Inclusion of Jerusalem on World Heritage List – UNESCO World Heritage Cttee – Report

---

UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND

CULTURAL ORGANIZATION

CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD

CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE

World Heritage Committee

First Extraordinary Session

Paris, 10 and 11 September 1981

REPORT OF THE RAPPORTEUR

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The first extraordinary session of the World Heritage Committee was held at Unesco Headquarters in Paris on 10 and 11 September 1981, at the request of seventeen States members of the Committee which also requested that the meeting deal with two items : the election of two Vice-Chairmen to the Bureau and the inscription of "the Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls" on the World Heritage List.

2. The meeting was attended by the following States members of the World Heritage Committee : Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Egypt, France, Federal Republic of Germany, Guinea, Iraq, Italy, Jordan, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Nepal, Pakistan, Senegal, Switzerland, Tunisia, United States of America and Zaire. Representatives of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) attended the meeting in an advisory capacity. Observers from sixteen States Parties to the Convention not members of the Committee also attended the session, as well as observers from six international organizations, invited in accordance with the decision of the Committee. The full list of participants is to be found in Annex I to this report.

II. OPENING OF THE SESSION AND ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

3. In opening the meeting, the Assistant Director-General for Culture and Communication recalled the decision taken by the Committee at its fourth session (September 1980) to open the established procedure for the examination of the proposal by Jordan for the inscription of "the Old City of Jerusalem and its walls" on the World Heritage List and mentioned resolution 21 C/4/I4 adopted by the Unesco General Conference at its 21st session referring to this question. He also drew attention to the comments formulated by the International Council on Monuments and Sites and to the record of the

*[2]

proceedings of the fifth session of the Bureau. The Assistant Director- General informed the Committee that Mr. Parent, who had been elected Chairman at the fourth session of the Committee, felt that because he had recently been elected President of ICOMOS he could no longer continue to chair the Committee and that, according to Rule 14.2 of the Rules of Procedure, he was to be replaced by a Vice-Chairman, in the English alphabetical order of States members of the Committee, for the remainder of the term of office. The Ambassador of Australia, Mr. R. Slatyer, was accordingly invited to act as Chairman until the beginning of the fifth ordinary session of the Committee and to take the chair, which he proceeded to do.

4. On the proposal of the Chairman, the Committee adopted the agenda of the session.

III. ELECTION OF TWO VICE-CHAIRMAN

5. The Chairman explained that two Vice-Chairmen were to be elected to replace Ghana and Yugoslavia which, in accordance with Rule 12.1 of the Rules of Procedure of the Committee, had not been able to remain in office after the end of the 21st session of the General Conference. The Committee elected by acclamation Bulgaria and Senegal as Vice-Chairmen.

IV. NOMINATION OF THE "OLD CITY OF JERUSALEM AND ITS WALLS" FOR INSCRIPTION ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST

6. The examination of this question was taken up following the resolution adopted by consensus by the World Heritage Committee at its fourth session held in Paris from 1 to 5 September 1980, and of the report of the Bureau of the Committee which, during its fifth session held at Unesco Headquarters from 4 to 7 May 1981, had examined the proposal to inscribe the "Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls", presented by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, as well as the report of ICOMOS which recommends the inclusion of this property on the World Heritage List.

7. The Chairman informed the Committee that Israel had requested that a representative of Israel be invited to take part in the deliberations of the Committee concerning the request by the government of Jordan that the "Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls" be inscribed on the World Heritage List. The Delegate of the United States of America, recalling the terms of Article 11(3) of the Convention, requested that Israel, as the State responsible for the administration and de facto control of the Old City of Jerusalem, be given the right to speak at the appropriate time. The Chairman referred to Rules 6, 7 and 8 of the Rules of Procedure and concluded that Israel could not be invited to participate in the session, since it was not a State Party to the Convention.

8. The Chairman of the Committee informed States members of the terms of the letter addressed to him by the Permanent Delegate of Jordan to Unesco (see Annex II) by which he communicated in the form of an addendum to Annex III of file No. 148 Rev. the list of the buildings which ICOMOS had recommended adding (see Annex III).

*[3]

9. The representative of Jordan presented the nomination with the following statement :

"Jordan as a member of UNESCO and as a State Party to the Convention for the protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, presented in September last year its nomination for the inscription of "The Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls" on the World Heritage List.

The value that Jerusalem represents for the three religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam was the only possible explanation for the unanimous decision of your Committee in its 4th session of September 1980 to take 'info consideration the nomination presented by the H. K. of Jordan concerning the Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls in all its cultural and human aspects'.

The Committee was in full agreement in appreciating their unique importance in view of the universal values they represent from the religious, historical, architectural and artistic points of view.

The Committee decided to open the established procedure for the examination of this proposal for the inscription of the Old City and its Walls on the World Heritage List.

In the same spirit the General Conference of UNESCO in its 21st session adopted a resolution 4/14 in which it recommends to your very Committee 'to speed up the procedure for including the City of Jerusalem on the World Heritage List'.

Since the decision of your Committee in its 4th session, Jordanian specialists have been able to complete the technical file on the Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls, which was presented to the Secretariat on December 16, 1980. This file was later studied by ICOMOS, which in turn in its document No. 148 recommended to the Bureau of this Committee to accept the Jordanian nomination.

Mr Chairman,

The reason why this extraordinary session of your Committee is held is the attempt of some colleague members of the Bureau to go back on the decision taken unanimously by your Committee at its 4th session. Despite this decision, despite the recommendation of the General Conference and despite even the recommendation for inscription made by the ICOMOS, those colleagues instead of studying the technical aspects of the nomination, as were expected to do, chose to deal with irrelevant complicated questions, that are neither within the competence of the Bureau nor of the Committee.

Jordan agreed during the discussions of the Bureau to all additions made by ICOMOS. Our letters addressed to the Chairman of your Committee and the Director-General of UNESCO and the Secretariat show clearly Jordan's adherence to the Recommendation concerning the safeguarding and contemporary role of historic areas.

*[4]

"It has been always our understanding that the Old City of Jerusalem constitutes an historic ensemble which should be considered in its totality as a coherent whole. The list of monuments attached to the application is meant to be indicative of the richness of the city and not exhaustive.

I ask you to consider this nomination in the spirit of the unique value of Jerusalem. I ask you to stay within your competence. Jordan is not using this Committee or your deliberations as a vehicle for political claims. We realize and you should realize that the status of Jerusalem cannot be decided in your Committee. It is up to other inter­national organs to decide on this very complicated issue. I appeal to you for the sake of humanity and its heritage, to stay within your competence, and accept the Jordanian request for the inclusion of the Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls on the World Heritage List."

10. The representative of ICOMOS recalled that, at the meeting of the Bureau in May 1981, that non-governmental organization had recommended the inscription of the "Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls" on the World Heritage List. He took note of the favourable response given by Jordan to their observations relating to the list of monuments and stated that, with the supplementary list now added to the file, there was no longer a lack of balance in the list of monuments set out in Annex III of file No. 148 Rev. He confirmed that the description of the property comprised the totality of the Old City and its Walls, and included both the list of buildings submitted with the original nomin­ation and the supplementary list.

11. The Committee registered this confirmation. It agreed that the "Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls" constituted an historic ensemble which should be considered in its totality as a coherent whole whose balance and specific character depend on the synthesis of the elements of which it is composed and where the preservation should be carried out taking into account the manifestations of all the different historical periods.

12. With respect to the adequate protection and preservation of the site, ICOMOS considered that current practices ensured the adequate protection of the "Old City of Jerusalem", and drew attention to the participation of the international community in this regard. The ICOMOS representative recalled finally that, in any case, the procedures adopted by the Committee, in the case of proven inadequacy or manifest deficiency in the matter of preservation, enabled the Committee to decide that the inscription be cancelled. In conclusion, he stated that ICOMOS was favourable to the inscription of the "Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls" on the World Heritage List.

13. In the subsequent discussion, it became evident that there was widespread support that a property as outstanding as the Old City should be inscribed on the World Heritage List. The majority of speakers had no reservations about Jordan's competence to make the proposal. A few speakers expressed reservations about Jordan's legal right to present the nomination and about the possible implications

*[5]

of inscription to questions related to the status of Jerusalem and to questions of sovereignty and jurisdiction. Although it was recognized that Article 11(3) of the Convention existed to cover these matters, these speakers were concerned that there should be no implicit or explicit recognition of the sovereignty of any State associated with the inscription. The United States Delegation objected explicitly to the nomination by Jordan as not conforming with the articles of the Convention which provide that the nominating State submit only those sites which are "situated in its territory", which require that the consent of "the State concerned" be obtained and which require that the nominating State provide an effective plan for the protection and management of the site. This delegation asked other delegations to join in rejecting an impermissible nomination.

14. At the end of the debate on file No. 148 Rev. presented by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, the Committee decided to inscribe the Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls on the World Heritage List.

15. The above-mentioned decision was the subject of a vote by roll- call, the result of which was as follows : 14 for, 1 against and 5 abstentions. The representatives of nine States members of the Committee explained their votes; their statements, in extenso or in summarized form, are to be found in Annex IV. The observer from Chile wished to address the meeting concerning the inscription of the Old City of Jerusalem on the World Heritage List; since the decision on that question had already been taken by the Committee, his request was not considered receivable and he was asked to transmit his statement in writing to the Chairman who would ensure that it was added to the file.

16. In closing the extraordinary session, the Chairman reminded members of the Committee of its forthcoming 5th ordinary session in Sydney from 26 to 30 October 1981. He said that Australia was looking forward to hosting the meeting and hoped that, to the greatest possible extent, States Members of the Committee would endeavour to include in their delegations experts in the cultural and natural heritage.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

ANNEX I

ANNEXE I

CC-81/CONF.008/2 Rev.

CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD

CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE

CONVENTION CONCERNANT LA PROTECTION DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL,

CULTUREL ET NATUREL

WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE / COMITE DU PATRIMOINE MONDIAL

First extraordinary session/Première session extraordinaire

Paris 10-11 September 1981/Paris 10-11 septembre 1981

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS/LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS

I. STATES MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE / ETATS MEMBRES DU COMITE

ARGENTINA/ARGENTINE

M. le Professeur Javier Fernandez

Ministre plénipotentiaire

Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco

AUSTRALIA/AUSTRALIE

H. Exc. Professor R.O. Slatyer

Ambassador

Permanent Delegate to Unesco

Mr. John Watson

Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco

Mrs. B. Barry de Longchamp

Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco

BRAZIL/BREZIL

S. Exc. M. Geraldo Holanda Cavalcanti

Ambassadeur

Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco

BULGARIA/BULGARIE

S. Exc. M. Milan Milanov

Ambassadeur extraordinaire et plénipotentiaire

Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco

CYPRUS/CHYPRE

S. Exc. M. Constantin Leventis

Ambassadeur

Délegué permanent auprès de l'Unesco

M. Christos Cassimatis

Délegué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco

EGYPT/EGYPTE

Mr. Abdel Moniem El Sawi

Ex-Minister of Information and Culture

H. Exc. Dr. Chams El-Dine El-Wakil

Ambassador

Permanent Delegate to Unesco

FRANCE

M. Michel Parent

Inspecteur général des monuments historiques

M. Jean-Pierre Bady

Directeur de la Caisse nationale des monuments historiques et des sites

GERMANY (Fed. Rep. of)/ALLEMAGNE (Rep. fédérale d')

Dr. Wolfgang Tidten

Chargé d'affaires

Permanent Delegation to Unesco

Mr. Heimo Richter

Counsellor

Permanent Delegation to Unesco

GUINEA/GUINEE

S. Exc. M. Aboutacar Somparé

Ambassadeur extraordinaire et plénipotentiaire de Guinée en France

M. Youssouf Diaré

Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco

IRAQ/IRAK

H. Exc. Dr. Aziz Ali Haidar

Ambassador

Permanent Delegate to Unesco

Dr. Mouyad Damerji Said

President, State Antiquities and Heritage Organization

ITALY/ITALIE

S. Exc. M. Guglielmo Folchi

Ambassadeur

Delégué permanent Auprès de l'Unesco

JORDAN/JORDANIE

H. Exc. Mr. Taher N. Masri

Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Jordan to France

Permanent Delegate to Unesco

Mr. Ahmadd Al-Tawil

Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco

Dr. Adnan Al Hadidi

Director-General of Antiquities, Amman

Mr. Rohi Al Khatib

Mayor of the Arab Sector of Jerusalem at present in exile (advisor)

LIBYAN ARAB JAMAHIRIYA/JAMAHIRIYA ARABE LIBYENNE

Dr. Abdullah Shaiboub

Director-General, Department of Antiquities

Saray-al-Hamra

NEPAL

Mr. Narayan Das Shrestha

Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco

PAKISTAN

H. Exc. Mr. Sahabzada Yakub-Khan

Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Pakistan to France

Permanent Delegate to Unesco

Mr. Abad Hussain

Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco

Mr. Aftab Hussain Syed

First Secretary

Permanent Delegation to Unesco

SENEGAL

M. Lamine Diakhaté

Ministre Conseiller

Délégué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco

SWITZERLAND/SUISSE

S. Exc. M. Charles Hummel

Ambassadeur

Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco

SWITZERLAND/SUISSE (Suite)

M. Ernest Martin

Architecte SIA/FAS

Commission fédérale des Monuments historiques, Genève

TUNISIA/TUNISIE

S. Exc. M. Mustata Masmoudi

Ambassadeur

Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco

M. Azedine Beschaouch

Directeur général de l'Institut d'Archéologie et d'Art Tunis

Mlle Hayet Boussofara

Délégué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA/ETATS-UNIS D'AMERIQUE

Mr. David Rowe

Director, Directorate for Unesco Affairs

Bureau of International Organization Affairs Department of State, Washington

Mr. Elkin Taylor

Acting Permanent Delegate to Unesco

Mr. Howard Hardy Cultural Attaché Permanent Delegation to Unesco

ZAIRE

Mr. Makeli Boguo

Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco

II. OBSERVERS FROM OTHER STATES PARTIES/OBSERVATEURS D'AUTRES ETATS PARTIES

AFGHANISTAN

Mr. Mir Hamidullah Nezam

Second Secretary

Embassy of Afghanistan

ALGERIA/ALGERIE

S. Exc. M. Abdelatif Rahal

Ambassadeur

Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco

CANADA

S. Exc. M. Pierre Trottier

Ambassadeur

Delegué permanent auprès de l'Unesco

CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC/REPUBLIQUE CENTRAFRICAINE

M. Gaston Azibolo

Premier Secrétaire

Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco

CHILE/CHILI

S. Exc. M. Jorge Berguno Barnes

Ambassadeur

Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco

M. Dennis Biggs

Délégué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco

CUBA

Mme Martha Arjona

Directeur du Patrimoine culturel

Ministère de la Culture, La Havane

DEMOCRATIC YEMEN/YEMEN DEMOCRATIQUE

Mr. Ali Kassem Abdulla

First Secretary

Embassy of the Democratic Yemen

DENMARK/DANEMARK

Mr. Jorgen V. Larsen

Délégué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco

Mrs. Lisbeth Saaby

Head of Section

Ministry of Environment

National Agency for the Protection of Nature, Monuments and Sites, Copenhagen

HONDURAS

Dr. Carlos Deambrosis-Martins

Ministre plénipotentiaire

Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco

INDIA/INDE

Miss B. Mukherjee

Second Secretary

Permanent Delegation to Unesco

IVORY COAST/COTE D'IVOIRE

M. Sylvestre Axa

Conseiller à la Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco

MOROCCO/MAROC

M. Abdeslam Bensouda

Conseiller, Délégation permanente auprès de l'Unesco

NIGER

M. Souleymane Abarry

Délégué permanent adjoint auprès de l'Unesco

NORWAY/NORVEGE

Mr. Rolf Willy Hansen

Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco

SAUDI ARABIA/ARABIE SAOUDITE

Dr. Saleh Abdullah Bawazeer

Ministre plénipotentiaire

Délégué permanent auprès de l'Unesco

UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA/REPUBLIQUE-UNIE DE TANZANIE

Mr. Donald Kusenha

Counsellor

Deputy Permanent Delegate to Unesco

III.  ORGANIZATIONS ATTENDING IN AN ADVISORY CAPACITY/ORGANISATION

PARTICIPANT AVEC UN STATUT CONSULTATIF

INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON MONUMENTS AND SITES (ICOMOS)/CONSEIL INTER­NATIONAL DES MONUMENTS ET DES SITES

M. François Leblanc

Directeur du Secrétariat

M. Léon Pressouyre

Professeur à l'Université de Paris I

IV. OTHER INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS/AUTRES ORGANISATIONS INTERNATIONALES

ARAB EDUCATIONAL, CULTURAL AND SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATION/0RGANISATION ARABE POUR L'EDUCATION LA CULTURE ET LA SCIENCE (ALESCO)

M. Ahmed Derradji

Représentant permanent auprès de l'Unesco

M. Ali Babacar Tahar

Directeur général adjoint, Tunis

AFRICAN CULTURAL INSTITUTE (ACI)/INSTITUT CULTUREL AFRICAIN

M. Eric Apronti

Directeur général adjoint, Dakar

INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF MUSEUMS (ICOM)/CONSEIL INTERNATIONAL DES MUSEES

M. Luis Monreal

Secrétaire général

Paris

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR THE PROTECTION OF WORKS OF ART/ORGANISATION INTERNATIONALE POUR LA PROTECTION DES OEUVRES D'ART

M. Adolphe Mocquot

Vice-Président

Auxerre

M. Max Schvoerer, Consultant

INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ARCHITECTS/UNION INTERNATTONALE DES ARCHITECTES (UIA)

M. Henri Calsat

Architecte-urbani ste

Secrétaire du Groupe de travail "Aménagement urbain et rural"

ORGANIZATION FOR MUSEUMS MONUMENTS AND SITES IN AFRICA (OMMSA)/ORGANISATION POUR LES MUSEES, LES MONUMENTS ET LES SITES D'AFRIQUE

Mr. Kwasi Myles

Secretary-General

Accra

V. UNESCO SECRETARIAT / SECRETARIAT DE L'UNESCO

M. Makaminan Makagiansar

Sous-Directeur général

Secteur de la Culture et de la Communication

M. Michel Batisse

Sous-Directeur général adjoint

Secteur des Sciences

M. Gérard Bolla

Sous-Directeur général adjoint

Secteur de la Culture et de la Communication

M. Daniel de San

Chef

Division des Normes internationales

Bureau des Affaires juridiques

M. Bernd von Droste

Division des Sciences écologiques

Mme Anne Raidl

Division du patrimoine culturel

Mme Margaret van Vliet

Division du patrimoine culturel

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

CC-81/CONF.008/2 Rev.

ANNEX II

Original : French

Permanent Delegation of the Hashemite

Kingdom of Jordan to Unesco

Paris, 9 September 1981

The Chairman

World Heritage Committee

On the occasion of the extraordinary session of the World Heritage Committee, to be held in Paris on 10 and 11 September 1981 to examine the nomination submitted by my country and registered on 16 December 1980 under Identification nº 148 Rev., concerning the inclusion of the "Old City of Jerusalem (Al-Quds) and its Walls" on the World Heritage List, I have the honour to bring the following to your attention.

At its meeting in May 1981, the Bureau of the Committee, apprised of the favourable recommendation of ICOMOS, took note of the agreement of my country to include in the list of monuments contained in Annex III to the above-mentioned file, the buildings whose addition had been recommended by ICOMOS. I therefore have the honour to forward to you, in the attached document, the information requested, drawing your attention to the fact that my country has every confidence in the distinguished representative of ICOMOS and endorses all the factual details that, as a man of science and integrity, he may consider useful to provide on this technical Annex to the file.

I should be grateful if you would inform the members of the Committee of the terms of this letter at the opening of the discussion, so that the debate may focus on essentials.

Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration.

(Signed) TAHER MASRI

Permanent Delegate

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

CC-81/CONF.008/2 Rev.

ANNEX III

 

Convention concerning the Protection

of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage

WORLD HERITAGE LIST

Nomination submitted by the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan

The Old City of Jerusalem (Al-Quds) and its Walls

Addendum to Annex III

*[ANNEX III/2]

Preliminary remark

It should be recalled that in a town like the old city of Jerusalem, it is difficult to select a group of monuments, even as a cross-section. Historical periods, significant monuments, manifestations of civilization, art and culture and religious sites are so closely interwoven that a partial inventory runs the risk of appearing partisan.

The 220 monuments identified in the Medina of Jerusalem do not therefore constitute an exhaustive or complete list.

As recommended by ICOMOS, the following six monuments could be added :

1. The walls of the period of Herod the Great, today incorporated in the perimeter of the Haram al-Sharif and of which the Wailing Wall still remains, and the enormous vaulted substructures now known as the Stables of Solomon.

2. The northern arcature of the portal of Aelia Capitolina, known since the XVIth Century as the "Ecce Homo" Arch.

Nowadays incorporated in the choir of the basilica of Our Lady of Zion, near the Second Station of the Via Dolorosa (Way of the Cross), it is one of the rare vestiges of the triumphal arches erected by Emperor Hadrian after the capture of Jerusalem and the foundation of a Roman colony known as Aelia Capitolina.

3. The Ramban Synagogue, built in the Jewish quarter of the Medina, towards the end of the XIVth Century, not far from the Suq el-Hussor (Mat Market).

4. The Ben Zakkai Synagogue, built around 1606 to 1610 in the same area and initially restricted to the principal Jewish community of the town, the "Sephardim".

5. The Synagogue of Elijah the Prophet, built from 1615 to 1625, with a large dome.

6. Lastly, still in the same area, the Stamboulli Synagogue, the largest of all, built around 1740.

These synagogues have recently undergone major repairs which have almost fully renovated them. Nevertheless, the historical value of their site justifies their inclusion in the list.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

ANNEX IV

The statements made by nine States members of the World Heritage Committee in explaining their votes concerning the inscription of the Old City of Jerusalem and its walls on the World Heritage List are given below in full or in summarized form.

1. The following statement was made by the Australian Delegation :

"Thank you Mr. Chairman. The Australian Delegation fully appreciates the great importance of the Old City of Jerusalem. We believe that it is worthy of inclusion in the World Heritage List and we had hoped that the circumstances would have permitted us to cast a favourable vote on the decision just taken by the Committee.

Our abstention was made after careful consideration of the issue in the context of the Articles of the Convention and in the light of the political dispute which surrounds the Old City. Delegations will be aware that Australia regards the status of Jerusalem as undetermined and the question of sovereignty as unresolved and to be a matter which should be resolved in the context of an overall settlement of the Middle East question. We do not recognize any claims to sovereignty over Old Jerusalem as a basis for action under the Convention.

We noted with appreciation the statement of the Jordanian Delegate that Jordan seeks to gain no recognition of any claims of sovereignty through this nomination. However, we believe that the decision does not satisfy the concern that has been expressed by several delegations as well as ourselves that the inclusion of the Old City on the World Heritage List should have been accompanied by a declaration stating that inscription carried no explicit or implicit endorsement of any claim to sovereignty.

Mr. Chairman, we are also aware of the damage that undue politicization of the issue could cause to the reputation and effectiveness of the Committee and the Convention and we consider that the decision that the Committee has just taken does not take sufficient account of this problem. Thank you Mr. Chairman".

2. The representative of Cyprus made the following statement :

"Cyprus has voted in favour of the inscription of Jerusalem on the World Heritage List because of the pre-eminent claims of that City on religious and cultural grounds to feature on the List.

In casting our affirmative vote, we also register our agreement with statements by the distinguished representative of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and by other members of the Committee to the effect that this inscription is in accordance with the objectives of the World Heritage Convention and has no political implications."

*[ANNEX IV/2]

3. The representative of the Arab Republic of Egypt made the following statement :

"The delegation of the Arab Republic of Egypt voted in favour of including the Old City of Jerusalem on the World Heritage List in application of the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage and in affirmation of the fact that

Egypt considers the occupied city of Jerusalem to be Arab sovereign territory".

4. The representative of France recalled that throughout the session his delegation had sought a special solution whereby the Committee would not find itself divided by considerations of a legal or political nature. It had proposed a number of alternatives, believing that a completely fresh formula might have the advantage of being acceptable to all delegations. His abstention during the vote did not in any way signify a lack of appreciation on the part of the French delegation of the universal value of the site of Jerusalem from the historical, cultural and religious points of view.

5. The representative of the Federal Republic of Germany stated that he believed that it would have been possible to obtain the inclusion of the Old City of Jerusalem on the World Heritage List on the grounds of its outstanding universal cultural value without attributing the application to any individual State. He expressed the hope that the problem of the legal status of Jerusalem, which, he stated, was as yet regrettably unresolved, would soon be resolved.

6. The following statement was made by the representative of Italy :

"It was with the greatest regret, Mr. Chairman, that Italy abstained during the vote on the inclusion of the Old City of Jerusalem in the World Heritage List. I do not consider it necessary in this forum to give proof of the respect, consideration and indeed affection in which the Italian people hold this shrine of three great cultures and of three great religions, including their own. This is why, although we did not participate in the discussion, which was already exhaustive enough, we spared no effort in trying to find a formula likely to receive general approval. I remain convinced that this would not have been impossible. This only serves to heighten our regret that the inscription of Jerusalem should take place under conditions which, with a final effort of goodwill, could have been avoided, since no one contests the right of Jerusalem to appear in any list of cultural property whose preservation merits a general pooling of efforts".

7. The representative of Nepal made the following statement :

"While supporting the proposal of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to nominate Jerusalem to the World Heritage List, Nepal has expressed its support purely on cultural grounds. We are of the view that Jerusalem as a site is undeniably of universal cultural heritage value and should be included in the World Heritage List. But we would like to put on record that inclusion in the List should in no way be regarded as a means for registering the political or sovereignty claims by any states associated with the inscription".

*[ANNEX IV/3]

8. The representative of Switzerland refereed to the exceptional cultural and historical importance of the Old City of Jerusalem and stated that he would have wished to vote in favour of its inscription in the World Heritage List for these entirely objective reasons. In the form in which it had been presented, however, the decision called for did not take account of the specific legal aspects of the issue. He further stated that "the Swiss Government is of the opinion that the Old City of Jerusalem is situated neither on Jordanian nor on Israeli territory. According to the partition plan drawn up by the United Nations in 1947, the former mandated territory of Palestine was to become an independent Palestinian Arab State, and a special status of corpus separatum was envisaged for Jerusalem. In consequence, neither Israel nor Jordan are entitled to claim sovereignty over the Old City of Jerusalem".

9. The representative of the United States of America made the following statement :

"The U.S. delegation wishes to be associated with the remarks of earlier speakers which emphasized the recognition of the universal cultural and historical value of Jerusalem important to all mankind.

My delegation would like to reiterate that the U.S. position on this issue does not reflect in any way on the high esteem the U.S. delegation holds for the distinguished Jordanian delegation and the close and collaborative relations between our two countries.

In the view of my delegation, the World Heritage Committee has just taken a major step in the wrong direction. The approval of this nomination is a failure to adhere to the articles and provisions of the World Heritage Convention, specifically, those articles which provide that the nominating state submit only those sites which are "situated in its territory", which require that the consent of "the state concerned" be obtained, and which require that the nominating state provide an effective plan for the protection and management of the site. This Committee has taken an impermissible action and now must abide by the ensuing unfortunate consequences.

These consequences are the intrusion of an element of politization to the World Heritage Committee. Politization may be inevitable to a certain degree in any international institution, but it is our task to attempt to limit, not expand, this problem. The introduction of Middle East politics into this Committee cannot but be to the detriment of the World Heritage Committee and its proud achievements to date.

The U.S. delegation regrets the result of this extraordinary session and asks that the record reveal our full disassociation from its outcome".