ITEM 7.a OF THE AGENDA:
EXAMINATION OF NOMINATIONS FOR INSCRIPTION ON THE LIST OF INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE IN NEED OF URGENT SAFEGUARDING
Documents ITH/13/8.COM/7.a+Add.2
12 nominations
Decision8.COM 7.a
The Chairperson briefly outlined the working methods in the examination of the files to the Urgent Safeguarding List, stating that although limiting judgement to the content of a file was frustrating, compared to the richness of intangible cultural heritage, it was also the only way to ensure fairness in the treatment of the various files. Thus, the conclusions of the Consultative Body did not address the reality of the element, but only the content of the file. The Chairperson recalled that the Committee at its sixth and seventh sessions established the working method that it would not take into consideration new information that was not already included in the nomination file, and that was the basis for the draft decision. However, the Rules of Procedure allow the submitting State to reply to specific questions from the Committee in order to clarify the information already existing within the nomination, but not to provide new information, as newly received evidence could not be considered in the decision-making process. There were no objections voiced to the way of working. He then moved to the individual nominations, ceding his place to the Vice-Chair from Brazil, Mr Adam Muniz, as the first nomination was submitted by Azerbaijan.
The Vice-Chair informed the Committee that Nicaragua and Côte d’Ivoire had withdrawn their nominations. Thus, there were only ten files to examine. He gave the floor to the Chairperson of the Consultative Body, Ms Claudine Angoué.
The Chairperson of the Consultative Body presented the first nomination on Chovqan, a traditional Karabakh horse-riding game in the Republic of Azerbaijan [draft decision 8.COM.7.a1] submitted by Azerbaijan. Chovqan is a traditional horse-riding game played on a flat, grassy field by two competing teams of five players mounted on Karabakh horses. The players use wooden mallets to drive a small leather or wooden ball into their opponents’ goal. The game is interspersed with instrumental folk music called janghi. Chovqan strengthens feelings of identity rooted in nomadic culture. However, the practice and transmission of Chovqan had weakened due to socio-economic factors, leading to a shortage of players, trainers and Karabakh horses. The Consultative Body concluded that all five criteria were satisfied. The State Party had sufficiently demonstrated that the Chovqan is part of the everyday life of the community comprising players, trainers and spectators who recognized it as an element of their intangible cultural heritage (U.1). The file also adequately described a series of specific threats such as a declining community, disinterest among youth, and general threats such as urbanization and migration that affects the viability of the practice (U.2). Relying on considerable financial support from the government, the file presented clearly formulated and budgeted measures from legal action to training players and horses, and public awareness in which the participation of Chovqan practitioners is systematically considered (U.3). The participation and free, prior and informed consent of a number of groups concerned in the Chovqan, including players and trainers, were demonstrated (U.4).
The Chairperson of the Consultative Body explained that the Body was also satisfied with the evidence that Chovqan was included in the inventory of intangible cultural heritage of Azerbaijan (U.5), as well as the explanation given about its updating and monitoring. The evaluation of the file gave rise to interesting discussions within the Body, including the social and cultural dimension of sport. In light of these discussions, two paragraphs were added as recommendations for the implementation of the safeguarding measures given in the file. The Body believed that Chovqan should be saved not only as a sport and professional practice, but because a wide number of stakeholders identified with it. Safeguarding measures should therefore include all the expressions associated with it, such as the music and crafts. Similarly, each of the associated expressions could not be excluded from the safeguarding measures, and the Committee might wish to invite the State to involve all the communities concerned by the practice in the implementation of the safeguarding plan and not only the players and coaches. The Committee would have the opportunity to measure whether the submitting State Party had taken heed of its recommendations on the state of viability of Chovqan when it submitted its report in four years.
The Vice-Chair was pleased to begin the task with one of four files that the Consultative Body had recommended favourably, and drew the Committee’s attention to correspondence received by the Secretariat. The Vice-Chair recalled that at its seventh session, the Committee adopted Guidelines for the treatment of correspondence from the public or other concerned parties with regard to nominations. According to those Guidelines, any correspondence received up to four weeks before the Body met would be transmitted to the submitting State for a possible response no later than two weeks before the Body examining the nomination would meet. It is within that context that the Islamic Republic of Iran sent a letter to the Secretariat on 4 November 2013 concerning this nomination, to which Azerbaijan replied on 19 November 2013. Both letters were posted on the website of the Committee meeting for the past two weeks and would be removed following examination of the nomination. The Vice-Chair was pleased to inform the Committee that the two parties had resolved their concerns through a small clarification of the title of the element and a minor technical modification in the accompanying video. They had also welcomed the possibility of cooperating together and with other countries in the future submission of a multinational nomination. With that agreement, and with no voiced objections, the Vice-Chair declared Decision 8.COM 7.a1, to inscribe Chovqan, a traditional Karabakh horse-riding gamein the Republic of Azerbaijan on the List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in Need of Urgent Safeguarding, adopted.
The delegation of Azerbaijan thanked the Committee for its decision to inscribe Chovqan, and the Consultative Body that identified this traditional game as worthy of inscription. It was delighted in joining the community of Chovqan players in extending its gratitude to see this centuries-old Karabakh horse-riding game recognized at the international level. Reinforcing the sense of identity of many Azerbaijanis, the inscription would give a strong incentive to the communities concerned to continue practising the element and passing it to the next generation. The inscription had been the result of years of hard work, working together with the community of Chovqan practitioners in different regions of the country. The delegation thanked the Committee that resulted in the inscription, as well as the Secretariat for its untiring support. Concluding, it reiterated its spirit of shared commitment to the values of international cooperation, adding that it was open to discussing future files with its neighbouring countries. Chovqan showed how inscription could be used to unite people with shared origins, traditions and cultural assets.
The Vice-Chaircongratulated Azerbaijan, and especially for its openness for a possible multinational nomination in the future.
The Chairperson of the Consultative Body presented the next nomination on Seperu folk dance, associated traditions and practices of the Basubiya community in Botswana’s Chobe District [draft decision 8.COM.7.a.2] submitted by Botswana. The Seperu folk dance is practised by the Basubiya community during ceremonies and holidays. The dancer leads a succession of pairs of women dancers wearing dresses made of eight pieces of skirt that rise into the shape of a peacock’s tail. A group of vocalists encircles the dancers, singing and clapping throughout the performance. The dance is transmitted orally and through observation. However, enactment is declining, as the active practitioners are mainly elderly women with a limited transmission to the younger generation. The Consultative Body concluded that two criteria were met: U.2 and U.5. Indeed, the nomination clearly demonstrated that the Seperu was in urgent need of safeguarding, particularly due to the advanced age of all its practitioners. The Body was also satisfied with the evidence provided that Seperu was included in the inventory of intangible cultural heritage in the district of Chobe State. However, the Body encountered major issues with the definition of the element. In criterion U.1, based on information contained in the file, the Body was unable to fully understand the traditions and practices associated with the element and to which the title referred. The Body also regretted that a clearer description of the social and educational functions and cultural meanings of Seperu were not provided in the file, even though it was alluded to in the accompanying video. The Body also noted a lack of linkages between the proposed safeguarding measures and the threats highlighted in the file, in accordance with criterion U.3. Some of these measures, such as the establishment of cultural festivals or associated products, and audiovisual and advertising programmes, would not appear to enhance transmission of the element given the elderly practitioners and lack of interest by the youth to learn the dances. Moreover, the proposed measures did not seem to emanate from the communities themselves or be designed to benefit them primarily. The Body also could not conclude on the feasibility of the proposed measures due to a lack of information on potential funding sources or the schedule of implementation. Finally, the Body regretted that some of the proposed measures were identical to those submitted in another nomination by the same State Party instead of being tailored to the specific threats to the viability of Seperu.
Regarding U.4, the Chairperson of the Consultative Body explained that although the community was informed of the nomination, it did not imply that it had fully participated in all the processes of development of the file including the safeguarding plan. With three criteria considered unsatisfied, the Body could not recommend the inscription of Seperu on the Urgent Safeguarding List. However, it welcomed the initiative by the submitting State to safeguard the intangible cultural heritage of this rural community, which was subject to a precarious economic situation. The Body also provided suggestions to the State Party should it wish to revise the file, which related to the description of the element, the identification of safeguarding measures that meet specific threats to the viability of the element, and the elaboration of a safeguarding plan commensurate with the financial and in-kind resources available.
The Vice-Chair thanked the Chairperson of the Consultative Body and turned to the draft decision 7.a.2.
The delegation of Nigeria noted some contradiction in the Body’s report, because it stated, ‘The characteristics of the Seperu dance and the practices and traditions associated with it are not clearly described’ yet the description given in the file clearly stated, ‘It features prominently during girls’ initiation ceremonies, the coronation of Basubiya chiefs, wedding ceremonies and other festivities’. It felt that girls’ initiation ceremonies, the coronation of a chief within an African context was clear to everyone in that it clearly had a social practice and cultural function. In this way, criterion U.1 was clearly met.
The Chairperson of the Consultative Body explained that U.1 was not satisfied because the Body was unable to find the answers in the four sub-paragraphs with regard to the element’s social and cultural functions, the characteristics of the bearers and practitioners, the specific role of these persons and the current mode of transmission. The Chairperson reiterated that this did not imply that the element was not intangible cultural heritage, but that because the element was not very well known, it would benefit from a more detailed description. Moreover, the information contained in the file did not sufficiently describe Seperu and its associated practices, which it should as the latter were part of the element’s title.
The delegation of Nigeria was unsatisfied with the answer because the file read, ‘Seperu folk dance’ and ‘associated traditions’; the associated traditions implied the coronation of Basubiya chiefs and wedding ceremonies, which were not dances.
The Vice-Chair thanked Nigeria for the point well taken.
Supporting the comments by Nigeria, the delegation of Spain was surprised that the Consultative Body did not find that criterion U.1 was met as the practices were clearly specified in the appropriate section.
The delegation of Nicaragua also supported the remarks by Nigeria and Spain.
The Vice-Chair responded that according to the report by the Consultative Body, although practices had been explained in the document, the social and cultural functions had not been described. He asked the Committee to suggest wording for the criterion.
The delegation of Indonesia understood from the interventions that Nigeria had made a proposal that the Committee decide to inscribe the Seperu folk dance, and it was now up to the Committee to make the decision; Indonesia was inclined to support the inscription.
The delegation of Burkina Faso congratulated Botswana on its initiative to submit the nomination, agreeing that the element surely deserved to be on the Urgent Safeguarding List. However, it recalled the many previous Committee discussions in which it was agreed that the information had to be contained within the nomination file, and should not rely on prior knowledge of the element, thereby ensuring the credibility of the list, vis-à-vis the Committee, but also the larger community that might consult the lists for use as a reference for viability and the urgent safeguarding of intangible cultural heritage. Thus, if the title says it is composed of music and dance, but only music is apparent, then there is a problem. The delegation believed this was a problem of formulation with regard to the title of the element and expectations within the file. As such this was not the fault of the Consultative Body, but the editor of the nomination in the country’s administration. The delegation reiterated that the value of the element was not in question, but rather the quality of the file submitted. For this reason, the delegation sought to maintain the recommendation.
The delegation of Namibia congratulated Botswana for submitting this file, adding that the Basubiya traditions and practices are also practised in Namibia. Referring to the description in U.1, the delegation explained that as someone familiar with the dance it found that the element was very well described. It thus strongly believed that the description given in U.1 was sufficient.
The delegation of Czech Republicunderstood that the Committee was discussing criterion U.1, so did not understand why it was referring to the decision as a whole.
The Vice-Chair clarified that the floor was open to general comments and the Committee had not begun to examine the decision paragraph by paragraph.
The delegation of Belgiumsupported the eloquently expressed remarks by Burkina Faso.
The delegation of China voiced support for Nigeria in supporting Botswana’s nomination, as criterion U.1 satisfied the requirement.
The delegation of Tunisia spoke of the need to scrupulously respect the form of nominations. However, the nature of the element had to be taken into account, and the international community had a responsibility to safeguard these elements when necessary. It believed that the definition of the element given in the file was satisfactory, but that perhaps the title was insufficient.
The delegation of Uganda thanked Botswana for its nomination, adding that criterion U.1 identified the practices and traditions that are related with the element, and therefore satisfied the criterion.
The delegation of Madagascar took the opportunity to thank Azerbaijan for its welcome and hospitality, and the Secretariat for the quality of the documents. It also wished to congratulate Botswana for submitting its file, and also found that the criterion U.1 was satisfied, but that in the additional recommendations the Committee should ask the State Party to provide additional evidence on the traditions and practices associated with the element.
The delegation of Grenada congratulated Botswana on its nomination, remarking that in addition to criterion U.1, there were other criteria, namely U.3 and U.4 that were lacking information. Thus, when discussing the file, it should be seen in its entirety.
The Vice-Chair wished to go through the draft decision on a paragraph-by-paragraph basis, requesting Members who manifested agreement concerning criterion U.1 to prepare an amendment.
The delegation of Uruguay did not wish to cast any doubt on the quality of the Seperu folk dance, but since it did not know how the necessary information could be complemented, it fully supported the recommendation by the Consultative Body.
The delegation of Czech Republic associated itself with the comments made by Burkina Faso and supported by Belgium.
The delegation of Albania congratulated Botswana for submitting a good file, asking the submitting State to clarify the involvement of the community in the preparation of the file and in the elaboration of the safeguarding measures under U.4, as the Consultative Body had found evidence of their involvement to be lacking.
Before giving the floor to the Botswana, the Vice-Chair recalled the Committee’s Rule 22.41.
The delegation of Botswana recognized the hospitality of the host and the organization of the meeting. With response to the question on community involvement, the delegation explained that a committee had been nominated by the community to represent them in the process of file preparation. In the context of Botswana, the delegation further explained that its communities had structures with a leadership in the form of a chief who worked with a council, and ultimately the community. In this particular Basubiya community, the work began with a general meeting involving all members of the community, whose members then had representation through a council. Any work carried out with the community had to first be endorsed by the council as well as the chief, who was the custodian of the culture of the tribe.
The Vice-Chair thanked Botswana for its clarification, and noted that Albania was satisfied with the answer. The Vice-Chair then turned to the draft decision on a paragraph-by-paragraph basis, remarking that the description of the element in paragraph 1 was prepared by the Secretariat. With no comments or objections, paragraph 1 was pronounced adopted.
The delegation of Morocco sought clarification on the Committee’s position on U.1.
The Vice-Chair explained that the Committee was examining paragraph 2 on U.2 and U.5.
The delegation of Morocco remarked that should the Committee’s position on U.1 change then paragraph 2 would also automatically change.
The Vice-Chair agreed and therefore moved to first adopt criteria U.2 and U.5 without moving to adopt paragraph 2 as a whole. With no objections, criteria U.2 and U.5 were adopted. Returning to criterion U.1, the Vice-Chair noted the concerns raised by Nigeria, followed by other States that believed the criterion has been satisfied by the information provided in the file. The Vice-Chair reminded the Committee that a clear scope of the element was needed for a safeguarding measure to be fully implemented. The Vice-Chair asked Nigeria to provide new wording.
The delegation of Peru remarked that the opinion of the Committee was divided regarding criterion U.1 and therefore wondered why the Vice-Chair was requesting new wording from Nigeria when the majority position should first be ascertained.
The Vice-Chair explained that there seemed to be an inclination towards the Nigerian proposal, and since the present text in the draft decision read, ‘the practices and traditions associated with it are not clearly described’, new wording would have to be submitted. He took the opportunity to ask Committee Members who sought an amendment to U.3 and U.4 to begin drafting the text, reminding the Committee that an amendment should be based on the information that is provided in the nomination file. In the future, in order to save time, Committee Members should prepare amendments in advance.
The delegation of Albania suggested that Members presenting an amendment should also provide the rationale, explaining how their understanding of the information provided in the file differes from the interpretation of the Consultative Body.
The Vice-Chair fully agreed and asked Nigeria to introduce its amendment, while explaining the rationale to the amendment and the foundations within the nomination.
The delegation of Nigeria presented its amendment, which read, ‘The Seperu dance and associated traditions clearly demonstrates the connection between its social functions and the cultural foundation of the society with the coronation of the Basubiya chiefs; this is complemented by the social practice of wedding ceremonies’. The delegation explained that the statement indicated the connection between the Seperu folk dance and the traditions of the coronation of the Basubiya chiefs as well as the wedding ceremonies.
The delegation of Grenada reminded the Committee of the method of work and wished to know specifically to which text in the file the declaration alluded. It added that the element itself was not being evaluated, and that the Committee was evaluating the file.
The Vice-Chair agreed that the Committee was evaluating a file, but that ultimately it would inscribe an element. The Vice-Chair asked Nigeria to identify the information in the form.
The delegation of Nigeria remarked that the definition in the file was very descriptive and apt with regard to the dance and practices in that the female dancers took turns, each displaying their range of skills. It explained that these skills were physical and were best appreciated visually. For instance, when watching a footballer displaying his skills, one would need to watch the match to fully appreciate the skills as they were beyond words. Moreover, the video was submitted for this reason and complemented the information.
The Vice-Chair turned to the Committee, inviting support for the amendment.
The delegation of Belgium repeated Grenada’s question, asking that concrete references be identified in the file to support the amendment, which clearly substantiated it, as it was not yet convinced that it was contained in the file.
