World Heritage 24COM

Distribution limited WHC-2000/CONF.204/21

Paris, 16 February 2001
Original : English/French

UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL

ORGANIZATION

CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD

CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE

WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

Twenty-fourth session

Cairns, Australia
27 November – 2 December 2000

REPORT
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. OPENING SESSION 1 Annexes

II. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND TIMETABLE 2
I. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS 67
III. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON,
RAPPORTEUR AND VICE-CHAIRPERSONS 2 II SPEECH OF THE OUTGOING CHAIRPERSON
MR. ABDELAZIZ TOURI 89
IV. REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT ON THE
ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN SINCE THE TWENTY- III SPEECH OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
THIRD SESSION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE GENERAL FOR CULTURE OF UNESCO, MR.
COMMITTEE 3 MOUNIR BOUCHENAKI 91
V. REPORTS OF THE RAPPORTEURS ON THE
SESSIONS OF THE WORLD HERITAGE BUREAU 4 IV. FIRST PACIFIC WORLD HERITAGE YOUTH
FORUM ACTION PLAN 95
VI. WORK OF THE WORLD HERITAGE REFORM
GROUPS 5 V. RECOMMENDATIONS TRANSMITTED TO THE
ATTENTION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE
VII. PERIODIC REPORTING 12 COMMITTEE BY THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
VIII. STATE OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES FORUM 97
INSCRIBED ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST 15
VI. SPEECH OF THE INCOMING CHAIRPERSON OF
IX. PROGRESS REPORT ON REGIONAL ACTIONS THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE, MR.
FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GLOBAL PETER KING 101
STRATEGY ACTION PLAN 31
VII. SPEECH OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE WORLD
X. INFORMATION ON TENTATIVE LISTS AND
HERITAGE CENTRE, UNESCO, MR.
EXAMINATION OF NOMINATIONS OF CULTURAL
FRANCESCO BANDARIN 103
AND NATURAL PROPERTIES TO THE LIST OF
WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER AND WORLD VIII. REVISED CALENDAR AND CYCLE FOR
HERITAGE LIST 33 WORLD HERITAGE STATUTORY MEETINGS
TO BE IMPLEMENTED AS OF 2002 105
XI. INFORMATION STRATEGY 51
XII. DOCUMENTATION, INFORMATION AND IX. LETTER FROM THE ITALIAN GOVERN-MENT
EDUCATION ACTIVITIES 52 CONCERNING REPRESENTATIVITY OF THE
WORLD HERITAGE LIST 107
XIII. EXAMINATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE
FUND AND APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET FOR X STATE OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES
2001 AND PRESENTATION OF A PROVISIONAL INSCRIBED ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST 109
BUDGET FOR 2002 53
XIV. INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE 58 XI. REPORT FROM PROFESSOR BRIAN
WILKINSON, LEADER OF THE ICSU
XV. TRAINING STRATEGY 61 INDEPENDENT SCIENTIFIC PANEL (ISP) ON
KAKADU NATIONAL PARK, AUSTRALIA 135
XVI. DATE, PLACE AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF
THE TWENTY-FIFTH ORDINARY SESSION OF THE
XII. STATEMENT BY IUCN ON KAKADU
BUREAU OF THE WORLD HERITAGE NATIONAL PARK, AUSTRALIA 139
COMMITTEE 64
XVII. DATE, PLACE AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF XIII. STATEMENT ON THE REPORT OF THE
INDEPENDENT SCIENTIFIC PANEL OF ICSU
THE TWENTY-FIFTH ORDINARY SESSION OF THE
BY THE SUPERVISING SCIENTIST OF
WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE 64 AUSTRALIA CONCERNING KAKADU
XVIII.OTHER BUSINESS 64 NATIONAL PARK, AUSTRALIA 141
XIX. CLOSURE OF THE SESSION 64 XIV. LETTER FROM YVONNE MARGARULA,
MIRRAR SENIOR TRADITIONAL OWNER
CONCERNING KAKADU NATIONAL PARK,
AUSTRALIA 143
XV. RECOMMENDATION OF THE TECHNICAL
WORKSHOP ON WORLD HERITAGE AND
MINING 145

XVI. DECLARATION OF THE MINISTERS

RESPONSIBLE FOR CULTURAL AFFAIRS IN
THE ARAB WORLD 149

XVII. STATEMENT BY THE OBSERVER OF

PALESTINE 151

XVIII STATEMENT BY THE OBSERVER OF ISRAEL

. 153
XIX. PROVISIONAL AGENDA OF THE TWENTY-
FIFTH SESSION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE
BUREAU IN PARIS 155
I. OPENING SESSION Zealand), The Wilderness Society (Australia), and the
World Archaeological Congress, WWF Australia and
I.1 The twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Queensland Conservation Council. (The full List of
Committee was held in Cairns, Australia, from 27 Participants is attached as Annex I to this report).
November to 2 December 2000. It was attended by all
twenty-one members of the World Heritage Committee: I.5 The twenty–fourth session of the World Heritage
Australia, Belgium, Benin, Canada, China, Colombia, Committee was opened by Mr Abdelaziz Touri,
Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, who
Malta, Mexico, Morocco, Portugal, Republic of Korea, presented Ms Jeanette Singleton, Traditional Owner. Ms
South Africa, Thailand, and Zimbabwe. Singleton, representative of a coastal indigenous group,
informed the Committee that her people lived on the land
I.2 The following States Parties to the Convention from time immemorial coming into contact with the first
who are not members of the Committee were represented Europeans in 1876. She expressed her appreciation that the
as observers: Angola, Argentina, Austria, Azerbaijan, Committee was held in Cairns near the Great Barrier Reef
Botswana, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, Fiji, and the Wet Tropics of Queensland World Heritage site.
France, Germany, Holy See, India, Israel, Japan,
Lithuania, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mongolia, Nepal, 1.6 The outgoing Chairperson of the World Heritage
Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Papua New Committee, Abdelaziz Touri thanked Ms. Singleton for her
Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Russian Federation, presentation. He expressed his appreciation for the support
Saudi Arabia, Slovak Republic, Solomon Islands, Spain, of the Committee during a demanding year and
Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom, highlighted progress made and challenges faced. (His
United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, speech is attached as Annex II to this report).
Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam and Yemen.
1.7 Mr. Roger Beale AM, Secretary, Department of
I.3 The Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the Environment and Heritage, on behalf of the host
UNESCO, non State Party to the World Heritage country, welcomed all participants to Australia, noting that
Convention, also participated at this session as an the meeting was being held on Aboriginal lands of North
observer. Queensland. He commended Mr Touri for his efficient
Chairmanship of the World Heritage Committee and
I.4 Representatives of the advisory bodies to the Bureau and the way he had steered the sessions of the
Committee, the International Centre for the Study of the Bureau and Committee. He expressed his gratitude to Mr.
Preservation and Restoration of the Cultural Property Bouchenaki and the staff of the UNESCO World Heritage
(ICCROM), the International Council on Monuments and Centre for their support. With respect to the preparations
Sites (ICOMOS) and the World Conservation Union for the meeting, he drew attention to the enormous task
(IUCN) attended the meeting in an advisory capacity. The involved and urged the Secretariat and the Committee to
meeting was also attended by representatives and use new technological tools to make these meetings more
observers of the following international governmental efficient. Mr Beale also acknowledged the great
organizations (IGOs), international non-governmental contribution made by the Queensland Government; and the
organizations (INGOs) and non-governmental staff of the two local World Heritage sites, namely, the
organizations (NGOs): Organization of World Heritage Wet Tropics of Queensland, and the Great Barrier Reef
Cities, South Pacific Regional Environment Programme, Marine Park Authority all which made the meeting
Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Commission, possible.
Australian Conservation Foundation, Australian Rainforest
Conservation Society, Bama Wabu, The Colong 1.8 Mr Rod Welford, Minister for Environment and
Foundation for Wilderness Ltd (Australia), CRC Heritage, Queensland Government, paid respect to the
Tourism/Southern Cross University, Environment Center Traditional Owners of Queensland on whose land the
NT Inc. (Australia), Environmental Defender’s Office of meeting was being held. He welcomed the Chairperson,
Northern Queensland, Inc., Fraser Island Defenders the Committee members and all participants and informed
Organization, Friends of the Earth Australia, Friends of the the Committee that Queensland has five of the thirteen
Earth Japan, Gimy Walubara Yidinji, World Heritage areas of Australia and that these unique
Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation, Waanyi Traditional sites are managed with responsibility. On behalf of the
Elders Corporation, International Centre for Cultural Queensland Government, he warmly welcomed all the
Landscapes, International Council for Science [ICSU Committee participants.
Independent Science Panel - Kakadu], International
Federation of Landscape Architects (IFLA), North 1.9 The Representative of the Director-General of
Queensland Conservation Council, Organisation for UNESCO, Mr Mounir Bouchenaki, Assistant Director-
Museums, Monuments and Sites of Africa (OMMSA), General for Culture, expressed his sincere gratitude to the
Simon Wiesenthal Centre Europe, United Nations Australian authorities for hosting the meeting and for their
Foundation, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on generosity and hospitality. Noting the special significance
Resources, Victoria University of Wellington (New of this meeting in the Pacific region, where only six of the

1
16 Member States of UNESCO were States Parties to the They urged the Committee to adopt four specific
World Heritage Convention, he made special mention of recommendations that they submitted, particularly for the
the two Pacific Island States Parties, Papua New Guinea establishment of a World Heritage Indigenous Council of
and Solomon Islands, who were present. He informed the Experts. Representatives of Traditional Owners from
Committee about reform measures undertaken in Kakadu, Uluru-Kata Tjuta, the Willandra Lakes Region,
UNESCO, which he linked to the complementary reform the Tasmanian Wilderness, the Wet Tropics Area and New
process being undertaken by the Committee and the Zealand, returned to the Committee to confirm the
Secretariat. He said that he was fully confident that authenticity of the presentation. (See Annex V).
"Cairns 2000" would become as equally well known as the
recently concluded "Sydney 2000" and, like it, a I.13 Following a proposal by Australia and supported
worldwide success. (His speech is included as Annex III). by members of the Committee, the Committee asked the
Secretariat to follow-up on the recommendations of both
1.10 Mr Francesco Bandarin, Director of UNESCO the Youth Forum and the Indigenous People's Forum. A
World Heritage Centre, then took the floor to acknowledge review of the feasibility of these proposals would be
the warm welcome given by Australia. He praised the presented by the Secretariat to the twenty-fifth session of
leadership of Mr Touri who had been at the helm during a the Bureau.
challenging year. The Director expressed appreciation for
the way he had been received into the Secretariat and the
support from the Committee that enabled him to settle in II. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA AND
well into his new position. TIMETABLE
I.11 A delegation of students presented the results of II.1 The Committee adopted the Provisional Agenda
the First Pacific World Heritage Youth Forum, held in and Timetable (WHC-99/CONF.204/1 Rev.10) without
Cairns, Australia, 23 – 28 November 2000. The Forum any modifications.
was organised by the Australian National Commission for
UNESCO and Environment Australia within the III. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON,
framework of the UNESCO Special Project "Young RAPPORTEUR AND VICE-CHAIRPERSONS
People's Participation in World Heritage Preservation and
Promotion". The students presented an action plan for III.1 Proposed by the Delegate of Hungary, and
2001 to better ensure young people's participation in endorsed by Canada, Thailand and Benin, Mr Peter King
World Heritage identification, preservation and promotion (Australia) was elected as Chairperson by acclamation.
in the Pacific (see Annex IV). They emphasised the need The following members of the Committee were elected as
for 1) integrating World Heritage into classroom teaching, Vice-Chairpersons by acclamation: Canada, Ecuador,
2) organisation of on-site conservation activities for young Finland, Morocco and Thailand. Mr. Dawson Munjeri
people and 3) proposed to set up a network of "Pacific (Zimbabwe) was elected as Rapporteur.
Patrimonitos' Centres" at schools to provide students with
a platform for concrete conservation work and research in III.2 The Committee warmly thanked the out-going
the fields of local and World Heritage. These centres Chairperson, Mr Abdelaziz Touri for the excellent
would furthermore ensure networking and exchange of leadership he provided the Committee during the past year
know-how between young people throughout the region. A which had resulted in closer working relations between the
teacher from New Zealand presented the plan to develop a Committee and the Secretariat.
Pacific version of the World Heritage Educational
Resource Kit and an Associated Schools Coordinator from III.3 The newly-elected Chairperson, Mr Peter King,
Fiji explained how World Heritage is being integrated into expressed his appreciation for the remarkable manner in
the curriculum at the national level. The Director of the which Mr Touri carried out his functions as Chairperson of
UNESCO Apia Office underlined the complementarity of the Committee. He pointed out that this had resulted in
education and World Heritage conservation in the Pacific several important initiatives taken during his tenure of
region. office and thanked all Committee members for electing
him into office. Mr King further highlighted regional
I.12 On 28 November 2000 representatives from initiatives and concluded by stating his commitment to a
Australia, Canada, the Solomon Islands and New Zealand new partnership in the World Heritage movement and to
attending an Indigenous Peoples Forum on World Heritage finding new ways of encouraging practical support for
held in Cairns (24 November) made a presentation to the heritage conservation. (His speech is attached as Annex
World Heritage Committee. In their presentation they VI).
made a plea for the protection of indigenous knowledge
systems, values and traditions in World Heritage areas,
asserting that these sites were "ancestral lands" that had to
be treated with respect. In the management of these sites,
consideration should be taken to involve and negotiate
with Indigenous Peoples who are the Traditional Owners.

2
IV. REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT ON THE that included the Biodiversity Convention, the Convention
ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN SINCE THE on Migratory Species and the Ramsar Convention. He also
TWENTY-THIRD SESSION OF THE WORLD mentioned the adoption of the European Landscape
HERITAGE COMMITTEE Convention by the Council of Europe’s Committee of
Ministers in July 2000.
IV.1 Mr Francesco Bandarin, Director of the World
Heritage Centre and Secretary to the World Heritage IV.7 Concerning the co-operation with other
Committee, presented the report on activities undertaken organizations, special mention was made of the partnership
since the last session of the World Heritage Committee in with the United Nations Foundation for strengthening the
1999. He referred to Information Document WHC- protection of World Heritage natural sites, in the
2000/CONF/204/INF.4. Using a Powerpoint presentation, framework of which some 8.5 million dollars had been
he highlighted the important points of the past year’s provided as outright grants for projects of benefit to World
activities. Natural Heritage of global biodiversity significance. The
Director further mentioned ongoing projects and co-
IV.2 The Director stressed the wide reform agenda operation with, among others, the United Nations
within UNESCO and commitments made by Mr Koichiro Environment Programme, the International Council on
Matsuura, the new UNESCO Director-General, to reform Metals and the Environment (ICME), the World Tourism
the Secretariat in order to meet these challenges. Among Organization, The World Bank, the Japan Bank for
positive changes envisaged were the announced reform of International Cooperation, the French Agency for
the Committee’s working methods, to energize the Centre Development, the Caisse des dépôts et consignation de
and which will increase its efficiency to meet the growing France, the European Union Asia Urbs Programme and the
demands of the Committee and the States Parties. Nordic World Heritage Office. In all this, the Director
stressed the increasing importance of strategic partnerships
IV.3 The Director briefly mentioned the four World that would reinforce the Centre's efforts and help improve
Heritage statutory meetings held in 2000 and the work the problems arising from insufficient resources.
accomplished by the four reform groups, namely the Task
Force on the Implementation of the World Heritage IV.8 The Director of the Centre indicated that
Convention, the Working Group on the Representivity of Namibia, Kiribati and Comoros had ratified the
the World Heritage List, the Working Group on Equitable Convention in 2000, bringing the number of States Parties
Representation in the World Heritage Committee and the to the Convention to 161. He stressed the record number of
International Expert Meeting on the Revision of the 72 nominations to be discussed at this session of the World
Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the Heritage Committee and informed the Committee that 115
World Heritage Convention. He also presented some among the 161 States Parties, had submitted Tentative
preliminary proposals for improvement in Documentation. Lists that comply with the format specified in the
These were designed to facilitate and speed-up decision- Operational Guidelines.
making by the Bureau and the Committee.
IV.9 Within the activities related to the Global
IV.4 Concerning co-operation with the advisory Strategy to ensure a representative and balanced World
bodies, the Director referred to two meetings held in Heritage List, reference was made to a certain number of
February and September 2000 which enabled close co- initiatives undertaken to address lacuna related to under-
ordination between inputs from the advisory bodies and represented regions and types of heritage. Among the
the Centre in the preparation of working documents for the meetings and workshops held in 2000, mention was made
Bureau and the Committee sessions. Other meetings and of the following: ‘Assessing Natural Heritage of Coastal
workshops were organized in co-operation with the and Marine Areas of Africa’, held in Maputo,
advisory bodies, for example, the expert meeting on World Mozambique; ‘Authenticity and Integrity in an African
Heritage and Mining (September 2000) in Gland, Context’, held at Great Zimbabwe; the AFRICA 2009
Switzerland, jointly organized by the Centre and IUCN, regional 3-month training course, ‘Conservation and
with the active participation of ICOMOS and the Management of Immovable Cultural Heritage’, Porto
International Council on Metals and the Environment Novo, Benin; the ‘Regional Capacity-Building Workshop
(ICME). for the Promotion of Awareness in Natural Heritage
Conservation’, Muscat, Oman. Furthermore, a Global
IV.5 The Director highlighted the continuing co- Strategy Expert Meeting on Central Asian Cultural
operation of the Centre with other UNESCO Sectors and Heritage was hosted by the Government of Turkmenistan
Units in the implementation of a variety of projects related in Ashgabat; a seminar on Natural Heritage in the
to the preservation of World Heritage sites, as well as the Caribbean was held in Paramaribo, Suriname; a Workshop
increasing number of activities undertaken in co-operation on the Management of Sites in the Guyana Shield was held
with the regional offices. in Georgetown, Guyana; a Regional Thematic Expert
Meeting on Potential Natural World Heritage Sites in the
IV.6 In the framework of co-operation with other Alps took place in Hallstatt, Austria; a conference was
Conventions, the Director mentioned fruitful exchanges organized on World Heritage Fossil Sites in Australia, and

3
cultural landscapes meetings were held in Italy, Kenya and Heritage Centre and Secretary of the World Heritage
Costa Rica. Committee. (His speech is attached as Annex VII to this
report).
IV.10 In the framework of Periodic Reporting, the
Director indicated that the final synthesis report for IV.16 The Chairperson of the World Heritage
periodic reporting for the Arab Region will be presented to Committee thanked the Director for his excellent
this session of the Committee and that the Periodic presentation that enabled him to gain insight into the wide
reporting exercise for Africa, taking place in 2001, is in and diverse array of the Centre’s activities.
preparation.

IV.11 Several other sites had been in the focus of public V. REPORTS OF THE RAPPORTEURS ON THE
attention in 2000, such as the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal, SESSIONS OF THE WORLD HERITAGE
the Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu, Peru, and the BUREAU
Whale Sanctuary of El Vizcaino, Mexico. The Director
briefly mentioned reports on the state of conservation of V.1 The Chairperson informed the Committee that the
sites inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger at Rapporteur of the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau (26
the last session of the World Heritage Committee, and June – 1 July 2000), Ms Anne Lammila, had finished her
particularly the recent developments at the Group of term as Deputy Permanent Delegate of Finland to
Monuments at Hampi, India. UNESCO and had returned to Finland to the take up new
duties. Therefore, at the invitation of the Chairperson, the
IV.12 The increase in the number of international Deputy Director of the World Heritage Centre informed
assistance requests approved in 2000 (105) reflects the the Committee that the Report of the Rapporteur of the
growing number of sites and threats to them. In view of twenty-fourth session of the Bureau of the World Heritage
the limited budget within the World Heritage Fund, the Committee, Document WHC-2000/CONF.204/2, had been
World Heritage Centre continued to give priority to Least adopted by the Bureau.
Developed Countries (LDCs) or Low-Income Countries
(LICs), especially those with sites on the List of World V.2 The Chairperson informed the Committee that the
Heritage in Danger, encouraging them to utilize the funds Bureau, at its twenty-fourth session, decided to hold a
in catalytic ways. Moreover, non LDC/LIC States Parties Special Session of the Bureau in Budapest, Hungary from
were encouraged to actively seek funds for large-scale 2-4 October 2000. This Special Session was held in order
projects from other sources. to further discuss the:
IV.13 The Director referred to the activities of the
 Implementation of the World Heritage
Centre’s Documentation, Information and Education Unit, Convention
emphasizing the increased range of activities undertaken in
 Representivity of the World Heritage List
2000. He particularly stressed the heavy workload
 Equitable Representation of the World Heritage
concerning the Centre’s statutory archival and Committee
documentary function, but pointed out that the Unit had
 Revision to the Operational Guidelines.
been reinforced with two staff members detached from the
UNESCO Culture Sector. He also indicated that the World As the position of the Rapporteur was vacant, in
Heritage Review had increased its frequency by becoming accordance with Rule 15.2 of the Rules of Procedures of
a bi-monthly edition, and that new partnership initiatives the World Heritage Committee, the Committee was
had been undertaken, notably through activities with the informed that Australia had been called upon to provide a
tourism industry. Special mention was made of the Special replacement Rapporteur for the Special Session of the
Project Young People's Participation in World Heritage Bureau and the twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the
Preservation and Promotion, which is proving to be one of Bureau in Cairns, Australia (23-24 November 2000). Mr
the most successful flagship projects launched by Kevin Keeffe served as Rapporteur at these two sessions.
UNESCO for young people. In 2000, more than 130
Member States actively participated in the experimentation V.3 The Rapporteur drew the attention of the
and adaptation of the Educational Resource Kit for Committee to the Report of the Special Session of the
Teachers “World Heritage in young hands”. Bureau of the World Heritage Committee (Budapest, 2-4
October 2000) presented in Document WHC-
IV.14 Finally, the Director brought to the attention of 2000/CONF.204/3 that includes recommendations on:
the Committee, the inadequacies of resources, but was
optimistic that this would not delay the work of the (a) Statutory meetings, strategic planning, the proposal
Committee. for a sub-committee system and equitable
representation in the World Heritage Committee
IV.15 At the end of the presentation of the Secretariat’s (b) Representivity of the World Heritage List
report, the Director shared with the Committee his initial (c) Information and documentation management
impressions as newly appointed Director of the World (d) Other matters.

4
The Committee was informed that the Budapest Bureau made during discussions under Agenda Item 8.2, and on
session was very fruitful and should lead to the finalisation the Feasibility Study during Agenda Item 6 respectively.
of some of the important reform measures which were now
before the Committee, including those related to World VI. WORK OF THE WORLD HERITAGE
Heritage statutory meetings. REFORM GROUPS
V.4 In relation to the discussions held concerning the VI.1 The Committee noted the reports of the following
Revision to the Operational Guidelines, Mr Keeffe four reform groups and sincerely thanked the States Parties
presented the following text, to replace paragraph III.22 of who had participated in their work.
the Report of the Special Session of the Bureau of the
World Heritage Committee (Budapest, 2-4 October 2000) Task Force on the implementation of the Convention
presented in Document WHC-2000/CONF.204/3. Chair: C. Cameron (Canada)
Rapporteur: K. Keeffe (Australia)
“The Bureau recommended that once the new WHC-2000/CONF.2000/INF. 7
overall framework for revised Operational
Guidelines (WHC-2000/CONF.202/9) had been Working Group on the Representativity of the World
approved by the Committee, details of new text Heritage List
could be finalized. The Bureau agreed that the Chair: H.E. Ambassador Mr Olabiyi B.J. Yai (Benin)
production of revised Operational Guidelines, Rapporteur: H.E. Mr M. Peek (Australia)
incorporating proposed changes be considered by WHC-2000/CONF.2000/INF. 8
the Committee as a high priority. The Bureau
agreed that the revision of the Operational Working Group on Equitable Representation in the
Guidelines would require teamwork on the part of World Heritage Committee
the Secretariat, advisory bodies and representatives Chair: H.E. Ambassador J. Musitelli (France)
of States Parties.” Rapporteur: D. Masek (Czech Republic)
WHC-2000/CONF.2000/INF.9
An initial draft text had been prepared by Australia and is
presented as an Information document, but not intended International Expert Meeting on the Revision of the
for discussion by the Committee. Operational Guidelines, Canterbury, United Kingdom
(10-14 April 2000)
With this correction, the Report of the Special Session of Chair: C. Young (United Kingdom)
the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee was adopted Rapporteur: K. Kovacs (United States of America)
by the Committee. WHC-2000/CONF.2000/INF.10

V.5 The Rapporteur thereafter presented the Report of VI.2 In view of the large number of detailed
the twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the Bureau of recommendations prepared by the four groups listed
the World Heritage Committee (Cairns, 23-24 November above, and given that there was limited time for
2000) presented in Document WHC-2000/CONF.204/4. discussion, the Committee focused its discussions on the
He recalled that this was a working document for the reform process by examining four specific issues as
twenty-fourth session of the Committee and drew the follows:
attention of the Committee to the sections concerning:
1. PROPOSED REFORM OF THE CALENDAR AND
III. State of conservation of properties inscribed on the CYCLE OF WORLD HERITAGE STATUTORY
World Heritage List MEETINGS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY OF THE
•= World Heritage and Mining PROPOSED SYSTEM OF SUB-COMMITTEES
•= State of conservation of natural properties
•= State of conservation of mixed properties The Committee recalled that the Task Force for the
•= State of conservation of cultural properties Implementation of the Convention, chaired by Ms
Christina Cameron (Canada), had proposed that sub-
IV. Examination of nominations of cultural and natural committees be established to facilitate the work of the
properties to the List of World Heritage in Danger World Heritage Committee and the World Heritage
and the World Heritage List Centre.

VI. Feasibility study on the proposed system of sub- The Committee also recalled that the twenty-fourth session
committees. of the Bureau (June 2000) had requested that there be
further examination of the possibility of a sub-committee
The Rapporteur informed the Committee that any system and that the Special Session of the Bureau
additional comments on the state of conservation of (Budapest, 2-4 October 2000) had discussed the proposal
properties inscribed on the World Heritage List could be further with reference to a paper prepared by the United
Kingdom.

5
As requested by the Special Session of the Bureau, a paper
 Introduce an Item A and B decision-making system
on the feasibility and implications of a sub-committee (Item A: items which are the subject of consensus
system was prepared and examined by the twenty-fourth for adoption and, Item B: items requiring
extraordinary session of the Bureau (WHC- discussion by the Committee)
2000/CONF.203/6).

 Enforce Rule 22.2 of Committee’s Rules of
The four objectives for proposing changes to the existing Procedure to limit the time allowed to each speaker
Bureau and Committee system were to: (especially if they are an observer)

Objective 1 Facilitate the work of the World
 Defer the examination of nominations received in
Heritage Centre 2001 to the year 2003. This deferral would imply
Objective 2 Facilitate the work of the World only a limited pause (7 months) in the nomination
Heritage Committee and allow it to process, and allow the necessary transitional
devote more time to general policy adjustments
discussions for the implementation of
the Convention
 Introduce a biennial budget for the World Heritage
Objective 3 Improve the prior examination of Fund to harmonize with the UNESCO budget cycle
various issues submitted to the
Committee, and
 Review any changes to the calendar, cycle and
Objective 4 Increase representation of States Parties meetings of the Bureau (or sub-committees) and the
in the work of the Committee Committee after they have been in operation for 4
years
The Committee decided to:
The revised deadline for nominations would be 1

 Revise the calendar and cycle of World Heritage February. Evaluations would be due from IUCN and/or
meetings from June/November to April/June (see ICOMOS 6 weeks prior to the April Bureau.
Annex VIII)
Referrals of nominations would be re-examined by the

 Abolish the extraordinary sessions of the Bureau Bureau in the year following initial examination before
and Committee proceeding to the Committee for decision.

 Implement changes to the calendar and cycle of the The deadline for receipt of international assistance
Bureau and the Committee in 2002 (Note: Hungary, requests and state of conservation reports would also be
who hopes to be host country to the Committee in on 1 February.
2002, expressed their agreement to this date for the
introduction of a new calendar and cycle) During the transition period the following timetable would
apply:

Nominations received by To be examined by the To be examined by the

Bureau Committee
1 July 2000 June/July 2001 December 2001
1
31 December 2000 April 2002 June 2002
1 February 2002 April 2003 June 2003
1 February 2003 April 2004 June 2004

1
Full and complete nominations received by the World Heritage Centre prior to 31 December 2000 will be considered together
with nominations deferred, or referred, from previous meetings and changes to the boundaries of already inscribed properties.
The Committee may also decide to consider, on an emergency basis, situations falling under paragraph 67 of the Operational
Guidelines.

6
The Committee decided to defer a decision on the
prepare a regular report referencing documents
introduction of a sub-committee system or the extension of currently available
the Bureau session from six to eight days, until the
organize two information meetings per year for
effectiveness of the other reforms (changed statutory Committee members at UNESCO Headquarters
meeting calendar and cycle, limitation in number of (non-Committee members to attend as observers)
nominations to be examined each year and reforms to
continue to prepare a Secretariat Report to the
meeting documentation) could be assessed at a later date. Bureau and Committee but improve its structure
It was thus agreed that reform should proceed gradually. and content.
Greater efforts were to be given to structuring the work of
the Bureau to focus its work. The ordering of the agenda The Committee requested the World Heritage Centre to
by topics was considered useful as was the use of informal implement as many of these reforms as are feasible before
ad hoc working groups to expedite the work of the Bureau the twenty-fifth session of the Committee.
and Committee.

The Delegate of Hungary presented a document distributed 2. EQUITABLE REPRESENTATION IN THE

to the Committee entitled “A Hungarian World Heritage WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Vision”. The document refers to the need to address the
balance of representation of the World Heritage List in The Committee recalled that in October 1999 the twelfth
favour of under-represented or non-represented countries. General Assembly,
It also calls for a more prominent role for tentative lists.
The Delegate of Hungary suggested that with a pause in
 adopted by consensus a Resolution underlining the
the examination of nominations in 2002, the twenty-sixth importance of an equitable representation of the
session of the Committee in 2002 could concentrate on the World Heritage Committee and the need to increase
preparation of a Strategic Plan and other issues important the number of its members
for the future implementation of the Convention.

 requested the World Heritage Committee to submit
Documentation proposals on this matter to the thirteenth General
Assembly of States Parties and to inscribe an item
The Committee noted that the Task Force on the on the agenda of the thirty-first General Conference
Implementation of the World Heritage Convention had in 2001.
recommended a number of reforms to the documents
prepared for World Heritage statutory meetings. The Committee noted that in 2000, a Working Group on
Equitable Representation within the World Heritage
Following a presentation by the Director of the World Committee was established under the Chairmanship of
Heritage Centre, the Committee agreed that the objectives H.E. Ambassador J. Musitelli (France). The report of the
of reforming meeting documentation would be to: Working Group was discussed at the June and October
2000 sessions of the Bureau (WHC-

 facilitate decision-making and increase efficiency 2000/CONF.204/INF.9).

 streamline document preparation

 provide transparency and equity of access to The Committee noted the proposals on the equitable
documentation representation of the Committee developed following the

 reduce costs. Special Session of the Bureau session (WHC-
2000/CONF.204/6) and decided to recommend the
The Committee decided that reform of the system of following Draft Resolution for adoption by the 13th
documentation, as proposed by the Director of the World General Assembly:
Heritage Centre, would include:
The General Assembly of States Parties to the Convention

 maintaining Reports of the Rapporteurs concerning the protection of the World Cultural and

 reducing the number of working documents by Natural Heritage,
compiling one decision-making guide to be
distributed 2 weeks prior to the meeting Recalling Article 8, paragraph 2, of the Convention

 including additional working documents only in which stipulates that “Election of members of the
exceptional cases - e.g. Strategic Planning Committee shall ensure an equitable representation
documents, or changes to Reference Texts of the different regions and cultures of the world";
(Operational Guidelines, Rules of Procedure etc.)

 all other documents as Information Documents. Recalling Article 9 of the Convention which
stipulates that “The term of office of States members
To enhance communication between the World Heritage of the World Heritage Committee shall extend from
Centre and the Committee, the Committee also decided, as the end of the ordinary session of the General
proposed by the Director of the World Heritage Centre, Conference during which they are elected until the
that the Centre would, end of its third subsequent ordinary session”;

7
Recalling the Resolution of the 7th General Assembly required is less than the number of seats to be
of States Parties (1989); filled, there shall be a second ballot. If the number
of States obtaining the majority required is still
Considering the representivity of the World Heritage less than the number of seats to be filled there
List could be enhanced through the increased shall be a third and, if necessary a fourth ballot, to
participation in the work of the Committee of States fill the remaining seats. For the third and fourth
Parties whose heritage is currently unrepresented in ballots, the voting shall be restricted to the States
the List; obtaining the greatest number of votes in the previous
ballot, up to a number twice that of the seats
Considering that the strong interest of States Parties remaining to be filled.
in participating in the work of the World Heritage
Committee could be addressed by a more frequent Decides that this resolution should be implemented
rotation of Committee members; immediately.

Invites the States Parties to the World Heritage The Committee also recommended that the General
Convention, to voluntarily reduce their term of office Assembly organize the agenda of its thirteenth session so
from six to four years; that the measures foreseen by these amendments may enter
into force at that same session.
Encourages States Parties that are not members of
the Committee to make use of their right to In order to implement the new rule to be inserted
participate in meetings of the World Heritage following Rule 13.1, the Committee decided that one seat
Committee as observers; be reserved for a State Party not having a site inscribed on
the World Heritage List at the date of the thirteenth session
Discourages States Parties from seeking consecutive of the General Assembly.
terms of office in the World Heritage Committee;
The Committee requested the Secretariat to inform all
Decides that before each election of Committee States Parties of the implementation of the new electoral
members, the President of the General Assembly of procedures, particularly those States Parties which may
States Parties will inform States Parties of the fulfill the conditions to be candidates for the reserved seat.
situation of the representation of regions and cultures
in the World Heritage Committee and World The Committee requested the Secretariat to prepare with
Heritage List; the involvement of interested States Parties and the
advisory bodies, a proposal for the twenty-sixth session of
Decides to amend its Rules of Procedure as follows: the World Heritage Committee for further amendment to
Rule 13 of the Rules of Procedures of the General
Assembly relating to the election of members of the World
New Rule to be inserted after Rule 13.1 Heritage Committee in order to ensure an equitable
representation of the different regions and cultures of the
A certain number of seats may be reserved for world. This proposal is to be based on a thorough analysis
State Parties who do not have sites on the World of the consequences of the proposed changes and the
Heritage List, upon decision of the World adjustments that would be required to the election
Heritage Committee at the session that precedes procedures.
the General Assembly. Such a ballot for reserved
seats would precede the open ballot for the The Committee also decided to revise the Rules of
remaining seats to be filled. Unsuccessful Procedure of the World Heritage Committee as follows:
candidates in the reserved ballot would be eligible
to stand in the open ballot. New Rule 4.3

Amendment to existing Rule 13.8 (new text in “In determining the place of the next session, the
bold) Committee shall give due regard to the need to
ensure an equitable rotation among the different
13.8 Those States obtaining in the first ballot the regions and cultures of the world.”
required majority shall be elected, unless the number
of States obtaining that majority is greater than the New Rule 20.4
number of seats to be filled. In that case, the States
obtaining the greatest number of votes, up to the “In appointing consultative bodies, due regard
number of seats to be filled, shall be declared elected. shall be given to the need to ensure an equitable
If the number of States obtaining the majority representation of the different regions and
required is less than the number of seats to be filled, cultures of the world.”
there shall be a second ballot, followed by a third
and, if necessary a fourth, to fill the remaining seats.
If the number of States obtaining the majority

8
 New Rule 21.3 heritage mentioned in Articles 1 and 2 is situated, and
without prejudice to property right provided by
“In appointing subsidiary bodies, due regard shall national legislation, the States Parties to this
be given to the need to ensure an equitable Convention recognize that such heritage constitutes a
representation of the different regions and world heritage for whose protection it is the duty of
cultures of the world.” the international community as a whole to co-operate
(Article 6 (1)
3. REPRESENTIVITY OF THE WORLD
HERITAGE LIST (ii) The States Parties undertake, in accordance with
the provisions of this Convention, to give their help
The Committee examined and discussed the in the identification, protection, conservation and
recommendations of the Working Group on the presentation of the cultural and natural heritage … if
Representivity of the World Heritage List chaired by the States on whose territory it is situated so request
Ambassador Yai (Benin), which had been transmitted by (Article 6 (2)).
the Special Session of the Bureau with some changes.
(iii) Every State Party to this Convention shall, in so
The Committee recognized that the issue of representivity far as possible, submit to the World Heritage
of the World Heritage List was the most difficult of the Committee an inventory of property forming part of
reform issues under consideration by the Committee. The the cultural and natural heritage, situated in its
Committee noted that more effective use of tentative lists territory and suitable for inclusion in the list …
and greater regulation of the ever-increasing number of (Article 11 (1).
nominations was required. It was agreed that other
measures, such as assistance for capacity-building would Decisive cooperative action is required by the Committee
be vital for ensuring the representation of sites from all and States Parties to ensure that the World Heritage List is
regions on the World Heritage List. fully representative of the world’s natural and cultural
heritage.
The Committee therefore agreed on a decision presented in
5 sections: 2. Tentative Lists

1. Respecting the Convention (i) In the future, consistent with Article 11, .the
2. Tentative Lists tentative lists of cultural and natural sites should be used,
3. Nominations as a planning tool to reduce the imbalances in the World
4. Resolution of the Twelfth General Assembly, 1999 Heritage List. States Parties are reminded of the invitation
5. Capacity Building for under-represented Regions to submit tentative lists in conformity with Article 11 of
the Convention. The Committee should revise paragraphs
With reference to Section 3, the Delegate of Hungary 7 and 8 of the Operational Guidelines to extend to natural
asked that his request for a change in the deadline for sites its decision not to examine nominations of sites for
submission of nominations to be examined in 2002, from inscription if the property does not appear on a tentative
December 2000 as agreed by the Committee, to April list.
2001, be noted in the Report. The Committee agreed to
note this request by the Delegate of Hungary but stated (ii) The advisory bodies and the World Heritage
that in the interest of a smooth transition, the majority Centre should proceed with an analysis of sites inscribed
position of the Committee will be maintained. on the World Heritage List and the tentative list on a
regional, chronological, geographical and thematic basis.
With the exception of Hungary, the text of the decision This analysis should be undertaken as soon as possible,
was adopted by all members of the Committee. A letter taking into account the workload on advisory bodies and
from the Italian Government is included as Annex IX of the financial implications of this work, particularly in
this report. regard to the large number of sites on the tentative list.
For this reason, the work should be undertaken in two
The Committee agreed to transmit its decision to the parts, sites inscribed on the World Heritage List and sites
Thirteenth General Assembly of States Parties in 2001. on the tentative list. The analysis will provide States
Parties with a clear overview of the present situation, and
1. Respecting the Convention likely trends in the short to medium term with a view to
identifying under-represented categories.
The Committee reaffirmed the Convention for the
Protection of the World Natural and Cultural Heritage as (iii) The advisory bodies should take into account in
an instrument of consensus, cooperation and accord their analyses:
between States Parties and takes particular note of Articles
6 (1) and 6 (2) and Article 11 (1):
The diversity and particularities of natural and
cultural heritage in each region,
(i) Whilst fully respecting the sovereignty of the
The results of regional Periodic Reporting, and
States on whose territory the cultural and natural

9

The recommendations of the regional and thematic 1. Nominations of sites submitted by a State Party
meetings on the harmonisation of tentative lists held with no sites inscribed on the List;3
since 1984 and those on the Global Strategy
organised since 1994. 2. Nominations of sites from any State Party that
illustrate un-represented or less represented
(iv) The World Heritage Centre and advisory bodies categories of natural and cultural properties, as
should communicate the results of the analyses to the determined by analyses prepared by the Secretariat
World Heritage Committee and, following the and the Advisory Bodies and reviewed and approved
Committee's examination, the results should be conveyed by the Committee;
to States Parties to the Convention, together with the
Committee's recommendations. This will allow them to 3. Other nominations.
prepare, revise and/or harmonise their tentative list, taking
into account, where appropriate, regional considerations, When applying this priority system, date of receipt of full
and to take the results of the analyses into consideration and complete nominations by the World Heritage Centre
for the submission of future nominations. shall be used as the secondary determining factor within
the category where the number of nominations established
(v) The results of the analyses should be communicated no by the Committee is reached.
later than 30 September 2001.
In addition to the approved maximum number of sites, the
3. Nominations Committee will also consider nominations deferred, or
referred, from previous meetings and changes to the
In order to promote the effective management of the boundaries of already inscribed properties. The Committee
increasing size of the World Heritage List, the Committee may also decide to consider, on an emergency basis,
at each ordinary session will set the maximum number of situations falling under paragraph 67 of the Operational
nominations to be considered. In the first instance and on Guidelines.
an interim basis, it is proposed that at the twenty-seventh
session of the Committee in 2003, the number of Transition arrangements
nominations examined by the Committee will be limited to
a maximum of 30 new sites. Committee meeting, December 2001

In order to determine which sites should be given priority No change to existing system.
for consideration, all nominations to be considered at the
twenty-seventh session of the Committee must be received Committee meeting June 2002
in full by the new due date of 1 February 2002 agreed by
the Committee as part of the change of cycle of meetings. Full and complete nominations received by the World
No State Parties should submit more than one nomination, Heritage Centre prior to 31 December 2000 will be
except those States Parties that have no sites inscribed on considered together with nominations deferred, or
the World Heritage List who will have the opportunity to referred, from previous meetings and changes to the
propose two or three nominations. boundaries of already inscribed properties. The
Committee may also decide to consider, on an
In order to address the issue of representivity of the List emergency basis, situations falling under paragraph 67
the following criteria will be applied in order of priority2: of the Operational Guidelines.
In the event that the number of nominations received
exceeds the maximum number set by the Committee, the Committee meeting June 2003
following priority system will be applied each year by the
World Heritage Centre before nominations are transmitted Nominations to be submitted by 1 February 2002 and
to the advisory bodies for evaluation, in determining which prioritized in accordance with the system as described
sites should be taken forward for consideration: above.

Review

The system described above is to be reviewed by the

Committee after two full years of operation.

2
In nominating properties to the List, States Parties are
invited to keep in mind the desirability of achieving a
3
reasonable balance between the numbers of cultural heritage In evaluating these, and all other nominations, the
and natural heritage properties included in the World Advisory Bodies should continue to apply a strict
Heritage List (Paragraph 15 of the Operational Guidelines) evaluation of criteria as set out in the Operational
Guidelines.

10
4. Resolution of the Twelfth General Assembly, 1999 Heritage Centre budget process to undertake such
workshops.
The Committee decided to call on States Parties concerned
to inform the Committee with a minimum of delay, of (iii) Requests by States Parties whose heritage is non-
measures taken in the implementation of the clauses of the represented or under-represented should be given a high
Resolution adopted by the Twelfth General Assembly priority when the portion of the World Heritage budget
(Paragraph B) that invites all States Parties that already relating to Preparatory Assistance in preparing
have a substantial number of sites inscribed on the World nominations is developed.
Heritage List to:
(iv) The order of priorities for the granting of international
(i) Apply paragraph 6 (vii) of the Operational Guidelines assistance, as defined in paragraphs 91 and 113-114 of the
for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention: Operational Guidelines, should be revised in a manner
consistent with the recommendations of the International
a) by spacing voluntarily their nominations according Expert Meeting on the Revision of the Operational
to conditions that they will define, and/or Guidelines (Canterbury, United Kingdom) to improve the
representivity of the World Heritage List and to be
b) by proposing only properties falling into categories coherent with the Global Strategy. Beyond the conditions
still under-represented, and/or provided for by the Convention, and subject to the
conclusions of the evaluation of international assistance,
c) by linking each of their nominations with a the new priority order should take into account:
nomination presented by a State Party whose heritage
is under-represented, or -The necessity of encouraging the beneficiary countries to
develop measures for the implementation of the
d) by deciding, on a voluntary basis, to suspend the Convention in their country,
presentation of new nominations. - The order of priority for the examination of the
nominations for inscription,
ii) Initiate and encourage bilateral and multilateral - The state of preparation of the beneficiary countries, and
co-operation with States Parties whose heritage is still - The necessity of giving priority to the least developed
under-represented in the List within the framework of the countries (LDCs) and countries with a low revenue.
preparation of tentative lists, nominations and training
programmes, (v) Regional Plans of Action should be updated and
developed within the framework of the Global Strategy.
iii) Give priority to the re-examination of their These should specify for each targeted region and State
tentative lists within the framework of regional Party, the objective, action needed, responsibility,
consultations and to the preparation of periodic reports. timetable for adoption, state of play and a mechanism to
report on progress in implementing these at each session of
5. Capacity Building for Under-represented Regions the World Heritage Committee. In order to underline their
incentive nature, the Plans of Action should highlight the
The Committee decided that cooperative efforts in actions by the States Parties concerned, notably in
capacity-building and training are necessary to ensure that application of Article 5 of the Convention, and should
the World Heritage List is fully representative and agrees mention the bilateral or multilateral co-operation
that: programmes in the field of heritage in general, for the
elaboration in particular of nominations.
(i) The World Heritage Centre should continue to
promote training programmes, preferably at the regional (vi) The next UNESCO Medium-Term Strategy should
level, aimed at allowing States Parties whose heritage is stress the necessity of adopting an intersectoral policy
still under-represented to be better versed in the aimed at better implementing the Convention. From the
Convention and to better implement the measures under 2002-2003 biennium, an intersectoral project should be
Article 5. These primarily concern the identification, developed and implemented to encourage the States
management, protection, enhancement and conservation of Parties whose heritage is still under-represented to
heritage. Such programmes should also assist States reinforce their capacity to protect, conserve and enhance it.
Parties to acquire and/or consolidate their expertise, in the
preparation and harmonisation of their tentative lists and The Committee noted that the Hungarian authorities had
the preparation of nominations. prepared a proposal for the establishment of a Heritage
Partnership Programme to be examined by the Committee
(ii) The advisory bodies and the World Heritage at its twenty-fourth session in Cairns (WHC-
Centre should use the opportunity of evaluation missions 2000/CONF.204/19).
to hold regional training workshops to assist under-
represented States in the methods of preparation of their The Committee decided that a review of the
tentative list and nominations. Appropriate financial and implementation and effectiveness of such measures should
human resources should be provided through the World take place not later than 2003.

11
4. PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE OPERATIONAL Operational Guidelines should reflect different regional
GUIDELINES and cultural perspectives. The Committee agreed to the
following phased approach to the revision of the
The Director of the World Heritage Centre thanked Operational Guidelines. The Director of the World
English Heritage and the Government of the United Heritage Centre noted that additional human and financial
Kingdom for having organized, jointly with the UNESCO resources would be required for the Centre to co-ordinate
World Heritage Centre, the International Expert Meeting this process.
on the Revision to the Operational Guidelines in
Canterbury, England, from 10 to 14 April, 2000. He also Phase I Meeting at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris in
thanked the Government of the United Kingdom for January 2001 to define the process for revising
having offered to provide an additional financial the Operational Guidelines
contribution to this important activity in 2001.
Phase II Preparation by the Secretariat of a first draft
Following a report on the results of the Expert Meeting by revised text in English and French to reflect
Christopher Young (United Kingdom), who had chaired all current proposals for revision and showing
the meeting, the Committee decided that the Operational the source of the proposed revisions
Guidelines be restructured according to the proposed new
overall framework (WHC-2000/CONF.204/INF.10). Phase III Circulation of the revised text to all States
Parties and posting of revised text on the Web
I INTRODUCTION
II ESTABLISHMENT OF THE WORLD Phase IV Contributions in writing from States Parties
HERITAGE LIST
III PROTECTION AND CONSERVATION OF Phase V Meeting to refine new Operational
WORLD HERITAGE PROPERTIES Guidelines, section by section
IV INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE
V ACTIVITIES IN SUPPORT OF THE WORLD Phase VI Submission of revised Operational Guidelines
HERITAGE CONVENTION to the twenty-fifth session of the World
The Committee requested that the Operational Guidelines Heritage Committee in 2001 for decision.
be simplified, streamlined and presented in a user-friendly
form with most of the existing and new supporting VII. PERIODIC REPORTING
material to be moved to annexes and other documentation.
The Committee asked that the Operational Guidelines be Report on the state of conservation of World Heritage
organized in a logical way, returning to the fundamental in the Arab region
principles of the World Heritage Convention. The revised
Operational Guidelines will introduce for the first time a VII.1 The report (WHC-2000/CONF.204/7) was
consolidated section on the Protection and Conservation of presented to the Committee by Mr Abdelaziz Daoulatli,
World Heritage Properties. Consultant (WHC) for Periodic Reporting in the Arab
Region. In all, as at the beginning of November 2000,
IUCN welcomed the excellent work done at the there were 52 sites on the World Heritage List, of which
Canterbury Expert Meeting to propose a reshaping of the 44 were inscribed prior to 1993 and the latter were the
Operational Guidelines. IUCN agreed that a subject of the report. He explained the processes followed
comprehensive overhaul of this key document was in the compilation of the report (a synthesis of 2,500 pages
required rather than the past practice of incremental, ad of data) and underscored the high level of co-operation
hoc amendments. IUCN expressed their wish to contribute received from the States Parties. Out of a possible 44
to a process of revisions and proposed five objectives for reports, 36 had been received.
the revised Operational Guidelines:
From his observations, Mr Daoulatli drew special attention
1. The integration of cultural and natural criteria of the Committee to the following areas:
while maintaining the current wording of the
natural criteria - Absence of strategies and management plans
2. The close link between concepts of integrity and - General absence of adequate documentation
authenticity - Lack of and, in cases, absence of necessary
3. Stronger emphasis placed on site management professional and technical skills
4. Emphasis on reactive monitoring as nothing does - Ignorance about the World Heritage Convention
more for the credibility of the Convention and a general public unawareness of the existence
5. More creative use of tentative lists. or significance of World Heritage sites
- Central government-driven initiatives and non-
The Committee decided that the process for revising the involvement of civil society, NGOs and the public
Operational Guidelines should be co-ordinated by the - Management-based on "rule of thumb" and not on
World Heritage Centre through a collaborative process scientific principles and consequently absence of
involving representatives of States Parties, the advisory key indicators
bodies and the Secretariat. It was agreed that revised - Ill-defined or ill-understood values.

12
 with the Permanent Delegates to UNESCO to inform them
In the light of these observations, Mr Daoulatli advocated of the results of the periodic reporting exercise.
an Action Plan focused on:
Periodic Reporting: Progress report on regional

 Identification of properties strategies for periodic reporting.

 Integrated management and conservation plans

 Preventive monitoring VII.5 The Secretariat recalled that in accordance with

 Promotion of the Convention and awareness the decisions taken by the World Heritage Committee at its
proposals on World Heritage sites twenty-second session regarding the application of Article

 Training and international co-operation. 29 of the World Heritage Convention, the following
principles guide the design and implementation of the
VII.2 He recommended the holding of a second regional periodic reporting strategies:
regional meeting to submit the final report to the States
Parties of the Arab region; the harmonization of the •= The States Parties themselves are responsible for the
tentative lists for the Arab Region; the limiting of new preparation of national Periodic Reports.
nominations whilst taking into account an equitable •= States Parties may request expert advice from the
representation in States Parties and categories of Secretariat or the advisory bodies. The Secretariat
properties, and focusing on the conservation of existing may also commission expert advice with the
ones. He also recommended the setting up of a monitoring agreement of the States Parties.
service for the Arab region and the study of an Action •= Periodic reporting will provide the framework for the
Plan, the implementation of which to be funded jointly by exchange of experiences among States Parties.
the World Heritage Fund and extrabudgetary sources. •= Periodic reporting is a participatory process in which
all World Heritage partners are involved.
VII.3 The Delegates of Mexico, Italy, Canada, •= The Secretariat will facilitate the implementation of
Morocco, Cuba, the Observer of the United Kingdom and the periodic reporting requirement by the States
the Delegate of Greece, as well as the Representative of Parties and will synthesise the national reports by
IUCN, successively took the floor to express their region. In doing so, full use will be made of the
satisfaction with the report, the first of its kind. They available expertise of the advisory bodies, States
pointed out that it served as a prototype for the other Parties, competent institutions and expertise available
regions, and conveyed their congratulations to the authors. within the region.
The Delegate of Mexico questioned the existence of a
system for inventories and the Delegate of Italy queried VII.6 Following the overall approaches to periodic
the reasons why some Arab States had advocated the reporting for the Arab States and Africa that were
revision of the statement of value in the nomination forms, presented to and endorsed by the World Heritage
or the elaboration of new statements of value. This notion Committee at its twenty-third session (working document
of value was taken up by the Delegate of Morocco, who WHC-99/CONF.209/12), a progress report on the
considered it to be a critical question that deserved implementation of the periodic reporting strategy for
thorough discussion. He also drew attention to the Africa, as well as the regional strategies for Asia and the
appropriateness of the Moroccan boundary, as reflected on Pacific, and Latin America and the Caribbean were
the presenter's map of the Arab region. The Observer of presented to the World Heritage Committee.
the United Kingdom underlined the need to take into
account, at the time of the revision of the Operational VII.7 Concerning the African region reporting on 40
Guidelines, changes concerning the boundaries of the sites located in 18 States Parties, the Committee was
inscribed sites or their buffer zones. The Delegate of informed that the first two phases of the seven-phase
Greece emphasized the need to evaluate, prior to the action plan were already completed. The remaining phases
inscription of new sites, their management plans. She are foreseen for completion in time for the presentation of
referred to the statement of the Observer of the United the regional synthesis report to the twenty-fifth session of
Kingdom, to integrate monitoring into the framework of the World Heritage Committee in 2001:
the global approach to site management, idea also taken up
by the Representative of IUCN. Phase I: Preparation of the periodic reporting exercise
and finalisation of a questionnaire
VII.4 Noting the awareness problem, the Delegate of Phase II: Exploitation of the first replies to the
Canada suggested that the Secretariat arrange a meeting questionnaires
with the representatives of the States Parties of the Arab Phase III: Organisation of periodic reporting workshops
region to appraise them on the Report. The Secretariat and set-up of electronic communication as
could arrange another meeting with possible funding well as analysis of questionnaires
agencies. In concluding, the Chairperson invited the Phase IV: Completion of analysis of questionnaires
Director of the Centre to study the proposals contained in Phase V: Analysis and synthesis of periodic reporting
the Report, as they were unanimously supported by all exercise
delegates, who looked forward to their implementation, in Phase VI: Assistance missions to identify and solve
co-operation with the States Parties concerned. In this problems on the ground
respect, the Director was called upon to convene a meeting

13
Phase VII: Presentation of the regional report to the
World Heritage Committee in 2001. VII.11 The process for Latin America and the Caribbean
was presented as a five-phase approach, leading from a
VII.8 A Periodic Reporting Workshop for the preparatory information phase, through three sub-regional
Francophone African countries was held in Dakar, Senegal meetings and one regional meeting to the presentation of
from 5-8 July 2000. Site managers of four cultural and five the regional report to the Committee in 2003. The first
natural sites attended this Workshop representing six out phase, which is already underway, is centred on informing
of the invited nine countries. Various sections of the the concerned States Parties about the reporting process
reporting questionnaire were examined by the participants. and providing them with the necessary information
The participating managers, who completed the material. The States Parties have been requested to identify
questionnaires themselves, expressed their general national focal points.
satisfaction with this reporting tool, which was designed
by the World Heritage Centre. At the Workshop several VII.12 For Europe and North America, a regional
general problems concerning site management and more strategy proposal will be submitted to the Committee at its
specifically information-flow and decision-making twenty-fifth session.
processes were identified. Furthermore, the lack of human
and material resources was highlighted, especially VII.13 During the debate, several States Parties and
emphasising the need for regular training to enable site IUCN took the floor. Regarding the action plans presented
managers to apply more efficiently the decisions of the for the Asia-Pacific region, the Delegate of Australia
World Heritage Committee. A regional Periodic Reporting remarked that it was not entirely clear how the process
Workshop for Anglophone African countries will be held leads from the preparation of national reports to the
during the first half of 2001. synthesis report to be presented to the World Heritage
Committee in 2002. Concern was expressed that the
VII.9 The geographically vast Asia-Pacific Region, region's States Parties had not been given enough
with 26 Asian and six Pacific States Parties, is home to opportunities to contribute to the development of the
124 World Heritage sites. There are 42 natural or mixed action plan. The Delegate of Hungary highlighted the
World Heritage sites distributed over thirteen countries in importance of the reporting exercise and suggested the use
Asia and the Pacific. Of these, 42 natural or mixed, 33 of the regional division used by UNESCO, i.e. Europe and
from eleven countries were inscribed on the World North America, to be divided into the Western Europe and
Heritage List in or before 1994 and will be included in the North America group and the Eastern and Central
periodic reporting exercise. Three of the eleven countries, European group, taking into consideration the different
i.e. Australia, China and India, account for 21 of the 33 budgetary requirements of these sub-regions. The Delegate
sites inscribed on the World Heritage List up until 1994. of Italy asked about the existence of management plans for
As for cultural heritage sites, out of 84 cultural World African sites. The Secretariat responded that most of the
Heritage sites in the Asia-Pacific Region, all concentrated African sites do not have management plans and those that
in the Asian Region, 55 were inscribed before or in 1994 do are facing difficulties in their implementation due to
located within 14 States Parties. In China, India, Pakistan lack of financial resources and expertise. A request by the
and Sri Lanka are located 36 of 55 of these cultural sites. African States Parties for a model management plan
The reporting approach is subdivided into the following applicable to the African context was mentioned by the
four phases: Secretariat. The Delegate of Canada remarked that the
approaches outlined in Annex 4 of Working Document
Phase I: Information to States Parties of the periodic WHC-2000/CONF.204/8 mentioned the creation of
reporting procedures reporting tools in different regions and stated the need to
Phase II: Desk studies to harmonise and collate avoid the duplication of efforts. She suggested that the
existing data World Heritage Centre take the leadership in co-ordinating
Phase III: Collection and analysis of data these efforts. IUCN commended the Secretariat as well as
Phase IV: Preparation of a synthesis report and the States Parties for the preparation of the action plan for
submission for examination by the Asia-Pacific and welcomed the proposed linkage between
Committee in 2002. periodic reporting and reactive monitoring, as well as the
provisions for input from external bodies such as the
VII.10 Considering that an integrated approach advisory bodies and NGOs. IUCN furthermore informed
combining all forms of assistance for national capacity the Committee about a World Heritage Centre/IUCN
building has been applied in the region since 1996, fact project focused on monitoring, which is funded by the
sheets on countries and on sites which have been United Nations Foundation over a four-year period. The
compiled, will be made available to the States Parties for project will operate in pilot World Heritage sites in Eastern
the reporting exercise. National focal points are being and Southern Africa, South Asia and Latin America. The
identified and a regional meeting for cultural properties to selection of sites is currently being discussed with States
be hosted by the Republic of Korea in early 2001, Parties, site managers and other partners. In preparation of
followed by sub-regional meetings in 2002, are intended to the periodic reporting exercise, IUCN urges linking
stimulate exchange of information and experience to meetings whenever possible to avoid the multiplication
enrich the preparation of the synthesis report for and duplication of efforts.
submission to the Committee in 2002.

14
VII.14 The Committee approved the regional strategies to the Centre, before 15 April 2001, on progress to ensure
presented in Annexes I, II, III and IV of Working effective closure of the Colon Road and rehabilitate
Document WHC-2000/CONF.204/8. The budgetary impacted areas. The State Party was also requested to
implications are considered under item 13 of the Agenda provide an up-date on the results of monitoring the impacts
(WHC-2000/CONF.204/15, Chapter IV of the budget). of the oil spill that occurred in July 2000. The Committee
retained the site in the List of World Heritage in Danger.

VIII. STATE OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES VIII.4 Srebarna Nature Reserve (Bulgaria)

INSCRIBED ON THE WORLD HERITAGE
LIST The Committee was informed that the Minister of
Environment and Water, by a letter dated 11 September
A. REPORTS OF THE STATE OF CONSERVATION OF 2000, has transmitted a state of conservation report to the
PROPERTIES INSCRIBED ON THE LIST OF WORLD Centre. The report reached the Centre only on 17
HERITAGE IN DANGER November 2000 and hence allowed only a preliminary
desk-review by IUCN.
VIII.1 The Committee reviewed document WHC-
2000/CONF.204/9 describing state of conservation reports of The report describes changes in physical (e.g. water
eighteen natural and five cultural properties inscribed on the quality) and biodiversity indicators that show
List of World Heritage in Danger. improvements in the state of conservation of the site. It
outlines measures taken by the State Party to strengthen
A. NATURAL HERITAGE social, cultural and political support for the protection of
the site, including regional and international arrangements
VIII.2 The Committee was informed that in accordance made to co-ordinate the overall protection of wetlands in
with the recommendation it made at the last session, the the Danube River basin. The report stresses the fact that
Centre and IUCN had organised a workshop on the "Role the improvements registered in the state of conservation of
of World Heritage Danger Listing in Promoting the site, including the administrative and organizational
International Co-operation for the Conservation of World arrangements put in place to sustain those improvements,
Natural Heritage" on 6 and 7 October 2000 in Amman, justify the removal of Srebarna from the List of World
Jordan, at the time of IUCN's Second World Conservation Heritage in Danger by the twenty-fourth session of the
Congress. As requested by the participants of that Committee. However, IUCN, while noting the positive
Workshop, the Committee noted the seven priority achievements in the state of conservation reported,
recommendations included in WHC-2000/CONF.204/9 suggested that the Committee defer its consideration of the
and suggested that the Centre consider incorporating them removal of Srebarna from the List of World Heritage in
as appropriate in revisions to the Operational Guidelines. Danger until a site visit is undertaken to assess the results
The Committee requested the Centre and IUCN to consult of the rehabilitation efforts reported by the State Party.
with States Parties and other suitable partners to study the
feasibility of implementing the priority recommendations The Committee thanked and commended the State Party
and submit a report to the twenty-fifth session of the for submitting a comprehensive report and for its efforts to
Committee in 2001. fully rehabilitate the site. The Committee requested the
Centre and IUCN to co-operate with the Ramsar
VIII.3 Iguacu National Park (Brazil) Convention Secretariat and other suitable partners to field
The Committee noted that an oil spill that occurred 600 a mission to the site to undertake a thorough evaluation of
km from the site did not have any major impact on the site. the successes of the rehabilitation efforts reported and their
The Committee recognised that the illegal opening and the sustainability. The Committee asked the Centre and IUCN
use of the Colon Road is the most immediate threat to the to submit a report to the twenty-fifth session of the
site and learned that IBAMA has allocated the equivalent Committee in 2001, advising the Committee whether it
of US $560,000 to support action related to the closure of could remove Srebarna from the List of World Heritage in
the road and to restore areas affected by road construction. Danger and of the next steps in preparing a trans-national,
The Committee was informed that the Brazilian participant multi-country Danube Delta World Heritage area
at the workshop held in Amman, Jordan had informed the nomination incorporating designated and potential World
Centre and IUCN of other potential threats posed by Heritage areas of the Danube Delta River Basin. The
expanding agricultural lands outside of the northeastern Committee retained the site in the List of World Heritage
sectors of the Park that would require systematic in Danger.
monitoring.
VIII.5 Manovo-Gounda-St.Floris National Park
The Committee commended the State Party for its (Central African Republic (CAR))
persistence in strictly enforcing the Federal legal decision
to close the Colon Road and urged the State Party to The Committee was informed that a representative of the
communicate the reasons for the closure of the road to the State Party had presented a paper on the state of
wider public and take all necessary actions to restore the conservation of the site at the Amman Workshop held on 6
World Heritage area affected by road construction and 7 October 2000. He had confirmed that poaching,
activities. The Committee invited the State Party to report including by armed groups from neighbouring States, was

15
widespread in the area and that an UNESCO/IUCN and Kampala) implicated in the war in eastern DRC to
mission to the site to plan mitigation and rehabilitation meet with the Heads of States and other important
measures would be welcome. The UNESCO National personalities and draw their attention to the need to respect
Commission of CAR had contacted the Centre and plans to international law and strengthen conservation of the all
field a mission were underway. The Committee noted World Heritage sites in the area, and particularly those in
opportunities for possible collaboration with a US-based eastern DRC. The possibility of fielding such a mission
non-governmental organisation, namely the Earth will be further pursued by the Centre in co-operation with
Conservancy. relevant partners of UNESCO under the framework of
activities for executing the UNESCO/DRC/UNF-UNFIP
The Committee thanked the UNESCO National Project. The three technical authorities located in the three
Commission of CAR for facilitating discussions to plan different regions of DRC (see point 3 above) have
and field a mission to the site and for arrangements to committed to facilitate such a high-level diplomatic
prepare a state of conservation report and a rehabilitation mission to the fullest extent possible, if and when it is
plan. The Committee urged the Centre and IUCN to fielded.
undertake the mission as early as possible in 2001 with a
view to submitting a comprehensive report to the twenty- IUCN underlined the significance and the timeliness of the
fifth session of the Bureau in 2001. The Committee financial support provided by the UN Foundation to
retained the site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. support the work of site personnel and commended the
dedication and commitment of the site staff to protect the
VIII.6 World Heritage sites of the Democratic sites.
Republic of the Congo (DRC)
The Committee noted with satisfaction that the Centre has
The Committee noted detailed information on the state of established contracts with project partners for payment of
conservation of the five sites in the DRC, i.e. Virunga, salaries, performance related bonuses and medical and
Garamba and Kahuzi Biega and Salonga National Parks food rations to site staff in all of the five World Heritage
and the Okapi Wildlife Reserve, reported from pages 2 to sites and transfer of funds to benefit site staff are about to
5 of the document WHC-2000/CONF.204/9. Furthermore, begin soon. The UNESCO/DRC/UNF-UNFIP project has
the Committee noted the following additional information set aside funds for the continuation of such payments to
reported by the Centre: site staff over a period of four years; i.e. until October
2004. The Committee also noted with appreciation the
(1) In addition to the UNOMC, contacts have been support of the Government of Belgium for a project
established with members of a UN Panel conducting a focusing on providing support to local communities in and
Probe on Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources in DRC around the five sites to enable them to contribute towards
and located at the UN complex in Nairobi, Kenya. their protection. The Government of Belgium is expected
Information on the state of conservation of the five sites to provide a sum of US$ 500,000 for the four-year project
will be regularly transmitted to the UN Panel mentioned that is expected to begin in early 2001.
above for appropriate action;
(2) A Co-ordination Unit for the UNESCO/DRC/UNF- The Centre, based on information received from partners
UNFIP Project has been operational in Nairobi, Kenya of the UNESCO/DRC/UNF-UNFIP Project and a variety
since 10 September 2000, assisted by the services of a of other sources, informed the Committee that the state of
consultant and an "ICCN Homologue" seconded by ICCN, conservation in Garamba and Virunga National Parks was
Kinshasa. Recruitment of a Project Co-ordinator had been relatively good. In Okapi, recent assistance from military
delayed but is likely to finalized before the end of the first authorities in the region had enabled staff of the Wildlife
quarter of 2001; Reserve to disarm poaching gangs and improve
(3) A meeting of technical personnel representing the three conservation prospects. Salonga, though outside of the war
different governance regimes within the territory of the zone and still accessible to ICCN-Kinshasa, is
DRC was convened from 8 to 10 November 2000 in significantly threatened by illegal poaching. The situation
Nairobi, Kenya. The three technical personnel have signed in Kahuzi Biega is the most disconcerting, as staff do not
a formal agreement of co-operation that will facilitate the have access to nearly 90% of the Park's surface area.
monitoring of the state of conservation of the sites,
execution of the UNESCO/DRC/UNF-UNFIP Project, The Committee requested the Centre to further develop its
information and material exchange between sites and the relations and explore optimal ways of liaising with
organization and conduct of joint activities involving staff UNOMC and other appropriate bodies, like the UN Panel
from the five sites. Furthermore, the three authorities have undertaking a Probe on Illegal Exploitation of Natural
also agreed to co-ordinate together movements and career Resources in DRC, in order to promote the links between
development options for ICCN personnel, despite peace-building and World Heritage conservation in DRC
prevailing administrative and political barriers to such co- and in neighbouring countries. The Committee
ordination; recommended that the Centre, in co-operation with ICCN
(4) Following a meeting on 28 September 2000, the and other partners, ensure effective execution of the
Director-General of UNESCO and the Executive Director UNESCO/DRC/UNF-UNFIP project emphasizing and
of UNEP expressed an interest to lead a high-level mission prioritizing project components that strengthen the work of
to the capitals of the three countries (i.e. Kinshasa, Kigali site staff. The Committee urged the Centre to work with

16
relevant administrative and support units of UNESCO to discussions with local communities; (c) steering
find ways and means to ensure rapid and effective transfer committee for rehabilitation and development; (d) a 5-year
of funds via project partners to on-site beneficiaries who plan for execution; (e) strengthened co-operation with
are attempting to protect World Heritage sites in a zone of donors; and (e) increased numbers of key species such as
high security risks. The Committee thanked and welcomed ibexes and red foxes. In the same letter, the Permanent
the interest of the Government of Belgium to support a Delegate also informed the Centre that the Amhara
project that would enable local communities to work with Regional Government is intending to propose a
site staff to support conservation of the five sites, and realignment of a road expected to run through the Park,
urged UNESCO and the Centre to expedite finalisation of resettle farmers currently resident inside the Park and
negotiations with Belgium to enable early transfer of enlarge the Park and redefine boundaries to excise areas
assistance to local communities resident near the five sites. occupied by villagers
The Committee decided that all five sites be retained in the
List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee requested the Centre and IUCN to co-
operate with the State Party and the Amhara Region to
VIII.7 Sangay National Park (Ecuador) field a site visit to Simen National Park in order to prepare
a report for the next session of the Committee, including
The Committee was informed that the Minister for observations and comments on existing plans for
Environment of Ecuador participated in the Amman rehabilitation and changes and modifications to such plans
Workshop and had noted that the inclusion of the Sangay that may be needed. In preparing such a report, the Centre
National Park in the List of World Heritage in Danger had and IUCN may also wish to discuss indicators and
helped the Ministry of Environment in negotiations with benchmarks that may be described and be useful in
the Ministry Public Works and other Government bodies determining when the site could be removed from the List
to obtain resources to evaluate environmental impacts of of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee retained the
the Guamote Macas Road and plan mitigation measures. site in the List of World Heritage in Danger.
The Minister was of the view that despite recent
improvements in the state of conservation of the site, VIII.9 Mount Nimba Nature Reserve
Sangay should continue to remain in the List of World (Guinea/Côte d'Ivoire)
Heritage in Danger. IUCN informed the Committee that
the increased access to the site resulting from the The Committee noted that at a World Heritage and Mining
construction of the Guamote Macas Road could threaten Technical Workshop, held at IUCN Headquarters from 20-
the integrity of the site 23 September, 2000, the case of Mt. Nimba was discussed
and participants noted that key issues at this site include:
The Committee requested that the Centre and IUCN (a) the need for clear boundary demarcation, taking into
continue negotiations with the State Party to elaborate a consideration the boundaries proposed at the time of
plan with indicators and benchmarks, including those that inscription and changes proposed subsequently; (b) the
could signal the timing for the removal of the site from the need for effective transboundary co-operation between the
List of World Heritage in Danger. The Committee two States Parties (Guinea and Côte d’Ivoire) as well as
endorsed IUCN's view that indicators must directly relate Liberia, which has yet to ratify the Convention; and (c) the
to the values for which the site had been granted World need to stimulate fund-raising efforts for this site, based on
Heritage status and that they should be clear, previous proposals and recommendations, including those
understandable and capable of replication over time. The made by the Committee concerning the establishment of a
Committee retained Sangay in the List of World Heritage fund or a foundation for the conservation of Mt. Nimba.
in Danger. The Director General of CEGEN (Centre for
Environmental Management of Mt. Nimba), presented a
VIII.8 Simen National Park (Ethiopia) paper at the Amman Workshop which reiterated the
findings reported at the World Heritage and Mining
The Committee was informed that the Director of the Workshop referred to above. In that context, the
Department of Agriculture from the Amhara Region, Committee recommended that the Centre and IUCN co-
which is directly responsible for the management of this operate with CEGEN and relevant authorities in Côte
site, participated in the Amman Workshop. In his d'Ivoire and Liberia to address points (a), (b) and (c), as
presentation, the Director had pointed out several described above, and prepare an action plan describing
improvements in the state of conservation of the site and specific measures to be taken within a defined time period.
expressed his disagreement with the 1996 consultant The Committee retained the site in the List of World
mission findings that led to the Committee to include Heritage in Danger.
Simen in the List of World Heritage in Danger. The
Permanent Delegate of Ethiopia, by letter of 16 October VIII.10 Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve (Honduras)
2000 to the Director of the Centre, has confirmed
agreement of the Amhara Regional authorities to receive a The Committee was informed that the Centre/IUCN
new and high-level consultant mission that may view and mission to this site was fielded from 24 to 30 October
discuss the many efforts of the Regional Government to 2000. A preliminary report of the mission indicated that of
rehabilitate the Park. Such efforts including: (a) increases the ten major recommendations of the previous (1995)
in budget and staff deployment; (b) favourable outcome of Centre/IUCN mission which led to the inclusion of this

17
site in the List of World Heritage in Danger 1996, five threats to the rhinos in Manas. The Committee retained the
have been implemented. Some notable achievements made site in the List of World Heritage in Danger
since 1995 include: completion of a participatory
management plan; increasing on-the-ground management VIII.12 Aïr and Ténéré Natural Reserves (Niger)
presence; establishment of inter-agency control posts in
strategic locations; preparation and the beginning of the The Committee was informed that the State Party had
execution of an inter-institutional action plan; and notified the Centre that it wished to complete
organization of agro-forestry co-operatives. Continuing implementation of all activities of the rehabilitation
concerns regarding the integrity of the site centre around: programme before requesting the Committee to consider
deforestation rates in the buffer zone that exceed the removing this site from the List of World Heritage in
national average (4%); resettling core-zone family units Danger. A representative of the State Party who
into the buffer zone and land-titling issues in influence participated and presented a paper at the Amman
zones; and unacceptable levels of logging and poaching. Workshop confirmed this position of the State Party.
The mission report acknowledges and appreciates the
support given by the German Government to the The Committee invited the State Party to submit a
conservation of Rio Platano. The Committee was informed comprehensive progress report, before 15 April 2001, to
of a UN Foundation-financed project to link biodiversity the Centre on the achievements of the rehabilitation
conservation and sustainable tourism development programme implemented to date. It also requested the
targeting six sites, including Rio Platano. This project may Centre and IUCN to review that report and submit their
generate employment and economic benefits via outreach, findings to the twenty-fifth ordinary session of the Bureau
ecotourism and research activities as recommended by the in 2001. The Centre and IUCN should undertake a detailed
1995 mission. assessment of the threats to the site that have been
effectively mitigated and determine the need for any
The Committee requested the Centre to transmit the full additional actions that may be required to enable the
report of the IUCN/Centre mission to the site to the State twenty-fifth session of the Committee to decide whether or
Party to obtain formal written responses and comments not this site could be removed from the List of World
from the State Party for submission to the twenty-fifth Heritage in Danger by the Committee at its twenty-fifth
session of the Bureau in 2001. The Committee urged the session at the end of 2001. The Committee retained this
State Party to continue its efforts to improve management site in the List of World Heritage in Danger.
of the site. The Committee retained the site in the List of
World Heritage in Danger. VIII.13 Ichkeul National Park (Tunisia)

VIII.11 Manas Wildlife Sanctuary (India) The Committee was informed that following two winters
of adequate rainfall that allowed recovery of the freshwater
The Deputy Inspector General for Wildlife of the Ministry vegetation, reversal in rainfall patterns has led to a
of Environment and Forests (MOEF) in New Delhi, in a renewed increase in the salinity of Lake waters,
letter of 26 September 2000 addressed to the Charge resembling levels that prevailed in the area in 1997 and as
d'Affairs of the Permanent Delegation of India to such, the benefits of the restoration of the Lake achieved
UNESCO suggested that the proposed UNESCO World during the last two years are in danger of being lost. Such
Heritage Centre mission to Manas be undertaken in May unpredictable, climate-induced reversals are likely to
2001. The Deputy Inspector General for Wildlife also happen in the future. Nevertheless, the Committee stressed
presented a paper at the IUCN/Centre Workshop in the need to fully implement the recommendations of a
Amman in which he emphasised the fact that the inclusion mission to the site undertaken in March 2000 by a team
of Manas in the List of World Heritage in Danger has comprising representatives from IUCN, the Ramsar
influenced State and Central Government decision to Convention Secretariat and other international and regional
invest funds to rehabilitate the Sanctuary. IUCN observed organisations described in document WHC-
that this is another example of a site where the inclusion of 2000/CONF.204/9. A representative of the State Party who
the site in the List of World Heritage in Danger resulted in participated at the Centre/IUCN Workshop in Amman,
the elaboration of a rehabilitation plan and its execution Jordan from 6 to 7 October 2000, also emphasised the
with partial support from the World Heritage Fund. importance of implementing the recommendations of the
March 2000 mission team.
The Committee recommended that the Centre/IUCN
mission to review progress in the implementation of the The Committee recommended that the State Party take all
rehabilitation plan adopted in 1997 and partly financed by necessary steps to implement, as expeditiously as possible,
grants amounting to US$ 165,000 from the World Heritage the recommendations of the mission team that visited the
Fund be undertaken in May 2001 as proposed by the State site in March 2000. The Committee highlighted, in
Party, and a report submitted to the twenty-fifth ordinary particular, the importance of the development of a clear
session of the Bureau in 2001. The Committee urged the timetable of activities leading to measurable improvements
Centre and IUCN to use all available information to plan of the Lake and surrounding marshes within the next five
the site visit, particularly to assess the impacts of the years. The Committee requested the Centre to contact the
rehabilitation measures designed to minimize poaching State Party once again to obtain a formal written response
to the recommendations proposed by the mission team that

18
visited the site in March 2000. The Committee retained by the appropriate US Department of the Interior and
this site in the List of World Heritage in Danger. National Park Service staff have taken place.

U.S. officials determined that complex scientific analyses

VIII.14 Rwenzori Mountains (Uganda) of measures necessary to abate the threats to these two
Parks are required. They have also concluded that it will
The Committee noted that the Executive Director of the be possible to prepare for review by the Committee a
Uganda Wildlife Authority (UAW), in his letter of 13 schedule of actions necessary for the eventual removal of
September 2000, has stressed that the Rwenzori Mountains these two sites from the List of World Heritage in Danger.
National Park (RMNP) should be retained in the List of This schedule will include measures as part of a national
World Heritage in Danger, owing to the fact that: (a) assessment of risks to Parks based on domestic law. Once
RMNP is still closed to visitors and effects of insurgency this national assessment has been completed, the U.S. will
by armed groups continue to affect management, habitats derive from those analyses the information necessary to
and wildlife; (b) Communities resident around the Park are respond more fully to the Bureau's request.
equally affected and regard the Park as a major source of
resources posing clear threats to habitats and wildlife and, Meanwhile, the Department of the Interior and the
in the absence of control and management, may adopt National Park Service will continue to submit interim
unsustainable resource use practices; and (c) the Park lacks reports on the condition of the two Parks and will work on
basic management tools to meet the challenges of completing the schedule for their removal from the List of
insurgency and community pressure for resources. The World Heritage in Danger.
Executive Director has welcomed suggestions of the
twenty-fourth ordinary session of the Bureau to increase The Observer of the United States of America also
international awareness for the conservation of the site and indicated that the Operational Guidelines do not provide
expressed his readiness to work with the Centre and others clear procedures for removing sites from the List of World
concerned for raising funds for the protection of the World Heritage in Danger. Consequently, the potential exists for
Heritage site in Danger. The Committee noted that the different interpretations of how removal from the List
Centre has initiated communication with the Executive should be accomplished. It was noted that the issue had not
Director to explore possibilities for financing projects and been resolved in the Operational Guidelines revisions
activities to strengthen conservation of the site. proposed by the Canterbury Working Group. Accordingly,
it was believed that a technical workshop on the process
The Committee suggested that the Centre and IUCN for delisting, involving other States Parties, as well as the
continue to explore possibilities to raise international United States, is well merited. Such a workshop could
awareness for the conservation of this site, and co-operate propose an appropriate amendment to the Operational
with the State Party and concerned UN units in the region Guidelines.
to study ways and means, including mobilising necessary
financial resources, to support staff responsible for the IUCN welcomed the observations of the Observer of the
protection of the site and minimize threats posed by United States and agreed that the elaboration of measures
militant and armed groups. The Committee retained the and indicators that could provide a systematic approach to
property in the List of World Heritage in Danger. placing and removal of sites from the List of World
Heritage in Danger require considerable research work and
VIII.15 World Heritage sites of the United States of scientific analyses. IUCN expressed its readiness to co-
America: operate with the State Party and the Centre to test out work
needed to improve these aspects of state conservation
Everglades National Park monitoring.
Yellowstone National Park
The Committee recommended that the Centre and IUCN
The Committee recalled that the twenty-fourth ordinary co-operate with the State Party to carry out the necessary
session of the Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to scientific and technical work, using suitable means such as
meet with the State Party and discuss the preparation of a conference calls and workshops, in order to put in place a
schedule of actions for complete rehabilitation of the site schedule of actions that will enable the Committee to track
and its eventual removal from the List of World Heritage improvements in the state of conservation of these two
in Danger. The Centre, IUCN and relevant authorities from sites in an objective manner and determine, in consultation
the State Party, including the Directors of the two sites, with the State Party, the appropriate time for their removal
participated in a conference call on 27 October 2000. The from the List of World Heritage in Danger.
Observer of the United States of America informed the
Committee that measures to address the threats to both
Parks continue to be undertaken. In the view of the State
Party, neither Yellowstone nor Everglades National Park
has shown enough progress to warrant removal from the
List of World Heritage in Danger. Following the
conference call, consultations between the Centre, IUCN
and the State Party, comprehensive discussions of the issue

19
CULTURAL HERITAGE the information contained in WHC-2000/CONF.204/9
for the attention of the twenty-fourth session of the
State of Conservation of properties inscribed on the Committee.
List of World Heritage in Danger
The Delegate of Hungary stated that despite past requests
VIII.16 Butrint (Albania) by the Bureau and the Committee for the report of the
ICC meetings, these had not been made available.
The Committee recalled that in October 1997, a joint Furthermore, he drew the attention of the Committee to
UNESCO-ICOMOS-Butrint Foundation mission was the fact that the report on all on-going and planned
undertaken to assess the damages caused to the site by projects for conservation, as well as on infrastructure had
civil unrest earlier that year. US$ 100,000 was made not been received. He urged the Committee and the
available as emergency assistance in 1997 to implement advisory bodies to demonstrate more commitment for the
activities identified in the Programme of Corrective safeguarding of this outstanding site. The Secretariat, at
Actions, but to date, no report has been received on its the invitation of the Chair, responded that the case of
implementation. Angkor has been examined by the Bureau and
Committee, at every single session since 1992, or no less
The Committee reiterated its request to the State Party to than 20 times. All requests for international assistance
submit a progress report by 15 April 2001 on the submitted by the State Party have been supported, in
implementation of recommendations of the 1997 addition to multi-year projects being financed through
UNESCO-ICOMOS-Butrint Foundation Joint Mission, to the Culture Sector of UNESCO in the largest operational
enable the Bureau to examine this case at its twenty-fifth programme being undertaken by the Organization. As for
session. the advisory bodies, the Committee was informed that
ICOMOS participated in the ICC meeting, and both
Noting the apparent difficulties in the implementation of IUCN and ICCROM have had operational presence,
the Programme of Corrective Actions, including those including a highly successful well-appreciated training
financed under the World Heritage Fund's Emergency programme (Tanee) recently implemented by ICCROM.
Assistance, the Committee requested the Albanian
authorities concerned to establish the administrative The Committee, after having examined the report on the
procedures necessary to enable the implementation of the state of conservation of the site, congratulated the Royal
Programme. Government of Cambodia for the significant progress
made in the field of training thus ensuring the control and
The Committee requested UNESCO and ICOMOS to maintenance of the monuments and encouraged it to
undertake a joint mission in early-2001 for an assessment continue in its efforts. The Committee invited the
of the current situation and to report to the twenty-fifth APSARA and UNESCO to strengthen development
session of the Bureau. activities for the collection of documents for the
International Centre for Scientific and Technical
VIII.17 Angkor (Cambodia) Documentation of Angkor, which should aim at securing
all documentation produced during the safeguarding and
The Secretariat recalled that this site, inscribed on the development projects of the site. It also encouraged
List of World Heritage in Danger at the time of its further efforts to develop partnerships with international
inscription in 1992, is the largest cultural site in teams at the site.
Southeast Asia. It extends over an area of some 400 km2
and includes no less than 100 monuments and hundreds Furthermore, the Committee requested additional
of archaeological features. The socio-economic needs of information on the monitoring of work undertaken on the
the inhabitants require integration of conservation and entrance porch of the central monument and the
development considerations. Although the armed conflict collapsed tiers of the western moat of the Angkor Vat
in the region of Angkor, which prompted its in-danger Temple. The Committee reiterated its earlier request for
listing is now over, looting, illicit excavation and traffic information concerning tourism development at the site
in cultural objects and the continued need for large-scale and the development of infrastructure in this respect,
international assistance, have kept this site on the Danger with particular reference to the question of the extension
List. It was recalled that the Committee expressed of the Siem Reap/Angkor airport. Finally, the Committee
concern at its twenty-third session in 1999, and the decided to retain this property on the List of World
Bureau at its twenty-fourth session, regarding the airport Heritage in Danger.
extension plan, rapid development of tourism facilities,
and uncoordinated public and private works that may VIII.18 Group of Monuments of Hampi (India)
undermine the integrity of the site. Responding to the
Committee's request for APSARA, the site management The Committee’s attention was drawn to the state of
authority, and the International Coordinating Committee conservation of the Group of Monuments of Hampi and
for Angkor (ICC) to coordinate all conservation and the updated information concerning progress made by the
development projects in the region and strengthen State Party in removing the threats facing the site caused
national capacity through training, the State Party, by the ad-hoc public works within the World Heritage
through the UNESCO Office in Phnom Penh, provided protected areas. The Committee examined the findings and

20
recommendations for corrective measures of the (a) relocating the two intrusive bridges outside the
ICOMOS-UNESCO reactive monitoring (February 2000) World Heritage site;
requested by the Committee at its twenty-third session. It (b) implementing the 4-point recommendations for
noted with appreciation the successful work of the corrective measures of the UNESCO-ICOMOS
Karnataka State Government’s Task Force for Hampi that mission in February 2000;
examined the ICOMOS-UNESCO mission (c) preparing a comprehensive management plan for
recommendations leading to the State Government's the site.
decision to demolish and relocate the two bridges that
were negatively impacting upon the site. The Committee In addition, the Committee requested the Government of
noted that the Task Force Chairperson had informed the India to examine the possibilities of establishing a special
Director-General of UNESCO that the decision by the administrative body empowered to ensure integrated
State Government had been received favourably by the development and conservation of the whole World
general public in India. The Committee also examined the Heritage protected areas, whose primary objective would
deliberations and decision of the Bureau at its twenty- be to co-ordinate various development and cultural and
fourth session in June 2000, as well as the resolution natural heritage conservation activities within the protected
concerning Hampi adopted by the participants of the areas of Hampi World Heritage site. The Committee
UNESCO-Archaeological Survey of India National requested the World Heritage Centre to continue closely
Workshop for Management of Indian World Cultural co-operating with the State Party to ensure the
Heritage (22-24 October 2000). development of a comprehensive management plan. The
Committee decided to retain the property on the List of
The Observer of India expressed her Government’s World Heritage in Danger.
appreciation for the co-operation of the World Heritage
Committee and the World Heritage Centre for the actions VIII.19 Bahla Fort (Oman)
taken to enhance conservation and management of this
site. She informed the Committee that the Indian The Secretariat informed the Committee that following the
Government was taking all necessary actions to ensure the recommendations of the twenty-fourth ordinary session of
conservation and development of this unique and vast site. the Bureau, two consultants prepared "Guidelines for the
The Observer stated that the construction of the two establishment of a Management Plan for Bahla Fort and
bridges was halted, not withstanding repeated news that Oasis, a World Heritage Site". A mission was scheduled to
work to complete the bridges had resumed. The Observer visit the site in September 2000 to discuss the management
informed the Committee that the State Government of plan, but the mission has been rescheduled to December
Karnakata decided to dismantle and relocate the footbridge 2000. A report will be provided to the Bureau for
connecting the Virupaksha Temple and the Virapapura examination at its twenty-fifth session.
Gada Island. Reference was also made to other actions
such as removal of illegal encroachment and preparation of The Committee encouraged the State Parties to proceed
a comprehensive management plan, being taken by the with the preparation of the management plan and furnish a
District Commissioner of Bellary. The relevant State progress report by 15 April 2001. It decided to retain the
authorities were committed to ensure the protection of the property in the List of World Heritage in Danger.
integrity and authenticity of the site. The Committee was
informed that the Chief Minister of the State Government VIII.20 Chan Chan Archaeological Zone (Peru)
of Karnataka had recently announced his commitment to
protect the World Heritage areas of Hampi, and that a As suggested by ICOMOS at the twenty-fourth session of
careful study of the vehicular bridge would be undertaken, the Bureau in 2000, the Peruvian authorities prepared a
with a view to maintaining a balance between the needs to single volume Management Plan to summarize the nine
protect the heritage values and those of the local volumes previously produced and approved. Furthermore,
community members who had been demanding the a document on the state of conservation of the site was
construction of these bridges and therefore had strong submitted to the World Heritage Centre, following the
views on the matter. The Observer underlined the periodic reporting format. The entire documentation was
importance of fully involving the local communities in the transmitted to ICOMOS.
process of elaborating the comprehensive management
plan. The Committee commended the State Party for its efforts
to protect the property and to implement the Master Plan
The Committee expressed its appreciation for the positive and congratulated the completion of the single volume
actions and measures taken by the State Party to ensure the Management Plan and the use of the periodic reporting
conservation of the World Heritage values of the Group of format for the state of conservation document. The
Monuments of Hampi. The Committee requested State Committee requested the Peruvian authorities to submit a
Party to submit for examination by the Bureau at its report on further progress made in the implementation of
twenty-fifth session, a report on the progress made in: the Management Plan by 15 September 2001 for
examination by the World Heritage Committee at its
twenty-fifth session. The Committee furthermore decided
to retain the property on the List of World Heritage in
Danger.

21
REPORTS ON THE STATE OF CONSERVATION to implement the World Heritage Convention. It
OF PROPERTIES INSCRIBED ON THE WORLD encouraged the authorities to collaborate with the Centre
HERITAGE LIST and other interested partners in implementing on-site
projects for demonstrating possibilities for generating
VIII.21 The Committee considered the decisions of the employment and income for local communities, such as
twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the Bureau (WHC- the UN Foundation project on 'Linking Conservation of
2000/CONF.204/4) and the working document WHC- Biodiversity and Sustainable Tourism at World Heritage
2000/CONF.204/10). The relevant section of the report of Sites'.
the twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the Bureau is
attached as Annex X. iii ) State of conservation reports of natural properties
noted by the Committee
i) Natural properties which the Committee inscribed
on the List of World Heritage in Danger VIII.24 World Natural Heritage Properties of
Australia
VIII.22 Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary (Senegal)
Shark Bay, Western Australia
The Committee noted the results of the joint expert Great Barrier Reef
mission by the Centre, IUCN and the Ramsar Bureau
undertaken from 14 – 22 September 2000, which was The Secretariat informed the Committee that a letter on the
examined by the Bureau. The report of the mission called recent grounding incident was received from the
for urgent financial assistance to deal with the introduced Australian authorities on 28 November 2000 and that a
species Salvinia molesta. In view of the imminent danger report will be presented to the twenty-fifth session of the
facing the site, the Director of Senegal National Parks had World Heritage Bureau in 2001.
requested that the site be inscribed in the List of World
Heritage in Danger. IUCN highlighted the seriousness of Central Eastern Australian Rainforest Reserves
the threat to both the environment and the economy of the Wet Tropics of Queensland
region, and the difficulty of controlling the introduced
species. The Delegate of Benin commented that the site is Belovezhskaya Pushcha/Bialowieza Forest
facing a number of threats as discussed by the Bureau, and (Belarus/Poland)
that danger listing would be an appropriate step to be Pirin National Park (Bulgaria)
taken. Dja Faunal Reserve (Cameroon)
Gros Morne National Park (Canada)
The Committee decided to include the site in the List of Canadian Rocky Mountains Parks (Canada)
World Heritage in Danger, in accordance with the
expressed wishes of the State Party. The Committee VIII.25 Los Katios National Park (Colombia)
furthermore called on international donor support.
The Delegate of Colombia informed the Bureau that the
ii) State of conservation reports of natural properties field visit foreseen from 10-12 November 2000 had not
examined by the Committee taken place and looked forward to a visit in 2001. Such a
field visit would not only review the state of conservation
VIII.23 Whale Sanctuary of El Vizcaino (Mexico) of the site, but moreover review co-operation possibilities
for a World Heritage nomination of the meso-american
The Secretariat informed the Committee that, following biological corridor project and transboundary collaboration
the President of Mexico’s statement of 2 March 2000, the with the adjacent Darien National Park (Panama).
proposed salt works at the World Heritage site of El
Vizcaino would not proceed. The Committee noted that Comoe National Park (Côte d’Ivoire)
letters from the Chairperson of the Committee and the Galapagos Islands (Ecuador)
Director-General of UNESCO welcomed this decision and Komodo National Park (Indonesia)
congratulated the President of Mexico for the actions taken Lorenz National Park (Indonesia)
to implement the World Heritage Convention. The UN Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest (Kenya)
Foundation had approved a US$ 2.5 million project Te Wahipounamu – South West New Zealand (New
entitled “Linking Conservation of Biodiversity and Zealand)
Sustainable Tourism at World Heritage sites” for six sites, Arabian Oryx Sanctuary (Oman)
including the two natural sites in Mexico, the Whale Huascarán National Park (Peru)
Sanctuary of El Vizcaino and Sian Ka’an. The Danube Delta (Romania)
Committee furthermore noted that the Management Plan
of the El Vizcaino Biosphere Reserve has been published VIII.26 Golden Mountains of Altai
and transmitted to the Centre. (Russian Federation)

The Committee commended the Mexican Government for The Observer of Russia informed the Committee that the
its actions to ensure the conservation of the World proposed road and gas pipeline through the Ukok Plateau is
Heritage values of the Whale Sanctuary of El Vizcaino and supported at the highest political level. The project will be

22
reviewed at a meeting on 15 and 16 December 2000 in the
Altai Republic. The Director of the World Heritage Centre informed the
Committee that on 28 November 2000 the State Party had
VIII.27 Volcanoes of Kamchatka (Russian Federation) advised that a new agreement had been signed between the
Northern Territory government and the Commonwealth
The Observer of Russia informed the Committee that the government to provide further regulation of mining in the
information provided in the Bureau report seemed to relate Northern Territory.
to the Kamchatka region and not the World Heritage site.
He stated that in-depth information would be provided by The Delegate of Australia thanked the ISP of ICSU and
September 2001. IUCN for their constructive participation in the mission in
July 2000. With reference to a concern raised about the
Lake Baikal (Russian Federation) change in ownership of the mining company Energy
Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal) Resources of Australia Inc (ERA), he informed the
Doñana National Park (Spain) Committee that the Minister for Environment and Heritage
Sinharaja Forest Reserve (Sri Lanka) had written to ERA on 22 September 2000, to ensure that
Bwindi Impenetrable Forest (Uganda) they meet commitments made to the World Heritage
Gough Island (United Kingdom) Committee in July 1999. The Minister’s letter had been
Ngorongoro Conservation Area and the Serengeti copied to the new parent company of ERA, Rio Tinto.
National Park (United Republic of Tanzania) ERA replied on 31 October 2000 confirming it would
Ha Long Bay (Vietnam) honour the commitments.
Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls (Zambia/Zimbabwe)
The Delegate of Australia indicated his full respect for the
advice of the ISP and Supervising Scientist concerning
MIXED (CULTURAL AND NATURAL) monitoring. He stated that he would seek resources for
PROPERTIES early implementation of monitoring at Jabiluka as part of
normal budgetary appropriation procedures.
(i) Mixed properties which the Committee inscribed
on the List of World Heritage in Danger Responding to questions relating to the ISP’s
recommendation to establish an Independent Science
VIII.28 The Committee did not inscribe any mixed sites Advisory Committee for the proposed mine and mill at
on the List of World Heritage in Danger. Jabiluka raised by the Delegate of Finland, the Delegate of
Australia informed the Committee that the appointment of
the chair and the majority of the voting members of the
(ii) State of conservation reports of mixed properties existing statutory scientific review committee will be made
examined by the Committee by learned societies in Australia such as the Australian
Academy of Science and the equivalent academy for
VIII.29 Kakadu National Park (Australia) engineering and technology.

The Committee recalled that in July 1999, the third The Committee adopted the following decision concerning
extraordinary session of the Committee examined the state the protection of the natural values of Kakadu National
of conservation of Kakadu National Park with reference to Park:
the development of a uranium mine on the Jabiluka
Mineral Lease in an enclave of the Park. The twenty-fourth Session of the World Heritage
Committee, recalling
The Committee examined the state of conservation of this
mixed cultural and natural property in two parts relating to 1. The Committee decision of July 1999 that ICSU
natural values and cultural values. should continue the work of the ISP to assess, in
co-operation with the Supervising Scientist and
Natural values IUCN, the Supervising Scientist’s response to the
first ISP report
The Committee was informed that the Independent
Scientific Panel (ISP) of the International Council of Notes
Science (ICSU) and a representative of IUCN had
participated in a mission to Kakadu National Park and the 2. That the overall conclusion of the ISP is that the
Jabiluka and Ranger Mineral Leases in July 2000. Supervising Scientist has identified all the
principal risks to the natural values of the Kakadu
The Committee noted the conclusions of the report of the World Heritage site that can presently be
ISP of ICSU presented by Professor Brian Wilkinson, the perceived to result from the approved Jabiluka
leader of the ISP (WHC-2000/CONF.203/INF.20) (see Mill Alternative proposal; these risks have been
Annex XI), the statement made by IUCN to the Committee analysed in detail and have been quantified with a
(see Annex XII) and the response of the Supervising high level of scientific certainty; such analyses
Scientist of Australia (see Annex XIII). have shown the risks to be very small or

23
 negligible and that the development of the The World Heritage Committee:
approved Jabiluka Mill Alternative should not
threaten the natural World Heritage values of the 8. Welcomes the work of the ISP and the IUCN and
Kakadu National Park the response of the Australian Government to
their recommendations
3. That the ISP assessment has been made only in
relation to the proposal to develop Jabiluka as 9. Requests that the Australian Government allocate
described in the April 1999 Report of the resources as soon as possible to enable the
Supervising Scientist to the World Heritage implementation of the landscape and ecosystem
Committee and does not necessarily relate to any analysis and monitoring program recommended
future new proposals for the Jabiluka Mill by the ISP and IUCN and the appointment of a
Alternative water resource specialist to the Office of the
Supervising Scientist
4. That Australia has provided an assurance that all
new aspects of the Jabiluka proposal would be the 10. In the light of the above, concludes that the
subject of formal assessment by the Supervising currently approved proposal for the mine and mill
Scientist and that any significant changes would at Jabiluka does not threaten the health of people
be referred to the Chair of the scientific review or the biological and ecological systems of
committee (see below) for comment Kakadu National Park that the 1998 Mission
believed to be at risk.
5. That the ISP has made a number of
recommendations related to processes that should, Cultural values
in its view, be followed in the final design of the
project and on the ongoing regulation and The Director of the World Heritage Centre referred the
monitoring process Committee to the text of the recommendation of the
twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the Bureau. Since
6. That the Australian government has accepted the then, the Committee had been informed that he had
intent of all of the recommendations of the ISP received a letter dated 28 November 2000 from Yvonne
and the IUCN. In particular, Margarula, Mirrar Senior Traditional Owner, informing
him that discussions between the Mirrar and the Australian
(a) The Australian Government has decided to Government in relation to a new process regarding cultural
amend the membership and role of the heritage protection (as outlined in the Bureau
existing statutory scientific review committee recommendation) had broken down. (See Annex XIV).
to meet the needs identified by the ISP in its
recommendation on the establishment of an The Representative of ICOMOS reflected that when
Independent Science Advisory Committee. ICOMOS had evaluated the Phase I and Phase 2
The chair and the majority of the voting nominations of Kakadu, for inclusion on the World
members will be appointed following Heritage List, the cultural values had been assessed in
selection by the most appropriate body relation to the area’s archaeology and rock art. It had only
representing Australian scientists and been in the evaluation of Phase 3 of the nomination that
engineers, possibly the Australian Academy the living cultural traditions were properly considered.
of Science. This Committee will be able to
report openly, independently and without The Representative of ICOMOS stressed that for any
restriction cultural heritage impact assessment there must be cultural
mapping. He acknowledged the existence of an impasse
(b) The supervisory role of the Supervising between the Mirrar Traditional Owners and the Australian
Scientist has been strengthened through the government and suggested that the same process as had
Agreement between the Commonwealth and been used for the review of scientific issues by the ISP of
Northern Territory governments dated 17 ICSU should be used for resolving the issue of cultural
November 2000 mapping. He suggested the establishment of an
independent international group to consult with the Mirrar
7. That Australia, noting that the natural values of and the Australian government to find a way forward.
the lease and surrounding areas have been
extensively investigated and documented through The Delegate of Thailand cautioned against intervening in
the environmental assessment process for domestic affairs by establishing an independent
Jabiluka, has undertaken to extend this work in international group to deal with cultural issues at Jabiluka.
the manner recommended by the ISP and the
IUCN. The Delegate of Hungary trusted that a solution could be
found and made reference to the outstanding importance of
the living cultural heritage of Kakadu National Park and
expressed his concern with the current situation reported to
the Committee.

24
 of reference to process was necessary for the consolidated
The Delegate of Australia expressed his concern about the recommendation being drafted to be fully effective in
breakdown in dialogue between the Mirrar Traditional assisting the State Party.
Owners and the Australian government. He however saw
it as "an interruption" and "not termination" of the Yvonne Margarula, Mirrar Senior Traditional Owner, was
dialogue process. He informed the Committee that the invited to address the Committee. She spoke about her
Minister for Environment and Heritage was ready to re- country (her traditional lands) and of the sacred sites and
commence talks at any time. Explaining what could have "dangerous sites" (djang) at Jabiluka. She said that her
been the cause of the interruption, he referred to the letter country was "in danger" because the Government of
from Yvonne Margarula that referred to concern to Australia said that they were lying when they said the site
allegations that financial incentives had been offered to the was sacred and the Mirrar appealed for help from the
Mirrar People (see Annex XIV). He stressed that indeed at World Heritage Committee. The Delegate of Australia
no time had such an offer been made by the Australian said that the Minister for Environment and Heritage
negotiators. stressed that he did not believe the Mirrar were acting
dishonestly.
The Delegate of Australia informed the Committee that he
considered that the only commitment made by the The Committee adopted the following decision on the
Australian government to the Committee in July 1999 that protection of cultural values at Kakadu National Park:
had not been fully met was the development of a cultural
heritage management plan and cultural mapping. He The Committee,
recalled that the Jabiluka mine was on stand-by and in
environmental management mode and that commercial 11. Noted the concern of the Traditional Owners that
production would not take place for a considerable time serious impacts on the living cultural values of
reflecting the commitment to sequential mines. He stated Kakadu National Park posed by the proposal to
that the mining company was legally obliged to provide a mine and mill uranium at Jabiluka still exist.
Cultural Heritage Management Plan and that the
Australian government was concerned that a correct 12. Considered that the Committee’s previous
process for its preparation be found as soon as possible decision regarding cultural mapping and the
through a process of domestic negotiation. preparation of a cultural heritage management
plan for Jabiluka cannot be implemented at this
The Delegate of South Africa expressed her agreement stage and that an approach founded on
with the independent review process proposed by partnership between all parties concerned is
ICOMOS and suggested use of a facilitator. She appealed required to ensure the protection of the living
to the Australian government to agree to a process cultural values of Kakadu National Park.
involving an outside facilitator noting that Kakadu is a site
of value to all humankind not just Australia. 13. Recalled that at the twenty-fourth session of the
Bureau in Paris (2000) ICOMOS indicated its
The Delegate of Finland suggested that a similar method willingness to “participate in activities leading
of working to that which had been used to address towards resolving cultural heritage issues
scientific issues at Kakadu should be used to ensure pertaining to the management of Kakadu National
progress on cultural heritage issues. Park”.

The Delegate of Canada acknowledged the importance of 14. Noted that the State Party is prepared to consider
the living cultural values of Kakadu and expressed the a new process to address any outstanding issues
wish of Committee members to see their protection. If an relating to cultural values. Any new process
agreement between the Mirrar and the State Party was not would be facilitated by the State Party, in
possible, then involvement of a third party should be consultation with Traditional Owners and other
considered. domestic stakeholders.

The Observer of Papua New Guinea stressed the 15. Expressed disappointment about the current
importance of recognizing living cultural heritage values interruption in dialogue between the State Party
right at the beginning of the process of World Heritage and the Mirrar Traditional Owners.
identification and protection.
16. Reaffirmed the importance of the living cultural
ICCROM commented that while they had strongly heritage of Kakadu National Park.
supported the recommendation proposed by the twenty-
fourth session of the Bureau, particularly given its 17. Encouraged the State Party and the Mirrar
emphasis on process, they were concerned that "process" Traditional Owners to resume and continue their
was being interpreted in different ways by different efforts in a constructive dialogue, in order to
delegates, as "mediated dialogue" by South Africa, and as develop together a process leading towards the
"study" or "scientific reference group" by ICOMOS and protection of Kakadu’s cultural heritage.
others. ICCROM felt that clarification of the implications

25
 18. In the event that the interruption in the dialogue demolition of the third hydraulic work. Recognising that
continues, requested that the State Party and the the property is threatened by serious and specific danger,
Mirrar Traditional Owners consider a facilitated necessitating major operations to ensure the protection of
dialogue to achieve an agreed-upon process by these essential components of the historic monumental and
the twenty-fifth session of the Committee in garden complex within the property, the Committee
2001. decided to inscribe the Fort and Shalamar Gardens on the
List of World Heritage in Danger.
(iii) State of conservation reports of mixed properties While appreciating the co-operation between the central
noted by the Committee and local authorities concerned to enhance the
conservation of the Shalamar Gardens, the Committee
Mount Emei and Leshan Giant Buddha (China) requested the State Party:
Historic Sanctary of Machu Picchu (Peru)

 to prohibit parking on the site of the first and
CULTURAL HERITAGE second tanks as soon as possible to prevent further
damage to the archaeological remains;.

(i) Cultural property which the Committee inscribed
 to fence off the site on which these remains are
on the List of World Heritage in Danger located from the immediate surrounding so that it is
no longer directly accessible;
VIII.30 Fort and Shalamar Gardens of Lahore
(Pakistan)
 to consolidate the remaining foundations of the two
tanks as an archaeological relic and take measures
The World Heritage Centre informed the Committee that to prevent further deterioration of what still remains
the Director-General of UNESCO had received a letter of the third tank with its brick arches, in order to
dated 27 November 2000 from the authorities of Pakistan safeguard the remains of the former hydraulic
requesting the World Heritage Committee to inscribe the works;
Shalamar Gardens on the List of World Heritage in
Danger. In the letter, the authorities of Pakistan informed
 to define and implement a “rescue programme” as
the Director-General that the State Party recognised the soon as possible, as recommended by the
urgent need to restore the damaged part of the outer walls ICOMOS-UNESCO reactive monitoring mission
and hydraulic works of Shalamar Gardens. Reiterating the (October 2000) in close co-operation with the
great importance attached to activities for protecting the World Heritage Centre;
World Heritage sites located in Pakistan, the Director-
General was assured that all necessary steps would be The Committee requested the State Party to provide
taken to ensure proper renovation and restoration of these clarification concerning ownership, land use and the legal
unique gardens, which are not only an important cultural status of the land within 60 metres of these hydraulic
heritage landmark in the historic city of Lahore, but also a works, particularly in view of the Punjab Special Premises
site visited by thousands of people. The authorities (Preservation) Ordinance, applicable to this site.
informed the Secretariat that the Department of
Archaeology and Museums of the Ministry of Culture, and Finally, the Committee underlined that the damage to this
the local authorities concerned are actively co-operating to property illustrates a case where world heritage values of a
ensure that the gardens remain intact and do not suffer any property had been severely undermined due to insufficient
further deterioration. attention given to conservation needs in the planning and
implementation of public works.
Through this letter, the Government of Pakistan expressed
its appreciation for continued assistance from the World VIII.31 Historic City of Zabid (Yemen)
Heritage Committee and the World Heritage Centre for the
conservation and development of the Shalamar Gardens. The Committee recalled the report on the state of
By nominating the property on the List of World Heritage conservation of the Historic City of Zabid, examined by
in Danger, the State Party expressed its hope to increase the Bureau at its twenty-fourth extraordinary session that
public awareness both nationally and internationally on the included information on the State Party's request to
importance of preserving this Moghul exemplary site of inscribe the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
World Heritage of value, which continues to be a living ICOMOS fully supported the findings and
cultural heritage site. recommendations of the UNESCO monitoring mission
undertaken in 1999 and the request by the State Party that
The Committee examined the state of conservation of the site be inscribed on the World Heritage in Danger in
Shalamar Gardens and the deliberations of the Bureau view of the serious condition of the historic buildings
during the twenty-fourth extraordinary session, and took within the property.
note of the request by the State Party to inscribe the
property on the List of World Heritage in Danger. The The Committee decided to inscribe the Historic City of
Committee expressed serious concern over the complete Zabid on the List of World Heritage in Danger. The
loss of two of the three hydraulic works and the partial Committee requested the World Heritage Centre and

26
ICOMOS to organize a mission composed of by the lack of technical capacity and the population
multidisciplinary experts in order to evaluate the situation pressures giving rise to encroachment from the periphery
and recommend further actions. to the Monument Zones. As a result of this, the Bureau at
its twenty-fourth extraordinary session, transmitted the
(ii) State of conservation reports of cultural recommendations presented in WHC-2000/CONF.204/4 to
properties examined by the Committee the Committee.

VIII.32 Kathmandu Valley (Nepal) The Committee examined the state of conservation of the
Kathmandu Valley and the discussion of the Bureau. The
The Committee recalled that it had repeatedly expressed Committee also took note of the two information
concern for this site and repeatedly deferred inscription on documents tabled on 27 November 2000, WHC-
the List of World Heritage in Danger since 1992. The 2000/CONF.204/INF.21 (Updated progress report on the
Committee recalled that it had decided again to defer implementation of the 55 Recommendations for Enhanced
decision on in-danger listing at its twenty-third session, Management of Kathmandu Valley and Time-Bound
pending a report from a High Level Mission that the Action Plan for Corrective Measures, submitted by His
Committee decided to send to Kathmandu in 2000 for Majesty's Government of Nepal on 22 November 2000)
consultations with representatives of His Majesty’s and WHC-2000/CONF.204/INF.22 (Conclusions of Mr.
Government of Nepal. This mission, headed by the Henrik Lilius, Vice-President of the World Heritage
Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, Mr Committee and ICOMOS Representative during the High
Abdelaziz Touri, would also transmit the Committee’s Level Mission to Kathmandu Valley).
concerns and try to convince the Nepalese authorities of
the merits of in-danger listing. This mission took place The former Chairperson, Mr Abdelaziz Touri, who headed
from 24 to 29 September 2000. The High Level Mission the High Level Mission, noted that the serious state of
was well received by the State Party and met high level conservation of Kathmandu Valley had been examined at
authorities including His Majesty the King and the Prime 20 sessions of the Committee and Bureau since 1992. The
Minister of Nepal. situation was indeed grave. However, he informed the
Committee that the Bureau had formulated a
The Director of the World Heritage Centre presented the recommendation for the Committee's consideration at its
conclusive findings and final considerations of the Report twenty-fourth extraordinary session, which allowed two
of the High Level Mission to Kathmandu Valley (23-30 more years for the Nepalese authorities to further
September 2000), WHC-2000/CONF.204/INF.17. The implement the 1998 UNESCO-ICOMOS-HMG of Nepal
Director informed the Committee that no new plans had Joint Mission's 55 Recommendations for Enhanced
been put forth by the Nepalese authorities to redress the Management and Time-Bound Action Plan for Corrective
persistent and continued deterioration of the materials, Measures adopted by the State Party.
structures, ornamental features, and overall architectural
coherence in most Monument Zones. He drew the The Committee, recalling that it had deferred the
attention of the Committee to the state of conservation of inscription of Kathmandu Valley on the List of World
the site, highlighting the fact that in general, publicly- Heritage in Danger numerous times, expressed its
owned historic monuments were in good condition, but the disappointment that the State Party was not convinced of
problem lay in the urban fabric within the Monument the constructive objectives of the List of World Heritage in
Zones. Thus, essential and authentic urban fabric had been Danger, as a mechanism for strengthening further political
severely altered to the point that in a number of Monument commitment and mobilizing international technical co-
Zones, the changes were irreversible. operation and greater awareness at both national and
international levels.
The Committee was informed of the continuing
commitment of His Majesty’s Government of Nepal to During the ensuing debate, discussions focused on the
protect the seven Monument Zones composing the site. objectives of the Convention and international co-
The Director reported that the authorities had emphasised operation. The Committee underlined the need to ensure
the difficulties in imposing international standards in the the credibility of the World Heritage Convention, its
conservation of privately-owned historic buildings without Committee and the World Heritage List, while effectively
substantial subsidy and technical support. The Director implementing the mechanisms provided under the
informed the Committee, however, that the mission was Convention and appropriately assisting States Parties in
unable to convince the representatives of His Majesty’s safeguarding the World Heritage properties, especially
Government of Nepal on the constructive aims of the when both ascertained threats faced sites inscribed on the
system of in-danger listing, notably to mobilise the support World Heritage List. Most members of the Committee
of policy makers at the highest level and international agreed that it would be desirable to define procedures for
donors. In light of this, the High Level Mission concluded examining cases such as Kathmandu Valley, where certain
that the deterioration of the historic urban fabric will values or components justifying World Heritage
persist, irreversibly damaging the vernacular architecture inscription have been irreversibly lost.
surrounding the public monuments, and consequently
destroying the World Heritage values of this unique and The question of whether or not consent by a State Party
universally significant site. The problem was compounded was necessary for inscribing a property on the List of

27
World Heritage in Danger was debated at length, mentioning general principles concerning the
especially in relation to the interpretation of Articles 11.3 interpretation of the World Heritage Convention. He
and 11.4 of the Convention. Some delegates and the requested that the UNESCO Legal Advisor would clearly
Observer of Nepal felt that the Committee was not declare whether, in his opinion, prior consent of the
empowered to inscribe a property on the List of World Government concerned is or is not necessary and that his
Heritage in Danger without the consent of the concerned advice would be transmitted to all States Parties to the
State Party and without the request for assistance by the Convention through the World Heritage Centre early
State Party. However, other members of the Committee enough for the question to be discussed during the
and Observers stressed that Article 11.4 allowed the forthcoming Meeting for the Revision of the Operational
Committee to inscribe a property on the List of World Guidelines to be organized by the Secretariat or at the next
Heritage in Danger without the consent of the State Party Bureau or Committee session. The Delegate of Belgium
concerned, although it was preferable to have the State underlined that the advice and view of the UNESCO Legal
Party's consent in advance. Advisor could only be an interpretation and would not
provide a definitive answer to the issue in question.
The Delegate of Belgium underlined the crucial Finally, the Delegate of Belgium stressed that should the
importance of clarifying this point. Recalling the view of the UNESCO Legal Advisor and those of
obligation of UNESCO to provide legal advice to international legal experts in various States Parties be
Members of the Committee when requested, the Delegate divergent and States Parties do not reach an agreement on
of Belgium formally requested legal advice concerning the interpretation of Article 11 of the Convention, this
this question on behalf of his Government. question must be submitted to the International Court of
Justice of the Hague or arbitrated by another competent
At the invitation of the Chairperson, the UNESCO Legal legal body.
Adviser pointed out that this subject was quite
controversial. It had most recently been debated at the The Committee decided to consider the issue of the
Canterbury International Expert Meeting on the Revision inscription of properties on the List of World Heritage in
of the Operational Guidelines where the experts had Danger in a broader context, in order to develop
recommended that legal advice be sought on the matter. appropriate criteria and procedure for the Committee to
The Legal Adviser had been informed that certain States evaluate situations such as Kathmandu Valley. To this end,
Parties in fact had obtained legal advice from eminent the Committee accepted the offer by the Government of
jurists on this question, and that these jurists apparently Morocco to host a meeting on this issue, and decided to
had provided legal opinions that were widely divergent. consider developing a draft agenda and allocation of funds
for the organisation of this meeting, within the context of
The Committee was reminded that the UNESCO Legal the revision of the Operational Guidelines.
Adviser had no authority to provide any definitive
interpretations of the terms of the Convention. Under The Committee expressed its appreciation to Nepal for the
international law it was only the States Parties as a whole continued efforts to enhance the management and
who could make definitive interpretations of the terms of conservation of the Kathmandu Valley World Heritage
their Convention. In his view, there were various options site. The Committee reiterated its deepest concern for the
available to the States Parties. They could: state of conservation of Kathmandu Valley, where urban
encroachment and alteration of the historic fabric in most
a) exchange copies of the expert legal opinions which of the seven Monument Zones composing the site have
they had obtained or would obtain, with a view to significantly threatened its integrity and authenticity.
reaching a consensus as to which legal arguments
were the most persuasive, The Committee requested the State Party to produce a new
structured framework for monitoring all corrective
b) agree to have the matter decided simply by a vote measures by the State Party, to be reviewed by the
of the General Assembly of States Parties, or Committee within the context of the Asia-Pacific Regional
Periodic Reporting exercise in 2002. In the interim, the
c) agree to have the matter arbitrated by some State Party was requested to submit a progress report for
competent legal body such as the World Court at consideration by the Committee at its twenty-fifth session
the Hague. in 2001. The Committee further recommended that other
States Parties be engaged in the conservation and
The Legal Advisor concluded by indicating that while he monitoring effort by providing technical and financial
was not in a position to give a spontaneous opinion on this assistance to the concerned authorities of His Majesty’s
matter without the benefit of appropriate research, Government of Nepal. In this regard, the Committee
especially on the relevant preparatory work preceding the decided to consider reserving an appropriation within the
adoption of the Convention, he remained at the disposal of 2001 International Assistance budget, to finance specific
the States Parties to provide, in due course, any further time-bound activities related to the protection of the urban
advice or opinions as may be considered useful. fabric within the World Heritage site.

The Delegate of Belgium, expressed regret that the The Observer of Nepal expressed to the Committee his
UNESCO Legal Advisor would limit himself to Government’s appreciation for the favourable response to

28
requests for technical and financial assistance which the The Committee recalled that, at its twenty-third session
Committee and UNESCO have been providing for (Kyoto, 1998), it confirmed its support for the principles
Kathmandu Valley since the 1970s. He recalled the great laid out in the Declaration of March 1997; this process
pride of the Nepalese citizens in 1979 when the site was should continue in a consensual manner among all parties
inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List, but involved. It expressed the belief that no steps should be
informed the Committee that they were unaware, until taken unless consensus had been reached.
1992, of the World Heritage conservation standards, hence
the errors made. The Observer reiterated the Government’s The Committee expressed its concern regarding the delay
strong commitment to ensure the implementation of the 16 in implementing the Strategic Governmental Programme
Recommendations of the 1993 Joint Mission, the 55 for Oswiecim and the work of the international group of
Recommendations and Time-Bound Action Plan resulting experts. It urged the Polish authorities to address these
from the 1998 Joint Mission, and requested that the issues without further delay.
Bureau provide the Government of Nepal sufficient time to
redress the situation and defer decision on in-danger listing Concerning the construction projects within the zones
until 2004. related physically or symbolically to the Concentration
Camp, the Committee requested the State Party to avoid
The Committee finally decided to adopt the Bureau’s any action that could compromise reaching consensus
recommendations including the acceptance of the between the authorities, institutions and organizations
invitation extended by the Government of Morocco. involved and to ensure that the sacred nature of the site
and its environment are preserved giving special attention
VIII.33 Taxila (Pakistan) to their integrity.

The Committee examined the state of conservation of the The Committee reiterated its request to the State Party,
site, and adopted the following: previously made during its twenty-fourth session, to
The Committee noted the Reports submitted by the State submit a progress report on the implementation of the
Party, ICOMOS and the World Heritage Centre Strategic Governmental Programme for Oswiecim, and
concerning the state of conservation of the Taxila World requested the State Party to submit this detailed report by
Heritage site. The Committee expressed its appreciation to 15 April 2001, at the latest, for examination by the twenty-
the authorities of Pakistan for taking the necessary fifth session of the Bureau.
measures to mitigate the threats caused by the construction
of the sports stadium on the Bhir Mound within Taxila. Furthermore, the Committee requested the Secretariat to
The Committee, while noting the efforts made by the State maintain close contacts with the State Party and other
Party to strictly control illicit trafficking of sculptures parties involved in order to support planning actions and
illegally excavated from Buddhist archaeological remains, the process for establishing a consensus as indicated in the
nevertheless reiterated its request to the State Party to decision adopted by the Committee at its twenty-third
continue strengthening the protection of unexcavated areas session.
in Taxila. The Committee requested the Government of
Pakistan to implement the recommendations formulated by In conclusion, the Committee reiterated the need for the
ICOMOS following the October 2000 ICOMOS-UNESCO establishment of a buffer zone to be created around the
reactive monitoring mission. The Committee requested the site, as well as a plan for the implementation of
State Party to submit a report before 15 September 2000 development control mechanisms within this newly
on the progress made in implementing these identified area. It urged the Polish authorities to pay
recommendations, for examination by the Bureau at its particular attention to this matter and to submit a report on
twenty-fifth extraordinary session in September 2001. the progress made in the identification of a buffer zone and
Finally, in order to support the State Party to overcome the control mechanism for examination by the twenty-fifth
difficulties faced in regularly monitoring the numerous and session of theBureau.
physically dispersed archaeological remains of the Taxila
World Heritage site, the Committee expressed its The Observer of Israel underlined that the two former
commitment to extend its assistance to support the State Concentration Camps -Auschwitz and Birkenau -
Party, and requested the State Party to consider nominating approximately 3 kms from each other, are located in two
the site for the List of World Heritage in Danger at the different municipalities - Oswiecim and Birkenau - are
twenty-fifth session of the World Heritage Committee. managed under different jurisdictions, and that before the
creation of a buffer zone, the two locations should be
VIII.34 Auschwitz Concentration Camp (Poland) unified. He stressed that the Strategic Governmental
Programme for Oswiecim was not the management plan
The Committee examined the state of conservation of the but a plan developed by the town of Oswiecim and that
site and noted the information provided by the Secretariat this should be clarified. Furthemore, he declared that he
and by the Under-Secretary of State of Poland, responsible had taken note of the comments from Zimbabwe, Finland
for the implementation of the Strategic Governmental and Greece (included in the Report of the Rapporteur).
Programme for Oswiecim . Finally, he underlined that coordination between the
International Group of Experts, the State Party and
ICOMOS was essential and should be reinforced. In

29
addition, due to the high sensitivity linked to this site, the VIII.38 Khajuraho Group of Monuments (India)
Observer of Israel specified that representatives of the
State Party and of the Jewish community should be The Observer of India informed the Committee that her
involved in the work undertaken by the International Government intended to provide an updated report on the
Group of Experts. state of conservation of Khajuraho Group of Monuments
site to the World Heritage Centre. She informed the
Committee that the authorities have ascertained that the
(iii) State of conservation reports of cultural unauthorized construction has taken place on privately
properties which the Committee noted owned land, near the western group of the Khajuraho
Temple but not within the area of 100-meter boundary
VIII.35 Brasilia (Brazil) limits of the protected monuments. Nevertheless, the
Archaeological Survey of India is taking the necessary
Concerning the state of conservation report to be noted by legal measures to correct the illegal construction.
the Committee, the Observer of Brazil stated that strict Moreover, the authorities concerned are acquiring vacant
building regulations are being applied to all construction areas surrounding the western group of temples in order to
activities in Brasilia. Although the city is facing challenges prevent further encroachment. Therefore, the Observer
due to the increase in population (3 million for a city from India expressed her Government’s view that the
originally designed for 500,000 inhabitants), which has led ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission in early 2001 may
to some tension in the outskirts, the core of the city which be premature and requested postponement.
forms the World Heritage site is intact and the World
Heritage value is not adversely affected in any way by new Sun Temple of Konarak (India)
developments. The Observer pointed out that the Petra (Jordan)
recommendation as adopted at the twenty-fourth Luang Prabang (Lao People's Democratic Republic)
extraordinary session of the Bureau, did not reflect the Byblos (Lebanon)
situation on the site. Ksar Ait Ben Haddou (Morocco)

Peking Man Site at Zhoukoudian (China) VIII.39 Island of Mozambique (Mozambique)

The Potala Palace, Lhasa (China)
The Observer of Israel made a statement regarding the
VIII.36 Islamic Cairo (Egypt) situation in Mozambique after the Cyclone Eline and the
present socio-economic conditions in the country. He
The Delegate of Belgium recalled an intervention during underscored the importance of enhancing conservation
the Committee's twenty-third session in Marrakesh in strategies through capacity-building of the African States
1999, on the need to make the local population aware of Parties, in particular offering training programmes which
the need to ensure the conservation of this site, and stated provided employment opportunities in conservation. He
that this important issue should be taken into account. welcomed the views of the Delegate of Zimbabwe as
reflected in the Bureau report, which emphasizes the
importance of consultation and co-operation with the
VIII.37 Roman Monuments, Cathedral St Peter and States Party's Ministry of Culture.
Liebfrauen-Church in Trier (Germany)
Lumbini, the Birthplace of the Lord Buddha (Nepal)
The Observer of Germany stressed that the vestiges of a Fortifications on the Caribbean Side of Panama:
water pipe and the wall of the ramparts in proximity to the Portobelo - San Lorenzo (Panama)
Amphitheatre are important witnesses to the history of the Archaeological Site of Chavin (Peru)
town and the Roman civilization of the north of the Alps.
However, he indicated that these vestiges are located VIII.40 Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras
inside a building for commercial use and that the problems (Philippines)
linked to conservation, presentation and public access are
not entirely resolved. The Minister of Culture of the Land The Observer of the Philippines underlined that
Rhenanie-Palatinat has decided to provide the necessary monitoring of the fragile cultural landscape of the Rice
funding to elaborate a project which aims at preserving the Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras required not only a
property without altering its authenticity. The Observer of GIS database but also a comprehensive management plan
Germany further indicated that the Minister intended to for ensuring its conservation and sustainable development.
invite ICOMOS to carry out a mission before the twenty- He informed the Committee that the Philippines National
fifth session of the Committee to examine these Mapping Authority was expected to complete its work in
discoveries and the efforts made for their preservation. January 2001 for the GIS mapping project, supported by
the World Heritage Fund. For this reason, the Observer
Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin (Germany) expressed his Government’s appreciation for the Bureau’s
Classical Weimar (Germany) decision requesting the World Heritage Centre to organize
Hortabagy National Park (Hungary) a reactive monitoring mission to the site in close co-
operation with ICOMOS and IUCN. Regarding the site’s
tourism development plan requested by the Bureau, the

30
Committee was informed that the Government and the VIII.46 The Observer of the United States stated that the
World Tourism Organization were co-operating to discussions at the Bureau session on mining and World
elaborate a National Tourism Master Plan which would Heritage were helpful. This partially stems from the World
integrate management plans for the conservation of all Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) position
World Heritage properties in the Philippines as a priority statement on mining and World Heritage that had been
concern. discussed at past meetings of the World Heritage
Committee and its Bureau. The Rapporteur's report of the
VIII.41 Baroque Churches of the Philippines twenty-fourth session cited IUCN's view "that this issue
(Philippines) has been characterized by a lack of dialogue between
conservation and mining interests". He agreed, and
The Observer of the Philippines informed the Committee applauded IUCN, ICME and the Centre for holding a
of the intention of the authorities to elaborate in January technical meeting in Gland (Switzerland), that included
2001, a Conservation Master Plan for the San Agustin representatives of mining and conservation interests. He
Church of Intramuros Manila, in accordance with the believed that there remained a need for more dialogue on
ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission recommendations. this issue to resolve outstanding issues. As a result, he
Furthermore, the Committee was informed that the requested that the Centre and IUCN consider holding a
Philippines National Committee for Culture and the Arts follow-up workshop on this issue to build on the progress
had commenced consolidation of the façade of the San made at the Gland meeting. Finally, he informed the
Agustin Church of Paoay to enhance protection against Committee that the US House of Representatives
further earthquake damage, following the ICOMOS Committee on Resources held a hearing on this subject in
reactive monitoring mission recommendations. October 1999. The report of this hearing is available at
http:www.house.gov/resources, listed as document 106-80.
VIII.42 Cultural Landscape of Sintra (Portugal)
VIII.47 The Delegate of Canada supported the comments
The Observer of Portugal stated that, contrary to what was by the United States of America and recommended that the
indicated in the Bureau Report, the "Monte da Lua" proceedings of the workshop be published. Concerning the
Agency was created to strengthen the integrated specific recommendations of the workshop, his country
management of the site. would see the preparation of guidelines on World Heritage
and mining and the dissemination of the results of the
VIII.43 Istanbul (Turkey) workshop as a priority. The Delegate of Hungary noted
that this issue is a breakthrough in terms of a strategic
The Observer of Turkey assured the Committee that all policy development and requested that progress made in
efforts were being made to complete the conservation plan this matter be brought back to the next Committee session
of the Historic Peninsula of Istanbul and the detailed plan and that possibly similar strategic issues, such as World
of Fatih and Eminonu. The Observer confirmed the report Heritage and tourism be raised.
of the Secretariat that the delay was caused by public
hearings on the revised land use regulations. VIII.48 In summing up the discussion, the Chairperson
said that the Committee agreed to the establishment of a
Complex of Hué Monuments (Vietnam) Working Group on World Heritage and Mining to carry
forward the work in this important field.

WORLD HERITAGE AND MINING VIII.49 The Committee noted the recommendations of the
report for transmission to the various key actors. The
VIII.44 The Committee recalled that in accordance with recommendations of the Workshop are contained in Annex
its request at its twenty-third session, IUCN and the World XV.
Heritage Centre planned and organised, in consultation
with the International Council on Metals and the
Environment (ICME), a technical meeting which analysed IX. PROGRESS REPORT ON REGIONAL
case studies on World Heritage and mining. This meeting ACTIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
was held at the IUCN Headquarters (Gland, Switzerland) THE GLOBAL STRATEGY ACTION PLAN
from 21 to 23 September 2000 and reviewed practical case
studies from the following sites: Lorentz National Park, IX.1 The Secretariat introduced document WHC-
Indonesia; Huascaran National Park, Peru; Doñana 2000/CONF.204/11 describing the progress report on the
National Park, Spain; Camp Caiman Gold Project, French implementation of regional actions as described in the
Guyana (adjacent to a Ramsar site); Kakadu National Park, Global Strategy Action Plan adopted by the Committee at
Australia; and Greater St. Lucia Wetlands Park, South its twenty-second session (Kyoto, 1998). The Committee
Africa. reviewed progress achieved in the year 2000, noting the
regional Action Plans for 2001-2002 and approved specific
VIII.45 The Committee noted the deliberations of the activities to be executed during 2001.
twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the Bureau on this
matter included in working document WHC-2000/204/4. IX.2 The Delegate of Benin noted the importance of
implementing the Global Strategy and linking it to issues

31
related to improving the representivity of the List. The IX.6 The Delegate of Greece pointed out that the
Centre's efforts in Africa were commended. He informed document needed to set out priorities as well as
the Committee that international co-operation activities emphasizing a selection of themes for meetings and
offered by countries such as Norway and France have workshops. She called for a better illustration of the links
improved support to African States Parties and appealed between the activities implemented as part of the Global
for the expansion of such effective partnerships with other Strategy Action Plan and the preparation of indicative lists
donor nations. He drew the attention of the Committee to and training activities. She noted that several workshops
the recommendations of the meeting held in Zimbabwe on and seminars had been held, but a critical analysis and
authenticity within the African context (reference: WHC- evaluation of such activities was lacking.
2000/CONF.4/INF.11) and suggested that the list of
recommendations of that meeting be widely circulated. He IX.7 The Representative of IUCN highlighted the need
welcomed planned activities to improve awareness of the to link the implementation of the Global Strategy Action
work of the Convention in States Parties and urged the Plan and improving the representivity of the World
Centre to aim for a balanced distribution of activities 2.2 - Heritage List. He noted the importance of identifying
2.8 of the Action Plan among the various sub-regions of critical gaps in the List and in that regard highlighted the
Africa. work of the Centre and IUCN to undertake a global review
of the application of the Convention in coastal and marine
IX.3 The Delegate of South Africa acknowledged the ecosystems. Currently, World Heritage sites in coastal and
usefulness of Global Strategy activities in Africa and marine ecosystems are under-represented. To address that,
called for special attention to raise awareness for the there would be a workshop on marine World Heritage in
protection of World Heritage of States Parties such as the 2001. The IUCN Representative also drew the attention to
Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) suffering from the World Parks Congress to be held in 2003 in Durban,
war and armed conflict. She expressed the hope that peace South Africa. Referring to the comments of the Delegate
would return to DRC soon and in the meantime urged the of South Africa, he emphasized the significance of the
Centre to make efforts to raise awareness among decision- links between the Global Strategy and periodic and
makers and the people as a whole so that they can reactive monitoring activities.
understand the universal significance of these sites. She
proposed that consideration be given to designating World IX.8 The Ambassador of France to UNESCO made a
Heritage sites in zones of conflict, such as those in the presentation of the France-UNESCO Co-operation
DRC, as 'peace parks' and efforts be made to link Agreement for Protection of Monumental, Urban and
protection of these sites to peace-making efforts. Natural Heritage signed in 1997. This instrument of co-
operation aims to support the implementation of the
IX.4 The Observer of Japan made reference to the Convention, and in particular, includes provisions for
Workshop on "Nature and Biodiversity as World preparatory assistance to assist under-represented States
Heritage", (page 12 of working document CONF.204/11), Parties to meet the conditions required for the nomination
and expressed Japan's satisfaction with the successful of sites. The co-operation therefore includes activities that
conduct of that Workshop which was held in close co- strengthen legal protection, management and restoration of
operation with the Centre, IUCN and East and Southeast sites on the tentative lists as well as designated World
Asian States Parties, as well as with the participation of Heritage sites, and support for improvement of
New Zealand. The Workshop had resulted in a "Strategic documentation and training of personnel in less developed
Statement on Natural World Heritage in East and countries. A joint co-ordination and a technical committee
Southeast Asia" describing practical measures to enhance facilitate the selection and implementation of activities and
the implementation of the Global Strategy Action Plan and emphasis is on decentralised co-operation; i.e. co-
raising awareness of the role of the Convention in operation between designated sites in less developed
biodiversity conservation. He said that copies of the countries (e.g. Luang Prabang in Laos) and in France (e.g.
"Strategic Statement" and the proceedings of the Chinon), or co-operation between local authorities. Most
Workshop could be made available to interested States projects are of a minimum 3-year duration and between
Parties. He expressed Japan's continuing interest to 1997 and 1999, 17 projects have been launched in 26
collaborate with the Centre and IUCN to improve the countries including amongst others, Argentina, Brazil and
implementation of the Convention and attain the objectives Colombia in Latin America, Benin, Ethiopia, Madagascar,
of the "Strategic Statement" in East and Southeast Asia. Nigeria and Senegal in Africa and China and Laos in Asia.
He invited other countries interested in participating in the
IX.5 Japan intends to host a thematic expert meeting co-operative programme to contact the French Delegation
on Asian Sacred Mountains as Cultural Landscapes at the at UNESCO, Paris.
Wakayama Prefecture from 4 to 12 September 2001 and
hoped that the participation of representatives of less IX.9 The Chairperson thanked the Ambassador of
developed countries at the Workshop could be supported France for the information provided and noted that the
through international assistance from the World Heritage French-UNESCO co-operative programme could serve as
Fund. a model for similar efforts of other interested States
Parties. He requested the Ambassador of France to
transmit the Committee's thanks to the relevant French
authorities.

32
IX.10 The Delegate of Italy informed the Committee IX.11 The Observer of Germany congratulated the
that following the "Regional Thematic Expert Meeting on Centre for the excellent and valuable work in the
Potential Natural World Heritage Sites in the Alps" framework of the Global Strategy. Following the
(Hallstatt, Austria, 18 to 22 June 2000) it wished to comments from Greece, he felt that the results are
follow-up on the important issues related to the definition sometimes not well recognized by the national and local
and protection of the Alpine Arc as a transborder territory authorities and that a more comprehensive follow-up
with outstanding natural and cultural landscape values. To including publication and dissemination of results, would
this end, a meeting is to be organized in spring 2001 in be needed. He requested that the Centre report back on this
Turin, Italy. States Parties from the Alpine Arc, the Centre, matter to the next Committee session.
the advisory bodies, local communities, NGOs, as well as
other institutions and organizations involved were invited
to attend.

X. INFORMATION ON TENTATIVE LISTS AND Educational Cultural and Scientific Organization

EXAMINATION OF NOMINATIONS OF (ALECSO) dated 24 November 2000 transmitting the
CULTURAL AND NATURAL PROPERTIES TO THE Declaration of the meeting of Arab Ministers of Cultural
LIST OF WORLD HERITAGE IN DANGER AND Affairs held in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from 21 to 22
November 2000 concerning the Tentative List of Israel
WORLD HERITAGE LIST
(see Annex XVI to this Report).
Tentative Lists
X.3 Both the Observer of Palestine and the Observer
of Israel presented statements that are attached as Annexes
X.1 The Chairperson indicated that all the cultural
XVII and XVIII.
nominations for inscription are included in the tentative
lists of the countries concerned.
Changes to names of properties inscribed on the World
Heritage List
X.2 The Secretariat informed the Committee that it
had received in the year 2000 six new tentative lists from
Following the request from the States Parties concerned,
Australia, Israel, Malawi, Poland, Turkey and Ukraine. It
the Committee approved changes to the names of the
also had received a letter from the Arab League
following properties included on the World Heritage List:

Canada

Existing Name Name change requested

Anthony Island / SGaang Gwaii (Anthony Island) /
Ile Anthony SGaang Gwaii (Île Anthony)
Parcs des Rocheuses canadiennes Parcs des montagnes Rocheuses canadiennes
Parc provincial des Dinosaures Parc provincial Dinosaur
Parc national du Gros Morne Parc national du Gros-Morne
Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump Complex / Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump /
Secteur du précipice à bisons "Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Le précipice à bisons Head-Smashed-In
Jump Complex"
L'Anse aux Meadows National Historic Park / L’Anse aux Meadows National Historic Site /
Parc national historique de l'Anse aux Meadows Lieu historique national de L’Anse aux Meadows
Lunenburg Old Town / Old Town Lunenburg /
Vieille ville de Lunenburg Le Vieux Lunenburg
Quebec (Historic area) Historic District of Québec
Parc national de Wood Buffalo Parc national Wood Buffalo

Canada and the United States of America:

Tatshenshini-Alsek/Kluane National Park/Wrangell-St. Elias Kluane/Wrangell-St. Elias/Glacier Bay/Tatshenshini-

National Park and Reserve and Glacier Bay National Park / Alsek

Tatshenshini-Alsek, Parc national de Kluane, Parc national et Kluane/Wrangell-St. Elias/Glacier Bay/Tatshenshini-

Réserve de Wrangell-St-Elias, et Parc national de la baie des Alsek
Glaciers
Glacier Waterton Parc international de la paix Parc international de la paix Waterton-Glacier

33
Germany:

Existing Name Name change requested

Roman Monuments, Cathedral and Liebfrauen-Church in Roman Monuments, Cathedral of St. Peter and Church of
Trier our Lady in Trier

List of World Heritage in Danger

IUCN noted that existing pressures on the site are low, that
X.4 Following the review of the state of conservation the site is effectively managed and that a positive response
reports and at the recommendations of the Bureau, the was received from the State Party concerning a co-
Committee decided to inscribe the following natural operative management plan.
cultural properties on the List of World Heritage in
Danger: A number of delegates, in supporting the nomination,
highlighted the uniqueness of the site covering the whole

 Fort and Shalamar Gardens of Lahore (Pakistan) Triassic period.

 Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary (Senegal)

 Historic City of Zabid (Yemen) The Observer of Argentina thanked the Committee for the
decision, which will strengthen the protection of natural
X.5 The Committee did not recommend the deletion areas in his country. He informed the Committee that the
of any properties from the List of World Heritage in two areas are now well integrated and that a joint
Danger. management plan is in place since 2 October 2000. He also
agreed to a name change from Ischigualasto Provincial
Examination of nominations of cultural and natural Park and Talampaya National Park to Ischigualasto/
properties to the World Heritage List Talampaya Natural Parks as suggested by some
delegates who felt the name was complicated.
X.6 The Secretariat informed the Committee that the
following sites have been withdrawn: National Park of
Abruzzo (Italy) and Lena River Delta (Russian Property Greater Blue Mountains Area
Federation). Id. N° 917
State Party Australia
X.7 The Committee noted that concerning the sites of Criteria N (ii), (iv)
Fernando de Noronha Marine National Park (Brazil),
Ancient Pula with the Amphitheatre (Croatia) and The Recalling the history of the nomination, IUCN informed
Cape Floristic Region - Phase 1: Cape Peninsula the Committee that the Bureau at its twenty-third session
Protected Natural Environment (South Africa), the had recommended deferral for the natural part of this
respective States Parties have requested postponement. originally mixed nomination inviting the Australian
authorities to consider the possibility of a serial
nomination to cover the full range of values of eucalyptus
A. NATURAL HERITAGE ecosystems. The Bureau had noted that although the area
was nationally important, it was not considered on its own
A.1 Properties inscribed on the World Heritage to be a significant representation of eucalyptus-dominated
List vegetation on a global scale. There were also unresolved
integrity questions. The Bureau at the time also did not
Property Ischigualasto/Talampaya Natural Parks recommend inscription for its cultural values.
Id. N° 966
State Party Argentina IUCN informed the Committee that a thorough evaluation
Criteria N (i) of the additional material subsequently presented by
Australia took place. The additional material did not
The Committee inscribed Ischigualasto/Talampaya Natural address the question of a serial nomination to cover the
Parks on the World Heritage List under natural criterion full range of values of eucalyptus ecosystems. IUCN also
(i). noted that, while the information provided by the State
Party had verified the international significance of
Criterion (i). The site contains a complete sequence of eucalypt dominated vegetation, the areas to be included in
fossiliferous continental sediments representing the entire a serial site were not identified and recommended again to
Triassic Period (45 million years) of geological history. defer the site. Now that the issue was before the
No other place in the world has a fossil record comparable Committee to decide, IUCN's advice was to defer the
to that of Ischigualasto-Talampaya which reveals the nomination, as recommended by the Bureau in 1999 in
evolution of vertebrate life and the nature of favour of a possible serial site and reminded the
palaeoenvironments in the Triassic Period. Committee of Operational Guidelines, Paragraph 19

34
dealing with serial sites. IUCN noted however, that this early theme for assessment, complementing the inscription
was a finely balanced case and if the Committee wished to of the Blue Mountains on the World Heritage List.
inscribe the site, it would suggest that criterion (ii) would
be a potential one. He also referred to proposed national
legislation where the identification of eucalypt heritage Property Noel Kempff Mercado National Park
sites could go some way to meeting IUCN's suggestion of Id. N° 967
a serial site. Possible sites could include areas in State Party Bolivia
Southwest Australia and the Australian Alps, although Criteria N (ii) (iv)
integrity problems may need to be addressed.
The Committee inscribed Noel Kempff Mercado National
The Committee discussed the issues raised by IUCN at Park on the World Heritage List under natural criteria (ii)
length and supported the nomination, in particular and (iv).
highlighting the need to recognize eucalyptus ecosystems
on a global scale. Committee members also pointed out the Criteria (ii) and (iv): The site contains an array of habitat
uniqueness of the site in relation to the recently discovered types including evergreen rainforests, palm forests,
Wollemi Pine and the increase in the representation of cerrado, swamps, savannahs, gallery forests, and semi-
eucalypts on the World Heritage List. They emphasised deciduous dry forests. The cerrado habitats found on the
Australia's responsibility in protecting eucalypts in their Huanchaca Meseta have been isolated for millions of years
original ecosystems. The Committee also considered providing an ideal living laboratory for the study of the
adding criterion (iv). evolution of these ecosystems. The site also contains a
high diversity of plant and animal species, including viable
The Committee inscribed the Greater Blue Mountains populations of many globally threatened large vertebrates.
Area under natural criteria (ii) and (iv).

Criteria (ii) and (iv): Australia’s eucalypt vegetation is Property Jaú National Park
worthy of recognition as of outstanding universal value, Id. N° 998
because of its adaptability and evolution in post- State Party Brazil
Gondwana isolation. The site contains a wide and balanced Criteria N (ii) (iv)
representation of eucalypt habitats from wet and dry
sclerophyll, mallee heathlands, as well as localised
The Committee inscribed Jaú National Park on the World
swamps, wetlands, and grassland. 90 eucalypt taxa (13% Heritage List under natural criteria (ii) and (iv).
of the global total) and representation of all four groups of
eucalypts occur. There is also a high level of endemism
Criteria (ii) and (iv): The site protects a large and
with 114 endemic taxa found in the area as well as 120
representative example of the Amazon Central Plain Forest
nationally rare and threatened plant taxa. The site hosts
including the entire hydrological basin of the Jaú River. The
several evolutionary relic species (Wollemia,
site is important for biodiversity, protecting a large portion of
Microstrobos, Acrophyllum) which have persisted in the biodiversity associated with the Blackwater River system
highly restricted microsites. – one of the three types of lymnological systems associated
with the Amazon basin. The site has a sufficient size to
The Delegate of Australia thanked the Committee and
allow the maintenance of significant on-going ecological and
IUCN for the constructive process and informed the
biological processes, such as blow downs, changes in the
Committee that the world's most eminent experts on river flood dynamics and natural burns, thus providing
biodiversity and eucalypts have stated the outstanding unique opportunities to study their effect on biodiversity in
universal value of the Blue Mountains. Whilst the Greater
natural ecosystems.
Blue Mountains has been inscribed as a stand-alone site,
Australia recognises that there may be other important key
The Observer of Brazil informed the Committee that his
sites of outstanding significance representing the evolution
Government is committed to the protection of the Amazon
of the eucalyptus. system.
He informed the Committee that the Australian
Government is shortly to introduce legislation to allow
Property Pantanal Conservation Area
listing of places of national heritage significance. These
Id. N° 999
places will be protected to the same level under
State Party Brazil
Commonwealth law currently provided to World Heritage
sites. The national list will be compiled according to Criteria N (ii) (iii) (iv)
themes representing the natural, cultural and historic
environment. Whilst any particular site can only be listed The Committee inscribed Pantanal Conservation Complex
following a public assessment and consultation process, it on the World Heritage List under natural criteria (ii), (iii)
is expected that the identification of places representing and (iv).
the evolution of the eucalyptus would be an appropriate

35
Criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv): The site is representative of the The Delegate of Italy stated that his authorities were happy
Greater Pantanal region. It demonstrates the on-going to comply with all requests by Committee and that they
ecological and biological processes that occur in the were ready to cooperate with IUCN in the implementation
Pantanal. The association of the Amolar Mountains with of the management plan for the site.
the dominant freshwater wetland ecosystems confers to the
site a uniquely important ecological gradient as well as a
dramatic landscape. The site plays a key role in the Property Kinabalu Park
dispersion of nutrients to the entire basin and is the most Id. N° 1012
important reserve for maintaining fish stocks in the State Party Malaysia
Pantanal. The area preserves habitats representative of the Criteria N(ii) (iv)
Pantanal that contain a number of globally threatened
species. The area is a refuge for fauna as it is the only area The Committee inscribed Kinabalu Park on the World
of the Pantanal that remains partially inundated during the Heritage List under natural criteria (ii) and (iv).
dry season.
Criteria (ii) and (iv): The site has a diverse biota and high
The Committee discussed a number of potential threats to endemism. The altitudinal and climatic gradient from
the site, including extraction of minerals and the use of tropical forest to alpine conditions combine with
mercury to extract gold from the soils. IUCN pointed out precipitous topography, diverse geology and frequent
that although there are threats in the Panatanal ecosystem, climate oscillations to provide conditions ideal for the
the nominated site is located upstream from them and development of new species. The Park contains high
studies confirmed that there are no pollution-related biodiversity with representatives from more than half the
impacts. The Committee decided to change the name from families of all flowering plants. The majority of Borneo’s
Pantanal Conservation Complex to Pantanal Conservation mammals, birds, amphibians and invertebrates (many
Area. threatened and vulnerable) occur in the Park.

The Observer of Brazil concurred with this and assured the IUCN noted that on request from the Bureau, the State
Committee that his Government is committed to the Party has provided the information requested concerning
protection of this unique area, part of a larger recently land-use impacts near the boundaries of the Park.
designated UNESCO Biosphere Reserve.
In supporting the nomination, a number of delegates
pointed out that the authorities have successfully tackled
Property Isole Eolie (Aeolian Islands) the Bureau's request and that the site is clearly of
Id. N° 908 outstanding universal value for its high biodiversity.
State Party Italy
Criteria N (i) The Observer of Malaysia informed the Committee about
the importance of the cultural and natural heritage in her
The Committee inscribed the Aeolian Islands on the World country.
Heritage List under natural criterion (i).
Property Gunung Mulu National Park
Criterion (i): The volcanic landforms of the site represent Id. N° 1013
classic features in the continuing study of volcanology State Party Malaysia
worldwide. With their scientific study from at least the 18th Criteria N (i) (ii) (iii) (iv)
Century, the islands have provided two of the types of
eruptions (Vulcanian and Strombolian) to vulcanology and The Committee inscribed the Gunung Mulu National Park
geology textbooks and so have featured prominently in the under natural criteria (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv).
education of all geoscientists for over 200 years. They
continue to provide a rich field for volcanological studies Criteria (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv): The concentration of caves
of on-going geological processes in the development of in Mulu's Melinau Formation with its geomorphic and
landforms. structural characteristics is an outstanding feature which
allows a greater understanding of Earth's history. The
The Committee noted that the State Party has adequately caves of Mulu are important for their classic features of
responded to the issues raised at its twenty-third session underground geomorphology, demonstrating an
and commended the State Party for further strengthening evolutionary history of more than 1.5 million years. One of
the nomination by simplifying the boundaries of the the world's finest examples of the collapse process in
nominated area, creating a clear surrounding buffer zone Karstic terrain can be also found. GMNP provides
and a co-ordinated management structure. outstanding scientific opportunities to study theories on the
origins of cave faunas. With its deeply-incised canyons,
A number of delegates supported the nomination and wild rivers, rainforest-covered mountains, spectacular
emhasized that the site is a textbook example of the limestone pinnacles, cave passages and decorations, Mulu
world's volcanology. has outstanding scenic values. GMNP also provides

36
significant natural habitat for a wide range of plant and distinctiveness of the site is the extent of the total isostatic
animal diversity both above and below ground. It is uplift which, at 294m, exceeds others. The site is the “type
botanically-rich in species and high in endemism, area” for research on isostacy, the phenomenon having
including one of the richest sites in the world for palm been first recognised and studied there.
species.
A number of Committee members supported the
IUCN also noted the positive response received from the nomination. The Committee, however, discussed a number
authorities received concerning a number of issues raised of issues relating to the integrity of the site. In light of the
at the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau and proposed evolving management regime, the Committee requested a
that the authorities be encouraged to review the additions review of the effectiveness of the management of this site
to the site for their World Heritage potential when the in two year's time.
gazetting process is completed.
The Delegate of Finland informed the Committee that the
The Observer of Malaysia stressed the commitment of the evaluation of the site was beneficial for the preparation of
authorities to preserve the site. the proposed Kvarken World Heritage nomination.

In supporting the enlistment, the Delegate of Morocco

Property Central Suriname Nature Reserve highlighted the fact that The High Coast was very
Id. N° 1017 significant because, apart from Hudson Bay in Canada, it
State Party Suriname was the most important example of glacio-isostatic uplift
Criteria N (ii) (iv) and the only icecap and geological feature in the north.

The Committee inscribed the Central Suriname Nature The Observer of Sweden informed the Committee that the
Reserve under natural criteria (ii) and (iv). designation of this property is of great importance and
thanked the Committee for the constructive review process
Criteria (ii) and (iv): The site encompasses significant requiring the production of additional studies. This
vertical relief, topography and soil conditions that have material will be beneficial for the management of the area.
resulted in a variety of ecosystems. This ecosystem
variation allows organisms within these ecosystems to A.2 Inclusion of an additional criterion to a
move in response to disturbance, adapt to change and property inscribed on the World Heritage List
maintain gene flow between populations. The site’s size,
undisturbed state (in general a rare condition in Property Ha Long Bay (renomination)
Amazonian forest parks) and protection of the entire Id. N° 672 bis
Coppename watershed, will allow long-term functioning State Party Viet Nam
of the ecosystem. The site contains a high diversity of Criteria N (i) (iii)
plant and animal species, many of which are endemic to
the Guyana Shield and are globally threatened. The Committee inscribed Ha Long Bay under natural
criterion (i) in addition to the site’s existing 1994 listing
The Delegate of Thailand expressed his concern about under criterion (iii).
potential threats from gold mining and impacts to the
integrity of the site. IUCN noted that the site is a pristine Criterion (i): The site is the most extensive and best
area, that the first phase of the management planning has known example of marine invaded tower karst and one of
been completed and that a US$ 18 million trust fund to the most important areas of fengcong and fenglin karst in
support protection of the site was established, which could the world. The size of the area provides sufficient
serve as a model for other sites. integrity for these large scale geomorphic processes to
operate unhindered.
This Chairperson informed the Committee that the site is
Suriname's first inscription on the World Heritage List. The nomination under criterion (i) was supported by a
number of Committee members, who wondered why this
Property The High Coast criterion was not taken into account originally. The
Id. N° 898 Delegate of Hungary also noted the environmental impact
State Party Sweden assessment referred to under the item "state of
Criteria N (i) conservation of properties" discussed during the twenty-
fourth extraordinary session of the Bureau.
The Committee inscribed The High Coast under natural
criterion (i).

Criterion (i): The site is one of the places in the world

that is experiencing isostatic uplift as a result of
deglaciation. Isostatic rebound is well-illustrated and the

37
A.3 Extension of natural properties inscribed on B. MIXED PROPERTY
the World Heritage List
B.1 Mixed Property inscribed on the World
Heritage List
Property Plitvice Lakes National Park
Id. N° 98 bis
State Party Croatia Property uKhahlamba/ Drakensberg Park
Criteria Id. N° 985
State Party South Africa
The Committee approved the extension of Plitvice Lakes Criteria N(iii) (iv) C (i) (iii)
National Park site by the nominated area of 10,020 ha as
this would contribute to the integrity of the site.
The Committee inscribed uKhahlamba/Drakensberg Park
on the World Heritage List under natural criteria (iii) and
Property Caves of the Aggtelek Karst and Slovak (iv) and cultural criteria (i) and (iii):
Karst
Id. N° 725-858 bis Natural criteria (iii) and (iv): The site has exceptional
State Party Hungary / Slovakia natural beauty with soaring basaltic buttresses, incisive
Criteria dramatic cutbacks and golden sandstone ramparts. Rolling
high altitude grasslands, the pristine steep-sided river
The Committee approved the incorporation of the valleys and rocky gorges also contribute to the beauty of
Dobšinská Ice Cave as part of the Caves of the Aggtelek the site. The site’s diversity of habitats protects a high
Karst and Slovak Karst World Heritage site. Although this level of endemic and globally threatened species,
ice cave is a relatively small (6km2) and specialised especially of birds and plants.
feature, it does add variety to the existing site and its
features relate to and complement the Caves of Aggtelek Cultural criteria (i) and (iii):
Karst and Slovak Karst.
Criterion (i): The rock art of the uKhahlamba/Drakensberg
The Delegate of Hungary welcomed the extension and the is the largest and most concentrated group of rock
Observer of Slovakia informed the Committee that an paintings in Africa, south of the Sahara and is outstanding
intergovernmental agreement between the two States both in quality and diversity of subject.
Parties was established in 1999 for joint projects including
research, protection and monitoring. Criterion (iii): The San people lived in the mountainous
uKhahlamba/Drakensberg area for more than four
A.4 Natural property which was not inscribed on millennia, leaving behind them a corpus of outstanding
the World Heritage List rock art which throws much light on their way of life and
their beliefs.
Property Kopacki rit
Id. N° 964 A number of delegates supported the nomination, which
State Party Croatia enhances the diversity of African biogeographical
Criteria provinces represented on the World Heritage List, with
this site being an example of the Mediterranean biome.
The Committee furthermore encouraged the State Party to
The Committee noted that Kopacki rit is an important site
work on an integrated management plan, including the
at the European scale and very significant within the
management of fire and invasive species as well as visitor
Danube Basin as a whole. Nonetheless, it does not meet
management.
the criteria set by the World Heritage Convention and a
number of important integrity questions remain
unresolved. The Delegate of South Africa informed the Committee of
the importance of Izintaba zoKhahlamba in her country
and that the authorities are addressing a number of issues
The Committee decided not to inscribe the property on the
raised by the Committee. She hoped that with bilateral and
World Heritage List.
international assistance the integrated management plan
could be accomplished.

38
C. CULTURAL HERITAGE
Property The Cathedral and Churches of
C.1 Properties that the Committee inscribed on the Echmiatsin and the Archaeological Site
World Heritage List of Zvartnots
Id. N° 1011
State Party Armenia
Property Jesuit Block and Estancias of Córdoba Criteria C (ii) (iii)
Id. N° 995
State Party Argentina The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
Criteria C (ii) (iv) World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iii):

The Committee decided to inscribe the site on the World Criterion (ii): The developments in ecclesiastical
Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv): architecture represented in an outstanding manner by
the Churches at Echmiatsin and the archaeological site
Criterion (ii) The Jesuit buildings and ensembles of of Zvartnots had a profound influence on church design
Córdoba and the estancias are exceptional examples of over a wide region.
the fusion of European and indigenous values and
cultures during a seminal period in South America. Criterion (iii): The Churches at Echmiatsin and the
archaeological site of Zvartnots vividly depict both the
Criterion (iv) The religious, social, and economic spirituality and the innovatory artistic achievement of the
experiment carried out in South America for over 150 Armenian Church from its foundation.
years by the Society of Jesus produced a unique form of
material expression, which is illustrated by the Jesuit
buildings and ensembles of Córdoba and the estancias. Property The Wachau Cultural Landscape
Id. N° 970
The Delegate of Mexico noted the influence of the Jesuit State Party Austria
Order on the American continent and highlighted the fact Criteria C (ii) (iv)
that the property was representative of an extensive
agricultural system founded by religious orders. The Committee decided to inscribed this property on the
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

Property The Monastery of Geghard and the Criterion (ii): The Wachau is an outstanding example
Upper Azat Valley of a riverine landscape bordered by mountains in which
Id. N° 960 material evidence of its long historical evolution has
State Party Armenia survived to a remarkable degree.
Criteria C (ii)
Criterion (iv): The architecture, the human settlements,
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the and the agricultural use of the land in the Wachau
World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (ii): vividly illustrate a basically medieval landscape that
has evolved organically and harmoniously over time.
Criterion (ii): The Monastery of Geghard, with its
remarkable rock-cut churches and tombs, is an Several members of the Committee expressed their
exceptionally well preserved and complete example of appreciation for this nomination including the Delegate of
medieval Armenian monastic architecture and Canada who underlined the importance of the coordinating
decorative art, with many innovatory features which commission for the management of the site. She also
had a profound influence on subsequent developments inquired whether the new boundaries of the site protected
in the region. its viewscape; this question was answered positively by
ICOMOS.
The Delegate of Italy stressed that this site is integrated in
a programme of cultural routes initiated by the Council of
Europe and Italy. Property The Walled City of Baku with the
Shirvanshah's Palace and Maiden
Tower
Id. N° 958
State Party Azerbaijan
Criteria C (iv)

The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the

World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (iv):

39
 Criterion (iv): The Walled City of Baku represents an Criterion (vi): The Town of Brugge was birthplace of
outstanding and rare example of a historic urban the Flemish Primitives and a centre of patronage and
ensemble and architecture with influence from development of painting in the Middle Ages with
Zoroastrian, Sassanian, Arabic, Persian, Shirvani, artists such as Jan van Eyck and Hans Memling.
Ottoman, and Russian cultures.
The Delegates of Thailand and Mexico questioned the
In response to several Delegates, expressing concern about application of criterion (vi) for this site. ICOMOS justified
the authenticity and coherence of the management policy the criteria on the basis that the city had sponsored the
of the site, ICOMOS underlined that the Walled City of development of Flemish primitive art and was home to
Baku was the best preserved city of this region and that the artists. The Delegate of Thailand expressed his reservation
inscription on the World Heritage List enhances the on the use of criterion (vi).
protection of the site. This statement was endorsed by
several delegates. The Committee agreed to enlist the
property but indicated that its concerns should be brought Property The Major Town Houses of the
to the attention of the State Party. Architect Victor Horta (Brussels)
Id. N° 1005
State Party Belgium
Property The Mir Castle Complex Criteria C (i) (ii) (iv)
Id. N° 625
State Party Belarus The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
Criteria C (ii) (iv) World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (ii) and
(iv):
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv). Criterion (i): The Town Houses of Victor Horta in
Brussels are works of human creative genius,
Criterion (ii): Mir Castle is an exceptional example of representing the highest expression of the influential
a central European castle, reflecting in its design and Art Nouveau style in art and architecture.
layout successive cultural influences (Gothic,
Renaissance and Baroque) that blend harmoniously to Criterion (ii): The appearance of Art Nouveau in the
create an impressive monument to the history of this closing years of the 19th century marked a decisive
region. stage in the evolution of architecture, making possible
subsequent developments, and the Town Houses of
Criterion (iv): The region in which Mir Castle stands Victor Horta in Brussels bear exceptional witness to its
has a long history of political and cultural radical new approach.
confrontation and coalescence, which is graphically
reflected in the form and appearance of the ensemble. Criterion (iv): The Town Houses of Victor Horta are
outstanding examples of Art Nouveau architecture,
brilliantly illustrating the transition from the 19th to the
Property The Historic Centre of Brugge 20th century in art, thought, and society.
Id. N° 996
State Party Belgium Further to a question raised by several delegates
Criteria C (ii) (iv) (vi) concerning the protection of the town houses, Belgium
underlined that town planning provisions already exists
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the and that the protection goes beyond the requirements of
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iv), and the World Heritage Committee. ICOMOS confirmed
(vi): protection measures in place in particular the series of
bufferzones.
Criterion (ii): The Historic Town of Brugge is
testimony, over a long period, of a considerable
exchange of influences on the development of Property The Neolithic Flint Mines at Spiennes
architecture, particularly in brick Gothic, as well as (Mons)
favouring innovative artistic influences in the Id. N° 1006
development of medieval painting, being the birthplace State Party Belgium
of the school of the Flemish Primitives. Criteria C (i) (iii) (iv)

Criterion (iv): The Historic Town of Brugge is an The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
outstanding example of an architectural ensemble, World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (iii) and
illustrating significant stages in the commercial and (iv):
cultural fields in medieval Europe, of which the public,
social, and religious institutions are a living testimony.

40
 Criterion (i): The Neolithic flint mines at Spiennes Several States Parties raised the issue of the authenticity of
provide exceptional testimony to early human the site as noted in the ICOMOS report. The Advisory
inventiveness and application. Body remarked that the restorations made in Tiwanaku
were not of recent date and that scientific knowledge
Criterion (iii): The arrival of the Neolithic cultures available today would permit more careful interventions.
marked a major milestone in human cultural and
technological development, which is vividly illustrated The Delegate of Cuba stressed the universal significance
by the vast complex of ancient flint mines at Spiennes. of the site as an icon of a larger pre-columbian culture.

Criterion (iv): The flint mines at Spiennes are

outstanding examples of the Neolithic mining of flint, Property Churches of Chiloé
which marked a seminal stage of human technological Id. N° 971
and cultural progress. State Party Chile
Criteria C (ii) (iii)
The Committee noted the change of name of the property
from Archaeological Site of the Neolithic Flint Mines at The Committee decided to inscribe the site on the World
Spiennes, Mons to The Neolithic Flint Mines at Spiennes Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iii):
(Mons).
Criterion (ii) The Churches of Chiloé are outstanding
examples of the successful fusion of European and
Property Notre-Dame Cathedral in Tournai indigenous cultural traditions to produce a unique form
Id. N° 1009 of wooden architecture.
State Party Belgium
Criteria C (ii) (iv) Criterion (iii) The mestizo culture resulting from
Jesuit missionary activities in the 17th and 18th
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the centuries has survived intact in the Chiloé archipelago,
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv): and achieves its highest expression in the outstanding
wooden churches.
Criterion (ii): The Cathedral of Notre-Dame in Tournai
bears witness to a considerable exchange of influence A number of delegates took the floor to express their
between the architecture of the Ile de France, the support for the nomination citing the churches as
Rhineland, and Normandy during the short period at emblematic of the architecture of the archipelago and as
the beginning of the 12th century that preceded the embodiment of Jesuit ideals. The need to protect the
flowering of Gothic architecture. vernacular architecture surrounding the churches was also
stressed. Ecuador noted that tourism numbers might rise
Criterion (iv): In its imposing dimensions, the with the construction of a planned bridge that connects the
Cathedral of Notre-Dame in Tournai is an outstanding area to the mainland making additional protection
example of the great edifices of the school of the north necessary. Finland suggested that sub-numeration of
of the Seine, precursors of the vastness of the Gothic properties including distinct monuments, would give a
cathedrals. better idea of the number of monuments actually inscribed
on the World Heritage List. Italy and South Africa both
indicated that they felt sub-numeration would detract from
Property Tiwanaku: Spiritual and Political the unity of the site, and that the churches should be seen
Centre of the Tiwanaku Culture as an ensemble within their setting and not be subdivided.
Id. N° 567rev
State Party Bolivia
Criteria C (iii) (iv) Property Mount Qingcheng and the Dujiangyan
Irrigation System China
The Committee decided to inscribe the site on the World Id. N° 1001
Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv): State Party China
Criteria C (ii) (iv) (vi)
Criterion (iii) The ruins of Tiwanaku bear striking
witness to the power of the empire that played a leading The Committee decided to inscribe this site on the World
role in the development of the Andean prehispanic Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii),(iv), and (vi):
civilization.
Criterion (ii): The Dujiangyan Irrigation System,
Criterion (iv) The buildings of Tiwanaku are begun in the 2nd century BCE, is a major landmark in
exceptional examples of the ceremonial and public the development of water management and technology,
architecture and art of one of the most important and is still discharging its functions perfectly.
manifestations of the civilizations of the Andean region.

41
 Criterion (iv): The immense advances in science and
technology achieved in ancient China are graphically Property Ancient Villages in Southern Anhui -
illustrated by the Dujiangyan Irrigation System. Xidi and Hongcun
Id. N° 1002
Criterion (vi): The Temples of Mount Qingcheng are State Party China
closely associated with the foundation of Taoism, one Criteria C (iii) (iv) (v)
of the most influential religions of East Asia over a
long period of history. The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii), (iv), and
The Delegate of Hungary recommended the application of (v):
cultural criterion (v) for this site as it is an outstanding
example of traditional land-use marked by the irrigation Criterion (iii): The villages of Xidi and Hongcun are
system which is representative of a culture. ICOMOS was graphic illustrations of a type of human settlement
requested to examine this point, particularly for sites in Asia, created during a feudal period and based on a
but it maintained that in this case, the site's outstanding prosperous trading economy.
universal value could not be justified on the basis of cultural
criterion (v). Criterion (iv): In their buildings and their street
patterns, the two villages of southern Anhui reflect the
The Committee discussed the question of inscription under socio-economic structure of a long-lived settled period
natural criteria, a proposal for the construction of a dam by of Chinese history.
the water conservancy project and the issue of sacred
mountains in China. The Committee noted that Mt Criterion (v): The traditional non-urban settlements of
Qingcheng is considered to meet natural criteria (ii) and China, which have to a very large extent disappeared
(iv). However, it decided to defer the nomination under during the past century, are exceptionally well
natural criteria and requested that IUCN and the World preserved in the villages of Xidi and Hongcun.
Heritage Centre clarify with the State Party the following
matters relating to the integrity of the site: the The Committee recommended that the State Party consider
management regime in the buffer zone; the completion of nominating other historic villages in Southern Anhui to
the Overall Plan for the management of Longxi-Hongkou extend the site.
Nature Reserve, and a commitment to its early
implementation; the inclusion within the plan of
arrangements to deal with long term funding, the Property Longmen Grottoes
development of adequate trained staff, satisfactory controls Id. N° 1003
over tourism development and activities, and programmes State Party China
for monitoring, research, education and public awareness Criteria C (i) (ii) (iii)
and information on the water conservancy project and the
possible impacts of the dam proposal. The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (ii), and
The Delegate of China explained that the proposal for a
(iii):
new dam was only a proposition at this stage and the
authorities were willing to invite foreign experts to inspect
Criterion (i): The sculptures of the Longmen Grottoes
the site. are an outstanding manifestation of human artistic
creativity.
The Committee encouraged the State Party to consider: (a)
the merits of enlarging the site to include other Giant
Criterion (ii): The Longmen Grottoes illustrate the
Panda areas, such as Wolong Nature Reserve, physically
perfection of a long-established art form that was to
linked to the site; (b) initiating a wider review of the
play a highly significant role in the cultural evolution
potential which exists in China for other natural World of this region of Asia.
Heritage sites with consideration for a workshop focusing
on possible boundaries for an enlarged site as well as to
Criterion (iii): The high cultural level and sophisticated
identify other sites of biodiversity value in the region.
society of Tang Dynasty China are encapsulated in the
exceptional stone carvings of the Longmen Grottoes.
The Chairperson also recalled that a workshop on sacred
mountains in Asia will be hosted by the Japanese
Government.

42
 Property Imperial Tombs of the Ming and Qing Criterion (iv): The Cathedral of St James in Šibenik is
Dynasties a unique testimony to the transition from the Gothic to
Id. N° 1004 the Renaissance period in church architecture.
State Party China
Criteria C (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (vi)
Property Archaeological Landscape of the First
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the Coffee Plantations in the Southeast of
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (ii), (iii), Cuba
(iv) and (vi): Id. N° 1008
State Party Cuba
Criterion (i): The harmonious integration of Criteria C (iii) (iv)
remarkable architectural groups in a natural
environment chosen to meet the criteria of geomancy The Committee decided to inscribe the site on the World
(Fengshui) makes the Ming and Qing Imperial Tombs Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv):
masterpieces of human creative genius.
Criterion (iii) The remains of the 19th and early 20th
Criteria (ii), (iii) and (iv): The imperial mausolea are century coffee plantations in eastern Cuba are unique
outstanding testimony to a cultural and architectural and eloquent testimony to a form of agricultural
tradition that for over five hundred years dominated exploitation of virgin forest, the traces of which have
this part of the world; by reason of their integration disappeared elsewhere in the world.
into the natural environment, they make up a unique
ensemble of cultural landscapes. Criterion (iv) The production of coffee in eastern Cuba
during the 19th and early 20th centuries resulted in the
Criterion (vi): The Ming and Qing Tombs are dazzling creation of a unique cultural landscape, illustrating a
illustrations of the beliefs, world view, and geomantic significant stage in the development of this form of
theories of Fengshui prevalent in feudal China. They agriculture.
have served as burial edifices for illustrious personages
and as the theatre for major events that have marked In support of the nomination some delegates mentioned
the history of China. the significance of the nomination as the first of its kind
and drew attention to the slave trade on which these
The Committee took note, with appreciation, of the State plantations were founded.
Party’s intention to nominate the Mingshaoling
Mausoleum at Nanjing (Jiangsu Province) and the
Changping complex in the future as an extention to the Property The Holy Trinity Column in Olomouc
Imperial Tombs of the Ming and Qing dynasties. Id. N° 859 Rev
State Party Czech Republic
Criteria C (i) (iv)
Property The Cathedral of St James in Šibenik
Id. N° 963 The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
State Party Croatia World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i) and (iv):
Criteria C (i) (ii) (iv)
Criterion (i): The Olomouc Holy Trinity Column is
The Committee decided to inscribe this property be on the one of the most exceptional examples of the apogee of
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (ii) and central European Baroque artistic expression.
(iv):
Criterion (iv): The Holy Trinity Column constituted a
Criterion (i): The structural characteristics of the unique material demonstration of religious faith in
Cathedral of St James in Šibenik make it a unique and central Europe during the Baroque period, and the
outstanding building in which Gothic and Renaissance Olomouc example represents its most outstanding
forms have been successfully blended. expression.

Criterion (ii): The Cathedral of St James is the fruitful The Delegate of Greece expressed some reservations
outcome of considerable interchanges of influences regarding the application of criterion (i) for this site.
between the three culturally different regions of
Northern Italy, Dalmatia, and Tuscany in the 15th and
16th centuries. These interchanges created the
conditions for unique and outstanding solutions to the
technical and structural problems of constructing the
cathedral vaulting and dome.

43
 Property Kronborg Castle Criterion (ii): The Garden Kingdom of Dessau-Wörlitz
Id. N° 696 Rev is an outstanding example of the application of the
State Party Denmark philosophical principles of the Age of the
Criteria C (iv) Enlightenment to the design of a landscape that
integrates art, education, and economy in a harmonious
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the whole.
World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (iv):
Criterion (iv): The 18th century was a seminal period
Criterion (iv): Kronborg Castle is an outstanding for landscape design, of which the Garden Kingdom of
example of the Renaissance castle, and one that played Dessau-Wörlitz is an exceptional and wide-ranging
a highly significant role in the history of this region of illustration.
northern Europe.
The Committee noted the change of name of the property
from Gartenreich Dessau-Wörlitz (The Garden Kingdom
Property The Loire Valley between Sully-sur- of Dessau-Wörlitz, cultural landscape of Dessau-Wörlitz)
Loire and Chalonnes to The Garden Kingdom of Dessau-Wörlitz.
Id. N° 933
State Party France
Criteria C (i) (ii) (iv) Property The Monastic Island of Reichenau
Id. N° 974
State Party Germany
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the Criteria C (iii) (iv) (vi)
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):
Criterion (ii): The Loire Valley is an outstanding The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
cultural landscape along a major river which bears World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii), (iv) and
witness to an interchange of human values and to a (vi):
harmonious development of interactions between
human beings and their environment over two Criterion (iii): The remains of the Reichenau
millennia. foundation bear outstanding witness to the religious
and cultural role of a great Benedictine monastery in
Criterion (iv): The landscape of the Loire Valley, and the early Middle Ages.
more particularly its many cultural monuments,
illustrate to an exceptional degree the ideals of the Criterion (iv): The churches on the island of Reichenau
Renaissance and the Age of the Enlightenment on retain remarkable elements of several stages of
western European thought and design. construction and thus offer outstanding examples of
Chambord has been inscribed on the World Heritage List monastic architecture in Central Europe from the 9th to
on the basis of criterion (i) alone. The revised State Party the 11th century.
nomination incorporated this property into the cultural
landscape of the Loire Valley. The Committee decided that Criterion (vi): The Monastery of Reichenau was a
criterion (i) is also applicable to this new inscription. highly significant artistic centre of great significance to
the history of art in Europe in the 10th and 11th
Criterion (i): The Loire Valley is noteworthy for the centuries, as is superbly illustrated by its monumental
quality of its architectural heritage, in its historic towns wall paintings and its illuminations.
such as Blois, Chinon, Orléans, Saumur, and Tours, but
in particular in its world-famous castles, such as the The Committee noted the change of name of the property
Château de Chambord. from Monastic Island of Reichenau in Lake Constance
Members of the Committee commended the State Party for (Klosterinsel Reichenau im Bodensee) to The Monastic
taking into account the recommendations of the Bureau. Island of Reichenau.

Property The Garden Kingdom of Dessau- Property The Pécs (Sopianae) Early Christian
Wörlitz Cemetery
Id. N° 534 Rev Id. N° 853 Rev
State Party Germany State Party Hungary
Criteria C (ii) (iv) Criteria C (iii) (iv)

The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv): World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv):

44
 Criterion (iii): The burial chambers and memorial traditional land-use.
chapels of the Sopianae cemetery bear outstanding
testimony to the strength and faith of the Christian Criterion (iv): The Basilica of San Francesco is an
communities of Late Roman Europe. outstanding example of a type of architectural
ensemble that has significantly influenced the
Criterion (iv): The unique Early Christian sepulchral art
development of art and architecture.
and architecture of the northern and western Roman
provinces is exceptionally well and fully illustrated by
Criterion (vi): Being the birthplace of the Franciscan
the Sopianae cemetery at Pécs.
Order, Assisi has from the Middle Ages been closely
associated with the cult and diffusion of the Franciscan
The Committee noted the change of name of the property
movement in the world, focusing on the universal
from Sopianae Palaeochristian Cemetery Site, Pécs to The
message of peace and tolerance even to other religions
Pécs ( Sopianae) Early Christian Cemetery.
or beliefs.

The Observer of the Holy See warmly congratulated the

Property The City of Verona Committee for the inscription of the site. He underlined
Id. N° 797 Rev that the rehabilitation work of the Balisica of San
State Party Italy Francesco undertaken after the earthquake of 1997 was
Criteria C (ii) (iv) carried out remarquably. He stressed the importance of the
commitment - including financially- of the Italian State.
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the He considered that the application of criterion (vi) was
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv): particularly justified.

Criterion (ii): In its urban structure and its architecture,

Verona is an outstanding example of a town that has Property Gusuku Sites and Related Properties of
developed progressively and uninterruptedly over two the Kingdom of Ryukyu
thousand years, incorporating artistic elements of the Id. N° 972
highest quality from each succeeding period. State Party Japan
Criteria C (ii) (iii) (vi)
Criterion (iv): Verona represents in an exceptional way
the concept of the fortified town at several seminal
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
stages of European history.
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iii), and
(vi):
Property Assisi, the Basilica of San Francesco and Criterion (ii): For several centuries the Ryukyu Islands
other Franciscan sites served as a centre of economic and cultural interchange
Id. N° 990 between south-east Asia, China, Korea, and Japan, and
State Party Italy this is vividly demonstrated by the surviving
Criteria C (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (vi) monuments.

The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the Criterion (iii): The culture of the Ryukyuan Kingdom
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i), (ii), (iii), evolved and flourished in a special political and
(iv) and (vi): economic environment, which gave its culture a unique
quality.
Criterion (i): Assisi represents an ensemble of
masterpieces of human creative genius such as the Criterion (vi): The Ryukyu sacred sites constitute an
Basilica of San Francesco, which have it a deep exceptional example of an indigenous form of nature
fundamental reference for art history in Europe and in and ancestor worship that has survived intact into the
the world. modern age alongside other established world
religions.
Criterion (ii): The interchange of artistic and spiritual
message of the Franciscan Order has significantly Property Curonian Spit
contributed to developments in art and architecture in Id. N° 994
the world. State Party Lithuania/Russian Federation
Criteria C (v)
Criterion (iii): Assisi represents a unique example of
continuity of a city-sanctuary within its environmental
setting from its Umbrian-Roman and medieval origins
The Committee inscribed the Curonian Spit as a cultural
to the present, represented in the cultural landscape, the
landscape on the World Heritage List on the basis of
religious ensembles, systems of communication, and
criterion (v):

45
 Criterion (v) The Curonian Spit is an outstanding The Committee therefore decided to defer the the
example of a landscape of sand dunes that is under application of criterion (vi) to this property.
constant threat from natural forces (wind and tide). After
disastrous human interventions that menaced its survival
the Spit was reclaimed by massive protection and Property Ruins of León Viejo
stabilization works begun in the 19th century and still Id. N° 613 rev
continuing to the present day. State Party Nicaragua
Criteria C (iii) (iv)
Concerning natural values, the Committee noted that the
Curonian Spit is an important site at the European scale The Committee decided to inscribe the site on the World
and very significant within the Baltic Region as a whole. Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv):
However, it was not considered to meet the criteria for
inscription on the World Heritage List as a natural Criterion (iii) The ruined town of León Viejo provides
property. exceptional testimony to the material culture of one of
the earliest Spanish colonial settlements.
The Committee welcomed the effective collaboration in
the management planning between the two States Parties. Criterion (iv) The form and nature of early Spanish
settlement in the New World, adapting European
The Observer of Lithuania in expressing her appreciation, architectural and planning concepts to the material
informed the Committee of her Government's commitment potential of another region, are uniquely preserved in the
to the effective protection of this fragile environment. The archaeological site of León Viejo.
Observer from the Russian Federation noted that this is the
first cultural landscape from his country and a result of
continuous transborder co-operation for the last two years. Property The Frankincense Trail
He hoped that a similar exercise could be envisaged with Id. N° 1010
Finland for a potential World Heritage area. State Party Oman
Criteria C (iii) (iv)
Property Rietveld Schröderhuis (Rietveld The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
Schröder House) World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv).
Id. N° 965
State Party Netherlands Criterion (iii): The group of archaeological sites in
Criteria C (i) (ii) Oman represent the production and distribution of
frankincense, one of the most important luxury items
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the of trade in the Old World in antiquity.
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i) and (ii):
Criterion (iv): The Oasis of Shisr and the entrepots of
Criterion (i): The Rietveld Schröderhuis in Utrecht is Khor Rori and Al-Balid are outstanding examples of
an icon of the Modern Movement in architecture and medieval fortified settlements in the Persian Gulf
an outstanding expression of human creative genius in region.
its purity of ideas and concepts as developed by the De
Stijl movement. At the initiative of ICOMOS, and with the agreement of
the State Party the name of the property was changed to
Criterion (ii): With its radical approach to design and The Frankincense Trail.
the use of space, the Rietveld Schröderhuis occupies a
seminal position in the development of architecture in
the modern age. Property The Historical Centre of the City of
Arequipa
Following an extensive debate on the application of Id. N° 1016
criterion (vi) to this particular site and in general, and at State Party Peru
the request of several delegates, the Delegate of Zimbabwe Criteria C (i) (iv)
(Rapporteur) informed the Committee that during the
meeting "Authenticity and Integrity in the African The Committee decided to inscribe the site on the World
Context" held recently in Zimbabwe, the application of Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i) and (iv):
criterion (vi), as well as, of criterion (i) was debated at
considerable length. He therefore proposed, upon
Criterion (i): The ornamented architecture in the
completion of the report of that meeting, to transmit it to
historic centre of Arequipa represents a masterpiece of
the Committee in order to enable the Committee to
the creative integration of European and native
continue discussions on this matter. characteristics, crucial for the cultural expression of the
entire region.

46
 Criterion (iv): The historic centre of Arequipa is an Property The Historic and Architectural Complex
outstanding example of a colonial settlement, of the Kazan Kremlin
challenged by the natural conditions, the indigenous Id. N° 980
influences, the process of conquest and evangelization, State Party Russian Federation
as well as the spectacular nature of its setting. Criteria C (ii) (iii) (iv)

The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the

Property The Kyongju Historic Areas World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iii) and
Id. N° 976 (iv):
State Party Republic of Korea
Criteria C (ii) and (iii) Criterion (ii): The Kazan Kremlin complex represents
exceptional testimony of historical continuity and
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the cultural diversity over a long period of time, resulting
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iii): in an important interchange of values generated by the
different cultures.
Criterion (ii): The Kyongju Historic Areas contain a
number of sites and monuments of exceptional Criterion (iii): The historic citadel represents an
significance in the development of Buddhist and exceptional testimony of the Khanate period and is the
secular architecture in Korea. only surviving Tatar fortress with traces of the original
town-planning conception.
Criterion (iii): The Korean peninsula was ruled for
nearly a thousand years by the Shilla Dynasty, and the Criterion (iv): The site and its key monuments
sites and monuments in and around Kyongju (including represent an outstanding example of a synthesis of
the holy mountain of Namsan) bear outstanding Tatar and Russian influences in architecture,
testimony to its cultural achievements. integrating different cultures (Bulgar, Golden Horde,
Tatar, Italian, and Russian), as well as showing the
The Delegate of Morocco commended the State Party for impact of Islam and Christianity.
agreeing to remove the railway line currently truncating
the site.
Property The Ensemble of Ferrapontov
Monastery
Property The Koch'ang, Hwasun, and Kanghwa Id. N° 982
Dolmen Sites State Party Russian Federation
Id. N° 977 Criteria C (i) (iv)
State Party Republic of Korea
Criteria C (iii) The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i) and (iv):
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (iii): Criterion (i): The wall paintings of Dionisy in the
Cathedral of the Nativity of the Virgin at Ferrapontov
Criterion (iii): The global prehistoric technological and Monastery are the highest expression of Russian mural
social phenomenon that resulted in the appearance in art in the 15th-16th centuries.
the 2nd and 3rd millennia BCE of funerary and ritual
monuments constructed of large stones (the Criterion (iv): The complex of Ferrapontov Monastery
“Megalithic Culture”) is nowhere more vividly is the purest and most complete example of an
illustrated than in the dolmen cemeteries of Koch’ang, Orthodox monastic community from the 15th-17th
Hwasun, and Kangwha. centuries, a crucial period in the cultural and spiritual
development of Russia.
Supporting the nomination, the Delegate of Australia
commended the impeccable state of the site and hoped that
when the time is ripe, dolmen sites north of the 38° Property The Island of Saint-Louis
parallel would be added. Id. N° 956
State Party Senegal
Criteria C (ii) (iv)

The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the

World Heritage List in the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv):

47
 Criterion (ii): The historic town of Saint-Louis exhibits
an important exchange of values and influences on the Property The Palmeral of Elche
development of education and culture, architecture, Id. N° 930
craftsmanship, and services in a large part of West State Party Spain
Africa. Criteria C (ii) (v)

Criterion (iv): The Island of Saint-Louis, a former The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
capital of West Africa, is an outstanding example of a World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (v):
colonial city, characterized by its particular natural
setting, and it illustrates the development of colonial Criterion (ii): The Palmeral (palm groves) of Elche
government in this region. represent a remarkable example of the transference of a
characteristic landscape from one culture and continent
ICOMOS informed the Committee that it had received a to another, in this case from North Africa to Europe.
map of the property responding to the request by the
Bureau to expand the boundaries of the property to include Criterion (v): The palm grove or garden is a typical
the entire island. feature of the North African landscape which was
brought to Europe during the Islamic occupation of
much of the Iberian peninsula and has survived to the
Property The Bardejov Town Conservation present day. The ancient irrigation system, which is
Reserve still functioning, is of special interest.
Id. N° 973
State Party Slovakia The Committee noted the change of name of the property
Criteria C (iii) (iv) from The Palmeral of Elche: A Cultural landscape
Inherited from Al-Andalus to The Palmeral of Elche.
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv):
Property The Roman Walls of Lugo
Criterion (iii): The fortified town of Bardejov provides Id. N° 987
exceptionally well preserved evidence of the economic State Party Spain
and social structure of trading towns in medieval Criteria C (iv)
Central Europe.
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
Criterion (iv): The plan, buildings, and fortifications of World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (iv):
Bardejov illustrate the urban complex that developed in
Central Europe in the Middle Ages at major points Criterion (iv): The Roman walls of Lugo are the finest
along the great trade routes of the period. surviving example of late Roman military
fortifications.

Property The Archaeological Ensemble of

Tárraco Property The Catalan Romanesque Churches of
Id. N° 875 Rev the Vall de Boí
State Party Spain Id. N° 988
Criteria C (ii) (iii) State Party Spain
Criteria C (ii) (iv)
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iii):
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
Criterion (ii): The Roman remains of Tárraco are of World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and( iv):
exceptional importance in the development of Roman Criterion (ii): The significant developments in
urban planning and design and served as the model for Romanesque art and architecture in the churches of the
provincial capitals elsewhere in the Roman world. Vall de Boí testify to profound cultural interchange
across medieval Europe, and in particular across the
Criterion (iii): Tárraco provides eloquent and mountain barrier of the Pyrenees.
unparalleled testimony to a significant stage in the
history of the Mediterranean lands in antiquity. Criterion (iv): The Churches of the Vall de Boí are an
especially pure and consistent example of Romanesque
art in a virtually untouched rural setting.
In relation to the works of art of these churches, which are
currently exhibited in a museum in Barcelona, ICOMOS

48
recommended that the State Party investigate the
possibility of returning some of these to their original The Committee noted the change of name of the property
location. from Södra Ölands Odlingslandskap (The Agricultural
Landscape of Southern Öland) to The Agricultural
The Delegate of Finland recalled his previous statement on
Landscape of Southern Öland.
the necessity of a sub-numbering system for serial
nominations such as this property. He urged the
Committee to examine this issue. The Delegate of Ecuador
Property The Three Castles, Defensive Wall and
disagreed with the proposal of a sub-numbering system.
Ramparts of the Market-Town of
Bellinzone
The Committee noted the change of name of the property
Id. N° 884
from The Catalan Romanesque Cultural Landscape of the
Vall de Boí to The Catalan Romanesque Churches of the State Party Switzerland
Vall de Boí. Criteria C (iv)

The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the

Property The Archaeological Site of Atapuerca World Heritage List on the basis of criterion (iv):
Id. N° 989
State Party Criterion (iv): The fortified ensemble of Bellinzone is
Spain
an outstanding example of a late medieval defensive
Criteria C (iii) (v)
structure guarding a key strategic Alpine pass.
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
The Delegate of Italy drew the attention of the Committee
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (v):
to the influence of the Dukes of Milan in the construction
of the defensive walls.
Criterion (iii): The earliest and most abundant
evidence of humankind in Europe is to be found in the
caves of the Sierra de Atapuerca.
Property The Historic Town of St George and
Related Fortifications, Bermuda
Criterion (v): The fossil remains in the Sierra de
Id. N° 983
Atapuerca constitute an exceptional reserve of
information about the physical nature and the way of State Party United Kingdom
life of the earliest human communities in Europe. Criteria C (iv)

The Committee noted the change of name of the property The Committee decided to inscribe the site on the World
from Archaeological Site of the Sierra de Atapuerca, in Heritage List on the basis of criterion (iv):
the Municipalities of Atapuerca and Ibeas de Juarros
(Burgos) to The Archaeological Site of Atapuerca. Criterion (iv): The Historic Town of St George with
its related fortifications is an outstanding example of a
continuously occupied, fortified, colonial town dating
Property The Agricultural Landscape of from the early 17th century and the oldest English
Southern Öland town in the New World.
Id. N° 968
ICOMOS recommended that this property be inscribed on
State Party Sweden
the basis of criteria (iv) and (vi).
Criteria C (iv) (v)
The Delegate of Mexico expressed surprise at seeing the
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
property nominated as a single site instead of as part of a
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iv) and (v):
serial nomination of Caribbean fortifications.
Criterion (iv): The landscape of Southern Öland takes
The Committee discussed the application of cultural
its contemporary form from its long cultural history,
criterion (vi) for this site. The Delegate of Thailand noted
adapting to the physical constraints of the geology and
that the criterion had not been requested by the State Party.
topograpy.
ICOMOS responded that the Advisory Bodies evaluated
properties according to the procedures set out in the
Criterion (v): Southern Öland is an outstanding
Operational Guidelines and recommended criteria
example of human settlement, making the optimum use
deriving from their evaluations. The Committee decided to
of diverse landscape types on a single island.
inscribe the property only under cultural criterion (iv),
indicating the possibility of re-nomination of the property
Several delegates, as well as IUCN, emphasized that the
under cultural criterion (vi) at a later date.
site was an outstanding example of a continuing landscape
which supports and maintains biological diversity.

49
 Property The Blaenavon Industrial Landscape
Id. N° 984 Property The Historic Centre of Shakhrisyabz
State Party United Kingdom Id. N° 885
Criteria C (iii) (iv) State Party Uzbekistan
Criteria C (iii) (iv)
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv):
The Committee decided to inscribed this property on the
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (iii) and (iv):
Criterion (iii): The Blaenavon landscape constitutes an
exceptional illustration in material form of the social Criterion (iii): Shakhrisyabz contains many fine
and economic structure of 19th century industry. monuments, and in particular those from the Timurid
period, which was of great cultural and political
Criterion (iv): The components of the Blaenavon significance in medieval Central Asia.
industrial landscape together make up an outstanding
and remarkably complete example of a 19th century Criterion (iv): The buildings of Shakhrisyabz, notably
industrial landscape. the Ak-Sarai Palace and the Tomb of Timur, are
outstanding examples of a style which had a profound
influence on the architecture of this region.
The Observer of the United Kingdom, representing the
Blaenavon Industrial Landscape, hoped that this decision
would encourage nominations of other industrial sites. At
Blaenavon, heritage is integrated in the development Property Ciudad Universitaria de Caracas
process, in a partnership between local people, Id. N° 986
governmental and other organizations, as well as the State Party Venezuela
private sector. Criteria C (i) (iv)

The Committee decided to inscribe the site on the World

Property The Stone Town of Zanzibar Heritage List on the basis of criteria (i) and (iv):
Id. N° 173 Rev
State Party United Republic of Tanzania Criterion (i): The Ciudad Universitaria de Caracas is a
Criteria C (ii) (iii) (vi) masterpiece of modern city planning, architecture and
art, created by the Venezuelan architect Carlos Raúl
The Committee decided to inscribe this property on the Villanueva and a group of distinguished avant-garde
artists.
World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii), (iii) and
(vi)
Criterion (iv): The Ciudad Universitaria de Caracas is
an outstanding example of the coherent realization of the
Criterion (ii): The Stone Town of Zanzibar is an
outstanding material manifestation of cultural fusion urban, architectural, and artistic ideals of the early 20th
and harmonization. century. It constitutes an ingenious interpretation of the
concepts and spaces of colonial traditions and an
example of an open and ventilated solution, appropriate
Criterion (iii): For many centuries there was intense
for its tropical environment.
seaborne trading activity between Asia and Africa, and
this is illustrated in an exceptional manner by the
architecture and urban structure of the Stone Town.
C.2 Extension of cultural properties already
Criterion (vi): Zanzibar has great symbolic importance inscribed on the World Heritage List
in the suppression of slavery, since it was one of the
main slave-trading ports in East Africa and also the
base from which its opponents such as David Property The Monasteries of Haghpat and
Livingstone conducted their campaign. Sanahin
Id. N° 777 Bis
The Committee requested the State Party to report to the State Party Armenia
twenty-sixth session of the Committee on the progress Criteria C (ii) (iv)
made in clarifying the co-ordinating and supervisory role
and strengthening of the Stone Town Conservation and The Committee decided to approve the extension of the
Development Authority. inscribed property.

50
 analysis, as requested by the twenty-fourth session of the
Property The Potala Palace and the Jokhang Bureau.
Temple Monastery, Lhasa
Id. N° 707 Bis C.4 Cultural Property which the Committee did
State Party China not inscribe on the World Heritage List
Criteria C (i) (iv) (vi)

The Committee decided to approve the extension of the Property The Abava Valley
inscribed property of the Potala Palace to include the Id. N° Latvia
Jokhang Temple Monastery. State Party 997

The Committee decided to retain the name of the city The Committee decided not to inscribe this property on the
(Lhasa) in the name of the property. World Heritage List.

Property The Classical Gardens of Suzhou XI. INFORMATION STRATEGY

Id. N° 813 Bis
State Party China XI.1 The Director of the World Heritage Centre
Criteria C (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) introduced document WHC-2000/CONF.204/13,
describing the Centre's plans for developing an
The Committee decided to approve the extension of the Information Management Systems Plan. The plan has been
inscribed property of the Classical Gardens of Suzhou to developed based on the work of a Senior Information
include the Canglang Pavilion, the Lion Forest Garden, Consultant, Ms Gwynneth Martin, who worked at the
the Garden of Cultivation, the Couple’s Garden Retreat, Centre during a period of three months. The plan had
and the Retreat and Reflection Garden. already been presented by Ms. Martin to the Special
Session of the Bureau in Budapest, 2-4 October 2000.

C.3 Cultural Properties which the Committee XI.2 The Director outlined the history of the initiative,
deferred including the early calls in 1998 by the Management Audit
and the Expert Group on Information Management for an
Integrated System to receive, process, and archive large
Property The Old City of Mostar quantities of information in an efficient and expeditious
Id. N° 946 manner followed by a prototype in 1999. The plan,
State Party Bosnia and Herzegovina recognized the limited capacity of the Centre to implement
Criteria C (iv) (vi) such a system, and urged that an incremental approach
should underlie all planning. Plan implementation would
ICOMOS recommended that this property be inscribed proceed in three stages, as follows:
under criteria (iv) and (vi). However, following Stage I: Design and consolidation (months 1-4) - to
information received from the UNESCO Office in produce detailed system specifications; to begin building
Sarajevo concerning the threats to the site due to capacity in the Centre and to make better use of existing
uncontrolled building in the old town and its perimeter, the information technology facilities;
Committee decided to defer the inscription of this Stage II: Development and implementation (months 5-12)
property, in order to allow the State Party to provide more - to acquire and install hardware, to develop, install and
information on the protection of the site. Furthermore, the test the system, and to train users; and
Committee requested the Secretariat to report on this issue Stage III: Operation and review of an integrated data base
at the forthcoming session of the Bureau. (months 13-14) - to review and assess system operation,
and recommend further developments

Property The Bolgar Historical and Architectural XI.3 The Delegate of Hungary welcomed the Plan and
Complex said it formed the first step towards defining an overall
Id. N° 981 information management strategy for the Centre and for
State Party Russian Federation the work of the Convention. He recalled discussions held
Criteria C (iii) during the Special Session of the Bureau in Budapest (2-4
October 2000) when the Ministry of Information and
The Committee decided that this nomination be deferred to Technology of his Government indicated strong
allow the State Party to provide more detailed information willingness and commitment to support the work of the
about the reconstruction of the Great Minaret, Centre in this regard. He urged the Centre to continue the
confirmation that the industrial project has been incremental approach recommended in the Plan with a
definitively abandoned, and a more detailed comparative view towards elaborating and adopting a fully-fledged
Information Management Strategy by the time of the

51
twenty-sixth session of the Committee in Hungary in 2002. programme and budget for 2001. The Secretariat
He indicated fully Hungary's willingness to be a strategic emphasized the increasing interest of States Parties in the
partner in the process. activities of Chapter V, and notably with regard to
information and educational activities, a fact demonstrated
XI.4 The Observer of Argentina noted the discrepancy by an ever-growing number of international assistance
between the total budget indicated for the implementation requests for promotional activities. The Committee was
of the Plan, i.e. US$ 165,000 and the sum allocated in the informed that the activities of the Centre's Documentation,
budget proposals for the year 2001 in document WHC- Information and Education Unit and the promotional
2000/CONF.204/15Rev. The Director of the Centre activities of UNESCO's Cultural Heritage Division were
pointed out that the shortfall between the total amount now centralised at the World Heritage Centre. The
needed and the amount proposed for the year 2001 would Secretariat also indicated that this would contribute
be bridged by funds remaining unspent in the year 2000. towards ensuring a better synergy between the programme
He said that the latter funds are currently being held in activities, optimize the technical, financial and human
order to pay for the services of a consultant who will resources available and improve the visibility and impact
commence work before the end of the year. He also of the mobilizing messages to be conveyed.
responded to Hungary's points, which he was in agreement
with, namely that the issue had to eventually be addressed XII.2 The Secretariat emphasized upon the need to
in a wider context. Currently, the focus was on addressing seize the opportunity of the 30th anniversary of the
an immediate problem to do with internal organization. Convention to give decisive momentum for its promotion
amongst the local populations, young people, universities,
XI.5 The Delegate of Greece, echoing another remark decision-makers and public and private media sectors.
of the Observer of Argentina, noted the importance of
coordinating the Centre's information planning with that of XII.3 The Secretariat then presented the activities
UNESCO and asked if the Centre was in consultation with proposed for 2001 and the corresponding budget. It
the Organization's Informatics Division. In response, the underlined the need to devote particular attention to the
Director noted that both the consultant and members of his activities developed at the local and national levels. The
staff had established these contacts. need to strengthen efforts for the management and
updating of data bases through the development of new
XI.6 The Observer of the United Kingdom expressed methods of access to information was also expressed.
satisfaction with the Director's response and also Partnerships with the media, the private sector and
highlighted the importance of this aspect of the Centre's especially with the tourism industry, in accordance with
work and recalled the fact that his Government, as well as the Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the
the United States of America and Finland, have provided Convention, would be enhanced to inform the different
support to the Centre's work in this regard. He supported target groups and ensure a better comprehension of the
the views of the Delegate of Hungary about preparing an objectives of the Convention. With regard to education,
Information Management Strategy to be considered in the the Secretariat stressed the complementarity of these
year 2002 which should look ahead to the needs of the activities, more particularly between the Special Project
Convention over the coming 10 years. for the participation of young people and the Forum
UNESCO, University and Heritage.
XI.7 The Chairperson concluded discussions on the
subject. The Committee adopted the Information XII.4 During its presentation, the Secretariat drew the
Management System Strategy as presented by the Centre attention of the members of the Committee to the fact that
and endorsed the incremental approach to its the budget for this Chapter had been considerably reduced
implementation. The Committee however, invited the and underlined that this decrease could affect the execution
Centre to work with Hungarian and other interested and development of new projects. It stressed the need to
delegations to elaborate an Information Management reinforce in the future the information activities and in
Strategy that could be adopted at the time of the twenty- particular the production of specific material on technical
sixth session of the Committee in 2002. To this effect, he and scientific subjects.
suggested that the Centre should be requested to submit a
progress report on steps taken, to the next session of the XII.5 The Chairperson congratulated the Secretariat for
Bureau in 2001. the quality of its presentation. The Delegate of Belgium
intervened to commend the Secretariat and to indicate the
importance that her country accorded to the questions
XII. DOCUMENTATION, INFORMATION AND relating to the Guidelines and Principles governing the use
EDUCATION ACTIVITIES of the emblem. She also under-scored the need to put into
practice a rigorous selection process for partners. With
XII.1 The Chairperson introduced item 12 of the regard to the documents prepared by the Secretariat for the
agenda concerning documentation, information and statutory meetings, the Delegate emphasized the need to
education activities and invited the Secretariat to present ensure the simultaneous availability of these documents in
the report of activities and the proposals for the the two working languages of the Committee. The

52
Director of the World Heritage Centre responded to the Expenditures were now nearly 25% more than the income.
questions raised and underscored the importance he If the income-to-expenditure ratio of the Fund is
attached to awareness programmes, indicating that he had maintained at this level, it could lead to seriously reduce
already begun to take measures to establish linkages with future budgets, thus curtailing the number and range of
possible strategic partners and donors. The Delegate of activities which could be supported. The Director therefore
Morocco emphasized the importance of the UNESCO suggested the following :
itinerant heritage exhibitions to different countries and
their presentation at regional events such as those increase:
organized by the OAU.
 voluntary contributions to the Fund;

 Regular Programme Budget support from UNESCO;

 the percentage of assessed contributions from States
XIII. EXAMINATION OF THE WORLD HERITAGE Parties to the Fund;
FUND AND APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET FOR
2001 AND PRESENTATION OF A improve timeliness of payments of dues by States
PROVISIONAL BUDGET FOR 2002
Parties to the Fund. He noted that 78 States Parties
owed the Fund a sum of US$ 2,198,606 as of 31
XIII.1 The Chairperson presented the following October 2000, including 7 Members of the Committee
documents concerning the agenda item 13 : whose total dues to the Fund amounted to US$
48,988.
•= WHC-2000/CONF.204/15Rev. and 204/15Corr.
The current need to reduce the budget of the Fund for 2001
which present the World Heritage Fund, the income
results from:
and forecasts, the work plan and the proposed budget.

 stagnation of income,
These documents also present the annual

 a 14% annual increase in the budget between 1996
requirements of the advisory bodies as well as the
and 2000,
financial statements and the statement of

 implementation rates close to 90% between 1996 and
contributions for the World Heritage Fund as at 31
2000, making the Centre the UNESCO Unit with the
December 1999, and the provisional accounts and
highest project implementation rates, and
income of the World Heritage Fund as at 31st October

 a severe decrease in operational reserves as a direct
2000.
outcome of increased project implementation rates.
The Chairperson then reminded the Committee of the
XIII.4 The Chairperson noted that the Director of the
actions to be taken during this session:
Centre had adopted a responsible attitude to budget
planning for the year 2001. Delegates from Hungary,
•= Take note of the approved financial statements of the
Canada, Argentina, Thailand and Finland thanked and
Fund for the year 1999 and of provisional accounts as
congratulated the Director for providing a clear and
at 31 October 2000,
concise introduction to factors determining budget
•= Examine and approve the budget of the World planning for the year 2001. The Delegate of Hungary
Heritage Fund for 2001, its ceiling and allocation by expressed the hope that in the coming years the Director
chapters and components as well as the indicative would move towards developing a financial strategy for
budget for 2002. the work of the Convention. Delegates of Canada and
Thailand recalled the fact that at its annual session in 1996
XIII.2 The Director of the Centre, Mr Francesco (Mérida, Mexico) the Committee had urged the Centre to
Bandarin, then presented the documents in three parts, reduce the reserves of the Fund to the minimum required
each part followed by observations, comments and some by the financial regulations of UNESCO and use
questions from the Committee: maximum resources of the Fund for supporting projects
and activities. This strategy of the Committee had led to a
•= Situation of current reserves from States Parties’ reduction in these reserves. Both Delegates urged the
contributions and overall justifications for a reduced Director to negotiate with the Comptroller of UNESCO to
budget for 2001, reduce reserves to a suitable level that would allow more
•= Other available resources for the implementation of financial resources for the Centre’s annual budget for the
the Convention (Regular Programme Budget, Fund.
extrabudgetary funds),
•= The budget proposal for 2001, Chapter by Chapter, XIII.5 The Observer of Argentina noted that the extra-
and provisional budget for 2002. budgetary resources of the Centre (44%) now exceeded
contributions from UNESCO’ s Regular Programme
XIII.3 In introducing document WHC- Budget (21%) as well as the World Heritage Fund (35%).
2000/CONF.204/15Rev, the Director of the Centre, pointed He commented that this situation was not normal and that
out that the proposed budget of the World Heritage Fund the Centre should aim to obtain more funds from
was considerably reduced compared to previous years. UNESCO’ s Regular Programme Budget. He said that

53
given the fact that the Centre enjoys a certain degree of He informed the Committee that UNF was an important
autonomy, its Regular Programme Budget should be donor contributing towards Chapter II, III and IV for about
considered incompressible and budget cuts should not be US$ 3.5 million for 2001; Belgium, China and New
permitted. In addition, States Parties to the 1972 Zealand contributed towards Chapter I activities, whereas
Convention could consider requesting through the Italy supported projects under Chapter II and Belgium and
governing bodies of the Organization, a larger share of France projects under Chapter III. Other than UNF, other
UNESCO's Regular budget to benefit the work of the contributors of extra-budgetary resources do not provide
Convention. In this context, he recalled the fact that the overheads to cover the Centre's administrative costs. While
Director-General of UNESCO had been an active UNF and other co-operation are important for the Centre’ s
Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee in 1998. future, there are serious shortages of human resources to
The Delegate of Finland noted that the volume of unpaid ensure effective delivery of quality outputs and services
dues to the Fund was alarming and that the Committee demanded by such donors.
should call upon all States Parties to pay their dues
urgently. XIII.7 The Director continued with the third part of his
presentation of document WHC-2000/CONF.204/15Rev.
The Director of the Centre responded to the comments of and introduced the 2001 proposed budget Chapter-by-
the Delegates by reiterating his view that unless there are Chapter.
structural changes in the management of the Fund through
a strong increase in income resources, the crisis that may
result from continued deficit spending is likely to be Chapter I – Implementation of the Convention
unavoidable.
The amount proposed for Chapter I was approved: US$
XIII.6 In the second part of his presentation, the Director 195,000.
of the Centre informed the Committee that he had made all
efforts to meet the requirements of the advisory bodies so Chapter II – Establishment of the World Heritage List
that the core component of the Convention’s work, i.e.
evaluation of nominations submitted by the States Parties, In presenting Chapter II proposals, the Director pointed
would not suffer despite overall budgetary reductions he out the increases in the amounts proposed for the Advisory
has proposed. He praised the constructive attitude and Bodies under this Chapter fixed on the basis of the
cordial environment that had marked the negotiations consultations held during the Committee: US$ 430,000 for
between the Centre and advisory bodies and said that they ICOMOS, US$ 325,000 for IUCN, and once again
have initiated a new and joint approach to budgetary reassured Delegates that funds provided to the advisory
planning issues. bodies are sufficient for them to effectively carry out all
evaluations submitted by States Parties.
Referring to extra-budgetary resources available for the
work of the Convention, the Director noted that most The total sum approved for Chapter II amounts to US$
donors, including States Parties to the Convention, 975,000.
preferred supporting project activities bringing benefits to
specific sites rather than other core activities of the Chapter III – Technical Implementation of the Convention
Convention like improving the representativity of the
World Heritage List. He noted that extra-budgetary In the presentation of this Chapter, the Director explained
contributions to the work of the Convention had risen that the amount for Technical Cooperation was reduced to
substantially, that the UN Foundation (UNF) has become a offset the increase made to the Advisory Bodies
major partner and that the Centre will do its best to contributions in Chapter II. This was feasible due to the
continue to develop the co-operation with this important various extrabudgetary resources available this year
new partner. He said that Regular Programme Budget of against this budgetary line.
UNESCO met the Centre’s staff costs, costs of statutory
meetings and a certain amount of travel and other Training: the amount foreseen for ICCROM for training
operational costs. was approved for US$ 156,000 including ICCROM
management costs and coordination operations for World
He then informed the Committee of estimated amounts of Heritage (US$46,000), training sessions for modules
extra-budgetary resources benefiting each of the five testing (US$30,000) and AFRICA 2009 (US$80,000).
Chapters of the World Heritage Fund totaling US$
5,295,280 and distributed as follows: The total sum approved for Chapter III amounts to US$
2,355,000.
Chapter I US$ 746,630
Chapter II US$ 809,000
Chapter III US$ 2,969,650
Chapter IV US$ 540,000
Chapter V US$ 580,500

54
Chapter IV – Reactive Monitoring and Submission of XIII.11 The Delegate of Thailand recalled the fact that the
Periodic Reports World Heritage Fund resources were once used to pay
staff salaries. The Committee however requested
For reactive monitoring, ICOMOS and IUCN are UNESCO to absorb these costs from the Regular Budget.
attributed the same amounts as per year 2000.
Support to States Parties for the submission of periodic The Representative of South Africa pointed out that the
reports: Africa will be the region submitting periodic Committee must undertake strong action against States
reports in 2001 Parties who have not paid their dues, including preventing
the inclusion of sites nominated by such Parties in the
The total sum approved under Chapter IV amounts to US$ World Heritage List.
520,000.
The Delegate of the United Kingdom called upon the
Chapter V – Documentation, Information and Education Committee Members to ensure consistency in their
interventions in inter-governmental meetings such as that
The amount for this Chapter was approved without any of the World Heritage Committee and the UNESCO
modification (US$303.000) Executive Board. He acknowledged that the protection of
the tangible heritage as promoted by the Convention needs
XIII.8 Following this presentation, comments were to be a UNESCO strategic priority; but he pointed out that
made by Committee members on different aspects of the the recent strategic priorities established by UNESCO’ s
budget. Executive Board did not make sufficient reference to the
conservation of tangible heritage. Committee Members
The Canadian Delegate noted that as the percentage of the who are also Members of the Executive Board should send
extrabudgetary contributions to the work of the a strong message to the Director General and the
Convention increased, more external partners were UNESCO Secretariat staff involved in the preparation of
participating the Convention’s projects and activities and the next session of the Executive Board to raise the profile
the Centre may therefore need to develop tool-kits to of the Convention’s work to protect tangible heritage as a
develop standards and guidelines that could inform such strategic priority of the organization. He also invited the
partners on how to carry out the Convention’s work. She Centre to follow UNESCO’ s shift from inputs-based to
also pointed out that the Centre’s critical needs for office results oriented budgeting. The Director of the Centre
space, additional staff and programme resources from agreed to make that shift next year as the Centre, in
Regular Budget of UNESCO shall be addressed. She accordance with the Committee’s decision made at its
suggested that resolutions to the UNESCO General current session, will prepare biennial budgets to coincide
Conference in 2001 should be tabled in order to met some with UNESCO biennal programme and budget.
of these needs in the 2002-2003 biennium. She also
emphasized the need to adhere strictly to provisions of the XIII.12 The Chairperson closed the debate on the
Operational Guidelines in authorising promotional document WHC-2000/CONF.204/15Rev and declared that
products and texts and in the use of the emblem by parties the budget of the World Heritage Fund for the year 2001
external to UNESCO involved in the implementation of was approved for four million three hundred and forty
the Convention. eight thousand US dollars (US$ 4,348,000) and the
Emergency Reserve Fund for six hundred thousand US$
XIII.9 The Chairperson pointed out that the services (US$ 600,000). The provisional budget for the year 2002
provided by the Centre to the States Parties to prepare was fixed at four million one hundred thousand US dollars
nominations and implement other Convention activities (US$ 4,100,000).
may have to be paid for in the future under pay-as-you-go
principle which could imply some special provisions to XIII.3 The Committee asked the Chairperson, on their
exempt or accommodate the needs of less developed behalf, to write to the President of the Executive Board
countries (LDC). and to the Director-General of UNESCO, requesting that
the relevance of the objectives of the Convention be
XIII.10 The Director acknowledged the need to strictly recognized and resources of the World Heritage Centre,
follow Operational Guidelines paragraphs on the use of within the Culture Sector, be enhanced in the framework
the emblem and that he has recently raised this point with of the next biennial exercise. The Committee, after having
other UNESCO’ s Units. He noted that the importance of approved the content of this letter, suggested that the
the World Heritage in UNESCO is not adequately Chairperson meet the President of the Executive Board and
reflected in policy and budgetary documents. He also the Director-General of UNESCO to discuss these matters
committed himself to provide the Committee next year in more depth. It was also suggested that a copy of this
with estimates of in-kind contributions provided by the letter be sent to all members of the Executive Board.
Centre staff’s involvement in promoting bilateral and other
projects benefiting the work of the Convention. The following table provides details of the approved
budget by Chapter and component.

55
 Approved budget for 2001 and provisional budget for 2002

Approved Approved Provisional

Chapters and components budget Budget Budget
2000 2001 2002

Chapter I – Implementation of the Convention

Participation at statutory meetings 60 000 70 000 60 000

Reforms Group 20 000
Working group for WH strategic planning 10 000
Working group on revision of Operational 15 000
Guidelines
Development of an Information Management 114 000 80 000 100 000
System
Evaluation of International Assistance 40 000
Coordination with other Conventions and 25 000 25 000 30 000
Programmes etc…
Sub-total Chapter I 264 000 195 000 190 000
Chapter II – Establishment of the World Heritage
List
Global Strategy 278 000 200 000 180 000
Africa 40 000 5 000
Arab States 8 000 20 000
Asia, including Central Asia 50 000 30 000
Pacific 50 000 35 000
Europe & North America 10 000 5 000
Eastern and Central Europe 20 000 20 000
Latin America 25 000 25 000
The Caribbean 20 000 20 000
Thematic studies:
ICOMOS 40 000 30 000
IUCN 15 000 10 000
Advisory services:
ICOMOS 495 000 430 000 400 000
IUCN 355 000 325 000 300 000
Others 20 000 20 000 20 000
Sub-total Advisory Services : 870 000 775 000 720 000
Sub-total Chapter II 1 148 000 975 000 900 000
Chapter III – Technical Implementation of the
Convention
Preparatory Assistance 325 000 350 000 300 000
Technical Co-operation 1 245 000 965 000 960 000
Including IUCN/WHC Africa 2003 Nature 60 000 50 000
Training 980 000 960 000 900 000
Including ICCROM 85 000 46 000
Including training activities 107 635 30 000

Africa 2009 80 000 80 000

Including IUCN 30 000 30 000
Support to on-site promotional activities 80 000 80 000 70 000
Sub-total Chapter III 2 630 000 2 355 000 2 230 000

56
 Approved Approved Provisional
Chapters and components budget Budget Budget
2000 2001 2002

Chapter IV – Monitoring the state of conservation

of sites

Reactive Monitoring 262 500 200 000 200 000

Including ICOMOS 60 000 60 000
Including IUCN 56 500 56 500
Including ICSU (monitoring of Kakadu National 61 000
Park)
Support to States Parties for the submission of
Periodic Reports:

Methodology development 22 500 20 000 0

Support to States Parties of a Region selected by the

Committee (Article 29)
Technical Coordination for Submission 35 000 0 0
Africa 77 000 130 000 20 000
Arab States 100 000 20 000 20 000
Asia and Pacific 55 000 80 000 130 000
Europe and North America 15 000 10 000 20 000
Eastern and Central Europe 20 000 20 000 30 000
Latin America and the Caribbean 35 000 40 000 80 000
Sub-total support for periodic reporting 337 000 320 000 300 000
Sub-total Chapter IV 622 000 520 000 500 000
Chapter V – Documentation, Information and
Education

Documentation 38 000 38 000 40 000

Information material 140 000 105 000 95 000
Internet and WHIN 70 000 70 000 70 000
Media and Publishers 8 000 5 000 5 000
Education 80 000 85 000 70 000
Sub-total Chapter V 336 000 303 000 280 000
TOTAL ANNUAL BUDGET OF WHF 5 000 000 4 348 000 4 100 000

Emergency Reserve Fund 600 000 600 000 600 000

Promotional Activities and services for these 305 469 651 272
activities

GRAND TOTAL 5 905 469 5 599 272 4 700 000

57
XIV. INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE (i) Preparatory Assistance

XIV.1 Report on the evaluation of international Mixed Heritage

assistance and prioritization in granting No: 2001-444 Philippines
international assistance to States Parties “Regional expert meeting for the preparation of the World
Heritage nomination file of the Batanes Archipelago and
The attention of the Committee was drawn to WHC- Ivatan Archaeological Landscape in the Philippines”
2000/CONF.204/16, the Report on the evaluation of
international assistance and prioritization in granting IUCN’s evaluation was favourable and the Bureau
international assistance to States Parties. The Chairperson approved the requested amount of US$ 30,000 to support
recalled that the Committee, at its twenty-second session the proposed activity, requesting the World Heritage
decided to carry out an evaluation of international Centre to co-ordinate the implementation of the activity in
assistance. The Central Evaluation Unit of UNESCO was close collaboration with the State Party and the UNESCO
entrusted with this evaluation, which was carried out by a Bangkok Office.
French company, C3E. The evaluation was undertaken
between summer 1999 and April 2000, through a study of
the files of the World Heritage Centre, interviews with the New request presented to the Bureau: Kyrgystan
States Parties, advisory bodies, and the Secretariat, “Preparation of the nomination dossier for the Cholpon-
followed by a meeting with all parties concerned. The Ata Petroglyphs in the Issyk-Kul Basin as a mixed
evaluation did not include an impact study to permit the property.”
evaluation of the results of assistance granted to the
beneficiary sites. Similarly, it did not incorporate the The Secretariat informed the Bureau that both ICOMOS
results of the parallel evaluation carried out by ICCROM and IUCN reviewed the request favourably, and the
on international training requests for cultural heritage, as Bureau approved the requested amount of US$ 23,100 to
ICCROM had not completed its study at the time. The support the proposed activity. The Bureau noted with
Bureau, at its twenty-fourth session examined the C3E appreciation that this was the first international assistance
Report, and a summary of the discussions at the Bureau is request submitted by this relatively new State Party to the
contained in the Report of the Rapporteur of the twenty- Convention with no property inscribed on the World
fourth session of the Bureau, WHC-2000/CONF.204/2, Heritage List, and that this activity would eventually lead
paragraphs VII.5 to VII.9. to a better representation of the World Heritage List in the
Central Asian Region.
The Special Session in Budapest in October 2000 did not
have time to discuss the C3E Report. However, the IUCN
and ICCROM submitted comments on the C3E Report, Cultural Heritage
which were made available at the time. No: 2001-423 Mali
“Preparation of a nomination file for the Askia Tomb in
Moreover, there have been substantial discussions for the Gao”
improvement of the implementation of international
assistance at the The Bureau approved this request for US$ 30,000 subject
to the State Party paying its dues to the Fund, and

 Task Force on the Implementation of the Convention requested the Centre to ask the national authorities to

 Expert Meeting for the Revision of the Operational implement the activity within the framework of Africa
Guidelines 2009.
The Committee examined the C3E Report and took note of
its findings. No: 2001-433 Niger
“Preparation of the cultural nomination for the Aïr and
Ténéré site as a mixed site”
XIV.2 Requests for International Assistance

The Bureau met during the twenty-fourth session of the The Bureau approved this request for US$ 15,000 subject
Committee after the budget for Technical Assistance for to the State Party paying its dues to the Fund, and
year 2001 under Chapter III was approved, to take requested the Centre to clarify with the national authorities
decisions or recommend decisions to the Committee the points raised by the Advisory Bodies before
concerning international assistance requests. The attention preparation of the contracts.
of the Committee and Bureau was drawn to document
WHC-2000/CONF.204/17 and 6 requests for decision by
the Committee and 14 requests for decision by the Bureau No. 2001-449 United Republic of Tanzania
were examined and took the following decisions. All Preparation of nomination for the Kondoa Irangi Rock Art
decisions taken by the Bureau and Committee concerning Paintings
these requests are listed below:
The Bureau approved US$ 30,000 for this activity, which
should be implemented within the framework of Africa
2009, following the activities implemented in year 2000.

58
No. 2001-427 Peru resources from potential donors other than the World
“Background Studies and Preparation of Nomination Heritage Fund thereby minimising the demands on
Dossier for the Historic Centre of Trujillo” the World Heritage Fund for supporting second and
third phase operations.
The Bureau approved US$ 15,000 for this activity, subject
to the State Party paying its dues to the Fund. Furthermore, the Committee decided that this sum of US$
130,475 be allocated from the emergency assistance
budget for 2001 rather than from the technical co-
No: 2001-454 Israel operation allocation for natural heritage for the year 2001.
“Meeting for the harmonisation of the Tentative Lists
within the same geo-cultural area”
No. 2001-461 Costa Rica
After discussing this case at length, the Bureau decided to “Education and Protection in the Conservation Area of
defer approval of this request, recommending the State Guanacaste at the Area de Conservación Guanacaste”
Party to reformulate the request with the agreement of the
other Party and authority concerned (Jordan and Palestine) Following the recommendation of the Bureau, the
in the same geo-cultural region. Committee approved US$ 40,000 for this activity for
covering expenses for educational (US$ 17,600) and
The Observer of Israel informed the Bureau that, as a new protection (US$ 22,400) activities as proposed by the State
State Party to the World Heritage Convention since 1999, Party.
his Government had established a National World Heritage
Committee and prepared a Tentative List. Upon
identifying three cultural heritage themes, his Government Cultural Heritage
had formulated this request for support for the organisation
of a Meeting to harmonise trans-national sites with other No. 2001-439 Cuba
States Parties in the sub-region, and not for preparing “Continuation of the Consolidation and Rehabilitation of
nominations for Israeli sites. The Observer informed the the Ruinous Third Cloister of Santa Clara’s Convent of the
Bureau that preparatory work has already been achieved Old Havana and its Fortifications site”
with support from UNESCO and the European Union for
the Dead Sea Basin with Jordan and the Palestinian
Authorities. He stated that there continues to be a need for Taking into account the previous contribution to the
extending research for the Rift Valley, to be organised renovation of the building of US$ 30,000, the Committee
with the Friends of the Earth, an NGO. Finally, stressing approved a contribution of US$ 35,000 subject to the State
that heritage protection should be undertaken through Party paying its dues to the Fund, following the
consensus, the Observer informed the Bureau that the recommendation of the Bureau.
current climate may not be the most suitable for
implementing the proposed activity, but called upon States
Parties to support this activity when the climate improved. No. 2001-446 Dominican Republic
“Study on Cultural Tourism in the Historic Centre of Santo
Domingo”
(ii) Technical Co-operation
The Bureau approved US$ 24,207 for this activity subject
Natural Heritage to the State Party paying its dues to the Fund and
No. 2001 – 459 Senegal requesting the State Party to bear the costs of the
“Fight against Salvinia molesta in the Delta of the Senegal secretarial costs.
River at Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary”
(iii) Training
Following the recommendation of the Bureau, the
Committee approved a sum of US$ 130,475 for Natural Heritage
implementing phase 1 of the 3-phased mitigation project No. 2001-458 Cameroon
under the following conditions: “Three fellowships for African specialists in Protected
Area/Wildlife Management for the Academic Year 2001 –

the States Party pay its dues to the World Heritage 2002”
Fund;

the State Party provide a detailed budget breakdown Following the recommendation of the Bureau, the
for the sum of US$ 85,715 foreseen as expenditures Committee approved a sum of US$ 45,000 for three
for clearing the Lake Lamentin that meets the fellowships for African specialists in Protected
approval of the Centre and IUCN; Area/Wildlife Management for the academic biennium

the State Party, Centre and IUCN establish 2001 - 2003 at the Gaorua School for Training Specialists
benchmarks and indicators that can determine in Wildlife, Cameroon.
success of first phase mitigation operations and guide
planning of future steps, including any changes in
phase 2 and 3 activities as currently foreseen; and

the State Party, Centre and IUCN develop a plan for
financing activities beyond the first phase attracting

59
No. 2001-431 Malawi travel costs of participants to the workshop from
“Capacity Building for Lake Malawi National Park” developing countries.

In accordance with the recommendation of the twenty- The Bureau stated that such requests should be submitted
fourth session of the Bureau, the Committee approved a through the host country or with their endorsement.
sum of US$ 37,094 for the proposed activity.
The Delegate of China informed the Bureau that his
Government, in principle, supported the activity proposed
No. 2001 – 457 United Republic of Tanzania which appeared to be well organised and for the benefit of
“Three fellowships for African specialists in Protected numerous Asia-Pacific States Parties, and expressed his
Area/Wildlife Management for the Academic Year 2001 – appreciation for the initiatives taken by the Government of
2002” Norway to strengthen the capacity of site managers in the
Asia- Pacific Region. However, as the potential host
The Bureau approved a sum of US$ 30,000 for supporting Government of the proposed workshop, the Delegate of
three fellowships at Mweka College of African Wildlife China recommended that his Government and the local
Management for the academic year 2001-2002 authorities of Lijiang World Heritage site be officially
consulted. In addition, China expressed concern relating
to the absence of resource persons from Asia region It
Cultural Heritage requested that the meeting should be put in a global rather
than regional context.
No: 2001-445 Pakistan
“Training Course for physical, chemical and biological While the Bureau expressed its appreciation for the
technical analysis of the problems related to the initiative of the Government of Norway and the UNESCO
conservation of brick & stone archaeological monuments” Regional Advisor for Culture in the Asia-Pacific Region, it
requested the host country to submit the request in
The Representative of ICCROM informed the Bureau that consultation with Norway, the UNESCO Regional Advisor
the activity proposed was an important national training for Culture in the Asia-Pacific and the World Heritage
course targeted for professionals. However, the Centre.
Representative of ICCROM recommended that the activity
proposed be expanded to include participants from the
region, who could benefit from the activity held at World No. 2001-426 Russian Federation
Heritage sites. She informed the Bureau that ICCROM “International Workshop on the preservation and
would be prepared to provide technical advice for the conservation of wooden structures on the example of the
reformulation of the programme of the training activity restoration project of the Church of the Transfiguration of
proposed. the Kizhi Pogost”

The Bureau approved an amount of US$ 22,000, subject to No.: 2001-460 Russian Federation
the State Party implementing this activity as a sub-regional “International Training Workshop for decision-makers on
activity, in close co-operation with ICCROM, the the World Heritage from Eastern and Central Europe”
UNESCO Bangkok Office and the World Heritage Centre. The Bureau, temporarily waiving the application of
Operational Guidelines paragraph 121, deferred
examination of the two requests from the Russian
No: 2001-442 Norway Federation, in view of the outstanding dues of the State
“Culture, Heritage Management and Tourism: Models for Party since 1992, amounting to US$ 1,514,246.
Co-operation among Stakeholders. Workshop to elaborate
models of co-operation”
No. 2001-430 Mexico
ICCROM informed the Bureau that the request was, in “Course on Conservation and Management of
principle, found to be worthy of support, as the activity Archaeological Sites in the Humid Tropics”
proposed would form a part of the existing activity being
implemented by the UNESCO Regional Advisor for ICCROM informed the Bureau that the request addresses
Culture in the Asia-Pacific under the title “Integrated issues of great importance through an approach which is
Community Development and Cultural Heritage Site well designed, has accurate costs, is committed to post-
Preservation in Asia and the Pacific Through Local Efforts event dissemination of training materials, and programmed
(LEAP)". This LEAP project commenced in 1997 based to strengthen regional exchange and co-operation.
on understanding of the circumstances and problems in the However, ICCROM also noted that it would be useful to
region and has been achieving results in the training of build on lessons learnt in past similar courses in Latin
regional site managers and their partners, especially in the America, supported by the World Heritage Committee,
awareness-raising aspects of site management. The notably PAT 96 and PAT 99. While this course may well
programme covers a wide area of conservation issues from be a pilot experience on the humid tropics, many of the
historic areas to cultural landscapes and from site- issues involved are common to management of
management issues to tourism issues. This particular archaeological sites everywhere. Indeed, it would be useful
request covers tourism. ICCROM, while supporting the to examine precedents beyond Latin America, in the
technical content of the request, recommended that the Cultural Triangle of Sri Lanka for example, where many
contribution from the World Heritage Fund be restricted to innovative approaches to management of archaeological

60
sites in the tropics have been developed. Moreover, this sub-activity, new modules for inclusion in the
ICCROM informed the Bureau that it would be useful to Education Resource Kit for teachers specifically
see the nine modules in the proposed course linked within addressing in-danger listing could be developed.
an explicit framework promoting integrated conservation
and management. The Representative of ICOMOS informed the Bureau that
it had not had sufficient time to examine the request in
The Bureau approved US$ 20,900 for this activity, detail. However, it appeared that the budget allocation for
recommending the State Party to take into due international experts was high, and suggested that an
consideration the comments provided by ICCROM. international legal expert was not appropriate as national
legal expertise could be found in Pakistan. The ICOMOS
Representative informed the Bureau that it would be
(iv) Emergency Assistance prepared to work closely with the State Party and the
World Heritage Centre to reformulate the request.
Cultural Heritage
New Request Pakistan After considerable discussion, the Bureau recommended
“Development of a Rescue Programme for the Shalamar that the Committee approve an allocation of US$ 50,000,
Gardens, following the inscription of the site on the List of requesting the State Party to adjust the budget allocation
World Heritage in Danger and Activities for Awareness and activity plan in close co-operation with ICOMOS,
Raising” ICCROM and the World Heritage Centre, which should be
approved by the Chairperson before contracts were issued.
The World Heritage Centre informed the Bureau and the The Bureau considered that the component related to the
Committee that it had received on 30 November 2000, a Youth Forum and translation of the Education Kit could be
request for Emergency Assistance, seeking support to considered under “Assistance for Educational,
elaborate a “rescue programme” following the Information, Promotional Activities”, and should not be
recommendations of the UNESCO-ICOMOS Reactive funded under Emergency Assistance.
Monitoring Mission (October 2000), which had been Following the recommendation of the Bureau, the
adopted by the Bureau and Committee. The activity would Committee approved US$ 50,000, requesting the State
address the priority actions aimed to remove the threats Party to adjust the budget allocation and activity plan in
facing the site, as recognised by the Committee at its 24th close co-operation with ICOMOS, ICCROM and the
session. The request amounting to US$ 84,724, include World Heritage Centre, which should be approved by the
funding for Chairperson before contracts were issued.

international urban planning expertise US$ 19,692 Special note: Conditions for the granting of international

international heritage management planning assistance. Following a proposal from Thailand, the
expertise US$ 18,492 Committee agreed that, with respect to countries in arrears,

international legal expertise US$ 9,040 conditions for granting assistance as set out in Operational

national expertise to develop a comprehensive Guidelines, paragraph 121 should be adhered to.
management plan together with the international
experts US$ 8,000

awareness raising meetings for stakeholders and XV. TRAINING STRATEGY
local communities US$ 7,000

project proposal preparation for seeking other I. GLOBAL TRAINING STRATEGY
donors as major works were necessary to remove
the threats US$ 2,500 XV.1 The Chair stated that this agenda item has two

organization of a Youth Forum in Lahore, components, the Global Training Strategy and the
translation of the World Heritage Education Kit establishment of a Heritage Partnership Programme. The
into Urdu US$ 20,000 Secretariat presented working document WHC-
2000/CONF.204/18 indicating that there were two
The Bureau and Committee were informed that this recommendations for adoption by the Committee, the first
request would support specific actions requested by the on a Global Training Strategy for Cultural Heritage,
Committee during its examination of the state of prepared by ICCROM, and the second, recommendations
conservation of the site during its 24th session, and for follow-up activities to the Strategic Action Plan for
subsequent inscription of the site on the List of World Training in the Field of Natural Heritage. The Centre drew
Heritage in Danger. Moreover, the activity would lead to the attention of the Committee to the substantive 66-page
the development of project proposals, which could be document Global Training Strategy for Cultural Heritage
utilised to seek other funding sources for financing the prepared by ICCROM, which is provided in full as
major works necessary to ensure the conservation and information document WHC-2000/CONF.204/INF.16, to
development of this site. Regarding the funding requested complement the summary of ICCROM’s reflection
for the organization of a Youth Forum in Lahore, the contained in working document CONF.204/18.
Education Sector support the objectives. The organization
of a Youth Forum in Lahore and the translation of the XV.2 The Secretariat reported that the meeting between
“World Heritage in Young Hands” into Urdu language the World Heritage Centre, ICCROM and interested States
were considered important in light of the impact Parties and other advisory bodies to develop “the Regional
anticipated from such an activity (Pakistan being an E9 Training Strategy and Programme Matrix and Related
State). It was noted that, should the Committee support Action Plan”, which ICCROM proposed to host was not

61
held due to the Special Session of the Bureau in Budapest. role as builder of networks for World Heritage training, its
She emphasized the increasing awareness of the role in development of training materials for delivery by
importance of training, especially national-level capacity others, and the importance of its role in developing
building and how the target audience for training evolved training proposals with the World Heritage Centre.
along with the changed notion of heritage. Stating that
training forms an essential part of UNESCO’s fundamental XV.5 The delegates strongly welcomed the Strategy for
task to support national capacity building in the fields of providing a coherent framework, for emphasizing the link
competence of the Organization, the Secretariat informed to periodic reporting and for stressing the importance of
the Committee of the main orientation of past and on- the practical guidelines. Some Delegates expressed a
going training activities incorporating them in the heritage feeling that the existence of three different documents (two
conservation supported by UNESCO. Due to difficulties in working documents and one information document) rather
obtaining donor support for specialized national and than a consolidated one, caused confusion. The
regional training institutions for heritage conservation, Committee asked the Secretariat and ICCROM to produce
UNESCO shifted its focus to site-based on-the-job training one integrated document for consideration by the Bureau
activities inserted in the operational projects entrusted to at the twenty-fifth session.
the Organization to coordinate or execute, and to building
partnerships with existing institutions to insert teaching in XV.6 The Committee, upon reviewing the actions
heritage management and conservation skills. In this proposed by the Centre in document CONF/ 204/18,
regard, she expressed the Centre’s appreciation for the adopted the following:
newly established world heritage studies programmes at
the Technical University in Cottbus, Germany, Cilento
 For institutional teaching: continue identification
National Park, Italy; Beijing University, China, Waseda of partners in collaboration with ICCROM, ICOMOS
University, Japan, and indicated that the Francois Rabelais and relevant divisions of UNESCO; streamline Forum
University in Tours, France will soon be starting a UNESCO network and activities;
programme on world heritage and cultural landscape.

 For individual scholarships and study tour
XV.3 Stressing the need for coherence and opportunities: joint evaluation by ICCROM-World
complementarity in the numerous on-going initiatives and Heritage Centre on UNESCO fellowship programme
activities, the Centre expressed its appreciation for the and solicit more financial contributions and
collaboration of ICCROM in the development of this institutional partnerships.
Global Training Strategy for Cultural Heritage which was
fully endorsed by the Centre. ICCROM’s newly appointed
 For inventory of cultural resources and mapping: to
Director-General, Dr. Nicholas Stanley-Price, introduced establish modalities of cooperation with international,
the Global Training Strategy for World Cultural Heritage regional and bilateral development cooperation
and stressed ICCROM’s interest in strengthening its role agencies
as an Advisory Body to the World Heritage Committee.
The detailed presentation, made by ICCROM staff Herb
 For conservation of historic monuments and
Stovel and Nobuko Inaba, emphasized the importance of archaeological sites: in cooperation with national
bringing the 6 year development of the Strategy to a close, conservation agencies, ICCROM, UNESCO, Nordic
given the advent of the periodic reporting process, and its World Heritage Office (NWHO), Nara Cultural
expected strategic outputs for training. The ICCROM Heritage Protection Office (ACCU/Nara) and Forum
presentation covered historical development of the strategy UNESCO, to develop a more systematic approach to
as initially requested by the Bureau in June 1994, a brief identify on-site, on-the-job training opportunities at
review of ICCROM activities in support of the Convention World Heritage Sites; develop a proposal for an
in 2000, and outlined and elaborated on key elements of international or regional UNESCO-ICCROM
the proposed strategic approach. recognized diploma or certificate which would include
on-site training towards these diplomas, and, to
XV.4 These key elements included a “framework of identify means to ensure multi-year funding to
principles” developed in expert discussions over several stabilize such training courses.
years and used to define a “strategic orientation” for the
training strategy, priority actions within international XV.7 The Committee, upon examining the proposed
strategies and programmes, indicative areas of action Global Training Strategy for Cultural Heritage adopted the
within regional strategies and programmes, a funding and following priority actions:
implementation strategy and particular roles and
responsibilities within a World Heritage training system. Strategic orientation
The funding and implementation strategy proposed
included administrative measures (enhancing use of
 To be most effective, a global training strategy must
internal assessment and periodic reporting review tools), be composed of complementary regional training
measures concerning more focussed use of the World strategies. Towards this end, continuing attention
Heritage Fund, and measures to attract and guide external must be given to monitoring, updating and refining
funding. The presentation of roles and responsibilities regional training strategies.
within an overall World Heritage training system
 Training for World Heritage is best improved by
elaborated on the role assigned to ICCROM as “priority strengthening provisions for conservation training at
partner in training” by the Committee in 1996, stressing all levels and in all related disciplines globally.
ICCROM’s co-ordination role, its quality control role, its Training programmes specifically set up to focus on

62
 World Heritage site conservation may cause professionals, site managers and national decision-
unnecessarily duplication of effort. Rather, existing makers from “well-represented” and “under-
and new conservation training programmes should be represented” countries, which would treat, in line with
encouraged to integrate World Heritage components regional periodic reporting results, development of
and perspectives. draft tentative lists, nominations, state-of-conservation

 The Committee, Centre, and Advisory Bodies should monitoring reports, and analysis of best management
ensure appropriate monitoring and follow-up of practices.
training activities carried out within the Global
 Development of trainers' workshops and programmes,
Training Strategy. Information on training activities intended to strengthen the capacity of training leaders
should be archived as a planning tool for future (including site managers) to develop and deliver
activities.· needed training for improved implementation of the

 The “checklist and criteria for review of requests of World Heritage Convention.
training assistance” developed by ICCROM should
be reviewed and adopted by the Committee to ensure Natural Heritage
consistent and transparent review of training requests.

 The “framework of principles” to guide planning and XV.8 The Secretariat introduced the natural heritage
development of proactive training initiatives should component of the document WHC-2000/CONF.204/18 as
be reviewed and adopted by the Committee. reported on pages 13 - 15 of that document.

 Results of the periodic reporting process should be
used to update and adapt, as necessary, the global and XV.9 IUCN agreed with the five points of action
regional training strategies. recommended by the Secretariat for adoption by the
Committee. IUCN considered training to be an important
The Committee should integrate these results into its tool for achieving the goals and objectives of the
overall strategic planning process Convention and informed the Committee that it will start
discussions with the Centre to find better ways to
International training perspectives implement the Strategic Action Plan for Training
Specialists in Natural Heritage as adopted by the
Challenges: eighteenth session of the Committee (Berlin, 1995). IUCN

 Training institutions which have already developed also offered to assist the Committee and the Centre to
World Heritage components should be utilized by the elaborate a Global Training Strategy for Natural Heritage
Committee to the fullest extent possible to deliver similar to that developed by ICCROM for cultural
training activities. heritage.

 In regions where such specialization does not yet
exist, the Committee should encourage leading XV.10 The Delegate of Canada encouraged the
regional institutions to develop programmes with Committee and the Centre to accept the offer of IUCN to
significant World Heritage focus. develop Global Training Strategy for Natural Heritage. If

 Training programmes should be linked to the whole developed, this natural heritage component, together with
process of World Heritage protection including that developed by ICCROM for cultural heritage, will
preparation of tentative lists, nominations and constitute a complete training strategy for the Convention.
monitoring after inscription.

 Although specific needs can best be addressed by The Committee requested the Centre to co-operate with
looking at the local and regional context, the IUCN and other relevant partners in order to:
exchange of information and practices at the
international level plays an important development
 Re-inform States Parties of the Strategic Action Plan
and testing role for new approaches and ideas. for Training in the field of Natural Heritage adopted
by the Committee in 1995, stressing that the Plan will
Priority Actions determine the activities eligible for financial support

 Establishment of a network of existing from the World Heritage Fund beginning from 2001;
international/regional/national training institutions
 Communicate with Regional Training Institutes such
concerned with World Heritage. as Mweka College, Tanzania and Garoua College,

 Development of a series of off-the-shelf training Cameroon, to review the annual fellowship-support
modules and supporting materials to improve granted to them so far and initiate negotiations with
implementation of the Convention, particularly in them as well as with other new, training institutes in
relation to preparing nominations and to carrying out Africa to redesign training support to African site
periodic reporting and related state of conservation personnel using World Heritage Regional Training
monitoring for sites. Workshops as recommended by Action 2 of the Plan

 Continued development of the Management that could benefit a larger number of personnel each
Guidelines series published by ICCROM, UNESCO, year;
and ICOMOS to include areas not yet covered (e.g.,
 Review links between the Strategic Action Plan for
archaeological sites). Training in the field of Natural Heritage and the

 Development of simplified “technical notes” and recommendations of the CONNECT (Capacity
advice, linked to the above Management Guidelines Building for Outreach, Natural Heritage Networking,
series, for site managers. Education, Co-operation and Training) Task Force

 Explore development of a capacity-building meeting with a view to design and develop pilot
programme based on continuing exchange of teams of

63
 projects and actions which have significance for XVII. DATE, PLACE AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA
natural heritage training, education and outreach; OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH ORDINARY SESSION

 Expand partnerships for designing and developing OF THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
training, educational, networking and outreach
actions benefiting World Natural Heritage sites and XVII.1 The Chairperson recalled that at the earlier
develop pilot initiatives that could attract financing sessions, Finland had offered to welcome the twenty-fifth
from both public and private sector sources other session of the Committee in 2001. Furthermore, he also
than the World Heritage Fund; and recalled that Hungary and China had proposed to host the

 Report on measures taken to implement the above- Committee in 2002 and 2003 respectively.
mentioned recommendations, including significant
achievements made and difficulties and constraints XVII.2 The Delegate of Finland confirmed that her
encountered and proposals for a 3-year work Government would have the honour of hosting in Helsinki
programme, to the twenty-fifth session of the the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau from 7
Committee in 2001. to 8 December 2001 and the twenty-fifth session of the
Committee from 11 to 16 December 2001.
XV.11 The Chairperson requested that the Centre should
also, in accordance with the proposal made by the XVII.3 A presentation on the World Heritage sites and
Delegate of South Africa, place significant emphasis on the City of Helsinki was made, and the Delegate informed
the Training of Trainers as a way to ensure sustainability the Committee that an Internet site has been established to
of knowledge and skills transfer and a more cost-effective provide information on the organization of these meetings
use of the limited resources provided by the World (www.minedu.fi/minedu/whmeeting).
Heritage Fund for training specialists in natural heritage.

XVIII. OTHER BUSINESS

II. PROPOSAL FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT
OF A HERITAGE PARTNERSHIP XVIII.1 The Chairperson informed the Committee that
PROGRAMME the Observer of Germany wished to seek clarification
concerning the States Parties to the Convention, not
The Chairperson referred to document WHC- members of the Committee, attending the session of the
2000/CONF.204/19 on the Training Strategy: Proposal for Bureau and the Committee. The Chairperson responded
the establishment of a Heritage Partnership Programme. that according to Rule 8.1 of the Rules of Procedure of the
The Committee was informed of the background for the Committee, "States Parties to the Convention which are
Heritage Partnership Programme and the close linkages not members of the Committee" may attend the sessions of
between this programme and the implementation of the the Committee as observers. They shall be consulted by
Global Training Strategy. the Committee on all matters in respect of which
consultation is prescribed by the Convention.
In the ensuing discussions, the Delegate of Hungary also
pointed out their interest in developing a broad based XVIII.2 Concerning the document sent by Hungary
partnership related not only to the implementation of the relating to its Vision of the Implementation of the
Global Training Strategy but also to other aspects of the Convention, the Chairperson proposed that this document
implementation of the Convention, such as information be studied and transmitted for discussion at the next
management. The Chairperson requested the Hungarian session of the Committee.
Delegate, in consultations with the Centre and the advisory
bodies, to prepare a detailed proposal with a budget XVIII.3 Given the various issues relating to the
breakdown on the implementation of the Heritage application of cultural criterion (vi), the Chairperson
Partnership Programme for the twenty-fifth session of the informed the Committee that a meeting to discuss all
Bureau. criteria would be held in Paris during the next Bureau
session.
XVI. DATE, PLACE AND PROVISIONAL AGENDA XVIII.4 The Delegate of Australia then paid tribute to
OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH ORDINARY SESSION Mr Bing Lucas for his contribution to the work of the
OF THE BUREAU OF THE WORLD Committee since its creation and drew the attention of the
HERITAGE COMMITTEE Committee to the fact that this session would be the last
one in which Mr Lucas would participate with IUCN. The
XVI.1 The Committee decided that the twenty-fifth members of the Committee as well as the Secretariat
session of the Bureau would be held at UNESCO warmly applauded Mr Lucas.
Headquarters in Paris from 25 to 30 June 2001.
XIX. CLOSURE OF THE SESSION
XVI.2 The provisional agenda of this meeting is
attached in Annex XIX to this report. XIX.1 The Director of the World Heritage Centre, Mr.
Francesco Bandarin, on behalf of the Director-General of
UNESCO, thanked the Traditional Owners for their
participation and the Australian authorities for having
organized and provided the facilities for this session. He
thanked the Chairperson and all delegates for their

64
dedication to World Heritage and for a new spirit towards
the thirtieth anniversary of the Convention. He also
thanked his colleagues for their support. He highlighted
the progress achieved in particular with regard to the new
calendar, the improved documentation and the positive
exchange between the Secretariat and the Committee.

XIX.2 The Chairperson of the World Heritage

Committee expressed his gratitude to the Rapporteur for
his excellent work and thanked his predecessor, Mr A.
Touri (Morocco) for the guidance provided. He
commended the Secretariats of both UNESCO and
Environment Australia for their hard work, all members of
the Committee and the advisory bodies for their
constructive participation in the debates as well as the
interpreters for their support. He recalled progress made
with the new cycle, the budget approved and the
inscription of a record number of 61 new nominations. He
reminded the Committee of the work to be achieved in
2001 with a Bureau meeting in Paris, a Committee
meeting in Finland as well as the thirteenth session of the
General Assembly of States Parties.

XIX.3 On behalf of all members of the Committee and

participants, the Delgate of Morocco, Mr Touri, thanked
the Chairperson for the results achieved during the twenty-
fourth session, noting in particular his flexible
management style which facilitated new ideas that were
brought forward as part of the reform process launched.
He also highlighted the role of the new Director of the
World Heritage Centre as Secretary of the Committee, to
implement the decisions of the Committee during the year
2001. He also thanked Ms. Lammila (Finland), Mr.
Keeffe (Australia) and Mr. Munjeri (Zimbabwe), the three
Rapporteurs of the Bureau and Committee sessions in the
year 2000. He thanked the Australian authorities and
traditional owners for their hospitality and for providing
excellent facilities for the session.

XIX.4 The Delegate of Finland thanked the Australian

Government for having provided such a good model for a
Committee session and invited the Committee to the
twenty-fifth session which would be held in her country in
2001.

XIX.5 The Chairperson then declared the twenty-fourth

session of the World Heritage Committee closed.

65
 ANNEX I / ANNEXE I

WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE/

COMITE DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL

Twenty-fourth session/ Vingt-quatrième session

Cairns, Australia / Cairns, Australie

27 November - 2 December 2000 / 27 novembre - 2 décembre 2000
___________

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS / LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS

I. MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE / ETATS MEMBRES DU COMITE

AUSTRALIA/AUSTRALIE Mr Kevin KEEFFE

Assistant Secretary
Senator the Hon Robert HILL World Heritage Branch,
Minister for the Environment and Heritage Department of the Environment and Heritage
Suite MG 68, Ministerial Wing, GPO Box 787
Parliament House, Canberra ACT 2600 Canberra ACT 2601

Mr Roger BEALE Mr Peter WELLINGS

AM Secretary, Department of the Environment and Assistant Secretary, Parks Australia North
Heritage Department of the Environment and Heritage
GPO Box 787 GPO Box 1260
Canberra ACT 2601 Darwin NT 0801

Mr Matthew PEEK Mr David WALKER

Australian Permanent Delegation to UNESCO Director
1 rue Miollis International Section, World Heritage Branch,
75015 PARIS Department of the Environment and Heritage
FRANCE GPO Box 787
Canberra ACT 2601
Mr Howard BAMSEY
Deputy Secretary, Department of the Environment and Mr Daryl KING
Heritage Director Intergovernmental Section
GPO Box 787 World Heritage Branch
Canberra ACT 2601 Department of the Environment and Heritage
GPO Box 787
Mr Peter KING Canberra ACT 2601
Chair, Australian Heritage Commission
Australian Heritage Commission Mr Stuart CHAPE
GPO Box 787 Asia-Pacific Focal Coordinator
Canberra ACT 2601 World Heritage Branch,
Department of the Environment and Heritage
Dr Arthur JOHNSTON GPO Box 787
Supervising Scientist Canberra ACT 2601
Office of the Supervising Scientist
GPO Box 461 Mr Matt BROWN
Darwin NT 0801 Senior Adviser
Office of the Minister for the Environment and Heritage
Mr Bruce LEAVER Suite MG 68, Ministerial Wing,
First Assistant Secretary, Australian and World Heritage Parliament House, Canberra ACT 2600
Division
Department of the Environment and Heritage Mr Atticus FLEMING
GPO Box 787 Adviser
Canberra ACT 2601 Office of the Minister for the Environment and Heritage
Suite MG 68, Ministerial Wing,
Parliament House, Canberra ACT 2600

67
Dr Ian MCPHAIL Mr Clive COOK
Executive Director, Regional Service Director Northern
National Parks and Wildlife Service, Queensland Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service
Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service TOWNSVILLE QLD 4810
160 Ann St Brisbane QLD 4000
Mr Russell WATKINSON
Mr Peter COCHRANE Executive Director
Director, National Parks Wet Tropics Management Agency
GPO Box 787 PO Box 2050
Canberra ACT 2601 CAIRNS QLD 4870

The Hon Virginia CHADWICK Mr Vince MUNDRABY

Chair, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Chairperson
Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority Bama Rainforest Aboriginal Association (Bama Wabu)
PO Box 1379, Townsville Qld 4810 2/23 Scott St
CAIRNS QLD 4870
Professor Tor HUNDLOE
Chair, Wet Tropics Management Authority Mr Archie TANNA
PO Box 2050 Bama Rainforest Aboriginal Association (Bama Wabu)
Cairns QLD 4870 2/23 Scott St
CAIRNS QLD 4870
Official Australian State Party Observers –
Representatives from Australian World Heritage Area Mr Greg CROFT
Management Bodies NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service
152 Horton Street
Mr Brian CLARK PO Box 61
District Ranger PORT MACQUARIE NSW 2444
Australian Fossil Mammal Sites (Naracoorte)
South East Region Mr Bob CONROY
Dept of Environment & Heritage NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service
PO Box 134 24 Kennedy Pl
NARACOORTE SA 5271 BAYVIEW NSW 2114

Mr Steven BOURNE Mr Doug WILLIAMS

Guide, Australian Fossil Mammal Sites (Naracoorte) Executive Officer
South East Region Willandra Lakes Region WHA
Dept of Environment & Heritage c/o NSW Parks & Wildlife Service
PO Box 134 PO Box 318
NARACOORTE SA 5271 BURONGA NSW 2739

Ms Julia AUSTIN Mr Brian GILLIGAN

Media and PR Manager Director-General
Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority NSW Parks & Wildlife Service
PO Box 1379 PO Box 1967
TOWNSVILLE QLD 4810 HURSTVILLE NSW 2220

Senator Nick BOLKUS Ms Janet CAVANAUGH

Parliament House, Executive Officer
CANBERRA ACT 2600 Central Eastern Rainforest Reserves of Australia
NSW Parks & Wildlife Service
Hon. Dr Barry JONES PO Box 97
Board Chairman GRAFTON NSW 2460
CRC for Coastal Zone Estuary and Waterway
Management Mr Gregor MANSON
PORT ARTHUR TAS Executive Director
Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
Mr Peter F WILLIAMS PO Box 1379
General Manager TOWNSVILLE QLD 4810
Parks and Wildlife Division
Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment
GPO Box 44A
HOBART TAS 7001

68
Mr Jon DAY BELGIUM/BELGIQUE
Director, Conservation, Biodiversity and World Heritage
Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority S. Exc. M. Hubert VAN HOUTTE
PO Box 1379 Ambassadeur
TOWNSVILLE QLD 4810 Délégué permanent
Délégation permanente de la Belgique auprès de
Mr John TANZER l'UNESCO
Executive Director Villa de Saxe
Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 75007 PARIS
PO Box 1379
TOWNSVILLE QLD 4810 M. Edgard GOEDLEVEN
Chef de Division
Mr Lachlan FULLERTON Ministère de la Communauté Flamande
Fraser Island Département de l'Environnement et de l'Infrastructure
Manager Administration de l'Aménagement du Territoire, du
Great Sandy Region Logement et des Monuments et Sites
Qld Parks & Wildlife Service Division des Monuments et Sites
PO Box 101 Graaf de Ferraris-gebouw
MARYBOROUGH QLD 4650 Koning Albert II-laan 20 bus 7
1000 BRUXELLES
Ms Karen JACOBSON
Special Interest Tourism Products Team Mme S. VAN AERSCHOT-VAN HAEVERBEECK
Sport and Tourism Division Adjoint du Directeur
Department of Industry, Science and Resources Ministère de la Communauté Flamande
GPO Box 9839 Département de l'Environnement et de l'Infrastructure
CANBERRA CITY ACT 2601 Administration de l'Aménagement du Territoire, du
Logement et des Monuments et Sites
Mr Kim HILL Division des Monuments et Sites
ATSIC Commissioner Waaistraat 1
National Policy Office 3000 LEUVEN
P.O Box 17
WODEN ACT 2606 M. Philippe THIERY
Directeur
Mr Peter OGILVIE Service des Monuments et Sites
Queensland Parks and Wildlife Services Région de Bruxelles-Capitale
Po Box 155 Ministère de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale
BRISBANE QLD 4000 Rue du Progres, 80/1
B - 1030 BRUXELLES
Ms Gabrielle O’LOUGHLIN
Executive Officer, Kakadu National Park Board of M. André MATTHYS
Management Inspecteur général
PO Box 71 Ministère de la Région wallonne
JABIRU NT 0886 Direction générale de l'Aménagement du Territoire, du
Logement et du Patrimoine
Ms Sandra Mc GREGOR Division du Patrimoine
Member, Kakadu National Park Board of Management Rue des Brigades d'Irlande 1
PO Box 71 B-5100 JAMBES
JABIRU NT 0886
Mme Bénédicte SELFSLAGH
Mr Steve WILLIKA Relations internationales
Member, Kakadu National Park Board of Management Ministère de la Région wallonne
PO Box 71 Direction générale de l'Aménagement du Territoire, du
JABIRU NT 0886 Logement et du Patrimoine
Division du Patrimoine
Mr Terry O'SHANE p/a 30 avenue Junot
Chairman F-75018 PARIS
A.T.S.I.C. Regional Council
111 Grafton Street
CAIRNS QLD 4870

69
BENIN Mr DU Yue
Directeur de Division
M. Isidore MONSI Chef de Délégation
Premier conseiller 37 Damucang Hutong, Xicheng District
Délégation permanente de la République du Bénin auprès BEIJING 100816
de l'UNESCO
1, rue Miollis Ms ZUO Xiaoping,
75015 PARIS Deputy Director of Division, Ministry of Construction
FRANCE 9 San Li He Road
BEIJING 100835
M. Jules BOCCO
Directeur du patrimoine culturel Mr XU Wentao
BP 120, COTONOU Director , Suzhou Municipal Bureau of Parks and Gardens
37 Damucang Hutong, Xicheng District
BEIJING 100816
CANADA
Mr HOU Xiong fei
Dr Christina CAMERON Chairman, Dujiangyan Municipal People's Congress
Director General Ruilan Street
National Historic Sites DUJIANGYAN
Parks Canada
25 Eddy Street Mr LI Wangui
HULL Director, Management Office of Eastern Qing Tombs
QUÉBEC K1A 0M5 Zun Hua County
HEBEI
Mr Murray MCCOMB
Manager Special Projects Mr DENG Chonghui
National Parks Directorate Director
Parks Canada Dujiangyan Tourism Management Committee
25 Eddy Street Beije Dujiangyan
HULL 611830 SICHUAN
QUÉBEC K1A 0M5
Mr LAI Xuebo
Mme Gisèle CANTIN English interpreter
Affaires internationales Sichuan Foreign Affairs Office,
Parcs Canada No. 100, Dongshanduan, Yihuanlu
25, rue Eddy CHENGDU SICHUAN
HULL
QUÉBEC K1A 0M5 Mr XU Jin
Deputy Director
Mr Ernie GLADSTONE Chengdu Planning Commission,
Development Manager 16, Xiyujie
Gwaii Haanas CHENGDU SICHUAN
P.O. Box 37
QUEEN CHARLOTTE, BC VOT 150 Mr NIU Min
Vice Mayor
Ms Josie WENINGER Dujiangyan Municipal People’s Government,
Field Unit Superintendent DUJIANGYAN SICHUAN
Wood Buffalo National Park
Parks Canada Mr LIU Dian-Li
P.O. Box 750 Mayor of Luo Yang City
FORT SMITH LUO YANG CITY
North West Territories XOE OPO
Mr LIU Jing-Lung
Director of the Institute of Lumen Grottos,
CHINA/CHINE LUO YANG CITY

Mr GUO Zhan Mr MA Tianzen

Director of Division Director of the Bureau of Cultural Property
State Administration of Cultural Heritage of Luo Yang City
29 Wusi Street LUO YANG CITY
BEIJING 10009

70
COLOMBIA/COLOMBIE FINLAND/FINLANDE

H.E. Mr Augusto GALAN SARMIENTO H.E. Ms Taina KIEKKO

Ambassadeur Délegué Permanent de Colombie auprès de Ambassador, Permanent Delegate of Finland to UNESCO
UNESCO Permanent Delegation of Finland to UNESCO
1, rue Miollis 1, rue Miollis, Bureau M3.35
PARIS 75015 FRANCE F-75732 PARIS Cedex 15
FRANCE
Ms Katya GONZALEZ
Viceministra de Cultura Mr Henrik LILIUS
Cra 8 No 69-60 Director General
BOGOTA National Board of Antiquities
P.O.Box 913
Ms María Fernanda ACOSTA CONVERS FIN-00101 HELSINKI
Directora Territorial Costa Atlántica
Unidad Administrativa Especial del Sistema de Parques Mr Jukka-Pekka FLANDER
Nacionales Naturales Cheaf Inspector
Ministerio del Medio Ambiente Ministry of the Environment
Calle 15 No. 21-63 P.O.Box 380
SANTA MARTA FIN-00131 HELSINKI

CUBA Ms Päivi SALONEN

Senior Advisor
Dra Marta ARJONA PEREZ Ministry of Education
Presidenta P.O.Box 293
Consejo Nacional de Patrimonio Cultural FIN-00171 HELSINKI
Ministerio de Cultura
Calle 4 esq. a 13 Ms Margaretha EHRSTRÖM
Vedado Researcher
LA HABANA National Board of Antiquities
P.O.Box 913
Mr Antonio PERERA FIN-00101 HELSINKI
Director. Centro Nacional de Areas Protegidas
Calle 18A #4114 entre 41 y 47 Mr Ari MÄKI
11300 Miramar Playa Deputy Permanent Delegate of Finland to UNESCO
LA HABANA Permanent Delegation of Finland to UNESCO
1, rue Miollis, Bureau M3.35
F-75732 PARIS Cedex 15
ECUADOR/EQUATEUR FRANCE

Mr Hernán Crespo TORAL Ms Irma-Liisa PERTTUNEN

Arquitecto Counsellor
Instituto Nacional de Patrimonio Cultural Adviser in Cultural Issues
Ministerio de Eduación y Cultura Ministry of Foreign Affairs
La Cumbre 336 y Carlos Montúfar Department of Development Co-operation
QUITO 32 P.O.Box 176
FIN-00161 HELSINKI

Mr Alfredo CARRASCO V. Ms Leena RINKINEVA

Coordinador Ejecutivo de la Unidad Galápagos Project leader
Ministerio del Ambiente The Kvarken Council
P.O.Box 1722 20109 Kauppapuistikko 23A
QUITO FIN-65100 VAASA
FINLAND
EGYPT/EGYPTE

Dr Mohamed Abdel MAKSOUD

General Director of Egyptian Antiquities
ISMAILIA EL Kantara East

71
GREECE/GRECE Dott.ssa Federica MUCCI
Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Mme Hélène METHODIOU Servizio del Contenzioso Diplomatico
Conseiller pour la Culture piazzale della Farnesina 1
Délégation permanente de la Grèce auprès de l’UNESCO 00194 ROMA
Maison de l’UNESCO
1, rue Miollis Arch. Pasquale Bruno MALARA
75732 PARIS Cedex 15 Soprintendente ai Beni Ambientali e Architettonici per il
FRANCE Piemonte
Piazza S. Giovanni, 2
Dr Helen PAPAZOGLOU-MANIOUDAKI I - 10100 Torino
Curator of Antiquities
National Archaeological Museum Ing. Luciano MARCHETTI
Tositsa 1 str. Soprintendente ai Beni Ambientali e Architettonici
ATHENS 106 82 dell'Umbria
Via Ulisse Rocchi, 71
Ms Maria PSARRA-PAPAGEORGIOU I - 06100 Perugia
Archaeologist
Ministry of Culture Dr. Valentina LONGO
20, Bouboulinas Street Gabinetto - Servizio Rapporti Internazionali
ATHENS Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali
Via del Collegio Romano, 27
HUNGARY/HONGRIE I - 00186 Roma

Professor Dr Zsolt VISY

Deputy State Secretary MALTA/MALTE
Ministry of the Cultural Heritage
1077 BUDAPEST H.E Mr Ambassador Joseph LICARI
Wesslényi u. 20-22 Permanent Delegate to UNESCO
46, rue de Longchamp
H.E. Ambassador Janos JELEN PARIS 75116
Ministry of Foreign Affairs FRANCE
Department of Culture, Science and Information
Nagy Imre ter 4. Dr Antony PACE
BUDAPEST H-1027 Director of Museums
138 Melita Street
Dr Janos TARDY VALETTA CMR 02
Deputy Secretary of State
Ministry of the Environment
Hungarian Committee of the World Heritage MEXICO/MEXIQUE
Költo u.21
BUDAPEST, H-1121 Sr. Francisco Javier LÓPEZ MORALES
Expert Dirección General del Instituto Nacional de
Antropologia e Historia (INAH)
ITALY/ITALIE Reforma 101 San Angel
MEXICO DF CP 01000
Mr Cons. Mario PANARO
Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Professor Dr Architect Salvador DIAZ-BERRIO
DGPCC, Ufficio III UAM-INAH
piazzale della Farnesina 1 Callejón Ojito No-9
00194 ROMA COYOACAN
MEXICO D.F. 04320
Dott.ssa Roberta ALBEROTANZA
Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Mr Tirzo BELTRAN TORRES
DGPCC, Ufficio III Counsellor at the Mexican Embassy in Australia
piazzale della Farnesina 1 14 Perth Avenue
00194 ROMA Yarralumla, ACT 2600

Dott.ssa Lisa ZAFFI

Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
DGPCC, Ufficio III
piazzale della Farnesina 1
00194 ROMA

72
MOROCCO/MAROC Mr AHN Seong-doo
First Secretary
M Abdelaziz TOURI Delegation of the Republic of Korea to UNESCO
Secrétaire général 1, rue Miollis, M 3.32
Ministère de la culture et de la communication 75015 PARIS
1, Rue Ghandi FRANCE
RABAT
Mr CHUNG Byung-ha
S. Exc. Mme Aziza BENNANI Deputy Director, Cultural Cooperation Division
Ambassadeur Cultural Affairs Bureau
Déléguée permanente Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Délégation permanente du Maroc auprès de l'UNESCO 77-6 Sejongno
Maison de l'UNESCO Chongnogu
1, rue Miollis SEOUL
PARIS 75015
Mr KANG Kyung-Hwan
Mme Meriem BENHARBIT Assistant Director of Cultural Properties Planning Division
Chargée de Recherche Cultural Properties Administration
Ministère de la Culture et de la Comunication Daejon-Government Complex 920
1, Rue Ghandi Dunsan-dong
RABAT Seo-gu
DAEJON
M. Driss FASSI
Professeur Mr KIM Bong Gon
Université Mohamed V de Rabat Senior Researcher
14 cité El Khadra National Research Institute of Cultural Properties
GUICH OUDAYAS Chongno-ku
Sejongno-1
SEOUL
PORTUGAL
Mr KOH Byong-Ik
Mr Luis Antonio Branco de Pinho LOPES Chairman of Cultural Properties Committee
Architect Cultural Properties Administration
Assessor Principal do Instituto Portugues do Património Daejon-Government Complex 920
Cultural Dunsan-dong
Ministerio da Cultura Seo-gu
Palacio Nacionalda Asuda DAEJON
1349 021 LISBOA
Mr Hosu JANG
Commissioner, Monuments Division
REPUBLIC OF KOREA/REPUBLIQUE DE COREE Cultural Properties Administration
Dunsan-dong
Mr KIM Seung-eui Seo-gu
Director-General DAEJON
Cultural Affairs Bureau
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Mr KWON Huh
77-6 Sejongno Korean National Commission for UNESCO
Chongnogu C.P.O. Box Central 64
SEOUL SEOUL

KIM Jong-Hyuk
General Director of Cultural Properties Planning Bureau SOUTH AFRICA/AFRIQUE DU SUD
Cultural Properties Administration
Daejon-Government Complex 920 H.E Ms Thuthukile SKWEYIVA
Dunsan-dong Ambassador to France
Seo-gu Embassy of South Africa
DAEJON 59, Quai d'Orsay
PARIS 75007
Mr YOO Jung-hee FRANCE
Minister
Embassy of the Republic of Korea to Australia
CANBERRA ACT

73
Mr Devandhran MOODLEY Mr Marit SIRIWAN
Embassy of South Africa Senior Environmental Planning Expert
59 Quai D'Orsay Office of Environmental Policy and Planning
75007 PARIS 60/1 Rama6 Rd, Phayathai
FRANCE Bangkok 10400

Mr Makgolo MAKGOLO Mrs Prasertsuk CHAMORNMARN

Dept of Environmental Affairs & Tourism Secretary,
P/B x 447 National Committee for the Protection of the World
PRETORIA 0001 Heritage
Office of the Environmental Policy and Planning (OEPP)
60/1 Rama 6 Rd., Phayathai, Bangkok 10400
THAILAND/THAILANDE
Mr Borvornvate RUNGRUJEE
Professor Dr Adul WICHIENCHAROEN Fine Arts Department
Chairman of the National Committee for the Protection of Sri Ayutthaya Rd. Dusit
Natural and Cultural Heritage Bangkok 10300
Office of Environmental Policy and Planning (OEPP)
60/1 Rama 6 Rd, Phayathai, Bangkok 10400 Miss Korapin PHAYAKPRAKARN
Department of Environmental Policy and Planning
Dr Saksit TRIDECH 60/1 Rama 6 Rd., Phayathai,
Secretary-General Bangkok 10400
Office of Environment Policy and Planning
60/1 Pibulwattana 7, Phayathai ZIMBABWE
Bangkok 10400
Mr Dawson MUNJERI
Mr Chatree CHUEYPRASIT Executive Director
Director General National Museums and Monuments of Zimbabwe
Department of Environmental Quality Promotion 107 Rotten Row
60/1 Rama 6 Rd., Phayathai, Box CY 1485 Causeway
Bangkok 10400 Harare

Mr Arak SUNGHITAKUL Brig. Epmarcus KANHANGA

Deputy Director General Acting Director
Fine Arts Department National Parks, Wildlife Management
Ministry of Education P.O. Box CY 140
Naprathat Rd. Causeway
Bangkok 10200 Harare

II. ORGANIZATIONS ATTENDING IN ADVISORY CAPACITY/

ORGANISATIONS PARTICIPANT A TIRE CONSULTATIF

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

Dr N.P. STANLEY-PRICE Dr Nobuko INABA,

Director - General Project Manager, Heritage Settlements Programme
ICCROM ICCROM
Via di Michele, 13 Via di Michele, 13
1-00153 ROMA 1-00153 ROMA
ITALY ITALY

Mr Herb STOVEL Ms Jane LENNON

Programme Director, Heritage Settlements Programme Member of Council
ICCROM ICCROM
Via di Michele, 13 11 Joynt Street
1-00153 ROMA HAMILTON QLD 4007
ITALY AUSTRALIA

74
INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON MONUMENTS AND SITES (ICOMOS)/
CONSEIL INTERNATIONAL DES MONUMENTS ET DES SITES (ICOMOS)

M. Henry CLEERE M. Giora SOLAR

Coordinateur pour le Patrimone mondial Délégué Général aux Finances
ICOMOS ICOMOS
49-51 rue de la Fédération 49-51 rue de la Fédération
75015 Paris, France 75015 Paris, France

Mme Regina DURIGHELLO M. William LOGAN

Coordinateur adjoint Chairman ICOMOS Australia
ICOMOS Australia ICOMOS inc
49-51 rue de la Fédération c/o Faculty of Arts
PARIS 75015 Deakin University
FRANCE BURWOOD VIC 3125
AUSTRALIA
M. Jukka JOKILEHTO
Consultant
ICOMOS
49-51 rue de la Fédération
PARIS 75015
FRANCE

THE WORLD CONSERVATION UNION (IUCN)/ UNION MONDIALE POUR LA NATURE (UICN)

Mr David SHEPPARD
Head, Programme on Protected Areas Ms Pam EISER
IUCN-The World Conservation Union Executive Officer
Rue Mauverney 28 Australian Committee for IUCN
CH-1196 GLAND, Switzerland GPO Box 528
725 George Street, Level 5
Mr Jim THORSELL SYDNEY NSW 2001
Senior Advisor World Heritage AUSTRALIA
IUCN Programme on Protected Areas
Box 2846 Mr Marc HOCKINGS
BANFF, ALBERTA, T0L 0C0, Canada Senior Lecturer
School of Natural Rural Systems Management
Mr Adrian Phillips The University of Queensland, Gatton
Vice-Chair World Heritage (incumbent) GATTON QLD 4343
IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas AUSTRALIA
2 The Old rectory
Dumbleton Near Evesham WR 11 6GT, United Kingdom Mr Rodney SHEPPARD
IUCN Volunteer
Mr Rolf HOGAN 224 Iindah Road
Programme Associate for World Heritage Tinana
Programme on Protected Areas MARYBOROUGH QLD 4650
IUCN-The World Conservation Union AUSTRALIA
Rue Mauverney 28
CH-1196 GLAND Mr Peter VALENTINE
SWITZERLAND Dept of Geography and Environmental Studies
James Cook University of North Queensland
Mr Bing LUCAS Townsville
Vice-Chair World Heritage (outgoing) QLD, Australia
IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas
1/268 Main Road, Tawa
WELLINGTON 6006
NEW ZEALAND

75
III. OBSERVERS / OBSERVATEURS

(i) STATES PARTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION/

ETATS PARTIES A LA CONVENTION DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL

ANGOLA Ms Josefina PIANA

Directora del Patrimonio Cultural
M. Pedro M. NSINGUI-BARROS Dirección del Patrimonio Cultural
Chargé d'Affaires a.i. H. Yrigoyen 622
Délégation de l'Angola auprès de l'UNESCO 5000 CORDOBA
1, rue de Miollis
75015 PARIS Mr Edgardo J. VENTURINI
FRANCE Architecte chargé du patrimoine touristique
Government de Cordoba
ARGENTINA/ARGENTINE Tucumán 360
5000 CORDOBA
Dr Hugo JURI
Minister of Education of Argentina Mr Ariel W. GONZALEZ
CANBERRA ACT 2601, Secretary of Embassy
AUSTRALIA Permanent Delegation of Argentina to UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
Dr Carlos GUTIERREZ PARIS 75015
Director Nacional FRANCE
Secretaria de Turismo
Suipacha 1111, #21
C1008AAW BUENOS AIRES AUSTRIA/AUTRICHE

Ms Liliana BARELA Mr Hans HORCICKA

Diector of Heritage Director
State Secretariat for Culture Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture
Abteilung IV/3
Mr Pablo CANEDO Schreyvogelgasse 2
Sécretaire de la Culture A - 1014 WIEN
Gobierno Provincia de Cordoba
H. Yrigoyen 622
5000 CORDOBA AZERBAIJAN/AZERBAIDJAN
Tel : +54 351 433 3425
Mr Moukhtarov ROUSTAM
Ms Maria RICO Coordinator of Azerbaijan Cultural Heritage Project
Directore de Turismo Ministry of Culture
Provincia de San Juan Izmir str 9
Suipacha 1111, #21 370065 BAKU
C1008AAW BUENOS AIRES
Mr Moustafayev ORKHAN
Mr Adolfo SCAGLIONE Interpreter
Director De Tourismo Izmir str 9
Provincia De La Rioja 370065 BAKU
Suipacha 1111, #21
C1008AAW BUENOS AIRES
BOTSWANA
Mr William SILL
Museo De Ciencias Naturais Ms Tickey T. PULE
Dominquito 1552 Barrio Smata National Museum, Monuments and Art Gallery
SAN JUAN 5400 331 Independence Avenue
Private bag 00114
Mr Carlos PERNAUT GABORONE
Arquitecto
Comision Nacional de Museos, Monumentos y Lugares
Historicos
Virrey Del Pino 2632
BUENOS AIRES 1426

76
BRAZIL/BRESIL Mme Catherine DUMESNIL
Conseillère Technique
H.E. Mr Antonio DAYRELL DE LIMA Commission Nationale pour l’UNESCO
Ambassador 57 Bd. des Invalides
Embassy of Brazil 75700 PARIS
CANBERRA ACT 2600 FRANCE
AUSTRALIA

Ms Vera Cíntia ALVAREZ GERMANY/ALLEMAGNE

Head of the Division of Cultural Agreements and
Multilateral Affairs Mr Detlev RUNGER
Ministry of Foreign Affairs First Counsellor
DAMC/Ministerio dos Relacoes Exteriores, Sala 407 Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany, Canberra
Esplanada dos Ministerios 119 Empire Circuit
MRE/Brasilia – D.F. Brazil YARRALUMLA ACT 2600
AUSTRALIA

BURKINA FASO Dr Hans CASPARY

Curator, State Authority of Rhineland-Palatinate for
Mr Oumarou NAO Preservation of Monuments
Directeur du Patrimoine Culture Schillerstr. 44
Ministere de la Culture et des Arts 55116 MAINZ
01 BP 2727 Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso
Prof. Dr Harald PLACHTER
Philipps University Marburg,
CAMEROON/CAMEROUN Department of Nature Conservation
Faculty of Biology
Mr Denis KOULAGNA KOUTOU 35032 MARBURG
Direction de la Faune et des Aires Protegees
Ministere de l’Environnement et des Forets
YAOUNDE HOLY SEE/SAINT-SIEGE

Mons. Tullio POLI

CHILE/CHILI Secretariat of State
Section for Relation with States
Mr Patricio UTRERAS 00120 VATICAN CITY
First Secretary
Department for Specialized Agencies Mons. John LENNON
Ministry of Foreign Affairs 135 Robert Road,
Catedral 1158 Centenary Park, Qld 4869
SANTIAGO P.O. Box 41
EDMONTON QLD 4869
AUSTRALIA
FIJI/FIDJI

Ms Jiu KUBUABOLA INDIA/INDE

ASPNet National Co-ordinator
Ministry of Education H.E. Ms Neelam D. SABHARWAL
Marela House Ambassador
SUVA Permanent Representative of India to UNESCO
1, rue Miollis
PARIS 75015
FRANCE FRANCE

S.Exc. M. Jean MUSITELLI ISRAEL

Ambassadeur
Délegué permanent S.Exc. M. Arye GABAY
Délégation de la France auprès de l'UNESCO Ambassadeur
1, rue Miollis Délégué permanent
75015 PARIS Délégation permanente d'Israël auprès de l'UNESCO
5, Rue Rabelais
Paris 75008
FRANCE

77
Mr Michael TURNER Ms Kumiko YONEDA
Chair, Israel World Heritage Committee Senior Research Scientist
25, Caspi Street Japan Wildlife Research Center
JERUSALEM 93554 3-10-10 Shitaya,
TAITO-KU, TOKYO

JAPAN/JAPON Mr Koichi YONEMORI

Manager, Kagoshima Prefectual Government
Mr Jinichi MURAKAMI 10-1 Kamoike shinmachi-Kagoshima
Councillor on Cultural Properties,
Agency for Cultural affairs Mr Tashikazn TOKONAMI
3-3-2 Kasumigaseki Assistant Director, Kagoshima Prefectual Government
CHIYODA-KU, TOKYO 10-1 Kamoike shinmachi-Kagoshima

Ms Naomi TAKAHASHI
Official, LITHUANIA/LITUANIE
Multilateral Cultural Cooperation Division,
Cultural Affairs Department, Ms Ina MARCIULIONYTE
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Deputy Minister of Culture of the Republic of Lithuania
2-2-1 Kasumigaseki Ministry of Culture,
CHIYODA-KU, TOKYO J.Basanavicius 5,
2001 Vilnius, Lithuania
Mr Atsuhiro YOSHINAKA
Senior Planning Officer,
Protected Area Planning Division, MADAGASCAR
Nature Conservation Bureau,
Environment Agency Dr RAFOLO ANDRIANAIVOARIVONY
1-2-2 Kasumigaseki Directeur du Centre d'Art et d'Archéologie
CHIYODA-KU, TOKYO Université d'Antananarivo
P.O Box 4129
Ms Tomoka SATOMI 101 Antananarivo
Deputy Director, Madagascar
Monuments and Sites Division,
Cultural Properties Protection Department
Agency for Cultural Affairs MALAYSIA/ MALAISIE
3-3-2 Kasumigaseki
CHIYODA-KU, TOKYO Mr Datuk Lamri ALI
Director of Sabah Parks
Dr Makoto MOTONAKA The Sabah Parks
Chief Senior Specialist for Cultural Properties Post Office Box 10626
Monuments and Sites Division 88806 Kota Kinabalu
Cultural Properties Protection Department Sabah, MALAYSIA
Agency for Cultural Affairs
3-2-2 Kasumigaseki Mr Paul BASINTAL
CHIYODA, TOKYO Assistant Director
The Sabah Parks
Mr Tsuyoshi HIRASAWA Post Office Box 10626
Associate Specialiste for Curltural Propterties 88806 Kota Kinabalu
Monuments and Sites Division Sabah, MALAYSIA
Cultural Properties Protection Department
Agency for Cultural Affairs Mr Desmond Dick COTTER
3-3-2 Kasumigaseki Assistant Director
CHIYODA-KU, TOKYO National Parks and Wildlife Division
Forest Department
Mr Kazuhiko NISHI Wisma Sumber Alam
Associate Specialist Petra Jaya, Kuching,
Architecture and other Structures Division Sarawak, MALAYSIA
Cultural Properties Protection Department
Agency for Cultural Affairs Ms Sharifah ZAINAH
3-3-2 Kasumigaseki Ministry of Culture, Art & Tourism
CHIYODA-KU, TOKYO Malaysia

78
Mr Mohanan NAIR NORWAY/NORVEGE
Malaysian National Commission for UNESCO
Kuala Lumpur Ms Kris ENDRESSEN
Director
Mr Ayob TAMRIN Nordic World Heritage Office
Department of Museums and Antiquities Dronningenst, 13, Dep.
Talan Damansara OSLO
50566 Kuala Lumpur
Mr Einar HOLTANE
Mr Michael CHILCOTT Deputy Director General
Ministry of Environment
Mr Walter KOHLI P.O. Box 8013 Dep.
N-0030 OSLO

MONGOLIA/MONGOLIE
OMAN
Mr Norov URTNASAN
Deputy Director Mr Salim M. MAHRUQI
Public Administration, Cooperation Department Chief of the Minister's Office
Ministry of Science, Technology, Education and Culture Ministry of Information
Government Building III PO Box 600, Muscat 113
Baga toiruu 44 MUSCAT
MOSTEC, Ulaanbaatar
Prof. M. JANSEN
Member of the Omani Advisory Committee for
NEPAL Archeology Surveys

H.E. Mr Indra BAHADUR SINGH

Royal Nepalese Ambassador to France PAPUA NEW GUINEA/
and Permanent Delegation of Nepal to UNESCO PAPOUASIE-NOUVELLE-GUINEE
7 Rue Alberic Magnard
75016 Paris Mr Soroi MAREPO EOE
Director of the National Museum and Art Gallery
Dr Shaphalya AMATYA P.O. Box 5560
Joint Secretary Boroko
Ministry of Culture, Tourism, Civil Aviation
Mr Herman MANDUI
Archaeologist
NETHERLANDS / PAYS-BAS Papua New Guinea National Museum
PO Box 5560
Dr. Robert DE JONG Boroko NCD 121
Netherlands Department of Conservation
Broederplein 41, Mr ARAHO
3703 CD Zeist Chief Curator Prehistory
P.O. Box 1001 PO Box 5560
3700 BA Zeist Boroko, NCD

Ms Sabine GIMBRERE Ms Regina KATI

Ministry of Culture Papua New Guinea National Commission for UNESCO
P.O. Box 25000 Department of Education, PSA HAUS
2700 HZ Zoetermeer PO BOX 446
Port Moresby

NEW ZEALAND/NOUVELLE-ZELANDE
PERU/PEROU
Mr Murray REEDY
Technical Support Manager Mr Manuel SOAREZ
West Coast Conservancy Minister Counselor
Department of Conservation Embassy of Peru in Australia – Canberra
Private Bag 40 Brisbane Av. Barton, Canberra, Act
Hokitika, New Zealand Australia

79
PHILIPPINES SAUDIA ARABIA/ ARABIE SAOUDITE

H.E. Mr Hector VILLARROEL Dr Abu Al Hassan HUSSEIN

Ambassador, Permanent Delegate to UNESCO PO Box 53598
Philippine Delegation to UNESCO Riyadh 11593
1 rue Miollis
75015 Paris, France Mr Abdul HAMEED ALHASHASH
Damman
Mr Augusto VILLALON
Architect SLOVAKIA/SLOVAQUIE
Member, UNESCO National Commission
107 Wilson Circle San Juan Dr Josef KLINDA
1500 M. Manila Ministry of the Environment of the Slovak Republic
Namestie I. Stura 1 Bratislava
Ms Jeanette D. TUASON 812 35 BRATISLAVA
Deputy Executive Director, UNACOM
DFA Building 23300 Roxas Boulevard Ms Katarina NOVAKOVA
PASAY CITY Slovak Cave’s Administrations
Liptovsky Mikulas, 031 01
Hodjova 11
POLAND/POLOGNE 03101 LIPTOVSKY-MIKULAS

Mr Dariusz CHMIEL Dr Tamas DÖMENY

Consul Ministry of the Environment of the Slovak Republic
Consulate-General of the Republic of Poland in Sydney Na’mestie l Stura
10 Trelawney Str. 812 35 BRATISLAVA
2025 Woolahra, NSW
AUSTRALIA Mr Jozef HLAVAC
Slovak Cave’s Administrations
Liptovsky’ Hikula’s
RUSSIAN FEDERATION/
FEDERATION DE RUSSIE Mr Miroslav TONCIK
Slovak Environmental Agency
Mr Alexei BOUTORINE Banska’ Bystrica, Tajouske’ho
World Natural Heritage project coordinator
National WH Committee
Commission of the Russian Federation for UNESCO SPAIN/ESPAGNE
Greenpeace Russia
N. Bashilovka St. 6 Mr Luis LAFUENTE BADANERO
GSP - 4, Moscow, Russia 101428 Sub. Grl. Protección Patrimonio Histórico,
Ministry of Culture
Mr Rafael VALEEV Plaza del Rey 1
Vice Minister of Culture of Tatarstan Madrid
Liberty Square
420014 Kazan Dr Rafael RODRIGUEZ-PONGA
Mr Igor MITICHKIN Director General Relaciones Culturales
Deputy Director State Historic Museum Ministry of Foreign Affairs
1-2 Red Square c/ General Pardinas 55
103012 Moscow Madrid

Mr Kamil ISKHAKOV Sra. Dª ASCENSIÓN FIGUERES GÓRRIZ

Mayor of the City of Kazan Subsecretaria de la Consejería de Cultura y Educación
Kazan City Administration del Gobierno Valenciano
1, Kremlin Street Avda. de Campanar, 32
420014 Kazan 46015 VALENCIA

Mr Roustam ZABIROV
Chief Architect of Kazan Kremlin
Dostoevski, 53-177
420043 Kazan

80
Mr Francisco Miguel Castro ALLEGUE Mr Albert VALLVE
Subdirector Xeral proteccion Patrimonio Member of the City Council of Tarragona
Consellería de Cultura, Communication social & Turismo Plaza de la Fuente, no. 1
da Xunta de Galicia Tarragona
Edificio Administrativo de la Xunta de Galicia
San Caetano Mr Francesco VIDAL I CODINA
s/n Santiago de Compostela Delegat Cultura
LLEIDA Govern Catalan
Mr Felip FONT DE RUBINAT Rumbla ARGO 8, LLEIDA
Delegat Cultura Tarragona
Catalonia
C/ Major 14. SWEDEN/SUEDE
43003 Tarragona
Mr Hans ENFLO
Mr Ricardo MAR Deputy Director
Museo Historia Tarragona Kulturdepartementet / Ministry of Culture
Pza Bonsucces No. 1-3-1a S-103 33 Stockholm
Barcelona
Ms Birgitta HOBERG
Mr Luis Pablo MARTINEZ SANMARTINO International Office
Inspector of Heritage National Heritage Board
Generalidat Valenciana P.O. Box 5405
Calle Carratala 47 11484 Stockholm
03007-Alicante
Mr Rolf LÖFGREN
Mr Ferran MARTINIEZ MORATA Principal adm.officer
Delegation LLEIDA-BOI Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
C/ Carme, 27 106 48 Stockholm

Ms Mercedes MARTORELL COMAS Ms Christina LINDAHL

Member of City Council of Tarragona Principal Administrative Officer
Rambla Nova 41, 2 Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
Tarragona S-106 48 STOCKHOLM

Mr Poncio MASCARO FORCADO Mr Mats HENRIKSSON

General Secretary of Council City of Tarragona County Architect
Plaza de le Fuente, no. 1 County Administration of Västernorrland
SE-871 86 Härnösand
Mr Emilio MATEU MORELLU
Member of the Council City of Taragona Mr Curt FREDÉN
Plaza de la Fuente, no. 1 Senior state geologist
Geological survey of Sweden
Mr Santiago MIRET Box 670
Delegation LLEIDA-BOI 751 28 Uppsala
C/ Carme, 27
Mr Mats-Rune BERGSTROEM
Mr Enrique PINEDA Ministry of Culture
Public Officer City Hall of Elche Stockholm
Plaza de Baix, S/N
E-03202 Ms Helena LAGER
Kalmar County Administration
Ms Carmen POLO KALMAR
Delegation LLEIDA-BOI
C/ Carme, 27 Ms Ann MOREAU
Senior Antiquarian
Mr Josep PONT Kalmar County Administration
Delegation LLEIDA-BOI KALMAR
C/ Carme, 27
Ms Annigun WEDIN
Mr Ramon TEN CARNE Kalmar County Administration
Chief Service D’Archaeologie/Catalonia KALMAR
Portaferrissa 1

81
Ms Saga SIGVARDSSON Dr Anthony WEIGHELL
Municipal Comissioner Earth Science and Coastal Advisor
Mörbylånga Municipality Joint Nature Conservation Committee
Monkstone House
Mr Johan DANIELSSON City Road
President, Swedish Federation of Farmers Peterborough PE1 1JY
Risinge
38062 Mörbylånga Dr Clive GRACE
Chief Executive
Ms Britt-Marie HAMMARSKIÖLD Torfaen County Borough Council
Former Regional Inspector of Cultural Heritage Civic Centre
ODENGATAN 2 Pontypool, Torfaen NP4 6YB
39233 KALMAR
Councillor Bob WELLINGTON
Deputy Leader of Torfaen County Borough Council
SWITZERLAND/SUISSE Civic Centre
Pontypool, Torfaen NP4 6YB
S.E. Mme Sylvie MATTEUCCI
Ambassadeur de la Suisse en Nouvelle-Zelande Mr John RODGER
22 Panama Street Blaenavon Heritage Project Co-ordinator
Wellington, New Zealand Torfaen County Borough Council
Civic Centre
Ms Francesca GEMNETTI Pontypool, Torfaen NP4 6YB
Présidente de la Commission nationale suisse pour
l'UNESCO
Via Nizzola 4 UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA/
CH-6501 Bellinzona REPUBLIQUE-UNIE DE TANZANIE

TURKEY/TURQUIE Mr Ali Khalil MIRZA

Principal Secretary
Ms. Mine KANGAL Ministry of Water, Construction, Energy, Lands and
General Directorate for the Protection of Cultural and Environment
Natural Proprerties P.O. Box 238
Turkish Ministry of Culture Zanzibar
06100 Ulus/ Ankara
Mr Omar Dadi SHAJACK
UGANDA/OUGANDA Principal Secretary
Ministry of Culture, Information and Tourism.
Mr Moses Mapesa WAFULA P. O. Box 772
Deputy Director Field Operations Zanzibar
Uganda Wildlife Authority
P. O. Box 3530 Mr Mwalim Ali MWALIM
Kampala Acting Director General
Stone Town Conservation and Development Authority
(STCDA)
UNITED KINGDOM/ ROYAUME-UNI P.O. Box 4233
Zanzibar
H.E Mr David STANTON
Ambassador, Permanent Delegate to UNESCO Mr Hamad OMAR
1 rue Miollis Director
75015 Paris Department of Archives, Museum and Monuments
P.O. Box 116
Mr Nigel PITTMAN Zanzibar - Tanzania
Head of Buildings, Monuments and Sites Division
Department for Culture, Media and Sport Mr Issa SARBOKO MAKARANI
2-4 Cockspur Street Director of Master Plan and Implementation
London SW1Y 5DH Stone Town Conservation and Development Authority
(STCDA)
Dr Christopher YOUNG P.O. Box 4233
Head of World Heritage and International Policy Zanzibar
English Heritage
23 Savile Row
London W1X 1AB

82
Prof. Abdul SHARIFF Mr Dan WHITING
Historian Curator of National Museum Office of the Senator Larry Craig,
Department of Archives, Museum and Monuments United States Senate
P.O. Box 116 Washington DC 20510
Zanzibar - Tanzania
UZBEKISTAN/OUZBEKISTAN
Mr January FUSSI
Director of Planning and Administration Mr Bakhodir ABDURAKHIMOV
Stone Town Conservation and Development Authority Deputy Minister for Cultural Affairs
(STCDA) Ministry for Cultural Affairs
P.O. Box 4233 30, Navoi str., Tashkent, Uzbekistan
Zanzibar
Mr Djakhangir SAGDULLAEV
Mr Sheha JUMA MJAJA Deputy Head of International Relations Department
National Coordinator Ministry of Cultural Affairs
Sustainable Zanzibar Project 30, Navoi str., Tashkent, Uzbekistan
P.O. 4240
Zanzibar - Tanzania VENEZUELA

Ms Fatma ISSA KARA H.E. Mr Leonel VIVAS

Architect Ambassador of Venezuela to Australia
P.O. Box 2089 Canberra, ACT
Zanzibar - Tanzania
Mr Javier DIAZ
Ms Shinuna KARUME First Secretary
Programme Officer Permanent Delegation to UNESCO
Stone Town Conservation and Development Authority 1 Rue Miollis
(STCDA) Paris 75007
P.O. Box 4233
Zanzibar Prof. Anna Maria NARIN
Instituto del Patrimonio Mundial
Universidad Central de Venezuela
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA/ Biblioteca central ,Piso 92
ETATS-UNIS D'AMERIQUE Ciudad Universitaria de Caracas Patrimonio
Caracas 1060A
Mr Raymond E. WANNER
Bureau of International Organisation Affairs Ms Angela RODRIGUEZ
Department of State Instituto del Patrimonio Mundial
2001 C Street NW Universidad Central de Venezuela
Washington DC 20520 Biblioteca central ,Piso 92
Ciudad Universitaria de Caracas Patrimonio
Official United States Observers: Caracas 1060A

Unites States House of Representatives VIET NAM

Committee on Resources
Mr Nguyen VAN TUAN
Mr Kurt CHRISTENSEN Head of Halong Bay Management Department,
Legistalive Staff Quang Ninh Province, Vietnam
1324 Longworth House Office Building Address: 86 Le Thanh Tong Street, Halong City,
Washington DC 20515 Quang Ninh Province, Vietnam

Mr John RISHEL Dr Amareswar GALLA

Legistalive Staff Principal Technical Adviser
1324 Longworth House Office Building Ha Long Bay Management Department, Vietnam
Washington DC 20515 C/o P.O. Box 3175,
Manuka, ACT2603
United States Senate Australia

Ms Kelly JOHNSON Dr Truong Quoc BINH

Senior Counsel. Deputy Director General
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Ministery of Culture and Information
Washington DC 20150 51 Ngo Quyen
Hanoi

83
YEMEN

Mr Mohammed JAGHMAN
President
General Organisation for the Preservation of Historic
Cities of Yemen (GOPHCY)
P.O. BOX. 960
Sana'a - Yemen

(ii) OTHER OBSERVERS/AUTRES OBSERVATEURS

PERMANENT MISSION OF PALESTINE TO SAMOA

UNESCO/MISSION PERMANENTE
D'OBSERVATION DE LA PALESTINE AUPRES DE Mr Livi TANUUASA
L'UNESCO Associated Schools Project Coordinator
Apia, SAMOA
S.E. M Ahmad ABDELRAZEK
Ambassadeur, Observateur Permanent

(iii) INTERNATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS/

ORGANISATIONS GOUVERNEMENTALES INTERNATIONALES

INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE [ICSU Mr Denis RICARD

INDEPENDENT SCIENCE PANEL - KAKADU] Former Secretary General to the OWHC
15, St-Nicolas
Prof. William Brian WILKINSON QUEBEC
17/18 Union St
Ramsbury, Wiltshire UK SN8 2PR
SOUTH PACIFIC REGIONAL ENVIRONMENT
PROGRAMME (SPREP)
ORGANIZATION OF WORLD HERITAGE CITIES
(OWHC)/ORGANISATION DES VILLES DU Mr Sam SESEGA
PATRIMOINE MONDIAL (OVPM) Action Strategy Coordinator
South Pacific Regional Environment Programme
Dr Siri MYRVOLL P.O. Box 240
Secretary General to OWHC Apia
15 Rue Saint-Nicolas, Samoa
QUEBEC
Canada

(iv) NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS/

ORGANISATIONS NON-GOUVERNEMENTALES

ABORIGINAL & TORRES AUSTRALIAN RAINFOREST BAMA WABU ABORIGINAL

STRAIT ISLANDER CONSERVATION SOCIETY ASSOCIATION
COMMISSION
Mr Gavan MCFADZEAN Ms Kyle Pursche
Mr Wieslaw Lichacz 16 Colorado Avenue 3/23 Scott St
Senior Policy Adviser Bardon Cairns
P.O. Box 17 Australia Australia
Woden Act 2606
Australia Mr Lyndon SCHNEIDER CENTRE SIMON
Campaigner WIESENTHAL EUROPE
AUSTRALIAN 16 Colorado Ave.
CONSERVATION Bardon Dr Shimon Samuels
FOUNDATION Australia Director for International Liaison
64, avenue Marceau
Mr Dave SWEENEY 75008 Paris
340 Gore Street, Fitzroy France
Victoria, 3065
Australia

84
THE COLONG FOUNDATION FRIENDS OF THE EARTH Mr Stuart GARDELL
FOR WILDERNESS LTD AUSTRALIA Field Officer
(AUSTRALIA) P.O Box 245
Ms Loretta O’Brien Jabiru NT 0886
Mr Keith Muir P.O. BOX 222 Australia
Director Fitzroy, 3065
Level 2, 362 Kent Street, Australia Ms Valerie BALMOORE
Sydney 2000, Member
Australia Mr Gavin Mark MUDD P.O Box 245
P.O. BOX 222 Jabiru NT 0886
CRC TOURISM/SOUTHERN Fitzroy, 3065 Australia
CROSS UNIVERSITY Australia
Mr Scott ALDERSON
Ms Joanne CARMODY Ms Rebecca DUFFY Member
96 Pacific Parade P.O. BOX 222 P.O Box 245
Bilinga 4225 Fitzroy, 3065 Jabiru NT 0886
Australia Australia Australia

THE ENVIRONMENT CENTER FRIENDS OF THE EARTH Mr Leigh Bruce TILMOUTH

NT INC. (AUSTRALIA) JAPAN Member
P.O Box 245
Mr Mark Wakeham Mr Komei Hosokawa Jabiru NT 0886
Coordinator 2F, 3-17-24 Mejiro, Tokyo 171- Australia
GPO BOX 2120 Darwin NT 0801 0031
Unit 5/98 Wood Japan INTERNATIONAL CENTRE
St DARWIN NT 0800 FOR CULTURAL
Australia GIMY WALUBARA YIDINJI LANDSCAPES
ABORIGINAL ASSOCIATION
ENVIRONMENTAL Ms Carla MAURANO
DEFENDER’S OFFICE OF Mr Seith FOURMILE Consultant
NORTHERN QUEENSLAND Po Box 1805, International Centre for Cultural
INC. Cairns, QLD 4870 Landscapes
Australia Via Selva 7
Ms Joanna Cull 84043 Agropl (SA)
Solicitor GUNDJEHMI ARBORIGINAL SALERNO
First floor CORPORATION Italy
Corner Grove & Sheridan Street
P.O. Box 854 N Ms Yvonne MARGARULA INTERNATIONAL
North Cairns 4870 Chairperson FEDERATION OF
Australia P.O Box 245 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
Jabiru NT 0886 (IFLA)
Mr Henry Boer Australia
196 Sheridan Street Dr h. c. Hans DORN
Cairns 4870 Mr Justin O’BRIEN Landscape Architect BDLA
Australia Administration Manager Holbeinstrasse 17
P.O Box 245 D-60596 Frankfurt / Main
Mr David HAIGH Jabiru NT 0886 Germany
196 Sheridan St Australia
Cairns 4870 ORGANISATION FOR
Australia Ms Jacqui KATONA MUSEUMS, MONUMENTS
Executive Officer AND SITES OF AFRICA
FRASER ISLAND DEFENDERS P.O Box 245 (OMMSA)
ORGANIZATION Jabiru NT 0886
Australia Kwasi MYLES
Mr John Sinclair Secretary-General
P.O . Box 71, Gladesville, NSW, Ms Christine CHRISTOPHERSEN
1675 Research Consultant NORTH QUEENSLAND
P.O Box 245 CONSERVATION COUNCIL
Jabiru NT 0886
Australia Mr Jeremy TAGER
364 Flinders Mall
Townsville, Qld 4810
Australia

85
QUEENSLAND WAANYI TRADITIONAL WORLD ARCHAEOLOGICAL
CONSERVATION COUNCIL ELDERS CORPORATION CONGRESS

Kerryn O’Connor Mr Brad FOSTER Mr Lyndon ORMOND-PARKER

2/111 Hardgrave Rd, 93 Roberts St. Executive Member
West End Doomadgee, QLD 4830 C/o University of Newcastle
Brisbane Qld 4101 Australia Newcastle-upon-Tyne
Australia United Kingdom
THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY
UNITED NATIONS (AUSTRALIA) WWF AUSTRALIA
FOUNDATION
Mr Alec MARR Imogen ZEITHOVEN
Mr Nicholas Lapham National Campaign Director Great Barrier Reef Campaign
Senior Program Officer P.O. BOX 188 Manager
1301 Conneticut Avenue NW Civic Square, ACT, 2608 PO Box 710
Washington DC 20036 Australia Spring Hill, QLD 4004
United States of America Australia
Ms Virginia YOUNG
VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF National Forest Campaign Co- Ms Anne FERGUSON
WELLINGTON (NEW ordinator PO Box 710
ZEALAND) P.O. BOX 188 Spring Hill, QLD 4004
Civic Square, ACT, 2608 Australia
Mr Ralph PETTMAN Australia
Chair of International Relations
P.O BOX 600, Wellington,
New Zealand

V. HOST COUNTRY SECRETARIAT (AUSTRALIA)

Mr Stephen BATES Ms Genevieve THOMPSON Ms Rebecca SAVILL

Department of the Environment and World Heritage Branch, Department of the Environment and
Heritage Department of the Environment and Heritage
GPO Box 787 Heritage GPO Box 787
Canberra ACT 2601 GPO Box 787 Canberra ACT 2601
Canberra ACT 2601
Mr Frank MALONEY Ms Annie BOUTLAND
Director Assessment and Mr David BISHOP Biodiversity Group
Coordination Section Department of the Environment and Department of the Environment and
World Heritage Branch, Heritage Heritage
Department of the Environment and GPO Box 787 GPO Box 787
Heritage Canberra ACT 2601 Canberra ACT 2601
GPO Box 787
Canberra ACT 2601 Mr Tim WONG Dr Miranda BROWN
World Heritage Branch, Marine and Water Division
Mr David ROBERTS Department of the Environment and Department of the Environment and
World Heritage Branch, Heritage Heritage
Department of the Environment and GPO Box 787 GPO Box 787
Heritage Canberra ACT 2601 Canberra ACT 2601
GPO Box 787
Canberra ACT 2601 Ms Cate TURK Ms Dominique BENZAKEN
Department of the Environment and Marine and Water Division
Ms Joannah LEAHY Heritage Department of the Environment and
World Heritage Branch, GPO Box 787 Heritage
Department of the Environment and Canberra ACT 2601 GPO Box 787
Heritage Canberra ACT 2601
GPO Box 787 Ms Corena SLOPER
Canberra ACT 2601 World Heritage Branch,
Department of the Environment and
Heritage
GPO Box 787
Canberra ACT 2601

86
VI. UNESCO SECRETARIAT / SECRETARIAT DE L’UNESCO

Mr Mounir BOUCHENAKI
Assistant Director General for Culture

World Heritage Centre Ms Mireille JARDIN

Division of Ecological Sciences Interpreter:
Mr Francesco BANDARIN, Mr Mourad BOULARES
Director Ms Elizabeth KHAWAJKIE
Ms Minja YANG, Education Sector Translators:
Deputy Director Ms Sabine DE VALENCE
Mr John DONALDSON Ms Anne SAUVETRE
Mr Natarajan ISHWARAN Legal Advisor
Ms Sonia RAMZI
Ms Mechtild RÖSSLER Ms Elspeth WINGHAM
Ms Josette ERFAN World Heritage Officer for Pacific
Ms Sarah TITCHEN UNESCO Regional Office, Samoa
Ms Junko TANIGUCHI P.O. Box 5766
Ms Vesna VUJICIC-LUGASSY Matautu Post Offices
Ms Fréderique ROBERT Apia
Mr Niklas SCHULZE Samoa
Mr Peter STOTT
Ms Johanna SULLIVAN
Ms Julie HAGE
Ms Jane DEGEORGES
Ms Marianne RAABE
Mr David MARTEL
Mr Jan TURTINEN

Mr Abdelaziz DAOULATLI
Consultant

87
 ANNEX II

Speech of the Outgoing Chairperson, M. Abdelaziz Touri,

on the occasion of the opening of the 24th session of the Committee

Cairns, 27 November 2000

Chers membres du Comité, en matière de protection juridique, de gestion et de

Délégués Observateurs, compétences techniques sur les sites, qu’ils soient déjà
Chers Collègues, inscrits sur la Liste ou qu’ils figurent sur les listes
Mesdames, Messieurs, indicatives des Etats parties. Outre le fait que ces actions
contribuent à établir des liens durables entre les Etats, elles
Je m’adresse à vous en qualité de Président du Comité contribuent également à atteindre les objectifs fixés par le
pour la dernière fois et je souhaite saisir cette occasion Comité en matière de Stratégie globale. De la même
pour brièvement rappeler les points les plus importants manière, je voudrais mentionner la contribution du Japon
abordés par ce Comité au cours de cette année. et de l’Italie au renforcement de l’assistance préparatoire.

Tout d’abord, il me semble nécessaire de revenir sur Cette année fut également marquée par l’accomplissement
quelques-unes des réussites de cette année et d’une série de travaux stratégiques et décisifs. Le groupe
particulièrement celle liée au Sanctuaire de Baleines d’El d’étude sur la mise en oeuvre de la Convention aura
Viscaino au Mexique. Suite à la demande du Comité, et contribué de façon notable à l’amélioration de notre
sur invitation du gouvernement mexicain, une mission système de fonctionnement, notamment au niveau du cycle
conjointe de l’UICN et de l’UNESCO a été menée sur le des réunions du Bureau et du Comité, mais également
site afin d’évaluer les menaces potentielles liées à la concernant la documentation produite pour ces réunions.
proposition de construction de salines dans la zone Les groupes de travail sur la représentativité de la Liste et
protégée. Après examen du rapport de mission, le Comité la représentation équitable des Etats au sein du Comité,
a reconnu que ce projet pourrait mettre en cause l’intégrité créés à la demande de l’Assemblée générale des Etats
du site. Sur la base de ces conclusions, le Président parties, ont permis de traiter des questions essentielles
mexicain a annoncé la decision d’annuler le projet. liées à la Stratégie globale. Toutes ces questions
importantes, ainsi que celles soulevées par les experts
Une autre réussite, cette fois en Inde, concerne le site de réunis à Canterbury au Royaume-Uni sur le thème du
l’ensemble de monuments de Hampi. Vous vous processus de révision des Orientations devant guider la
rappellerez que le Comité a inscrit ce site sur la Liste du mise en oeuvre de la Convention, seront examinés par
patrimoine mondial en Péril en 1999 à Marrakech. Depuis cette session du Comité. Je souhaite que cet examen puisse
cette décision, les autorités concernées ont créé un groupe être couronné de décisions concrètes, lesquelles
d’étude spécifique pour tenter de remédier aux menaces constitueront une étape historique dans le développement
pesant sur le site, liées à l’éxécution de travaux publics de la Convention et dans sa mise en oeuvre au cours des
non controlés. Les travaux de ce groupe d’étude ont mené années à venir.
le Cabinet du Gouvernement d’Etat concerné à prendre les
mesures nécessaires pour déplacer les deux ponts Mes Chers collègues,
incriminés. Depuis l’inscription de ce site sur la Liste du
patrimoine mondial en péril, les autorités La charge de travail qui nous attend est lourde. Elle est la
gouvernementales centrales et locales concernées, conséquence d’une année particulièrement active. Je ne
travaillent en collaboration avec l’UNESCO et en vous retiendrai donc pas plus longtemps. Je tiens
consultation avec la communauté locale et les parties cependant à prendre encore un instant pour remercier les
concernées au développement d’un plan de gestion organes consultatifs, ICOMOS, UICN et ICCROM, pour
intégrée du site tel que le Comité l’avait recommandé. l’assistance et l’expertise qu’ils mettent fidèlement à notre
disposition, et pour avoir accepté de voir leur charge de
C’est le poids et la forte notoriété de la Convention qui travail augmenter avec la nôtre. Je voudrais également
contribue chaque année de facon significative à réduire le remercier le gouvernement australien, pays hôte de cette
nombre de menaces pesant sur les sites. C’est sa notoriété reunion, pour son accueil chaleureux et efficace. Je
et sa crédibilité qui attire un nombre grandissant remercie également le secrétariat pour son soutien tout au
d’organismes et d’institutions spécialisés dans le domaine long de cette année, particulièrement chargée.
de la conservation du patrimoine naturel et culturel et rend J’aimerais enfin remercier le Comité pour son engagement
possible la mise en oeuvre de projets conjoints. Le soutien inconditionnel.
de la Fondation des Nations Unies, avec une contribution
qui s’élève à près de 5 millions de dollars, en est un En vous souhaitant à tous une session particulièrement
exemple phare. De plus, les engagements de coopération riche et fructueuse.
des Etats parties se multiplient et la Convention signée
entre le gouvernement français et l’UNESCO en est un Merci.
exemple concret. Les activités entreprises dans le cadre de
cet accord ont pour objectif le renforcement des capacités

89
 ANNEX III

Speech of the Assistant Director-General for Culture of UNESCO, Mr. Mounir Bouchenaki
on the occasion of the opening of the 24th session of the Committee

Cairns, 27 November 2000

Honourable Minister inscrits sur la Liste. Elle continue à jouer un rôle

Mr Beale significatif dans le cadre de la Convention et son esprit
Chairman of the World Heritage Committee d’innovation a permis de mieux reconnaître et comprendre
Members of the World Heritage Committee les paysages culturels du patrimoine mondial en Australie
Distinguished observers et dans le Pacifique.

Ms Singleton Here, in the Asia-Pacific region, two of the key challenges

Members of the Advisory Bodies to the World Heritage in the conservation of World Heritage properties are being
Committee experienced in dramatic fashion.

Ladies and gentlemen First, in relation to the representativity of the World

Heritage List, the Pacific, composed of 16 UNESCO
On behalf of the Director-General of UNESCO Mr Member States of whom only 6 are States Parties to the
Koichiro Matsuura, I would like to welcome you to the Convention, is the sub-region whose cultural and natural
twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee. heritage is most under-represented in the World Heritage
List. It is a pleasure to note that two Pacific Island State
The Director-General is deeply grateful to the Australian Parties are repressented at this session. UNESCO
government for having offered to host this session. welcomes Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands. It
UNESCO also acknowledges the welcome of the has also been a pleasure for me to meet with the
Aboriginal Traditional Owners. representatives of the Youth Forum for the Pacific
organized in Cairns by the Australian authorities in co-
I am so impressed by the physical setting for this meeting. operation with the Education Sector of UNESCO and the
We are meeting amongst the splendour of the Wet Tropics World Heritage Centre.
and the Great Barrier Reef, both of which are World
Heritage sites. Some of us have had the opportunity to The second challenge concerns the fate of World Heritage
visit, although briefly, these two important sites. sites after they have been inscribed on the World Heritage
List. For Asia, the region is experiencing unprecedented
On location, presentations were made to show how these urbanisation and growth. With such rapid development
sites are managed. Above all, we were very impressed towards modernity and globalisation, new challenges to
with the quality and commitment shared by the persons heritage protection and conservation are arising. As Mr
responsible for the sites, from the rangers to the experts, Koichiro Matsuura, Director-General of UNESCO, stated,
who are all working to achieve the same goal: preserving when Chairman of the World Heritage Committee in 1999,
World Heritage. it is imperative that the root causes of these conflicts
between development and conservation be the focus of the
Le Comité du patrimoine mondial s’est rarement réuni attention of all States Parties. This is often neither popular
dans cette région mais l’Australie a déjà reçu ce Comité il nor easy. The only way we can address the conflicts that
y a 20 ans et c’est là une preuve supplémentaire de do unfortunately arise is through political will and
l’attachement de ce groupe à la Convention. L’Australie courage. We must rely on the key principles of
est l’un des Etats parties à la Convention où le patrimoine international co-operation and assistance that lie at the
mondial, est le mieux connu du grand public. Comme on a heart of the World Heritage Convention and work towards
pu le constater maintes fois, l’Australie se mobilise pour an integration of heritage conservation as part of the
recenser et protéger les sites du patrimoine mondial. Tout a development process. I hope that this Committee will
commencé dans les années soixante-dix avec la provide support for projects that will encourage
participation d’un expert australien à la rédaction des conservation as a means, and not just an end for
Orientations devant guider la mise en œuvre de la development.
Convention. Par la suite, l’Australie a offert les services de
ses experts pour aider à définir les critères d’inscription de As we meet here amidst two of Australia’s natural World
biens culturels et naturels sur la Liste du patrimoine Heritage sites, I wish to comment on the increasing
mondial. Le Parc national de Kakadu, la Grande Barrière support of several international partners in the work of
et la Région des Lacs Willandra figurent parmi les implementing the natural part of the Convention. For
premiers sites australiens inscrits au patrimoine mondial, example, the UN Foundation’s Biodiversity Programme
au début des années quatre-vingt. Peu après, une Framework, adopted in November 1999 is targeting multi-
législation nationale a été promulguée pour protéger ce million dollar grant support to Natural World Heritage
patrimoine. L’Australie compte désormais treize biens sites. UNF assistance will benefit sites such as those on

91
the List of World Heritage in Danger in the Democratic The appointment of the new management team in the
Republic of the Congo where most other donors have World Heritage Centre has taken place in a broader
avoided launching assistance packages due to prevailing context of reform within UNESCO.
war and insecurity. Other projects will link biodiversity
conservation and sustainable tourism at sites such as the En novembre 1999, le Directeur général a lancé un vaste
Whale Sanctuary of El Vizcaino in Mexico. You will programme de réforme visant à repenser les priorités de
recall that the President of the Republic of Mexico l’UNESCO, à redéfinir son action, à normaliser ses
intervened in April 2000 to remove a potential threat to El structures et ses procédures de gestion, à remotiver son
Vizcaino posed by proposals to expand an existing salt- personnel et à rationaliser sa politique de décentralisation.
production facility. This bold decision of the Mexican
Government had an opportunity cost for those local people Cette réforme a pour but essentiel de recentrer le
who would have gained employment and economic programme de l’UNESCO pour qu’il soit plus efficace et
benefits from the expansion of the salt-production facility. mieux adapté aux besoins des Etats membres. A l’heure de
The UNF project to link tourism with biodiversity la mondialisation, le thème unificateur de cette réforme
conservation will specifically aim to bring employment entend renforcer la contribution de l'UNESCO à la paix et
and economic benefits to the local communities via au développement à travers l’éducation, la science, la
alternative means such as ecotourism. culture et la communication. Pour le Secteur de la Culture,
l’important sera de préserver et de promouvoir la diversité
This meeting is taking place at the dawn of the 21st century culturelle face à la mondialisation. Pour le Secteur des
and with the new vision of the Director-General of Sciences, les efforts porteront sur les ressources en eau et
UNESCO, himself having served as Chairperson of the les écosystèmes. Le travail intersectoriel permettra de
World Heritage Committee. As a part of this new vision, définir des thèmes transversaux. Le patrimoine mondial
the Director-General began restructuring UNESCO and atteste déjà de la capacité interdisciplinaire de l'UNESCO.
chose to appoint Mr Francesco Bandarin as new Director
of UNESCO's World Heritage Centre. Just as with the reform process underway in UNESCO, the
World Heritage Committee's reform agenda, one of the
Mr Bandarin, who began work as Director of the World key subjects of this session of the Committee, will require
Heritage Centre and Secretary to the World Heritage a reorientation of action through a process of strategic
Committee on 20 September, holds degrees in architecture planning as has been suggested by the Task Force on the
and city and regional planning from the University Implementation of the Convention. You will recall that
Institute of Architecture of Venice and the University of this was also a major recommendation of the World
California, Berkeley respectively. He has extensive Heritage Management Review performed in 1998. A
experience working with both public and private research process of further strategic reflection is required to update
centres and institutions in the fields of planning and and refocus the Committee's actions in relation to
maintenance of built heritage, cultural heritage substantial issues such as addressing the root cause of
conservation plans and programmes, environmental threats to World Heritage natural and cultural sites. A
heritage, architectural design, urban planning and revitalisation of two of the underlying principles of the
management, and development planning. He is already Convention, protection and international co-operation,
well-known to most of the members of the Committee and should be seen as the ultimate goals of your reflection. In
the Advisory bodies. this context, it is important to consider the UNESCO 1972
Convention not in isolation of the Hague Convention of
Subject to confirmation through an internal recruitment 1954 and the 1970 Convention on Illicit Traffic of Cultural
process, Mrs Minja Yang will be working with the new Property. It has to be noted that a draft Convention for the
Director as Deputy Director of the Centre. Mrs Yang, Protection of the Underwater Archaeology is under
with an academic background in development studies from preparation.
Georgetown University and the University of London,
brings with her over twenty years of experience in the UN It may also be necessary to reform the working method
system and considerable experience in World Heritage and the schedule of Committee and Bureau meetings.
conservation through her role over the past years in Such change will require time to take root. At the same
directing the Centre's work in the Asia-Pacific region and time, for new strategic orientations to bring expected
historic cities projects. She also worked with me, as a results, we will need reformed implementation “tools”
colleague in the Division of Cultural Heritage where she including revitalized and additional human resources in the
handled successfully a number of operational projects in Secretariat and an adequate technical infrastructure and
Asia. information management system. Enhanced co-ordination
and synergy between the Centre, UNESCO's Science and
The coincidence of having a new management team in Cultural Sectors and the advisory bodies (ICCROM,
place at the World Heritage Centre at the same time as the ICOMOS and IUCN) will also be required.
World Heritage Committee work through a substantial
agenda of reform is opportune. This should create a new During the last year, we have seen the extent to which
synergy for reform, involving the Committee and States Parties want reform to take place. On behalf of the
Secretariat in an effective partnership. Director-General, I would like to thank you for having
devoted your time to this challenge. I would also like to
express the commitment of the Secretariat who will make

92
all effort possible to implement the processes of reform to
meet the expectations of you as States Parties to the World
Heritage Convention.

Mesdames, Messieurs,
Je ne voudrais pas conclure sans rappeler le travail
immense accompli depuis votre réunion de Marrakech par
les membre du Comité eux même, qui n’ont pas menagé
leurs efforts dans le cadre des trois groupes de travail et de
l’atelier de Cantorbéry. Grâce à la génereuse invitation de
la Hongrie dont je tiens à saluer les représentants, nous
avons pu confronter dans un riche debat les apports de
chacun des groupes et pu faire ainsi avancer la réflection
sur une meilleure practique de la mise en oeuvre de la
Convention que les Présidents et rapporteurs de ces
groupes de travail et de l’atelier trouvent ici l’expression
de nos remerciement.

Mes collegues et moi même voudrions également associer

à l’expression de ces remerciement Monsieur Touri qui
pendant toute une année en plus de ces nouvelles fonctions
de Secrétaire général du Ministère des Affaires Culturelles
et de la Communication du Maroc, a été sollicité en
permanence dans ce processus dynamique de
développement de la Convention de 1972.

Enfin, un grand merci à nos hôtes australiens. Ils n’ont rien

laissé au hasard pour que Cairns 2000, comme les
Olympiades 2000, soient un succès mondial.

93
 ANNEX IV

FIRST PACIFIC WORLD HERITAGE YOUTH FORUM:

ACTION PLAN

Main objectives

•= To mobilise young people to save the World Heritage sites, important local sites and our environment
in the Pacific
•= To encourage all Pacific Member States to sign the World Heritage Convention and participate
actively in its promotion

Main lines of action

1. Education
•= We need to be more aware of the importance of our heritage as well as our World Heritage.
Therefore, it needs to be part of our education.
•= We think a Pacific version of the World Heritage Education Kit will help get World Heritage into our
curricula.

2. Organisation of local preservation activities for young people

•= Visits to sites and special actions to clean and preserve them
•= Organise World Heritage Youth Forums and camps in each of our countries
•= Writing to our governments asking for their support for World Heritage

3. Pacific students networking

Setting up a network of Pacific Patrimonitos’ Centres in our schools to:
•= Organise activities to promote local / World Heritage sites as well as local cultures and traditions
•= Produce Pacific Patrimonitos’ Newsletter and web-site to share ideas
•= Take part in solidarity actions to equip Pacific schools with Information Technology and provide
training

Reporting 2001
Deadline: 30 July 2001 through ASPnet schools to UNESCO Apia and Paris

Main partners
•= Patromonitos and Patrimonitas
•= ASPnet schools
•= National Commissions for UNESCO
•= ASPnet Co-ordinators
•= UNESCO
•= World Heritage site managers
•= Advisory Bodies to the Convention
•= Cultural and natural heritage experts
•= Local and national authorities
•= UNESCO World Heritage Committee

95
 ANNEX V

SUBMISSION TO THE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

FROM A FORUM OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES ASSEMBLED
IN CAIRNS, AUSTRALIA, 24 NOVEMBER 2000

CONCERNED by the lack of involvement of Indigenous peoples in the development and

implementation of laws, policies and plans, for the protection of their holistic knowledge, traditions and
cultural values, which apply to their ancestral lands within or comprising sites now designated as World
Heritage Areas, the Indigenous Peoples Forum in Cairns:

1. AFFIRMS the view of Indigenous Peoples as the traditional owners and guardians of lands and
waters, including biota thereon and therein, who remain forever the repositories, proprietors and
custodians of their holistic knowledge, traditions and cultural values, which apply to all their
ancestral lands especially those within or comprising sites now designated as World Heritage
Areas.

2. CONFIRMS therefore the responsibilities and obligations of Indigenous Peoples to their

succeeding generations, with emphasis on their duty of care, to provide expert advice on effective
and efficient consultation, involvement and negotiation in the development, implementation and
management of laws, policies and plans, including all matters regarding research and other
activities and decisions affecting the World Heritage Areas applicable to them.

3. MOTIVATED by the above and seeking appropriate avenues to address their concerns, the
Indigenous Peoples Forum assembled in Cairns hereby petition the World Heritage Committee, to
receive and consider the following submission:

SUBMISSION: It is submitted:

That the World Heritage Committee facilitate the establishment of a World Heritage Indigenous
Peoples Council of Experts (WHIPCOE) pursuant to the provisions of Section 10 (3) of the World
Heritage Convention, a body that would bring new competencies and expertise to complement
other expert groups, to support the objectives of the World Heritage Committee in the provision
of expert Indigenous advice on the holistic knowledge, traditions and cultural values of
Indigenous Peoples relative to the implementation of the World Heritage Convention, including
current operational guidelines.

RECOMMENDATIONS. It is recommended that the World Heritage Committee:-

1. Note the contents of the submission of the Indigenous Peoples forum presented to the 24th session
of the Committee,

2. Note the contents of the supporting paper marked Appendix 1 as tabled with this submission,

3. Agree that the proposed WHIPCOE be established within three months of the 25th session of the
World Heritage Committee, Agree that the proposed WHIPCOE be provided with operational
funding

97
 APPENDIX: 1

SUPPORTING PAPER TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES

FORUM PRESENTED BY LEAVE TO THE 24TH SESSION OF THE WORLD
HERITAGE COMMITTEE, CAIRNS, AUSTRALIA, 28 NOVEMBER 2000

PREAMBLE:

1. RECALLING the obligations on States Parties to the World Heritage Convention under
Article 5 of the Convention, to ensure that effective and active measures are taken for the
protection, conservation and presentation of the cultural and natural heritage situated on their
territories; and

2. NOTING the extensive obligations of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention,
especially those who are also parties to the following international conventions, covenants or
protocols, to recognise, respect, promote and protect, the rights and interests of Indigenous
peoples and local communities in their natural and cultural heritage consistent with:

(a) the International Convention for the Elimination of all Forms of Racial
Discrimination.
(b) the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
(c) the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
(d) the International Convention on Biological Diversity.
(e) the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification.
(f) the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl
Habitat (The Ramsar Convention).
(g) the International Labour Organisation Convention 169 on Indigenous and Tribal
Peoples in Independent Countries; and
(h) the United Nations Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (albeit not
yet in force)

3. ACKNOWLEDGING Principle 22 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development

and Chapter 26 of Agenda 21, and the Draft Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of the
Heritage of Indigenous People elaborated by the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on
Human Rights Working Group on Indigenous Populations (as contained in the annex to
document E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/26)

4. RECALLING the obligation of Contracting Parties under the World Heritage Convention to
identify, protect, conserve, present and transmit both natural and cultural heritage:

(a) even where properties are not included on the World Heritage List; and
(b) where properties are only listed for certain natural or cultural heritage values, and

5. TAKING ACCOUNT of the International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People being
1995 – 2004 the goal of which is to strengthen international co-operation for the solution of
problems faced by Indigenous peoples in such areas as human rights, the environment,
development, education and health, the theme of which is “Indigenous People - Partnership in
Action”, and accordingly, the Commission on Human Rights, in paragraph 15 of resolution
2000/56, encourages Governments as appropriate, recognising the importance of action at the
national level for the implementation of the goals and activities of the Decade, to support the
Decade, in consultation with Indigenous peoples, by:

(a) preparing relevant programmes, plans and reports in relation to the Decade and
establishing national committees or other mechanisms involving Indigenous people to
ensure that the objectives and activities of the Decade are planned and implemented
on the basis of full partnership with Indigenous people;

98
 (b) seeking means of giving Indigenous people greater responsibility for their own affairs
and an effective voice in decisions on matters which affect them; and
(c) identifying resources for activities designed to implement the goals of the Decade.

INSPIRED BY THE ABOVE,

THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES FORUM HEREBY PETITIONS THE WORLD HERITAGE

COMMITTEE AND ALL STATES PARTIES TO THE WORLD HERITAGE CONVENTION,
TO:

Re: The Establishment of New Competencies and Expertise

1. ESTABLISH a World Heritage Indigenous Peoples Council of Experts (WHIPCOE) pursuant

to the provisions of Section 10 (3) of the World Heritage Convention, a body that will bring
new competencies and expertise

(a) to complement existing expert groups under the convention being IUCN, ICOMOS
and ICROM, and –
(b) to support the objectives of the World Heritage Committee in the provision of expert
Indigenous advice on the holistic knowledge, traditions and cultural values of Indigenous
Peoples relative to the implementation of the World Heritage Convention, including
current operational guidelines.

Re: The Relationship between the Holistic Natural and Cultural Values and Traditions of Indigenous
Peoples

2. RECOGNISE the holistic nature of Indigenous natural and cultural values and traditions, and –

(a) that the maintenance and survival of the said values and traditions of Indigenous peoples and
traditional local communities is dependent upon their continued access to and use of
traditional biological resources; and
(b) that the maintenance and practice of the said values and traditions is necessary to ensure the
complete conservation of the biological diversity by which many areas qualified for World
Heritage Listing; and
(c) that the application of traditional knowledge, innovations and practices of Indigenous peoples
and traditional local communities is vital to the conservation and sustainable use of the
biological diversity of many World Heritage Areas, and in line with decisions III/14, IV/9 and
V/16 of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, “traditional
knowledge should be given the same respect as any other form of knowledge” in the
management of World Heritage Areas; and
(d) that the holistic, natural and cultural values and traditions of Indigenous peoples and
traditional local communities are dynamic living values rather than static historic ones.

Re: The Duty of Care and Responsibility

3. NOTE that the social dimension to Indigenous cultural and natural values and traditions
includes rights, obligations and responsibilities for decision making.

Re: The Removal and Ownership of Cultural Property

4. ACCEPT that the removal of cultural property from a World Heritage site in no way
diminishes the Indigenous cultural values and traditions of the site, and that any such property
so removed remains the property of the Indigenous people or traditional local community of
origin.

99
Re: The Restoration and Return of Cultural Property

5. SUPPORT the return of cultural property removed from World Heritage Areas listed for their
cultural values or as cultural landscapes.

THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES FORUM FURTHER PETITIONS THE WORLD HERITAGE

COMMITTEE, TO:

Re: The Participation of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in Meetings and Processes
Established by the World Heritage Convention Relationship

6. RECOMMEND to the UNESCO World Heritage Unit that it work in collaboration with the
Convention on Biological Diversity in regard to Task 9 of the programme of work adopted by the
Conference of the Parties under decision V/16 concerning the development of guidelines or
recommendations for the conduct of cultural, environmental and social impact assessments
regarding any development proposed to take place on sacred sites and on lands or waters
occupied or used by Indigenous and traditional local communities. The guidelines and
recommendations should ensure the participation of Indigenous and traditional local communities
in the assessment and review.

7. RECOMMEND to States Parties to the World Heritage Convention that they work in partnership
with Indigenous and traditional local community organisations in the establishment of policies,
guidelines, and/or strategic plans, which include requirements for national reporting, to enable the
continuous, on-ground monitoring of impacts of any decisions or proposed developments in
World Heritage Areas on the Indigenous spiritual and cultural values associated with those areas

Re: The Protection of Information Concerning Indigenous Cultural and Natural Values.

8. RECOGNIZE that the protection of the traditional knowledge, innovations and practices of
Indigenous peoples and traditional local communities is of major international significance and
that work is being carried out under Article 8(j) of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and by
WIPO, the UN Convention to Combat Desertification, the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests
and by the Commission on Human Rights and the Working Group on Indigenous Populations.

9. RECOGNISE these processes by developing a set of protocols and guidelines in conjunction

with Indigenous peoples and traditional local communities, based on the prior informed consent
of traditional knowledge holders, with regard to access and application of such knowledge in the
implementation of the World Heritage Convention.

Re: The Spiritual, Intellectual and Social Recovery of Indigenous Peoples and Traditioal Local
Communities

10. RECOGNISE that the direct involvement of Indigenous peoples in the conservation and
protection of natural and cultural heritage, will contribute to the spiritual, intellectual and social
recovery and development of Indigenous peoples and traditional local communities whose
ancestral territories fall within World Heritage Areas now

11. RECOMMEND to States Parties to the Convention on World Heritage that they facilitate
effective and meaningful consultation, co-operation and involvement of Indigenous peoples and
traditional local communities in the management of their ancestral territories that fall within
World Heritage Areas now.

12. ENSURE that any personnel to be engaged for the purposes of monitoring and managing the
cultural values of World Heritage areas, are drawn from the Indigenous peoples and traditional
local communities whose traditional knowledge and practices are the source of the cultural values
involved.

100
 ANNEX VI

Speech of the Incoming Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, Mr Peter King
on the occasion of the opening of the 24th session of the Committee

Cairns, 27 November 2000

Distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen: in fulfilling its responsibilities under Article 4 of the
Convention.
Let me acknowledge the traditional owners.
Let me finish by making two comments as to how I see my
Thank you all for your support of my election. I would role looking ahead and regarding the World Heritage
especially acknowledge Professor Visy, the distinguished movement generally.
historian and delegate of Hungary. Professor Visy has
made a major contribution to the work of this Convention First, it is central that States Parties retain and enhance
as well as scholarship more generally. their commitment to the Convention. Broadening State
Party commitment by adding new members, deepening it
I also thank Dr.Adul Wichiencharoen of Thailand, a by encouraging the nomination and improved protection of
country that I love and respect. I am honoured to be sites should be our aim. State Parties are the life blood of
nominated by such a distinguished member of the the Convention.
committee, himself a chairman in the year 1994 and with
whom I have enjoyed a couple of laughs over a few drinks Second, for the World Heritage movement to succeed over
already. I am honoured to be also supported by Dr the next ten years, we must not lose sight of the central
Christina Cameron who by reason of her knowledge and organizing idea in the Convention. I mean partnership or
experience, embodies all that is good about the World cooperation. This is not just partnership between States
Heritage movement. Parties, but also with our expert advisory groups, and
highly skilled Secretariat and the thousands of individuals
I would also like to acknowledge the work of the previous world-wide who provide voluntary effort to protect,
chairman M. Touri. I am much impressed with his preserve and present World Heritage places.
handling of the work of the chair and the several important
initiatives that have occurred under his chairmanship. The Mr. Touri has already facilitated an important initiative on
search he has started for a more efficient way to do our our approach to sites facing threats to their World Heritage
business is an important one. I am impressed by the way values. I look forward to supporting this initiative. Whose
he has ensured that all members, all cultures, can play their heart could fail to have been touched by the stories in our
part in building consensus. I undertake to you to continue papers of sites under threat? Finding new ways of
his record of reform and advance the proposed reforms encouraging practical support could be one of the ways
during my term. forward.

It is normal for the incoming chair to make a few remarks I feel truly privileged to be given this opportunity to play a
on taking up the post. part in protecting our global heritage.

I bring, I hope, more than just the Australian, but also a I look forward to serving the convention and facilitating
regional perspective to the work of the chair. In this the work of the Committee and Bureau over the year
regard, I would particularly acknowledge the delegation of ahead.
China, some of whom I have worked with in my role as
chair of the Australian Heritage Commission in developing
mutual programmes for the benefit of the valuable heritage
of both nations.

As a whole the Asian region has much to offer the

Convention and its work in education and training work;
and in the field of management of World Heritage
properties it has taken a leadership role. As a result of an
important initiative of Senator Hill, the Minister for
Environment and Heritage in the Australian Government,
the Asia Pacific Focal Point was established to find better
ways of managing properties throughout the Asia-Pacific
region. I hope, too, that you have found the field trips to
the Wet Tropics and the Great Barrier Reef of interest and
recognize the seriousness of effort which Australia makes

101
 ANNEX VII

Speech of the Director of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, Mr. Francesco Bandarin
on the occasion of the opening of the 24th session of the Committee

Cairns, 27 November 2000

Mr Chairman Even the equipment and the physical setting of the Centre
Members of the World Heritage Committee are a problem. We have very limited resources to invest in
Distinguished Observers computers, servers and the like. The very furniture of the
Ladies and Gentlemen Centre dates back to the origin of UNESCO. It is
disfunctional and unaestethic. Our working environment
Having presented to you the Secretariat’s report for the doesn’t project a very positive image to the numerous
year 2000, I would now like to spend a few minutes to visitors we receive every day.
share with you some of my preliminary ideas on the needs
and on the development prospects of the World Heritage But I don’t want to focus your attention on this type of
Centre. As you know, I have only been in this job for 2 problem. It is for us to solve them, albeit their solution
months. This is enough time for an initial assessment but being essential for your own work.
certainly too short a time for the definition of a more
comprehensive programme of activities and for the setting As you know, the management of the Convention is
of a medium and long term strategy for the Centre. experiencing many changes. The number of nominations
has steadily increased, as well as the number of State
I count on developing, with the help of my colleagues of Parties. Increasingly, our system receives the attention of
the World Heritage Centre, and also with your support, a the world. From governments, NGO’s, private
broader action framework in the next months. I hope to be corporations and the public.
able to present a preliminary scheme of proposals to the
next Bureau meeting in June 2001 and to the next Our responsibilities are becoming greater and greater.
Committee meeting in December 2001. Educating the younger generations, informing the public,
assuring the efficient monitoring of the World Heritage
The World Heritage Centre List, extending the Convention to new categories of World
Heritage, ensuring sustainability of the management
In the first instance I consider that the World Heritage process and involving public and private institutions in the
Centre – your Secretariat – has been well structured thanks protection of World Heritage.
to my predecessors. The Centre has a well defined
mission and its high quality staff are well motivated. The These changes clearly call for a reorganisation of our
amount of work that the Centre is able to deliver is really activities, and for a revision of our strategy.
quite impressive. I would like to cite some figures that I think that the Centre needs to define more precisely its
might interest you. In the year 2000, we coordinated the own mission and needs to focus on priority areas that are
production and the circulation of 111 working and specific to its own position in the international system of
information documents for the Bureau and the Committee, institutions that operate in the area of Cultural and Natural
prepared over 700 contract documents (double that of of Heritage protection. We cannot do everything, and we can
1996) and ensured the follow-up of over 200 projects and only be useful to our own State Parties if we more
initiatives. The implementation rate for the year 2000 precisely focus our activities on your priority needs.
budget was 76% as of October 31, 2000. I can therefore
confirm to you that your Secretariat is very productive. At the same time, I think that the Centre needs to limit the
fragmentation of its own activities. 200 projects are too
And yet, even a short stay at the Centre reveals that there many, and may even have less impact than 10 larger ones.
are a number of serious problems that need to be addressed
in order to improve our services to the Committee and our Furthermore, I think that we cannot act alone. Out of
activity for the implementation of the Convention. broader partnerships, we will never achieve significant
impacts, even if we double or triple our budget. We must
The Centre has a severe lack of staff, especially of general therefore develop partnership agreements with national
service and secretarial support. Our regular budget and international organisations, to act together and to
allocation is insufficient to provide the services that you create effective and sustainable results.
receive. We compensate for this with the help of State
Parties that provide us with Associate Experts (Finland, In two years the Convention will celebrate its 30th
Germany, Italy and Japan) and by working long hours and anniversary. I see this as a really great achievement, that
often weekends. merits not only to be evaluated in detail, but also
communicated to the world. The year 2002 can be a very

103
important opportunity to reflect on the first 30 years of the Furthermore, I have already developed some initial
Convention, and to look ahead to its next 30 years. I think activities to further expand our partnership agreements.
UNESCO should promote a reflection on the past and the The Centre received last year international recognition of
future of the Convention. great importance. As you know we developed an
important partnership with the United Nations Foundation
The issues I have cited require the development of a on major projects for Natural World Heritage sites. I think
medium and long-term strategy, and I hope to be able to that my colleagues have set an important model for our
achieve this, with your help. future action, and I would like to commed them for this.
The Centre has also been able to promote important
But I recognize at the same the need to be practical: our bilateral partnerships in the field of culture. This has led
work continues everyday, and we cannot ask for a to the development of world class conservation programs
“moratorium” whilst we develop our new strategy. Let me and to the mobilization of significant resources. These
therefore summarize some of the preliminary ideas I am types of partnerships need to be further developed and
trying already to test for the improvement of the activity of expanded.
the Centre in 4 areas of great importance for the
management of the Convention: the Secretariat’s activities, c) Information and Education
the projects managed by the Centre, the information and
education activities, and finally the extension of our I attach enormous importance to information and
knowledge of World Heritage. education. The success of the World Heritage Convention
depends to a great extent on our ability to inform and
a) Secretariat’s activities educate. If we reach out more, especially if we are able to
pass our message to the younger generations, then and
The Committee will discuss today the reform proposals only then, we will be able to say that we have fulfilled the
that have been agreed by the Bureau. These reforms are mission of UNESCO and the mission of the Convention. I
targeted at improving the work of the Centre and of the think that the Centre's activities in information and
Committee, and therefore have great importance to us. education should be expanded and connected with a
Should they be approved, I am sure that we will be able to greater system of education and training. Clearly, we must
serve the Committee more effectively and also ensure a find the resources for this, and we must find ways to
greater impact of the Convention. establish permanent activities in the State Parties, and to
make them sustainable. Again, we will not reach any result
As you know, I have proposed to the Bureau a preliminary alone. We must establish partnerships with public and
plan for reducing the documentation needed for the work private institutions. Some interesting experimental
of the Committee. I suggest to use an experimental activities in this direction have been launched at the
approach, to be able to evaluate costs and benefits of the Centre, and notably the World Heritage in young hands,
new system before we actually decide on a final system. and I will do all I can to try to frame them within a broader
strategy on information and education.
However it is clear that greater efficiency in the meetings
of the Committee will not derive only from a simple d) A better knowledge of World Heritage
reduction in the number of pages put before you at each
meeting. If we simply reduce the number and size of Although we have very little time left for this type of
documents that we present to the Committee there may be activity, I give great importance to research, study and
some risk that you are not properly informed about the documentation on World Heritage. It is essential for the
activities of the Secretariat. I therefore also suggested to quality of our work to be able to update our knowledge
the Bureau that we hold regular information meetings for using research conducted internationally in our field.
the Committee at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris. This Exchanges and the organisation of seminars and meetings
will give the Secretariat the opportunity to regularly update are therefore an important tool. I would like the Centre to
you on the current state of affairs. be able to do more in this field, in partnership with
universities and research institutions. I think that this
b) World Heritage Centre Projects activity should be done jointly with our advisory bodies,
which are the repositories of a great experience in working
As you know, our project activities are funded essentially with the Convention. As a first step, as I have announced
from two sources. The World Heritage Fund and to the Bureau, the Centre initiate in January an activity
Extrabudgetary funds. targeted to develop a better knowledge of the World
Heritage List and the Tentative Lists.
I would like in the near future to examine these activities
in greater detail, as I have the impression that only some of I think that knowing our own world is the best step to be
these projects refer to a defined strategy. Althogh I able to look at its future.
recognize that a certain number of ad hoc activities will
always need to be implemented, I would like to propose to I thank you for your attention.
you a gradual change in our approach to increase the
strategic value of our projects.

104
 ANNEX VIII
REVISED CALENDAR AND CYCLE FOR WORLD HERITAGE STATUTORY MEETINGS TO BE IMPLEMENTED AS OF 2002

JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER

6 DAY
YEAR 1

6 DAY BUREAU COMMITTEE

6 DAY BUREAU 6 DAY 2 DAY GENERAL GENERAL

COMMITTEE ASSEMBLY CONFERENCE
(includes election
YEAR 2

of Committee and
Bureau members)

Deadlines

 DEADLINE FOR STATE OF CONSERVATION, INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE AND NOMINATIONS (1 FEBRUARY)

DOCUMENTS TO BE DISPATCHED 6 WEEKS PRIOR TO MEETING

105
 ANNEX IX

Letter from the Italian Government

concerning Representativity of the World Heritage List

Rome, 23 November 2000

Dear Director General:

There seems to be, however, a number of
The next session of the World Heritage
Member States inside the WHC that are in favour of a new
Committee, scheduled in Cairns on November 27 -
priority order for inscriptions, which would make it hard -
December 2, will have to deal, among other things, with
if not virtually impossible - for well represented countries
the recommendations by the extraordinary session of the
to continue applying for inscriptions even if they were to
Bureau in Budapest in order to improve the
implement the resolution of the 12th General Assembly.
representativity of both the Committee and the List.
One can easily foresee that such a new priority order
would in practice promote inscriptions aimed at offsetting
My country has already adhered to the prevailing
the lack or insufficient level of representation on the List
view that a better representation inside the World Heritage
of a number of Member States, rather than acknowledge
Committee should be somehow ensured by shortening the
the intrinsic quality of the sites: all this would inevitably
mandate of WHC Members and by fostering a more
diminish the value of the entire List.
balanced presence of all "regions and cultures of the
world". In this spirit we will support all endeavours aimed
It seems to me that such an approach is both
at making the WHC a more representative managing body
contrary to the spirit, if not to the letter of the Convention
for the Paris Convention.
and counterproductive, for it will discourage a number of
Member States from continuing to support the restoration
I am frankly disappointed, on the other hand, that
and conservation system.
the recommendations of the Bureau concerning ways and
means to readdress the composition of the List continue to
Should the upcoming debate in Cairns not
imply very negative consequences for countries like Italy.
reorient itself towards more consensus-based measures, an
This appears to go beyond the terms indicated by the 12th
important opportunity will be lost to further develop the
General Assembly resolution for well represented
system, so as to meet more adequately the legitimate
counties.
expectations of a growing number of Member States.
At the June 2000 session of the Bureau Italy had
I am confident that your Presidency will greatly
adopted a very forthcoming attitude towards the
help in putting the debate into more constructive
expectations of underrepresented regions and cultures (that
framework.
is its fact the representatativity/ under-representativity
standard to be applied according to the Convention, rather
[ signed ]
than one focused on represented/under-represented
Member States). Moreover, Italy has been allocating for
Giovanna Melandri
years substantial voluntary resources to the benefit of
under-represented developing countries, precisely along
the lines indicated by the aforesaid resolution.

Mr. Koichiro Matsuura

Director General
UNESCO
PARIGI

107
 ANNEX X

STATE OF CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES

INSCRIBED ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST
Extracts from the Report of the Rapporteur of the twenty-fourth extraordinary session of the
Bureau, Cairns, Australia (23-24 November 2000) (WHC-2000/CONF.204/4)

WORLD HERITAGE AND MINING strategic planning and periodic reporting efforts of the
statutory meetings of the Convention in general, and the
In accordance with the Committee’s request at its twenty- Committee in particular. The number of such working
third session, IUCN and the World Heritage Centre groups need to be determined and budgetary implications
planned and organised, in consultation with the incorporated along with the best timing requirements for
International Council on Metals and the Environment maximising the strategic impact of the reports produced by
(ICME), a technical meeting which analysed case studies the working groups. The chair of every group would need
on World Heritage and mining. This meeting was held at to be secured by one of the Bureau members to ensure
the IUCN Headquarters (Gland, Switzerland) from 21 to close involvement of the statutory bodies of the
23 September 2000 and reviewed practical case studies Convention. The reports of each working group should
from the following sites: Lorentz National Park, Indonesia; include a comprehensive analysis of each World Heritage
Huascaran National Park, Peru; Doñana National Park, site inscribed in relation to the issues examined. They
Spain; Camp Caiman Gold Project, French Guyana should also examine tentative lists of the States Parties to
(adjacent to a Ramsar site); Kakadu National Park, give recommendations, if necessary, regarding preliminary
Australia; and Greater St. Lucia Wetlands Park, South analysis of potential impacts of the issue on the
Africa. These case studies were presented by site managers nominations of those sites that are involved.
and the mining companies. The report of the meeting
included: (a) principles underlying the relationship “The Bureau took note of the report contained in the
between World Heritage and mining; (b) recommendations Information Document WHC-2000/CONF.203/INF.7
to: World Heritage Committee and States Parties; which is based on specific case studies on mining and
management agencies; and the mining industry; and (c) World Heritage and commended the States Parties,
follow up actions. site managers, IUCN, UN agencies and the mining
industry for having started a collaboration in this
IUCN informed the Bureau that mining has been a matter. The Bureau noted the recommendations of
controversial issue at many World Heritage sites and that the report and transmitted them to the World Heritage
the issue has been characterized by a lack of dialogue Committee for examination.
between conservation and mining interests. Thus IUCN
welcomed the Committee’s invitation to host a technical
workshop jointly with ICME and UNESCO. IUCN NATURAL HERITAGE
highlighted the following issues: There was agreement to
disagree on a number of points, for example on mining III.1 The Bureau examined the state of conservation
within World Heritage sites, whereas IUCN feels it reports of a total of thirty-four natural heritage properties,
incompatible, the industry representatives called for a which were presented in Working Document WHC-
more flexible approach, but agreed on maintaining the 2000/CONF.203/5. The relevant paragraph number is
integrity of World Heritage values. The workshop also indicated below the property name. The Bureau also noted
noted the close co-operation that exists between some that a report will be presented on Canaima National Park
mining companies and World Heritage site managers and (Venezuela) at its next session. The Bureau decided not to
the importance of considering World Heritage sites in their discuss the site of Thungyai Huay Kha Khaeng
broader context and for the effective planning for mining (Thailand) as the issue mentioned in the Working
and conservation to be considered in land-use Document concerns fire prevention in general.
programmes. The critical importance of disaster mitigation
plans was also emphasised. The meeting was successful i) Natural properties which the Bureau
and productive and should be considered as part of an on- recommended for inscription on the List of
going process. World Heritage in Danger

ICOMOS agreed with the conclusions by the Secretariat Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary (Senegal)
and IUCN concerning the outcome of the workshop. (see paragraph I.24)

Some delegates spoke in support of the Mining Workshop The Secretariat informed the Bureau about the results of
proposal, including Australia. Several delegates (including the joint expert mission by the Centre, IUCN and the
Greece, Hungary) addressed the issue of the working Ramsar Bureau undertaken from 14–22 September 2000,
group to be established and its budgetary implications. It presented in Information Document 8. The report of the
was pointed out that the number of working groups on mission calls for urgent financial assistance to deal with
strategic issues should be harmonized with on-going the introduced Salvinia molesta. In view of the imminent

109
danger facing the site, the Director of Senegal National conserving natural values within World Heritage sites and
Parks has requested that the site be inscribed in the List of demonstrates the value of focused UNESCO/IUCN
World Heritage in Danger. An international assistance monitoring missions. IUCN suggested that this be
request will be presented to the World Heritage promoted as a World Heritage success story.
Committee.
The Delegate of Mexico thanked UNESCO for the
IUCN pointed out that the key issue is the invasive successful work carried out and expressed his appreciation
species, first detected in September 1999, which has to the Bureau. He highlighted the social pragmatism in
spread rapidly including the neighbouring Diawling linking development and ecology, and expressed his wish
National Park (Mauritania). The IUCN West African that all countries should collaborate on sustainable
Regional Office has convened an international meeting to development.
promote co-ordinated action against this species. The
report underlined the seriousness of the threat to both the The Bureau suggested that the World Heritage Committee
environment and the economy of the region. The global commend the Mexican Government for its actions to
environmental significance of the Senegal River Delta ensure the conservation of the World Heritage values of
mainly for migratory species was also noted. Positive steps the Whale Sanctuary of El Vizcaino and to implement the
have been taken by the Government of both Senegal and World Heritage Convention. It encouraged the authorities
Mauritania but, despite these efforts, the situation is not to collaborate with the Centre and other interested partners
under control. There is a need for a practical action plan at in implementing on-site projects for demonstrating
local, national and international level. The reports also possibilities for generating employment and income for
called for this site to be placed on the Danger List local communities, such as the UN Foundation project on
recognizing that this list can be used as a management 'Linking Conservation of Biodiversity and Sustainable
tool. IUCN endorses the States Party’s request for Danger Tourism at World Heritage sites.
List and called on international donors to urgently support
actions at the site. (iii) State of conservation reports of natural
properties which the Bureau transmitted to
A number of Bureau members supported the the Committee for noting
recommendation for danger listing, highlighting the fact
that Salvinia molesta is an invasive species very difficult World Natural Heritage Properties of Australia
to eradicate and that the same problem has been (see paragraph I.1)
encountered in other regions of the world. They pointed
out that this has also enormous economic and social The Bureau took note of the information on the
consequences. The question of dams in arid zones was also commencement of the Environment Protection and
discussed. Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBCA) of 1999
including the recommendation by IUCN and noted that it
The Bureau recommended the Committee consider would be made available to delegates on request.
whether the site should be inscribed in the List of World
Heritage in Danger, in accordance with the expressed IUCN noted that the ACIUCN process for monitoring
wishes of the State Party. The Bureau also recommended Australian sites has continued and that there are a number
the Committee call on international donor support. of features of this process which are of interest and
potential relevance for other States Parties: (a) it brings
ii) State of conservation reports of natural together the government and NGOs under the umbrella of
properties which the Bureau transmitted to the the Australian Committee for IUCN; (b) it is based on
Committee for action extensive consultation focusing on key issues, and (c) it
emphasises the identification of a limited number of
Whale Sanctuary of El Vizcaino (Mexico) practical recommendations. It is hoped that the process
(see paragraph I.16) will be extended to other Australian sites depending on
funding available.
The Secretariat informed the Bureau that, following the
President of Mexico’s statement of 2 March 2000, the The Delegate of Australia commented that this process
proposed salt-works at the World Heritage site of El coincides with the preparations for the periodic reporting
Vizcaino would not proceed. Letters from the Chairperson process and that it would be useful if these reports be
of the Committee and the Director-General of UNESCO presented in 2002.
welcomed this decision and congratulated the President of
Mexico for the actions taken to implement the World Shark Bay, Western Australia
Heritage Convention. The UN Foundation approved a US$ (see paragraph I.2)
2.5 million project entitled “Linking conservation of
Biodiversity and Sustainable Tourism at World Heritage IUCN noted that the ACIUCN report for the site was
sites” for six sites, including the two natural sites in discussed at the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau.
Mexico, the Whale Sanctuary of El Vizcaino and Sian ACIUCN has advised some amendments of the Focused
Ka’an. IUCN strongly supported and commended the Recommendations on mining consistent with the original
State Party for its decision to halt the proposed salt-works ACIUCN recommendation to emphasise that no mineral
at the World Heritage site of El Vizcaino. This sends a sands mining or exploration should be allowed if it
clear message to the world about the importance of

110
damages the World Heritage Area and values. IUCN satisfaction the State Party's efforts to involve local
welcomed the State Party’s response to the five Focused communities in the work of Management Committees that
Recommendations and looked forward to the completion are beginning to address integrated land and catchment
of the strategic plan for the property and offered to work management issues. The Bureau invited the State Party to
with the State Party to establish time frames for actions sustain the pace of progress in the implementation of the
identified. “Focused Recommendations” achieved in the first year
and submit the second-year report to the twenty-sixth
The Bureau commended the State Party and ACIUCN for session of the Bureau in 2002 in the context of periodic
successfully repeating the process applied to the Great reporting.
Barrier Reef for the Shark Bay World Heritage area. The
Bureau urged them to develop a Framework for The Bureau also requested the State Party to submit a
Management that could be used as a basis for annual report on the grounding of the vessel on the Great Barrier
monitoring of progress in the implementation of the five Reef and follow-up actions for the consideration of the
Focused Recommendations, and submit it to the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau in 2001.
consideration of the twenty-sixth session of the Bureau in
2002, in the context of periodic reporting. Central Eastern Australian Rainforest Reserves
(see paragraph I.4)
Great Barrier Reef (Australia)
(see paragraph I.3) IUCN noted that the State Government of Queensland has
decided not to approve the Naturelink Skyrail
The Secretariat informed the Bureau about the recent development. IUCN had concerns about the
grounding of a freighter upon the reef. IUCN commended appropriateness of this development impacting on the
the first-year progress report on implementing the Focused World Heritage area and applauded the reported decision
Recommendations for this site. IUCN agreed with the of the Queensland Government. The Delegate of Australia
State Party that a key issue is to effectively manage confirmed the cancellation of the project and stated that
catchments adjacent to the reef to reduce overall further information will be provided to the Secretariat
environmental impact on the site and noted that 80 shortly.
catchment management projects are currently underway.
IUCN suggested that the effectiveness of these projects in The Bureau noted with satisfaction that the cable car
reducing pollution impacts should be monitored. IUCN construction was not proceeding and requested the State
also noted and applauded efforts to establish a Party to keep the Centre informed on this matter.
representative management planning system in the World
Heritage areas based around an expanded core of highly Wet Tropics of Queensland
protected areas. IUCN saw a clear link between such areas (see paragraph I.5)
and sustainable fisheries in the Great Barrier Reef region.
IUCN reviewed the recent refloating of the grounded The Bureau took note of Information Document INF.6
container vessel with a potentially dangerous cargo from “ACIUCN Report on the state of conservation of the Wet
the reef. This was achieved by the use of explosives by the Tropics of Queensland World Heritage Area, Australia”.
site management agency. It was noted that legal action is ACIUCN carried out a comprehensive monitoring exercise
being taken against the shipping operator. This highlighted for this site, which involved a series of stakeholder
several issues: the need for pilotage of large vessels within consultations and extensive joint involvement of the
the World Heritage area, especially those carrying Government and NGOs. The report identified four priority
hazardous materials, as well as the need for effective action areas: (i) the need to support site management,
response strategies which aim to minimise environmental particularly to ensure adequate resources to effectively
impact and which involve consultation with key implement the Wet Tropics Management Plan and
stakeholders, including traditional owners. Strategic Plan; (ii) the need to closely monitor the
management of native and introduced species, in particular
Bureau members noted the fragile ecosystem and the need the control of feral and exotic species; (iii) the need to
for continuous monitoring of the coral reef and the need to ensure complementary management of land use and
protect it from pollution. human impacts within and beyond the boundaries of the
World Heritage area. ACIUCN recommended a particular
The Delegate of Australia informed the Bureau about the focus on industrial and tourism developments, as well as
actions taken to remove the vessel and that other options the need to carefully assess electricity options in the
would have been preferred, but there was a need for urgent region, which may impact the World Heritage area, and
removal. Criminal procedures are underway against the (iv) consideration of a number of strategic issues,
owners of the vessel. The management of shipping needs including indigenous involvement on management, the
to be of highest international standards. Australia also recognition of cultural values in any review of boundaries
participates actively in the International Coral Reef to enhance site management.
Initiative and in the Coral Reef Watch.
The Delegate of Australia informed the Bureau that the
The Bureau thanked the State Party for submitting a first- State Party’s response to the priority action areas as
year progress report on the implementation of the described by IUCN is under Ministerial consideration and
“Focused Recommendations” adopted by the Committee will be transmitted to the Centre very shortly.
at its twenty-third session. The Bureau noted with

111
The Bureau noted the State Party’s response would be difficult with illegal opening of roads for forestry activity
made available in due course. The Bureau requested the and poaching continuing to be a threat. The IUCN Central
State Party and IUCN to collaborate in the development of African Office has been working with the State Party to
a Framework for Management that could be used as a basis secure funding since the main funding agencies pulled out
for annual monitoring of progress in the implementation of of the site in 1999. In 1999 the IUCN/WWF Forest
the five Focused Recommendations and submit it for the Innovations Project conducted an assessment of
consideration of the twenty-sixth session of the Bureau in management effectiveness in co-operation with site
2002, in the context of periodic reporting. managers and partners. The review highlighted problems
arising from the withdrawal of funding and issues such as
Belovezhskaya Pushcha/Bialowieza Forest bushmeat. There was a recent meeting between the key
(Belarus/Poland) Dja partners (IUCN, ECOFAC and other NGOs) to discuss
(see paragraph I.6) the Dja Reserve Management Plan in relation to
surrounding pressures. A meeting in January 2001 will
IUCN noted that the document “Principles of the discuss the bushmeat issue, a key issue relating to
Bialowieza National Park” would guide the organization poaching at Dja and it is hoped that a project proposal may
of the proposed extended Park. The extension has been arise. In view of the circumstances, it is considered that a
controversial and this document represents an important mission to this site is warranted to assess the situation.
compromise as it balances conservation and sustainable
development of the region. It allows for zoning, phasing The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to review the
out of the logging activity that is outside of the World report and to co-operate with the State Party to work out
Heritage area and increasing emphasis on tourism. IUCN methods for the implementation of the recommendations
supported the extension of the National Park to include the of the Sangmelima Workshop, and to report on these
entire Polish side of the Bialowieza Forest. While this measures, and on the state of conservation of this site with
extension area was assessed by IUCN not to be of World special reference to illegal roading, poaching, and the
Heritage value, it is still considered important to status of mineral exploration and any proposed mining
complement the existing World Heritage site. activities in time for the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau.
The Bureau also encouraged international donors and
The Bureau commended the efforts of the State Party. The partners to support conservation efforts at this site.
Bureau urged the State Party to expedite the enlargement
of the National Park to include the entire Polish side of the Gros Morne National Park (Canada)
Bialowieza Primeval Forest, and to apply the document (see paragraph I.9)
“Principles of the Bialowieza National Park functioning
after its extension on to the entire Polish side of the IUCN noted that logging outside the Gros Morne National
Bialowieza Primeval Forest (Proposition)” as a basis for Park could affect the exceptional natural beauty of the site.
management of the National Park when it is enlarged. It is noted that Parks Canada has expressed concern
regarding the cumulative impacts of logging in areas
Pirin National Park (Bulgaria) adjacent to the Park, as part of the environmental impact
(see paragraph I.8) process of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
As part of this process, the logging company has been
The Secretariat informed the Bureau that a letter from the asked for more information relating to the potential
Ministry of Environment and Water (MOEW) of Bulgaria impacts on the Park. IUCN recommended the State Party,
was received on 3 November 2000 concerning the project through Parks Canada, continue to work with the Province,
proposal of the enlargement of the existing ski zone within environmental groups and the forest industry to find
the World Heritage site. It pointed out that the existing ski solutions to this issue.
zone was constructed in 1985/86 in compliance with the
existing national nature protection. The MOEW decided to The Observer of Canada informed the Bureau that the
give approval for the construction of two new ski runs company’s proposition concerning additional logging
(13.5 ha) and a ski lift facility and to give approval for a plans outside the area has been cancelled.
study on a new ski run (7ha) and a lift. At the same time,
no approval is given for the remaining ski runs proposed. The Bureau requested the State Party to provide a report
The information has been transmitted to IUCN and will be on this development and issues associated with this site as
reviewed carefully. indicated by IUCN in time for the twenty-fifth session of
the Bureau.
The Bureau requested the State Party to provide an up-date
report on this development as well as on the legal status of Canadian Rocky Mountains Parks (Canada)
the existing ski zone within the World Heritage site in time
for the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau. The Observer of Canada informed the Bureau that the
plans for the Cheviot Coal Mine outside the Jasper
Dja Faunal Reserve (Cameroon) National Park portion of the Canadian Rocky Mountains
(see paragraph I.7) Parks, have been cancelled, mainly due to declining coal
prices.
IUCN welcomed the State Party’s report on the site that
indicated proposals to enhance the management capacity.
However, IUCN noted that the situation on the ground is

112
Los Katios National Park (Colombia) IUCN commended the States Party for its positive
(see paragraph I.10) conservation measures implemented at the site,
specifically the development of regulations to the
The Secretariat informed the Bureau about the report of Galapagos Special Law for immigration, invasive species
the technical meeting on the two World Heritages sites of and tourism. IUCN noted the need to ensure these
Los Katios National Park and Darien National Park regulations are effectively implemented. IUCN urged
(Panama) held in Bogota on 23 and 24 May 2000. finalization of the special regulations for fisheries. This
Following the Bureau’s request for a mission to the site to should address issues such as permissible fishing methods,
obtain detailed information on the state of conservation, boat permits and principles for setting fisheries quotas,
the Centre received an invitation for a field mission from including for lobster fisheries. The unsuitability of
10 to 12 November 2000 including visits to Medellin, longline fisheries in this area rich in seabirds, sharks and
Turbo and Bogota for discussions with on-site staff. turtles was also noted. IUCN commended the States Party
Security clearance for the mission was obtained from for fundraising efforts for the site, especially the success
UNDP. Due to the dates just prior to the Bureau session with the GEF Grant and the Inter American Development
and the unavailability of a representative from IUCN, the Bank Loan. These will strengthen the quarantine system,
mission had to be postponed. marine reserve management and the conservation agency.
IUCN looks forward to reviewing the marine extension to
IUCN noted the continuing instability in this area that the World Heritage site in 2001 and suggested this
continues to impact Los Katios and the contiguous Darien evaluation be combined with a monitoring mission.
World Heritage site. IUCN recommended that further
consideration of this site await the 2001 mission. This The Bureau welcomed the positive developments for
mission should review the potential for inclusion of the conservation at this site and thanked the State Party for
site on the List of World Heritage in Danger as well as considering extending the World Heritage Area to include
reviewing the potential for developing one transfrontier the marine zone. The Bureau commended the State Party
site. IUCN supported the efforts by the States Party to on the excellent progress with implementing the
encourage on-site co-operation and capacity building Management Plan and recommended that a monitoring
between Los Katios and Darien World Heritage sites. mission be linked with the IUCN evaluation of the marine
extension in 2001. The Bureau, however, noted with
The Bureau welcomed the transboundary collaboration and concern recent threats arising from industrial fishing
recalled the request of the Committee at the time of the interests and invited the States Party to strictly enforce all
inscription to create a transboundary site between laws and regulations, to underline its commitment to the
Colombia and Panama. Concerning the mission to the site, conservation of the site. The Bureau also encouraged the
the Bureau requested UNESCO and IUCN collaborate and State Party to expedite finalising regulations and other
find suitable dates to carry out the mission in 2001. provisions for the effective enforcement of the Galapagos
Law, particularly in the fisheries, tourism and quarantine
Comoe National Park (Côte d’Ivoire) sectors.
(see paragraph I.11)
Komodo National Park (Indonesia)
IUCN, through its West African Office, noted continuing (see paragraph I.13)
major problems at this site mainly relating to poaching and
forestry and agricultural encroachments on Park IUCN and UNESCO participated in a monitoring mission
boundaries. IUCN supported a mission to the site, if to this site in September 2000. Key issues were identified
invited by the State Party. as: destructive fishing using cyanide and dynamite, mainly
by fishermen outside the Park. It is a difficult challenge for
The Bureau decided to give additional time to the State the Park management to control the application of the
Party to enable it to complete the implementation of the regulation and enforcement of fishing laws. Due to
International Assistance provided. The Bureau requested inadequate staffing levels, poaching and collecting
the Centre and IUCN to co-operate with the State Party activities are impacting the natural values of the site. These
with a view to undertaking the mission requested by the problems are exacerbated by internal migration to the
twenty-third session of the Committee, and requested the Park. The State Party is addressing this by trying to
State Party to provide the detailed state of conservation improve the socio-economic conditions of communities
report and corrective measures for mitigating threats to the outside of the Park boundary. There are a number of
site before 15 September 2001 to be considered by the management issues, including the provision of water and
twenty-fifth session of the Committee. the need for improved waste management and sanitation.
IUCN also noted that the existing 25-year Master Plan is a
Galapagos Islands (Ecuador) very useful document, but recommends development of a
(see paragraph I.12) more detailed 5-year management plan. It is critical that
there be strong emphasis on involving local communities
The Secretariat informed the Bureau of positive in plan preparation. IUCN noted the positive steps being
developments at the site. However, reports had also been taken by the State Party to address management issues and
received concerning tensions with lobster fishermen and the very constructive partnership role of the Nature
their recent occupation of the offices of the Charles Conservancy in the management of the site. The mission
Darwin Research Station on Isabella Island. identified a number of recommendations, including (1) to
promote and increase community awareness of the benefits

113
of the Komodo National Park; a critical element is to Mount Kenya National Park/Natural Forest (Kenya)
ensure full involvement of local communities in the (see paragraph I.15)
preparation of the management plan; (2) other specific
recommendations include increasing public awareness, The Secretariat informed the Bureau that a letter was
encouraging appropriate eco-tourism, improving site received by the Centre on 17 November 2000 from the
management and developing effective monitoring and Kenyan Embassy in France, on a number of positive
research programmes. IUCN concluded that this positive actions by the Government, including security operations
reactive monitoring mission identified practical steps to in the newly gazetted National Reserve, a task force on the
address key issues. transition of management to the Kenya Wildlife Service
and the extension of the boundaries to cover an area of
The Bureau also took note of the UN Foundation project 1632 sq. km. It stated that these positive actions would
of US$ 2.5 million entitled “Linking Conservation of negate suggestions to include Mt. Kenya on the List of
Biodiversity and Sustainable Tourism at World Heritage World Heritage in Danger.
sites” for six sites, including the Komodo and Ujung
Kulon National Parks of Indonesia. IUCN noted positive measures that will have long-term
The Bureau noted the recommendations by the benefits for the management of the site. IUCN is however
IUCN/UNESCO mission and also that the UNESCO- concerned about the critical situation of the site and
UNEP project already addresses several of the issues suggests a monitoring mission to assess the potential for
mentioned (training, funding and park management). The inscription of this site on the List of World Heritage in
Bureau urged the State Party to develop an action plan for Danger.
the implementation of the recommendations of the Report
of the IUCN/UNESCO mission to Komodo National Park The Bureau welcomed the actions taken by the State Party,
and submit it, as well as a progress report, for the and requested the Centre and IUCN to co-operate with the
consideration of the twenty-fifth session of the Committee State Party with a view to undertaking a monitoring
in 2001. mission to the site to ascertain its state of conservation.
The Bureau requested the State Party to co-operate with
Lorenz National Park (Indonesia) the Centre and IUCN with a view to completing the
(see paragraph I.14) management plan and the programme of rehabilitation, to
be submitted to the Centre by 15 March 2001 for
The Bureau noted that the site was one of the case studies consideration by the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau.
at the Mining Workshop. IUCN informed the Bureau that
the study presented was an excellent case which noted the Te Wahipounamu – South West New Zealand
close collaboration between the company and the Park, (New Zealand)
with Freeport being a major source of funding support for (see paragraph I.17)
biodiversity projects and studies in the Park. A number of
environmental impacts associated with the disposal of IUCN reported that the issue arose from concerns of a
mine tailings from the site and potential impacts were New Zealand NGO at the impact on parts of the World
noted. It recommended that those be further investigated. Heritage site from the Himalayan Thar, introduced for
Freeport is developing ways to contain and treat waste and sport hunting long before the World Heritage inscription.
is undertaking a health and ecological risk assessment The Himalayan Thar Management Plan aims at sustained
study. The issue of mine tailings should be also addressed control of thar to maintain vegetation in an ecological
as part of the study. IUCN also pointed out the co- acceptable condition. Thar numbers had been reduced
operation between WWF, TNC and the State Party to significantly under the control plan in place but the New
develop a three-year Action Plan for this site and proposals Zealand Conservation Authority favours a review of the
for a Lorenz Trust Fund. policy. IUCN stated that such a review would be possible
when the management agency reviews the impacts of the
The Bureau encouraged the Indonesian authorities to existing policy over the next few years.
closely collaborate with Freeport and other partners like
WWF and TNC who are keen to support the conservation The Observer of New Zealand reaffirmed the commitment
of Lorentz. The Bureau welcomed the idea for the to the sustained control of this particular introduced animal
establishment of a Lorentz Trust Fund or similar and asked the Bureau to note the legal status of the control
arrangements to ensure long-term conservation financing measures being implemented and to be reviewed in 2003.
for the site. The State Party believed it may be useful to report back in
2002, when the process to review the control plan will
The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to collaborate have commenced.
with the State Party and Freeport to obtain detailed
information on the current practice of tailings disposal The Bureau noted that the State Party is in the process of
from the mining concession adjacent to the Park and the implementing a Himalayan Thar Control Policy but invited
potential threats it may pose to its integrity. The Bureau the State Party to take into consideration the criticisms of
endorsed IUCN’s suggestion that Freeport be requested to NZCA concerning some aspects of the Policy. The Bureau
address this issue as part of the ecological and health risk requested that the State Party give due consideration to
assessment study it is preparing. changes called for by the NZCA when it reviews the
Policy’s impacts during 2002/2003, or if possible, earlier.
The Bureau invited the State Party to submit a progress

114
report on the implementation of the Policy and its plan or Danube Delta (Romania)
efforts to undertake a review of policy implementation to (see paragraph I.21)
the twenty-sixth session of the Bureau in 2002.
The Bureau took note of the report supplied by the State
Arabian Oryx Sanctuary (Oman) Party. IUCN noted reports of re-opening of mining
(see paragraph I.18) operations upstream from this site. IUCN urged caution,
bearing in mind that there have been four spills of cyanide
IUCN carried out a reactive monitoring mission to the site and heavy metals from three mine sites in Romania in the
in May 2000 and the report has been circulated. It includes first half of this year. This situation needs to be carefully
the following points: The poaching of the Arabian Oryx reviewed. IUCN also noted that it is essential that mining
has been stopped for the past 16 months, thus arresting the companies have clear and effective disaster mitigation
previous decline in populations. The key role of the plans, experience borne out from this case and Doñana
Sultan’s special force should be noted, indicating the National Park, Spain.
highest level of support of this species for the conservation
of this site. A new management plan has been prepared The Delegate of Hungary asked that a report be provided
with revised boundaries and clearly identified management by the State Party on measures taken in the mine region.
zones. It is important that these boundaries are marked on
the ground and adequate resources allocated to ensure its The Bureau thanked the State Party for having provided
implementation. The Report also identified a number of information on the impacts of the spill on the Danube
other issues, including control of vehicles, overgrazing and Delta World Heritage area and urged the State Party to
mining. These issues need to be addressed in the develop clear and effective disaster mitigation plans for
implementation of the management plan. The site should any on-going or future mining activities that may affect
not be considered for Danger Listing. World Heritage values. It requested the State Party to
provide a report on measures taken in the mine region in
The Delegate of Morocco welcomed the progress made time for the twenty-fifth session of the Committee.
and highlighted the fragile environment and the economic
and petroleum exploitation interests. Such a site could be Golden Mountains of Altai (Russian Federation)
seen as a core area in a wider Biosphere Reserve context to (see paragraph I.22)
include sustainable development.
The Secretariat informed the Bureau that the Director of
The Bureau commended the State Party for finalising the the UNESCO Office in Moscow would attend a meeting
draft management plan for the Sanctuary and proposing on the proposed road and gas pipeline through the Ukok
new, more rational boundaries. To maintain the integrity Plateau, from 18 to 20 December 2000 in the Altai
of the site, the Bureau requested the State Party, as a Republic. IUCN pointed out that it is currently only a
matter of urgency, to adopt the draft management plan, proposal and suggested caution on this issue. There is a
complete the boundary marking, and allocate adequate need to assess options for the road outside of the World
resources for the plan’s implementation. The Bureau Heritage area and consult with stakeholders. IUCN also
invited the State Party to submit a new boundary for the noted proposals for an Altai Convention, which aims to
World Heritage listing which excluded the buffer zone. provide a framework for balancing conservation and
Finally, the Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to development needs.
collaborate with the State Party in order to continuously
monitor the site and to report regularly to the Bureau. The Bureau invited the State Party to inform the Centre on
details concerning the proposed road construction project,
Huascarán National Park (Peru) including any environmental impact studies that may be
(see paragraph I.20) underway and any future developments in time for the
twenty-fifth session of the Bureau.
The Secretariat informed the Bureau that the site was one
of the successful case studies of the Mining Workshop. Volcanoes of Kamchatka (Russian Federation)
IUCN pointed out that the mining company agreed to (see paragraph I.23)
develop the southern route for the transport of mineral
resources, rather than transporting them through the Park. IUCN noted the serious reports received on salmon
IUCN highlighted the positive co-operation between the poaching, gold mining, gas pipeline and a geothermal
State Party, the mining company and the Mountain powerplant in the region. IUCN noted the socio-economic
Institute at this site. The need for the development of a challenges in this region and emphasised the need to link
new management plan which focuses on effective planning of the World Heritage site with development
management of tourism and better control of small-scale opportunities for local populations and regional planning
mining operators within the Park was emphasized. as set out in the Project Kamchatka Report. Additional
donor support would be required and more initiatives need
The Bureau encouraged the State Party to implement the to be developed. The Secretariat informed the Bureau that
recommendations of the mission report and to regularly a mission of a staff member of the UNESCO Office in
report on the status of the implementation of these Moscow will take place in January 2001.
recommendations.

115
A number of Bureau members and observers expressed Doñana National Park (Spain)
concerns about the magnitude of the problems (see paragraph I.27)
encountered, and requested that these brought to the
attention of the State Party. IUCN recognized the efforts made by the State Party to
clean up the site, particularly associated with the Doñana
The Bureau noted with concern the reported threats to this 2005 Restoration Project and the Green corridor project.
site and that a case may exist for inscription on the List of However, there is still a long way to go. The need for
World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau requested the State decommissioning of the old tailings dam and better storage
Party to provide a state of conservation report on this site, of mining waste was highlighted.
which addresses the points raised by IUCN, and the
potential for inscription on the List of World Heritage in The Bureau commended the continuing efforts of the State
Danger, in time for the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau. Party to clean up the area, which indicated a gradual
recovery of the Guadiamar River Basin. However, the
Lake Baikal (Russian Federation) Bureau noted that there is still a great deal of effort
(see paragraph I.24) required and that there remains high pollution in some
areas. The Bureau urged the State Party to accelerate
IUCN noted that a Workshop on Lake Baikal was held in implementation of the Doñana 2005 restoration project and
July 2000 and that this meeting and other reports have implement the review meeting to be held during 2001. The
indicated: (a) continuing concerns about the discharge of authorities are invited to inform the Centre by 15 April
waste waters into Lake Baikal, and the main tributary of 2001 on tentative dates and a programme for the review
Lake Baikal, the Selenga River. One of the major waste meeting.
water inputs is the Baikalsk Pulp and Paper Mill; (b) a
delay in the preparation of a detailed plan for the Sinharaja Forest Reserve (Sri Lanka)
conversion of the Pulp and Paper Mill; (c) concerns about (see paragraph I.28)
the adequacy and effectiveness of the Federal Law on
Lake Baikal were pointed out, as well as concerns about IUCN urged priority attention to resolving boundary issues
other threats to the integrity of the site (unregulated and endorsed efforts to incorporate an additional 1,000 ha
hunting, fishing). IUCN also noted that the State of natural forest into the Reserve. IUCN Sri Lanka will be
Committee on Environmental Protection has been working with the State Party on this issue and on
abolished. The specific implications for World Heritage implementing a proposed GEF-funded project to conserve
sites in the Russian Federation are unclear. the south-western rainforests of Sri Lanka.

The Bureau expressed its concern that no updated The Bureau noted that the Forest Department is making
information was received from the State Party on this efforts to reclaim the land released for organic tea farming
property and that other recent reports indicate serious and may encounter a legal challenge from the private
threats to this site and that a case may exist for inscription enterprise concerned. The Bureau requested the Centre and
on the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau IUCN to monitor further developments on the matter and
requested the State Party invite a mission to this site in report on progress to the next extraordinary session of the
2001 to ascertain whether it should be inscribed on the List Bureau in 2001. In addition, the Bureau invited the State
of World Heritage in Danger. Party to report on steps taken to incorporate 1,000 ha of
natural forest to the National Reserve and its eventual
Niokolo-Koba National Park (Senegal) inclusion in the World Heritage site.
(see paragraph I.26)
Bwindi Impenetrable Forest (Uganda)
IUCN noted significant threats from poaching by local (see paragraph I.30)
subsistence farmers and armed gangs. The report
suggested that there may soon be no Derby Elands left, IUCN noted continuing problems regarding security at this
unless urgent measures are taken. The IUCN Senegal site. The Observer of Uganda informed the Bureau about
Office has expressed concern about the situation in the the difficult situation and civil unrest in the whole region.
Park and has reported proposals to transfer animals, A new strategic plan was prepared in September 2000 that
including the Derby Elands, from the World Heritage site. addresses a number of issues including a security plan.
There are also recent proposals to import western giant This will be translated into an Operational Plan with
elands from Senegal to a commercial ranch in South budgetary implications by March 2001. This will also
Africa. IUCN noted that there has not been a study to define which areas could be financed by the World Bank
assess the impacts of the translocation of animals on the and the World Heritage Fund. He confirmed that
conservation status of the Park and urged caution. information would be provided as soon as possible to the
Centre. IUCN also noted there is a $7 million trust fund
The Bureau noted with concern the reports concerning this for Bwindi.
site. The Bureau requested the State Party to consider
inviting a monitoring mission to this site in 2001. The Bureau recalled its earlier request and recommended
that the Centre and IUCN continue efforts to verify, with
the Ugandan authorities, their needs for support for
purchase of vehicles and staff training and to continue

116
assisting the Ugandan authorities to obtain financial
support from suitable sources, including the World The Observer of Vietnam informed the Bureau that during
Heritage Fund. The Bureau requested the State Party to the last months a strategic partnership framework has been
provide the information on the Operational Plan by 15 agreed upon for a consolidated integrated management
April 2001 and asked the Centre and IUCN to report on approach. On 1 December 2000 the Master Plan 2000-
the measures taken to support the management programme 2020 would be due for ratification by the Prime Minister.
at the twenty-fifth ordinary session of the Bureau in mid- The Master Plan will take into account the World Heritage
2001. area and its buffer zone. The environmental legislation was
amended to allow a thorough environmental management
Gough Island (United Kingdom) audit of the Bai Chay Bridge construction project. There is
(see paragraph I.31) a high level of commitment by both the provincial and
central Government. World Heritage education
IUCN noted that the invasive species Sagina has been programmes are to be introduced into all schools in the
eradicated but urged the State Party to carefully monitor region. A new donor strategy is being developed and
the situation to ensure that future outbreaks do not occur. training in donor advocacy is being provided to staff of the
The Observer of the United Kingdom informed the Bureau Ha Long Bay Management Department.
that his Government is addressing long-term issues
through the revision of the management plan. The revision The Bureau commended the commitment of the State
of boundaries of the Reserve had been extended from three Party to continue to improve infrastructure and capacity
nautical miles to 12 nautical miles, but that this did not for the protection of the site and for providing a report on
affect the World Heritage area. the Management and Preservation of the site. The Bureau
however, drew the attention of the State Party to risks
The Bureau commended the State Party and the St. Helena linked to addressing environmental impacts of individual
Government for their effective and prompt response in projects to the neglect of monitoring cumulative impacts
eradicating this invasive species. It invited the State Party of the overall development of Ha Long City and other
to keep the future situation of the site under close review. areas surrounding the World Heritage area. The Bureau
urged the Government of Vietnam and the Provincial
Ngorongoro Conservation Area and the Serengeti Government of Quang Ninh to seek donor support,
National Park (United Republic of Tanzania) including from JICA and other Japanese Institutions that
(see paragraph I.32) co-operated to carry out the Study on Environmental
Management of Ha Long Bay, to initiate implementation
IUCN noted that an Environmental Impact Assessment of the Study’s recommendations with minimum possible
was carried out on the proposed routes for the planned delay. The Bureau noted that the State Party amended the
access road and a decision made that the road should avoid environmental legislation as appropriate to ensure the full
environmentally sensitive areas. IUCN urged the State implementation of the Environmental Management and
Party to proceed slowly and with caution on this matter. Audit Programme recommended by the EIA of the Bai
IUCN also noted problems with introduced species in the Chay Bridge Construction Project, during the construction
crater. phase as well as beyond. The Bureau also encouraged the
State Party to increase its efforts to co-ordinate and
The Bureau requested the Centre and IUCN to continue consolidate inputs of all stakeholders for the conservation
monitoring this site, and invited the State Party to provide of the Ha Long Bay World Heritage area and the
reports to the Centre on a regular basis and to provide the sustainable development of its surrounding region. The
Centre with a copy of both the management plan and the Bureau invited the State Party to submit a progress report
Environmental Impact Assessment Study. on the outcome of its efforts to implement the above
recommendations to the next extraordinary session of the
Ha Long Bay (Vietnam) Bureau at the end of 2001.
(see paragraph I.33)
Mosi-oa-Tunya/Victoria Falls (Zambia/Zimbabwe)
IUCN reviewed the State Party’s annual report and (see paragraph I.34)
applauded many positive actions underway, including
raising community awareness and support for the area. The The Secretariat informed the Bureau that problems were
key concerns are the cumulative impacts of activities in the encountered with the proposed bilateral meeting. A
Ha Long Bay region outside the site. IUCN supported related international assistance request has been received
programmes such as the integrated coastal and marine from Zambia. IUCN saw the implementation of the joint
management programme for the Tonkin Archipelago Zambia/Zimbabwe planning workshop as a priority and
proposed by IUCN Vietnam and the World Bank. This looked forward to participating. The Delegate of
tries to balance conservation and development across the Zimbabwe confirmed that problems existed and welcomed
region. the Centre’s letter on this matter. He informed the Bureau
that a meeting would take place in Zimbabwe from 19 to
The Delegate of Hungary highlighted the complexity of 22 December 2000 prior to the bilateral meeting.
the site and the need for a broader heritage impact
assessment, as well as the need for the consolidated The Bureau reiterated its requests of earlier sessions and
involvement of all partners. those of the Committee, that the States Parties expedite the

117
organisation of the bilateral meeting in order to report to proposal. However, the ISP considers that there is still the
the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau in mid-2001. need for:

(a) landscape and ecosystem analyses;

MIXED (NATURAL AND CULTURAL) HERITAGE (b) improvement in management arrangements as a
leakage incident at the Ranger Mine showed that
the response of the mining company and
i) State of conservation reports of mixed authorities was unsatisfactory, and that the
properties which the Bureau transmitted to the standard of monitoring and maintenance had
Committee for action fallen below those expected;
(c) an independent scientific advisory group and
transparent review process.
Kakadu National Park (Australia)
(see paragraph I.35) The ISP considers that the Australian Government
response to the ISP recommendations dated 10 November
The Bureau recalled that in July 1999, the third 2000 are satisfactory in relation to some of the ISP
extraordinary session of the Committee examined the state recommendations, but unsatisfactory for others. The
of conservation of Kakadu National Park with reference to leader of the ISP of ICSU said that the ISP findings do not
the development of a uranium mine on the Jabiluka necessarily relate to milling proposals other than the JMA.
Mineral Lease in an enclave of the Park. Furthermore he commented that the ISP had little
information on alternative milling proposals.
The Bureau reviewed progress on two main issues.
Firstly, the resolution of a number of scientific issues and, The ISP stated that if these alternative milling proposals
secondly, cultural issues. can be shown to reduce any potential environmental risk,
then the ISP would accept and welcome them but would
Scientific issues still need:

The Bureau noted the conclusions of the report of the - detailed rigorous environmental analyses
Independent Scientific Panel (ISP) of the International - full stakeholder involvement at the earliest stage
Council for Science (ICSU) (see Executive Summary of - transparency of process, and
WHC-2000/CONF.203/INF.5). - a fully independent review body.

The Bureau also noted that on 10 November, in a letter IUCN referred to the joint statement made by the advisory
addressed to the Chair of the Committee, the State Party bodies in July 1999 and to the report of the IUCN expert
had advised that: who had participated in the mission in July 2000 (see
Annex 4 of WHC-2000/CONF.203/INF.5). IUCN
•= they accepted the intent of the ISP recommendations endorsed the process of scientific peer review and said that
and will ensure that their implementation achieves the in accordance with the Precautionary Principle there
objectives outlined by the ISP and IUCN in that should be no mining until there was a complete
report. Environmental Impact Assessment on the modified mine
plans.
•= subject to a review of the resource implications, and
the need to ensure the cooperation of Traditional IUCN said they were very concerned about the leak at the
Owners, a more extensive monitoring programme at a Ranger uranium mine reported to the twenty-fourth session
local and regional level could be put in place. of the Bureau in June 2000, and about other reported leaks,
but noted that only minor ecological impacts have
•= they will explore mechanisms for improving the occurred. They expressed concern about the potential
transparency of the external technical advice review cultural impacts of the leak and the inconsistencies in the
process through the incorporation of further reports of the Northern Territory and the Federal
independent advice from the most appropriate Government on the leak.
Australian scientists and engineers.
IUCN recommended that there be further documentation
•= amendments have been made to Australia’s legal of the natural values of the Lease and adjacent areas at the
regime in relation to environmental protection and the earliest opportunity. In noting that there were also ethical
regulations governing the exports of uranium. and cultural issues relating to the scientific and technical
issues at Jabiluka, IUCN indicated that it was essential for
The leader of the ISP of ICSU informed the Bureau that the Traditional Owners not to feel excluded from future
the ISP report was concerned principally with issues discussions and assessments.
relating to the approved proposal for the Jabiluka Milling
Alternative (JMA). The ISP considers that the risks to The Delegate of Australia thanked the ISP of ICSU and
natural values of the World Heritage Area have been the IUCN Representative for their constructive
quantified with a high level of scientific certainty and are participation in the mission to the Jabiluka and Ranger
small or negligible for the approved mining and milling Mineral leases in July 2000. In referring to the ISP’s work

118
as a good example of a process of scientific peer review, be implemented at this stage and that an approach
he welcomed the finding of the ISP report, particularly the founded on partnership between all parties concerned
overall finding that risks to natural values were small or is required to ensure the protection of the living
neglegible. He informed the Bureau that discussions cultural values of Kakadu National Park.
between the leader of the ISP of ICSU, the Supervising
Scientist of Australia and IUCN would continue over the 5. Recalled that at the twenty-fourth session of the
coming days to seek agreement on a proposed decision to Bureau in Paris (2000) ICOMOS indicated its
be submitted to the twenty-fourth session of the willingness to “participate in activities leading
Committee. towards resolving cultural heritage issues pertaining to
the management of Kakadu National Park”.
Cultural issues
6. The Bureau requested that the Committee note that the
At its twenty-fourth session in June 2000, the Bureau also State Party is prepared to consider whether a new
requested that all affected parties and the Australian process is required to address any outstanding issues
Government, work to find a constructive solution to relating to cultural values. Any new process would be
addressing the economic, social and cultural expectation of facilitated by the State Party, in consultation with
the people of Kakadu while protecting the full range of Traditional Owners and other domestic stakeholders.
World Heritage values.

On 10 November the State Party informed the Chair of the ii) State of conservation reports of mixed
current status of initiatives to improve the social and properties which the Bureau transmitted to the
economic circumstances of Aboriginal people living in Committee for noting
Kakadu. However, for cultural issues, particularly in
relation to cultural mapping and the development of a Mount Emei and Leshan Giant Buddha (China)
cultural heritage management plan, all parties reported a (see paragraph I.36)
lack of progress and some difficulties in co-operation.
Monitoring missions were carried out by IUCN and
ICOMOS recommended that an independent scientific ICOMOS to evaluate the impact of a monorail linking two
group perform an objective assessment of the cultural summits of Mt. Emei. The construction of the monorail
values of the Jabiluka Mineral Lease and referred to the was noted with concern when IUCN evaluated the site in
possible development of international guidelines 1996. At the time, the relevant authorities announced that
concerning World Heritage and indigenous people. construction had been suspended and the site was
inscribed in December 1996. Subsequently, the Bureau
The Delegate of Australia informed the Bureau that the learnt that the monorail was completed and has been
Australian Government was pleased to begin a new operating since December 1998. IUCN pointed out that the
dialogue with the Traditional Owners and other outcome of the monitoring mission has been positive, as
stakeholders to together consider a process for addressing the monorail has largely followed the existing footpath.
cultural issues at Jabiluka. The majority of members of the The footpath has been closed and vegetation is
Bureau, in welcoming these developments, acknowledged encroaching and there is control over the visitor numbers
that dialogue between the Traditional Owners and the State to Wanfo Summit. The route of the monorail is relatively
Party was crucial if progress could be made towards unobtrusive.
developing a new process to address any outstanding
cultural issues relating to the development of the uranium ICOMOS drew the attention of the Bureau to the proposed
mine and mill at Jabiluka. access walkway to view the Leshan Giant Buddha. The
siting and general appearance of the structures were
The Bureau, acceptable, but ICOMOS recommended that modification
be made relating to the use of materials in conformity with
1. Noted the report of the ISP of ICSU and IUCN on the the proposals of the World Bank expert.
science issues and the new information provided by
the State Party and recommended it be examined by The Bureau, upon examining the findings of the IUCN and
the twenty-fourth session of the Committee. ICOMOS missions, requested the State Party to inform the
site management authorities of the World Heritage
2. Welcomed the fact that discussions are taking place properties in China that major projects of this type should
between the State Party and the Traditional Owners. not be undertaken without prior evaluation of all
environmental impacts, and for the Committee to be
3. Noted the concern of the Traditional Owners that provided with information prior to their implementation.
serious impacts on the living cultural values of The Bureau also requested the State Party to provide more
Kakadu National Park posed by the proposal to mine training opportunities to the staff of the site in (1) tourism
and mill uranium at Jabiluka might still exist. management, including measures to monitor and mitigate
the impact of tourism; and (2) management tools for
4. Considered that the Committee’s previous decision biodiversity protection. The Bureau recommended that the
regarding cultural mapping and the preparation of a report of the IUCN/ICOMOS missions be transmitted to
cultural heritage management plan for Jabiluka cannot the relevant Chinese authorities and requested the State

119
Party, with the support of UNESCO and the advisory in consolidating the institutional structure for the
bodies, to develop a programme of action to ensure management of the site. Furthermore, the Bureau urged the
follow-up to the recommendations of the IUCN/ICOMOS Peruvian authorities to consider and implement all
missions. recommendations made by the UNESCO-IUCN-ICOMOS
mission of October 1999. It also requested the authorities
Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (Peru) to submit a further progress report on the implementation
(see paragraph I.37) of the mission recommendations, particularly the
consolidation of the institutional structure and the
ICOMOS noted that, of the 16 recommendations made by development of the carrying capacity study and the cable
the UNESCO-IUCN-ICOMOS mission of October 1999, car project, by 15 April 2001 for examination by the
only some are referred to in the report received from the World Heritage Bureau at its twenty-fifth session. Upon
Peruvian authorities and others still needed to be approved receipt of this report the Bureau may decide whether a
and/or implemented. The advisory body also observed that further field mission to review progress made would be
it was necessary to undertake the study on the carrying necessary.
capacity of the Sanctuary and the Ciudadela as a basis for
other programmes and projects such as access to the site, The Bureau furthermore expressed serious concern over
tourism use as well as protection of natural and cultural the accident that damaged one of the main monuments at
resources etc. Machu Picchu, the Intihuatana Sundial. It recommended
the Peruvian authorities to review its policy for the use of
IUCN welcomed the progress made concerning the the World Heritage site for commercial purposes. It
establishment of a national co-ordinating Committee and requested the Peruvian authorities to submit a report on the
the management committee of the Historic Sanctuary as accident, the restoration efforts taken and the policy
well as the approved fire prevention plan. IUCN review by 15 April 2001 for examination by the World
recommended encouraging the Government of Japan to Heritage Bureau at its twenty-fifth session.
finance the landslide project and acknowledged the
continuous support of the Government of Finland. IUCN
furthermore noted that the installation of the cable car CULTURAL HERITAGE
while retaining the road access would add to the problem
of visitor numbers which the Peruvian Management Unit III.2 The Bureau examined the state of conservation of
is addressing through a study on the carrying capacity. a total of twenty-eight cultural heritage properties which
IUCN also recalled the monorail that led to the elimination were presented in Working Document WHC-
of ground access at Mt. Emei in China and suggested that 2000/CONF.203/5. The relevant paragraph number is
the Peruvian authorities include such an approach in their indicated below the property name.
planning process.
i) Cultural properties which the Bureau
The Secretariat informed the Bureau about the accident recommended for inscription on the List of
that had occurred on the site during the production of a World Heritage in Danger
beer commercial, when a crane that formed part of the film
team’s equipment, fell on the Intihuatana or stone sundial, Fort and Shalamar Gardens of Lahore (Pakistan)
chipping off a piece of stone. A detailed report reached the (see paragraph I.52)
World Heritage Centre in October 2000, prepared by an
assessment mission to Machu Picchu, which examined the The Bureau recalled the Committee and Bureau’s request
damage as well as initial actions taken in response to the for a reactive monitoring mission to be organized by the
accident. The Centre also informed the Bureau of the Centre and ICOMOS following receipt of information
preparation of a Technical Co-operation request for an concerning the demolition of the 375 year-old hydraulic
international expert in stone restoration. works, an essential monument within the site of the
Shalamar Gardens. The Bureau examined the findings and
Several Bureau members expressed concern and suggested recommendations of the ICOMOS-UNESCO reactive
that guidelines for the use of World Heritage sites should monitoring mission undertaken in October 2000, which
be devised, although there was no agreement concerning a was summarized as below:
site specific or general approach. ICOMOS suggested that
the use of World Heritage sites in general, not only the The 375 year-old hydraulic works of the Shalamar
Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu, should be regulated Gardens
by some form of charter or guidelines to avoid damage in
comparable situations. The Observer of the United The three water tanks forming part of the 375 year-old
Kingdom informed the Bureau of the experience with hydraulic works of the Shalamar Gardens had been
management and use-regulations at Stonehenge. The irretrievably demolished over a period of ten days in June
Chairperson concluded that the issue was of general 1999 by the Metropolitan Corporation of Lahore (MCL) of
concern and that the United Kingdom was in a position to the Provincial Government of Punjab in order to widen the
supply valuable information for other States Parties. Grand Trunk Road located along the southern wall of the
Shalamar Gardens. Two of the three water tanks originally
The Bureau commended the State Party for the actions constructed in brick and mortar were demolished and what
taken to protect the property, especially the advances made remains are parts of its walls at the ground level. The third

120
tank now, considerably reduced in size, stands alone along Awareness of the unique character, historical significance,
the Grand Trunk Road (GT Road) threatened by traffic. and World Heritage values of the Shalamar Gardens
These tanks were linked to the canal “Shah Nahar”, which appeared to be low.
once irrigated the fountains of the Shalamar Gardens.
Threats facing the Shalamar Gardens
The site of the ancient hydraulic works after the
demolition has been used by the MCL as a parking lot for The integrity and authenticity of the 375 year-old
heavy trucks (eastern part), and partially for the sale of hydraulic works of the Shalamar Gardens have been
furniture by a vendor (western part) who has illegally severely damaged by the demolition of the greater part of
occupied the site. the hydraulic works, the Shah Nahar, located on the
opposite side of the Grand Trunk Road.
The mission found that:

 the legal ownership and boundary of the area where The property is threatened by serious and specific danger,
the hydraulic works were located are unclear; and to conserve this site, major operations are necessary.

 the Department of Archaeology and Museums (DoA)
of the Federal Government of Pakistan protested All parts of the site are subject to “ascertained danger” due
several times against the demolition work but to no to serious deterioration of materials, structure, ornamental
avail; features, town-planning coherence, and significant and

 alternative proposals drawn up by the DoA for important loss of historic authenticity and cultural
widening the GT Road were not given due significance.
consideration;

 the DoA was requested by the Commissioner of The site is subject to “potential danger” due to a lack of
Lahore and the Governor of Punjab to propose effective means to implement existing conservation
corrective measures on 14 August 2000. However, at policies for the site in the face of rapid urbanisation of the
the time of the ICOMOS-UNESCO Mission in greater Lahore City and its surrounding areas.
October 2000, the DoA had not yet submitted a
proposal. The State Party should define and implement a “rescue
programme” as soon as possible in order to safeguard the
Perimeter Walls of the Shalamar Gardens remains of the hydraulic works.

Examination of the exterior of the perimeter wall around Legal, political, financial and management measures are
the Shalamar Gardens, the three terraced gardens and the needed to redress the situation. There is no structured co-
Naqqar Khana, the garden to the east, indicated that operation between the federal and local authorities
despite efforts made by the DoA to mobilize resources and concerned. Unchecked growth (human settlements, traffic,
the co-operation of the various authorities concerned, etc) undermine the integrity and authenticity of the site.
restoration and rehabilitation of the historic monuments
and gardens had not progressed. Difficulties in Priority actions recommended by the UNESCO-
implementing the Recommendations of the 1998 ICOMOS ICOMOS Joint Mission
mission that had been adopted by the DoA during a 1999
UNESCO mission, were also noted. Although the 1998 The authorities are urged to undertake conservation of the
ICOMOS mission had been informed that funds had been perimeter wall and of the gates. This will require full co-
made available for restoration activities in the Naqqar operation of the Metropolitan Co-operation of Lahore, and
Khana, there was no evidence that such works had been may require establishment of a sound drainage system near
implemented. the walls to prevent further damage caused by humidity
undercutting the walls.
During the past year, a modern hydraulic system was
installed to supply water to the upper two terraces located The authorities are urged to prioritise for the restoration
at the southern part of the Shalamar Gardens. The natural (not reconstruction) of the pavilions and other historic
stone decorating the eastern and western entrance gates monuments within the Shalamar Gardens.
within the lowest northern terrace were being replaced by
hand-carved stone at the time of the October 2000 The authorities are urged to revitalize the garden layout
Mission. and water works, based upon archaeological research and
scientific analysis of the original layout of the gardens.
Both sides of the perimeter wall have deteriorated (peeling
plaster and flaking mud mortar, advertisements painted on The authorities are urged to establish a co-ordination body
the outside, vandalism, graffiti, illegal construction along with representatives of all stakeholders concerned in the
the walls, damage to the original hand-painted decoration protection and utilisation of the Shalamar Gardens.
on the outside, humidity rising at the base of the wall UNESCO, the World Heritage Committee, ICOMOS,
caused by raising the ground level along the outside walls, ICCROM and other bodies will need to provide financial
aggravated by the construction of paved sidewalks against and technical support in developing a long-term
the wall along the northern and western sides, garbage). management plan to ensure the development and
conservation of this unique site.

121
Conclusion hydraulic works, particularly in view of the Punjab Special
Premises (Preservation) Ordinance, No. XXXIV of 1985
The ICOMOS-UNESCO reactive monitoring mission (The Punjab Gazette, Lahore, Wednesday, Feb. 27, 1985)
recommended that the World Heritage Committee inscribe applicable for this site.
the Shalamar Gardens of Lahore on the List of World
Heritage in Danger, taking into due consideration the state The Bureau underlined that the state of conservation of
of conservation of the site, the ascertained and potential this property illustrates a case where world heritage values
threats, and the positive response from the State Party of a property had been severely damaged due to
concerning the inscription of the site on the List of World insufficient attention given to conservation needs in the
Heritage in Danger during discussions held between the planning and implementation of public works.
Centre and the authorities concerned since 1999.
Historic City of Zabid (Yemen)
Deliberations by the Bureau during its twenty-fourth (see paragraph I.42)
extraordinary session
The Secretariat presented its report, including new
The Secretariat informed the Bureau that consultations information following the mission in October 2000.
between the Representatives of the Government of Following a question raised by the delegate from Hungary
Pakistan, the Director-General of the Department of about the position of the Yemen authorities concerning the
Archaeology and Museums, and the World Heritage State Party’s request to inscribe the Historic City of Zabib
Centre had taken place since 1999 concerning the on the List of World Heritage in Danger, the Secretariat
possibility of nominating the property for inscription on informed the Bureau that an official letter of 17 October
the List of World Heritage in Danger. The Bureau was 2000 had been received requesting the Committee to
informed that representatives of Pakistan to UNESCO and consider an inclusion of the site in the List of World
the DoA indicated that the Government is considering the Heritage in Danger as this would be necessary to safeguard
inscription of the site on the List of World Heritage in the site.
Danger. A formal letter of request that was expected prior
to the twenty-fourth session of the Committee, had not The Bureau decided to transmit the report to the
been received. Committee for examination and to recommend the
Committee to adopt the following:
The Bureau expressed serious concern over the complete
loss of two of the three hydraulic works, and the partial “The Committee notes the request of the Yemeni
demolition of the third hydraulic work. Taking note of the authorities to inscribe the Historic Town of Zabib on the
previous assistance requested by the State Party, and List of World Heritage in Danger and decides to inscribe
recognizing that the property is threatened by serious and the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger. It
specific danger, necessitating major operations to ensure requests the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS to send
the protection of the remains of an essential historic a multidisciplinary team in order to evaluate the situation
monument within the property, the Bureau recommended and take further actions.”
that the Committee examine the state of conservation of
this site at its twenty-fourth session, with a view to ii) State of conservation report of cultural
inscribe the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger, properties which the Bureau transmitted to the
at the request of the State Party. Committee for action

The Bureau recommended that the Committee request the Kathmandu Valley (Nepal)
State Party to define and implement a "rescue programme" (see paragraph I.49)
as soon as possible in order to safeguard the remains of the
former hydraulic works, through consolidation as an The Bureau recalled that the Committee had repeatedly
archaeological relic of the remaining foundations of two expressed concern for this site and deferred inscription on
tanks, by taking measures to prevent further deterioration the List of World Heritage in Danger since 1992.
of what still remains of the third tank with its brick arches, Recognizing the continuing loss of authenticity of the
and by fencing off the site on which these remains are urban fabric of the site, the Committee at its twenty-third
located from the immediate surroundings so that it is no session decided to again defer decision on in-danger listing
longer directly accessible. Parking on the site of the first until the twenty-fourth session. The Committee also
and second tanks should be prohibited as soon as possible, decided to send a High Level Mission in 2000 to ensure
and the Bureau recommends the Committee underline the consultations with representatives of His Majesty’s
equally urgent need to adequately conserve the remains of Government of Nepal to transmit the Committee’s concern
the third tank, currently being used both as a toilet and a and to convince the authorities of the merit of in-danger
garbage disposal area. Considering the extent of listing. This mission took place from 24 to 29 September
destruction and loss of the original materials of the two 2000.
demolished tanks, reconstruction is no longer possible. For
the area around the remains of the hydraulic works, the The Director of the World Heritage Centre reported on the
Bureau recommends that the Committee request the State conclusive findings and final considerations of the High
Party to provide clarification concerning ownership, land Level Mission to Kathmandu Valley World Heritage site,
use and the legal status of the land within 200 feet of these presented in WHC-2000/CONF.203/INF.4. He drew the

122
attention of the Bureau to the state of conservation of the Heritage in Danger against the wish of the State Party
site, much of which had not improved since 1999. The would set a precedent, which could impact upon the work
Bureau was informed of the continuing commitment of of the Convention and the States Parties' common goals to
His Majesty’s Government of Nepal to protect the seven protect world heritage. He informed the Bureau that
Monument Zones composing the site. The Director Australia did not consider that under the Convention the
reported that the authorities had emphasized the Committee was empowered to inscribe a property on the
difficulties in imposing international standards in the List of World Heritage in Danger without the consent of
conservation of privately-owned historic buildings without the State Party concerned and without the request for
substantial subsidy and technical support. assistance by the State Party.

The Director informed the Bureau that no new plans had Discussions ensued on the objectives of the Convention
been put forth by the Nepalese authorities to redress the and international co-operation. The Delegate of Hungary
persistent and continued deterioration of the materials, recognized the challenges in urban heritage protection in
structures, ornamental features, and overall architectural the face of rapid urbanization, change in urban life style
coherence in most Monument Zones. The High Level and economic growth. The use of the Convention as a
Mission was received positively by the representatives of mechanism for mobilising further political commitment
the central and local government authorities including an and international technical co-operation was underscored.
audience with His Majesty the King. The Director
informed the Bureau, however, that the mission was The Delegate of Greece recalled that the Committee had
unable to convince the representatives of His Majesty’s deferred the inscription of the Kathmandu Valley on the
Government of Nepal on the constructive aims of the List of World Heritage in Danger numerous times. She
system of in-danger listing, notably to mobilise the support pointed out the evident difficulty faced by both the
of policy makers at the highest level and international Committee and the State Party in implementing the
donors. Convention to safeguard the site for future generations.
With reference to the debate on the necessity for State
Finally, the Bureau was informed that the High Level Party consent for in-danger listing, she stated that Article
Mission concluded that should no new measures be 11.4 allows the Committee to inscribe a property on the
undertaken, the deterioration of the historic urban fabric List of World Heritage in Danger without the consent of
will persist, irreversibly damaging the vernacular the State Party concerned. Recalling her intervention at the
architecture surrounding the public monuments, and twenty-third session of the Committee, she reminded the
consequently damaging the world heritage values of this Bureau that she had foreseen that the High Level Mission
unique and universally significant site. would not be able to convince the Nepali Government on
the merits of the in-danger listing system. She drew the
The Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee, who Bureau’s attention to the significant loss of historic
led the High Level Mission, thanked the Director of the buildings within Bauddhanath Monument Zone where
World Heritage Centre for his comprehensive presentation. there were approximately 88 historic buildings
The Chairperson stressed that the gravity of the situation surrounding the stupa in 1979, which decreased to 27 in
should not be underestimated and reminded the Bureau 1993, and 15 in 1998. Recalling that the serious state of
that the decision of the Committee whether or not to conservation of this site has been examined at 19 sessions
inscribe this site on the List of World Heritage in Danger of the Committee and Bureau since 1992, the Delegate of
at its twenty-fourth session would reflect upon the Greece stressed the gravity of the situation and the need to
credibility and moral responsibility of the World Heritage ensure the credibility of the UNESCO World Heritage
Convention and its Committee. Convention, its Committee and the World Heritage List.

The Delegate of Finland, who participated in the High The Delegate of Mexico reminded the Bureau that the
Level Mission as both a Vice-President of the Committee seven Monument Zones of the Kathmandu Valley were
as well as the ICOMOS Representative during the mission, nominated and inscribed together as one site in 1979,
underscored the complexity of the site, composed of seven exemplifying the heritage of Nepalese art and culture at its
Monument Zones located in different geographic areas at height. He emphasized the importance of “preventive
considerable distances from each other and in different conservation” in addressing the conservation of historic
conservation conditions. He emphasized that the principal cities to prevent irreversible damages.
cause of concern is the difficulty in conserving the historic
urban fabric, as the public monuments are in generally The Delegate of Zimbabwe reminded the Bureau that the
good condition. The Delegate of Finland recommended conclusive findings of the High Level Mission
that the Committee defer inscription of the site on the List underscored the fact that Kathmandu Valley was in
of World Heritage in Danger, as the inscription of the danger. Regardless of whether or not it was placed on the
entire site could be discouraging for the authorities and the List of World Heritage in Danger, he suggested the
people of Monument Zones. ICOMOS concurred with this possibility of deleting certain parts of the Monument
view. Zones as a means of retaining the credibility of the World
Heritage Convention.
The Delegate of Australia, underlining the importance of
the Committee’s decision, stated that a decision by the In the discussion which followed, the Bureau members
Committee to inscribe the site on the List of World agreed that the Committee would need to define

123
procedures for examining cases such as Kathmandu monitoring all corrective measures by His Majesty’s
Valley, where certain world heritage values or components Government of Nepal, to be reviewed by the Committee
justifying inscription have been irreversibly lost. within the context of the Asia-Pacific Regional Periodic
Reporting exercise in 2002. The Bureau further
The Observer of the United Kingdom noted the recommended that other States Parties be engaged in the
shortcomings of Committee decisions in previous years for conservation and monitoring effort by providing technical
having inscribed properties which lacked adequate and financial assistance to the concerned authorities of His
management and conservation mechanisms, and Majesty’s Government of Nepal. In this regard, the Bureau
underscored the importance of the periodic reporting recommended that the Committee reserve an appropriation
exercise in addressing related problems. within the 2001 International Assistance budget, to finance
specific time-bound activities related to the protection of
The Observer of Nepal expressed his Government’s the urban fabric within the World Heritage site in order to
appreciation for responding favourably to requests for strengthen the State Party’s capacity.
technical and financial assistance which the Committee
and UNESCO have been providing for Kathmandu Valley The Bureau recommended the Committee to consider the
since the 1970’s. He recalled the great pride of the issue of the inscription of properties on the List of World
Nepalese citizens in 1979 when the site was inscribed on Heritage in Danger in a broader context, in order to
the UNESCO World Heritage List, but informed the develop appropriate criteria and process for the Committee
Bureau that they were unaware until 1992 of the world to evaluate situations such as Kathmandu Valley. To this
heritage conservation standards and the errors made. The end, the Bureau welcomed the offer by the Government of
Observer of Nepal stated that Government instability up Morocco to host a meeting on this issue, and recommends
until 1998 had prevented the enforcement of measures to that the Committee decides on a general schedule for the
protect the urban heritage of the site. The Observer meeting and allocate funds for the organisation of this
reiterated the Government’s strong commitment to ensure meeting."
the implementation of the 16 Recommendations of the
1993 Joint Mission, the 55 Recommendations and Time- Taxila (Pakistan)
Bound Action Plan resulting from the 1998 Joint Mission, (see paragraph I.51)
and requested that the Bureau provide the Government of
Nepal sufficient time to redress the situation and defer The Secretariat presented the findings and
decision on in-danger listing until 2004. recommendations of the UNESCO-ICOMOS reactive
monitoring mission to Taxila (1-5 September 2000)
The Chairperson reminded the Bureau that the organised by the Centre and ICOMOS following the
deliberations taking place were repeating discussions held request of the Committee and Bureau. The purpose of the
in Marrakesh during its twenty-third extraordinary session. mission was to examine the state of conservation of the
Noting the importance of elaborating a better process for Bhir Mound archaeological area, where a football stadium
inscribing properties on the List of World Heritage in had been constructed.
Danger, the Chairperson offered to host a meeting in
Morocco to discuss this issue separately in a more The findings and recommendations included the following
comprehensive manner. points:

The Bureau adopted the following recommendation for 1. The mission was convinced that the work on the
transmission to the Committee for examination at its stadium had been stopped and that the demolition of
twenty-fourth session: the walls would soon be commenced. It is
recommended that action be taken to conserve and
“The Bureau examined the findings of the High Level present Bhir Mound site as an important part of the
Mission to Kathmandu Valley which was undertaken Taxila World Heritage site.
between 24 to 29 September 2000, which held
consultations with the Representatives of His Majesty’s 2. Recent excavation of Bhir Mound and removal of
Government of Nepal and was granted an audience with vegetation was observed. Although appreciative of the
His Majesty the King. efforts made by the concerned authorities in
undertaking excavations of Bhir Mound, the
The Bureau, noting the findings of the High Level authorities of Pakistan are urged to place priority on
Mission, expressed its appreciation to the State Party for conservation and presentation of archaeological areas
its continued efforts to enhance the management and already excavated and exposed, rather than engage in
conservation of the Kathmandu Valley World Heritage new excavation exercises. In this context, the
site. The Bureau reiterated its deepest concern for the state authorities are urged to elaborate a comprehensive
of conservation of Kathmandu Valley, where urban management programme for the development and
encroachment and alteration of the historic fabric in most conservation of Taxila as a matter of priority.
of the seven Monument Zones composing the site are
significantly threatening its integrity and authenticity. 3. Illicit excavations did not appear to constitute a major
threat to the site. Nevertheless, the national
The Bureau recommended that the Committee request the programme to prevent illegal excavation and illicit
State Party to produce a new structured framework for trafficking of artefacts should be applied to Taxila.

124
 following the October 2000 ICOMOS-UNESCO reactive
4. Demarcation of the existing boundaries and buffer monitoring mission. The Committee requests the State
zones and the preparation of management and Party to submit a report before 15 September 2000 on the
maintenance programmes for each of the progress made in implementing these recommendations,
archaeological areas composing Taxila is required, not for examination by the Bureau at its twenty-fifth
only to conserve individual monuments, but also to extraordinary session in September 2001. Finally, in order
protect the natural setting and historical evolution of to support the State Party to overcome the difficulties
Taxila in its entirety. faced in regularly monitoring the numerous and physically
dispersed archaeological remains of the Taxila World
5. Impact assessment studies of the heavy industries and Heritage site, the Committee expresses its commitment to
military compounds within the Taxila Valley, which extend its assistance to support the State Party, and
will require substantial efforts on the part of the requests the State Party to consider nominating the site for
authorities concerned, should be carried out. the List of World Heritage in Danger at the twenty-fifth
session of the World Heritage Committee.”
6. Co-operation between planning, development and
cultural heritage protection agencies is encouraged as Auschwitz Concentration Camp (Poland)
a matter of priority. (see paragraph I.63)

7. The authorities may wish to consider proposing the The Secretariat informed the Bureau of the receipt of new
site for inscription on the List of World Heritage in information transmitted by the Under-Secretary of State of
Danger to encourage the mobilisation of financial and Poland, responsible for the implementation of the Strategic
technical assistance. Governmental Programme for Oswiecim, and the
Permanent Delegate of Poland to UNESCO, following the
The Secretariat also presented the information transmitted finalisation of the working document. The information
by the Permanent Delegation of Pakistan to UNESCO on reported concerned the Strategic Governmental
10 November 2000, which provided updated information Programme for Oswiecim, a proposal to build a "visitor
concerning actions taken by the Government. According to centre" at the entrance of the national Auschwitz-Birkenau
this updated information, Museum and a discotheque in the vicinity of the site.

(a) ownership of Bhir Mound site has been restored In his letter, the Under-Secretary of State specified that the
to the Department of Archaeology and Museums Polish Government gives great importance to the Strategic
and the structures of the sports stadium are to be Governmental Programme for Oswiecim, and further
dismantled in November 2000; indicates that the Programme’s first phase will end in 2001
and its second phase is planned for 2002 -2007. He
(b) excavation on Bhir Mound is continuing, expressed regret concerning the delay of the work assigned
supported by additional funding from the to the International Group of Experts, as so far there has
National Fund for Cultural Heritage; been no meeting in 2000. He further reported that the
Government planned to integrate this group of
(c) heavy industries have not had any adverse effect international experts within the structure of the
so far on the Taxila World Heritage areas; International Council for Auschwitz.

(d) Custom Authorities are taking strict measures to In his letter, the Under-Secretary of State also informed the
prevent illegal trafficking of artefacts from the Secretariat about modifications to the construction plan
Taxila areas. (which initially included a shopping mall). This was
revised to consist of a service centre including a restaurant,
The Bureau recommended the following decision for a car park, bookshops for publications on the history of the
adoption by the Committee: Museum, a flower shop and rest-rooms. This proposal is
being studied by the Polish Government and local
“The Committee takes note of the Reports submitted by authorities.
the State Party, ICOMOS and the World Heritage Centre
concerning the state of conservation of the Taxila World Concerning the discotheque, the Under-Secretary of State
Heritage site. The Committee expresses its appreciation to stressed that, contrary to previous information submitted,
the authorities of Pakistan for taking the necessary the building in which the discotheque is situated, is 2
measures to mitigate the threats caused by the construction kilometres distance from the site; it is a building
of the sports stadium on the Bhir Mound within Taxila. constructed after the Second World War, replacing a
The Committee expresses its appreciation for the efforts tannery used for slave labour during the War. He
made by the State Party to strictly control illicit trafficking underlined the importance that the Polish Governement
of sculptures from Buddhist archaeological remains gives to this matter and further stated his Government’s
illegally excavated, but nevertheless reiterates its request will to find solutions within the limits of the law. The
to the State Party to continue strengthening the protection Under-Secretary of State mentioned the possibility of
of unexcavated areas in Taxila from illegal looters. The establishing an inventory of monuments and locations
Committee requests the Government of Pakistan to within the World Heritage area that could be placed under
implement the Recommendations formulated by ICOMOS special protection.

125
 Concerning the construction projects within the zones
Finally, the Under-Secretary of State recalled that should related physically or symbolically to the Concentration
the Bureau request additional information relating to the Camp, the Committee requests the State Party to avoid any
Strategic Governmental Programme for Oswiecim, a action that could compromise reaching consensus between
summary of the annual reports prepared by the division the authorities, institutions and organizations involved and
responsible for this Programme could be submitted to the to ensure that the sacred nature of the site and its
twenty-fifth session of the Bureau for examination. environment are preserved giving special attention to their
integrity.
A representative of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre was
given the floor as observer on this subject. He underlined The Committee reiterates its request to the State Party,
the fact that the opening of the discotheque in the vicinity previously made during its twenty-fourth session to submit
of the site was contrary to the spirit of the site itself, as a a progress report on the implementation of the Strategic
place of memory, and that all efforts should be undertaken Governmental Programme for Oswiecim, and requests the
to maintain the site’s World Heritage values. He urged the State Party to submit this detailed report by 15 April 2001,
Bureau to ask the Committee to take appropriate action by at the latest, for examination by the twenty-fifth session of
studying a list prepared by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre of the Bureau.
twenty-one monuments and locations within a buffer zone
around the site. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Secretariat to
maintain close contacts with the State Party and other
In light of the information provided, ICOMOS expressed parties involved in order to support planning actions and
its concern on this issue, and stressed the need to establish the process for establishing a consensus as indicated in the
a buffer zone, which had not been foreseen at the time of decision adopted by the Committee at its twenty-third
the site’s inscription in 1979. ICOMOS further session.
emphasized the need to impose a system, designed to
control development within the buffer zone, once In conclusion, the Committee reiterates the need for the
identified. establishment of a buffer zone to be created around the
site, as well as a plan for the implementation of
The Delegate of Zimbabwe underlined the necessity to development control mechanisms within this newly
identify a new perimeter of the site, and that it would be identified area. It urges the Polish authorities to pay
useful to ask ICOMOS to undertake a site mission and particular attention to this matter and to submit a report on
present its conclusions to the twenty-fifth session of the the progress made in the identification of a buffer zone and
Bureau. control mechanism for examination by the twenty-fifth
session of the Bureau."
The Delegate of Greece supported the proposal formulated
by ICOMOS to establish a buffer zone and control and use
of the buildings. (iii) State of conservation reports of cultural
properties which the Bureau transmitted to the
The Delegate of Finland recalled that the issues at stake Committee for noting
were strongly linked to moral values and supported the
proposals made by the other delegations. Brasilia (Brazil)
(see paragraph I.56.)
The Bureau agreed to recommend the following to the
Committee : ICOMOS emphasized the need for a mission to investigate
reports on the threats to the environment of the site. In
"The Committee takes note of the information provided by response, the Observer of Brazil stated that even though
the Secretariat and by the Under-Secretary of State of there was increased demographic pressure, construction
Poland, responsible for the implementation of the Strategic activity concentrated on areas outside the main urban
Governmental Programme for Oswiecim . design, did not threaten the integrity of the World Heritage
site.
The Committee recalls that, at its twenty-third session
(Kyoto, 1998), it confirmed its support for the principles The Bureau noted with concern the reported threats to the
laid out in the Declaration of March 1997; this process site. The Bureau requested the State Party to provide a
should continue in a consensual manner among all parties report on the issues raised above by 15 April 2001 to be
involved. It expressed the belief that no steps should be examined at the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau, and
taken unless consensus had been reached. furthermore requested an ICOMOS/UNESCO mission to
examine the state of conservation of Brasilia.
The Committee expresses its concern regarding the delay
in implementing the Strategic Governmental Programme Peking Man Site at Zhoukoudian (China)
for Oswiecim and the work of the international group of (see paragraph I.44)
experts. It urges the Polish authorities to address these
issues without further delay. ICOMOS presented the findings of its study concerning
the six fossil hominid sites inscribed on the World
Heritage List, undertaken at the request of the Committee.

126
It noted that there was some inconsistency in the criteria Authorities launch the next phase in the Islamic Cairo
applied in some cases. In 1999, a ICOMOS - ICCROM Project, being the conservation of Shareh Al Mouizz area,
Joint Mission had recommended that cultural criterion (iv) initiated by a seminar on the approach and actions to be
be removed. After closely studying the criteria applied for taken and to be held in Cairo in the beginning of 2001.
all six fossil hominid sites inscribed on the World Heritage
List, ICOMOS did not support the proposal of the Joint The Bureau supported the holding of a seminar in Cairo as
Mission, recommending that the two criteria currently the start of the next phase for Islamic Cairo, together with
applied be retained. an expert and high-level mission to Cairo, including the
Director of the World Heritage Centre, in order to review
The World Heritage Centre informed the Bureau that the the project and discuss follow-up actions for the year
Government of China had expressed its agreement to the 2001.
final recommendation made by ICOMOS to retain the two
cultural criteria currently applied for the Peking Man Site ICOMOS expressed concerns in relation to the Al Azhar
at Zhoukoudian. The Bureau decided not to change the Mosque, in particular the impacts of traffic and the need to
criteria currently applied to the Peking Man Site of monitor the structural condition of the Mosque. He also
Zhoukoudian. raised the important issue of the appropriateness of
modern intervention techniques that conflict with
The Bureau requested the Secretariat and ICOMOS to principles of conservation. Furthermore, ICOMOS is well
make the comparative thematic study undertaken by aware of the sensitive and delicate issue of potential
ICOMOS available to States Parties to contribute to conflicts between spiritual requirements and the protection
enhancing understanding of similar sites. of religious monuments. Special care should be taken
when evaluating the restoration of monuments that still are
The Bureau, recognising the need to review the criteria in religious use.
justifying the inscription of a number of properties
inscribed on the World Heritage List, underscored the The Chairperson endorsed the ICOMOS concerns.
importance and usefulness of the Periodic Reporting
Exercise as a mechanism for re-examining the application Roman Monuments, Cathedral St. Peter and
of natural or cultural criteria applied to sites. The Bureau Liebfrauen-Church in Trier (Germany)
agreed that the 6-year cycle exercise would provide the (see paragraph I.59)
opportunity for revising inscription criteria, removing
anomalies and ensuring greater consistency. The Secretariat informed the Bureau that it had received
some comments from ICOMOS on the report transmitted
The Potala Palace, Lhasa (China) by the German authorities. These comments stressed that,
(see paragraph I.45) contrary to the opinion expressed by the State Party in its
report, the safeguarding of the remains of the water system
The Bureau took note of the information provided by the to the north of the amphitheatre, is a central issue and that
Government of the People’s Republic of China, ICOMOS every effort should be made to conserve it for further
and the Secretariat, and requested the State Party for scholarly study and presentation to the general public.
clarifications regarding the buffer and construction- ICOMOS underlined the need for an adequate and
restricted zones of the site. comprehensive long-term planning system for Trier.

The Bureau noted with appreciation, the explanation The Bureau expressed the view that the Roman City wall
provided by the State Party on the established procedures and the Roman water system discovered to the north of the
for the approval of international co-operation activities for Roman amphitheatre in Trier, represents exceptional facets
cultural heritage, and the offer by the State Administration of Roman town planning that are not well represented
for Cultural Heritage to assist international expert groups north of the Alps. The Bureau requested the German
interested in working in Lhasa. authorities to formulate and implement without delay
planning regulations that will ensure the long-term
The Bureau requested the Secretariat and ICOMOS to preservation of the archeological remains in this area.
undertake a mission and to report on the situation to the
twenty-fifth session of the Bureau in June 2001. Palaces and Parks of Postdam and Berlin (Germany)
(see paragraph I.60)
Islamic Cairo (Egypt)
(see paragraph I.38) ICOMOS informed the Bureau that the report provided by
the State Party did not fully answer all the questions
The Secretariat presented the report on Islamic Cairo, regarding the site. In particular, the Havel project
including the recommendations of the July 2000 ICOMOS (German Unity project 17) seriously jeopardized the
mission to report on the state of conservation of the Al- World Heritage values of the site.
Azhar Mosque.
The Observer of the United Kingdom asked whether
The Bureau thanked the Egyptian Government for their ICOMOS was requesting further information from the
ongoing financial support in the preservation of Islamic German authorities regarding this issue. ICOMOS
Cairo. For 2001, the Bureau recommended the Egyptian clarified that this would enable it to present a thorough

127
report to the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau. To therefore recommended the Committee agree that the
accomplish this, close contact between the ICOMOS Bureau examine the findings of the ICOMOS expert
expert and the German authorities should be maintained. reactive monitoring mission at its twenty-fifth session in
June 2001.
The Bureau noted the comments made by ICOMOS on the
report transmitted by the State Party and that this issue will Sun Temple of Konarak (India)
be further examined by the Bureau at its twenty-fifth (see paragraph I.47)
session.
The Bureau recalled that it had examined the findings and
Classical Weimar (Germany) recommendations of the ICOMOS reactive monitoring
(see paragraph I. 61) mission at its twenty-fourth session. In order to mitigate
potential threats caused by illegal encroachment and ad-
The Bureau noted that ICOMOS expressed its concerns hoc construction in areas surrounding the site, the Bureau
regarding the planned road, as it may have an adverse had requested the authorities concerned to prepare urgently
impact on the values of the site. a Comprehensive Development Plan and requested the
Secretariat to assist the State Party in mobilising
The Bureau requested the German authorities to submit a international technical expertise and co-operation as
report on the possible impact of the construction of a road required.
close to the Castle of Tiefurth, which forms part of the
World Heritage site Classical Weimar, before 15 April The Secretariat informed the Bureau that the Government
2001 in order that it may be examined by the Bureau at its of India had not submitted its report on the progress made
twenty-fifth session. Furthermore, the Bureau requested in preparing this Plan. However, a report on soil
the Secretariat, in cooperation with ICOMOS, to identify investigation, geo-radar studies, sampling and testing of
an independent expert to undertake a thorough analysis of stones of the Sun Temple of Konarak had been received by
this matter. the Secretariat in November 2000. This report had been
carried out by the Central Building Research Institute in
Hortobágy National Park (Hungary) September 1999 utilizing US$ 27,000 of the US$ 39,000
(see paragraph I.62) allocated in 1997 as Emergency Assistance for carrying
out a thorough structural survey of the Sun Temple of
ICOMOS informed the Bureau that consultations with the Konarak.
State Party had taken place and reassured the Bureau that
the accident had had a negative impact on the natural According to the investigations, the ground level profiles
values, but no impact on the cultural values of the site. indicate no spread of the foundations of the Sun Temple.
The lateral movement of the subsurface in the unconfined
The Delegate of Hungary thanked the Bureau for the areas appears to be due to the structural load, but dating to
recommendation proposed and reassured trhe Bureau that previous years. The report found that the soil underneath
the Government will do its best to remove any danger to the Temple has already settled and no further settlement is
the area and expressed his hope that a similar accident expected.
never will occur. He recalled that the Bureau requested a
report from the Romanian authorities on prevention The Bureau expressed its appreciation to the Indian
mesures which was discussed in relation to the natural site authorities for carrying out the soil and stone analysis of
of the Danube Delta. the Sun Temple of Konarak site. The Bureau, informed
that the structures are stable, thanked the authorities for
The Bureau commended the efforts of the State Party for their efforts to preserve and present the Sun Temple.
establishing a monitoring programme and many other
organisations for their actions taken in response to this Following the ICOMOS monitoring mission to the site
environmental disaster. The Bureau encouraged the State undertaken in February 2000, the Bureau reiterated its
Party to provide reports on the results from this request made at its twenty-fourth session to the State Party
programme and give priority to the implementation of a to urgently prepare a Comprehensive Management Plan to
restoration programme. The Bureau requested the State mitigate potential threats caused by illegal encroachment
Party to provide a report on the monitoring programme, its and ad-hoc construction in the areas surrounding the site,
action plan and the state of conservation by 15 April 2001. and requested the Secretariat to assist the State Party in
mobilising international technical expertise and co-
Khajuraho Groups of Monuments (India) operation as required and appropriate. The Bureau
(see paragraph I.46) requested the State Party to report on the progress made in
developing the Plan and on the measures taken in favour
The Bureau recalled that, following the information of the conservation and development of this site for
received from ICOMOS and ICCROM international examination by the Bureau at the twenty-fifth
experts concerning illegal encroachment within the site, extraordinary session in November 2001.
the World Heritage Centre requested ICOMOS to organise
a reactive monitoring mission. The Bureau was informed
that the mission of the ICOMOS expert was postponed and
was expected to take place in early 2001. The Bureau

128
Petra (Jordan) The Bureau reiterated its request for ICOMOS to carry out
(see paragraph I.39) a mission to examine the state of conservation of the
archaeological mound and the presentation of the Byblos
The Secretariat presented its report on Petra, including the World Heritage site.
conclusions of the report of the ICOMOS mission in
September 2000. The ICOMOS Representative explained that the reason
why a mission had not taken place earlier, as was indicated
The Bureau, having examined the ICOMOS report, in the Secretariat’s report, was to avoid duplication with
thanked the Jordanian authorities for their efforts and the preparation of periodic reporting and the concurrent
strongly recommended them to take a high-level decision UNESCO mission. He informed the Bureau that a mission
in order to prepare and implement a management plan and was to take place in January 2001.
to support all the actions stated in the report.
Ksar Aït Ben Haddou (Morocco)
Town of Luang Prabang (Laos) (see paragraph I.41)
(see paragraph I.48)
Following the presentation by the Secretariat, the
The Bureau was informed that ICOMOS has identified an Chairperson spoke on behalf of Morocco, and confirmed
expert in hydro-engineering and soil mechanics to that the mission had taken place at the request of the
undertake a mission to evaluate the design and technical Moroccan authorities. The mission included an expert with
specifications of the riverbank consolidation project so long-standing experience in Morocco, and particularly in
that this Asian Development Bank-financed public works earthen architecture.
can resume after five months halt following the concerns
expressed by the Bureau at its twenty-fourth session in The Chairperson presented a brief overview of the
June-July 2000. The Secretariat also informed the Bureau complex situation at this site, and explained the difficulty
that the Japan International Co-operation Agency (JICA) for the Government to intervene in a situation where most
is considering approval of a request from the Government of the buildings are privately owned. In spite of this, the
of Laos to finance construction of a bridge over the Government has made the necessary contacts and decided
Mekong River within the World Heritage protected area. to implement the recommendations presented by the
The Bureau was informed that the State Party has been mission. The Chairperson expressed his appreciation of the
requested to make available the technical specifications of work undertaken by the expert.
the bridge for review by the Committee.
Based on new information and the presentation by the
Having examined the report of the Secretariat, the Bureau Chairperson, the Bureau congratulated the Moroccan
expressed appreciation to the State Party and the Asian authorities for the measures taken to implement the
Development Bank for halting the planned works on the recommendations of the expert report, and welcomed their
riverbank consolidation and the quay to take into proposal to conduct an evaluation of the activities by mid-
consideration the outcome of the ICOMOS reactive 2001 and to report on progress at the Bureau and the
monitoring mission. The Bureau noted with interest the Committee at its meeting in November-December 2001.
report by the Secretariat on its cooperation with the
Agence Francaise de developpement (AFD) to establish a The Chairperson made it clear that, during 2001, the
system of subsidies and soft loans to be offered to owners Moroccan authorities will do their utmost to implement the
of historic buildings located within the World Heritage mission’s recommendations. He also gave the assurance
protected area through a “Fund for Conservation Aid to that, should the proposed actions not be achieved, the
the Local Population” and requested to be kept informed Moroccan authorities will submit a request for inclusion of
of developments. The Bureau requested the State Party to the site on the List of World Heritage in Danger.
prepare, with support from the Secretariat, a full report for
the twenty-fifth extraordinary session of the Bureau on The Delegate of Australia commended the Moroccan
the national heritage protection laws and regulations, as authorities for their commitment, and stated that the State
well as information on all on-going national and Party’s approach was positive and would conserve its
international conservation and development projects proper role in the spirit of the Convention.
related to Luang Prabang. The Bureau also requested the
State Party to ensure protection of the urban wetlands and The Delegate of Greece commended the Moroccan
the traditional village form and vernacular architecture, authorities for their efforts, and for considering danger
which are as important as the historic monuments to the listing. She stated that danger listing is an effective tool for
integrity of the site. the protection of sites.

Byblos (Lebanon) Island of Mozambique (Mozambique)

(see paragraph I.40) (see paragraph I.43)

The Bureau supported the March 2001 follow-up meeting The Secretariat presented its report, including the
in Byblos and the establishment of the Task Force for a recommendations of the ICOMOS mission in October
Management and Master Plan for Byblos. 2000.

129
The Bureau recommended the authorities of Mozambique Lumbini, the Birthplace of the Lord Buddha (Nepal)
give the most urgent priority to the legal protection of the (see paragraph I.50)
site, and to the appointment of a site manager and the
preparation of a conservation plan that would involve the The Bureau was informed by the World Heritage Centre
local population. The plan should be based on a that the International Technical Meeting to discuss
rehabilitation and participation approach, including a alternative conceptual designs to rehabilitate the Maya
comprehensive social and economic programme for the Devi Temple was scheduled to take place in March 2001.
Island. Noting that the Maya Devi Temple was both a fragile
archaeological site and a living site of great religious
The programme should: importance and a major destination of Buddhist pilgrims,
i) allow the local people to be economically the Bureau requested the findings of this International
productive; Technical Meeting to be reported to its twenty-fifth
ii) improve the infrastructure and stimulate the session. In the meantime, the Bureau requested the
economic base of the Island to combine authorities to continue implementing the recommendations
conservation and development; made by the Bureau at its twenty-fourth session, and to
iii) determine a specific conservation policy to report to its twenty-fifth session in June 2001 on any
include the recuperation of the buildings which further measures taken to enhance the management and
have potential, such as: conservation of the site.
•= those that could characterise the Island
•= those reflecting the past with integrity Fortifications on the Caribbean side of Panama:
•= those belonging to the Government Portobelo – San Lorenzo (Panama)
•= those which could serve as adequate lodging (see paragraph I.57)
for the inhabitants of the Island;
•= those which could serve for ICOMOS stated that the information concerning the lack
visitation/tourism/research/training/cultural of management and the precarious state of conservation of
activities the site had been received from two distinguished
ICOMOS members. The advisory body’s representative
The ICOMOS Representative reaffirmed the need for also mentioned that, upon receipt of the report that the
action and added that none of the recommendations of an Secretariat had requested the State Party to submit, the
earlier report from 1995 had been implemented. Bureau may decide whether a field mission to review the
Inscription of the site on the List of World Heritage in situation on the site would be necessary.
Danger might be the most appropriate course of action.
The Bureau noted with concern the reported threats to the
The Delegate of Zimbabwe emphasised the need for a site. The Bureau requested the State Party to provide a
more systematic approach to linkages between the report on the state of conservation by 15 April 2001 to be
Minister of Culture and the agencies responsible for examined at the twenty-fifth session of the Bureau.
cultural heritage management. He also requested that the
ICOMOS report be viewed by the Mozambique Minister Archaeological Site of Chavín (Peru)
of Culture, so that appropriate action could proceed. He (See paragraph I.58)
added that ICOMOS should be an active player in the
process of raising local capacity. The Bureau commended the State Party for its efforts to
ensure the conservation of the site but emphasised the
The Delegate of Greece questioned the inscription of this importance of a Master Plan for well co-ordinated short
site on the World Heritage List, as there seemed to be a and long-term actions to be taken. The Bureau furthermore
lack of legal instrument for the protection of the site, and encouraged the State Party authorities to collaborate with
questioned ICOMOS on whether this had been taken into the Centre and other interested partners in the endeavour to
account in their evaluation. generate the necessary funds for safeguarding of the site.
The Bureau requested the Peruvian authorities to submit a
The ICOMOS Representative explained that evaluation report on the progress made by 15 April 2001 for
missions were not always sent to sites before 1993 and that examination by the World Heritage Bureau at its twenty-
this site had been inscribed in 1991. fifth session.

The Secretariat further clarified the point, recalling the Rice Terraces of the Philippine Cordilleras
important work undertaken under a joint UNDP/UNESCO (Philippines)
project that included the drafting of legal protection. (see paragraph I.53)
However, the draft plans have not been implemented.
Given the socio-economic situation of Mozambique, it was The Bureau examined the report on the state of
of critical importance to take practical measures in order to conservation presented in the Working Document. The
rectify the situation. Bureau underscored the information provided by the
Secretariat that the Ifugao Rice Terraces are extremely
fragile, where human land-use has been in balance with
this mountainous environment for centuries. The Bureau
recalled that this was the most prominent justification to

130
inscribe the Ifugao Rice Terraces as World Heritage in Baroque Churches of the Philippines (Philippines)
1995. There is a continuous and essential shift in the (see paragraph I.54)
relationship between human land- use and the
environment, and the Bureau underlined the need to The World Heritage Centre and the Representative of
continuously monitor the socio-economic and physical ICOMOS presented to the Bureau the findings of the
changes within this cultural landscape. Although a valid ICOMOS reactive monitoring missions to the San Agustin
GIS system is an important tool to achieve, such Church in Paoay and San Agustin Church in Intramuros
monitoring, as previously discussed by the Committee, the Manila. The Bureau noted that this ICOMOS Mission to
Bureau recognized that the problems are complex and a the Paoay San Agustin Church formulated an 8-point
GIS database alone may not be sufficient. The Bureau Recommendation concerning the following issues:
noted that a comprehensive management plan for the site
had not yet been elaborated, in spite of the Committee’s 1) General conservation;
request in 1995 at the time of the site’s inscription on the 2) Monitoring of movement of the cracks in the
World Heritage List. Recognizing the challenges in main façade;
specifying and implementing a management plan for a 3) Further surveys needed for the structural stability;
complex cultural landscape inhabited and owned by a large 4) Evaluation of the cause of the cracks and the
population, the Bureau was convinced that such a deformation of the façade;
comprehensive management plan was essential, as in other 5) Structural safety evaluation in the present
comparable cases such as Lake Baikal in the Russian conditions;
Federation. 6) Structural analyses for designing the seismic
intervention;
The Bureau, noting the concern expressed by the 7) Materials for structural intervention;
Secretariat regarding the sustainability of the on-going GIS 8) Recommendation for use of a flow-chart for the
project and consequently of the management of the site as structural preservation of the Paoay Church;
a whole, requested the Centre to urgently organize a
reactive monitoring mission to the site together with The Bureau also examined the findings and
ICOMOS and IUCN, to discuss the following issues with recommendations of the ICOMOS Mission to the San
the authorities of the Philippines: Agustin Church of Intramuros Manila, which concluded
that

 elaboration of measures to overcome
difficulties in activating the GIS system, 1. It is essential that the community of the Augustinian

 evaluation and provision of technical advice Order should stay in its original home.
concerning the type and quality of data to be
gathered and utilized to enable the full 2. The original layout or "footprint" of the Monastery is
protection and sustainable development of distinct and consists of two courtyards meeting along
the site, and the diagonal axis of the site. The location of the

 definition of the aims and scope of the courtyards on the diagonal axis may have been for
permanent agency to manage and conserve reasons of cross-ventilation. It allows a wider visual
the Philippines Cordilleras, currently under entry to the Church. The adjacent garden may have
consideration by the national authorities. acted as a parking place for some of the transport
systems used in the past; this would have freed the
Recalling the allocation of considerable funds for mapping narrow street and restricted the junction for other road
the Ifugao Rice Terraces by the Committee in 1998, the users.
Bureau expressed its commitment to extend its assistance
to support the State Party to overcome the difficulties 3. Before any further interventions for developing the
faced in sustainably managing the fragile cultural site are decided upon, the following studies should be
resources of this property. The Bureau encouraged the undertaken:
national authorities to give priority to the creation of a
permanently staffed agency responsible for the
formulation of a master plan for the site,
implementation of the site’s conservation, preservation and addressing the uses of existing buildings in
development programmes, including the GIS mapping of relation to future development needs, land-use
the site, as well as its heritage resources. The Bureau studies, and proposals for the ideal development
requested the State Party to report, through the Secretariat of the site;
by 1 September 2001 on the progress made with regard to
a detailed engineering study of the site;
the Above and to report to the twenty-fifth extraordinary
a detailed archaeological survey of the site.
session. Finally, the Bureau reiterated the request of the
Committee to the State Party to submit the tourism The Bureau examined the findings and recommendations
development plan and management plan for the site. of the ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring Missions to the
Paoay Church of San Agustin and the Intramuros Manila
Church of San Agustin. The Bureau requested the State
Party to examine the possibility of adopting and
implementing the ICOMOS mission recommendations,
and requested the State Party to report to the Bureau at its

131
twenty-fifth extraordinary session in November 2001 on from 13-18 November 2000. The terms of reference of this
the progress made and measures taken. mission to review progress in the preparation of the
conservation plan of Istanbul, was extended to gathering
The Bureau requested the Secretariat and ICOMOS to information and making an initial assessment on the
make the comparative thematic study undertaken by impact on the World Heritage values of Istanbul caused by
ICOMOS to be made available to States Parties interested the on-going construction of the Istanbul subway. The
in the subject, as it would contribute in enhancing Bureau was informed that the State Party transmitted, by
understanding of similar sites. letter dated 16 November 2000, a map indicating the route
of the planned subway with the location of stations, as well
The Bureau, recognising the need to review the criteria as an assessment containing technical details on the impact
justifying the inscription of a number of properties on the Historic Peninsula of Istanbul.
inscribed on the World Heritage List, underscored the The Bureau, upon examining the report of the Secretariat,
importance and usefulness of the Periodic Reporting expressed concern over the delay in the completion of the
Exercise as a mechanism for re-examining the application Conservation Plan by the Greater Istanbul Authority and
of natural or cultural criteria applied to sites. The Bureau the detailed conservation plan by the Fatih and Eminonu
agreed that the 6-year cycle Exercise would provide the Municipalities. Regarding the Istanbul subway, the Bureau
opportunity for revising inscription criteria, removing noted the information provided by the State Party by letter
anomalies and ensuring greater consistency. dated 16 November 2000, stating that:

Cultural Landscape of Sintra (Portugal) •= the route of the Istanbul subway and the Strait
(see paragraph I.64) Railway Tube Tunnel for the city of Istanbul was
approved by the Ministry of Culture;
The Secretariat informed the Bureau that the joint
mission IUCN/ICOMOS took place from 30 October to 3 •= the Council has continued to assess the
November 2000. ICOMOS stressed that during the implementation of the projects, the urban design of the
original evaluation mission assurances had been given by stations and bridge to be built on the Golden Horn;
the State Party regarding the implementation of
management and conservation programmes. However, •= all excavations of the station areas are carried out
little if any progress had been made in the intervening under the control of the Istanbul Archaeology
period. These points were raised in the report of the Museum Directorate.
mission and will be dealt with in the coming years. The
advisory bodies had made a number of proposals to the •= inspection of the cracks on the building of the
local authorities and would continue to maintain contact. guardian in the premises of the French General
Consulate in Istanbul led the Council to conclude that
The Bureau encouraged the Portuguese authorities to the damage was not due to design but due to its
undertake a restoration programme and to improve the implementation. The Council, by decision No. 118-78
management of the cultural landscape of Sintra during the of 7 June 2000, subsequently decided to issue a
next six years. This includes the restoration of individual warning to the Greater Istanbul Authorities.
monuments, gardens, parks and forests. It recommended
they develop a concept of dynamic conservation, to set up The Bureau expressed regret that the State Party did not
a programme of education and public awareness raising inform the Committee of this major public work at its
and to ensure the integrity of the buffer zone and avoid planning phase, in conformity with paragraph 56 of the
undertaking new works. Furthermore, the Bureau Operational Guidelines, and requested the Secretariat and
requested the State Party to provide a management plan for ICOMOS: to study the technical information made
the site by the end of 2001. Following the joint IUCN- available by the State Party; undertake a mission to assess
ICOMOS mission, four practical steps are requested : the impact of the subway construction on the World
Heritage values of the site, and report to the twenty-fifth
1. Creation of an independent Cultural Landscape session of the Bureau in June 2001. For matters requiring
Advisory Committee urgent attention, the Chairperson of the Committee should
2. Creation of an advisory body/association of be alerted for instructions.
residents
3. The establishment of a public information, research Complex of the Hue Monuments (Vietnam)
and archives centre (see paragraph I.55)
4. An adjustment of the high protection area of the
Natural Park to coincide with the core area of the The Bureau noted with interest the work underway in
World Heritage site. establishing the Housing Improvement Loan and subsidy
scheme in co-operation with the Caisse des Depots et
Historic Areas of Istanbul (Turkey) Consignation (CDC) within the framework of the Hue-
(see paragraph I.65) Lille Metropole Programme (France), and requested the
State Party to keep the Bureau informed of developments
The Secretariat indicated that it received on 22 November in this regard.
2000, a report on the mission to Istanbul and Ankara by
Messrs Stephane Yerasimos and Pierre Pinon undertaken

132
The Bureau, with regard to the emergency rehabilitation
needs, requested the Secretariat to support the efforts of
the State Party in seeking international assistance.
Concerning the inscription of the site on the List of World
Heritage in Danger, the Bureau requested the State Party to
consider this as a means to promote international solidarity
to meet the rehabilitation needs caused by the floods of
November-December 1999.

(iv) Reports on the state of conservation of

properties inscribed on the World Heritage
List, which the Bureau noted:

Historic Centre of the City of Salzburg (Austria)

Colonial City of Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic)
Amiens Cathedral (France)
Palace and Park of Fontainebleau (France)
Historic Centre of Puebla (Mexico)
Earliest 16th-Century Monasteries on the slopes of
Popocatepetl (Mexico)
Historic City of Meknes (Morocco)

The Observer of Germany raised the question of reports

which were requested by the Committee at previous
sessions and for which no information was brought back to
the Committee, such as in the case of Pompei (Italy)
discussed at the twenty-first session of the Committee. The
Observer of Italy confirmed that the requested reports were
submitted. The Chairperson expressed his appreciation for
the clarification.

133
 ANNEX XI

KAKADU WORLD HERITAGE SITE

PRESENTATION IN CAIRNS to the WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Wednesday 29 November 2000
By Professor Brian Wilkinson ICSU Independent Science Panel [ISP]

Chairman, Ladies & Gentlemen

SLIDE 3
Thank you for the opportunity to make this presentation,
on behalf of the ICSU ISP, of the ISP’s Final Report October 1998 WHC concern over natural &
[WHC-2000/CONF.204/INF 20]. The members of the ISP cultural values of Kakadu in
who prepared the Final Report are: relation to Jabiluka

SLIDE 1 April 1999 Australia’s Supervising

Scientist’s Report to WHC
Professor Jane Plant (Assistant Director, British
Geological Survey) May 1999 ICSU Independent Science Panel
Professor roger Green (University of Western Ontario) Report to WHC
Dr Ben Klink (British Geological Survey) -- Scientific uncertainties
Dr John Rodda (President, International Association of -- 17 recommendations
Hydrological Sciences)
Professor Brian Wilkinson (Formerly, Director Centre July 1999 WHC – continuing scientific
for Ecology and Hydrology, UK) reservations
Representative of IUCN – Professor Pierre Horwitz ISP, IUCN and SS to attempt to
(Director, Centre for Ecosystem Management, Edith resolve
Cowan University, Western Australia)
July 2000 ISP, IUCN site visit
SLIDE 2
December 2000 ISP, ICUN present final reports
Terms of Reference of the ISP
The site visit by ISP and IUCN in July 2000 to Kakadu
WHC [July 1999] and Jabiluka was particularly important. Additional
“ … continues to have significant reservations … information was provided in papers, reports and through
relating to mining and milling at Jabiluka” [JMA] extensive discussions which gave the ISP a much more
detailed insight than formerly into the scientific and other
“ICSU to continue the work of the ISP issues associated with the approved proposal for the JMA
… to assess, in co-operation with the Supervising and its potential to impact on the biology, ecology,
Scientist and the World Conservation Union [IUCN], hydrology etc of the Kakadu World Heritage Site.
the Supervising Scientist’s Response to the ISP
Report” Turning now to the Recommendations which appear in the
ISP’s Final Report – The Australian government has
IMPORTANT TO NOTE responded to each of these. The ISP found some of these
responses satisfactory and some unsatisfactory. This was
the ISP assessment made only in relation to the brought to the attention of the Bureau last week. It
APPROVED proposals for JMA requested the ISP to work with the Australian Supervising
ISP findings DO NOT necessarily relate to any Scientist and IUCN to attempt to resolve, prior to the
new proposals for the JMA meeting of this Committee, those Recommendations where
the ISP viewed the response as being unsatisfactory. The
It is important to note in relation to the Jabiluka Mill following slides show the ISP’s principal
Alternative [JMA] – [ this is for a sub-surface mine at Recommendations. Normal text indicates a satisfactory
Jabiluka to mill on site and store the tailing wastes deep response by the Australian government and bold text and a
under ground.] that the ISP assessment has only been ‘question mark’ identifies areas which the ISP believed
made of the approved proposal for the JMA. The ISP needed further discussion.
findings do not necessarily relate to any new proposals at
Jabiluka.

The sequence of events leading up to the preparation of the

ISP Final Report is given on the cover page of WHC-
2000/CONF.204/INF20

135
SLIDE 4 SLIDE 6

Recommendations not fully addressed or arising from site ISP Recommendation [Para 9.6]
visit
Office of the Supervising Scientist needs:
ISP Recommendation – [Para 9.2(b)] (1) Jabiluka Project Manager
(2) Water resources specialist ?
New proposals for water management system or any other
changes to the approved JMA to be subject to: ISP Recommendatin [Para 9.7]
- early stage discussion involving stakeholders
- rigorous environmental assessment Fully independent Advisory Committee to be
- fully independent review ? established?

Contaminant simulation study on water management The Recommendation concerning the new proposals for a
system required for: water management system or any other changes to the
- approved JMA approved JMA was that these should be subject to
- - any new proposals discussions involving stakeholders, rigorous
environmental assessment and independent review. The
ISP Recommendation [Para 9.2 (e)] Australian government, while accepting the first 2
requirements, made no reference to the need for a review
Sediment monitoring and analysis on and adjacent to procedure.
Jabiluka required
For the 3 Recommendations, which were concerned with
ISP Recommendation [ Para 9.2 (f)] the need for a contaminant simulation study, sediment
monitoring programme and a risk assessment for a mine
Extend risk assessment to mine life 40, 50, 60 years life of 40, 50 or 60 years, the government’s response was
satisfactory.

SLIDE 5 Turning to landscape and ecosystem monitoring and

analysis [SLIDE 5] – The Panel concluded that the risks
ISP Recommendation [Para 9.2(g)] to the World Heritage Site, as a result of a carefully
designed, operated and monitored JMA as approved, are
Landscape and ecosystem monitoring and analyses in minimal. Nevertheless the region and the Site will be
place immediately ? subject to changes unrelated to mining [climate change,
invasive sps etc]. . The ISP therefore considers it prudent
ISP Recommendation [Para 9.2(h)] and necessary to put in place landscape and ecosystem
analyses. In parallel with these a survey and monitoring
Statement of intent that long-term monitoring continues programme should be established by the Supervising
after mining company obligations cease Scientist immediately. The IUCN fully supports this
recommendation. The Australian response is
ISP Recommendation [Para 9.3] unsatisfactory in the view of the ISP in that, while the
New monitoring and response arrangements for intent is to undertake this work, it will be subject to
Supervising Scientist at Jabiluka (following leak at resource availability. The WHC should request the
Ranger) government to put this work in place without delay.
- make known to WHC
The ISP Recommendations concerning long-term
ISP Recommendations [para9.4] monitoring, strengthening the role of the Supervising
If ‘stand-by arrangements at Jabiluka are protracted the Scientist and a review of the stand-by arrangements at
Supervising Scientist to review and report on any proposed Jabiluka by the Supervising Scientist have been
action every 5 years satisfactorily addressed by the government. However the
recommendation that the performance of the reverse
During ‘stand-by’ the performance of the reverse osmosis osmosis treatment plant and irrigation system should be
treatment plant and irrigation to be subject to: subject to independent review was not accepted by the
- rigorous monitoring Australian government.
- independent scrutiny ?
The ISP found the quality of the OSS and eriss to be very
high but recommended that within the OSS there should
be: (i) a designated project manager for Jabiluka and (ii) an
in-house specialism in water resource management
[SLIDE 6]. The Australian government responded by
accepting the need for a project manager but suggested
that the water resources management post would be
subject to a review of resource requirements. The ISP

136
would wish the WHC to request to the Australian SLIDE 8
government to allocate resources to enable this post to be
filled. New JMA Proposal

The final Recommendation concerned independent review. ISP little information on these
The present review arrangements, through the Mine Site If it can be demonstrated that they reduce the risks, then
Technical Committee, should be retained but they lack accept
transparency and a fully independent perspective. It is
noteworthy that a number of senior Australian scientists However need
e.g. Prof. Wasson, White and others have raised issues that - detailed environmental analyses
led to a reappraisal of some of the Jabiluka design - full stakeholder involvement at the earlies stage
procedures and monitoring approaches. Such independent - transparency of process
but informal inputs are very positive, however the ISP and - full independent scientific advisiory committee to
IUCN consider that such important interventions should ensure that the Park’s natural values are not
not be left to chance. These should be focussed through an endangered.
independent science advisory committee. Following
discussion with the Supervising Scientist and IUCN over
the last 2 days good progress has been made in relation to
the independent review procedure. It appears that this can
be accomplished through modifications to, but within the
framework of, an existing scientific review committee.
There is thus a satisfactory outcome in regard to this final
Recommendation of the ISP.

The ISP’s overall conclusions are given in SLIDE 7. This

also indicates the ISP requirements with respect to
additional monitoring, management arrangements and
review.

SLIDE 7

ISP Overall Conclusion

Approved JMA Proposal

•= Supervising Scientist has

- Identified the principal risks to the natural values of
Kakadu
- analysed and quantified with a high level scientific
certainty
- shown risks to be small or negligible

•= But

- Unexpected impacts due to mining may arise 9see

IUCN Report)
- Other impacts may occur e.g. climate change, invasive
species etc, so additionalmonitoring analyses & clear
response procedures essential

•= Management arrangements to be improved

•= Fully independent review procedure necessary

Finally turning to new proposals for the JMA, [SLIDE 8]

these are still under development.The ISP has had little
information on these [indeed they lie outside the ISP
brief]. However, if it can be clearly demonstrated that they
reduce the risks, then they should be accepted. With such
proposals there is the need for a detailed environmental
analysis, a full stakeholder involvement [particularly of the
Traditional Owners who have much to offer] at the earliest
stage, transparency of process and independent review so
as to ensure that Kakadu is not endangered.

137
 ANNEX XII

Statement by IUCN on Kakadu National Park

The World Heritage Committee at its 24th Ordinary It follows that:

Session adopted a resolution on Kakadu National Park
World Heritage site that was based upon an agreed text IUCN might take a different view about any new
between the International Scientific Panel of ICSU, IUCN or revised proposals that may be forthcoming in
and the Supervising Scientist of the Australian future and which would of course require
Government. appropriate assessment, including – in line with
the precautionary principle – a full EIS for any
At the 24th session of the World Heritage Committee, significantly modified mining plans.
IUCN made the following statement which sets out its
views on the issue of mining at Jabiluka in relation to the It also follows that:
Kakadu World Heritage site.
IUCN recognises that there are other values – aesthetic as
KAKADU NATIONAL PARK well as cultural values – which were not examined by the
WORLD HERITAGE SITE ISP but which are affected by the mine and about which
STATEMENT BY IUCN IUCN still has concerns, which it has set out in the past
and which have been well documented.
1. IUCN believes that mining should not take place
within designated natural World Heritage sites. IUCN Moreover, IUCN appreciates that there are legitimate
also believes that any mining operations on the edge concerns of the Traditional Owners to be addressed -
of, or near World Heritage sites, should be subject to for example they should be involved in the monitoring
stringent risk analysis to ensure World Heritage values programme.
are not threatened. That, of course, is the test the
World Heritage Committee should apply in this case. 4. IUCN very much hopes that the Australian
Government will respond quickly and positively to the
2. There is a lesson to be learnt from the “Kakadu saga”. request that it commence the additional analysis and
During the evaluation process, more attention needs to monitoring programme recommended by the ISP and
be paid to potential threats to World Heritage sites and IUCN. It is self-evident, of course, that these
values. Evaluating possible threats from mining can measures should be in place before any mining
be difficult and costly. But if the Committee is to commences.
avoid the complex and time-consuming arguments
which have been a feature of this case, it would be 5. In view of the change in the majority ownership of the
better to identify such potential problems well in Jabiluka mine, IUCN would welcome a message from
advance and as part of the evaluation process. this Committee to the new owners – Rio Tinto - that
they should undertake to comply with all undertakings
3. IUCN is now satisfied that the currently approved site given by the former owners, and will fulfil all their
and mine do not threaten the biological and ecological obligations towards the Kakadu National Park World
systems of Kakadu National Park (it is not of course Heritage site.
qualified to comment on any possible threats to
human health). 29th November, 2000

139
 ANNEX XIII

Statement on the Report of the Independent Scientific Panel of ICSU

by the Supervising Scientist of Australia
concerning Kakadu National Park, Australia

Thank you Mr Chairman for providing me with the

opportunity to provide comment on the final report of the I draw to your attention the response of the Australian
Independent Science Panel of ICSU. Government to the recommendations of the ISP and the
I would like to preface my comments by thanking IUCN. This response is given as an attachment to letter of
Professor Wilkinson and the members of his panel who the Secretary of Environment Australia to the then Chair
visited Kakadu in July, and also to the representative of the of the Committee in November 2000. As the Secreatary
IUCN, Dr Pierre Horwitz, for the thoroughly cooperative advised, Australia accepts the intent of all of the
and professional manner in which they conducted their recommendations of the ISP and the IUCN and will ensure
discussions. The process was a very good example of that their implementation achieves the objectives outlined
scientific peer review and by the end of the visit there were by the ISP and IUCN. During the course of the past few
no issues of science on which there was any disagreement days, I have had discussions with the Chair of the ISP and
between members of the panel and members of my team of with representatives of the IUCN to clarify the position of
staff and consultants. the Australian Government and to determine specific ways
in which the intent of the recommendations can be met.
I would now like to draw the attention of members of the
Committee to the overall conclusion of the final report of Probably the most important residual issue for members of
the ISP which states: the ISP and the IUCN was to agree on a method of
implementing the ISP recommendation on the
Overall the ISP considers that the Supervising Scientist establishment of an Independent Science Advisory
has identified all the principal risks to the natural Committee. The approach adopted by Australia has been
values of the Kakadu World Heritage site that can to adapt the existing Committee structure that has been
presently be perceived to result from the Jabiluka Mill established under Australian law rather than to set up a
Alternative proposal. These risks have been analysed new structure.
in detail and have been quantified with a high level of
scientific certainty. Such analyses have shown the The Australian Government has decided to amend the
risks to be very small or negligible and that the membership and role of the existing statutory scientific
development of the JMA should not threaten the review committee to meet the needs identified by the ISP
natural World Heritage values of the Kakadu National in its recommendation on the establishment of an
Park Independent Science Advisory Committee. The chair and
the majority of the voting members will be appointed
This conclusion, Mr Chairman, reached after detailed and following selection by the most appropriate body
lengthy consideration of possible threats to the natural representing Australian scientists and engineers, possibly
values of Kakadu, clearly vindicates the overall conclusion the Australian Academy of Science. This Committee will
of the report which I submitted to the Committtee in April be able to report openly, independently and without
1999. restriction. Agreement has been reached on this approach
between the ISP, the IUCN and Australia.
I feel confident, Mr Chairman, that members of the
Committee will now be reassured that the scientific issues An important issue raised by the ISP and the IUCN is that,
on which the 1998 Mission to Kakadu expressed concern although we have made rigorous efforts to identify all of
have all been resolved and that they can reach a firm the principal risks to the natural values of Kakadu National
conclusion that the natural values of Kakadu National Park Park, and have shown these risks to be very small or
are not threatened by the proposed development of a mine negligible, unforeseen environmental impacts may occur
and mill at Jabiluka. in the future. The ISP, therefore, considers that, while such
effects are unlikely, it would be prudent to put in place a
In reaching its overall conclusion, the ISP made a number more extensive monitoring program at both a local and a
of observations related to processes that should, in its regional level. This program would be designed to detect
view, be followed in the final design of the project and on any secondary, cumulative or interactive effects that may
the ongoing regulation and monitoring process. As arise from the development of Jabiluka and to distinguish
Professor Wilkinson has summarised, the ISP listed a between such unlikely mining-related impacts and other
series of recommendations on these issues and requested impacts that may occur in the region that are not related to
that the Australian Government implement the mining.
recommendations. In addition, the representative of the
IUCN who accompanied the ISP to Kakadu in July made The ISP agrees that Australia already has in place a
several recommendations that were taken into account by monitoring program that addresses the principal risks and
the ISP in its final report. that these risks are very small or negligible. In addition,

141
the ISP agrees that risks at the landscape scale are included the leak of tailings water at the Ranger mine
minimal. It is my view, therefore, that the justification for during the 1999 – 2000 wet season.
an additional expensive landscape scale analysis and
monitoring program is questionable for mining related I am pleased to report that the ISP fully supported the
issues alone. principal conclusion of my report to the Australian
government on the Ranger tailings water leak. That is, the
However, in the broader context of monitoring the natural leak had a negligible impact on people and the
World Heritage values of Kakadu, a program at the environment and the World Heritage values of Kakadu
landscape scale has merit. Noting that implementation National Park were not affected. The ISP also gave its full
would have significant resource implications, the support to the recommendations made in my report, all of
Supervising Scientist has recommended that a suitable which have been accepted by the Australian Government.
program be considered by the Government in the context
of other programs such as the monitoring of the impact of In summary, Mr Chairman, the Australian Government
invasive species. welcomes the final report of the ISP. It has given its
commitment to taking measures to ensure that the intent of
The ISP and the IUCN wish to see such a program all of the recommendations made by the ISP is achieved.
implemented and have drafted, in the Draft Decision Following discussions over the past few days, the ISP, the
before the Committee a recommendation that the IUCN and Australia believe that the Committee could now
Australian Government allocates resources for this support a conclusion that the currently approved proposal
purpose. for the mine and mill at Jabiluka does not threaten the
health of people or the biological and ecological systems
The ISP recommended that a contaminant simulation study of Kakadu National Park that the 1998 Mission believed to
be carried out for the Jabiluka Mill Alternative project as it be at risk.
was described in the Supervising Scientist’s report to the
World Heritage Committee of April 1999. Similarly, it
recommended that the risk assessment for this project Thank you Mr Chairman.
should be extended to 40, 50, and 60 years.

Members of the Committee should note that, while ERA

has not yet submitted its Amended Proposal for the
Jabiluka project, a proposal that is required under the
conditions of the approval given by the Government, the
company has advised me of a number of measures that it
intends to introduce in its final design that will give rise to
an even greater level of environmental protection. Thus,
the risks associated with the project in its final design will
be even smaller than those described in my previous report
to the Committee. In these circumstances, it is the
Government’s view that any further detailed analysis of
the project described in my previous report would be
redundant. It would also consume resources that would be
better directed at ongoing research and monitoring of the
Ranger mine and to the development of the monitoring
program for Jabiluka recommended by the ISP.

Nevertheless, the Government has given its commitment

to the Committee that the contaminant simulation study
and the extension of the time scale for the risk assessment
recommended by the ISP will be undertaken for the
Amended Proposal for Jabiluka when it is submitted by
ERA.

As Professor Wilkinson has indicated to you, both the ISP

and the IUCN now accept the merit of the Government’s
approach to these recommendations and have agreed that
further analysis of the approved project is not justified.

Mr Chairman, the remit of the ISP was to assess the

reports of the Supervising Scientist to the World Heritage
Committee on Jabiluka of April 1999 and June 1999.
However, several other issues that had been brought to its
attention were considered by the ISP in its report because
the ISP considered them relevant to Jabiluka. These

142
 ANNEX XIV

Letter from Yvonne Margarula, Mirrar Senior Traditional Owner

concerning Kakadu National Park, Australia

28 November 2000

Francesco Bandarin Director,

World Heritage Centre
c/- Cairns Convention Centre
QUEENSLAND

Dear Mr Bandarin,
It is with great regret that I write to inform you that discussions during the 24th Session of the World Heritage
Committee between the Mirrar and the Australian Government in relation to a new process (as outlined in last
week's Bureau decision) regarding cultural heritage protection have broken down.

We have proposed the assistance of the World Heritage Committee in the preparation of terms of reference
and development of a new process to consider the protection of Kakadu's living cultural heritage. We remain
extremely concerned at the Australian Government's unwillingness to accept, in an advisory or observatory
capacity, the assistance of the World Heritage Committee, in spite of the Government's admission that an
impasse has been reached.

We submit our suggested text to the Secretariat and recommend it be considered during deliberations on
Kakadu at the Committee this week.

Additionally, I wish to raise a matter that has further deteriorated any notion of trust between the Australian
Government and the Mirrar delegation. The Australian Government representatives to this forum have
misrepresented, improperly and inaccurately, the content of our discussions with the Government to members
of States Parties. These representatives have suggested that the discussion focussed on issues related to
financial resources rather than a constructive process that would result in the protection of Kakadu's cultural
heritage. Such misinformation only undermines any opportunity of future constructive dialogue.

In conclusion I stress that the Mirrar delegation has tirelessly pursued resolution with the Australian
Government by constructive dialogue. Our suggestions have been routinely rejected. This process has now
reached a point where the integrity of the Mirrar position is in danger of being undermined. We have,
therefore, suspended all discussions but are willing to receive advice and direction from the World Heritage
Committee to ensure Kakadu's living cultural heritage is protected.

Yours truly,

[signed]

Yvonne Margarula
Mirrar Senior Traditional Owner
Chairperson Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation

• PH.: 08 8979 2200 • PO BOX 245 JABIRU NT 0886 • FAX: 08 8979 2299
e-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.mirrar.net

143
With reference to the protection of the living cultural values of Kakadu National Park the Committee,

1. Welcomes the fact that discussions are taking place between the State Party and the Mirrar Traditional
Owners.

2. Recalls that the UNESCO World Heritage Committee (i998) noted "severe ascertained and potential
dangers to the cultural and natural values of Kakadu National Park posed primarily by the
proposal for uranium mining and milling at Jabiluka".

3. Considers that the Committee's previous decision (June 1999) regarding cultural mapping and the
preparation of a cultural heritage management plan for Jabiluka cannot be implemented at this
stage and that a new approach founded on partnership between all parties concerned is required to
ensure the protection of the living cultural values of Kakadu National Park.

4. Recalls that at the twenty-fourth session of the Bureau in Paris (2000) ICOMOS indicated its
willingness to "participate in activities leading towards resolving cultural heritage issues
pertaining to the management of Kakadu National Park".

5. Requests that the Committee note that the State Party is prepared to consider a new process to address
any outstanding issues relating to the protection of the living cultural values of Kakadu National
Park. Any new process would be facilitated by the State Party in consultation with Mirrar
Traditional Owners and the World Heritage Committee.

6. Proposes a new process beginning with the preparation of terms of reference developed in agreement
with the Mirrar Traditional Owners, UNESCO and other interested States Parties. These terms of
reference and a progress report on implementation shall be presented, if possible, to the Bureau at
its 25th Session in 2001.

7. The review process is proposed to consider issues affecting the living cultural values of Kakadu
National Park including: -

•= the recommended application of the cultural heritage criterion (iii) and the World Heritage
cultural landscape categories.
•= an examination of the feasibility of extending the boundary of Kakadu National Park and
World Heritage Property to ensure increased protection of more of the catchment of the East
Alligator River;
•= consultation and dialogue with all Traditional Owners and the Kakadu National Park Board of
Management is required.

144
 ANNEX XV

Recommendations of the Technical Workshop on World Heritage and Mining

held at IUCN Headquarters (Gland, Switzerland), 21-23 September 2000

The WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE AND WORLD HERITAGE MANAGEMENT AGENCIES

STATE PARTIES are invited to note these findings: should:

 Mining and conservation specialists are •= Clarify and communicate roles and
encouraged to work together, taking into account responsibilities regarding World Heritage sites
the unique aspects of mining (e.g. mineral •= Put monitoring programs in place, as well as
potential, deposits) and the unique values and emergency preparedness and response plans, all
conditions of World Heritage sites; each case with effective indicators, to ensure that the
needs to be carefully considered, taking account integrity of World Heritage values is not
of the conditions and integrity under the World threatened by mining, agricultural, tourism or
Heritage Convention other activities, and to deal with incidents
•= Early in the nomination process, relevant national •= Endeavour to link protected areas planning with
and local government ministries and agencies, all broader regional land use planning, so that
affected stakeholders and independent third protected areas are seen as an integral element of
parties should be identified and an open, their region.
transparent and effective communication •= Increase awareness about mining and recognize
mechanism established, including conflict that mining companies may be key stakeholders
resolution mechanisms •= Establish communication mechanisms with all
•= An open and transparent multi- affected stakeholders
disciplinary/science-based approach should be •= Work with mining companies in order to integrate
adopted for determining boundaries for World their environmental management and community
Heritage sites - one that protects World Heritage development programs into the overall
values and takes into account ecological, cultural, management objectives of World Heritage sites.
and mineral and other economic values, as well as
socio-economic factors
•= Tentative lists of potential World Heritage sites MINING INDUSTRY
should be made public to all stakeholders to
encourage input of views and information The mining industry has the potential to make significant
•= An effective flow of information should be contributions as follows:
assured between the UNESCO World Heritage
Centre, IUCN and ICOMOS regarding mining- a) In respect of World Heritage Protection/
related activities and World Heritage sites prior to Conservation, it can:
designation, in compiling state of conservation
reports, and during/after emergency situations •= Undertake assessments of unique biodiversity,
•= Regarding the evaluation of new nominations, the increase scientific understanding of ecosystems,
Advisory Bodies should ask State Parties to and contribute to the conservation of flora and
confirm that all affected stakeholders, including fauna affected by exploration, extraction and
the mining industry, have been consulted processing activities
•= Given that World Heritage and mining issues are •= Support research to expand scientific knowledge
often polarized, there is a need to protect the and develop improved technologies to protect the
process of World Heritage nomination and the environment, and promote the international
state of conservation evaluations transfer of technologies that mitigate adverse
•= If a mine is operating near a World Heritage site, environmental effects
facilities should be designed, operated and closed •= Assist in the development of eco-tourism
in consideration of World Heritage values and •= Contribute to government capacity in World
should contribute to the conservation of those Heritage management and support site
values management programmes
•= Education and awareness programs are required •= Contribute to the promotion of the World
so that local communities understand the Heritage Convention and sites through building
importance and the values of World Heritage sites awareness.
and can benefit from the presence of such areas.

145
b) In respect of Environmental Management and •= Contribute to, and participate in, the social,
Protection, it can: economic and institutional development of
communities, and encourage the establishment of
•= Encourage all those involved in the mining sustainable local and regional economic activities
industry to better understand ecosystem •= In cooperation with international agencies, public
management and adopt these principles interest groups and national governments,
•= Work with governments and other relevant parties contribute to the development of local
in developing sound, economic and equitable government capacity as well as to plans to
environmental standards and clear decision- address secondary impacts created by mining
making procedures, based on reliable and activity
predictable criteria •= Mitigate, to the greatest practical extent, adverse
•= Comply with all applicable environmental laws effects on communities by activities related to
and regulations and, in jurisdictions where these exploration, extraction and closure of mining and
are absent or inadequate, apply cost-effective processing facilities
technologies and management practices to ensure •= Provide adequate resources and build requisite
the protection of the environment and worker and capabilities so that employees at all levels are
community welfare able to fulfill their environmental and community
•= Conduct environmental assessments of responsibilities
exploration, infrastructure development, mining •= Develop relevant sustainable development
or processing activities, including secondary monitoring indicators on a site by site basis
effects, and plan and conduct the design, •= Respect the authority of national and regional
development, operation, remediation and closure governments, take into account their development
of any facility in a manner that optimizes the objectives, and support the sharing of the
economic use of resources while reducing adverse economic benefits generated by operations.
environmental and community impacts to
acceptable levels Granting of Exploration Licenses
•= Employ risk management strategies and best
practices that take into account local cultures, and Finally, in respect of granting of exploration licenses, the
economic and environmental circumstances in the mining industry should work with stakeholders to create
design, construction, operation and clarity by defining the decision-making process, roles and
decommissioning, including the handling and responsibilities. It is expected that the granting of permits
disposal of hazardous materials and waste would carry a reasonable assurance of the right to develop,
•= Ensure that adequate financial resources or surety subject to appropriate approval mechanisms based on a
instruments are in place to meet the requirements clear decision-making process set out in advance.
of remediation and closure plans
•= Implement effective management systems,
conduct regular reviews and act on the results FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS
•= Develop, maintain and test emergency plans and
response procedures in conjunction with the The conclusion of the workshop was that a Working
provider of emergency services, relevant Group on World Heritage and Mining should be formed to
authorities and local authorities to deal adequately carry forward the work in this important field.
with any emergency
•= At the initial phases of mining projects, develop It is important that the World Heritage Committee should
closure concepts and/or plans that address give its support to such a Group. The Group's membership
environmental and community related issues as should be drawn from various UN Agencies, the Advisory
well as World Heritage values, in consultation Bodies, ICME, and other interested parties. It could be co-
with appropriate stakeholders chaired by IUCN and ICME. The Group should work
•= Encourage governments to establish closely with other consultative mechanisms such as
communication mechanisms that will promote MMSD and other initiatives.
dialogue amongst local communities and other
affected organizations, facilitate the provision of If established, the Group would be able assist the World
expert advice and serve in a regular planning Heritage Committee in this area, and in particular it could:
and/or oversight capacity; and establish effective
processes for conflict resolution.
 If invited, assist the Committee in any review of
criteria used for assessing potential World Heritage
c) In respect of Community Development, it can: sites

 Arrange for the case studies presented at this
•= Assess the social, cultural, environmental and meeting and the recommendations arising from the
economic impacts of proposed activities and discussions to be widely publicized, possibly in the
engage with local communities and other affected form of a best practice guidelines volume
organizations in the design of community
 Explore the interest in preparing a guidance
development strategies, including such a strategy document on World Heritage and Mining
for mine closure

146

 Plan a workshop and other activities on Mining and
World Heritage at the World Parks Congress in
2002

 Investigate the development of databases of
existing and potential World Heritage sites and
other protected areas, along with mineral
occurrences and public domain exploration
information. This may involve use of existing map
databases of protected areas maintained by UNEP-
WCMC

 Increase awareness through all possible means of
the issues raised by the interaction of World
Heritage sites and mining, involving World
Heritage Managers as appropriate

 Investigate sources of funding for the Group's
programme of work.

In addition to its collaboration with ICME on World

Heritage and mining, IUCN should consider how best to
establish linkages with the wider mining sector on a broad
range of issues concerning sustainable development,
working with appropriate established initiatives.

147
 ANNEX XVI

" Communiqué addressed to UNESCO by

the Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs in the Arab World
concerning Israel's request to inscribe Palestinian sites in the World Heritage List

(12th Conference of the Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs in the Arab World
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 21-22 November 2000)

We, the ministers responsible for cultural Israel is also intentionally ignoring
affairs in the Arab World, meeting at our twelfth international resolutions, in particular United Nations
conference held in Riyadh, the capital of the General Assembly resolution 181(II) adopted in 1947
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, on 21 and 22 November, and Security Council resolution 242 (1967).
strongly condemn the hostile Israeli action consisting
of a request to inscribe Palestinian heritage sites, the Therefore, on these grounds, we, the
historic Arab cities of Jerusalem and Acre and also ministers responsible for cultural affairs in the Arab
the Negev and other natural sites, as Israeli sites in world, call upon UNECO and its World Heritage
the World Heritage List. Through this uncivilized Committee to reject in the strongest possible terms
action Israel is seeking to consecrate its fait accompli this Israeli request, which is contrary to resolutions
policy towards Palestinian land, flouting the 1954 under international law, consecrates the occupation,
Hague Convention and disavowing all international lays claim to manifestations of Arab culture, and
agreements and conventions, including the World seeks to obliterate Palestinian cultural identity. "
Heritage Convention adopted by the General
Conference of UNESCO in 1972.

149
 ANNEX XVII

Intervention by H.E. Ahmad Abdelrazek,

Ambassador, Permanent Observer of Palestine to UNESCO,
on the ocassion of the Twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee,
27 November - 2 December 2000, Cairns, Australia

Monsieur le Président,
Excellences,
Mesdames, Messieurs,

Tout d’abord, Monsieur le Président, je tiens à vous Au regard de la Convention, l’Etat d’Israël ne peut
remercier de me donner la parole et je souhaite également présenter une demande d’inscription des biens situés à
remercier les membres du Comité d’avoir permis à la JERUSALE M , qui ne fait pas partie juridiquement du
Mission d’Observation de la Palestine de participer, en tant territoire sur lequel Israël a la souveraineté.
qu’observateur, aux travaux de cette vingt-quatrième
session du Comité du patrimoine mondial. Si en revanche, Israël respecte les dispositions du Droit
International et se considère comme une PUISSANCE
Je souhaiterais exprimer la position de Palestine sur D’OCCUPATION exerçant sa juridiction sur Jérusalem, il
l’inscription d’un site situé à ALQUDS/Jérusalem sur la doit dans ce cas, appliquer les dispositions de la
Liste indicative présentée par Israël. CONVENTION DE LA HAYE (Convention de 1954) et,
en particulier, l’article 5 sur l’occupation d’un territoire et
L’article 3 de la Convention précise « qu’il appartient à les modalités de protection du patrimoine culturel dans ce
chaque Etat Partie à la présente Convention d’identifier et territoire occupé.
de délimiter les différents biens situés sur son
TERRITOIRE » Si son objectif est la protection des biens culturels situés à
Jérusalem, Israël doit reconnaître que Jérusalem est un
Si l’Etat d’Israël revendique la souveraineté sur territoire occupé et qu’il propose la protection de biens
JERUSALEM-EST et même sur JERUSALEM- OUEST, situés sur ce territoire occupé, sous réserve de respecter le
il ne peut récuser les revendications de souveraineté ou de droit international.
juridictions de l’autre partie Palestinienne au différend sur
JERUSALEM. Dans le cas actuel, nous demandons au Comité de ne pas
retenir la demande d’inscription de ce site, situé à
L’Etat d’Israël, au regard des Nations Unies et du Droit Jérusalem, sur la Liste, en attendant que les questions
International n’a pas de souveraineté reconnue sur politiques et juridiques concernant la ville soient réglées
JERUSALEM. par les Nations Unies.

Juridiquement, l’Etat d’Israël ne peut considérer que les Nous nous gardons le droit de soulever des questions sur
biens situés à JERUSALEM soient des biens situés sur son d’autres points sur la liste ultérieurement.
territoire.

151
 ANNEX XVIII

Intervention by H.E. Aryé Gabay, Ambassador, Permanent Delegate of Israel to UNESCO

on the occasion of the Twenty-fourth session of the World Heritage Committee
27 November - 2 December 2000, Cairns, Australia

Mr Chairperson,

May I first of all congratulate you upon your election Would it not be logical to say that the Committee acts
to the head of this honourable forum and wish you every according to political motivations, that there are two rules,
success. two measures or otherwise that, quite simply, the
Committee is used for political means by a certain group
So as not to disturb the atmosphere of this forum of countries.
and contribute to its politisation, let me, Mr
Chairperson, make a complete abstraction of all There is not a lack of forums where Jerusalem can be
disagreeable political references concerning my discussed. The problem of Jerusalem, like the Middle
country, among others, and reference to East, is discussed by a dozen international organizations,
occupying forces in Jerusalem, the city of our and what is even more absurd, it is also discussed within
roots, our Biblical and cultural heritage, place of an organization dealing with education culture and science
worship and our national entity. and this, for thirty years, twice a year.

I regret to have to say that the Committee has made a I advise you, Mr Chairperson, to ask, privately, and
serious error in applying Rule 38 of the Rules of "off the record" the opinion of the members of UNESCO
Procedure, namely to suspend Rule 7, 8.1, 8.2 and 8.3, of the logic and utility of these debates. You will be
which define the conditions for invitation of observers and enlightened and perhaps you will see an example not to be
representatives of NGOs and professional institutions. In followed.
doing so, the Committee has not only gone beyond the
directives of the Rules of Procedure but it has also failed in Let the specialised organizations deal with the
the spirit of the Convention which, wishes to avoid, to the problem of Jerusalem and keep us at a distance from that.
extent possible, the trap of politicalisation in this forum.
The Convention is not a body that judges the
Upon receipt of the request for the application of sovereignty of States and their sites and, in this respect
Rule 38, without prior warning, for a question that is not Article 11.3 is clear and without ambiguity:
on the agenda, it was difficult for members of the
Committee to make any comment, and I can easily "The inclusion of a property in the World Heritage
understand this. List requires the consent of the State concerned. The
inclusion of a property situated in a territory,
In this way, you have granted the observer status to a sovereignty or jurisdiction over which is claimed by
political entity whose intention is certainly not to more than one State shall in no way prejudice the
contribute towards the discussions at a professional level. rights of the parties to the dispute."

Unfortunately, this is not the first time that a In other words, the Convention, in inscribing this site
transgression has been made in respect of my country. did not recognise in any way the sovereignty of my
country and, consequently, the demands of the Palestinians
Just twenty years ago, Israel, as a State, was refused are not affected in the least. But, even more absurd, Mr
observer status and the right of response by this same Chairperson, is the following:
Committee, to allow Jordan to inscribe Jerusalem on the
World Heritage List, despite the fact that this city was not 1. Israel wishes to inscribe on the World
located in its territory nor under its jurisdiction or Heritage List MONT ZION that is situated in an
sovereignty. UNCONTESTED PART of Jerusalem since
1948. One only has to look at the map of
In one go, Article 11.3 of the Convention and Rule Jerusalem, edited and published by the UNO to
8.1 of the Rules of Procedure were transgressed. realize this.
Naturally, the Committee involved Rule 38 for suspension
of its application! The irony of the situation is that this 2. Furthermore, it concerns an extension to the
happened twenty years, here...in Australia. Old City of Jerusalem which, as I have already
told you, was already inscribed on the World
Heritage List, by Jordan, twenty years ago here in
Australia.

153
 3. The inscription of this site shall only be For the moment, let us have the courage to proceed
discussed in a year's time, so why all this fuss and with rigour and integrity, the spirit and letter of our
why transgress the rules and procedures? Convention and the rules and procedures that guide it.
This can only improve our work.
The Convention concerning the protection of World
Cultural and Natural Heritage is itself an intellectual site Thank you, Mr Chairperson.
that requires protection. Do not allow political
contamination, as one day we may have to inscribe this
forum on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

I can assure you, Mr Chairperson, that Israel will be

among the first to welcome the adhesion of the
Palestinians to this forum, as soon as they accede to the
status of a State, in the framework of the peace process. In
this respect, I should mention that our Tentative List
already includes regional cooperation projects with the
Palestinians and Jordanians, and I hope wholeheartedly
that the day for this cooperation is not far off.

154
 ANNEX XIX

World Heritage 24 COM

Distribution limited WHC-2000/CONF.204/20
Cairns, 1 December 2000
Original : French/English

UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL

ORGANIZATION

CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL

AND NATURAL HERITAGE

WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE

Twenty-fourth session
Cairns, Australia
27 November – 2 December 2000

Item 16 of the Provisional Agenda: Provisional Agenda of the twenty-fifth session of the
Bureau of the World Heritage Committee (UNESCO Headquarters, June 2001)

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

and on the World Heritage List

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

Danger

4.2. Reports on state of conservation of properties inscribed on the World

Heritage List

5. 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

6. Requests for international assistance

7. Provisional agenda of the twenty-fifth session of the World Heritage Committee

(December 2001)

8. Other business

9. Adoption of the report of the session

10. Closure of the session

155