8194 Decisions
146 Resolutions
By Year
3 COM VIII.21
Procedure for the eventual deletion from the World Heritage List of properties in case of deterioration leading to the loss of the characteristic which determined their inclusion (Document CC-79/CONF.003/10)
With respect to the source of information on the deterioration of a world heritage site, the Committee presumed that it would in most cases be the State Party on whose territory the property was located which would transmit such information to the Secretariat. However, information on the deterioration of a site may be made available by other sources and it would be for the Secretariat to check, as far as possible, on the source of the information and on the substance in consultation with the State Party concerned. The Committee requested the Secretariat in such cases to inform the ...
3 COM VIII.22
Procedure for the eventual deletion from the World Heritage List of properties in case of deterioration leading to the loss of the characteristic which determined their inclusion (Document CC-79/CONF.003/10)
After some discussion, the Committee retained the proposal that decisions such as the sending out of fact-finding missions should be taken by the Committee, except in the case where emergency action was necessary, when the Bureau would be authorized to request the Secretariat to take such measures. It was understood that in all cases, the State Party concerned would be consulted. The question of organizing regular inspection missions was also raised, but the Committee felt that each action should not be taken, particularly in view of the States' obligations to adequately preserve ...
3 COM VIII.23
Procedure for the eventual deletion from the World Heritage List of properties in case of deterioration leading to the loss of the characteristic which determined their inclusion (Document CC-79/CONF.003/10)
The representative of ICOMOS proposed that ICOMOS should be consulted on the choice of experts to be sent on fact-finding missions in connection with the state of preservation of cultural properties. In reply, Mr. Bolla indicated that ICOMOS was regularly consulted on the roster of experts maintained by the Secretariat but that any obligation for the Secretariat to consult ICOMOS, in addition to the State Party which was always consulted on the choice of experts, would invariably lead to delays in the sending out of missions.
3 COM VIII.24
Procedure for the eventual deletion from the World Heritage List of properties in case of deterioration leading to the loss of the characteristic which determined their inclusion (Document CC-79/CONF.003/10)
The Committee adopted the procedure proposed by the Secretariat subject to amendments to stage A on the source of information on the deterioration of a property and subject to reference to cases where the necessary corrective measures for threatened natural sites have not been duly taken (see paragraph 40 below). It was decided to incorporate this procedure in the "Operational Guidelines". The full text of the procedure is to be found in Annex II to this report.
Following the recommendation of the Bureau, the Committee approved the draft form for requests concerning preparatory or emergency assistance and fellowships as annexed to document CC-79/CONF.003/8.
The Committee took note of the report of the Secretariat on public information activities undertaken during the preceding year. This report called for decisions by the Committee on the publication of the World Heritage List and on the proposal received from the Swedish firm, Upsala Ekeby, to produce glass and silverware commemorating the World Heritage Convention.
On the publication of the World Heritage List, the Committee decided:
(a) to retard the publication of the List in order to include the properties placed thereon at its third session;
(b) that the List of World Heritage in Danger and the List of properties for which international assistance has bean granted would be published as appendices of the List;
(c) that the list of properties for which international assistance has been granted would include reference to properties for which technical assistance has been granted but would make no mention of preparatory assistance;
(d) to ...
The proposal from Upsala Ekeby to produce glass and silverware gave rise to considerable discussion, since it raised the principle of using tho World Heritage Emblem and depictions of World Heritage Sites for commercial purposes. There was some reticence among members of the Committee to authorize any commercial company to use the Emblem or pictures of the sites for such purposes. On the other hand the Committee underlined the need to create a world-wide interest in the Convention and recognized the importance of publicity. The Committee therefore decided:
(a) that the World Heritage ...
After examining the proposals of the Secretariat for promotional activities for 1980 (document CC-79/CONF.003/6.2) the Committee authorized the Secretariat to proceed with the following activities within a total budget of $36,900:
Estimated cost($)
(a) creation of a photo library of world heritage sites 9,600
(b) slide series and sound-track 7,000
(c) poster 7,500
(d) postcards 4,000
(e) journalists' seminars 2,800
(f) postage stamps 6'000// $36,900
In response to a question from a member of the Committee who sought to avoid the publication of information on cultural and natural world heritage sites in separate publications, Mr. Batisse indicated that the Secretariat was studying the possibility of enlarging the scope of the Cultural Heritage bulletin to cover not only cultural sites but also natural heritage sites.
The question was raised as to whether the Committee would authorize States Parties to the Convention to produce material bearing the Emblem such as postage stamps and postcards for publicity purposes and for raising financial contributions to the Fund. The Committee was of the opinion that States Parties were free to use the Emblem for such purposes, and could make additional voluntary contributions to the Fund by this means.
3 COM XI.(b).37
Amendments to the criteria for the inclusion of natural properties in the World Heritage List and guidelines for the evaluation of nominations by IUCN
In view of the difficulty of assessing nominations without an adequate inventory, the Committee decided to encourage States Parties to prepare such inventories. It was furthermore decided to ask IUCN to prepare a proposal for the next meeting of the Bureau relating to the methodology and cost of preparing an inventory on a global basis.
3 COM XI.(b).38
Amendments to the criteria for the inclusion of natural properties in the World Heritage List and guidelines for the evaluation of nominations by IUCN
The Committee decided to instruct IUCN to use great caution in the application of criterion (iv) when it was the sole criterion for recommending sites for the World Heritage List. The sites nominated under this criterion should be habitats where "significant populations" or "concentrations of populations" of rare or endangered species of plants or animals survive, that is, sites representing in some way "superlative situations".
3 COM XI.(b).40
Amendments to the criteria for the inclusion of natural properties in the World Heritage List and guidelines for the evaluation of nominations by IUCN
The Committee noted that several areas nominated which meet the criteria may be marginal because of the inability of States, for various reasons to apply the rigid management criteria which they believe is necessary. The Committee was concerned that this could lead to further deterioration of these sites if corrective measures were not implemented. The Committee therefore decided to amend the "Operational Guidelines" by adding a sub-paragraph (vi) to paragraph 11 as follows:
"Where the intrinsic qualities of a World Heritage site are threatened by action or works of man and yet meet the ...
The application of the procedure foreseen in paragraph 40 above to cultural properties will be considered by the Committee at a later meeting.
The Committee requested the Secretariat to prepare a revised text of the "Operational Guidelines" reflecting the above-mentioned decisions and to present this text to the Bureau at its next session. One question that should be studied in this connection would be the possibility of adding a criterion on integrity for the evaluation of cultural properties.
The Committee considered that it would be desirable to be able to examine nominations at its fourth session within the framework of a national inventory of cultural and natural properties which the State Party considers suitable for inclusion in the World Heritage List. This would allow for a preliminary evaluation of the comparative value of properties within that State. The Committee therefore expressed the hope that each State Party concerned would make available to the Committee before its next session a list of those properties which it intends to nominate to the World Heritage List ...
3 COM XI.32
Amendments to the criteria for the inclusion of cultural and natural properties in the World Heritage List and Guidelines for the evaluation of Nominations to the World Heritage List by ICOMOS and IUCN
The Committee considered that it was absolutely essential that the List contained only properties which were of outstanding universal value. Unless this general criterion was applied to every nomination, the List could rapidly decline in value and indeed in credibility. With this in mind, the Committee recommended that the wording in the "Operational Guidelines" and the nomination forms should more adequately reflect this overriding consideration, and that ICOMOS and IUCN should be instructed to regard this requirement as of critical importance in their evaluation of nominations.
3 COM XI.33
Amendments to the criteria for the inclusion of cultural and natural properties in the World Heritage List and Guidelines for the evaluation of Nominations to the World Heritage List by ICOMOS and IUCN
The Committee heard the reports of the two working groups set up to examine amendments to the criteria and guidelines for the evaluation of nominations and took the decisions set out below:
3 COM XI.34
Amendments to the criteria for the inclusion of cultural and natural properties in the World Heritage List and Guidelines for the evaluation of Nominations to the World Heritage List by ICOMOS and IUCN
On the general question of the number of inscriptions to be entered on the World Heritage List, as well as of the selection criteria to be applied, the Committee recalled that the Convention foresees in Article 11 paragraph 1 that each State Party "shall in so far as possible submit to the World Heritage Committee _an inventory of property forming part of the cultural and natural heritage_, situated in its territory and _suitable for inclusion_" in the World Heritage List (passages not underlined in the text of the Convention). The Committee recommends that States Parties in future ...
3 COM XI.35
Amendments to the criteria for the inclusion of cultural and natural properties in the World Heritage List and Guidelines for the evaluation of Nominations to the World Heritage List by ICOMOS and IUCN
In response to specific questions raised by Mr. Michel Parent's report, the Committee adopted the following principles:
(i) States Parties may propose in one single nomination several individual cultural properties, which may be in different geographical locations but which should:
-be linked because they belong to the same historico-cultural group, or-be the subject of a single safeguarding project, or-belong to the same type of property characteristic of the zone.
the geographical zone in which these properties are situated should be delimited and the cultural properties individually ...
3 COM XI.36
Amendments to the criteria for the inclusion of cultural and natural properties in the World Heritage List and Guidelines for the evaluation of Nominations to the World Heritage List by ICOMOS and IUCN
The Committee took note of the typology proposed in Mr. Michel Parent's report. It considered that it was on the basis of the inventories submitted by States Parties that such a typology could be finalized. The question will therefore continue to be studied until its next session.
3 COM XI.39
Amendments to the criteria for the inclusion of natural properties in the World Heritage List and guidelines for the evaluation of nominations by IUCN
The Committee considered the complex issues concerning sites occupied by migratory species on a seasonal basis and decided to add to paragraph 11 on integrity in the "Operational Guidelines" a new sub-paragraph (v) as follows:
"In cases of migratory species, integrity will require critical areas necessary for the survival of the species to be included in the nomination. States which are parties to the Convention are requested to seek the co-operation of other States which contain seasonable sites for populations of World Heritage species so as to ensure that these species are protected ...
The Australian Delegation drew attention to the fact that, on several occasions, members of the Committee and representatives of IUCN and ICOMOS had referred to the threat to which certain nominated sites were exposed, and had suggested that this factor should influence the favourable and rapid acceptance of the site in question. The Delegation expressed concern at this development, pointing out that acceptance should be based only on the established criteria dealing with the intrinsic properties of the site and, further, that if the threat affected the integrity of the site, acceptance ...
The Committee took up one by one those nominations which had been recommended by the Bureau for inscription on the List, those which had been recommended by the Bureau not to be entered on the List and nominations which raised a problem of application of the criteria, in accordance with the Committee's decision mentioned in paragraph 15 above. In each case the Committee heard, as appropriate, the comments of the representatives of IUCN and/or ICOMOS who referred to the criteria met by the property in question.
The Committee decided to enter in the World Heritage List the following 45 properties:
No. Name of property / State Party___________________________________________
19 Fasil Ghebbi, Gondar Region / Ethiopia
20 Ancient City of Damascus Syrian / Arab Republic
The Committee noted the reservation expressed by ICOMOS concerning the threat to the site from rapid urban development.
31 Auschwitz concentration camp / Poland
The Committee decided to enter Auschwitz concentration camp on the List as a unique site and to restrict the inscription of other sites of a similar nature.
33 ...
Sites: Abu Mena Amphitheatre of El Jem Ancient City of Damascus Ancient Thebes with its Necropolis Antigua Guatemala Archaeological Site of Carthage Auschwitz Birkenau German Nazi Concentration and Extermination Camp (1940-1945) Białowieża Forest Boyana Church Bryggen Chartres Cathedral Dinosaur Provincial Park Everglades National Park Fasil Ghebbi, Gondar Region Forts and Castles, Volta, Greater Accra, Central and Western Regions Grand Canyon National Park Historic Cairo Historical Complex of Split with the Palace of Diocletian Independence Hall Kathmandu Valley Kluane / Wrangell-St. Elias / Glacier Bay / Tatshenshini-Alsek Madara Rider Medina of Tunis Meidan Emam, Esfahan Memphis and its Necropolis – the Pyramid Fields from Giza to Dahshur Mont-Saint-Michel and its Bay Natural and Cultural Heritage of the Ohrid region Natural and Culturo-Historical Region of Kotor Ngorongoro Conservation Area Nubian Monuments from Abu Simbel to Philae Old City of Dubrovnik Palace and Park of Versailles Persepolis Plitvice Lakes National Park Prehistoric Sites and Decorated Caves of the Vézère Valley Rock Drawings in Valcamonica Rock-Hewn Churches of Ivanovo Sagarmatha National Park Stari Ras and Sopoćani Tchogha Zanbil Thracian Tomb of Kazanlak Tikal National Park Urnes Stave Church Vézelay, Church and Hill Virunga National Park
The Committee decided furthermore to defer the following sites:
No. Name of property / State Party
8 Ichkeul National park / Tunisia
The Committee deferred this nomination until the Tunisian Government has contacted the other States concerned to ensure adequate protection of summering and wintering areas of major migratory species found in Ichkeul.
79 Paphos, Birthplace of Aphrodite / Cyprus
The Committee deferred this nomination until more precise information was available on the possible adverse impact on the sites of the pressing needs of tourism development.
92 Sta. Giulia/St. ...
The Committee furthermore decided not to inscribe the following two sites on the World Heritage List:
No. 5: Zembra and Zembretta Islands National Park (Tunisia) andNo. 73: the Madeleine Island (Senegal).
In order to facilitate the examination by the Committee of nominations, it was decided that in future documents submitting nominations to the Committee would include indication of the criteria under which each nomination was to be considered.
After examining the requests received from States Parties and the recommendations of the Bureau, the Committee decided to grant technical co-operation as follows:
(a) Ecuador
Equipment to enable the authorities to ensure the integrity of tho natural environment of the Galapagos Islands through protective measures.
up to a maximum of $50,000
Sites: Galápagos Islands
After examining the requests received from States Parties and the recommendations of the Bureau, the Committee decided to grant technical co-operation as follows:
(b) Tanzania
Services of an architect-museologist for three weeks in order to draw up a project for the conservation and presentation of the prehistoric sites of Olduvai and Laetolil.
estimated cost $5,400
Sites: Ngorongoro Conservation Area
After examining the requests received from States Parties and the recommendations of the Bureau, the Committee decided to grant technical co-operation as follows:
(c) Egypt
Services of specialists in cultural heritage as well as equipment to draw up a project for the restoration and development of the Islamic Centre of Cairo.
up to a maximum of $ 30,000
Sites: Historic Cairo
The Committee was informed that requests for technical co-operation were forthcoming for the Ngorongoro Conservation Area in Tanzania and Virunga National Park in Zaire and agreed to delegate authority to the Chairman to approve these requests after consultation with members of the Bureau if he considered it desirable.
The Committee approved the revised nomination form (CC-79/CONF.003/7) subject to the following:
(a) the text should be revised to reflect the decisions taken by the Committee on the criteria for the inclusion of properties in the World Heritage List and guidelines for the evaluation of nominations (see session XI above); the attention of States Parties should be drawn, in particular, to the essential criterion of outstanding universal value that should be met by properties nominated;
(b) The form should emphasize the importance of adequate buffer zones and ask for details on measures ...
The Committee heard the report of the working group on the management of the Convention and its financial implications and took note of the following points:
i) The Convention was now entering its operational phase particularly as regards technical co-operation, emergency assistance and the training of specialists, which implied a considerable increase in the workload of the Secretariat. An amount of approximately $210,000 had been spent by the Unesco Secretariat in 1979 under its Regular Budget for the management of the Convention.
ii) Funds actually obligated in 1979 under the World ...
The Committee then decided:
a) that it was not opportune at the present time to retain a fixed percentage such as 14%, as indicated in paragraph 26 of document CC-79/CONF.003/12, to cover direct management costs of the Convention;
b) to ask the Director-General of Unesco to make additional efforts to provide the Secretariat with an adequate permanent staff to enable it to meet the substantial increase in workload due to the fact that the Convention has now entered its operational phase. Until the Secretariat could be fully constituted and a sufficient number of Member States ratified ...
3 COM XVI.55
Presentation of the Statements of accounts of the World Heritage Fund and adoption of a budget
The Committee took note of the statement of account of the World Heritage Fund for the financial period which ended on 31 December 1978 and the interim statement of account of the Fund for the two-year financial period 1979/80 as set out in document CC-79/CONF.003/9.
3 COM XVI.56
Presentation of the Statements of accounts of the World Heritage Fund and adoption of a budget
The Committee adopted the following budget for the period October 1979 to December 1980.
BUDGET (October 1979 - December 1980)
Activities / Brought forward from 1978-1979 / Additional funds allocated / Total funds authorized for period October 78- December 80
I. Preparatory Assistance / $69,234 /$ 80,000 / $ 149,234 (30 m/m)
II. Technical Co-operation / -- / $165,400 / $ 165,400
III. Training / $4,700 / $ 200,000 / $ 204,700
IV. Emergency / $ 70,000 / $ 100,000 / $ 170,000
V. Promotional Activities / $ 500 / $ 36,400 / $ 36,900
VI. Programme Support
- ICOMOS } ...
The working group on natural criteria also reported to the Committee on its concern at the relatively low number of natural properties so far included in the World Heritage List. It considered that, if the List gave an initial impression of being a list of cultural properties, it would deter further nominations of natural properties. The working group was also concerned that the delegations of States Members at the third session of the Committee did not include a sufficient number of specialists in the natural heritage field which reduced the Committee's ability to evaluate properly ...
The Committee shared the concern of the group. It considered, however, that in view of the difficulty of determining precisely whether persons were competent in the fields of nature conservation or of the protection of cultural property, it would not be feasible to introduce such a rule on the quorum for meetings of the Committee. The responsibility for ensuring balanced representation lay with each State Member of the Committee.
The Committee requested the Secretariat to renew its efforts to ensure that the authorities in each State Party responsible for the natural heritage were fully informed of the activities undertaken under the Convention and of the meetings of the Committee. IUCN could also be of assistance through its direct contacts. It was decided that copies of letters of invitation would be sent to those authorities responsible for the national heritage in the States Parties. The Committee decided furthermore to take up the matter again if the situation did not improve.
3 COM XVII..b).60
Emergency assistance for the Natural and Culturo-historical region of Kotor (Yugoslavia)
Note was taken of the request from Yugoslavia for emergency assistance, in the form of equipment and consultant services, for the Natural and Culturo-historical region of Kotor. However, the Committee felt that further information should be made available on the equipment required and decided to grant in the first instance $20,000 for consultant services.
3 COM XVII.c).61
Charter on the rights and obligations relating to towns inscribed on the World Heritage List (Cracow-Quito)
The Committee noted that a draft Charter had been prepared jointly by the Ecuadorian and Polish authorities on this question and decided to take up the matter at a later stage.
The Committee fully supported the appeal launched by Mrs. El-Sadat for assistance in preserving the Islamic heritage of Cairo and members declared that they would transmit details of the appeal to their respective governments.
Sites: Historic Cairo
The next session of the Committee will take place early in September 1980, probably in France. The precise place and dates will be communicated to all concerned as soon as possible.
Following an expression of thanks from the floor to the Egyptian authorities for the remarkable hospitality offered to the Committee, to the Chairman for the admirable way in which he had conducted the meeting and to all those who had contributed to the smooth running of the meeting,
the Chairman declared the session closed.
The Chairperson drew the attention of the Committee to the two main documents of relevance to their deliberations. WHC-99/CONF.205/5 entitled "Report on the state of conservation of Kakadu National Park, Australia" provided a summary of information and deliberations concerning Kakadu up until the date of finalization of the document at the end of May. WHC-99/CONF.205/INF.4 included the record of the deliberations of the twenty-third session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee (5-10 July 1999).
Sites: Kakadu National Park
The Chairperson reminded Committee members that a mission was sent to Kakadu National Park in late 1998, at the request of the twenty-second session of the Bureau in June 1998. The mission was led by the former Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, Professor Francioni of Italy. Professor Francioni reported on the mission at the twentysecond session of the Committee in Kyoto in 1998.
Sites: Kakadu National Park
The mission report (WHC-99/CONF.205/INF.3A) focused primarily on ascertained and potential dangers to the World Heritage values of Kakadu National Park posed by the Jabiluka mining proposal, and presented a total of 16 recommendations.
Sites: Kakadu National Park
3 EXT.COM XI.1
Decision of the Third Extraordinary Session of the World Heritage Committee concerning Kakadu National Park, Australia
The Committee,(a) Emphasizes the importance of Articles 4, 5, 6, 7 and 11 of the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention. In particular the Committee emphasizes Article 6 (1) which states that:Whilst fully respecting the sovereignty of the States on whose territory the cultural and natural heritage (...) is situated, and without prejudice to property right provided by national legislation, the States Parties to this Convention recognize that such heritage constitutes a world heritage for whose protection it is the duty of the international community as a whole to cooperate.(b) Recalls that ...
Sites: Kakadu National Park
3 EXT.COM X1.2
Decision of the Third Extraordinary Session of the World Heritage Committee concerning Kakadu National Park, Australia
The Committee,(a) Recognizes, with appreciation, that the Australian Government, Australian Supervising Scientist, advisory bodies (IUCN, ICOMOS and ICCROM) and independent scientific panel (ISP) established by the International Council of Science (ICSU) have provided the reports requested by the twenty-second session of the Committee (Kyoto, 1998);(b) Acknowledges that there are indications that a new dialogue between the Mirrar Aboriginal people and the Australian Government has begun in relation to issues concerning the Jabiluka uranium mine and mill. The Committee considers this to be ...
Sites: Kakadu National Park
3 EXT.COM XI.3
Decision of the Third Extraordinary Session of the World Heritage Committee concerning Kakadu National Park, Australia
With consideration of 1 and 2 above, the Committee will remain vigilant in reviewing and assessing the progress made by the Australian Government. To this end the Committee requests that the Australian Government submit a progress report on the following issues by 15 April 2000 for examination by the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee:(a) progress made with cultural mapping of the Jabiluka Mineral Lease and the Boyweg-Almudj site and its boundaries and the completion of the cultural heritage management plan with the necessary co-operation of the Mirrar, ...
Sites: Kakadu National Park
3 EXT.COM XI.4
Decision of the Third Extraordinary Session of the World Heritage Committee concerning Kakadu National Park, Australia
To resolve the remaining scientific issues, such as those raised in the ISP report, the Committee asks ICSU to continue the work of the ISP (with the addition of any additional members) to assess, in co-operation with the supervising Scientist and IUCN, the Supervising Scientist's response to the ISP report. The report of the ISP's assessment should be submitted to the World Heritage Centre by 15 April 2000 for examination by the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee in 2000.
Sites: Kakadu National Park
The Third General Assembly of States Parties to the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural-Heritage met in Belgrade, Yugoslavia, on 7 October 1980 during the 21st session of the General Conference.
Forty-eight of the fifth-three States which were Parties to the Convention as at 7 October 1980 and which thus had the right to vote, were represented at the meeting, namely Afghanistan, Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, France, Federal Republic of Germany, Ghana, ...
7. The General Assembly elected by acclamation H..E. Mr. G. Abad Grijalva (Ecuador) as Chairman, the representatives of Monaco, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka and Yugoslavia as Vice-Chairmen and M. Benyam Bekele (Ethiopia) as Rapporteur.
8. The agenda of the Session was adopted without amendment. The work of the Assembly was completed in one meeting.
9. The representative of the Bureau of the Comptroller introduced document CC-80/CONF. 018/2 by which, in accordance with the Financial Regulations for the World Heritage Fund, the accounts of the Fund were submitted to the General Assembly. He drew attention to the statement of accounts for the financial period which ended on 31 December 1978, given in Annex I to the document, and to the interim statement for the two-year financial period 1979-1980, drawn up as at 31 July 1980, set out in Annex II. The Assembly was then informed that contributions had been received from several States ...
3 GA 13
Determination of the amount of the contributions to the World Heritage Fund in accordance with the provisions of Article 16 of the World Heritage Convention
13. The General Assembly then unanimously decided, on the proposal of the Chairman, to maintain for the financial period 1981-1983 the amount of the contribution to be paid to the World Heritage Fund foreseen in Article 16, paragraph 1; of the Convention at 1 per cent of the contribution of States Parties to the Regular Budget of Unesco.
14. The General Assembly was .called on to elect seven members to the World Heritage Committee to replace the following seven members whose term of office was due to expire at the end of the 21st session of the General Conference : Algeria, Ecuador, Ghana, Iran, Nigeria, Sudan and Yugoslavia.
15. The list of the States Parties which had presented their candidature was read out before the Assembly. In addition to Ecuador, which had announced earlier in the proceedings that it was no longer a candidate for election to the Committee, the following States then withdrew their candidature : ...
18. The Assistant Director-General for Culture and Communication offered his congratulations to those States which had been elected to the World Heritage Committee. He went on to refer to the essential role which the Convention and the Committee were playing in increasing.the awareness of people of the importance of preserving cultural and natural monuments and sites which were of value to mankind as a whole. Another important result of the work undertaken under the Convention had been the fruitful collaboration which had developed between specialists in nature conservation and those in ...
19. Before announcing the closure of the meeting, the Chairman stated that the implementation of the Convention was one of the examples of activities in which each and every country had a contribution to make. Each had its own heritage and the heritage of all nations together .formed-the patrimony of mankind. The Convention embodied the very ideals on which the Unesco Constitution was based. The Chairman then declared the meeting closed.
10. Bureau authorised the Secretariat to pursue, in co-operation with the Ethiopian authorities, the preparation of a project for a photogrammetric survey of the monuments of Lalibela and to submit a revised technical co-operation request to the Committee. The delegate from the United States of America abstained from this recommendation.
Sites: Rock-Hewn Churches, Lalibela
9. The Bureau deferred the following requests either because the properties to which they related were not included or recommended for the World Heritage List or further clarifications were required:
Algeria:
Dey's Palace
Qal'ah of Beni Hammad
Citadel Quarter of Setif
Ethiopia:
Bale Mountain National Park
Abijatta Shalla Lakes National Park
Further elements of the technical co-opertaion requests for these sites have to be established first by a preparatory assistance mission which has been granted for Simien National Park and will be now extended to the other two ...
11. The Bureau granted preparatory assistance to
(a) Guatemala: services of 2 consultants (at an estimated cost of $22,000) (ecologist and specialist in stone, stucco and wood conservation) to prepare a technical co-operation request for Tikal National Park. The request for a jeep included in the preparatory assistance requested could be considered together with the technical co-operation request.
Sites: Tikal National Park
11. The Bureau granted preparatory assistance to:
(b) Senegal: consultant services for 4m/m (at an estimated cost of $20,000) to plan technical measures for adequate protection of the site including regulation of the water level. The equipment requested requires some clarification and could be considered by the Committee at a later date.
Opening of the session.
Adoption of the agenda.
Election of the Chairman, Vice-Chairmen and Rapporteur.
Nominations to the World Heritage List.
Technical co-operation requests.
Protection of the World Heritage Emblem and of the name of the World Heritage Fund.
Revised text of the "Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention".
Measures to be taken to improve the balance between the cultural and the natural heritage in the implementation of the Convention.
Public information activities.
Consideration of ...
I would like to welcome the participants of the fourth session of the World Heritage Committee. The French Government is honored that this meeting, which brings together the leading specialists in historical monuments and natural sites, is being held in 1980 in France. At the request of the President of the Republic, 1980 is in fact Heritage Year in our country. It is marked by numerous activities initiated by the State, local communities and associations for preserving and enhancing the illustrious and more humble legacies of our people's past. It is fortu- nate that Heritage Year offers ...
The fourth session of the World Heritage Committee was held in Paris, France, (1-5 September 1980) at the kind invitation of the French Government. The meeting was attended by the following States Members of the World Heritage Committee: Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Bulgaria, Ecuador, Egypt, France,Ghana, Iraq, Italy, Nepal, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Senegal, Sudan, Switzerland, Tunisia, United States of America, and Yugoslavia.
Representatives of the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and of the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) attended the meeting in an advisory capacity.
Observers from thirteen States Parties to the Convention which were not members of the Committee, namely Brazil, Canada, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Federal Republic of Germany, Haiti, Honduras, Jordan, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and Zaire also attended the session, as well as an observer from one other international organization: the Arab, Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization. The full list of participants will be found in Annex I to this report.
The Chairman, Dr. Shehata Adam, declared the session open and addressed the meeting to welcome the participants and thank the French Government for their kind invitation to hold the fourth session of the World Heritage Committee at the Hotel de Sully. M. Jean-Pierre Bady, Director of the Caisse nationale des monuments historiques et des sites,gave a welcoming speech which inaluded a brief history of the Hotel Bethune de Sully. M. Michel Batisse, Deputy Assistant Director-General, Sector of Sciences, addressed the meeting on behalf of M. Amadou Mahtar-M'Bow, Director-General of Unesco. M. ...
5. Dr. Shehata Adam brought to the attention of the Committee the text of a letter from the Government of Jordan regarding the nomination to the World Heritage List of the "Old City Jerusalem and its walls" and suggested the matter be taken up under Item 4 of the proposed agenda.6. The delegate from the United States of America suggested that a working group on the balance between cultural and natural sites be established and the exanimation of the Report of the Rapporteur on the 4th session of the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee (19-22 May1980) was inserted between Items 10 ...
8. Mr. M. Parent was elected as Chairman of the Committee by accla- mation. The Committee then elected by acclamation the following representatives of States Members of the Committee as Vice-Chairmen : H. Exe. Prof. R.O. Slatyer (Australia), Mr. J. Adusei (Ghana), Mrs. R. Torres de Arauz (Panama), Mr. D. Hales (United States of America), Dr. M. Prelog (Yugoslavia) and Mr. A. Beschaouch (Tunisia) as Rapporteur. Dr. S. Adam (Egypt), the former Chairman of the Committee, was invited to participate in the work of the Bureau.
9. Mr. M. Parent, in his capacity as Chairman of the Committee ...
The Committee discussed one by one those nominations which had been recommended by the Bureau for inscription on the List, those which had been recommended by the Bureau not to be entered on the List and nominations which raised a problem of application of the criteria, and were hence recommended by the Bureau to be deferred. In each case the Committee heard, as appropriate, the comments of the representatives of IUCN and/or ICOMOS who presented an evaluation of each property in question in relation to the criteria. The representatives of IUCN and ICOMOS were invited when appro- priate ...
The Committee also decided to extend the protected site of Ohrid Lake to include the cultural and historical area. This site will carry the name "Ohrid region with its cultural and historical aspects and its natural environment".
4 COM V.15
Consideration of Item 4 of the agenda:Nominations the World Heritage List (not inscribed sites)
The Committee furthermore decided not to inscribe the following ten sites on the World Heritage List :
No. / Name of property / State Party
104 / Church of Orosi / Costa Rica
105 / National Monument at San Jose / Costa Rica
108 / National Theatre / Costa Rica
110 / Church of Nicoya / Costa Rica
123 / Kainji Lake National Park / Nigeria
56 / Valley of Heidal / Norway
57 / Kjerringøy Trading Centre / Norway
60 / Eidsvoll Building / Norway
141 / Archaeological ruins at Harappa / ...
4 COM V.16
Consideration of Item 4 of the agenda:Nominations to the World Heritage List (the Old City of Jerusalem and its walls)
16. After a discussion concerning the nomination presented by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan regarding "the Old City of Jerusalem and its walls", the following motion was adopted by consensus :
"The World Heritage Committee, at its fourth session, took into consideration the nomination presented by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan concerning "the Old City of Jerusalem and its walls" in all its cultural and human aspects.
The Committee was in full agreement in appreciating their unique importance in view of the universal values they represent from the religious, historical, architectural ...
4 COM V.12
Consideration of Item 4 of the agenda: Nominations the World Heritage List (inscribed sites)
The Committee decided to enter in the world Heritage List the following 28 sites:
No.
Name of property
State Party
102
Qalaa of Beni Hammad
Algeria
124
Historic Town of Ouro Prêto
Brazil
133
Burgess Shale Site
Canada
79
Paphos
Cyprus
10
Lower Valley of the Awash
Ethiopia
12
Tiya
Ethiopia
5
Aksum
Ethiopia
17
Lower Valley of the Omo
Ethiopia
35
Ashante Traditional Buildings
Ghana
129
Maya Site of Copan
Honduras
91
Historic Centre of Rome
Italy
The representative ...
Sites: Aksum Al Qal'a of Beni Hammad Ancient City of Bosra Archaeological Ruins at Moenjodaro Buddhist Ruins of Takht-i-Bahi and Neighbouring City Remains at Sahr-i-Bahlol Church and Dominican Convent of Santa Maria delle Grazie with “The Last Supper” by Leonardo da Vinci City of Valletta Durmitor National Park Historic Centre of Rome, the Properties of the Holy See in that City Enjoying Extraterritorial Rights and San Paolo Fuori le Mura Historic Centre of Warsaw Historic Town of Ouro Preto Ħal Saflieni Hypogeum Ichkeul National Park Kahuzi-Biega National Park Lower Valley of the Awash Lower Valley of the Omo Maya Site of Copan Megalithic Temples of Malta Paphos Redwood National and State Parks Røros Mining Town and the Circumference Site of Palmyra Taxila
4 COM V.14
Consideration of Item 4 of the agenda:Nominations the World Heritage List (differed sites)
The Committee decided furthermore to defer the following sites :
No. / Name of property / State Party
101 / Dey's Palace at Algiers/ Algeria
103 / Citadel Quarter of Setif / Algeria
106 / National archaeological park of Guayabo de Turrialba / Costa Rica
107 / Santa Rosa historic mansion / Costa Rica
109 / Ruins of Ujarras / Costa Rica
11 / Adulis / Ethiopia
111 / Bale Mountain National Park / Ethiopia
112 / Abijatta Shalla Lakes National Park / Ethiopia
13 / Melka Kontoure / Ethiopia
14 / Matara / Ethiopia
16 /Yeha / Ethiopia
92 / Convent of Santa Giulia-San Salvatore ...
4 COM VI.18-20
Consideration of item 7 of the agenda : The revised text of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention
18. The Committee reiterated the importance of the Operational Guidelines and emphasized that every measure should be taken to ensure that the resulting guidelines are the best possible and that they reflect the thorough deliberations which precede each decision taken by the Committee. The insertion in the introduction of a brief paragraph to this effect was recommended by the Committee.
19. The Committee then discussed in detail the Revised Operational Guidelines and made the following modifications:
a) Chapter I, section A, paragraph 5 (ii) should read :
Because of the ...
4 COM VII.21
Consideration of item 8 of the agenda: Measures to be taken to improve the balance between the cultural and the natural heritage in the implementation of the Convention
21. The Committee heard the report of the working group set up to examine measures to improve the balance between the cultural and the natural heritage in the implementation of the Convention and agreed with the recommendations set out below:
1) Preparatory assistance to States Parties should be granted on a priority basis for:
(i) the establishment of tentative lists of cultural and natural properties situated in their territories and suitable for inclusion in the World Heritage List;
(ii) the preparation of nominations of types of properties underrepresented in the World Heritage ...