Cultural Property In Time Research Articles

PROTECTION OF CULTURAL PROPERTY IN ARMED CONFLICT WITHIN THE HAGUE CONVENTION 1954

Cultural values are part of human dignity and civilian life. Cultural property must be primarily protected during armed conflicts as well as during peacetime. Unfortunately, in armed conflicts, culture has often been one of the primary victims of conflict. As a matter of fact, the parties to the conflict usually target the cultural heritage militarily or politically in order to demoralize the targeted society and show their superiority. During the armed conflicts, many cultural heritages, many of them world heritage, have been destroyed or damaged. The destruction of cultural heritage fuels violence, hatred and revenge among people and undermines the foundations of peace by impeding reconciliation even when conflicts are over. The protection of cultural property in international law is regulated in many international documents. However, the first international regulation prepared by UNESCO on the protection of cultural property in times of armed conflict, “The 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict” has a special importance. International law requires the protection of cultural heritage in armed conflicts. Recent history, however, provides numerous examples of the deliberate destruction or its use to secure a military objective. This leads to questioning whether international law provides adequate protection to cultural heritage in times of armed conflict. The study aims to examine what should be understood from the concept of cultural property in terms of international law, what the international regulations are in this regard and whether these regulations are sufficient, on the basis of the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Properties during Armed Conflicts, and to make some observations and comments.

Role of Polish Armed Forces and Crisis Management System in Cultural Property Protection – review and analysis

Deterring a crisis or war requires the commitment of large forces and resources that may include armed forces, security services or other non-military defense elements. The entire crisis management system is organized by the public administration. A crisis and the threat of war necessitate the implementation of a wide range of tasks aimed at securing life, health and property. Cultural property is a special category of property protected under the Polish legal system. The Republic of Poland undertook to protect it upon accession to the Hague Convention of 1954 on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Time of an Armed Conflict. This international agreement, along with the Polish experiences of the Second World War, laid the foundations for building an efficiently functioning system for the protection of cultural property during an armed conflict. Recent years have brought an increase in global interest in this area. Asymmetric threats against cultural heritage objects forced the involvement of military entities in developing security mechanisms. The author will provide an overview of national institutions tasked with the protection of cultural property in times of peace, assess the quality of these institutions as well as propose de lege ferenda postulates that could improve their functioning.

ЖИВАЯ ЭТИКА КАК ФИЛОСОФСКОЕ ОСНОВАНИЕ ПАКТА РЕРИХА

The paper demonstrates the intrinsic connection between the Roerich Pact - the first international treaty on the protection of cultural property in peace-time and in time of armed conflicts, and the philosophic system of the Living Ethics. The Pact was initiated by the outstanding Russian thinker, artist, scholar and public figure Nicholas Roerich whereas the Living Ethics was created by Helena Roerich and Nicholas Roerich in cooperation with the spiritual Teachers of the East, and it represents a synthesis of the Eastern philosophy and the Russian cosmism. According to the Living Ethics, culture is the foundation and the driving force of the evolution of humanity, it is also the basis for lasting peace in the world. Nicholas Roerich’s concept of culture-which is based on the ideas of the Living Ethics-not only draws a clear line of distinction between culture and civilization, it also substantiates the necessity of according priority to culture in its interrelation with civilization. The principle of priority of culture is implemented in the Roerich Pact: this international treaty provides for unconditional protection of cultural property in times of armed conflict (priority of culture over military necessity), and in peacetime it accords priority to culture (education, science, arts and spirituality) in the internal policies of the countries, which means in particular priority of funding of the cultural, scientific and educational institutions. The main objective of the Roerich Pact is the preservation of cultural property. According to the Living Ethics the preservation of the material objects of culture means the preservation of the energy of culture (the latter is the foundation for the evolution of mankind), for energy does not exist without matter. Cultural heritage which has accumulated in itself the creative luminiferous power of thought of its great creators is of paramount importance for improvement of society and for overcoming the deep-running contemporary crises and particularly the main one of them - the moral crisis. The destruction of cultural objects and consequently of the very space wherein culture exists inevitably brings about the domination of pseudoculture which resonates with the low instincts of the human being and leads to the swelling of egotism, aggression and mass predatory consumption. True culture, true art, and science elevated by ethics contribute for the development of the inner spiritual strength of the human being, for the flowering of her/his creative potential and therefore for the advancement of humanity on the ladder of its cosmic evolution.

Enhancing International Law with Respect to The Protection of Cultural Property in Times of Armed Conflict: A Comparative Analysis

Enhancing International Law with Respect to The Protection of Cultural Property in Times of Armed Conflict: A Comparative Analysis

Enhancing International Law with Respect to The Protection of Cultural Property in Time of Armed Conflict: A Comparative Analysis

Enhancing International Law with Respect to The Protection of Cultural Property in Time of Armed Conflict: A Comparative Analysis

International Legal Protection of Cultural Heritage in Armed Conflict: Achievements and Developments

The recent statement by President Donald Trump, according to which he was ready to strike at 52 sites in Iran – some of them of primary cultural importance – in response to possible attacks against United States targets in the aftermath of the killing of General Soleimani, has been met with outrage by many international observers, while the Pentagon hastened to distance itself from ‘its’ President. These reactions shed light on the fundamental importance that the international community presently attaches to the safeguarding of cultural property in times of armed conflict, in particular that property of outstanding universal value that should be considered part of the world cultural heritage, such as the many Iranian sites that provide testimony of some of the most ancient civilizations. This paper will first summarize the existing legal framework for the protection of cultural property in times of war and the main problems associated with it. That framework will then be revisited in light of the various developments arising from the normative and judicial practice which has emerged, to an unprecedented extent, in the context of recent cultural crises and tragedies caused by armed conflict. Developments relating to customary law, individual criminal responsibility and the activities of the UN Security Council in this area are especially analyzed. The paper concludes that, ultimately, all conditions are in place for the protection of cultural heritage in armed conflict to take further steps forward, for example by strengthening the ban on the use of cultural property for military purposes, or by increasing the legal and political synergies between UNESCO’s work, chiefly in safeguarding the world heritage, and that of the institutions most involved in the military and humanitarian field.

الحماية المعززة للممتلكات الثقافية في أوقات النزاعات المسلحة

الحماية المعززة للممتلكات الثقافية في أوقات النزاعات المسلحة

The Criminalization of Offences against Cultural Heritage in Times of Armed Conflict: The Quest for Consistency

This article undertakes a comparative analysis of the two main international legal instruments providing for offences against cultural property and cultural heritage in times of armed conflict in order to assess existing gaps and lacunas, and to make suggestions on how better to advance the protection of cultural property through international criminal law. The International Criminal Court Statute takes a very retrograde attitude to this kind of crime � which the author calls the civilian-use approach � whereas the Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in Times of Armed Conflict seems far more innovative, preferring a cultural-value oriented approach. The author concludes that the latter approach is more appropriate and that, at present, the most effective tool for pursuing war crimes against cultural property is Protocol II to the 1954 Hague Convention. It is thus crucial to promote ratification by a large number of states and to encourage states to adopt implementing legislation that may allow domestic judges to prosecute the most serious crimes against cultural heritage on the basis of jurisdictional criteria provided for in Protocol II to the 1954 Hague Convention.

War and Cultural Property: The 1954 Hague Convention and the Status of U.S. Ratification

In May of 1954, the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (Hague Convention) was adopted in an attempt to curb the destruction of movable and immovable cultural property during war. Recent conflicts, such as the continuing war in the Balkans, remind us that the Hague Convention is as relevant today as it was fifty years ago. Although this Convention is the most comprehensive and internationally recognized treaty to protect cultural property in time of war, the United States remains one of the few signatories that has yet to ratify it. In January 1999, former President William J. Clinton forwarded the Hague Convention to the Senate with the recommendation that it ratify the Convention and part of Protocol I. Although this presented perhaps the first real opportunity in nearly half a century for the United States to join one hundred countries and ratify the Hague Convention, its fate remains uncertain. Generally oriented towards the United States' policy and practice, this article broadly discusses the Hague Convention, its history, its weaknesses and strengths, and the current status of U.S. ratification.

On Defining the Cultural Heritage

Examples can be found from ancient times of concern for the protection of cultural artefacts and early legislation to protect monuments and works of art first appeared in Europe in the 15th century. Cultural heritage was first addressed in international law in 1907 and a body of international treaties and texts for its protection has been developed by UNESCO and other intergovernmental organisations since the 1950's. The 1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict of UNESCO (henceforth the “Hague Convention”) is the earliest of these modern international texts and was developed in great part in response to the destruction and looting of monuments and works of art during the Second World War. It grew out of a feeling that action to prevent their deterioration or destruction was one responsibility of the emerging international world order and an element in reconciliation and the prevention of future conflicts. International law relating to the protection of cultural heritage thus began with comparatively narrow objectives, the protection of cultural property in time of war.

Protection of cultural property in time of armed conflict

The extent of destruction and appropriation of cultural property in recent armed conflicts, especially those in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, questions the adequacy of international rules aimed at the protection of cultural property in armed conflicts. This article seeks to examine that problem by analysing the basic international rules devoted to the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflict.

The return of cultural property

The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries bore witness to the zenith of the European art of 'collecting' antiquities. The second half of the nineteenth century saw the beginnings of systematic archaeological techniques of excavation, field survey, conservation and protection. It saw what Professor Seton Lloyd has called the 'birth of a conscience' regarding the expropriation of antiquities from other countries. In the twentieth century the idea has emerged that cultural property is a matter of international concern, as being part of the 'heritage of mankind'. This concern has centred around looting from and destruction of archaeological sites, cultural heritage, the illicit traffic of art in the international market, and the return of cultural property. ildditional controls have been sought to establish the protection of cultural property in time of war as well as peace.

The International and National Protection of Movable Cultural Property – A Comparative Study

Written by a lawyer, this publication has as its objective an analysis and comparison of past and present laws relating to the protection of cultural property in both peacetime and war. Williams covers the historical background of the problem of the displacement of cultural property, various attempts (from the 1870's to the Hague Convention of 1954) to regulate the movement of cultural property in time of war, the protection of cultural property under Customary International Law, nationally imposed export controls, and international agreements for the protection of cultural property in peacetime. A great deal of space is devoted to the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and preventing the Illicit Import Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural property. Appendices provide the texts of various conventions and acts.