Questionnaire for States parties to UNESCO s Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property INTRODUCTORY REMARKS At the 5th session of the Subsidiary Committee of the Meeting of States Parties to the 1970 Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (1970 Convention), held from 17 to 19 May 2017 at UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, France, the Members of the Subsidiary Committee adopted Decision 5.SC 6 bis requesting the Secretariat to: establish, in coordination with the Bureau of the Subsidiary Committee, a questionnaire in order to identify potential measures to strengthen the implementation, efficiency and visibility of the Convention in all its aspects especially legal, political and structural, including the opportunity to establish a List of Good Practices; send the questionnaire to the Bureau of the Subsidiary Committee for approval; send the questionnaire to all States Parties before the end of September 2017, asking States Parties to submit their responses before 15 January 2018; consolidate the answers of the States Parties and send a summary of the results to all States Parties before the end of April 2018. The present Questionnaire is prepared in application of the aforementioned decision of the Subsidiary Committee. The Secretariat would appreciate receiving the replies from States Parties to the Questionnaire before 15 January 2018. Please send the completed Questionnaire to convention1970@unesco.org. 1
EFFICIENCY IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONVENTION The questions below relate to the implementation of paragraph 3 of the Decision 5.SC 6 bis with regard to the efficiency in the implementation of the Convention. 1) How does your country wish to improve the implementation of the Convention (please elaborate briefly). It is essential for the efficiency of the convention as global tool to combat illicit trafficking of cultural property that more states ratify the Convention. It is also substantial that the implementation on the national level is strongly supported. With reference to UNESCO's letter to the European Commission on November 10 (ref: CLT / HER / MHM / 218) Sweden considers it very important that a contracting Party to the Convention provides a higher level of protection of cultural goods regardless if the objects are created or discovered in their own territory or in another country (see page 3 of the letter, third paragraph). It is important to strengthen the implementation of the Convention through the development of methods and tools to monitor the trade with art, antiques and antiquities, particularly the increasing trade on the Internet. The aim is to improve the ability to detect the sale of cultural objects that have been plundered, stolen and/or illegally exported/imported. 2) Which pillar(s) of the Convention should be given priority in terms of strengthening the implementation? (please tick the box(es) and provide explanations if need be). (X) Prevention ( ) Return and Restitution (X) International Cooperation ( ) other 3) Does your country have any specific proposals and examples regarding the strengthening of the implementation and efficiency of the 1970 Convention? If yes, please provide your input under the most relevant section. a) Prevention The Customs Authorities have an important role in preventing illegal export and import of cultural goods. Security issues concerning cultural goods must also be 2
prioritized. Many thefts of cultural objects around the world seem to be possible due to lack of security systems, plans and other kind of security measures. Recurring awareness-rising campaigns aimed at the public and different stakeholders about what is legal and what is illegal in dealing with and trade in cultural property is also essential. b) Return and Restitution The return and restitution of cultural goods that have been exposed to illicit trafficking could be facilitated if the quality of registered data and photos of objects that is part of the inventories of museums and religious institutions is improved. Often when Swedish National Heritage Board obtains information about the theft of cultural goods in other countries, mostly through their embassies, descriptions and photos of the objects are of such low quality that it is impossible to identify the objects. c) International Cooperation International cooperation is the basis for the success of the fight against illicit trafficking in Cultural property. d) Other 4) With regard to Return and Restitution, does your country have any suggestions regarding the interaction between the Subsidiary Committee and the Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in case of Illicit Appropriation (ICPRCP)? It is a great advantage that the Committees have their meetings back-to-back to facilitate participation by experts as well as synergies between the committees. 5) Considering the momentum gained through the establishment of the Meeting of the States Parties, the creation of the Subsidiary Committee and the adoption of Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the Convention, how could these governing bodies be better utilized in order to strengthen the Convention and support States Parties interests? The governing bodies (above-mentioned) should give priority to analysis and discussions regarding the Periodic Reporting at the meetings of the States Parties. The reports provide an important basis for how to strengthen the implementation of the Convention as well as identifying problems in the implementation. Most presentations are made in collaborations with Meetings of the States Parties and of the Subsidiary Committee and should be made available at UNESCO s webpage and disseminated among the participants. These presentations often contain information on best practices and on valuable experiences that are important to spread and recur, something that is facilitated if they are made long-term available. 3
6) How useful in your experience, are the existing legal and practical tools 1 produced by the Secretariat? Do you have proposals for possible future deliverables by the Secretariat? If so, would you be prepared to provide resources to deliver them? The Model Export Certificate is very useful and constituted a model when Swedish National Heritage Board drafted a new form for the application on the export of cultural goods in 2016, even if there is not a full compliance. The NatLaw Database can be fully useful when all the documents are available in an English version. 7) Do you have further suggestions to improve the dissemination of the tools produced by the UNESCO Secretariat? The UNESCO Secretariat can inform the States Parties with an annual e-mail notification where information about the different tools is shown; the new ones as well as the ones that are since long established. 8) Once a tool is produced to support the implementation of the Convention, endorsed by the relevant governing bodies, what steps should be taken by the national authorities in order to ensure that all relevant governmental or related experts are aware of the existence of the tool and make use of it? Dissemination of knowledge and encouragement of the use of the tool are facilitated by the existence of a well-functioning network for cooperation between authorities at the national level. Such networks should be promoted and need to exist not only between different cultural heritage authorities, archives and museums but also between these authorities and the Customs and Police. 9) Have you or other stakeholders in your country benefited from capacity-building activities/tools related to preventing illicit trafficking of cultural property developed by the Secretariat? If so, give examples and indicate briefly the resulting effect or change. The campaign #Unite4Heritage has been a useful tool to reach out to the public and to the media with information about and views on illicit trafficking of cultural property. 1 Practical tools : Model Export Certificate for Cultural Objects (UNESCO-WCO); UNESCO International Code of Ethics for Dealers in Cultural Property; UNESCO Database - National Cultural Heritage Laws Basic Actions concerning Cultural Objects being offered for sale over the Internet (INTERPOL-UNESCO-ICOM) Legal tools: Model Provisions on State Ownership of Undiscovered Cultural Objects; Rules of Procedure for Mediation and Conciliation 4
10) Do you have suggestions for how the capacity-building programme could be further improved, should financial resources be available? VISIBILITY AND PROMOTION OF THE CONVENTION The questions below pertain to the implementation of paragraph 3 of the Decision 5.SC 6 bis with regard to the visibility of the Convention. 11) What steps have been taken by your national authorities to promote the Convention and its implementation in your country? Information about the Convention and links to UNESCO's webpages for the Convention are available at the websites of several Swedish cultural heritage institutions and other organizations. By the end of 2016 Sweden contributed to strengthening UNESCO's cultural heritage work by giving 4.5 million SEK to the World Heritage Convention, the 1970s Convention and the 1954 Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. This year (2017) Sweden has contributed with 3 million SEK for the same purpose. Within the framework of UNESCO s global campaign # Unite4Heritage the National Museums of World Culture, Swedish National Heritage Board, Swedish ICOM and the Swedish National Commission for UNESCO have launched an information campaign on illegal trade in looted cultural objects, primarily in Syria and Iraq. Examples of activities conducted in association with the campaign are several lectures and panel discussions, including one at Sweden's largest Antique Fair. In addition, an international symposium was conducted on 31 March 2017 arranged by National Museums of World Culture and the Swedish National Commission for UNESCO. 12) Does your country have any proposals regarding the improvement of the visibility and further promotion of the Convention including through the following organs/activities? a) Statutory bodies b) Capacity-building activities 5
c) Awareness-raising activities d) Education material and activities e) Publications The excellent UNESCO Handbook Legal and Practical Measures Against Illicit Trafficking in Cultural Property (2006) should be updated and redistributed. f) Online resources and web-pages g) Media Videos like End trafficking, save culture, posted on YouTube, are very effective measures to increase the awareness. 13) Does your country benefit from the information and links available on the 1970 Convention webpage. Do you find information to be easily accessible and useful? If no, how would you recommend the Secretariat to develop its webpage? Yes, the information is both easily accessible and useful. However, see also answer to question 5. 14) Please provide any additional suggestions to increase the visibility of the Convention. An example of what UNESCO could do to increase knowledge about the convention, is to cooperate with larger guide books and include information about the convention in them. CAPACITY BUILDING AND GOOD PRACTICES The questions below pertain to the implementation of paragraph 3 of the Decision 5.SC 6 bis with regard to the opportunity to establish a List of Good Practices. 15) Does your country maintain a List of Good Practices pertaining to the implementation of the Convention? If yes, which criteria are used to establish such a national List? 6
No. Sweden wants to underline that international lists tend to take much focus and demand large resources. 16) Does your country inform the Secretariat on national good practices concerning the protection of cultural property? (X) yes. For example, through Periodic Reporting and through presentations/statements at different UNESCO-meetings and other relevant national and international forums. ( ) no 17) What in your view should be the criteria and assessment mechanism for a possible international list? 18) Does your country support the idea of the creation of an international list on the best practices of return and restitution cases? ( ) yes (X) no 19) How could Good Practices be better integrated in capacity building initiatives to strengthen the implementation of the Convention? 20) Additional Comments: 7