9 com ith/14 com/4 Rev. Paris, 27 October 2014 Original: English

The Chairperson of the Subsidiary Body presented the next nomination Music of Terchová [draft decision 8.COM 8.26] submitted by Slovakia. The village of Terchová in northwest Slovakia is renowned for its collective vocal and instrumental music, performed by three, four or five member string ensembles with a small two-string bass or diatonic button accordion. It is often accompanied by polyphonic singing and combined with folk dances. Performances take place at a variety of events, including anniversaries, festivals and, most importantly, the Jánošík’s Days International Festival. The traditional musical culture, which is transmitted orally, is a matter of pride and a marker of identity among the inhabitants of the village of Terchová and the surrounding areas. The Subsidiary Body found that the nomination satisfied all five criteria. Although the Body wondered whether the file had adequately addressed the element in all its complexity, and not just some of its aspects, it concluded that the file did convincingly demonstrate that the music of Terchová was a marker of identity for the communities and provided a sense of continuity. The Body particularly appreciated that the music of Terchová had adapted to social changes. However, it also noted the use of inappropriate terms such as ‘authentic’ and ‘pure’, which was reflected in the draft decision. The Body nevertheless concluded by recommending its inscription on the Representative List.

With no comments or objections, the Chairperson declared Decision 8.COM 8.26, to inscribe Music of Terchová on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, adopted.

The delegation of Slovakia thanked the organizers of the Committee session and the people of Azerbaijan for their warm welcome. Slovakia highly esteemed the work of the Subsidiary Body and the time and effort afforded to the process of evaluation. The Music of Terchová presented a vivid tradition connecting all generations, not only in the particular village community, but also because it was well known by everyone throughout Slovakia. It invited the delegates to attend the cultural performance it had organized later in the day.

The Chairperson remarked on the brilliance of having all these cultural manifestations in one place.

The Chairperson of the Subsidiary Body presented the next nomination Feast of the Holy Forty Martyrs in Štip [draft decision 8.COM 8.27] submitted by the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. The Feast of the Holy Forty Martyrs takes place every year on 22 March, honouring the fourth century martyrs of Sebaste and marking the first day of spring. Participants hike up the Isar hill, stopping en route at the church to pay tribute to the Holy Forty Martyrs. This spring event requires the selfless cooperation of many people from all age groups, social classes and backgrounds, thus promoting and encouraging teamwork and solidarity. The feast is transmitted through parents hiking with their children, or older relatives and also brings together the different religious and ethnic groups that live in Štip, The Subsidiary Body found that the nomination satisfied all five criteria, and concluded that it convincingly demonstrated that the feast of the Forty Holy Martyrs gives various ethnic and religious groups present in Shtip a sense of identity and continuity. In addition, the Body appreciated the role played by the feast in encouraging dialogue among the different religious and ethnic groups, thus promoting respect for cultural diversity. As in the case of Slovakia, the Body noted the use of a number of inappropriate terms. The Body nevertheless concluded by recommending its inscription on the Representative List.

With no comments or objections, the Chairperson declared Decision 8.COM 8.27, to inscribe Feast of the Holy Forty Martyrs in Štip on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, adopted.

The delegation of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia expressed its deepest gratitude to the Subsidiary Body and the Committee for recognizing the importance and uniqueness of the element. For several centuries, the Feast of the Holy Forty Martyrs had taken place on 22 March honouring the martyrs of Sebaste and marking the first day of spring. It was grateful that the first inscribed element of the Republic of Macedonia united several cultural expressions in the spirit of the Convention. It was a social practice that represented deep ritual and religious beliefs, as well as beliefs concerning nature and the universe. The multicultural and multi-ethnic background of this social practice manifested the wealth of the country’s cultural diversity, a crossroad of many civilizations.

The Chairperson congratulated the State Party and moved to the next item 8.COM 8.28.

The Chairperson of the Subsidiary Body presented the next nomination Turkish coffee culture and tradition [draft decision 8.COM 8.28] submitted by Turkey. Turkish coffee combines special preparation with a rich communal traditional culture. The beverage is mainly drunk in coffee-houses where people meet to converse, share news and read books. The tradition itself is a symbol of hospitality, friendship, refinement and entertainment that is anchored in the Turkish way of life. Turkish coffee also plays an important role on social events such as engagement ceremonies and holidays. Family members informally transmit knowledge and rituals through observation and participation. The Subsidiary Body found that the nomination satisfied all five criteria, and concluded that the tradition of Turkish coffee provided a sense of identity and continuity, stressing that its meaning was derived from the social and cultural use of the product, not the product itself. The Body appreciated the commitment by organizations of coffee lovers, as well as local and national authorities in implementing safeguarding measures dedicated to the promotion of the traditional culture of Turkish coffee. It also appreciated the social use and the cultural significance of Turkish coffee and the opportunities to promote dialogue and mutual understanding. The Body thus concluded by recommending its inscription on the Representative List.

With no comments or objections, the Chairperson declared Decision 8.COM 8.28, to inscribe Turkish coffee culture and tradition on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, adopted.

The delegation of Turkey wished to thank the Azerbaijan authorities and people for their generous hospitality, congratulating them for the efficient organization of the meeting. It thanked the Committee for its decision, adding that the inscription would help expand dialogue to the national, regional and international levels. Turkish coffee culture and tradition was a very strong element of intangible cultural heritage in Turkey, but also in a broader geographic region that included the Balkans, the Caucuses, the Mediterranean and the Middle East. This culture and tradition had a profound effect on Turkish social and cultural life as a means for social interaction and dialogue. It has equally impacted on Turkish literature, rituals, music, crafts and paintings, and would thus contribute greatly to the visibility of the Convention.

The Chairperson congratulated Turkey and proceeded to the next nomination.

The Chairperson of the Subsidiary Body presented the next nomination Petrykivka decorative painting as a phenomenon of the Ukrainian ornamental folk art [draft decision 8.COM 8.29] submitted by Ukraine. The people of the village of Petrykivka decorate their living quarters, household belongings and musical instruments with a style of ornamental painting that is characterized by fantastic flowers and other natural elements. In folk belief, the paintings protect people from sorrow and evil. Local people, and in particular women of all ages, are involved in this folk art tradition. Every family has at least one practitioner, and tradition is taught at local schools at every level, making decorative painting an integral part of daily existence in the community. The Subsidiary Body found that the nomination had demonstrated that criteria R.1, R.3 and R.5 were met, but that criteria R.2 and R.4 were not. Although Petrykivka painting had broad international visibility, the Body found that the nomination neither convincingly demonstrated how inscription on the Representative List would promote dialogue at national level nor how its inclusion would contribute towards increasing the visibility of intangible cultural heritage in general. Regarding criterion R.4, the Body found that although the file contained a list of supporting associations and institutions, it did not describe the process itself, or demonstrate the widest possible community participation. The Body thus concluded by recommending not to inscribe the element on the Representative List. Finally, it reiterated the importance of using appropriate vocabulary.

The Chairperson opened the floor for comment.

The delegation of Greece congratulated the Ukrainian delegation for submitting its file, and knowing about Petrykivka painting, sought further elaboration from Ukraine on the two criteria that the Subsidiary Body felt were not fulfilled.

Commending Ukraine for its nomination, the delegation of Brazil acknowledged the work of the Subsidiary Body, but felt that criterion R.4 was satisfied if analysed together with the community’s consent. It agreed that section 4.1 of the form only listed the institutions and did not describe how the communities participated in the nomination process. However, when consulting the consent of the communities, which was available online, a number of letters and minutes of meetings of the city and district councils and the public council of Petrykivka helped understand how the process of consultation was conducted, and perhaps provided the evidence needed in criterion R.4. The delegation thus sought clarification from Ukraine on how this process was undertaken that would paint a better picture of how the communities were implicated in the process.

The delegation of Egypt reiterated thanks to the Subsidiary Body for its in-depth assessment, agreeing with Brazil that criterion R.4 was at least partially met and that the community participated actively in the nomination process. Additionally, the second part of the file was quite clear on the sustainability and cultural dynamism in the local community of Petrykivka. It sought clarification from the submitting State.

The delegation of Nicaragua congratulated the Subsidiary Body for its very thorough work, and Ukraine for presenting its initiative, adding that it endorsed the remarks by Brazil, Egypt and others.

Referring to the nomination file, the delegation of Azerbaijan noted with regard to criterion R.2 that it clearly stated under section 1(iv) that the element contributes to uniting people, ‘to harmonizing society relationship background’ and creating ‘harmony with nature and the world’. The inscription will expand the circle of the bearers of intangible cultural heritage on a national level. Citing section 2(ii), ‘It could also open new prospects for the Ukrainian craftsmen who might exchange their skills with other world and regional folk art community experts’ and could promote ‘more effective relationship between the art and crafts experts, will make constructive the dialogue between scientific research and educational institutions, museum communities, schools of professional painters and groups of volunteers and amateurs’ (also section 2(ii)). The delegation appreciated that the nomination had to explain how the inscription of the element would contribute towards the visibility and awareness of intangible cultural heritage in general, but that it was also obvious that the very fact of inscription on the Representative List has a great effect on increasing visibility and raising awareness of its significance nationally. It definitely raised the social and cultural status of such heritage. The Petrykivka painting is an art tradition of exceptional cultural value and significance for Ukraine. The delegation agreed that States Parties should attach great importance to the preparation of their nomination files, but at the same time, it should respect a reasonable balance between the recognition of the file’s quality and the value of the nominated element, i.e. the quality of the file should not be valued more than the cultural value of the element itself and its significance for the national culture, as this contradicted the spirit of the Convention. The delegation reminded the Committee that the spirit of the Convention was to support intangible heritage all over the world, and to help national communities to safeguard their living traditions. It had provided an amendment to the Secretariat.

The delegation of Indonesia took note of the evaluation of the Subsidiary Body, as well as the comments by Brazil, Azerbaijan and others, adding that it would like to request Ukraine to indicate, within the file itself, how this inscription might encourage dialogue among communities, groups and individuals, related to criterion R.2, and how the process of community participation was indicated in the file. The delegation felt that Ukraine’s replies, citing the text within the file, would help the Committee come to an informed decision in keeping with not only the letter of the Convention but the spirit of the Convention.

The delegation of Tunisia noted that the various documents in the file showed that there was a lot of support for this nomination and proved that it had benefitted from the active participation of the local community concerned. It therefore felt that criterion R.4 was met.

The delegation of Namibia associated itself with the remarks by Greece, Brazil and Azerbaijan, asking Ukraine to clarify the points already raised.

The delegation of Kyrgyzstan supported the points expressed by Azerbaijan and Indonesia, adding that the cultural value of the element was sufficiently expressed in criterion R.2. It also asked Ukraine to elaborate on how the inscription would encourage dialogue among the communities, groups or individuals at the national level.

The delegation of Uganda thanked Ukraine for nominating Petrykivka. Under criterion R.2, it found that Ukraine had clearly indicated in section 2(i) that awareness would be raised through the establishment of a regional website, the publication of information brochures, and by initiating television programmes. These awareness-raising activities would actually help the element to create visibility and as such criterion R.2 responded to Article 14 of the Convention, which stated that these activities encouraged the sharing of information.

The delegation of China expressed its appreciation to Ukraine for submitting its very first nomination, and shared the same view as Greece, Brazil, Egypt, Nicaragua and Indonesia, and supported the proposed amendment by Azerbaijan, sensing the strong willingness and high expectations of the local communities. Regarding criterion R.4, it noted the many local communities and institutions involved, with local government holding public hearings. The delegation also asked Ukraine to elaborate more on the process of obtaining informed consent.

The delegation of Latvia welcomed Ukraine’s first nomination and also appreciated the attentive work of the Subsidiary Body. It supported the educational initiatives implemented by Ukraine to sensitize the younger generations to local traditional crafts. It drew the Committee’s attention to certain responses found within the nomination file, namely under criterion R.4 on community participation. It referred to the annex of the nomination in which the consent of a public council, comprising several local organizations, could be found, containing the minutes of the public hearing of the local Petrykivka community that brought together 115 people to discuss the nomination. Although the text of the nomination could be considerably more explicit on community involvement, the delegation could see that there had been noticeable efforts to involve the community in the nomination process. On criterion R.2, the delegation also noted some of the visibility and public awareness initiatives to be carried out post-inscription, including at the local and Ukrainian level. It thus welcomed more explicit explanations of these aspects in the core text of the nomination file, even though it recognized that the responses were not entirely absent from the file in its totality.

The delegation of Belgium remarked that it was important not to confuse the evaluation of the file with the evaluation of the value of the cultural element; the Subsidiary Body did not evaluate the value of the element, as they explicitly expressed, and the Committee should not mix up these discourses; this is not the World Heritage Convention. Regarding criterion R.4, the delegation was interested to know how a number of these groups e.g. the Petrykivka Organization of Veterans, the All-Ukrainian Sport Community ‘Colossus’, the Ukrainian Social Democratic Youth Union or the Farmers and Landlords Association had actively participated in the preparation and elaboration of the nomination file at all stages, as this could not be found in the file itself.

The delegation of Uruguay recognized above all the quality of Ukraine’s nomination in its first attempt to inscribe an element of its intangible heritage, but concurred with those in favour of Ukraine resubmitting the nomination file on the basis of the concerns raised.

The Chairperson gave the floor to Ukraine to clarify the positions that are not clearly reflected in the file.

Regarding the concern in criterion R.4 the delegation of Ukraine explained that the involvement of the communities was wide, direct and first-hand in the preparation of the nomination file. This process was reflected in particular in the annexes but also in sections 4.b and 5, where it was stated that the community was the initiator of the element’s inscription on the national inventory, and had participated in the inventory-making process, as stipulated by Articles 11 and 12 of the Convention. The file also included a number of documents demonstrating the process of preparation, starting with its initiation by the bearers, as well as its extensive involvement and support of the different local and regional communities. The delegation referred to the mention of the farmers in section 1(i) in which it was stated that the Petrykivka people decorated their living quarters and household items with this decorative art. Thus, involvement came not only from the practitioners but also from the many others who practised the art, and was also part of the successful measures to promote awareness about the element. The information about the meeting with the Petrykivka communities (with 115 people in attendance) was found on pages 16, 19, 20 and 21 of the consent letters. There was also a reference to the participation of 800 people at the meeting of the Petrykivka district community. The delegation hoped that this information could be considered. The delegation reiterated that all these measures were part of a broader context aimed at ensuring the sustainable development of the communities.

The Chairperson thanked Ukraine for the information, and turned to the draft decision.

The delegation of Brazil found that the answer by Ukraine was in line with its view that the supporting documents provided enough evidence of community participation. In addition, together with criterion R.3, it was stated that various schools, research and administrative organizations in the region would be carrying out the safeguarding measures. Thus, criterion R.3, which had been verified by the Subsidiary Body, together with the evidence in the supporting documentation, led the delegation to propose the following amendment regarding criterion R.4, ‘the wide participation of practitioners of the Petrykivka decorative painting in the nomination process is reflected in the safeguarding measures proposed, and the nomination includes evidence of the free, prior and informed consent’.

The delegation of Azerbaijan reiterated that there was sufficient information in the nomination file to satisfy criterion R.2, albeit the information was misplaced and dispersed. With this in mind, it proposed the following amendment to criterion R.2, which read, ‘Inscription of Petrykivka decorative painting on the Representative List could promote greater visibility of the intangible cultural heritage by encouraging dialogue between traditional craft practitioners at the national and international levels’.

The delegation of Kyrgyzstan supported the amendments by Brazil and Azerbaijan.

The Chairperson proceeded paragraph-by-paragraph with the proposal in R.2 by Azerbaijan, which read, ‘Inscription of Petrykivka decorative painting on the Representative List could promote greater visibility of the intangible cultural heritage by encouraging dialogue between traditional crafts practitioners at the national and international levels’. The Chairperson noted support from Greece, Nicaragua, Brazil, Egypt, China, Namibia, Latvia, Uruguay, Madagascar, Tunisia, Indonesia and Uganda. With the majority in favour, the Chairperson pronounced paragraph R.2 adopted. He then turned to the amendment in R.4 proposed by Brazil. The Chairperson noted support from Kyrgyzstan, Uruguay, Uganda, Azerbaijan, Madagascar, Tunisia, Egypt and Namibia.

The delegation of Grenada congratulated Ukraine for presenting its file and appreciated the effort made in its presentation. It also thanked the Subsidiary Body for its lengthy discussions on the file, adding that the recommendation to inscribe or not to inscribe did not constitute a judgement of the merit of the element itself but reflected the adequacy of the information presented in the file. It recalled that this had been the method of work adopted by the same Committee members in 2012; at that time the Committee also decided that ‘information placed in inappropriate sections of the nomination cannot be taken into consideration, and invite[d] States Parties to ensure that information was provided in its proper place’. The delegation remarked that the nomination form was clear as to the information required, and there was no description provided. This is not to say that there was no community participation, but the information was not in its correct place. As such, the delegation suggested that the file be referred so that it could be amended in criterion R.4, since the information was not provided within the file.

The delegation of Burkina Faso congratulated Ukraine for its first nomination, adding that it had doubts about criterion R.4 on community participation, as highlighted by Belgium on the role and involvement of some communities listed in the document. It explained that the community of Petrykivka, which may include the entire population, was cited as a number of veteran, sports and union organizations, yet the role of these communities in the elaboration of the nomination file was unclear, as was the link between the communities listed and the element. Not having heard a satisfactory answer, the delegation therefore agreed with the proposal by Grenada.

The delegation of Belgium supported the remarks by Grenada and Burkina Faso.

The delegation of Indonesia found the information to be in its correct place in the file, as pointed out by Azerbaijan, Brazil and others. It thus associated itself with the amendment proposed by Brazil and supported by Kyrgyzstan, Uruguay and others.

The delegation of Nicaragua also found sufficient information to satisfy criterion R.4 and therefore supported the proposal by Brazil, Uruguay and others.

The delegation of Greece remarked that the inclusion of the several listed organizations, providing they represented the communities and conferred to them their sense of identity, was not inappropriate. However, if for some reason the endorsement of the file by these organizations was a flaw in the file, if the other organizations representing the painters and the community as a whole were not given a chance to inscribe the element, then the Committee would do well to take this fully into consideration.

The delegation of Peru spoke of the need to remain consistent and coherent in the decisions adopted by the Committee and therefore concurred with the remarks by Grenada.

The delegation of Egypt remarked that the decision had to be adopted as a whole, and not considering each criterion one by one; if there was a shortcoming in the file, but that answer could be found elsewhere in the document, then it could be considered a formality and be overlooked. It therefore endorsed the proposal by Brazil, supported by other delegations.

The delegation of Brazil agreed with Grenada and Peru that the Committee needed to review its working methods because although the Committee was examining nominations it was ultimately inscribing the element and not the nomination. As such, it understood that all the criteria had to be satisfied, adding that even though the nomination form did not describe how the communities had participated (although it listed the communities), this information was contained in the supporting material and in its assessment of the file as a whole. The Committee could therefore agree that the nomination file was satisfactory.

The Chairperson turned to the proposal by Brazil and noted support from Kyrgyzstan, Uruguay, Uganda, Azerbaijan, Madagascar, Tunisia, Egypt, Namibia, Indonesia, Nicaragua, China, Nigeria and Greece. Thus, with the majority consensus, and with no strict or principled objections from other Members, the Committee could approve this version. The Chairperson thus pronounced adopted the paragraph on R.4. He then turned to the amendment on R.4, which was clearly very important for the communities concerned, and with no objections, it was pronounced adopted. With no further comments or objections to the draft decision as a whole, the Chairperson declared Decision 8.COM 8.29, to inscribe Petrykivka decorative painting as a phenomenon of the Ukrainian ornamental folk art on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, adopted.

On behalf of the Ukrainian government, representatives of the local communities all Ukrainians, the delegation of Ukraine expressed its deepest appreciation and gratitude for the support of the Petrykivka decorative painting, the first Ukrainian element on the Representative List. It expressed its gratitude to the Subsidiary Body for their thorough work, and the Committee for their support and trust, the Secretariat for its help, as well as all the experts for their active participation in the preparation of the nomination. It also extended its gratitude to Azerbaijan for their warm hospitality. Most of the bearers of the element are women, many of whom were elderly. The inscription was thus recognition of their ancestors’ living traditions transmitted from generation to generation. The inscription therefore offered the communities the chance to see the element become acknowledged and respected, an exceptional event for Ukraine, the Ukrainian people, and especially for the community of Petrykivka. Petrykivka decorative painting was an inseparable part of the Ukrainian identity. This inscription would reinforce the national identity and dignity. The delegation confirmed its intention to reinforce capacity-building and act in the spirit of the Convention by promoting and facilitating its main goals, adding that its inscription would contribute towards intercultural dialogue and cooperation, as well as the recognition of intangible cultural heritage as a crucial source of diversity and sustainable development.

The Chairperson congratulated Ukraine once again and proceeded to the next nomination.

The Chairperson of the Subsidiary Body presented the next nomination La Parranda de San Pedro de Guarenas y Guatire [draft decision 8.COM 8.30] submitted by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Every year in the small towns of Guarenas and Guatire, devotees of San Pedro the Apostle celebrate his saint’s day with a series of popular festivities and rituals. Venerated images of the saint are paraded on the streets accompanied by participants bearing flags and banners. Central to the celebration is a re-enactment of the story of the slave María Ignacia, whose daughter was healed by Saint Peter. Women decorate the churches, dress images of the saint and cook the traditional dishes. Adults and children of the community gather to share moments of joy and togetherness that celebrates the vitality of the tradition and reasserts the struggle against injustice and inequality. The Subsidiary Body found that all five criteria had been met, and it especially appreciated the mobilization of community members who transmitted their music, dances and crafts to younger generations within families, schools and cultural centres. Although the Body had hoped for more specific safeguarding measures, it concluded that the file had satisfactorily demonstrated that criterion R.3 was met. The Body concluded by recommending its inscription on the Representative List.

With no comments or objections, the Chairperson declared Decision 8.COM 8.30, to inscribe La Parranda de San Pedro de Guarenas y Guatire on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, adopted.

The delegation of Venezuela remarked that the people of Venezuela would wake up with this great news. It noted that the Convention served to bring closer the ties of friendship, which could be seen in the unanimously positive evaluation of the nomination file. The peoples in Guarenas and Guatire practised these age-old traditions that contributed towards promoting dialogue and creativity. The delegation spoke of the government’s commitment and responsibility towards safeguarding this intangible cultural. The folk culture that represented the identity of Venezuela has enjoyed protection since 2007 when the National Assembly adopted a law to support the Convention. As a consequence, a series of actions were implemented, and a centre for cultural diversity was established linked to the 23 states and 336 municipalities where the communities were organized in networks to protect their heritage. The delegation presented a member of the community of Guarenas and Guatire to explain what inscription means to the communities and to Venezuela, after more than 200 years the world had now acknowledged this tradition.

[Performance of the bearers of the element]

765. 
     Congratulating Venezuela, the Chairperson remarked on the great opportunity to witness the representatives of the different cultures in the moving performances of their intangible heritage during the session.
     
766. 
     The Chairperson of the Subsidiary Body presented the final nomination Art of Đờn ca tài tử music and song in southern Viet Nam [draft decision 8.COM 8.31] submitted by Viet Nam. The music and songs evoke the people’s life and work on the land and rivers of the Mekong Delta region and is performed at numerous events such as festivals, death anniversary rituals and celebrations. The performers express their feelings by improvising, ornamenting and varying the ‘skeletal melody’ and main rhythmic patterns of these pieces, which is based on twenty principal songs and seventy-two classical songs. The musical art is passed through oral transmission, based on imitation, from master instrumentalists and singers to students. The Subsidiary Body found that the nomination satisfied all five criteria. It also noted the commitment of participants to this element, as well as the experts and specialized institutions, together with the support of the government in the implementation of safeguarding measures principally dedicated to the formal and non-formal transmission of music and songs. The Body also appreciated the remarkable mutual respect for cultural exchanges between the different ethnic groups who practice this element. The participation of the communities and their free, prior and informed consent was demonstrated in criterion R.4. The Body thus concluded by recommending its inscription on the Representative List.
     
767. 
     With no comments or objections, the Chairperson declared Decision 8.COM 8.31, to inscribe Art of Đờn ca tài tử music and song in southern Viet Nam on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, adopted.
     
768. 
     Speaking in Vietnamese, the delegation of Viet Nam, represented by the Vice Minister of Culture, Tourism and Sport, spoke of his personal involvement in the work of the Convention for the past ten years and the mission of safeguarding intangible cultural heritage in Viet Nam. The Convention had become a legal instrument that was truly effective and useful as a guiding tool for safeguarding the country’s intangible cultural heritage. In implementing both the law on cultural heritage of Viet Nam and the Convention, thousands of elements had been inventoried nationwide with 38 elements inscribed on the asset list of the national inventory. Hundreds of NGOs had been involved in the safeguarding activities, involving thousands of cultural bearers as well as officers trained to safeguard intangible cultural heritage. In the context of rapid social development and globalization, Viet Nam was strongly committed to safeguarding intangible cultural heritage and the maintenance of cultural diversity. The delegation spoke on behalf of the delegations of the two communities of Đờn ca tài tử present to thank the Committee, the Subsidiary Body and the Secretariat for their support and approval of the inscription.
     
769. 
     The Chairperson congratulated the Committee on the completion of the last of the 28 nominations examined. On behalf of all the delegations and the Committee, he thanked the Chair of the Subsidiary Body and the Rapporteur for their very efficient preparatory work. The Chairperson proposed to discuss the draft decision 8.COM 8 in the afternoon session to allow the former Director-General of UNESCO, Mr Koichiro Matsuura, to address the session with his valuable comments and ideas on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the Convention. Looking back at this ten-year period, the Chairperson remarked that it was well known that Mr Matsuura had initiated the Convention’s procedures and ideas.
     
770.