1.  Having examined Document WHC-12/36.COM/7B.Add,

2.  Recalling Decision 35 COM 7B.6, adopted at its 35th session (UNESCO, 2011),

3.  Reiterates its utmost concern about the multiple threats affecting the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (OUV), including high levels of wildlife poaching (particularly of elephants), the evident deterioration in management, and the proposed Stiegler’s Gorge and Kidunda dams which, if approved, are likely to cause serious and irreversible damage to the property’s OUV;

4.  Takes note of the statement by the State Party on the protection and the conservation of the Selous Game Reserve;

5.  Considers that the approval of any dam, mining or oil exploration within the property would constitute a clear basis for its inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger, in line with Paragraph 180 of the Operational Guidelines, and urges the State Party to abandon plans for the different development projects which are incompatible with the World Heritage status of the property;

6.  Notes with satisfaction that Dominion Petroleum has relinquished its oil production sharing agreement for Selous, but deems that oil exploration and exploitation remain a threat to the property and also urges the State Party to make a clear commitment to not explore for or exploit oil within the property, in line with the Committee’s established position that such developments are incompatible with World Heritage status, and to enact specific legislation to prohibit prospecting, oil developments and mining within the property on the basis of its World Heritage status;

7.  Further urges the State Party to implement the remaining actions requested by the Committee in Decision 35 COM 7B.6, in order to ensure the protection of the property’s Outstanding Universal Value, in particular:

a)  Finalize the creation of the autonomous Wildlife Authority and reinstate the Revenue Retention Scheme,

b)  Ensure that the design of the Kidunda dam will not affect the Outstanding Universal Value of the property and avoid flooding part of the property or key wildlife areas on its boundaries,

c)   Develop and implement an emergency plan to strengthen anti-poaching activities in the property in order to cope with the alarming increase in poaching,

8.   Also reiterates its encouragement that the State Party provide appropriate protection to the Selous-Niassa Corridor which is becoming progressively fragmented, and considers that its permanent protection as a buffer zone or its inclusion within the property is vital to the long-term integrity of the latter;

9.   Requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2013, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and on progress in the implementation of anti-poaching measures, the reinstatement of the Revenue Retention Scheme and the creation of an autonomous Wildlife Authority, including confirmation that no permits have been issued for the various development projects within the property under consideration, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 37th session in 2013, with a view to considering, in the absence of substantial progress, the possible inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

1.   Having examined Document WHC-12/36.COM/7B.Add,

2.   Recalling Decision 35 COM 7B.120, adopted at its 35th session (UNESCO, 2011),

3.   Acknowledges the submission of the Geophysical study of the Cerro Rico Mountain;

4.   Notes the creation of an Emergency Committee for the safety of Cerro Rico Mountain which will be responsible for the development of a Strategic Emergency Plan, and urges the State Party to finalize this Strategic Emergency Plan as soon as possible;

5.   Encourages the State Party to consider widening the scope of the Emergency Committee to involve stakeholders and representatives from non-governmental organizations concerned with the protection of the Cerro Rico Mountain and the City of Potosi;

6.   Requests the State Party to clarify whether Article 6 of Supreme Decree 27787 has been modified and to halt all exploration, extraction and any other interventions under and above ground between altitudes 4400m and 4700m;

7.   Also notes that a project has been developed to consolidate the top of the Mountain and also requests the State Party to provide further details on the scope and extent of this project and its time-frame for implementation by 30 September 2012; 

8.   Also notes with concern that no information has been provided on putting in place a comprehensive topographic study and a monitoring system, and also urges the State Party to install as soon as possible a system for monitoring the safety of the existing mining activity on a regular basis and provide information on the development of a topographic study;

9.   Further requests the State Party to complete the geophysical study following its final recommendations in order to further identify the anomalies affecting Cerro Rico, to undertake a more complete analysis, and to elaborate a three dimensional model covering the entire Cerro Rico in the range of elevations studied;

10.  Requests furthermore the State Party to finalize the development of the participatory Management Plan for the property and upon completion to provide an electronic copy of the draft revised Management Plan for review by the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS;

11.  Invites the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre and Advisory Bodies for review, any proposals for development at the property, prior to approval and implementation, in accordance to Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines;

12.  Finally requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2013, an updated report on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the above, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 37th session in 2013, with a view to considering, in the case of confirmation of the ascertained or potential danger to Outstanding Universal Value, or in case that no intervention will be undertaken as a matter of urgency to prevent any further collapse of the summit of the mountain, the possible inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

1.   Having examined Document WHC-12/36.COM/7B.Add,

2.   Congratulates the State Party for having immediately expressed its concern regarding the worsening threats to the World Heritage cultural properties, in particular to Timbuktu and the Tomb of Askia, and for having requested UNESCO assistance for measures to be undertaken in the event of a future deterioration of the situation;

3.   Thanks the Director-General of UNESCO for having sent a mission to Mali to study with the State Party emergency measures to be taken to ensure the preservation of the World Heritage properties in Mali and takes note of the report on the state of conservation of the World Heritage properties in Mali threatened by armed conflict in the northern region of Mali;

4.   Expresses its serious concern regarding the situation of armed conflict in the northern region of Mali and the seriousness of threats to the World Heritage properties following the degradation of the Timbuktu tombs, and the threats to the conservation of the Outstanding Universal Value of the Tomb of Askia;

5.   Considers that the optimal conditions are not present anymore to ensure the preservation of the Outstanding Universal Value of the properties of Timbuktu and the Tomb of Askia and that they are threatened by a specific and proven imminent danger, in accordance with Paragraph 179 of the Operational Guidelines;

6.   Decides to inscribe Timbuktu (Mali) on the List of World Heritage in Danger;

7.   Also decides to inscribe the Tomb of Askia (Mali) on the List of World Heritage in Danger;

8.   Requests the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS to prepare, in consultation with the State Party, all the corrective measures as well as a Desired State of Conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger, once a return to stability is effective in the northern region of Mali;

9.   Launches an appeal to the frontier States Parties to Mali (Algeria, Burkina Faso, Cote d’Ivoire, Guinea, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal) to cooperate in the preparation of a joint conservation strategy for World Heritage properties of Mali and to combat the illicit traffic of cultural objects, in particular those linked to these properties;

10.  Also launches an appeal to the African Union and the CEDEAO in order that all the necessary measures may be undertaken to protect cultural heritage located in the northern region of Mali and to the international community to provide technical and financial support to ensure the strengthened protection of the World Heritage properties in Mali;

11.  Encourages the State Party to request emergency funding from the World Heritage Fund to implement the priority actions identified during the UNESCO mission, and also requests the assistance of the World Heritage Centre, ICOMOS and ICCROM to this end;

12.  Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre by 1 February 2013, a detailed report on the state of conservation of the World Heritage properties in Mali and more particularly on the progress achieved regarding their Outstanding Universal Value for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 37th session in 2013.

1.Having examined document WHC-12/36.COM/7C,

2.Recalling Decisions 35 COM 7C and 35 COM 12E adopted at its 35th session (UNESCO, 2011),

Significant factors negatively impacting the Outstanding Universal Value

3.Takes note of the statistical analysis and encourages the World Heritage Centre to continue with the production of such informative data, including regional analyses;

Recurrent conservation issues

4.Also takes note of the completion of the independent review process on extractive industries and World Heritage properties as a contribution to the Policy Guidelines development and invites the World Heritage Centre to disseminate this review as widely as possible;

Disaster risk reduction

5.Requests States Parties to make every endeavor to take into consideration disaster risks, including from human-induced hazards, in the management plans and systems for the World Heritage properties located in their territories;  

6.Also requests the World Heritage Centre, with the support of the Advisory Bodies, to continue working with global and regional institutions involved in disaster risk management, with an aim to mainstream a concern for heritage within their policies and programmes as well as in UN-led processes such as the Post-Disaster-Needs-Assessment (PDNA);

Follow-up to decisions 35 COM 7C and 35 COM 12E

7.Further takes note of the information provided regarding the recognition for the protectors of World Heritage properties in conflict and post-conflict zones, including through the use of blue/green berets or other appropriate insignia;

8.Takes note furthermore of the correspondence process in place to increase dialogue between the States Parties, the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies regarding conservation issues at World Heritage properties;

9.Thanks the Government of Flanders for its support to the establishment of a “state of conservation information system” hosted on the World Heritage Centre’s website and further requests the World Heritage Centre to present a progress report on the database and its access online, during the 37th session of the World Heritage Committee in 2013;

Other conservation issues not reported on at the 36th session under Items 7A and 7B

10.  Expresses its concern with regard to the state of conservation of World Heritage property of “Archaeological Areas of Pompei, Herculaneum and Torre Annuziata” and urges the State Party of Italy to intensify its efforts towards implementing the Committee’s decision taken at its 35th session (UNESCO, 2011);

11.  Extends its sympathy to the victims of the earthquake in northern Italy; also encourages the State Party of Italy to continue its important efforts for the assessment of the damage occurred and for the planning and implementation of the necessary remedial measures, including with a view to strengthening the overall resilience of the three properties in the future against all possible hazards; and requests furthermore the State Party of Italy to provide to the World Heritage Centre updated information on the situation and to coordinate with the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies possible initiatives for the recovery and restoration of the three affected properties;

12.   Finally requests the State Party of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to halt the proposed development of a golf resort at the World Heritage property “Giant’s Causeway and Causeway Coast” until its potential impact on the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage property has been assessed.

1. Having examined Documents WHC-12/36.COM/13, WHC-12/36.COM/9A, WHC-12/36.COM/12A and WHC-12/36.COM/14,
2. Recalling Decision 35 COM 13 adopted at its 35th session (UNESCO, 2011) to “establish an open-ended working group on the Operational Guidelines at the 36th session of the World Heritage Committee in 2012 to consider the proposals made by Jordan on paragraph 68 and reflect on other elements of the Operational Guidelines as may be proposed by other States Parties”,
3. Recognizes the value of the proposal presented by Jordan aimed at replacing the text of paragraph 68 of the Operational Guidelines, however considers that no change to the text of paragraph 68 is necessary at this stage;
4. Thanks the State Party of the United Arab Emirates for hosting the International World Heritage Expert Meeting on Integrity for Cultural Heritage (Al Ain, United Arab Emirates, 12-14 March 2012) in cooperation with the World Heritage Centre, takes note of the recommendations of this meeting as a basis to continue working on this issue, recognizes the need for clearer guidance on the issue of integrity and requests that the World Heritage Centre, in consultation with the Advisory Bodies and States Parties, proposes a revision of paragraph 89 based on the findings of the experts meeting, to be presented for consideration at the 37th session of the World Heritage Committee;
5. Also thanks the Government of Poland for organizing the International World Heritage Expert Meeting on Criterion (vi) and Associated Values (Warsaw, Poland, 28-30 March 2012), notes the recommendations of that meeting and their contribution to the assessment of integrity of associative values which should be taken into consideration in the revision to paragraph 89, and also notes the need for thematic studies on certain types of sites with associative values, such as sacred sites and those associated with the heritage of science;
6. Recommends that supplementary guidance to the Operational Guidelines on the subjects of the above-mentioned meetings, and particularly on defining the conditions of integrity and authenticity for cultural sites, should also be provided in appropriate volumes of the Resource Manuals and other publications or training materials;
7. Takes note of the need to include in Chapter III.A (Preparation of Nominations) a reference to the desirability of preparatory work before beginning work on a nomination dossier, and adopts a revision of Paragraph 122 as indicated in Annex 1;
8. Also takes note of the revisions proposed on International Assistance in working document WHC-12/36.COM/14 and approves the following revisions of the  Operational Guidelines for paragraphs 210, 235, 238, 240, 241, 252 and 254 as proposed in Annex 2;
9. Also requests the World Heritage Centre to proceed with the corrections of language consistency between the English and French versions of the Operational Guidelines, notably in paragraph 162 (d) to correct the French to read “d) Si les Organisations consultatives compétentes déterminent que le bien répond incontestablement aux critères d’inscription et que les exigences (voir a) ci-dessus) sont satisfaites, l’examen de la proposition d’inscription sera ajouté à l’ordre du jour de la prochaine session du Comité” while the English remains unchanged; and to adapt the French title of Annex 2B to read “Formulaire pour la soumission d’une liste indicative pour les futures propositions d’inscription transfrontalières et transnationales en série”;

10. Further requests the World Heritage Centre, in collaboration with the Advisory Bodies to:

a)  Propose a revision to paragraph 115 of the Operational Guidelines to confirm the degree to which management systems and legal frameworks need to be in place before inscription,

b)  Review paragraph 150 to ensure that the World Heritage Committee and States Parties concerned are informed of the process and status of factual errors letters including their upload on the web-page of the World Heritage Centre,

c)  Elaborate further proposals on options concerning deferral and referral, as well as on the process and timelines for emergency nominations presented under paragraphs 161-162, and to submit the findings and recommendations for examination at the 37th session of the World Heritage Committee,

d)  Make proposals on the methodology for revisions to the Operational Guidelines for the next cycle;

11. Finally requests, in order to ensure the most effective implementation of the World Heritage Convention, that the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies continue their reflections on clarifying the links between the different documents and their scope that have been elaborated for the implementation of the Convention. 

Annex 1

New Paragraph 122

Before States Parties begin to prepare a nomination of a property for inscription on the World Heritage List, they should become familiar with the nomination cycle, described in Paragraph 168. It is desirable to carry out initial preparatory work to establish that a property has the potential to justify Outstanding Universal Value, including integrity or authenticity, before the development of a full nomination dossier which could be expensive and time-consuming.  Such preparatory work might include collection of available information on the property, thematic studies, scoping studies of the potential for demonstrating Outstanding Universal Value, including integrity or authenticity, or an initial comparative study of the property in its wider global or regional context, including an analysis in the context of the Gap Studies produced by the Advisory Bodies.  Such work will help to establish the feasibility of a possible nomination at an early stage and avoid use of resources on nominations that may be unlikely to succeed. States Parties are invited to contact the Advisory Bodies and the World Heritage Centre at the earliest opportunity in considering nominations to seek information and guidance.

Annex 2

New Paragraph 210

The Committee requested the Secretariat with the Advisory Bodies, in consultation with the relevant States Parties, to develop long-term follow-up Regional Programmes structured according to its Strategic Objectives and to submit them for its examination. These Programmes are adopted as follow up to Periodic Reports and regularly reviewed by the Committee based on the needs of States Parties identified in Periodic Reports. These They should accurately reflect the needs of World Heritage in the Region and facilitate the granting of International Assistance. The Committee also expressed its support to ensure direct links between the Strategic Objectives and the International Assistance.

New Paragraph 235

The World Heritage Committee co-ordinates and allocates types of International Assistance in response to State Party requests. These types of International Assistance, described in the summary table set out below, in order of priority are:

a) Emergency assistance

b) Conservation and Management assistance (incorporating assistance for training and research, technical co-operation and promotion and education)

c)  Preparatory assistance.

 New Paragraph 238

To support its Strategic Objectives, the Committee also allocates International Assistance in conformity with the priorities set out by in its decisions and in the Regional Programmes it adopts as a follow up to Periodic Reports (see para. 210). These Programmes are adopted as a follow up to Periodic Reportsand regularly reviewed by the Committee based on the needs of States Parties identified in Periodic Reports (see chapter V).

 New Paragraph 240

A balance will be maintained in the allocation of resources for between cultural and natural heritage and between Conservation & Management and Preparatory Assistance. This balance is reviewed and decided upon on a regular basis by the Committee and during the last 3 months of each biennium by the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee.

New Paragraph 241

[Preparatory] assistance may be requested to (in order of priority):

(i) prepare or update national Tentative Lists of properties suitable for inscription on the World Heritage List; a commitment will be required from the State Party to nominate in priority on these lists sites recognized in approved thematic advice, such as the thematic studies prepared by the Advisory Bodies, as corresponding to gaps on the List;

(ii) organize meetings for the harmonization of national Tentative Lists within the same geo-cultural area;

(iii) prepare nominations of properties for inscription on the World Heritage List (this may include, including preparatory work such as collection of basic information, scoping studies of the potential for demonstration of Outstanding Universal Value, including integrity or authenticity, comparative studies of the property in relation to other similar properties (see 3.c2 of Annex 5), including analysis in the context of the Gap Studies produced by the Advisory Bodies. Priority will be given to requests for sites recognized in approved thematic advice as corresponding to gaps on the List and/or for sites where preliminary investigations have shown that further inquiries would be justified, especially in the case of States Parties whose heritage is un-represented or under-represented on the World Heritage List.

(iv)  prepare requests for Conservation & Management assistance for consideration by the World Heritage Committee for training and research assistance and for technical co-operation for World Heritage properties.

 New Paragraph 252

All requests for International Assistance of more than US$ 5,000, except those of Emergency Assistance up to and including US$ 75,000, are evaluated by a panel composed of representatives of the World Heritage Centre Regional Desks and the Advisory Bodies, and if possible the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee or one vice-chairperson, meeting at least once or twice a year before action by the Chairperson and/or Committee. Requests for the approval of the Chairperson can be submitted at anytime to the Secretariat and approved by the Chairperson after appropriate evaluation. Requests for Emergency Assistance of up to and including US$ 75,000 can be submitted at anytime to the Secretariat and will be submitted for approval by to the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee or to the Committee at its next session for decision after comments by the Advisory Bodies and without examination by the panel.

New Paragraph 254

All requests for Preparatory Assistance or Conservation and Management Assistance of more than US$ 5,000 for the approval of the Committee should be received by the Secretariat on or before 1 February 31 October. These requests are submitted to the Committee at its next session. Incomplete forms which do not come back duly completed by 30 November will be sent back to the States Parties for submission to a next cycle. Complete requests are examined by a first panel held in January during the meeting between the Secretariat and the Advisory Bodies. Requests for which the panel issues a positive or a negative recommendation will be submitted to the Chairperson/Committee for decision. A second panel may be held at least eight weeks before the Committee session for requests which were revised since the first panel. Requests sent back for a substantial revision will be examined by the panel depending on their date of receipt. Requests requiring only minor revision and no further examination by the panel must come back within the year when they were examined first; otherwise they will be sent again to a next panel. The chart detailing the submission process is attached in Annex 8.

1.   Having examined Document WHC-12/36.COM/13,

2.   Recalling Decision 33 COM 7.1, adopted at its 33rd session (Seville, 2006),

3.   Taking note of the adoption of the Recommendation on the Historic Urban Landscape by the UNESCO General Conference at its 36th session in 2011,

4.   Acknowledging the need to mainstream the methodological approach related to the above-mentioned Recommendation in the Operational Guidelines,

5.   Invites the Director of the World Heritage Centre to convene an expert meeting, in consultation with the Advisory Bodies, to reflect upon and propose appropriate revisions of the Operational Guidelines, in that regard, including its Annex III, for examination by the World Heritage Committee at its 37th session in 2013;

6.   Taking into account the inscription of the propertyRio de Janeiro: Carioca Landscapes between the Mountain and the Sea (Brazil) on the World Heritage List at the present session, welcomes the offer from the State Party of Brazil to host the aforementioned meeting in Rio de Janeiro, with the support of the UNESCO Category 2 Regional Heritage Management Training Centre “Lucio Costa”.