Samarra Archaeological City

• Management systems/ management plan
• Armed conflict
• Weathering and lack of maintenance affecting the fragile structures
• State of conflict in the country that does not allow the responsible authorities to assure the protection and management of the property
• Encroachment, urban sprawl and bulldozing activities
• Need for a comprehensive Conservation Plan to guide works

State of conflict in the country that does not allow the responsible authorities to assure the protection and management of the property.

Not yet drafted

Not yet identified

Not yet identified

Total amount granted: USD 100,000 from the Nordic World Heritage Fund for training and documentation aiming at the preparation of the Nomination File

Total amount granted for all World Heritage Sites of Iraq:

• USD 6,000 from the Italian Funds-in-Trust (for cultural heritage, including World Heritage)
• USD 1.5 million by the Government of Japan (for cultural heritage, including World Heritage)
• USD 154,000 by the Government of Norway (for cultural heritage, including World Heritage)
• EUR 300,000 by the Government of Italy (for cultural heritage, including World Heritage)
• USD 35,000 by the Government of the Netherlands (for cultural heritage, including World Heritage)
• USD 100,000 from the Heritage Emergency Fund - support for Iraqi World Heritage properties
• USD 35,782 from the Netherlands Funds-in-Trust (for Strengthening capacities in state of conservation reporting on properties inscribed on the list of World Heritage in Danger)
• USD 50,000 from the Netherlands Funds-in-Trust (Strengthening capacities for the documentation and conservation of Properties on the List of World Heritage in Danger in Iraq)

On 31 January 2024, the State Party submitted a state of conservation report available at http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/276/documents/, which presents a framework for the establishment of a Desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSCOR) and corrective measures, to be achieved in three phases (within three years 2024-2026). The proposed framework addresses the 17 recommendations of the 2023 joint World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring mission.

The report does not, as requested in Decision 45 COM 7A.29, provide detailed information on the property's state of conservation, nor does it include a detailed report on bulldozed areas and encroachments, provide a commitment to address interventions within a framework of overall assessment of damage and risks, respond to requests that emergency works adopt a minimum intervention approach, nor engage with the findings of the technical reviews undertaken for works being carried out in the Great Mosque, the Caliphal Palace, Al Hir, and the Bab al-'Amma, the proposed reconstruction project for the Great Mosque, and the possible construction of two primary schools within the buffer zone of the property.

The 2023 Reactive Monitoring mission recognised the multiple challenges faced by the State Party in ensuring adequate management and accordingly outlined a set of 17 recommendations. In Decision 45 COM 7A.29, the World Heritage Committee urged the State Party to implement those recommendations and to pursue the development of a comprehensive Conservation Plan, the identification of corrective measures and the elaboration of a DSOCR.

The State Party’s proposal for a framework for the achievement of a DSOCR, which addresses the implementation of the mission’s recommendations in three phases, is acknowledged. The proposed first phase comprises a strategic approach for 2024 that establishes the current condition and includes surveys and studies to identify threats, planning for the establishment of an ‘On-site Heritage Unit’, and undertaking studies and documentation of selected elements of the property. The second phase presents a strategic approach for 2025 that includes preparation of the previously requested comprehensive Conservation Plan, implementation of sustainable management activities, conservation planning for Samarra City and the property’s buffer zone, and the initiation of conservation projects based on the principles of minimal intervention. The third phase proposes a strategic approach for 2026 that includes implementation of the Conservation Plan, developing partnerships, implementation of an interpretation plan within a tourism development plan, irrigating green areas while protecting the archaeological remains, and submitting the required documentation for actions undertaken that would meet the DSOCR and thereby, would support the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The above-mentioned actions, providing a way forward for the implementation of the mission’s recommendations and supporting the conservation and management of the property, would be welcome. Hence, it is recommended that the Committee express appreciation for this plan of action and encourage the State Party to pursue its implementation as soon as possible, particularly with regard to surveys, documentation, assessments, conservation planning, and the setting up of an on-site management unit. However, there are some elements within the presented framework, such as the purpose and requirements for Heritage Impact Assessment, that require clarification. It should also be recognised that the matters addressed in the mission report extend across aspects of the state of conservation of the property that are not related to the reasons it was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

With regard to the elaboration of a DSOCR and related corrective measures, it is important to recall that the property has been on the List of World in Danger since 2007 due to the ‘state of conflict that does not allow the responsible authorities to assure the protection and management of the property’. It is recommended that the Committee request the State Party to consult with the World Heritage Centre and Advisory Bodies regarding the establishment of the DSOCR, with related corrective measures and timeframe for implementation, as previously requested by the Committee.

The State Party has not provided information about the previously planned or ongoing projects for which technical reviews were undertaken by ICOMOS. The Committee may wish to reiterate its request to the State Party to proceed only in accordance with the findings and recommendations of those technical reviews, and to submit to the World Heritage Centre, for review by the Advisory Bodies, detailed information on all planned or ongoing projects that may have a negative impact on the Outstanding Universal Value of the property before making any decision that would be difficult to reverse, in conformity with Paragraph 172 of the Operational Guidelines. For major projects, the information should include Heritage Impact Assessments prepared in accordance with the Guidance and Toolkit for Impact Assessments in a World Heritage Context. The Committee may also wish to remind the State Party of the need to address and report on each of the Committee’s Decisions.