Fortifying the Cross-Border Protection and International Security of Cultural Property and Heritage

Land use and land cover analysis of cultural World Heritage to inform assessments of climate vulnerability

The on going armed conflict in Sudan since April 2023 between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) has had a significant destructive impact on the country's cultural objects and historical heritage. In the context of international law, Sudan, as a state party to the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in Armed Conflict, has a legal obligation to protect and respect its cultural heritage, both in peacetime and in times of conflict. This article analyzes Sudan's state responsibilities under the 1954 Hague Convention, focusing on three main aspects: (1) legal compliance and implementation of the convention's provisions in the current armed conflict, (2) challenges and obstacles in protecting cultural heritage amidst humanitarian crises, and (3) international accountability and the role of the global community in upholding legal protection for cultural objects. The analysis shows that although Sudan has formally ratified the 1954 Hague Convention and participated in various UNESCO initiatives related to the protection of cultural heritage, the implementation of these obligations remains normative and ineffective on the ground. Various international reports indicate serious violations, such as the looting of national museums, the destruction of archaeological sites, and the illegal trade in cultural artifacts. The main obstacles to implementing the convention in Sudan include weak institutional capacity, unstable security conditions, the government's lack of prioritization of cultural protection amidst the humanitarian crisis, and limited national legal mechanisms for prosecuting perpetrators. From an international accountability perspective, the 1999 Hague Convention and its Second Protocol provide space for individual and state criminal responsibility for serious violations of cultural property, but its implementation mechanisms in Sudan remain elusive. Support from the international community, including UNESCO, ICOMOS, and human rights organizations, is crucial for encouraging compliance and restoring cultural heritage affected by the conflict. Overall, this study confirms that Sudan's responsibilities for the protection of cultural objects have not been effectively implemented in accordance with international legal standards. Concrete steps are needed to strengthen national capacity, provide international technical cooperation, and establish clear accountability mechanisms so that cultural heritage protection can become an integral part of post-conflict peacekeeping and reconstruction efforts.

Among the issues raised internationally that relate to the protection of cultural heritage, increasing attention is being paid to the individual responsibility of perpetrators of crimes against cultural property. The aim to harmonise the level of criminal law protection of cultural property in national legal systems is seen as one of the most important factors that could reduce crime in this area. Legislative initiatives undertaken by countries in order to strengthen the criminal law protection of cultural property focus primarily on two groups of problems: the development of a catalogue of offences against cultural property and the determination of the type and amount of sanctions with which these offences should be threatened. In the search for an optimal pattern of penalisation, the article identifies the norms of international law influencing the scope of penalisation of behaviours violating the principles of protection of cultural property in the national legal orders and analyses the legislative achievements so far obtained within the framework of international cooperation at the universal and regional (European) level. The considerations were concentrated around three key issues, which were considered to be: the notion of just punishment, the analysis of the scope of criminal law protection of cultural property set out in the documents of UNESCO and the Council of Europe, and the type and amount of sanctions that should be applied to behaviour directed against cultural property under legal protection. The last part of the article consists of the final conclusions formulated after an autonomous assessment of the regulations adopted in the two systems of international cooperation on the criminal law protection of cultural heritage indicated above.

RESUMENLa proteccin de bienes culturales en caso de conflicto armado es un tema que ha cobrado especial relevancia en los ltimos aos debido a las guerras en el medio oriente y los conflictos blicos recientes.La historia de nuestro pas no est exenta

The protection of cultural property constitutes one of the fundamental domains of international humanitarian law. However, the advent of modern era of cyber warfare and the digital technologies has generated novel legal challenges. This article examines the applicability of existing international legal frameworks, primarily the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and its additional protocols, to three categories of heritage: physical, digitized, and digitally created cultural property. A historical-legal analysis demonstrates that cultural property has consistently been a deliberate target of destruction and looting during armed conflicts, prompting the gradual evolution of international law from the Lieber Code to the Hague and Geneva Conventions. While the digital transformation has significantly increased the accessibility of cultural heritage, it has simultaneously created heightened risks of cyber-threats, manipulation, and data destruction. The article argues that, notwithstanding the 1954 Hague Convention does not explicitly address “digital” or “digitized” property, an evolutionary interpretation allows such assets to be considered analogous to archives and repositories of cultural memory, thereby subjecting them to the existing regime of international legal protection. This approach is consistent with state practice, UNESCO initiatives, and the principle established in international law that cultural heritage constitutes a common value of humankind. In conclusion, the study reflects that the protection of digital and digitized cultural heritage has emerged as one of the most pressing challenges of contemporary international law. While existing treaties provide a foundational framework, effective 139 guram Rvinjilia, revaz berulava samarTlis kultura, 2025, № 1 safeguarding requires not only interpretative development of current norms and state practice but also the creation of new, universal, and binding legal standards to ensure the preservation of humanity’s cultural identity in the digital age.

The protection of cultural property in times of armed conflict: Ethics, gender, and coloniality – CORRIGENDUM

Abstract Cultural heritage rests on imaginings of a shared humanity transcending national dividing lines. However, cultural heritage sites are frequently targeted in war. In this article I show that the politics of cultural protection is marked by tensions and contestations. A key argument is that the protection of cultural heritage in armed conflict is a militarised practice that is informed by notions of protection that are broadly western-centred and masculinised. Therefore, I suggest that they are insensitive to the gendered and colonial power relations that undergird the protection of cultural property. Informed by critical heritage studies, cosmopolitanism, and feminist IR scholarship, I elucidate the claims of this article through a feminist narrative analysis of protection. I identify what is said and what is silenced in heritage protection narratives. First, I focus on the wider storytelling that surrounds heritage protection, unpacking the ethical, gendered, and colonial assumptions employed. Second, I turn to the narration of military protection in the UNESCO military manual, attending to its ethical underpinnings, protection logics, and privileging of distinctively western military knowledge. I conclude by calling for a more nuanced approach to cultural protection.

The Mediterranean seaboard stretching across the Middle East consists of lands carved into states that are the inheritance of many older civilisations. These countries are at the intersection of the ancient and the modern world. The Libyan state, which was destroyed in 2011 on the pretext of regime change, was a fusion of classical and Arab civilisations, and the archaeological sites that were once in excellent order now lie in ruins in the wake of the subsequent rebel attacks under air cover. The takeover by factions of mostly Berbers who were given autonomy of conduct by NATO forces allowed the artistic treasures to be systematically dismantled and shipped abroad. The Western-backed militants, often supported by mercenary forces, destroyed the Roman architectural sites that were Libya's heritage. This amounts to a breach of the Hague Conventions for the Protection of Cultural Property, which is a crime in international law; however, the lack of a hierarchical structure makes it difficult to prosecute their commanders. The issue then is whether the arming and logistical support by the US/NATO of the armed factions binds them in vicarious liability for destruction of the cultural property in Libya. This paper argues that there should be a new annex to the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict that conveys responsibility for collateral damage to state parties who strategically support, with aerial bombardment, the irregular militias who plunder the culture heritage. This paper examines the aspect of international humanitarian law that applies in NIACs that would lead to the arrest and trial of those at the top of the chain in ‘cultural genocide’ and their liability under international conventions.

Objectives: This article examines the protection of cultural property in times of armed conflict, arguing that the absence of a unified legal framework contributes to the failure of international law in protecting such property. Methodology: Using analytical and critical approach, this Article analyzes relevant legal provisions and assesses their impact on cultural property protection. Results: The article proposes three key approaches to enhance the understanding and implementation of international law in this context. First, it suggests that cultural property protection should be viewed from a humanitarian perspective rather than solely as a matter of regulating armed conflicts. Second, it advocates for the use of existing international legal mechanisms that have proven effective and widely accepted. Third, the article calls for a reassessment of the military necessity exception. Given recent developments, it argues that this exception should be refined, and a new legal concept for “crimes against cultural property” should be introduced to deter violations. Conclusion: Ultimately, the article concludes that the failure to protect cultural property stems not from a lack of legal provisions but from inadequate understanding and application of existing laws. Instead of drafting new laws, improving comprehension and interpretation of current regulations would enhance compliance and effectiveness. Implementing the proposed approaches would contribute to a more coherent and practical legal framework, ensuring better protection of cultural heritage during armed conflict.

Seventy-one years after its adoption, the 1954 Hague Convention, along with its Protocols, remains the most specialised legal framework for protecting and safeguarding cultural property during armed conflicts and military occupation. This article, through specific cases, seeks to assess the practical implementation of the Convention and highlight its weaknesses. Specifically, the vagueness of certain critical provisions allows—at times deliberately—for their misinterpretation by the contracting parties. In particular, the ambiguity of the term ‘imperative military necessity’ or the relocation of cultural goods for protective purposes permits violations of the Convention. Moreover, the lack of a clear distinction between the cessation of hostilities and the period of occupation could enable abusive practices. In addition, significant issues, such as the return of looted cultural goods, are addressed not by the Convention itself but by its First Protocol. This weakens the overall protective framework, as states are not bound to ratify the Protocols. The current global developments involving both interstate conflicts and those involving non-state actors, such as terrorist organisations, underscore the serious challenges facing the 1954 Hague Convention. Consequently, it becomes imperative to strengthen its provisions to ensure more effective protection of cultural property during times of conflict.

Abstract In this study, we argue that uncovering losses from public collections and making efforts to recover them is of fundamental importance concerning the responsible management of state assets and the maintenance of the cultural public interest. In recent times, the perception of museums has been in a constant state of flux, with international expectations associated with them sometimes appearing to be contradictory. While much attention has been paid to the diligence of care, museums must exercise in areas such as acquisition, deaccessioning policies, repatriation, and decolonization, an equally important function – but one less discussed in the international literature – which is the duty of public collections to safeguard and manage state-owned assets. In 2023, the Hungarian National Museum implemented a new initiative aimed at recovering cultural property that had disappeared from public collections under unknown circumstances. This procedure has already generated numerous insights that the current study analyzes, ranging from the difficulty of shedding light on decades-long ownership chains to the challenges of acquisition and the effectiveness of dispute resolution. The Hungarian initiative represents an additional approach to the protection of cultural property, addressing a significant gap in the Hungarian heritage protection system that has received less attention.

The protection of cultural values of peoples is an important area of criminal policy in the Russian Federation. These objects include all the cultural heritage of the country, including historical and cultural monuments, art, painting, architecture and much more. Cultural values contribute to the formation of public consciousness, strengthen the identity of the nation, play a huge role in the education of future generations and the transfer of accumulated experience from previous generations. The main task of the State is to create conditions under which the proper protection of cultural property from outside encroachments will be respected. The research topic is conditioned by the need to preserve the cultural heritage of the nation, to cover all possible measures to prevent and suppress crime in this area. With this in mind, the author proposes to consider a separate entity, a foreign agent, as the subject of crimes committed in the field of cultural values of peoples and to develop a number of specific criminal law measures to combat crime. The need to identify a separate subject of crimes in the field of protection of cultural property is due to the current situation in the Russian Federation and in the world, as well as in connection with the expansion of the list of persons recognized as foreign agents in the country.

ABSTRACT In the near future the UK could be an unwilling participant in a state-on-state conflict that will result in broad physical destruction, not just of critical national infrastructure, but the UK’s cultural heritage. As demonstrated in conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, cultural heritage is another frontline target in the battle for national identity. This paper is not intended to address the ‘how’ of cultural property protection but look at the more theoretical problem of whether the UK is in a position to address the issues of protection for its own heritage. The military will surely be involved in the protection of UK cultural heritage but in what capacity is yet unclear. However, successful military support to civil authorities has already have been demonstrated in the last national and global crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic. Military activity in this situation was not applied to leading, but supporting and enabling civilian activity, bringing core military skills such as planning and analysis to bear quickly. However, failure to plan, failure to engage with key stakeholders, and failure to prepare for the worst scenario will result in the failure of UK CPP and the loss of a nation’s heritage. Preparedness measures must be conducted now.

Objective. The aim of the study is to analyze the state of implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on Offences relating to Cultural Property in national criminal legislation. Methodology. The methodology includes the analysis of individual scientific works, provisions of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, the draft law and the Nicosia Convention, synthesis of scientific knowledge and drawing of reasonable conclusions on the subject of the study. The following methods of scientific cognition were used in the study: analysis, synthesis, formal and dogmatic, comparative legal, systemic, logical and semantic, and systemic and structural. Results. In the course of the study, it was recognized that the improvement of legislation on the protection of cultural property should be guided by the provisions of the Nicosia Convention. The analysis of the draft law «On Amendments to the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses and the Criminal Code of Ukraine in connection with the ratification of the Council of Europe Convention on Offenses relating to Cultural Property» of December 12, 2024, No. 12310, allowed to establish its constructive and terminological flaws and inconsistency with the provisions of the Nicosia Convention. It is proposed to use the universal term «cultural property» in the process of improving Ukrainian criminal legislation. The author substantiates the need to harmonise the content of the term ‘cultural property’ with the Nicosia Convention and suggests that the term «cultural heritage object» should be clarified in the Law of Ukraine «On Protection of Cultural Heritage» of 8 June 2000. Originality. The study established that when updating criminal legislation on the protection of cultural property, one should be guided not only by the provisions of the Nicosia Convention, but also by the ongoing developments in the doctrine of criminal law. It is established that the draft law № 12310 and the Nicosia Convention do not take into account the current Russian aggression against Ukraine. Practical significance. The results of the study can be used in law-making activities in the course of improving national legislation in the field of protection of cultural property.

Abstract Mycenaean pottery was not only temporarily widespread in the Mediterranean region of the 2nd millennium BC, but from the late 19th century AD onwards it also entered numerous museums and other public collections “worldwide”, mainly due to trade in antiquities. Based on the thirteen Mycenaean pottery vessels from the Collection of Classical Antiquities of the Department of Classical Archaeology at Friedrich Schiller University Jena, this article focuses on the “collecting” of Mycenaean pottery vessels by public institutions in the German Empire up to and including 1914, the year in which World War I began. Regarding this topic, the legal regulations of the countries of origin of the objects kept abroad were given special consideration, not only the current German “Act on the Protection of Cultural Property (Cultural Property Protection Act – KGSG)” from 2016. Where provenance information could be found for the Mycenaean pottery vessels kept in Jena, which is true for eight vessels, they were purchased in the antiquities trade or acquired at an auction in 1908 and 1910. One of the vessels in Jena formerly belonged to the Julius Naue Collection. The information available, albeit very little, on the collecting processes of the Mycenaean pottery vessels kept in Jena is in line with the results of Birgit Sporleder’s study of the “Originalsammlung” of the Winckelmann Institute of Berlin Humboldt University. In addition, it does not contradict the results of Matthias Recke, who studied the collecting of ancient Cypriotica in Germany, which has unique aspects. According to the inventory book, six of the vessels in Jena are at least presumably from Rhodes, and one is presumably from Attica. In terms of shape, the Jena collection is dominated by the stirrup jar. The same is true for the Mycenaean pottery vessels published so far in the Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum (CVA) for Germany, on the one hand in general, on the other limited to acquisition for and/or entry into the corresponding institution up to the end of 1914. The prominence of the stirrup jars suggests that the Mycenaean pottery vessels that came to the German Empire/Germany once belonged primarily to looted tombs, and that mainly burials of LH III were/are affected. Based on the CVA, the stirrup jar is also the probably most numerous Mycenaean vessel shape represented in European museums and collections today, based on those countries where no Mycenaean pottery was produced in the 2nd millennium BC.

The issue of protecting and preserving cultural monuments of Ukraine has become acute in the conditions of the occupation of part of the territory of Ukraine by the Russian Federation, since a significant part of the cultural heritage of our state as a heritage of the entire world community is under threat. The purpose of this article was to study the legal status of cultural monuments, mechanisms for the legal protection of Ukrainian monuments during the war by analyzing international treaties and national legislation. The research methodology included the use of various scientific methods to achieve the set goal, in particular: theoretical analysis of literature, comparison, formal legal method and documentary analysis. During the study of the topic, it was found that the protection of cultural monuments in the conditions of the Russian-Ukrainian war covers both humanitarian and criminal aspects. An analysis of individual scientific investigations on the protection, preservation and use of cultural monuments in armed conflicts was conducted. The main attention is paid to international and national legal norms that regulate the protection of cultural monuments, as well as an analysis of their application in practice. Using the example of the ancient city-museum of Chersonesos (a UNESCO World Heritage Site), the article highlights the issues of violations of international humanitarian law and the difficulties in implementing measures to protect cultural heritage in conditions of armed aggression and countering illegal actions in conditions of long-term occupation. An analysis of the norms of international conventions ratified or signed by Ukraine, namely: the European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage, the Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe, the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, provides grounds to state the fact that the protection and preservation of cultural heritage is an international legal obligation of our state to the world community. The article examines the interaction of state bodies of Ukraine, international organizations and public initiatives in the field of monument protection. The results of the study are aimed at raising public awareness of the importance of preserving cultural heritage as an important component of national identity, as well as at strengthening legal guarantees for its protection in conditions of war.

The loss of Chinese cultural relics due to war plundering, colonial expropriation, and illegal trade has resulted in millions of artifacts being scattered across the globe. In response, China has actively engaged in cultural heritage protection through international treaties, including the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, the Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects. However, the effectiveness of these treaties in repatriating lost artifacts remains limited due to temporal constraints (non-retroactivity), spatial fragmentation (asymmetry in treaty ratification), and judicial barriers (cross-border litigation challenges). The non-retroactivity principle prevents the restitution of relics lost before treaty adoption, while disparities in treaty participation among market and source countries hinder enforcement. Additionally, procedural obstacles in litigation, such as conflicts of laws and recognition of foreign judgments, further restrict legal avenues for restitution. To address these issues, this paper proposes enhancing treaty applicability, strengthening international enforcement mechanisms, and promoting a unified global legal framework to improve the effectiveness of cultural relic restitution under international law.

Abstract On 22 January 2025, an international conference titled “Patrimoine en péril?” was held at the Museum of Art and History in Geneva. It was organized by the UNESCO Chair in the International Law of the Protection of Cultural Heritage (University of Geneva), the Museum of Art and History (MAH), and the International Alliance for the Protection of Heritage (ALIPH) Foundation. This event was part of the eponymous exhibition at MAH,1 commemorating the seventieth anniversary of the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, and coinciding with the twentieth anniversary of the entry into force of the Swiss Cultural Property Transfer Act. The conference explored these two themes, bringing together international experts from academia, law, and heritage conservation and management, reflecting a cross-disciplinary perspective on the protection of cultural property in times of crisis. In his opening remarks, Marc-Olivier Wahler (Director of the MAH) highlighted the evolving role of museums in contemporary society. The conference was split into five sessions, each addressing various critical issues related to cultural property, and were moderated by Béatrice Blandin (MAH), Antoinette Maget Dominicé (University of Geneva), and Marc-André Renold (University of Geneva).

Cultural property possesses considerable civilizational and historical significance, playing a key role in defining the identity of peoples and their relationship to diverse ways of life.It serves not only as a bridge between past and present but also as a medium of communication with future generations.This highlights the imperative to protect cultural property from various forms of aggression, as outlined in the 1954 Hague Convention.The Convention offers safeguards against looting, destruction, and illicit trafficking during armed conflicts, ensuring both general and specific protection from military exploitation, which can severely damage the economic stability of nations.