilitation and restoration of the Historical Centre of the Arequipa.

VII.38 The Observer of Israel informed the Bureau of his Government's intention to work towards the organization of a training activity for the Rift Valley.



Proposal for the Bing Lucas Annual World Heritage Scholarship and World Heritage Managers Award

VII.39 The Representative of IUCN drew the attention of the Bureau to the work achieved by the late Dr Bing Lucas, recalling the moment of silence observed by the Bureau during the Opening Session in his memory. IUCN presented a proposal for the establishment of "The Bing Lucas Annual World Heritage Scholarship and World Heritage Managers Award - A Proposal", which was made available to Bureau members and observer States Parties in English language only. This proposal is included in this Report as Annex IX. The Representative of IUCN informed the Bureau that protected area experts around the world had expressed their positive response to this proposal and invited the Bureau to consider the possibility of supporting the scholarship.

VII.40 The proposed Scholarship addressed two ideas, (a) an annual scholarship and (b) an annual award scheme, both focusing on improving the quality of management of natural World Heritage sites and cultural landscapes as these were the areas where Dr Lucas contributed most significantly. The Representative of IUCN informed the Bureau of the particular focus of the proposal given to support young World Heritage site managers from developing countries. The Bureau was further informed that the scholarship and the award schemes should be part of the World Heritage process, rather than a stand-alone initiative. IUCN suggested that the Bureau might wish to take these ideas into account in further elaborating the Global Training Strategy.

VII.41 IUCN underlined that the Scholarship proposal would require the investment of considerable effort. However, he expressed his conviction that there are potentially many friends and colleagues of Dr Lucas who may be prepared to contribute in the process of implementing the scholarship proposal. The Bureau was informed that the award proposal has no significant financial implications for the World Heritage Convention.

VII.42 The Delegate of Thailand indicated support for the idea of the Scholarship but expressed reservations on its modalities, particularly with reference to Article 22 of the Convention. The Delegates of Australia and Ecuador also expressed their support of this idea.

VII.43 The Bureau requested that modalities for this Scholarship be reviewed by IUCN and the Centre for consideration by the Committee at its twenty-fifth session.




VIII. DATE, PLACE AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH EXTRAORDINARY SESSION OF THE BUREAU (7- 8 DECEMBER 2001, HELSINKI, FINLAND)

VIII.1 The Chairperson presented Working Document WHC- 2001/CONF.205/8, the Provisional Agenda of the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau to be held in Helsinki, Finland, from 7 to 8 December 2001. The Provisional Agenda was adopted and is attached as Annex X.




IX. DATE, PLACE AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE (11 - 16 DECEMBER 2001, HELSINKI, FINLAND)

IX.1 The Chairperson presented Working Document WHC- 2001/CONF.205/9, the Provisional Agenda of the twenty-fifth session of the Committee to be held in Helsinki, Finland, from 11 to 16 December 2001.

IX.2 The Bureau decided to reverse the agenda items 14 and 15 in order to have the budget approved before requests for international assistance are examined. The Bureau also decided to include two additional agenda items: "Information on international assistance" and "Report on the World Heritage Indigenous Peoples Council of Experts (WHIPCOE)".

IX.3 The Provisional Agenda for the twenty-fifth session of the World Heritage Committee is included as Annex XI.




X. OTHER BUSINESS

X.1 The Chairperson invited the Bureau members to raise any other issues of concern.

X. 2 He informed the Bureau of his letter of 18 June 2001 concerning voluntary contributions to the World Heritage Fund. The letter is included as Annex XII. He then invited the Bureau members to comment on the proposal to be considered by the thirteenth General Assembly of States Parties to the Convention to be held on 30 to 31 October 2001 on the same issue. The Delegates of Thailand and Australia expressed their support for the initiative in appealing for voluntary contributions from States Parties and for alternative ways of increasing the World Heritage Fund. States Parties should be encouraged to follow the example of the Asia-Pacific Focal Point. The Observers of Greece and Belgium questioned the proposal pointing out that the contribution of Members States to UNESCO has recently been increased and that some States Parties may not be able to fulfil the expectations if accepted by the General Assembly and could propose alternative forms of contributions. The Chairperson informed the Bureau that his letter and the draft resolution would be circulated in preparation for discussions at the General Assembly. It was also pointed out by the Delegate of Thailand that the approach adopted by the Chairperson was not inconsistent with the World Heritage Convention as the call was for voluntary additional contributions.

X.3 The Observer of Germany took the floor concerning the Periodic Reporting exercise for Europe, now scheduled for the years 2005 and 2006 and said that there are many ways to divide Europe, by geographical, religious and other categories. The Secretariat informed the Bureau that under the agenda item "Progress reports on regional periodic reporting strategies" information would be provided to the twenty-fifth session of the World Heritage Committee in Finland, and will include suggestions for the European region.

X.4 The Chairperson informed the Bureau that he had received a letter from Lithuania concerning the transboundary site of the Curonian Spit (Lithuania/Russian Federation) and a preparatory oil exploration on the Russian side. This item will be included under the item "State of conservation of properties on the World Heritage List" at the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau.

X.5 The Chairperson informed the Bureau that the proposed dates for the twenty-sixth session of the Bureau are from 8 to 13 April 2002 (UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, France) and the proposed dates for the twenty- sixth session of the World Heritage Committee from 24 to 29 June 2002 (Budapest, Hungary). X.6 No other matters were raised.




XI. ADOPTION OF THE REPORT

XI.1 The Chairperson requested the Rapporteur to present the draft report to the Bureau. It was presented section-by-section and all changes suggested by the members of the Bureau, the observers and advisory bodies were noted, and the report adopted.




XII. CLOSURE OF THE SESSION

XII.1 The Chairperson thanked the Rapporteur, the Secretariat and the translators for the quality of work done in the preparation of the Report, adopted by acclamation. He also thanked in particular the work of the interpreters, and the contributions of the Members of the Bureau, advisory bodies and Observers and other Delegates. He paid special tribute to all those who contributed to the work carried out in relation to the application of criterion (vi).

XII.2 The Chairperson provided some statistics on the attendance at the Bureau session: 201 participants attended the session representing 67 States Parties and 7 Observers. Distribution of participants from States Parties belonging to the different regions was as follows: Europe and North America (36%); Central, South America and the Caribbean (17%); Asia Pacific (16%); Arab States (8%); and Africa (7%). The remaining 16% were made up of delegates representing countries that are not party to the Convention, NGO representatives, advisory bodies and Secretariat staff.

XII. 3 After re-iterating his appreciation to all concerned, the Chairperson declared the twenty-fifth ordinary session of the Bureau closed.








ANNEXE I / ANNEX I

BUREAU DU COMITE DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL /
BUREAU OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

Vingt-cinquième session / Twenty-fifth session

Paris, Siège de l'UNESCO, Salle X / Paris, UNESCO Headquarters, Room X
25 - 30 juin 2001 / 25 - 30 June 2001
___________

LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS / LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
___________

ETATS MEMBRES DU BUREAU / MEMBERS OF THE BUREAU

Australie / Australia

Mr Roger Beale
Secretary
Department of the Environment and Heritage
GPO Box 787
CANBERRA ACT 2601
Australia

Mr Matthew Peek
Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Australia to UNESCO
4 rue Jean Rey
75724 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Peter King
Chair
World Heritage Committee
Level 1
235 Macquarie Street
SYDNEY NSW 2000
Australia

Mr Kevin Keeffe
Assistant Secretary
World Heritage Branch
Department of the Environment and Heritage
GPO Box 787
CANBERRA ACT 2601
Australia

Mr David Walker
Director, International Section
World Heritage Branch
Department of the Environment and Heritage
GPO Box 787
CANBERRA ACT 2601
Australia

Mr David Roberts
World Heritage Branch
Department of the Environment and Heritage
GPO Box 787
CANBERRA ACT 2601
Australia

Ms Olwen Beazley
World Heritage Branch
Department of the Environment and Heritage
GPO Box 787
CANBERRA ACT 2601
Australia

Ms Anne Siwicki
Attaché
Permanent Delegation of Australia to UNESCO
4 rue Jean Rey
75724 Paris Cedex 15
France


Canada

Mrs Christina Cameron
Director General, National Historic Sites
Parks Canada
25 Eddy Street
5th floor
Hull, Quebec, K1A 0M5
Canada

Ms Dominique Levasseur
Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Canada to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mrs Gisèle Cantin
Affaires internationales
Parcs Canada
25, rue Eddy
6ème étage
Hull, Québec, K1A 0M5
Canada

Mr John Pinkerton
Officer, Ecological Integrity Branch
Parks Canada
25 Eddy Street
4th floor
Hull, Quebec, K1A 0M5
Canada

Ms Josie Weninger
Field Unit Superintendant
Southwest NWT Field Unit
Parks Canada
P.O Box 750
Fort Smith, NWT
Canada


Equateur / Ecuador

Mr Hernan Crespo-Toral
Expert en Patrimoine Culturel et Développement
La Cumbre 336
Quito
Ecuador

Mr Lautaro Pozo Malo
Chargé d'Affaires a.i.
Délégation permanente de l'Equateur auprès de
l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Rodolfo Rendón
Expert pour le patrimoine mondial
Apartado 8430
Quito
Ecuador


Finlande / Finland

Mr Henrik Lilius
Director General
National Board of Antiquities
P.O. Box 913
FIN-00101 Helsinki
Finland

H. E. Ms Taina Kiekko
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Finland to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Jukka-Pekka Flander
Chief Inspector
Ministry of the Environment
P.O. Box 380
FIN-00131 Helsinki
Finland

Mr Ari Mäki
Deputy Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Finland to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Ms Margaretha Ehrström
Researcher
National Board of Antiquities
P.O. Box 169
FIN-00511 Helsinki
Finland


Maroc / Morocco

Mr Abdelaziz Touri
Secrétaire général
Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication
1 rue Ghandi
Rabat 19429
Morocco

S. E. Mme Aziza Bennani
Ambassadrice, Déléguée permanente
Délégation permanente du Maroc auprès de
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Prof. Driss Fassi
Professeur
Université Mohamed V de Rabat
Rabat
Morocco

Mr Rachid Seghrouchni
Secrétaire
Délégation permanente du Maroc auprès de
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Thaïlande / Thailand

Prof. Dr. Adul Wichiencharoen
Chairman
National Committee for the Protection of the World Heritage
Office of the Environmental Policy and Planning (OEPP)
60/1 Rama 6 Rd., Phayathai
Bangkok 10400
Thailand

Ms Chirawan Pipitphoka
Deputy Secretary-General
Office of Environmental Policy and Planning (OEPP)
60/1 Rama 6 Rd., Phayathai
Bangkok 10400
Thailand

Mrs Prasertsuk Chamornmarn
Secretary
National Committee for the Protection of the World Heritage
Office of the Environmental Policy and Planning (OEPP)
60/1 Rama 6 Rd., Phayathai
Bangkok 10400
Thailand

Ms Korapin Phayakprakarn
Assistant Secretary
National Committee for the Protection of the World Heritage
Office of the Environmental Policy and Planning (OEPP)
60/1 Rama 6 Rd., Phayathai
Bangkok 10400
Thailand


Zimbabwe

Mr D. Munjeri
Executive Director
The National Museums and Monuments
107 Rotten Row
P.O Box CY 140
Causeway, Harare
Zimbabwe

Brigadier General Epmarcus W. Kanhanga
Acting Director
Department of National Parks and Wildlife
Botanical Gardens
P.O Box CY 140
Causeway / Harare
Zimbabwe

II. ORGANISATIONS PARTICIPANT A TITRE CONSULTATIF /
ORGANIZATIONS ATTENDING IN AN ADVISORY CAPACITY

CENTRE INTERNATIONAL D'ETUDES POUR LA CONSERVATION ET LA RESTAURATION DES BIENS CULTURELS (ICCROM) /
INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THE STUDY OF THE PRESERVATION AND THE RESTORATION OF CULTURAL PROPERTY (ICCROM)

Dr. Nicholas P. Stanley-Price
Director-General
ICCROM
Via di S. Michele, 13
00153 Rome
Italy

Mr Joseph King
Project Manager, Africa 2009
ICCROM
Via di S. Michele, 13
00153 Rome
Italy

Ms Nobuko Inaba
Project Manager, Heritage Settlements
ICCROM
Via di S. Michele, 13
00153 Rome
Italy

CONSEIL INTERNATIONAL DES MONUMENTS ET DES SITES (ICOMOS) /
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON MONUMENTS AND SITES (ICOMOS)


Mr Michael Petzet
Président
ICOMOS
49-51 rue de la Fédération
75015 Paris
France

Mr Henry Cleere
Coordinator
ICOMOS
49-51 rue de la Fédération
75015 Paris
France

Mrs Regina Durighello
Assistant coordinator
ICOMOS
49-51 rue de la Fédération
75015 Paris
France

Jukka Jokkilehto
Consultant
ICOMOS
49-51 rue de la Fédération
75015 Paris
France

Mr Giora Solar
Délégué général aux finances
ICOMOS
49-51 rue de la Fédération
75015 Paris
France

Gwenaelle Bourdin
Consultant
ICOMOS
49-51 rue de la Fédération
75015 Paris
France

M. Robin Letellier
Vice-Président
CIPA-ICOMOS
93 Chemin Juniper
Chelsea, Québec
Canada J9B IT3

Prof. Dr. Peter Waldhäusl
President
ICOMOS-CIPA
Weimarerstr. 11412
A-1190 Vienna
Austria


UNION MONDIALE POUR LA NATURE (UICN)
THE WORLD CONSERVATION UNION (IUCN)

Mr David Sheppard
Head Programme on Protected Areas
IUCN-The World Conservation Union
Rue Mauverney 28
CH-1196 Gland
Switzerland

Mr Adrian Phillips
Senior Advisor, World Heritage
IUCN-The World Conservation Union
2 The Old Rectory
Dumbleton
Livesham, WR11 6TG
United Kingdom

Mr Jim Thorsell
IUCN-The World Conservation Union
Rue Mauverney 28
CH-1196 Gland
Switzerland

Mr Pedro Rosabal
IUCN-The World Conservation Union
Rue Mauverney 28
CH-1196 Gland
Switzerland

Mr Rolf Hogan
IUCN-The World Conservation Union
Rue Mauverney 28
CH-1196 Gland
Switzerland

III. OBSERVATEURS - ETATS PARTIES A LA CONVENTION DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL/
OBSERVERS - STATES PARTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION


Afrique du Sud / South Africa

Ms Louise Graham
Deputy Permanent Delegate
South African Delegation
59 Quai d'Orsay
75343 Paris Cedex 07
France

Mr Devan Moodley
South African Delegation
59 Quai d'Orsay
75343 Paris Cedex 07
France


Albanie / Albania

Mrs Valentina Ikonomi
Chargée d'Affaires
Délégation de l'Albanie auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Allemagne / Germany

Dr. Hans Caspary
Curator
State Authority of Rhineland-Palatinate
Schillerstrasse 44
55116 Mainz
Germany


Arabie Saoudite / Saudi Arabia

M Habib Tarhouni
Attaché
Permanent Delegation of Saudi Arabia to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
Saudi Arabia


Argentine / Argentina

H. E. Mr Lucio Garcia del Solar
Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Argentina to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Ariel W. Gonzalez
Secretary of Embassy
Permanent Delegation of Argentina to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Autriche / Austria

Mag. Gabriele Eschig
Secretary-General
Austrian National Commission for UNESCO
Mentergasse 11
A-1070 Wien
Austria

Mr Hans Horcicka
Director
Federal Ministry for Education, Science and Culture
A-1014 Wien
Austria


Belgique / Belgium

Mr Yves Haesendonck
Délégué permanent
Délégation permanente de la Belgique auprès de l'UNESCO
Villa de Saxe 4
75007 Paris
France

Mrs Gislaine Devillers
Première Attachée
Région Wallonne
Rue Brigades d'Irlande, 1
B. 5100 JAMBES
Belgium

Mrs Bénédicte Selfslagh
Relations avec les organisations internationales
Division du Patrimoine, DGATLP
Ministère de la Région wallonne
30 avenue Junot
F-75018 Paris
France

M. Marc Thunus
Délégué permanent adjoint
Délégation permanente de la Belgique auprès de l'UNESCO
Villa de Saxe 4
75007 Paris
France

Ms Suzanne Van Aerschot
Assistant to the Director
Ministry of Flanders - Monuments and Sites
Waaistraat 3
B-3000 Leuven
Belgium

Madame Geneviève Francois
Première Conseillère
Délégation Wallonie-Bruxelles
43-45, rue Vieille du Temple
75004 PARIS


Belize

Dr Teny Topalian
Secretaire générale
Commission nationale de Belize pour l'UNESCO
Belize


Bénin / Benin

S. E. M. Olabiyi B.J. Yai
Ambassadeur
Délégation permanente du Bénin auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Victor Joseph Douyeme
Deuxième Conseiller
Délégation permanente du Bénin auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Botswana

Ms Tickey Pule
Representative
Government of Botswana
Botswana


Brésil / Brazil

Mr João Lanari Bo
Counsellor
Permanent Delegation of Brazil to UNESCO
1 rue de Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Chaul Nars Fayad
Secretario de Cultura representant do Governador de Goias
AGEPEL
Prasa Civica N° 2
Goias
Brazil

Mr José Pedro Oliveira da Costa
Secrétaire national pour la Biodiversité
Ministère de l'Environnement
Esplanada dos Ministerios
70 Andar
Brasilia 70000-000
Brazil

Mr Carlos Peixoto
Gabinete Civil da Governadoria Cerimonial
Av E N° 987
Goiania
Goias
Brazil


Chili / Chile

Madame Beatriz Rioseco
Chargée de la Culture et de la Presse
Délégation permanente du Chili auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

M. Alejandro Rogers
Chargé d'Affaires
Délégation permanente du Chili Auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Chine / China

Mr Zhijiun Yang
Director
Department for protection of Monuments and Sites
State Administration of Cultural Heritage
N°10 North Chaoyangmen Street
Beijing 100020
China

Ms Xiaoyu Zhu
Deputy Delegate
Chinese Permanent Delegation to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Zhan Guo
General Secretary
ICOMOS China
10 N Chaoyangmen Street
Beijing 100020
China

Ms Shuang Fu
Urban Planner
Ministry of Construction of China
N° 9 San Li-he Road
100845
Beijing
China

Ms Xioping Yu
Programme Officer
Chinese Naional Commission for UNESCO
37 Damucang Hutong Xidan
Beijing 100816
China

Mr Zhiguo Li
Director Research Institute of Yungang Grottoes
Datong City
Shan Xi Province
037007
China


Colombie / Colombia

Mrs Marcela Ordoez
Second Secretary
Permanent Delegation of Colombia to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Congo

H.E. Mr Antoine Ndinga Oba
Ambassadeur, Délégué Permanent
Délégation permanente du Congo auprès de l'Unesco
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mrs Jeannette Ifounde-Daho
Premier Secrétaire
Délégation permanente du Congo auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Franois Nguie
Premier Conseiller
Délégation permanente du Congo auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Costa Rica

Mrs Iris Leiva Billault
Déléguée adjointe, Chargée d'affaires a.i.
Délégation permanente du Costa Rica auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
Bureau MS2.27
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Danemark / Denmark

Mr Hjrdis Dalsgaard
Deputy permanent delegate
Permanent delegation of Denmark to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Poul Schjrring
Permanent Delegation of Denmark to UNESCO
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Egypte / Egypt

H. E. Ms Omar Tahani
Ambassadrice
Délégation permanente de l'Egypte auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Mohamed Sameh Amr
Deputy Permanent Delegate
Egyptian Permanent Delegation to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


El Salvador

Ms Nanette Viaud Desroches
Conseillère
Délégation permanente d'El Salvador auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Espagne / Spain

H. E. D. Francisco Villar
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Spain to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Ms Carmen Añon
Observateur
Ministère de la Culture
Puerto Santa Maria 49
Madrid 28043
Spain

Mr D. Luis La fuente Batanero
Subdirector General de Proteccion del Patrimonio Historico
Ministerio de Educacion, Cultura y Deporte
Spain

D. Pablo Benavides
Delegado permanente Adjunto
Permanent Delegation of Spain to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

D. Diego Fernandez
Jefe del Servicio de Regimen Juridico
Subdireccion de Proteccion del Patrimonio Historico
Ministerio de Educacion Cultura y Deporte
Spain


Etats-Unis d'Amerique / United States of America

Mr John J. Reynolds
Regional Director, Pacific West Region
U.S. National Park Service
600 Harrison Street, Suite 600
San Francisco, CA 94107-1372
United States of America

Ms Sharon Cleary
Chief,Office of International Affairs
U.S. National Park Service
1849 C Street, N.W. Rm. 2252
Washington, D.C. 20240
United States of America

Mrs Shirley M. Hart
United States Observer to UNESCO
United States Embassy
2 Avenue Gabriel
75382 Paris Cedex 08
France

Ms Stephanie Mulot
Program Specialist
United States Observer Mission to UNESCO
2 Avenue Gabriel
75382 Paris Cedex 08
France


France

S. E. M. Musitelli
Ambassadeur, Délégué permanent
Délégation permanente de la France auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mme Eva Caillart
Chargée de Mission
Ministère de la Culture
DAPA
8 rue Vivienne
75002 Paris
France

Ms Catherine Caro
Sous-Directrice
Ministère de l'Environnement
20 avenue de Ségur
75007 Paris
France

Mme Catherine Dumesnil
Conseillère technique
Commission nationale franaise auprès de l'UNESCO
57 boulevard des Invalides
75700 Paris SP
France

M. Olivier Poisson
Ministère de la Culture
10 rue du Parc Royal
75004 Paris
France


Grèce / Greece

Ms Helen Methodiou
Conseillère pour la Culture
Délégation de la Grèce auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Guatemala

Mr Pablo Arenales
Third Secretary
Permanent Delegation of Guatemala to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mrs Maria Delgado de Morataya
Deputy Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Guatemala to UNESCO
Guatemala City
Guatemala


Honduras

H. E. Ms Sonia Mendieta de Badaroux
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Honduras to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris cedex 15
France

Mr J.C. Bendana-Pinel
Deputy Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Honduras to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris cedex 15
France

Hongrie / Hungary

Mr Zoltán Cselovszki, Head of the delegation
Chairman of the Hungarian National WHC
National Board for the Protection of Historic Monuments
Táncsics Mihály utca 1.
H-1014 Budapest
Hungary

Mr Istvan Dobri
Deputy Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Hungary to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Ph. D Mr János Tardy .
Deputy State Secretary,
Head of Authority for Nature Conservatio
Ministry for Environment
Költo u. 21.
H-1121 Budapest
Hungary

Dr. Zoltán Szilassy
Deputy Head of Department
National Authority for Nature Conservation
Ministry for Environment
Költo u. 21.
H-1121 Budapest
Hungary

MSc Mr Ferenc Németh
Head
Secretariat of the Hungarian National WHC
Színház utca 14.
H-1014 Budapest
Hungary

Dr. Lia Bassa
Secretariat of the Hungarian National WHC
Színház utca 14.
H-1014 Budapest
Hungary

Mrs Edit Herboly
Secretariat of the Hungarian National WHC
Színház utca 14.
H-1014 Budapest
Hungary


Inde / India

H. E. Ms Sabharwal Neelam
Ambassador
Permanent Delegation of India to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Irak / Iraq

H. E Ali Al-Mashat
Ambassador
Permanent Delegation of Iraq to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Iran (Rép. islamique d') / Iran (Islamic Rep. of)

Mr Mohammad Reza Kashani
Deputy Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Iran to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
Iran

Israël / Israel

S. E. M. Ary Gabaye
Ambassadeur, Délégué permanent
Délégation permanente d'Israël auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Ms Hemda Golan
Deputy Legal Adviser
Ministry for Foreign Affairs
Jerusalem
Israel

Mr Michael Turner
Chair
Israel Heritage Committee
25 Caspi Street
93554
Jerusalem
Israel


Italie / Italy

S. E. M. Gabriele Sardo
Ambassadeur, Délégué permanent
Délégation permanente de l'Italie auprès de
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mme Roberta Alberotanza
Chef de Section, Direction générale pour la promotion
de la coopération culturelle - UFF. III
Ministère des Affaires Etrangères
rue della Farnesina n1
00197 Rome
Italy

Ms Marina Misitano
Permanent Delegation of Italy to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Ms Alessandra Molina
Permanent Delegation of Italy to UNESCO
1 rue Miolis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Japon / Japan

Dr. Yutaka Tokiwa
Director, Monuments and Sites Division
Agency for Cultural Affairs
3-2-2 Kasumigaseki
Chiyoda-ku,Tokyo 100-8959
Japan

Dr. Makoto Motonaka
Chief Cultural Properties Senior Specialist
Agency for Cultural Affairs
3-2-2 Kasumigaseki
Chiyoda-ku,Tokyo 100-8959
Japan

Dr. Kumiko Shimotsuma
Specialist for Cultural Properties
Agency for Cultural Affairs
3-2-2 Kasumigaseki
Chiyoda-ku,Tokyo 100-8959
Japan

Ms Kumiko Yoneda
Senior Research Scientist
Japan Wildlife Research Center
3-10-10, Shitaya, Taito-ku
Tokyo, 110-8676
Japan

Mr Atsuhiro Yoshinaka
Senior Planning Officer, Nature Conservation Bureau
Ministry of the Environment
1-2-2, Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo, 1008975
Japan


Jordanie / Jordan

Dr. Raji Al-Qubilat
Deputy Permanent Delegate to UNESCO
11 rue Alfred Dehodenia
Paris
France


Lettonie / Latvia

Vita Timermane-Moora
Délégué permanent adjoint
Délégation permanente de Lettonie auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Liban / Lebanon

Carla Jazzar
Déléguée permanente adjointe
Délégation permanente du Liban auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Lituanie / Lithuania

H. E. Mr Ugné Karvelis
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Lithuania to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Madagascar / Madagascar

H. E. Mr Ravaomalala RANDRIAMAMONJY-RASOANAIVO
Délégué permanent adjoint
Délégation permanente du Madagascar auprès de l'UNESCO
40 rue du Général Foy
75008 PARIS
France

Malte / Malta

H. E. Mr Joseph Licari
Ambassador
Permanent Delegation of Malta to UNESCO
46 rue de Longchamp
75116 Paris
France

Nathaniel Cutajar
Curator
National Museum of Archaeology
Museum Department
Valletta
Malta


Mexique / Mexico

H. E. Mr Javier Barros Valero
Ambassador and Permanent representative of Mexico
Permanent Delegation of Mexico to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Francisco Javier López Morales
Director
INAH
México, D.F. cp. 06700
México

Mrs Adriana Valades de Moulines
Second Secretary
Permanent Delegation of Mexico to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Népal / Nepal

H. E. Mr B. Indra
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate
Royal Nepalese Embassy
45 Bis rue des Acacias
75116 Paris
France

Nicaragua

Mrs Ximena Flores - Loaisiga
Déléguée permanente
Délégation permanente du Nicaragua auprès de l'UNESCO
Maison de l'UNESCO
Bureau MR 25
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Nigéria / Nigeria

Mr Yemi Lijadu
Adviser
Nigerian Permanent Delegation to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Nouvelle-Zélande / New Zealand

Mr Simon John Thimothy Gimson
Délégué permanent auprès de l'UNESCO
Ambassade de Nouvelle-Zélande
7 rue Léonard de Vinci
75016 Paris
France


Oman

H. E. Mr Musa Bin Jaffar Hassan
Ambassador
Permanent Delegation of Oman to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Pakistan

Ms Aïsha Farooqui
Deuxième Secrétaire
Délégation permanente du Pakistan auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Panama

Mr J. Fields
Attaché
Permanent Delegation of Panama to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Jorge Patiño
Délégué permanent adjoint
Délégation permanente du Panama to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Pérou / Peru

Eduardo Martinetti
Chargé d'Affaires
Délégation permanente du Pérou auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Carlos Vasquez
Conseiller
Délégation du Pérou auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Philippines

H. E. Hector Villarroel
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of the Philippines to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Ms Deanna Ongpin-Recto
Foreign Affairs Adviser
Permanent Delegation of the Philippines to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Pologne / Poland

Mr Malgorzata Dzieduszycka
Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Poland to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

M. Mariusz Kazana
Conseiller politique
Ambassade de Pologne
1 rue Talleyrand
75007 Paris
France


Portugal

Luís de Pinho Lopes
Architecte
Institut Portugais du Patrimoine Architectonique
Palácio Nacional da Ajuda
1349-021 LISBOA
Portugal

Mr Jose Augusto Frana
Représentant CPM
Ministère des Affaires Etrangères
4914 rua Escola Politecnica
Lisbonne
Portugal


République de Corée / Republic of Korea

Mr Seong-doo Ahn
First Secretary
Permanent Delegation of the Republic of Korea to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Sok Chol Han
Premier Secrétaire
Permanent Delegation of the Republic of Korea to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


République tchèque / Czech Republic

Mr Michael Benes
Secrétaire pour les Affaires culturelles de l'UNESCO
Ministère de la Culture
Milady Horákové 139
160 41 Praha
Czech Republic

Dr. Jozef Stulc
State Institute for the Heritage Preservation
Valdstejnské 3
Praha 1
Czech Republic


République-Unie de Tanzanie /
United Republic of Tanzania

Prof. Mohammed S. Sheya
Deputy Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of the United Republic of Tanzania to UNESCO
13 avenue Raymond Poincaré
75116 Paris
France


Royaume-Uni / United Kingdom

Mr Paul Alsey
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
2-4 Cocktpur St.
London SWIY 5DH
United Kingdom

Christine Atkinson
Deputy permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of United Kingdom to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis, M3.06
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Dr Anthony Weighell
Joint Nature Conservation Committee
Monkstone House
City Road
Peterborough PE1 1JY
United Kingdom

Mr Christopher Young
Head of World Heritage and International Policy
English Heritage
23 Savile Row
London W1X 1AB
United Kingdom

Hilary Izon
Third Secretary
Permanent Delegation of United Kingdom to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis, M3.06
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Saint-Kitts-et-Nevis / Saint Kitts and Nevis

Mr Frank Hwang
Permanent Delegate
Permanent Delegation of St. Kitts and Nevis to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Sainte-Lucie / Saint Lucia

Mr Giles Romulus
Executive Director
St Lucia National Trust
P.O Box 595
Santa Lucia


Slovaquie / Slovakia

Mr Jozef Klinda
Director-General
Ministry of the Environment
Namestie L. Stura 1
81235 Bratislava
Slovakia

Katarina Novakova
Director
Slovak Environmental Agency
Kammermof Sica' 26
96901 Banksa ' Stiavnica
Banska
Slovakia

Ms Adriana Klindova
Expert
Slovak Environmental Agency
Znievsica'12
Bratislava
Slovakia


Sri Lanka

Saroja Sirisena
Second Secretary
Permanent Delegation of Sri Lanka
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Suède / Sweden

Mr Jan Nyberg
Délégué permanent adjoint
Délégation permanente de la Suède auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Ms Margaretha Johnsson
Troisième Secrétaire
Permanent Delegation of Sweden to UNESCO
1 rue Miolis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Ulf Löfwall
County Antiquarian
County Council
Vårlidsväg.6
79137 Falun
Sweden

Ms Jessica Persson
Stagiaire
Permanent Delegation of Sweden to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Suisse / Switzerland

S. E. Mr Denis Feldmeyer
Ambassadeur, Délégué permanent
Délégation permanente de la Suisse auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Tunisie / Tunisia

Jamel Thlibi
Dir A.N Protection de l'Environnement
Agence Nationale de Protection de l'Environnement
BP 52
Tunis Belvedère 1002
Tunisie

Turquie / Turkey

Ms Gülseren Çelik
Permanent Delegation of Turkey to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Uruguay

H. E. Mr Adolfo Castells
Ambassadeur
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Venezuela

S. E. Ms Hiram Gaviria
Ambassadeur
Délégation du Venezuela auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Javier Diaz
Premier secrétaire
Délégation du Venezuela auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Igor Delgado
Conseiller
Délégation du Venezuela auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


Yémen / Yemen

H. E. Mr Abdullah El Zine
Ambassador
Permanent Delegation of Yemen to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Abdulbasset Mohamed Saad
Deputy Delegate
Permanent Delegation of Yemen to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
UNESCO Bureau M 528
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France


IV. AUTRES OBSERVATEURS / OTHER OBSERVERS


Emirats Arabes Unis / United Arab Emirates

H. E. Mr Hussein Ghubash
Ambassadeur, Délégué Permanent
Délégation Permanente des Emirats Arabes Unis
auprès de l'UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mission Permanente d'Observation de Palestine /
Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine

H. E. Mr Ahmad Abdelrazek
Ambassadeur, Observateur permanent
Mission permanente d'Observation de Palestine
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Mounir Nastas
Conseiller Culturel
Mission permanente d'Observation de Palestine
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

ORGANISATIONS GOUVERNEMENTALES INTERNATIONALES
INTERNATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

Nordic World Heritage Office (NWHC)

Synnve Vinsrygg
Senior International Advisor
Nordic World Heritage Office
Dronningens gt. 13
P.O. Box 8196 Dep.
N-0034 Oslo
Norway


Programme de l'ONU pour l'environnement (PNUE) / United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

Mr Daniel Drocourt
Coordonnateur Programme de 100 sites historiques méditerranéens
Plan d'action pour la Méditerranée (PAM)
Programme de l'ONU pour l'environnement (PNUE)
10 ter Square Belsunce
13001 Marseille
France

ORGANISATIONS NON-GOUVERNEMENTALES INTERNATIONALES
INTERNATIONAL NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS


M. Jacques Montluon
Président Délégué du Comité Patrimoine
Union Internationale des Associations et Organismes
Techniques
1 rue Miollis
75732 Paris Cedex 15
France

Mr Siri Myrvoll
Secretary General
Organization of World Heritage Cities
15 Rue Saint-Nicolas
Quebec
G1K 1M8
Canada

ORGANISATIONS NON-GOUVERNEMENTALES
NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS


Ms Marta De la Torre
Head Communications
The Getty Conservation Institute
1200 Getty Centre DR
Los Angeles, CA 90049
USA

Luke Gilliland-Swetland
Head of Information Resources
Getty Conservation Institute
1200 Getty Center Drive, Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90049
USA

Mrs Yvonne Margarula
Mirrar Senior Traditional Owner
Gundjehmi Aboriginal Coorporation
0886 Jabiru
Australia

Mrs Rosie Mundjundi
Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation
P.O Box 245 Jabiru NT
0886 Jabiru
Australia

Mr Justin O'Brien
Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation
P.O. Box 246
Jabiru, NT
Australia

Mr Shama Pawar Shapiro
Managing Trustee
The Kishkinda Trust
Karnakata, India
India

M. Joseph Phares
Président
UATI Patrimoine
119 avenue Victor Hugo
75116 PARIS
France

M. Shimon Samuels
Directeur
Centre Simon Wisenthal
64 avenue Marceau
75008 Paris
France

Ms Joanne Willmot
Chairperson, WHIPCOE Presenter
Uluru Kata Tjuta National Park Board
P.O Box 53
Yulara NT 0872
Australia

V. UNESCO SECRETARIAT

Mr Mounir Bouchenaki
Assistant Director-General for Culture


CENTRE DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL /
WORLD HERITAGE CENTRE

Mr Francesco Bandarin, Director
Ms Minja Yang, Deputy Director

Mr Alessandro Balsamo
Mr Giovanni Boccardi
Ms Jane Degeorges
Ms Nina Dhumal
Ms Josette Erfan
Mr Giovanni Fontana Antonelli
Ms Silvia Gasparetto
Ms Margarita Gonzalez-Lombardo
Mr Mario Hernandez
Mr Natarajan Ishwaran
Mr Feng Jing
Ms Yvette Kaboza
Ms Marjaana Kokkonen
Mr David Martel
Mr Bernd Paulowitz
Ms Marianne Raabe
Ms Sonia Ramzi
Ms Frédérique Robert
Ms Mechtild Rössler
Mr Hadi Saliba
Ms Alexandra zu Sayn-Wittgenstein
Mr Niklas Schulze
Ms Joanna Serna-Sullivan
Ms Claire Servoz
Ms Anna Sidorenko
Mr Peter Stott
Ms Junko Taniguchi
Ms Sarah Titchen
Mr Herman Van Hooff
Ms Vesna Vujicic-Lugassy
Ms Elizabeth Wangari

Division of Cultural Heritage
Ms Lyndel Prott, Director

Division of Ecological Sciences
Mr Peter Bridgewater, Director

Office of International Standards and Legal Affairs
Mr John Donaldson, Legal Adviser

Translators
Ms Sabine de Valence
Ms Anne Sauvêtre

UNESCO Apia Office
Ms Elspeth Wingham
World Heritage Officer for the Pacific
UNESCO Regional Office
Samoa







ANNEX II




Speech of the representative of the Director-General of UNESCO,
Mr Mounir Bouchenaki, Assistant Director-General for Culture

Monsieur le président du Comité du patrimoine mondial, Mesdames et Messieurs les membres du Bureau du Comité du patrimoine mondial, Mesdames et Messieurs les délégués et observateurs, Excellences, chers collègues,

Tout d'abord je souhaite vous informer que le Directeur- Général, qui regrette de se trouver dans l'impossibilité d'être avec nous à l'occasion de la séance d'ouverture de cette vingt-cinquième session du Bureau du Comité du patrimoine mondial, m'a chargé de vous transmettre ses plus vifs encouragements pour le travail qui nous attend et tous ses voeux pour le succès du Bureau.

Votre réunion commence après la visite de nombre d'entre vous au Val de Loire organisée par le Ministère de la Culture de la France et auquel je n'ai pas eu le plaisir d'assister. Je reviens moi-même de Kazan, capitale du Tatarstan, en Fédération de Russie, où j'ai participé - en présence du président de la République du Tatarstan - à la cérémonie d'inscription du Kremlin de Kazan sur la Liste du patrimoine mondial ; cérémonie grandiose et solennelle qui a montré combien est important l'attachement à la Convention de 1972. Lors de mon passage à Moscou, le Ministre de la Culture de la Fédération de Russie m'a annoncé la décision du Gouvernement Russe de régler sa dette auprès du Fonds du patrimoine mondial par le paiement de 750,00 US$ dès aujourd'hui. Ceci est une excellente nouvelle.

Mais en même temps, Monsieur le Président, Excellences, Mesdames, Messieurs, cette vingt-cinquième session du Bureau s'ouvre sur un constat à la fois dramatique et profondément attristant.

D'une part, la récente information du tremblement de terre au Pérou où plusieurs vies humaines ont dramatiquement disparues et où le site d'Arequipa a été affecté. Mes collègues du Centre du patrimoine mondial ont déjà pris des contacts à ce sujet.

Par ailleurs, comme vous le savez tous, les deux bouddhas qui veillaient depuis quinze siècles sur la vallée de Bamiyan ont disparu. Ce patrimoine culturel de l'humanité a été victime de l'ignorance et de l'intolérance. Dans un pays ou les droits humains, et en particulier ceux de la femme, ne sont malheureusement pas respectés, rien n'a pu empêcher ce que Monsieur Matsuura a qualifié de « crime contre la culture ». Ni les dizaines de milliers de pétitions parvenues du monde entier. Ni les démarches entreprises directement auprès des Taliban par Monsieur Pierre Lafrance, envoyé spécial du Directeur général - qui est à nos côtés aujourd'hui. Ni celles des pays islamiques ou d'éminentes autorités religieuses musulmanes, choqués par l'interprétation iconoclaste donnée à la foi musulmane et à l'Islam par les Taliban.

A ce sujet, le Groupe Arabe auprès de l'UNESCO ainsi que les représentants des pays voisins c'est à dire l'Iran et le Pakistan, se sont tous déclarés en faveur de la protection du patrimoine. L'ISESCO et l'ALESCO ont accepté de co-parrainer l'organisation d'une réunion sur ce sujet. Par ailleurs, le Directeur général de l'UNESCO s'est entretenu avec le Président de la République Islamique du Pakistan, lors de la visite officielle qu'il a effectuée dans ce pays au mois de mars 2001.

Ces bouddhas géants témoignaient, de façon unique, d'un Afghanistan, carrefour de religions et de civilisations. Véritable lieu de rencontre entre l'Orient et l'Occident, l'histoire de ce pays est faite de conquêtes, de migrations et de dialogue interculturel. Aussi, son patrimoine culturel est-il considéré à juste titre comme étant d'une richesse exceptionnelle. La statuaire préislamique afghane est un témoignage précieux de cette période illustre, qui fonde l'identité du peuple afghan. Elle est l'expression d'une page de l'aventure humaine qui appartient à jamais au patrimoine mondial. Avec leur dynamitage, le patrimoine afghan a perdu deux de ses fleurons. Les milliers de messages de solidarité provenant du monde entier, les soutiens reçus et qui ne cessent d'affluer, constituent pour l'UNESCO et pour le Directeur général un témoignage éloquent pour le renforcement de l'action en faveur de la sauvegarde du patrimoine culturel à quelque culture ou à quelque région que ce soit.

L'UNESCO, en tant que seule agence spécialisée des Nations Unies en charge de la culture, est déterminée à tout mettre en oeuvre pour préserver ce qui peut l'être encore du patrimoine afghan et pour qu'à l'avenir ce genre de « crime contre la culture » ne se reproduise plus.

J'aimerais aussi vous faire part des activités menées par l'UNESCO dans ce domaine. Une conférence internationale de spécialistes de la loi islamique est actuellement en préparation afin d'analyser la position du monde islamique vis- à-vis de la conservation du patrimoine islamique et non-islamique. Cette conférence, organisée conjointement avec l'Organisation de la Conférence Islamique, dont le Siège est à Qatar, l'ISESCO l'Organisation Islamique pour l'éducation la Science et la Culture, dont le siège est à Rabat, et l'ALECSO, Organisation de la Ligue Arabe pour l'éducation, la Culture et la Science, dont le siège est à Tunis devrait aboutir à une déclaration de principe qui apportera un éclairage définitif sur la position du droit en Islam vis à vis du patrimoine islamique ou non-islamique.

Par ailleurs, L'UNESCO a pris des contacts avec diverses organisations non-gouvernementales telles que l'ICOM, la SPACH, le Fonds Hirayama, la Biblioteca Afghanica etc... afin de soutenir la prise en charge des biens culturels afghans trouvés sur le marché international de l'art, en particulier les objets pillés des musées ou trouvés lors de fouilles illicites récentes. De tels objets seront, par la suite, rendus à l'Afghanistan quand la situation le permettra.

Comme vous avez pu constater, une exposition a été organisée en collaboration avec le Musée Guimet, le Centre Pompidou et la Fédération nationale des associations UNESCO au Japon pour rendre hommage au patrimoine afghan, qu'il soit bouddhique ou islamique. L'UNESCO voulait montrer à cette occasion ce qu'elle a fait dans les domaines de l'éducation, de la préservation du patrimoine culturel et de l'artisanat afghans. Lors de l'ouverture de cette exposition par le Directeur général en présence de l'Ambassadeur de bonne volonté M. Hirayama le 5 juin, un colloque s'est tenu sur le même sujet avec pour but de s'interroger sur les actions à venir : les actions internationales visant à prévenir d'autres destructions; les actions visant à sauver ce qui peut encore l'être en Afghanistan et à oeuvrer, au-delà de son patrimoine, à la préservation de la mémoire de l'ensemble du peuple afghan.

De plus, comme vous le savez sans doute, le Conseil exécutif de l'UNESCO a d'adopté à l'occasion de sa 161ème session, il y a moins de deux semaines, une décision concernant «  la protection du patrimoine culturel de l'humanité ». Cette décision condamne résolument « les actes destructeurs commis contre des monuments historiques et culturels notamment en Afghanistan  que le Directeur général a qualifiés de crimes contre la culture. » Cette décision invite notamment les Etats membres "à poursuivre inlassablement leurs efforts en vue de faire appliquer pleinement les principes de la Convention pour la protection des biens culturels encas de conflits armé (La Haye 1954), de la Convention concernant les mesures à prendre pour interdire et empêcher l'importation, l'exportation et le transfert de propriété illicites des biens culturels (1970), de la Convention concernant la protection du patrimoine mondial, culturel et naturel (1972) et des autres instruments de droits international pertinents ».

Cette décision est essentielle et pourquoi ne pas joindre nos efforts et profiter de cette occasion pour, dans un avenir proche, étudier les moyens d'empêcher la destruction de propriétés culturelles ainsi que la prise de sanctions éventuelles qui pourraient être appliquées dans le cadre des conventions internationales existantes ?

Dans ce sens, des mesures et actions pourraient être prises conjointement pour la protection et la préservation des biens communs de l'humanité qu'ils soient culturels ou naturels par les 3 Conventions précédemment nommées.

Enfin, il faut souligner que les récents évènements nous montrent plus que jamais combien la sensibilisation au patrimoine est importante ; de la prise de conscience de la valeur exceptionnelle et universelle d'un bien doivent découler les actions qui permettront de mettre en oeuvre sa protection et sa préservation . Le Directeur général reste ainsi persuadé que c'est par l'éducation et donc par la sensibilisation des populations que les générations futures pourront préserver, entretenir et conserver le patrimoine naturel et culturel qui sera leur héritage commun.

Souvenez-vous ainsi du plan d'action du premier forum des jeunes sur le patrimoine mondial pour le Pacifiquequi s'est tenu à Cairns lors de la vingt-quatrième session de votre Comité. La principale ligne d'action définie par ces jeunes n'était-elle pas : « Nous avons besoin de prendre conscience de l'importance de notre patrimoine ainsi que de notre patrimoine mondial. Donc, cela doit faire partie de notre éducation » ?

Ceci, dans notre esprit et dans nos actions, devrait rester un priorité.

Monsieur le Président, Excellences, Mesdames, Messieurs,

Au nom du Directeur général et en mon nom propre, je tiens à vous souhaiter tout le succès dans la conduite de vos travaux.







ANNEX III




Kakadu National Park (Australia) -
Letter concerning the Kakadu Region Social Impact Study (KRSIS)

Kakadu Region Social Impact Study
Implementation Team

Senator the Hon Robert Hill
Minister for the Environment and Heritage
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600

Dear Minister

You will recall that late last year I sent you a comprehensive report on progress with the implementation of recommendations of the 1997 Kakadu Region Social Impact Study (KRSIS). This letter is to update you on KRSIS-related activities that have occurred in the Kakadu region over the past six months.

Housing and infrastructure

In my November report I detailed a substantial ($3.8m) indigenous housing and infrastructure program underway at Aboriginal outstations in Kakadu National Park. During the last six months $1.8m dollars of work on upgrading of power, water and sewage systems was completed.

Housing works continue to progress and I am pleased to report that a large component of current work is being undertaken by the Djabulukgu Building Team. This team approach includes a large training component and key members of this team are close to completing technical (trade) qualifications in plumbing and building. These long-term residents of the Kakadu region will form the nucleus of an Aboriginal-managed housing construction and maintenance workforce.

Indigenous health initiative

In November I noted that the good work of the Kakadu Health Team was at risk because of uncertainty regarding funding for the program. I am pleased to report that in February this year the Commonwealth Office of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Services (OATSIS) announced a $1.4m funding package for the Kakadu Health Team.

An important element of this new program is that funds have been specifically dedicated for the use of indigenous languages in health service delivery. This is an important new initiative. In announcing the funding package OATSIS acknowledged that the proposed health program resulted from the Kakadu Region Social Impact Study.

Jabiru Aboriginal Education Unit

The establishment of an Aboriginal Education Unit at the Jabiru Area School is a project that has been given a high priority by both you and members of the KRSIS Implementation Team. In November last year I advised you that the KRSIS Implementation Team had endorsed the broad directions of plans being developed at the Jabiru Area School and that I looked forward to the early establishment of the unit within the school.

In the new year I became aware of concerns among some indigenous parents about plans for the education centre and, in particular, concern that this unit needed to more clearly target 'heritage children' - the young indigenous people who will over time have responsibility for the maintenance of local indigenous cultural traditions and the management of traditional lands in Kakadu National Park.

I have been involved in on-going discussions with the Northern Territory government, local school staff and indigenous parents to reconcile these concerns with education department plans for the education unit. I am pleased to advise that I have very recently been involved in meetings where it was confirmed that all concerns have now been addressed to the satisfaction of a wide range of indigenous representatives. A key revision is an enhanced role for indigenous parents in the management of the education unit, including establishment of an indigenous performance monitoring committee with representatives from the KRSIS Implementation Team.

Bininj Regional Economic Development Study

You will recall that the KRSIS recommended that the Northern Land Council (NLC) facilitate the development of a comprehensive economic development plan focusing on Aboriginal interests in the region. The project would aim to identify and assess different economic scenarios over the next 20- year period for the Kakadu region - including mining/no mining, parks management and tourism. KRSIS project staff assisted the NLC in the development of a submissions for funding of this work. I am pleased to advise that the NLC is preparing, within the next week, to commission a report from a highly regarded national economic consulting group. An outline of the objectives of this study are attached for your information.

Interpreter Service for Kakadu

In my November report I noted that steps were underway to establishment of an interpreter program for indigenous language speakers in the Kakadu region. I strongly endorsed this initiative given the importance of access to well-trained interpreters of indigenous languages of the Kakadu region.

I am pleased to advise that this program has commenced and a number of local indigenous people are undertaking this program.

Cultural heritage multi-media project

The Djabulukgu Association, with support from Parks Australia, has submitted to the Commonwealth Department of Environment and Heritage a proposal for funding for an indigenous cultural heritage multi-media project. The project aims to establish a community-based multimedia information system to assist young Bininj maintain cultural traditions and knowledge of the Kakadu-West Arnhem region and preserve that knowledge in an accessible form for current and future generations of Bininj people. It will link site visits, site recording and maintenance of oral traditions with permanent archiving (under Bininj control) of this cultural information.

Establishment of a Family Resource Centre in a permanent and appropriate facility

The Kakadu Family Resource Centre has been operating out of an interim facility for some time. It provides a meeting place for Bininj women to come together and address issues relating to family well being, health and education. The centre also acts as a place in which bininj families can develop small-scale business activities (e.g indigenous arts and crafts).

Funds have now been identified for acquisition of a permanent facility and final negotiations for the use of the preferred location (in Jabiru township) are proceeding with the Mirrar - native title claimants to the land in Jabiru.

Yours sincerely

[ signed ]

Bob Collins
Chair
KRSIS Implementation Team
18 June 2001



Economic Development Strategy for Aboriginal People Kakadu Region

Aim and Objectives: To develop a comprehensive economic and development strategy to provide for an independent socio and economic future for Aboriginal people of the Kakadu region.

The objectives should include:

  1. A realistic economic future for the Aboriginal people who are culturally tied to the Kakadu region;

  2. Research of the current economic environment to identify future economic opportunities to facilitate the establishment and development for Aboriginal business opportunity (Aboriginal people through the Kakadu Regional Social Impact Study (KRSIS) have identified a number of potential enterprise options). The research needs to include;
    • Preparation of strategic approaches to future development scenarios;
    • Investigation of the current impacts provided by externally based commercial users of the region and if appropriate the application of user pays principles; and
    • Investigation of alternatives or potential improvements to existing land use, tenure and leasing arrangements;
  3. Investigate the feasibility for the establishment of an Aboriginal Development Corporation to assist Aboriginal people in developing and managing business enterprises. This will include, management and operational mechanisms, and corporate structures required to take advantage of regional commercial opportunities, including acknowledgement of the crucial role currently played by "royalty" associations;

  4. Identify and recommend on training and education requirements.

The Research conducted by the consultancy should lead directly to the development of strategies that will ultimately result in the establishment of a number of Aboriginal people business enterprises.







ANNEX IV




Kakadu National Park (Australia) -
Letter from Yvonne Margarula, Mirrar Senior Traditional Owner,
Chairperson Gundjehmi Aboirginal Corporation

26 April 2001

Francesco Bandarin
Director World Heritage Centre
PARIS, FRANCE

Dear Mr Bandarin,

I write as Senior Traditional Owner of the Mirrar People of Kakadu and Chairperson of Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation regarding the ongoing Mirrar struggle to protect Kakadu's World Heritage natural and cultural values from ascertained and potential threats posed by the Jabiluka development, with specific reference to Bureau working document WHC-2001/CONF.205/5.

At the outset I welcome the ongoing consideration by the Bureau of the current state of conservation at Kakadu and the genuine concern for Mirrar culture with which the World Heritage Centre and States Parties have proceeded to date. The Mirrar are concerned, however, that a variety of key issues regarding Jabiluka have either been misapprehended or forsaken in the current deliberations of the Committee.

Working document CONF.205/5 states that current activity is "focused on responding to the concerns of Aboriginal people". The Mirrar contend that this is not the case; if the State Party considers this to be so it is clearly out of step with current events. Mirrar maintain they are consistently excluded from decision-making processes regarding work at Jabiluka and, specifically, refer the Bureau to water management problems at the site and their exclusion from remedial measures eventually decided upon (as outlined in the Mirrar submission dated 1 May 2001). It is in this light that the Mirrar disagree with the contention in CONF.205/5 that the Supervising Scientist is "working actively and consistently to open dialogue with the GAC".

Regarding water management, it is noteworthy that the State Party has stated there are "no water management problems at Jabiluka". Once again, this is clearly incorrect. The Bureau should note that Energy Resources of Australia has spent some $200,000 AUD on remedial measures regarding water management at Jabiluka over 2000/2001. The Mirrar submit that significant hydrological matters remain unresolved at Jabiluka, matters which, at the very least, amount to 'water management problems'. A key matter relates to the lack of data on the nature and extent of connection between the deep and shallow aquifers at Jabiluka, despite recommendations and requirements from two Commonwealth government Ministers to collect such data.

It is on the basis of these and other threats that the Mirrar recently joined environmental groups in a call for the rehabilitation of Jabiluka, following Rio Tinto's announcement it would not develop the site in the short term. We also recommend that an environmental risk assessment should be conducted ASAP by IUCN and the Supervising Scientist regarding the threats posed by some 30,000 tonnes of high-grade uranium ore currently stored (under a tarpaulin) at the Jabiluka site.

While not mentioned in any working documents, the successful motion of the Australian Senate in March 2001, is noteworthy in this regard. The Senate motion read, "That the Senate,

  1. notes the announcement by Rio Tinto in the week beginning 18 March 2001 that it would not support mine owner Energy Resources of Australia's development of Jabiluka in the short term,

  2. advises the Government that it is unacceptable for this major mine site including retention dams, mine construction and associated works to remain in this state for any length of time; and

  3. calls on the Government to commence discussions with Rio Tinto immediately with a view to an early rehabilitation of the site and for it to be handed back to the traditional owners as soon as possible."

The Committee should note that the mine operator, ERA, does not agree with its majority shareholder that Jabiluka not proceed in the short term. Indeed, the Mirrar understand that ERA will imminently seek Traditional Owner approval for the discredited Ranger Mill Alternative, through the Northern Land Council.

The Mirrar welcome the recommendation by IUCN that a report be requested of the Australian Government concerning the proposed Independent Science Advisory Committee (ISAC). Mirrar Traditional Owners wish to be fully consulted and involved in decision making processes regarding the Committee's establishment, constitution and on going operation. We request that the Bureau encourage the State Party to ensure that the Traditional Owners are fully consulted and involved in the establishment of ISAC to ensure we have meaningfully and practical input. This would allay our existing concerns that ISAC as proposed would not be independent.

I note that while the work of the Kakadu Regional Social Impact Study is mentioned in CONF.205/5, there is no reference whatsoever to the Mirrar Environmental Health, Housing Survey presented to the Committee and the World Heritage Centre in December 2000. This report details the deplorable living conditions of Mirrar in Kakadu in which 120 Mirrar live in only 16 houses, and health standards are below that of Third World countries. Regrettably, the Mirrar also continue to be marginalised in terms of health and housing issues by the Australian Government.

The Mirrar take exception to the reference in CONF.205/5 to the renewed offer of the Minister for the Environment and Heritage that Mr Gatjil Djerrkura act as a facilitator to assist in resolving outstanding cultural issues at Jabiluka. I have, in correspondence and meetings, already indicated the inappropriateness of this proposal and am greatly disappointed that the Government has seemingly ignored Mirrar concerns and repeated an offer that, in part, led to the earlier impasse regarding the protection of Kakadu's cultural heritage.

I reiterate that the Mirrar consider that UNESCO sponsored international mediation is required to adequately resolve issues regarding the protection of Kakadu's cultural heritage. While discussions between the Mirrar and Australian Government continue, they are strained by seemingly irreconcilable differences of opinion and approach. The Bureau should note we strongly believe that the Australian Government continues to be in serious breach of its international obligations under the World Heritage Convention and continues to be in breach of its obligations under international human rights law.

I further reiterate the Mirrar's recommendation that a high-level mission to Kakadu is now warranted. We submit that the concerns of the 1998 Mission have not been resolved. This is evidenced by the ongoing concerns raised by the Bureau, Committee, expert advisory bodies, domestic and international environment groups and the Australian Senate and the fears we, the Traditional Owners, have regarding the nature and, indeed, the intentions of Australian Government authorities.

I request that this letter be included as an appendix to the Rapporteur's report of the Bureau's proceedings.

Yours truly,

[ signed ]

Yvonne Margarula
Mirrar Senior Traditional Owner,
Chairperson







ANNEX V




Kakadu National Park (Australia) -
Letter from the Secretary Environment Australia,
Department of the Environment and Heritage

Office of the Secretary

Mr Francesco Bandarin
Director
World Heritage Centre
UNESCO
7, place de Fontenoy
75352 Paris 07 SP
FRANCE

Dear Mr Bandarin

At the Bureau meeting yesterday, Mr Justin O'Brien delivered an address to the Bureau on behalf of the Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation (GAC), which made a number of allegations about the impact of the Jabiluka uranium mine on the values of the nearby Kakadu National Park World heritage Area.

This intervention was allowed after the State Party had responded to the issues raised by the Advisory Bodies. Mr O'Brien also provided the Bureau with a letter from Ms Margarula, dated 26 April 2001 to you, which the State Party had not previously seen. We understand that this letter is to be included in the record of this meeting,

Against this background we would wish you to make this letter, which responds to the matters raised by the GAC, available to the Bureau members and to include it in the record of the meeting.

The GAC claims that the Supervising Scientist is not, as stated in CONF.205/5, "working actively and consistently to open dialogue with the GAC". The Supervising Scientist advises that he has openly and repeatedly offered to brief the members of the GAC on any issues relevant to Jabiluka. These offers have not been accepted. He points out that he actively seeks to employ Traditional Owners to assist in research projects, inter alia to assist communication. The GAC has formally requested in writing that he not employ GAC members on projects related to the science associated with the Jabiluka site. He further advises that the Northern Land Council (NLC), the Aboriginal body responsible for acting on behalf of all Traditional Owners including the Mirrar members of the GAC, has been fully involved in the decision making processes to which Ms Margarula refers. The NLC has advised the Supervising Scientist it consulted the Traditional Owners including the Mirrar.

The GAC submits that significant hydrological matters remain unresolved and that they amount to 'water management problems'. The Supervising Scientist advises that the issues raised by the GAC were considered by the International Science Panel of ICSU (ISP) and that water management at the site is being conducted in accordance with the systems reviewed and endorsed by the ISP. Furthermore, the NLC has been directly involved in the approval processes for water management system. In short there are no water management problems as suggested by the GAC. These matters are dealt with more fully in the letter from HE Mr Mathew Peek of 16 May to the Centre.

Following confirmation by Rio Tinto that it is unlikely that the mine would commence for some time, and not before agreement by the NLC and traditional owners, the GAC advises that it has called for the rehabilitation of the site.

The Australian Government reminds the Bureau that there are onerous requirements on the mining company on the completion of mining. However, the Company has made no such decision and its timetable and processes have not varied from the undertakings it has given the World Heritage Committee. In the interim the site will continue to be subject to strict scrutiny and oversight. The Supervising Scientist advises that the mineralised material on the site rests on an effectively impervious stockpile pad under an impermeable cover. It is probably the most enviromentally secure surface stockpile in the world.

Australia's previous advice to the Bureau has dealt comprehensively with issues of health and housing. It continues to regret that the GAC is not joining other Aboriginal groups in the KRSIS or Kakadu Housing and Infrastructure Group to address the issues. These issues are further addressed in the Hon Bob Collins letter of 18 June.

We have also detailed the ongoing consultations with the GAC and other clan groups on cultural heritage matters in our advice to this meeting. Australia notes that the Bureau did not accept the GAC proposals to sponsor international mediation and for a high level mission to Kakadu. We concur with this view.

Finally, I would note that the Australian Government firmly rejects any suggestion that it has been, or is, in breach of its obligations under the World Heritage Convention or other pertinent international law.

Yours sincerely

[ signed ]

Roger Beale
27 June 2001







ANNEX VI




Map of Auschwitz-Birkenau

Extract from the nomination dossier
submitted by the Govemment of Poland on 6 June 1978



plan N°1

Carte de terrains du Musée national d'Auschwitz - Birkenau
avec limites de la propriété et des zones de protection.
On y discerne la situation du Musée dans le partie sud-est
de la ville d'Oswiecim

la légende

__________ les limites du Musée

---------- les limites de zone de silence

.-.-.-.-.- les limites de zone de protection

A - le Musée d'Auschwitz

B - le Musée Birkenau

La ville Owicim









ANNEX VII




Jungfrau-Aletsch-Bietschhorn (Switzerland) -
Letter from the Ambassador of Italy to UNESCO
to the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee

Monsieur le Président,

Suivant les suggestions exprimées par le Comité du patrimoine Mondial à sa 21ème session (Marrakech, décembre 1999), lors de la présentation par l'Italie de la proposition d'inscription du site alpin « Parco del Gran Paradiso », mon Pays, ainsi que d'autres Pays de la région alpine, ont retenu le principe qu'à l'avenir les propositions d'inscription éventuelles de sites de la région seraient présentées de façon coordonnée sinon conjointe, la priorité étant donnée aux sites transfrontaliers.

Depuis 1'année dernière, un effort accru a été entamé en vue de mieux définir les valeurs des sites alpins à inscrire et d'assurer une action coordonnée de la part de tous les Pays intéressés (Allemagne, Autriche, France, Italie, Slovénie, Suisse). Un séminaire d'experts a eu lieu à cette fin à Hallstatt (Autriche) en juin 2000 et, sur la base des conclusions de la réunion, les six pays sus mentionnés ont entamé des négociations pour s'accorder sur les critères devant inspirer les propositions conjointes de sites alpins qui pourraient être présentées à partir de février 2002. Pour atteindre ce but, une rencontre intergouvernementale entre ces mêmes Pays se tiendra à Turin (Italie), du 5 au 8 juillet prochain.

Ceci étant, c'est donc avec beaucoup de surprise qu'on a appris que la Suisse, tout en participant à cet exercice, a néanmoins présenté à la prochaine session du Bureau, de façon autonome, la proposition d'inscription du site alpin : Jungfrau - Aletsch Bietschorn.

Dans un moment où des efforts aussi remarquables sont en train d'être déployés par tous les membres du comité et par le Centre du patrimoine mondial lui-même, afin de rationaliser le processus de sélection des sites proposés et d'assurer un meilleur équilibre à la fois dans la Liste du Patrimoine Mondial et dans la liste tentative, j'ai cru bon attirer l'attention de la Présidence sur cette circonstance, pour le cas que le Bureau décidait, dans ce contexte, d'inviter la Suisse à retirer sa proposition : d'autant plus que celle-ci pourrait être reformulée très prochainement dans le cadre d'une « nomination » conjointe.

Veuillez croire, Monsieur le Président, à l'assurance de ma plus haute considération.

[ signed ]

Gabriel Sardo



M. Peter King
Président du Comité du Patrimoine Mondial
C/o Délégation permanente de l'Australie auprès de l'UNESCO

c.c. :
- A tous les Pays membres du Bureau du Comité du patrimoine mondial
- Délégation permanente de la Suisse auprès de l'UNESCO
- M. Francesco Bandarin, Directeur du Centre du Patrimoine Mondial







ANNEX VIII




Jungfrau-Aletsch-Bietschhorn (Switzerland) -
Letter from the Ambassador of Switzerland to UNESCO
to the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee

26 juin 2001

Monsieur Peter King
Président du Comité du Patrimoine mondial
c/o Délégation permanente de l'Australie auprès de l'UNESCO

Monsieur le Président,

Me référant à la lettre du 21 juin 2001 que vous a adressée le Délégué permanent de l'Italie auprès de l'UNESCO, dont j'ai reçu copie, j'ai l'honneur de porter à votre attention les précisions suivantes.

La proposition d'inscription de la région "Jungfrau-Aletsch- Bietschhorn" sur la Liste du Patrimoine mondial, présentée sur la base d'une décision du Gouvernement suisse du 28 juin 2000, était le résultat d'une longue procédure remontant aux années 1970. Les experts suisses qui ont pris part à la réunion thématique régionale d'experts sur les sites potentiels du patrimoine mondial naturel des Alpes (Hallstatt, Autriche, 18- 22 juin 2000) ont clairement exposé alors l'état de cette procédure, qui était sur le point d'aboutir. L'idée discutée lors de la réunion d'envisager à l'avenir d'éventuelles propositions coordonnées ou conjointes de sites de l'Arc alpin mérite d'être examinée plus avant. La prochaine conférence qui aura lieu à Turin (5-8 juillet 2001), à l'invitation de l'Italie, en sera l'occasion. Les participants à la réunion de Hallstatt ne sont en aucun cas arrivés à la conclusion qu'il faudrait renoncer provisoirement à des candidatures nationales au profit de propositions communes. Par ailleurs, la discussion a mis en évidence l'existence, dans la région alpine, de sites ayant à eux seuls une valeur universelle exceptionnelle.

A la lumière de ce qui précède, mon pays n'a donc nullement l'intention de retirer la candidature de la région Jungfrau-Aletsch-Bietschhorn, dont l'examen est à l'ordre du jour de la présente session du Bureau du Comité du Patrimoine mondial.

En vous remerciant de l'attention que vous voudrez bien porter à ces lignes, je vous prie d'agréer, Monsieur le Président, l'assurance de ma haute considération.

Le Délégué permanent de la Suisse auprès de l'UNESCO

[ signed ]

Denis Feldmeyer
Ambassadeur

Copie à :

- Représentants des Etats membres du Bureau du Comité du Patrimoine mondial (c/o Délégations permanentes de l'Australie, du Canada, de l'Équateur, de la Finlande, du Maroc, de la Thaïlande, du Zimbabwe)
- Délégation permanente de l'Italie auprès de l'UNESCO
- M. Francesco Bandarin, Directeur du Centre du Patrimone mondial







ANNEX IX




THE BING LUCAS ANNUAL WORLD HERITAGE SCHOLARSHIP
AND WORLD HERITAGE MANAGERS AWARD

A Proposal

Bing Lucas died in December 2000. He was a man who earned the love and respect of many protected areas people, and others, from around the world. In his home country, New Zealand, his memory is recorded in the form of a pair of benches on the Queen Charlotte walkway, which he helped to create and where he died. But his many friends and admirers around the world feel that Bing's international standing should be honoured in another kind of memorial, which will support the kinds of things that Bing most believed in, and which meets real needs.

Bing devoted many years to IUCN's work on natural sites under the World Heritage Convention. He saw the convention as a unique instrument for international co-operation and conservation. He was among the most innovative thinkers on how it should develop, for example by including within its scope the category of cultural landscapes. Above all, he was concerned about the people who run World Heritage sites. They carry a huge burden of responsibility but are often frighteningly under- resourced, poorly supported and inadequately recognised.

So, the proposal is to take two linked initiatives: 1) to establish a Bing Lucas World Heritage Scholarship to help in the training or development of those managing natural, and cultural landscape, World Heritage sites around the world, but especially young people in developing countries; and 2) to operate a Bing Lucas World Heritage Managers Award to recognise outstanding achievement in World Heritage site management.

The scholarship
The concept is relatively simple. A Bing Lucas World Heritage Scholarship Fund will be created, which hopefully will be large enough to support a single annual scholarship grant of the order $20,000, paid out each year over at least ten years. Trustees will be nominated by IUCN/WCPA, the World Heritage Centre and the New Zealand Department of Conservation (DOC). A place will be kept for a member of Bing's family. The trustees will oversee the fund and approve expenditure. One of those institutions will need to provide a "home" for the fund, e.g. manage the finances, convene trustees meetings and see to any legal requirements.

All managers of WH natural and cultural landscape sites will be invited annually to bid for a scholarship. To qualify, a proposal would have to be about enabling managers or other senior staff to undertake their WH duties more effectively by increasing their personal abilities or knowledge. Preference will be given to younger people from developing countries. No other limitations are foreseen. Examples of submissions might include:

The trustees of the fund will meet annually and assess the bids. In making awards they will take account of such considerations as the past record of the applicant or nominee, the relevance of the proposal to the needs of the site and the individual, and any effort made to raise counterpart funding. Since the scholarship is intended to be an integral part of the training and capacity development programme undertaken under the auspices of the World Heritage Committee, the applicant's proposal also needs to be relevant to World Heritage training priorities. The trustees will not take responsibility for the execution of the project, but will require a report from the awardee at the end of the project.

The award
There will also be an annual invitation to managers of World Heritage sites to enter for the award. This would be given for the most outstanding individual achievement in World Heritage management, whether by the site manager or one of his staff. Examples might be:

The award - the Bing Lucas World Heritage Managers Award - would be in the form a prestigious certificate and medal that would be presented at the annual World Heritage Committee meetings. The trustees of the scholarship fund will assess the nominations at the same time as they consider the bids for the annual scholarships. However, it is not envisaged that a cash element would be involved in the awards.

Fund raising
The key to success of the scholarship element, of course, is raising the funds. These may come from several quarters: DOC (Bing Lucas's former employers), the World Heritage Fund, and Bing's many former friends and colleagues, both in New Zealand and worldwide, and notably WCPA members. Following approval of this concept by the WCPA leadership, it is proposed that it be discussed with Bing's family, the World Protected Areas Leadership Forum, the World Heritage Centre and the Director General of DOC. Thereafter an appeal will be launched by, if possible by June 2001. To ensure success, several significant donations would be sought before embarking on any publicity or general fund raising. The hope is that the Bing Lucas World Heritage Scholarship Fund and the Bing Lucas World Heritage Managers Award will be operational for the year 2002.







ANNEX X




UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL,
SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION

CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE
WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE

BUREAU OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

Twenty-fifth extraordinary session
Helsinki, Finland

7 - 8 December 2001

PROVISIONAL AGENDA

  1. Opening of the session

  2. Adoption of the agenda and the timetable

  3. State of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List

  4. Examination of nominations of cultural and natural properties to the World Heritage List

  5. Other business

  6. Closure of the session







ANNEX XI




UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL,
SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION

CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF
THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE

WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

Twenty-fifth session

Helsinki, Finland
11 - 16 December 2001

PROVISIONAL AGENDA

  1. Opening of the session by the Director-General of UNESCO or his representative

  2. Adoption of the agenda and the timetable

  3. Report on the activities undertaken by the Secretariat since the twenty-fourth session of the Committee

  4. Reports of the Rapporteurs on the twenty-fifth ordinary and twenty-fifth extraordinary sessions of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee

  5. Progress report on the implementation of reform measures

  6. Revision of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention

  7. Periodic Reporting

    7.1 Report on the State of the World Heritage in Africa

    7.2 Progress reports on regional periodic reporting strategies

  8. State of conservation of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger and on the World Heritage List

    8.1 State of conservation of properties inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger

    8.2 State of conservation of properties inscribed on the World Heritage List

  9. Progress Report on Regional Actions for the Implementation of the Global Strategy for a Representative and Balanced World Heritage List

  10. Information on Tentative Lists and examination of nominations of cultural and natural properties to the List of World Heritage in Danger and the World Heritage List

  11. Progress report on the Global Training Strategy

  12. Progress report on the Information Management Strategy

  13. Information, Communication and Education Activities

  14. Report on the World Heritage Indigenous Peoples Council of Experts (WHIPCOE)

  15. Examination of the World Heritage Fund and Approval of the budget for 2002-2003

  16. Information on international assistance

  17. Requests for international assistance

  18. Date, place and provisional agenda of the twenty-sixth session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee (April 2002)

  19. Date, place and provisional agenda of the twenty-sixth session of the World Heritage Committee (June 2002)

  20. Other business

  21. Adoption of the report of the session

  22. Closure of the session







ANNEX XII




 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Organisation des Nations Unies pour l'éducation, la science et la culture

World Heritage Committee      Comit du patrimoine mondial



7, place de Fontenoy
75352 Paris 07SP

Tel: + 33 (0) 1 45 68 15 71
Fax: + 33 (0) 1 45 68 55 70
email: f.bandarin@unesco.org




Reference: CL/WHC.6/01

Level 1
235 Macquarie St
Sydney NSW 2000
AUSTRALIA
Tel: (+61) 2 9232 4671
Fax: (+61) 2 9221 4951
DX 247 SYDNEY
AUSTRALIA
Peterking@qsclaw.com

2 July 2001




To : All States Parties to the World Heritage Convention

cc: Advisory Bodies to the World Heritage Committee (ICCROM, ICOMOS and IUCN

Subject: Proposals for a new additional voluntary contribution by States Parties to the World Heritage Fund

Madam/Sir,

You will recall that at the twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee in Cairns (November-December 2000), the Committee asked me to write to the President of the Executive Board and to the Director-General of UNESCO, "requesting that the relevance of the objectives of the Convention be recognized and resources of the World Heritage Centre, within the Culture Sector, be enhanced in the framework of the next biennial exercise."

The Committee approved the content of the letter which was subsequently sent on 10 January 2001 (copy attached). I am writing to inform you that I have received a reply from Mr Matsuura dated 13 March 2001 (copy attached). Mr Matsuura responded referring in general terms to the "visibility and maintenance of budgetary support to the Centre". The critical issues of concern to the Committee remain outstanding.

As suggested in Cairns, copies of this correspondence have also been sent to all Members of the Executive Board. Furthermore, as requested by the Committee I met with the President of the Executive Board and the Director-General of UNESCO to discuss these matters in more depth on 5 and 9 April respectively. I also met with the Assistant Director-General, and Director of the Executive Office of the Director-General, Mme Françoise Rivière on 2 April. These meetings were very constructive. It is now time to move forward.

With reference to the World Heritage Fund, in the long term I believe that the compulsory contribution by States Parties of 1% of the contribution to the Regular Budget indicated in Article 16 of the World Heritage Convention is outdated. There are also many other fiscal initiatives that must be examined to enhance the protection of World Heritage. As an immediate initiative I would ask you to support a Draft Resolution to the Thirteenth General Assembly of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention for a doubling of the contribution of States Parties, by a voluntary additional contribution to the World Heritage Fund.

After considering the financial statements as at 31 December 2000, the Comptroller of UNESCO has highlighted the World Heritage Fund's position in relation to cash reserves, indicating that during 2001 the financial resources of the Fund will be fully stretched. The only other resources are locked in the US$2,000,000 outstanding debts from States Parties, a significant asset which is not available. The Comptroller welcomes and supports this proposal to double contributions via voluntary contributions, based on the comparatively undersized budget of the World Heritage Fund.

I have prepared a Draft Resolution (attached) that will achieve this result.

Of course, one advantage in expressing the Draft Resolution in this fashion is that it will achieve the objective without opening the World Heritage Convention for amendment. It is important that the Thirteenth General Assembly adopt the Draft Resolution in October 2001. The need for this immediate action is, I know you will agree, supported by the background to the Draft Resolution.

Please let me know before the forthcoming thirteenth session of the General Assembly of the States Parties to the World Heritage Convention (UNESCO Headquarters 30-31 October 2001) whether you are in support of this initiative.

I count on your support to help strengthen the implementation of the World Heritage Convention by increasing the resources of the World Heritage Fund.

Please accept, Madam/Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration.

Yours sincerely,

Peter King
Chairperson
World Heritage Committee

Att. as stated


Proposed Draft Resolution of the 13th General Assembly of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention

Background

  1. Table 1 shows the current situation of the compulsory and voluntary contributions to the World Heritage Fund.

  2. In 2001 the total compulsory contributions to the World Heritage Fund will be only US$1 990 778.

  3. In 2001 the total voluntary contributions to the World Heritage Fund requested of 8 States Parties1 will be only US$1 315 138.

  4. As a way of increasing the total contributions to the World Heritage Fund (US$3 305 916 in 2001), it is proposed that an additional contribution be made by each State Party on a voluntary basis.

  5. Table 1 shows the proposal for a new voluntary contribution to equal the existing 1% compulsory and voluntary contribution. If States Parties agree, this would result in a total contribution to the World Heritage Fund equal to 2% of their contribution to the Regular Budget of UNESCO.

Table 1: Proposals for a new additional voluntary contribution by States Parties to the World Heritage Fund

1% - CURRENT
SITUATION
2001
US$
PROPOSED ADDITIONAL
VOLUNTARY
CONTRIBUTION OF 1%
US$
TOTAL

US$

Compulsory
1 990 778
1 990 778
Voluntary
1 315 138
1 315 138

CURRENT TOTAL
3 305 916
3 305 916
6 611 832


Text of Draft Resolution

Recalling Article 16 of the World Heritage Convention concerning States Parties compulsory and voluntary contributions to the World Heritage Fund;

Considering the need to increase the resources of the World Heritage Fund to ensure the provision of International Assistance according to Articles 19 to 26 of the World Heritage Convention, especially in the case of emergency situations;

Encourages all States Parties to make additional voluntary contributions to the World Heritage Fund;

Invites all States Parties to make additional voluntary contributions of an amount equal to their compulsory contribution or of a sufficient amount to bring their total contribution up to $300, whichever is the greater.

Requests that the Director-General includes the relevant amount in the annual assessment letters.

____________________
1 Brazil, Bulgaria, Cape Verde, Denmark, France, Germany, Norway, and the United States of America.





 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Organisation des Nations Unies pour l'éducation, la science et la culture
Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educatión, la Ciencia y la Cultura





7, place de Fontenoy
75352 Paris 07 SP
Tel: +33 (0)1 45 68 10 00
Fax: +33 (0)1 45 68 55 55

Reference: DG/4/32/9

The Director-General


13 MAR 2001



Dear Mr King,

Thank you for your letter of 10 January 2001 and for the message it conveyed from the World Heritage Committee concerning the future role and visibility of the World Heritage Centre in UNESCO's next Medium-Term Strategy (2002- 2007) and programme and budget (2002-2003).

I fully understand the concern of the Committee and of the States Parties of the World Heritage Convention as to the scope of the support provided by UNESCO to the World Heritage Centre.

I am keen, indeed, to maintain and extend support to the Convention and the Centre. In the draft Medium Term Strategy to be submitted to the 31st Session of the General Conference, the work of the Centre will be presented as one of UNESCO's flagship activities.

The activities of the Centre will be properly highlighted within Major Programme IV (Culture) in the draft Programme and Budget for 2002-2003 (doc. 31C/5). Furthermore, the budgetary allocations for the World Heritage Centre will be maintained at their 30 C/5 level.

I trust that this visibility and maintenance of budgetary support to the Centre, will provide a suitable platform for the Centre to continue to improve the provision of support to States Parties to the Convention, and most particularly to the World Heritage Committee. The Centre's work will, I believe, be further reinforced and streamlined through the implementation of the reform agenda agreed by the Committee at its recent meeting in Australia and the ongoing reorganization of strategies for technical assistance and information being conducted by the Centre.

Finally, may I take this opportunity to reiterate my congratulations to you for having been elected as Chairman of the World Heritage Committee and wish you and the Committee every success in the year to come. UNESCO is most appreciative of your unswerving dedication to the task of conserving the world's outstanding cultural and natural heritage.

Yours sincerely,


Koïchiro Matsuura




Mr. Peter King
Chairman, Australian Heritage Commission
Chairman, World Heritage Committee
GPO Box 787
Canberra, ACT 2601
Australia









Mr Koichiro Matsuura
Director-General of UNESCO
7, place de Fontenoy
75352 PARIS 07SP
FRANCE

Dear Mr Matsuura

The World Heritage Committee has asked me to write to you about the work of the World Heritage Centre in regard to the current process for establishing UNESCO's medium term strategy and programme and budget.

The Committee recognises that UNESCO's budget is likely to remain severely constrained and that the resources available to the Centre will depend on:

The Committee wishes to draw attention to the high visibility and respect for UNESCO deriving from the effective implementation of the World Heritage Convention. There is a sharply increasing demand from the States Parties to the Convention for inscription, monitoring and technical co-operation in respect of World Heritage sites which is not matched by the resources available to the Centre. The Committee has introduced reform measures designed to focus its work on enhancing the representation of sites among under-represented States Parties, particularly developing countries, and has embarked on reform of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, intended to shift the balance of its work towards capacity-building and sustainable development.

The Committee has attracted significant extra-budgetary funds and recognizes the scope for substantial additional resources available to mobilize such funding in a way that ensures that it serves the core objectives of the Convention.

The Committee therefore invites the Executive Board and the Director-General to recognize the relevance of the objectives of the Convention to the preliminary strategy and priorities adopted by the Board and requests that they should:

I look forward to progressing these issues with you. May I wish you and your staff a happy and prosperous New Year.

Yours sincerely

[signed]

Peter King
Chair
Australian Heritage Commission
Chair
World Heritage Committee



cc: Ms Sonia Mendieta de Badaroux, Chairperson, Executive Board of UNESCO










[EOF]