2015 HEURIGHT Institute of Art of the Polish Academy of Sciences

Transcription

1 2015 Institute of Art of the Polish Academy of Sciences

2 14 The Right to Cultural Heritage Its Protection and Enforcement through Cooperation in the European Union Working plan & agenda Contents 1. Programme of the first working meeting September 2015, Institute of Art of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw page 3 2. General strategy and objectives 7 3. General tasks and topics All teams Team Team Team General agenda Detailed agenda Topic and tasks distribution Deadlines Website March conference and publication 18 2/19

3 Institute of Art Polish Academy of Sciences 26/28 Długa Warszawa, Poland phone fax The Right to Cultural Heritage Its Protection and Enforcement through Cooperation in the European Union First working meeting, September 2015 Participants: Dr Mateusz M. Bieczyński, University of Fine Arts in Poznan Prof. Francesca Fiorentini, Principal Investigator, University of Trieste, Department of Legal Science, Language, Interpreting and Translation Studies Ms Kristin Hausler, Principal Investigator, Dorset Senior Research Fellow in Public International Law, British Institute of International and Comparative Law Dr Alicja Jagielska-Burduk, Editor-in-Chief, Santander Art and Culture Law Review Dr Andrzej Jakubowski, Project Leader, Institute of Law Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences Mr Piotr Jamski, Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences Prof. Ewa Manikowska, Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences Dr Hanna Schreiber, Institute of International Relations, University of Warsaw 23 September arrival of the participants PROGRAMME OF THE MEETING 20:00 Dinner: At the expense of the participants 24 September Accomodation: Francesca Fiorentini, Kristin Hausler, Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences, 26/28 Długa, Warsaw Mateusz M. Bieczyński SHS, Kamienica Fukierowska 44 Piwna, Warsaw 09:00 Breakfast: 10:00-11:30 Meeting First Session: Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences 26/28 Długa, Warsaw Welcome address Andrzej Jakubowski; 3/19

4 Presentation of the research teams Principal Investigators (Andrzej Jakubowski, Kristin Hausler, Francesca Fiorentini); Presentation of the research tasks Andrzej Jakubowski, Kristin Hausler, Francesca Fiorentini, Ewa Manikowska; Key questions and possible approaches related to the research Hanna Schreiber 11:30-11:45 Coffee break 11:45-13:30 Meeting Second Session: Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences 26/28 Długa, Warsaw Presentation of research questions and initial research Legal Report 2015 Principal Investigators (Andrzej Jakubowski, Kristin Hausler, Francesca Fiorentini); Investigators - Mateusz Bieczyński, Hanna Schreiber; Outline proposal for the Legal Report Kristin Hausler 13:45-14:45 Lunch: National Museum of Archaeology, 52 Długa, Warsaw 15:15-18:30 Visit to the National Museum in Warsaw; guided tour by Ewa Manikowska 19:30 Dinner: Faras Gallery the largest collection of Numbian art outside Sudan Medieval Gallery one of the biggest of medieval art in Central Europe 25 September 09:00 Breakfast 10:00-11:30 Meeting Third Session: Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences 26/28 Długa, Warsaw Presentation of research questions and initial research Regional Level Report and Domestic Level Reports (Cultural Report 2015) Principal Investigators (Kristin Hausler, Francesca Fiorentini); Investigators Ewa Manikowska, Piotr Jamski; 4/19

5 Facts finding research (questionnaires) all participants 11:30-11:45 Coffee break 11:45-13:30 Meeting Fourth Session: Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences 26/28 Długa, Warsaw Presentation of the Project s logo and website design Ewa Manikowska, Piotr Jamski Discussion all participants; Dissemination strategy all participants 13:45-14:45 Lunch: National Museum of Archaeology, 52 Długa, Warsaw 15:00-16:30 Meeting Fifth Session: Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences 26/28 Długa, Warsaw 16:30-16:45 Coffee break Alicja Jagielska-Burduk, Editor-in-Chief, Santander Art and Culture Law Review presentation of the journal strategy and objectives; March conference implementing the Directive 2014/60/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 (Recast) discussion with the Project s partner Santander Art and Culture Law Review; Publication strategy Santander Art and Culture Law Review 16:45-18:15 Meeting Concluding addresses and discussion Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences 26/28 Długa, Warsaw Detailed agenda October 2015-January 2016; Project Agenda ; Project strategy ; Monograph and publication strategy; General discussion; Concluding remarks 5/19

6 20:00 Meeting Dinner: 26 September 09:00 Breakfast departure of the participants 6/19

7 2. General strategy & objectives Abstract: This project investigates how human rights guarantees in relation to cultural heritage are being understood and implemented in the EU and in its neighbouring countries. It focuses on Poland, the United Kingdom and Italy - countries representing different cultural, political and legal traditions - and their relations with other states and non-state cultural communities. Acknowledging the changing nature of the right to cultural heritage, the project will map how this right s evolving content affects the forms of protection, access to and governance of cultural heritage. The added value of the project consists in combining an analysis of the relevant laws, their implementation and enforcement. Firstly, it will provide a theoretical reconceptualization of the right to cultural heritage, focusing not only on positive law and jurisprudence, but also on soft-law rules, diplomacy and cultural cooperation as possible alternative devices for fostering inter-cultural dialogue and understanding. Secondly, in its practical perspective, the project analyses how the technical tools used to manage and protect cultural heritage, in particular digitization processes with the development of databases, virtual museums, etc., are currently considered and how they could be further developed to strengthen the enforcement of the right to cultural heritage throughout the EU, including its external action. As a result, the project will contribute to the development of sustainable strategies for protecting and managing cultural heritage as a means to foster inter-national and inter-cultural dialogue within the European region. Its outcomes will be twofold: i) a path breaking contribution to an interdisciplinary scholarship in this area, disseminated through various publications (articles, reports, workshops and a monograph); ii) the elaboration of recommendations and guidelines openly accessible via a new online platform concerning best practices on the use of cultural heritage for the benefit of states and communities which all have an intrinsic interest in its protection and enjoyment. Research questions: to what extent the right to cultural heritage can be seen as a right protected and enforced within the body of EU law; to what extent the experiences of the Member States in their internal and external cultural heritage policies contribute to the decision-making and standardization of cultural heritage policies throughout the EU (within this context the distinct experiences of Poland, the UK and Italy will be examined in particular); how the accession of the EU to the ECHR will change EU action in the area of cultural rights and cultural heritage; the relation between the EU and other transnational regimes applicable to the protection and enjoyment of cultural heritage (both regional and global); whether/what are the distinctive features of European cultural rights, in particular in their relation to cultural heritage, in the different regions of Europe analysed in the project; what is the place of culture and cultural heritage within the EU s external action. 7/19

8 What are we aiming at? Our core objective is to define the concept of the right to cultural heritage within the body of EU Law. See general meta plan by Hanna Schreiber To research EU practice and evaluate it. To evaluate select EU programmes (digitalization) in the area of cultural heritage within supporting competences of the EU. To detect best practices in regional case-studies. Propose some recommendations. Dissemination of knowledge: reports, conferences, participation in conferences and workshops, publication of papers, web galleries and final monograph 1. All teams 3. General tasks and topics In relation to the first aspect, the project seeks to investigate whether such a right has already been formulated, guaranteed and enforced within various layers of EU law. This includes a consideration of the remaining obstacles to enforcement. Indeed, the right to cultural heritage constitutes one of the most important but at the same time less defined areas of EU law and policy. In fact, the European integration project which started with the Treaty of Rome in 1957 has for most of its history avoided to include cultural action as a field of common engagement. Until the adoption of the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992, establishing the European Union, European Communities had been focused predominantly on economic and political matters, whereas the areas of culture and cultural heritage had been dominated by the activities undertaken within the framework of the Council of Europe (CoE) and, in a broader context, of UNESCO. The fall of the Iron Curtain dramatically altered the cultural and human rights landscape in Europe. The subsequent accession of former Eastern bloc countries to the EU, CoE and to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) consolidated concepts of common European values, including a shared, though diverse, culture and cultural heritage. Nowadays, in the globalized reality, European culture no longer constitutes an emanation of Western civilization, values and ways of life. It rather amounts to a distinct phenomenon (profoundly shaped by the integration process, the diversity of European societies and regional human rights law) located vis-à-vis the plurality and variety of other cultures of the world. Thus, the need for a more coordinated common action in respect of cultural and cultural heritage policies has been voiced. The Treaty of Maastricht introduced for the first time culture as a part of the integration process (Article 128). Accordingly, the European Community shall contribute to the flowering of the cultures of the Member States, while respecting their national and regional diversity and at the same time bringing the common cultural heritage to the fore. The Community and its Member States committed themselves to foster cooperation with third countries and the competent international organizations in the sphere of culture, in particular the Council of Europe. The Community 8/19

9 was also obliged to take cultural aspects into account in its action under other provisions of that treaty. However, the common action was to be aimed at encouraging cooperation between Member States and, if necessary, supporting and supplementing their action in the areas of improvement of the knowledge and dissemination of the culture and history of the European peoples ; conservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage of European significance ; non-commercial cultural exchanges ; artistic and literary creation, including in the audio-visual sector. In fact, the lack of the Community s competences in the area of culture and cultural heritage has led to very limited common strategies in these areas, mostly referring to the subsidiary action supplementing Member States policies. The profound reform of the EU, introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon, has not changed the EU competences in the areas of culture and cultural heritage (see Article 167 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFUE)). Yet the new legal and institutional framework, comprising a consolidated legal personality for the EU, deeper integration of Member States, accession of the EU to ECHR, as well as more efficient decision-making instruments and greater coordination and consistency in EU foreign policy, have brought new challenges to EU action in respect of cultural policies, including the right to cultural heritage. In this light, the core objective of the project in its legal dimension is to explore the content of the right to cultural heritage within the framework of cultural rights and to consider whether and how it entails: the participation of individuals and communities in the interpretation, preservation/safeguarding of cultural heritage; the access and enjoyment of cultural heritage by individuals, groups and communities; the preservation and protection of common interests to cultural heritage on domestic, regional, EU and global levels; the resolution of conflicts pertaining to cultural heritage which often have also an ethnic and religious component and the coexistence of competing interests and values over cultural heritage. The analysis, jointly pursued by the three teams (Polish, British and Italian), will not be limited only to positive law and case law, but it will also deal with the role of soft-law rules, cultural policy, diplomacy and cultural cooperation (including bilateral agreements and memoranda of understanding) as possible alternative devices to foster inter-cultural dialogue and understanding as well as to settle existing and potential cultural heritage conflicts. Such research is extremely timely and needed within the context of evolving EU internal and external actions in matters of culture and cultural heritage, particularly in relation to the consolidation of European common engagement in these areas. 2. Team 1 The Polish team will focus on these aspects in Poland, examining and assessing such methods both in internal dimension as well as in the external one in relation to Ukraine and Germany. In fact, the case of Poland is particularly relevant since as a result of the 1945 Potsdam Agreement, Poland s state boundaries and its ethnic composition were greatly altered. It lost nearly half of its former territory in the east to the USSR, and it obtained vast territories to the west at the expense of Germany. Consequently, Poland, while losing its eastern historical territories, obtained large western territories of a predominantly German cultural character. The post-wwii extensive population transfers as well as the tragic disappearance of nearly the entire Jewish population of this region of Europe made Poland an ethnically homogenous country with an extremely fragmented, damaged and heterogeneous heritage. Moreover, the nationalization and socialisation of property as well as the policy of 9/19

10 the centralisation of cultural heritage management undertaken under the communist regime led to further complications and ruptures in terms of the right to the access and enjoyment of cultural heritage, both individually and collectively. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the profound process of political, legal and social transformation in Central and Eastern Europe enabled for a re-examination of the existing legal and policy frameworks. In this regard, the Polish team will explore the internal instruments and methods providing for community participation in the management, access to and protection of cultural heritage. In particular, it will explore, through the examination of existing laws and policies as well as by means of surveys and questionnaires, how non-governmental organizations and other groups (local communities and minorities) acting in the realm of tangible and intangible heritage attempt to influence the structures of power, mainly government institutions in order to gain different goals relating to cultural policy. Thus the process of the politicization of cultural heritage discourse will also be taken into account. The different roles and faces ascribed to cultural heritage will be analysed on two levels: non-state actors and governmental institutions. This research will thus provide an analytical report to be published online. In reference to the external dimension, the Polish team will endeavour to explore how the access to cultural heritage has been implemented in relation to those communities whose link to cultural heritage had been ruptured as a result of WWII and subsequent territorial and ethnic reconfigurations. In this regard, both the legal and non-legal means of providing access and enjoyment will be examined. In particular, these will concern the relations between Poland, Germany and Ukraine. Importantly, the team will explore what practical access instruments are available for human communities in these countries to the cultural heritage which was profoundly scattered in the 20 th century. Such heritage comprises artworks, photographic images of inexistent monuments and local traditions, church bells, library materials. This part of the research tasks will be also concluded with the online publication of an analytical report. Next, the research will also be pursued through a digitization project conducted by the Polish team to create its own online database comprising ca photographs of wooden Orthodox and Catholic churches and synagogues, as well as items of rural architecture in Central and Eastern Europe (covering current territories within the borders of Poland, Slovakia, Romania, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and European Russia), preserved at the Institute of Art of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw. These will comprise the images from several photographic surveys (the recording of buildings, art works, ethnography and landscapes deemed valuable) collections dating from between the end of the 19 th century and Most of the buildings are no longer in existence, yet memory and knowledge of them constitutes an important common heritage for this part of Europe. In this context, the project will advocate a novel concept, according to which survey photography may be perceived as a means of group self-determination by the visual process of representing cultural heritage. Such an approach will enable the consortium s members to understand the process of a digitization of cultural heritage from start to finish, including the practical issues and benefits associated with digitization projects. Selected topics 5 online exhibitions: 1) Eastern Prussia; 2) Wooden synagogues; 3) Church bells of the Catholic and Orthodox churches (Polish team will also assist Italian ones in relation to 10/19

11 Istrian and Dalmatian bells); 4) Polesie ethnology and anthropology of the one of the less know regions of Europe; 5) Wooden cerkvas Carpathian region and WH site. The objectives: to look at the phenomenon of these collections in borderlands; to survey (questionnaires) of communities who may have a stake in these collections; to advocate the access to European heritage often forgotten and lost; to overcome boundaries and obstacles in understanding and enjoying European heritage. Digitalization strategies and practices evaluation and recommendations. Intangible heritage ethics and practices within the EU. 3. Team 2 The British team will first focus on the protection and enforcement of cultural rights as human rights, and the right to cultural heritage more precisely, within the United Kingdom (UK), including their consistency with EU laws and other relevant legal frameworks, whether regional or international. This analytical research will include a conceptual analysis of the ways cultural rights and cultural heritage are understood and defined, in the broader sense, within the UK context. Following the analysis and assessment of the current understanding and legal frameworks applicable in the UK, including any shortcomings, the British team will then draft possible recommendations in order to strengthen the protection and enforcement of cultural rights and the right to cultural heritage within the United Kingdom, in particular through cooperation mechanisms. The British team will also conduct two series of case studies, which will focus on the practical aspects of the protection and enforcement of cultural rights and cultural heritage within the United Kingdom and vis-à-vis other EU Member States, as well as other States, including some of its former dependent territories. Particular attention will be given to the use of technical tools in rendering cultural heritage publicly accessible, including databases of art collections, virtual museums, etc., as well as the use of cooperation mechanisms. The first series of case studies will focus on the question of public access to cultural heritage and community participation in the preservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage within the United Kingdom (the internal access and participation). One suggested case study regards the online inventory being conducted by Edinburgh Napier University with regard to Scotland s Intangible Cultural Heritage, which includes recording the living aspects of Scotland s culture (McCleery et al., 2001). In order to conduct this series of case studies, the British team will develop questionnaires and relevant stakeholders will be identified in order to complete them, including government representatives, cultural heritage professionals (in particular those working on making collections publicly accessible through various databases), as well as NGO professionals working within the UK on the protection and enforcement of cultural rights and cultural heritage and other relevant representatives of civil society. In addition, once responses to questionnaires are received, interviews with relevant stakeholders will be conducted to complement them, when appropriate. The second series of case studies will concern the question of public access to cultural heritage and community participation in the preservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage situated within the United Kingdom but originating from other states, including former dependent territories. Once again, particular attention will be given to technical tools in making cultural heritage accessible and encouraging participation. The Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford, which contains an extensive collection of overseas cultural heritage, is one of the 11/19

12 institutions that will be examined in this series. This particular museum has been pre-selected because of its particularly innovative use of online accessibility such as making accessible recorded sounds or its use of public participation through the presentation of artists sketches of objects in museums collections. This series of case studies will also include the question of the resolution of cultural heritage disputes, in particular overseas claims over cultural objects held in the United Kingdom. The role of databases in cultural heritage recovery will be particularly considered, including as the database established by the Art Loss Register, a London-based art recovery agency. Furthermore, the role of alternative means in the resolution of cultural heritage disputes, including through negotiation and cooperation, will be considered in this series of case studies. This will cover an analysis of the work of the Spoliation Advisory Panel, a UKspecific body, including its recommendations to return pieces such as the Benevento Missal, which was housed at the British Library which subsequently returned it to Italy. The use of technical tools, such as the sharing of cultural heritage in virtual forms will be considered in this second series of case studies. It appears that at present, cultural institutions in the UK have been reactive when faced with claims over the cultural heritage situated on its soil and thus, this series of case studies will consider if a more proactive approach should not be developed in order to avoid conflict over cultural heritage and maximize its positive impact to all potential beneficiaries. Similarly to the first series of case studies, the British team will develop a questionnaire regarding this external aspect of public access and participation in cultural rights and cultural heritage, which will be sent to relevant stakeholders, including those directly impacted by cultural heritage disputes. Questionnaires will be completed by interviews where necessary. The British team will prepare a report for each series of case studies, including key findings and good practice recommendations, including legal recommendations and policy guidelines. These reports will result from an analytical synthesis of the questionnaires, additional deskbased research, as well as discussions conducted at two workshops (one for each series of case studies). These two reports will feed into the wider study conducted by the consortium and provide initial recommendations to strengthen the right to cultural heritage, including its enforcement through cooperation. 4. Team 3 The Italian team will focus on cultural heritage protection in Italy in the particular context of its external relationships with the neighbouring Western Balkan countries. The specific cultural and legal traditions that characterize the countries of the Western Balkan area (Benacchio, 1995), their recent past of wars, and the current process of their gradual accession to the EU, justify a specific interest in studying how human rights guarantees in relation to cultural heritage are being understood and implemented in this region. Here ethnic and religious diversity have represented, in recent history, more a factor of conflict and separation between communities than a factor of cultural richness, one promoting mutual understanding and tolerance. From 1991 to 1995 in the territories of the former Yugoslavia the warring factions involved in the conflict adopted systematic plans for the destruction of religious and cultural sites and objects with the deliberate intention of humiliating and eliminating the enemy ethnic groups (Lenzerini, 2013: 44). After these dramatic events, respect for, and the protection of, minorities and cultural rights, as well as an improvement in regional cooperation to address war crimes issues are 12/19

13 under constant scrutiny by EU institutions and constitute an important part of the conditions of accession established by the Stabilization and Accession Agreements with the Western Balkan countries (see e.g. Stabilisation and Association Agreements with Croatia and Serbia). Cultural cooperation is intended, inter alia, to raise mutual understanding and esteem between individuals, communities and peoples. Acceding countries should also undertake to cooperate to promote cultural diversity, notably within the framework of UNESCO legal instruments and standard-setting. With particular reference to Serbia, a path towards the comprehensive normalization of its relationships with Kosovo is particularly important for the EU accession process. In this context, the research will focus on Italy, Slovenia, Croatia and Serbia in their mutual relationships as well as in their relationships with neighbouring countries, included contested territories. The general aims of the study will be, firstly, to identify the current legal and meta-legal techniques of cultural heritage protection and restitution issues in each of these countries, in order to produce a reliable map of existing legislation and practice. Secondly, the project will assess how cultural heritage protection is perceived by the relevant communities (e.g. whether rights to cultural heritage are perceived as factors for the separation or harmonization of cultural differences). Particular attention will be devoted to the interconnection between the rights to cultural heritage and religion, as means that can be used to build the identity of the communities living in these countries. The legacy of the communist past and its relationship with religion and cultural rights will also be addressed. Thirdly, the research will identify the role that cultural heritage protection may play in the process of the Europeanization of these countries, studying whether the identification of new sustainable strategies for the protection and management of cultural heritage may help these countries in the preparation or implementation of their access to the EU, fostering cultural cooperation and minorities protection which are so crucial for EU enlargement within this region. The individuation of a series of case studies as the primary object of research for the Italian team will help to analyse the above aspects. The pre-selected case studies are the following: (A) The open dispute between Italy and Slovenia on the allocation of a group of Venetian works of art, known as Istria s jewels (Histria collection) (F. Castellani/P. Casadio, 2005; Jakubowski, 2010). These are objects from the municipal and ecclesiastical institutions of present-day Primorska, which until had been preserved in three coastline municipalities of Italian Istria: Koper, Piran, and Izola. In 1940, before the war against Yugoslavia, the Italian authorities decided on the evacuation of the most valuable works of art from the Eastern borderlands, in conformity with domestic Italian legislation. The team will analyse this controversy in the light of traditional international law, as well as on the basis of alternative approaches such as cultural reconciliation and cross-border cultural co-operation and will try to envisage possible alternative solutions to the dispute: aiming to increase access to, but also the management of, these treasures for all the interested communities. (B) Istrian church-bells in Trieste: In Trieste (Museo Miramare) there is a (never displayed) collection of fifteen church-bells dating between the 16 th and 18 th centuries, originally belonging to religious communities of the region of Trieste and Istria. Near the end of WWII, the bells were removed from their original location by the Italian authorities for safekeeping. After the war, the territories from where these bells came basically passed to Yugoslavia and subsequently, after 1991, to the independent states of Slovenia and Croatia. Yet, the bells remained in Italy. Now, the fate of these church-bells would be to return to their original locations and (ecclesiastical) owners, who are disseminated throughout Slovenia, Croatia and, 13/19

14 in a minor part, Italy (Gorizia). The team will analyse the legal and cultural issues developing around this case, and will strive to suggest legal and practical solutions. (C) Serbia and neighbouring countries, including contested territories: The Italian team will analyse two representative case studies. (i) Protection of, and access to, holy Places in Kosovo and Metohia: In Serbia, cultural heritage protection is strictly connected with religion. Religion is the only continuity element in the history and in the building of a collective memory and identity for the Serbian people, following the destruction brought about by sectarian nationalisms. The communist utopia banning any role for religion within society has been quite possibly the major factor out of which rose the worst meaning of nationalism. In this context, the role of religion in the building of a new democratic society after the somewhat delayed fall of the communist regime in 2000 must be particularly addressed in order to understand the ways in which it is possible, and imperative, and useful, to address the cultural heritage problems in this crucial region of the Western Balkans. In such a perspective, the team will address the case of the predicament of holy Places in Kosovo and Metohia (Avramovic et al., 2010). These sites, constituting the most substantial part of the holistic Serbian cultural and spiritual heritage, are located in a territory over which Serbia has not exerted governmental power since Moreover, since 2008 and Kosovo s declaration of independence, the scene has become even more complicated because of the contested sovereignty of Kosovo (at present Serbia considers Kosovo to be one of its territories). It is also reported that these monuments and holy places have been subject to attacks and intentional destruction committed by Kosovar troops in this mostly Muslim region. Given the close link existing in this region between religion, ethnicity and cultural identity, the destruction of these Orthodox sacred monuments is perceived by the Serbian community as an intentional act of denying the very spiritual, cultural and ethnic identity that these monuments provide to the Serbian Orthodox population. Beside this, such acts are also considered as serious cultural wrongs against the general interest of the international community as a whole, since some of them are part of the World Heritage List under the 1972 UNESCO Convention (UNESCO, 1972). In such a context, the research will focus on three major questions: 1) the enforcement of existing legal instruments for the protection of cultural heritage in post-conflict or contested territories; 2) the relation between the right to religion and the protection of cultural heritage; 3) the joint management and protection of world heritage as a means providing for reconciliation between different religious and ethnic communities. (ii) Protocol on the restitution of cultural objects between Croatia and Serbia of 2012: In relation to the arrangements between Serbia and Croatia on the restitution of cultural material, the research will focus on the significance of the EU human rights and cultural policies in setting and reconciling larger cultural, ethnic and religious conflicts. The team will analyse this dispute which also clearly connects cultural heritage protection with the larger context of religious tolerance, human rights and minorities rights, trying to individuate balanced, non-biased alternative solutions based on cultural cooperation through the support of the EU and other international institutions as useful tools for reconciliation. The research pertaining to the case studies will be conducted not only through the traditional means of an examination of existing laws and policies, but also empirically, by means of surveys, questionnaires and interviews conducted with representatives of the interested communities, scholars, NGOs and other governmental and non-governmental institutions endorsing the research. The research pertaining to case studies will result in analytical reports to be published online. 14/19

15 * * * The analysis of select studies, pursued for each team, will be supplemented by the critical and comparative assessment of the impact of digital archives on the enforcement of the right to cultural heritage by analysing the most pertinent digitization projects already in existence within the EU. This part of the study will consider the impact of v-must, the network of virtual museums funded by the European Community. This section of the project will be jointly undertaken by the three teams. In this regard, the project will endeavour their actual impact (how many people use such services), legal and institutional frameworks as well as the cost of their creation and maintenance. 4. General agenda ( ) The project is scheduled for a 35-month time span (August 2015-June 2018). Accordingly, the research task will be divided into four stages, corresponding to four milestones: - (August 2015-December 2015): archival and fact-finding research; evaluation and dissemination of the research already conducted. 1. (January 2016-December 2016): launching a new online platform of digitized cultural heritage; evaluation and dissemination of the research already conducted, including: - publication of research articles; - organization of two research workshops in the United Kingdom and Italy; - monograph in July 2016 meeting in Trieste the structure and invitation must be sent; book proposal on October 2016 Selier/Routledge/Ashgate prompt publication in 2017/2018, at the latest; - questionnaires to completed, distributed and evaluated. 2. (January 2017-December 2017): dissemination and promotion of the project: - assessment of the impact and public response to the new online platform; - open access publication of papers connected with the project; - publication of research articles; - organization of an international conference (invited speakers and open call for papers) in Poland; - organization of a research workshop in the United Kingdom and Poland. 3. (January 2018-June 2018): elaboration of final conclusions, including: - guidelines and proposals de lege ferenda to be submitted to the EU institutions and publication of a monograph on the right to cultural heritage in the EU as a major means of dissemination of the research outcomes - organization of an international conference (invited speakers and open call for papers) in Italy; - organization of an open seminar (promotion of the results) in Poland. 15/19

16 5. Detailed agenda ( ) 5.1. Topics and tasks distribution Participants 1. Dr Mateusz M. Bieczyński, University of Fine Arts in Poznan 2. Prof. Francesca Fiorentini, Principal Investigator, University of Trieste, Department of Legal Science, Language, Interpreting and Translation Studies 3. Ms Kristin Hausler, Principal Investigator, Dorset Senior Research Fellow in Public International Law, British Institute of International and Comparative Law 4. Dr Andrzej Jakubowski, Project Leader, Institute of Law Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences 5. Mr Piotr Jamski, Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences 6. Prof. Ewa Manikowska, Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences 7. Dr Hanna Schreiber, Institute of International Relations, University of Warsaw Jurisprudence of the CJEU and ECtHR research mission in Berlin WTO, EU-USA, trade agreements EU external action general issues and overview of particular policies layout of the first preliminary report EU Constitutional law and the Eastern Partnership (EaP) participation Wroclaw conference Right to Culture participation in the annual conference of the Polish Group of the ILA (International Law Association), Warsaw Galleries and website research mission to Lviv, Ucraine Galleries and draft report on digitalization research mission to Lviv, Ucraine paper on the conference on photo archives (ethnology and anthropology), Geneva Memo > meta plan; EU in relation to UNESCO and Council of Europe participation Wroclaw conference Right to Culture *by January 31, 2016, each participant is expected to prepare a research article on the topic covered by the research and submit it to a peer-reviewed journal Partners 8. Dr Alicja Jagielska-Burduk, Editor-in-Chief, Santander Art and Culture Law Review co-editing of invitation process (March conference); co-editing of the call for papers to the 4 th issue of SAACLR [2(2016)2] 16/19

17 5.2. Deadlines 12 October comments and suggestions to the March conference programme; 15 October all logos to be provided; 20 October all invitation to be sent; 25 October comments to the website; 25 October bios, photos to the website provided; 25 October content of the website; 30 October deadline Georgetown conference!; 30 October Dropbox folder established; 5 November website accessible; 5 November Hania circulates memo; 15 November submission of first drafts; 30 December submission of the consolidated draft preliminary report to language correction (max. 5 one-space pages); 31 January publication of the draft report on the project s website; March - conference in Warsaw; 23 March - participants meeting; 29 March - Georgetown conference (Washington DC). 6. Website Piotr Jamski presented the layout and design of our website. HUERIGHT.EU. The rights to the domain have been secured. A new heuright@gmail.com is already available. The website will operate from November, 2015, so please send me all your comments on 25 October, 2015, at the latest!!!! In addition, please send me the logos of your institutions as soon as possible! (to date I have received only one from BIICL!). 17/19

18 7. March conference implementing the Directive 2014/60/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 Organizers: & Santander Art and Culture Law Review (SAACLR) Generalities: 1. Date: , 02:30 PM 07:30 PM - dinner , 09:30 AM 01:30 PM lunch 2. Venue: Place Great conference room ground floor, Institute of Art Polish Academy of Sciences, 26 Długa, Warszawa, Poland phone , fax ispan@ispan.pl Comments confirmed Accomodation speakers: to be decided - Accomodation speakers (two rooms): Institute of Art, Polish Academy of Sciences, 28 Długa, Warsaw confirmed 3. Idea: We have agreed that the conference shall aim at debating the foundations and implementing process of the Directive 2014/60/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012. In addition, we have also agreed that the EU perspective shall be broadened by an outside-external look presented by international law scholars (ILA and Unidroit) + market/restitution perspective. 4. Content and structure: papers + welcome and concluding addresses +discussions Each paper max. 20 minutes 18/19

19 Draft programme: Monday, Welcome addresses and 8 papers Tuesday, papers and final discussion Publication SAACLR Selected conference papers + call for papers to SAACLR. 19/19