Report of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage on its activities between the first and second sessions of the General Assembly of the States Parties to the Convention

Composition of the Committee

1.

The Committee was established by the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage that was adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO at its 32nd session, 17 October 2003, and that entered into force on 20 April 2006.

2.

At its first ordinary session, on 29 June 2006, the General Assembly elected 18 members of the Committee. According to Article 5.2 of the Convention, the number of members of the Committee was to be increased from 18 to 24 once the number of States Parties reached 50, which became the case on 30 August 2006. The General Assembly thus met for an extraordinary session at UNESCO Headquarters on 9 November 2006 to elect six more members of the Committee. In conformity with Article 6.3 of the Convention, twelve States whose term of office shall be limited exceptionally to two years were chosen by lot, while respecting the principle of equitable geographical representation. The first 24 States members of the Committee have the following duration of term of office (the six States members that were elected on 9 November 2006 are indicated by an asterisk):

Group I

Group IV

Belgium

2006-2008

China

2006-2008

France*

2006-2008

India

2006-201

Turkey

2006-2010

Japan

2006-2008

Group II

Vietnam

2006-2010

Belarus*

2006-2010

Group Va

Bulgaria

2006-2008

Central African Republic*

2006-2010

Estonia

2006-2010

Gabon

2006-2010

Hongary

2006-2010

Mali*

2006-2010

Romania

2006-2008

Nigeria

2006-2008

Group III

Senegal

2006-2008

Bolivia*

2006-2008

Group Vb

Brazil

2006-2008

Algeria

2006-2008

Mexico

2006-2010

United Arab Emirates

2006-2010

Peru

2006-2010

Syrian Arab Republic*

2006-2008

Meetings of the Committee since the first session of the General Assembly (27 to 29 June 2006)

3.

Since its establishment, the Committee met four times:  

18 and 19 November 2006:

First ordinary session, Algiers, Algeria (1.COM)

23 to 27 May 2007:

First extraordinary session, Chengdu, China (1.EXT.COM)

3 to 7 September 2007:

Second ordinary session, Tokyo, Japan (2.COM)

18 to 22 February 2008:

Second extraordinary session, Sofia, Bulgaria (2.EXT.COM)

4.

At the beginning of its first ordinary session the Committee elected a Bureau for that session. At the end of that same session and at the end of its second ordinary session the Committee, in accordance with Rule 13.1 of its Rules of Procedure, elected Bureaux, whose terms were to continue through the next ordinary session. Rule 13.2 of the same Rules of Procedure stipulates that the extraordinary sessions of the Committee elect their own Bureaux for the duration of the sessions.  

Session

Bureau Membres

Term of office

First session,  Algiers, Algeria, 18 and 19 November2006

Chairperson:

H.E. Ms Khalida Toumi (Algeria)

18-19 November 2006

Rapporteur:

Mr Jean-Pierre Ducastelle (Belgium)

Vice-Chairpersons:

Bolivia, China, Estonia, Senegal 

First extraordinary session,  Chengdu, China,  23 to 27 May 2007  

Chairperson:

H.E. Mr Wang Xuexian (China)

23-27 May 2007

Rapporteur:

Mr Ousmane Blondin Diop (Senegal)

Vice-Chairpersons:

Belgium, Bolivia, Estonia, Syrian Arab Republic

Second session, Tokyo, Japan, 3 to 7 September 2007

Chairperson:

H.E. Mr Seiichi Kondo (Japan)

20 November 2006 –

7 September 2007

Rapporteur:

Mr Ousmane Blondin Diop (Senegal)

Vice-Chairpersons:

Bolivia, Estonia, France, Syrian Arab Republic

Second extraordinary, session Sofia, Bulgaria, 18 to 22 February 2008

Chairperson:

H.E. Ms Irina Bokova (Bulgaria)

18-22 February 2008

Rapporteur:

Ms Hortense Nguema Okome (Gabon)

Vice-Chairpersons: 

India, Mexico, Turkey, United Arab Emirates

Third session,  Istanbul, Turkey, 4 to 8 November 2008

Chairperson:

H.E. Mr Faruk Loğoğlu (Turkey)

8 september 2007 – 8 November 2008

Rapporteur:

Ms Claudine-Augée Angoué (Gabon)

Vice-Chairpersons:

Hungary, India, Mexico, United Arab Emirates

Activities of the Committee since the first session of the General Assembly

5.

The principal activities and decisions of the Committee since its creation concern the preparation, for approval by the General Assembly, of:

·         a draft plan for the use of the resources of the Intangible Cultural Heritage Fund (“the Fund”)

·         operational Directives for the implementation of the Convention;

·         selection criteria for inscriptions on the Lists of the Convention mentioned in Articles 16 and 17, for the selection of
          programmes, projects and activities mentioned in Article 18, and for the granting of international assistance in
          accordance with Article 22;

·         criteria and modalities for the accreditation of non-governmental organizations (“NGOs”) who are to have advisory
          functions to the Committee.

6.

Further, the Committee took the initiative of proposing to the General Assembly the creation of an emblem that would enhance the visibility of its activities and those of States Parties with a view to promoting the objectives of the Convention.

Rules of Procedure

7.

At its first session in Algiers, the Committee adopted its Rules of Procedure (Decision 1.COM 2), which inter alia enshrine the principles of equitable geographical representation and rotation, in conformity with Article 6 of the Convention. These same principles were respected subsequently for the election of its Bureaux and subsidiary bodies.

8.

During its first extraordinary session and its second ordinary session, the Committee noted that Article 8 of the Rules of Procedure did not adequately deal with the issue of the admission of observers to its sessions, particularly with regard to Permanent Observer Missions to UNESCO, Associate Members, intergovernmental organizations other than the United Nations and the organizations of the United Nations system, as well as non-governmental organizations. It therefore adopted decisions proposing solutions on a case-by-case basis for its sessions in Chengdu, Tokyo and Sofia, postponing to a future session a permanent solution.

Operational Directives

9.

At its first ordinary session the Committee, responding to Resolution 1.GA 7A adopted by the General Assembly at its first session in June 2006, discussed a draft outline for Operational Directives to guide the preparation of specific texts for the implementation of the Convention (Decision 1.COM 5), and invited the States Parties to send to it further recommendations on this subject.

10.

The Committee proceeded to elaborate a number of texts and Operational Directives at its subsequent meetings. If the General Assembly, at its second session in June 2008, approves the proposed Directives, the Convention could become fully operational and the first inscriptions of intangible heritage on the two lists of the Convention could take place as early as 2009.

·         Lists of the Convention (Articles 17[1] and 16[2] of the Convention)

11.

The Committee began considering the selection criteria for inscription on the two lists of the Convention at its first session in Algiers. Subsequently, 32 States Parties sent written observations on the issue, notably on the nature of the two lists, the respective inscription criteria, and the procedures for submission and inscription of nominations. During a meeting organized in New Delhi in April 2007, at the invitation of the Indian authorities, experts examined possible draft criteria for the lists of the Convention. At its first extraordinary session in Chengdu, the Committee adopted criteria for the Urgent Safeguarding List and the Representative List.

12.

During its second ordinary session in Tokyo, the Committee adopted Operational Directives indicating the procedures for nominations to the two lists and timetables for their preparation by States and evaluation by the Committee. It also agreed upon a transitional timetable for the first inscriptions on the Urgent Safeguarding List so that these inscriptions may begin in 2009, at the same time as those on the Representative List.

13.

The sets of criteria for the two lists are largely similar, the second criterion for each of the two lists distinguishing one from the other. The second criterion of the Representative List stipulates that the inscription of the proposed element may serve the objectives of that list, as set out in Article 16 of the Convention, while the second criterion of the Urgent Safeguarding List concerns the need for urgent safeguarding of the element. The sixth criterion for the Urgent Safeguarding List specifically concerns the procedures for consultation of States Parties in cases of extreme urgency.

14.

According to the first criterion, identical for the two lists, elements proposed for inscription must meet the definition of intangible cultural heritage presented in the Convention. An annotated nomination form shall explain to States Parties presenting a nomination how to demonstrate that the proposed element responds to this definition.

15.

The third criterion, similar for both lists, deals with safeguarding measures. The Committee considered that the elements inscribed on the Representative List require a management plan, while a more detailed safeguarding plan would be required for those elements whose viability is threatened that would be inscribed on the Urgent Safeguarding List.

16.

The fourth criterion concerns the participation and consent of the community, group or, if applicable, individuals concerned. The Committee was unanimous that their participation is essential in the preparation of a nomination file and the elaboration and implementation of safeguarding measures. Agreeing that their free, prior, and informed consent to the nomination must be shown, the Committee also discussed that such consent might be demonstrated in diverse ways.

^{[1] Article 17: List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding Criteria for inscription on the List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding, Decision 1.EXT.COM 6; Operational Directives for inscription on the List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding, Decision 2.COM 6:; Transitional timetable for the first inscriptions on the List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding Decision 2.COM 6.}

^{[2] Article 16 : Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity Criteria for inscription on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, Decision 1.EXT.COM 6; Operational Directives for inscription on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, Decision 2.COM 6.}

17.

The fifth criterion, also identical for the two lists, indicates that to be inscribed on one of the two Lists the element must first be listed in an inventory, or one of the inventories, established by the States Parties, however incomplete they may be.

18.

During its second ordinary session the Committee drafted the procedures and timetable governing the submission of nomination files, their examination, evaluation and inscription. It decided that an element of intangible heritage could not be placed simultaneously on the two lists but that States Parties concerned may request the transfer of an element from one list to the other. The Committee further decided to remove an element from a list if it no longer met at least one of the inscription criteria. The Committee decided that the Urgent Safeguarding List would be given priority and would be presented before the Representative List. It also prepared a more rigorous procedure for this list than for the Representative List.

19.

The procedure concerning the Urgent Safeguarding List would normally take 18 months (24 months for States requesting funding for the preparation of files). To speed things up, the Committee proposed an exceptional timetable so that the first series of nominations might lead to inscriptions in only 13 months. Thus the first inscriptions on the two lists could take place during the Committee’s fourth session foreseen for the end of 2009. Cases of extreme urgency could be brought to the attention of the Committee by any State Party, by the community concerned or by an advisory organization, and the Committee may decide to invite the submission of a nomination following an accelerated timetable and, in consultation with State(s) Party(ies) concerned, shall evaluate the nomination as soon as possible.

·         Incorporation of the items proclaimed “Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity” in the
          Representative List (Article 31)[3]

20.

At the Tokyo meeting, the Committee, reaffirming its position taken at its first ordinary and extraordinary sessions, decided that in conformity with Article 31 of the Convention all items that had been proclaimed “Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity” are to be automatically incorporated into the Representative List immediately upon the establishment of that List (Decision 2.COM 14).

21.

By that same decision, the Committee decided that States whose items proclaimed Masterpieces are incorporated into the List, regardless of whether they are States Parties or States non party to the Convention, enjoy all rights and are subject to all obligations included within the Convention as regards only the items proclaimed Masterpieces, on the condition that, in case of States non party, they so consent in writing; it being understood that these rights and obligations cannot be invoked or applied separately from each other.

22.

In Sofia, at its second extraordinary session, the Committee adopted the formal and procedural conditions concerning their incorporation in the Representative List, and decided that these conditions be included in the Operational Directives to be submitted to the General Assembly. In the case that a State non party to the Convention has not confirmed in writing within one year its consent to accept the rights and assume the obligations under the Convention concerning items present on its territory and inscribed on the Representative List, the directives foresee that the Committee shall have the right to withdraw these items from the List.

^{[3] Formal and procedural conditions concerning the incorporation of items proclaimed “Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity” in the Representative List, Decision 2.EXT.COM 7.}

·         Programmes, projects and activities for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage (Article 18)[4]

23.

At each of its sessions, the Committee has emphasized the importance it attaches to Article 18 of the Convention and – within this framework – the special attention that should be given to developing countries and South-South and North-South-South cooperation. Considering that the promotion and dissemination of selected activities should be vital in awareness raising with regard to intangible heritage and its safeguarding, the Committee, at its second ordinary session, prepared Operational Directives to this end. The Committee considered that preparatory assistance could be granted for States Parties preparing proposals in conformity with this Article, and it also discussed, in the framework of the use of resources of the Intangible Heritage Fund, possible funding for the implementation of selected projects and programmes that have not yet begun or are still ongoing.

·         The Intangible Cultural Heritage Fund (Chapter VI)[5]

24.

At its first extraordinary session, the Committee adopted the Financial Rules of the Fund, deciding that it shall be managed as a Special Account, in accordance with Article 6.6 of the Financial Rules of UNESCO. At its second session, the Committee prepared and recommended to the General Assembly for its consideration, draft guidelines for the use of the resources of the Fund, and adopted a plan for the use of the Fund for the period from June 2008 to June 2010, for approval by the General Assembly As proposed, the Fund shall be used, first and foremost, for international assistance. The remaining resources shall be divided among various activities, such as the participation of experts representing States Parties at the sessions of the Committee, the participation of bodies and individuals, including representatives of communities and groups that the Committee may wish to consult, and advisory services. The contributions to the Fund have reached a total amount of 1 924 854 USD as of 31 December 2007.

·         International Assistance (Articles 19-24)[6]

25.

At its second session in Tokyo, the Committee prepared a set of operational directives concerning international assistance, for approval by the General Assembly. Considering the priority to be given to the safeguarding of heritage inscribed on the Urgent Safeguarding List, the Committee recommended that the deadline for submission of preparatory assistance requests for the first inscriptions on that List be identical to those indicated in the transitional timetable that it had adopted for these same first inscriptions. Other proposals in the framework of international assistance concern the preparation of inventories, international assistance granted to States Parties wishing to submit requests for inscription on the Urgent Safeguarding List, and proposals for the selection of best practices for safeguarding.

^{[4] Operational Directives concerning programmes, projects and activities that best reflect the principles and objectives of the Convention for the purposes of promotion and dissemination, Decision 2.COM 12.}

^{[5] Financial Rules of the Intangible Heritage Special Account, Decision 1.EXT.COM 9; Draft guidelines for the use of the resources of the Intangible Heritage Special Account, Decision 2.COM 9; Draft Plan for the use of the resources of the Fund Decisions 2.COM 10 and 2.EXT.COM 7}

^{[6] Operational Directives for international assistance, Decision 2.COM 11.}

26.

Considering that a rapid response should be guaranteed in the case of a request for emergency assistance, the Committee decided to entrust its Bureau with the approval of requests up to a ceiling of USD 25,000. All requests above this amount shall be examined by the Committee.

27.

The participation of the communities or groups of tradition bearers and practitioners in the preparation of proposals and requests, and in the preparation and implementation of safeguarding activities, is strongly advocated by the Committee, as are the special needs of developing countries and the principle of equitable geographical representation.

·         Participation in the implementation of the Convention  (Articles 8, 9 and 15)[7]

28.

At its second session, the Committee decided to submit to the General Assembly, for approval, a set of operational directives for the accreditation of non-governmental organizations, including inter alia the criteria and modalities called for in Article 9.2 of the Convention. Those operational directives include the advisory functions that accredited organizations might be requested by the Committee to provide and the procedure for their accreditation. In the draft operational directives for inscription on the Urgent Safeguarding List, the Committee specified the role that accredited organizations might play, alongside public or private bodies and/or private persons with recognized competence in the field of intangible cultural heritage, in the examination of nominations for that List. In accordance with its Decision 2.COM 11, the Committee may also ask for examination of requests for international assistance over 25,000 USD.

29.

In Sofia, the Committee decided to study at its upcoming sessions, starting at its third session, the requests for accreditation by non-governmental organizations that will have been forwarded to it by the Secretariat, for possible recommendation to the General Assembly. However, in order to be able to make use of the services of NGOs between the second and third ordinary sessions of the General Assembly, the Committee is recommending that the General Assembly adopt a resolution that would allow it, on an exceptional basis, to call upon the advisory services of any of the non-governmental organizations that it will have recommended for accreditation, as provided above, in the period prior to the Assembly’s third session, while underlining that public or private bodies, private persons, practitioners, experts, centres of expertise, research institutes and non profit-making institutions with recognized competence in the various fields of the intangible cultural heritage will also be involved.

30.

At its first extraordinary session, the Committee reiterated the importance that it accorded to the participation of communities or their representatives, practitioners, experts, centres of expertise and research institutes in the implementation of the Convention. To this end, it adopted Decision 1.EXT.COM 10 bis, distinguishing those actors from NGOs who shall be accredited to the Committee in accordance with Article 9 of the Convention for advisory purposes and confirming its decision taken at its first session in Algiers (Decision 1.COM 6).

31.

At its second ordinary session, the Committee decided to create a subsidiary body to prepare a document for its next session on possible modalities for the participation of communities or their representatives, practitioners, experts, centres of expertise and research institutes in the implementation of the Convention, based on comments provided by States Parties (Decision 2.COM 8).

^{[7] Criteria and modalities for the accreditation of NGOs, Decision 1.EXT.COM 10; Operational Directives concerning the accreditation of NGOs, Decision 2.COM 7; Participation of communities, groups and, where applicable, individuals, as well as experts, centres of expertise and research institutes, in the implementation of the Convention, Decision 2.EXT.COM 6.}

32.

On 7 November 2007, the body held its first meeting to elect its bureau, and a second session in Bucharest (Romania) on 15 December 2007 at the invitation of the Ministry of Culture and Cults of Romania. A third meeting was held in Vitré (France) on 28 and 30 January 2008. This meeting benefited from the contributions of an expert meeting held on 28 and 29 January 2008, at the invitation of the French Ministry of Culture.

33.

In Sofia, the Committee thanked the subsidiary body for the excellent performance of its task and decided that it ceased to exist. It also approved a preamble to the Directives concerning the participation of communities, groups and, where applicable, individuals, as well as experts, centres of expertise and research institutes, in the implementation of the Convention.

·         Creation of an emblem for the Convention (Articles 1, 7(a), 7 (d), 13 and 14(a))[8]

34.

The Committee, entrusted by the Convention to promote the objectives of the Convention, to increase its resources and offer better visibility for intangible cultural heritage and its safeguarding, decided to “create an emblem in order to support its activities and those of States Parties in promoting the objectives of the Convention” (Decision 1.EXT.COM 8). During its session in Tokyo, the Committee defined the guidelines for the graphic design of the emblem of the Convention, as well as the terms of reference of the subsidiary body to assist the Secretariat in the organization of an open international competition for the creation of an emblem. Before the competition’s deadline of 17 March 2008, more than XXX persons from XX UNESCO Member States had submitted proposed emblems.  

35.

In Sofia, at its second extraordinary session, the Committee considered that, due to time constraints it was not able to take a decision on the proposed operational directives for the use of the emblem, and started a general discussion aiming at raising relevant legal questions related to intellectual property rights, the use of the emblem together with that of UNESCO, the responsibilities of States Parties concerning its use, as well as its commercial use.

36.

The Committee requested the Secretariat to provide States Parties with the text of Resolution 34 C/86 of the General Conference. It also invited States Parties to send their comments in writing to the Secretariat.

·         Reports (Article 29)[9]

37.

By its Decision 2.EXT.COM 11 taken in Sofia, the Committee decided to submit to the General Assembly, for approval, the operational directives for reporting to the Committee. These directives concern the reports by States Parties on the implementation of the Convention and on elements inscribed on the Urgent Safeguarding List, the receipt and processing of reports, as well as the reports by States non party to the Convention on elements inscribed on the Representative List

^{[8] Guidelines for the graphic design of an emblem for the Convention, Decision 2.COM 13}

^{[9] Operational Directives on reporting to the Committee by the States Parties, Decision 2.EXT.COM 11.}

38.

In accordance with Article 29 of the Convention, States Parties shall submit to the Committee reports on legislative, regulatory and other measures taken for the implementation of this Convention, observing the forms and periodicity to be defined by the Committee. At its second ordinary session, the Committee decided that an element shall be removed from either list by the Committee when it determines that the element no longer satisfies one or more criteria for inscription on that list. For the Committee to be able to make such determinations, it may rely inter alia on information reported to it by the States on whose territories such heritage is found.

39.

Moreover, the obligation to report on elements figuring on the Representative List should apply not only to States Parties to the Convention, but, in accordance with Decision 2.COM 14 of the Committee, to any State with items previously proclaimed Masterpieces that are incorporated in the Representative List in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention.

Meetings

40.

At the invitation of the Indian authorities, 30 experts from States Parties to the Convention met in New Delhi, India, from 2 to 4 April 2007, to reflect on draft criteria for inscription on the two lists of the Convention, the nature of the lists and the relationship between them. The conclusions of this meeting were taken into account by the Committee during the preparation of the criteria for the inscription of elements on these two lists.

Subsidiary bodies

41.

At its second session, and in conformity with Article 21 of its Rules of Procedure, the Committee proceeded with the establishment of two subsidiary bodies :

A.

By its Decision 2.COM 13, the Committee created a subsidiary body to guide the Secretariat in the organization of a competition concerning the creation of an emblem for the Convention, the examination of the graphic proposals received and preselection of the proposals of the emblem. This subsidiary body, which met for the first time during the second ordinary session of the Committee in Tokyo, and twice during the Sofia meeting, is composed of:

·         France (Chairperson: Mr Chérif Khaznadar)

·         Bolivia (Rapporteur: Mr Eduardo Barrios), succeeded by Brazil (Mr Antonio Ricarte)

·         Algeria (Vice-Chairperson)

·         Bulgaria (Vice-Chairperson)

·         India (Vice-Chairperson)

·         Nigeria (Vice-Chairperson)

B.

By its Decision 2.COM 8, the Committee also created a subsidiary body having as terms of reference the preparation of a document for the Committee on possible modalities for the participation of communities or their representatives, practitioners, experts centres of expertise and research institutes in the implementation of the Convention. This subsidiary body, which met three times, was composed as follows :

·         Senegal (Chairperson: Mr Pape Massène Sène)

·         Japan (Rapporteur: Mr Toshiyuki Kono)

·         Algeria (Vice-Chairperson)

·         Romania (Vice-Chairperson)

·         Belgium

·         Peru

Publications

42.

The Intangible Cultural Heritage Section of UNESCO works actively in maintaining up-to-date its website www.unesco.org/culture/ich. All the working documents, written comments of States Parties, decisions taken and reports of the different sessions of the Statutory Organs are available there. The results of the work of the Committee have also been reported in Numbers 5, 7 and 8 of the Intangible Heritage Messenger published by the Intangible Cultural Heritage Section.