Take advantage of the search to browse through the World Heritage Centre information.

Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam

Afghanistan
Factors affecting the property in 2005*
  • Civil unrest
  • Management systems/ management plan
  • Other Threats:

    Leaning of the Minaret

Factors* affecting the property identified in previous reports

Political instability; leaning of the Minaret; local infrastructural requirements; lack of management plan.

International Assistance: requests for the property until 2005
Requests approved: 1 (from 2002-2002)
Total amount approved : 20,000 USD
Missions to the property until 2005**

UNESCO Experts/Division of Cultural Heritage mission (February-March 2004)

Conservation issues presented to the World Heritage Committee in 2005

The World Heritage Centre received a progress report from the State Party on 5 March 2005.

The report informed that the Governments of Switzerland and Italy provided significant financial support for the emergency consolidation and restoration of this property, through projects implemented by UNESCO. The Government of Italy also provided US$ 50,000 for the elaboration of a management plan for the property. The latter activity, however, could not be completed due to security concerns in the area of Jam.

In autumn 2004, however, additional protective gabions were laid down along the riverbanks of the Jam Rud in order to reinforce the protection of the Minaret’s foundations against water infiltrations. UNESCO, moreover, is preparing a partial permanent consolidation of the base of the Minaret by means of stainless steel cables, in close cooperation with the Italian firm ALGA. To enable this delicate intervention in this particular context, ALGA aims to adapt the equipment and the intervention techniques used for the circling of the leaning Tower of Pisa. The intervention shall be executed as soon as the technical proposal is finalized by ALGA.

Concerning the construction of a road and a bridge at this property, no major operational activities have been executed since the last UNESCO monitoring mission in 2004, upon a ban on all UNmissions to Afghanistan related to the parliamentary elections in October 2004. The State Party has received the technical report and recommendations prepared by the UNESCO mission on the issue of the road, but apparently no action could be taken. Activities in Afghanistan are slowly resuming, and a UNESCO expert mission to Jam is now foreseen in May 2005 to initiate the preparation work necessary for the consolidation of the base of the Minaret. 

Decisions adopted by the Committee in 2005
29 COM 7A.20
Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Afghanistan)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-05/29.COM/7A and the Draft Decision 29 COM 7A.20.Rev,,

2. Recalling its Decision 28 COM 15A.21, adopted at its 28th session (Suzhou, 2004),

3. Urges the State Party to halt the on-going construction of the road;

4. Encourages the State Party to construct an alternative footbridge and a ford across the Hari River, in order to enable access of the villagers from the Bedam Valley to the Jam Valley, as well as allowing a limited number of vehicles to cross the river, following the recommendations of the UNESCO mission in February 2004;

5. Urges the State Party of Afghanistan, with assistance from UNESCO and the international community, to continue the on-going efforts for the structural consolidation of the Minaret;

6. Requests the State Party, with assistance from the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, to elaborate a site-management plan, taking into account the relevant provisions of the Operational Guidelines (2005);

7. Further requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1February 2006, a progress report on the state of conservation of this property, for examination by the Committee at its 30th session (Vilnius, 2006);

8. Decides to retain the Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Afghanistan) on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

29 COM 8C.2
New World Heritage List in Danger

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined the of state of conservation reports of properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger (WHC-05/29.COM/7A and WHC-05/29.COM/7A.Add),

2. Decides to maintain the following properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger:

  • Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam (Afghanistan)(Decision 29 COM 7A.20)
  • Cultural Landscape and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley (Afghanistan)(Decision 29 COM 7A.21)
  • Tipasa (Algeria) (Decision 29 COM 7A.16)
  • Walled City of Baku with the Shirvanshah's Palace and Maiden Tower (Azerbaijan) (Decision 29 COM 7A.28)
  • Royal Palaces of Abomey (Benin) (Decision 29 COM 7A.13)
  • Manovo-Gounda St Floris National Park (Central African Republic)(Decision 29 COM 7A.1)
  • Comoé National Park (Côte d'Ivoire) (Decision 29 COM 7A.2)
  • Mount Nimba Strict Nature Reserve (Côte d'Ivoire/Guinea) (Decision 29 COM 7A.3)
  • Okapi Wildlife Reserve (Democratic Rep. of the Congo) (Decision 29 COM 7A.5)
  • Kahuzi-Biega National Park (Democratic Rep. of the Congo) (Decision 29 COM 7A.5)
  • Virunga National Park (Democratic Rep. of the Congo) (Decision 29 COM 7A.5)
  • Garamba National Park (Democratic Rep. of the Congo) (Decision 29 COM 7A.5)
  • Salonga National Park (Democratic Rep. of the Congo) (Decision 29 COM 7A.5)
  • Abu Mena (Egypt) (Decision 29 COM 7A.17)
  • Simien National Park (Ethiopia) (Decision 29 COM 7A.4)
  • Cologne Cathedral (Germany) (Decision 28 COM 7A.29)
  • Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve (Honduras) (Decision 29 COM 7A.12)
  • Group of Monuments at Hampi (India) (Decision 29 COM 7A.22)
  • Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (India) (Decision 29 COM 7A.9)
  • Bam and its Cultural Landscape (Islamic Republic of Iran) (Decision 29 COM 7A.23)
  • Ashur (Qal'at Sherqat) (Iraq) (Decision 29 COM 7A.18)
  • Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls (Jerusalem) (Decision 29 COM 7A.31)
  • Kathmandu Valley (Nepal ) (Decision 29 COM 7A.24)
  • Air and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Niger) (Decision 29 COM 7A.6)
  • Fort and Shalamar Gardens in Lahore (Pakistan) (Decision 29 COM 7A.25)
  • Chan Chan Archaeological Zone (Peru) (Decision 29 COM 7A.30)
  • Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras (Philippines) (Decision 29 COM 7A.26)
  • Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary (Senegal) (Decision 29 COM 7A.7)
  • Ichkeul National Park (Tunisia) (Decision 29 COM 7A.8)
  • Ruins of Kilwa Kisiwani and Ruins of Songo Mnara (United Republic of Tanzania) (Decision 28 COM 7A.15)
  • Everglades National Park (United States of America) (Decision 29 COM 7A.10)
  • Historic Town of Zabid (Yemen) (Decision 29 COM 7A.19)

Draft Decision: 29 COM 7A.20

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Document WHC-05/29.COM/7A,

2. Recalling its Decision 28 COM 15A.21, adopted at its 28th session (Suzhou, 2004),

3. Encouragesthe State Party to construct an alternative footbridge across the Hari River in order to enable access of the villagers from the Bedam Valley to the Jam Valley, following the recommendations of the UNESCO mission in February 2004;

4. Urges the State Party, with assistance from UNESCO and the international community, to continue the on-going efforts for the structural consolidation of the Minaret;

5. Requests the State Party, with assistance from the World Heritage Centre and the Advisory Bodies, to elaborate a site-management plan, taking into account the relevant provisions of the Operational Guidelines (2005);

6. Further request the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2006, a progress report on the state of conservation of this property, for examination by the Committee at its 30th session in 2006;

7. Decides to retain the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

Report year: 2005
Afghanistan
Date of Inscription: 2002
Category: Cultural
Criteria: (ii)(iii)(iv)
Danger List (dates): 2002-present
Documents examined by the Committee
arrow_circle_right 29COM (2005)
Exports

* : The threats indicated are listed in alphabetical order; their order does not constitute a classification according to the importance of their impact on the property.
Furthermore, they are presented irrespective of the type of threat faced by the property, i.e. with specific and proven imminent danger (“ascertained danger”) or with threats which could have deleterious effects on the property’s Outstanding Universal Value (“potential danger”).

** : All mission reports are not always available electronically.


top