PEACETIME PREPARATION FOR THE APPLICATION OF
THE 1954 CONVENTION
5. 1. As outlined above154, the 1954 Convention's concept of `safeguarding' is essentially the making of preparations in time of peace for the protection of cultural property in the event of any future international or internal armed conflict. However, there is little or no guidance within the Convention itself as to the measures that an individual Contracting State may deem to be `appropriate' in its case.
5. 2. With one exception (discussed below) a Party could apparently perfectly well decide to do nothing at all if, in the judgement of the competent political and/or administrative authorities, nothing is what `they consider appropriate'. Such a position is not unknown across the whole field of civil defence preparations, not just in relation to peacetime preparations for the protection of cultural property.
5. 3. This problem can be particularly acute in cases where the government of the State is reluctant to admit to neighbouring states - and indeed its own population - that there is the slightest possibility of its future involvement in any form of either international or internal armed conflict. Indeed, it may be argued, merely to appear to countenance the possibility of war may be seen by neighbouring states as either an aggressive and potentially unfriendly stance or a sign of weakness and fear, with the risk in either case that this could become a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is of course a serious problem with all areas of peacetime preparation for the possibility of war or other armed conflict.
5. 4. There is also an adoptive (though not compulsory) provision for the marking of cultural property in both peacetime and during armed conflicts155 with a new official emblem. This was specified in the Convention as the successor to the use of a distinctive flag (to be notified to the enemy) provided for in the 1899 Hague Naval Bombardment Convention, to the black and white diagonally divided square emblem of protected monuments etc. of the 1907 Hague Naval Bombardment Convention, and to Roerich's emblem of a red circle on white, enclosing a triple red sphere in the circle, of the 1935 Washington Pact.
5. 5. The official emblem of a blue and white squares in the form of a shield is defined in the 1954 Convention: and its permitted use are defined as:
The distinctive emblem of the Convention shall take the form of a shield, pointed below, per saltire blue and white (a shield consisting of a royal blue square, one of the angles of which forms the point of the shield. and of a royal blue triangle above the square, the space on either side being taken up by a white triangle).
The purpose and application of the official emblem is discussed in Chapter 7 of this Report below.
5. 6. The decision to replace the Roerich Pact flag was one of the other, though more minor, issues of contention between the United States of America and the draughtsmen of the provisional text at the 1954 Intergovernmental Conference, with the USA arguing both that the change was unnecessary and that the proposed new Hague emblem was very similar to land survey markers widely used for both civilian purposes (and by United States ground forces in artillery training.)
5. 5. The one area of peacetime preparation in which there is an explicit obligation on Contracting Parties, relates to the State's own military forces:
1. The High Contracting Parties undertake to introduce in time of peace into their military regulations or instructions such provisions as may ensure observance of the present Convention, and to foster in the members of their armed forces a spirit of respect for the culture and cultural property of all peoples.
2. The High Contracting Parties undertake to plan or establish in peace time, within their armed forces, services or specialist personnel whose purpose will be to secure respect for cultural property and to co operate with the civilian authorities responsible for safeguarding it.156
5. 6. At the Third General Conference of the International Council of Museums (ICOM) in 1953 A. Noblecourt had presented a substantial paper on the protection of museum objects during armed conflicts157, while in the same year the Belgium Government published a new national manual on this158, in each case complementing and updating the wide range of such publications issued around the Second World War period159.
5. 7. To coincide with the 1954 Hague Intergovernmental Conference Lavachery and Noblecourt developed, and UNESCO published in its Museums and Monuments Series, a major study and practical manual on the recommended measures for the protection of cultural property in times of armed conflict160. This went much further than the 1939 International Museums Office advice161, drawing on the experience of the Second World War and also discussing the implications of new weapons technology, including nuclear weapons. Noblecourt (alone) updated the text in 1956, and a definitive English language edition was published two years later.
5. 8. This began (in Part One) with a discussion of and the texts of the 1954 Hague Convention, Regulations, the Hague Protocol and the Rules established by the Director-general of UNESCO concerning the International Register of Cultural Property under Special Protection162. Part Two outlined and considered the risks to cultural property arising directly from military operations: the possible effect of different types of weapons (including nuclear weapons), and the potential hazards consequent on the breakdown of normal environmental conditions during an armed conflict, including environmental and biological deterioration.
5. 9. Part Three examined in detail the practical measures that need to be considered in relation to protection techniques including topics as diverse as shelters, protection in situ of monuments, museums, archives and libraries, and measures against the risk of acts of vandalism by military personnel. This part was followed by forty pages of technical annexes covering practical measures: the making and use of sandbags, fire precautions, photogrammetric recording in order to have an adequate record for restoration in the event of damage, and of both packing and security microfilming techniques.
5.10. Part Four of Noblecourt's book reviewed and advised on the practical measures that could be taken at both the international and national level, including information on Hague Convention protection structures already established by Belgium, Denmark and the Netherlands (both civil and military in this case), with advice on action that could be taken at the local level as well. Noblecourt's last section, Part Five, offered detailed practical guidance for public authorities on the construction, adaptation and fitting out of both permanent buildings for all kinds of cultural purposes, and of temporary shelters and refuges of many kinds. The latter included purpose-built underground shelters, both in open country (with Belgian and Dutch examples), beneath or adjacent to museums (Belgium), and in adapted underground tunnels and mine workings (United Kingdom, USA and Sweden).
5.11. Almost forty years on, though long out of print the UNESCO manual written by Noblecourt still offers much practical information of great value to all concerned with both the general care of museums, monuments and collections in both peacetime and during armed conflicts, as indeed do some of the even earlier guides163.
5.12. However, up-to-date information and advice are now needed, especially if the High Contracting Parties are to review and update their application of the 1954 Hague Convention. It is therefore RECOMMENDED that UNESCO should commission and publish up-to-date research and advice on practical protection measures, integrating this advice with recommendations on necessary practical measures for the prevention and mitigation of natural and civil disasters.
5.13. Following the depositing in May 1956 of the fifth instrument of ratification, the 1954 Hague Convention's came into force in August 1956, and by the time of the first set of requested periodic reports (1962)164, Belgium, Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, the Holy See, India, Italy, Netherlands and Poland all reported progress in developing peacetime preparations in accordance with the Convention. Positive measures reported included the preparation of inventories of monuments and collections and action to include training in the requirements of the Convention in relevant military regulations.
5.14. The various national reports of 1962, 1967, 1970, 1979, 1984 and 1989165, contain a great deal of very valuable information on possible models for practical measures across most areas covered by the Convention, together with summaries of the work carried by UNESCO in support of it. An edited compilation of extracts of these six reports would be a good starting point for a new UNESCO handbook in relation to the Convention's `safeguarding' provisions, i.e. peacetime preparation, especially at the organisational level, following on from the recommendations of Noblecourt's 1954/1958 UNESCO Museums and Monuments manual166.
5.15. In view of the very wide scope of this study and Report, in the time available it has been possible to examine in detail the peacetime planning arrangements of only a limited sample of States Parties to the Convention. Out of those examined in detail, it is clear that there are a number of models of good practice which could be disseminated more widely in published form, and as case studies in the training/information seminar programme recommended in this Report. Particularly good examples include those of The Netherlands and France (both discussed below), Austria167 and Switzerland168 (each of which has developed a particularly detailed inventory of protected monuments and institutions, supported by large-scale maps, together with comprehensive military measures, plus the adoption of an official identity card and arm-band bearing the official emblem, for those engaged in cultural protection duties), and India169. Following re-unification Germany is currently preparing a new military law and training manual and has asked the distinguished expert on the Hague Convention Prof. Dr.Jur. Josef Partsch, Professor Emeritus in the University of Bonn, to prepare a chapter on all aspects of the protection of cultural property in time of war170. The civilian and military preparation arrangements of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia were also models of their kind, despite the recent grave breaches of the Convention171, (and of course many other provisions of international humanitarian law including the Geneva and Genocide Conventions).
5.16. The increasing trend in many parts of the world towards national decentralisation and constitutional devolution under new federal or cantonal structures within States Parties to the Convention presents significant problems in terms of implementation. In such cases the federal government remains responsible for international relations and hence for ratifying such Instruments, but may lack the constitutional authority needed to enforce action under them, for example in this case the preparation of peacetime planning, the listing of protected monuments, the construction or preparation of shelters and refuges and emergency evacuation plans). The long and successful experience in applying the Convention's provisions in such decentralised High Contracting Parties as Switzerland, and Germany (particularly the civilian and military preparations carried out in the former German Federal Republic) are valuable models for other States. Other States Parties currently in the process of devolving almost total responsibility for cultural and conservation matters to regional entities include Belgium and Spain, and these too may offer useful models for other States making similar transitions.
5.17. France has a long tradition of peacetime preparation for possible war damage and losses. The preparation of a national record of nationally important monuments and collections began in the first years after the 1789 Revolution172, while the experience of the German occupation in the Second World War led to extensive action to secure the protection of monuments, museums, libraries and archives during the 1944 liberation campaigns173, and particularly under De Gaulle's initial provisional government and the early years of the Fourth Republic.
5.18. France supported the draft proposals at the 1954 Hague Intergovernmental Conference, and (in particular) strongly opposed the demands led by the United States and the United Kingdom for the insertion of the `military necessity' amendment, pressing the opposition to a vote against their NATO allies on the point. France passed the necessary national legislation, and deposited Instruments of Ratification in respect of both the Convention and the Protocol. However, responsibility for the practical implementation of both is rather fragmented, with a wide range of ministries involved.
5.19. All ministries, including National Education and Culture, have liaison officers with Defence Ministry. France has a comprehensive system of planning for national defence in the event of armed conflict, though some of the administrative and practical arrangements are secret as part of the national defence planning.174 Both miliary and civilian staff training for national defence continues to have high priority, and the Institut des Hauts Etudes de Défense Militaire is responsible for running a continuing programme of defence planning courses, each of several weeks duration. These are attended by mixed groups of senior staff from all departments of the state administration.
5.20. Each year the Culture branch of the Ministry is able to nominate perhaps one or two senior staff from the museums or monuments services, including staff from both the operational side (including the national museums) and the various inspectorates, together with senior administrative staff. The training is by no means specific to the question of protecting the national heritage, and in fact this necessarily forms a small part of the syllabus of the courses. On the other hand through the courses the senior cultural officers nominated gain a comprehensive over-view of the national wartime emergency structure, and the way that cultural protection fits into this. Similarly, senior staff from all other areas of the civil and military systems are sensitised to the State's obligations under the Hague Convention, and no doubt valuable informal networks and understanding are developed.
5.21. The authorities for all arms of the French defence forces have comprehensive programmes of training and manuals covering all aspects of international humanitarian law for army, navy and air force personnel at all levels, graded according to their level of responsibility, and the obligations under the 1954 Hague Convention are part of these. For example, in relation to the French army at the entry and junior officer level basic training in the Laws of War is given to all officer cadets and junior officers at the Military Academy at St Cyr and the Ecole Militaire, and to other ranks in their specialised training centres and programmes. Then, as officers are trained for and promoted to more senior ranks more advanced training is offered by the various staff colleges, such as the Ecole de Guerre.
5.22. Legally and administratively much of France's civil defence functions remain decentralised and delegated to the local level. The préfects of the ninety-five metropolitan départements (senior civil servants appointed by parliamentary decree on the nomination of the Minister for the Interior) have extremely wide powers in this field, especially in the event of any actual or immediately threatened breakdown of the central power structure, whether in military or grave civil emergencies. With the recent development of a structure of twenty-two Régions as part of the national decentralisation programme the préfects are now sharing these powers and responsibilities with the regional directors. So far as the local museums, monuments etc. are concerned during actual military emergencies and for planning purposes they would be mainly under local or regional control. However, the Defence and Interior Ministries obviously set the general policies and standards, the civil defence colleges help to communicate these to staff at operational level both nationally and locally, and the Culture ministry inspectors and other specialists also assist in advising on standards and procedures.
5.23. There is parallel system of planning and training for major civil emergencies and threats such as security measures against terrorism and international and national organised crime etc. This system is run by the Police National, with Institut Hautes Etudes de la Sécurite Intérieure having a similar role to that of the Institut des Hauts Etudes de Défense Militaire in the military field. Appropriate senior Culture ministry personnel, such as the heads of security at national museums and monuments, the chiefs of their internal fire services and other appropriate ministry officials are nominated to these courses. (Following one or two attempted arson attacks against monuments and museums by terrorist groups over the past few decades the question of defence against non-international armed threats is an area receiving much more attention, and in times of particular tension extra security measures and checks are introduced in consultation with the State organisations responsible for internal security).
5.24. However, it is rather surprising that despite the scale of the museum, library and archive building programme in France in recent years, and particularly the programme of `grands travaux', there does not seem to have been a general policy of building high security shelters and refuges in, or adjacent to, the new or reconstructed buildings.
5.25. In view of the numerous constitutional and organisational changes in France since 1957, to some extent the initial measures and organisation taken soon after the ratification of the 1954 Hague Convention and Protocol might usefully be reviewed. Also, both the important International Affairs Department of the Culture and Foreign Affairs Ministry are active in the international cultural aid areas, including valuable initiatives in some war-affected areas, and greater coordination could usefully be developed between the two ministries.
5.26. Having hosted the 1954 Intergovernmental Conference at The Hague, the Government of the Netherlands has always taken a special interest in the effective implementation of the Hague Convention and Protocol, and completed the legislative process required for ratification of both in 1958, depositing the Instruments of Ratification with UNESCO on 14 October 1958. An early Dutch initiative was the production and distribution on 3 May 1962 to all States Parties to the Convention of a sample official national identity card for persons undertaking cultural protection duties, in accordance with Article 17 of the Convention. The Netherlands followed this with an application for `Special Protection' under Article 8 of the Convention for a network of six national cultural property dispersal air-raid shelters in remote rural areas away from potential military targets, and these were inscribed on the International Register on 12 November 1969.
5.27. The Dutch arrangements for peacetime preparation are particularly comprehensive and well-integrated.175 The primary responsibility lies with the Ministry of Welfare, Health and Cultural Affairs, which coordinates the relations with the other ministries necessarily involved, especially Defence. Another important aspect of the Dutch system which would serve as a valuable model for other nations is the increasingly close integration between the preparation for the risks of armed conflicts and of peacetime emergencies, both natural and civil disasters.
5.28. The management structure is admirably clear. Within the Ministry the Director of the Cultural Heritage Policy Directorate is responsible for developing and managing an integrated policy on cultural protection, including the preparation of legislation and regulations, and ensuring the implementation of the cultural protection policy at national, regional and local levels176. Under the Director the implementation is the responsibility of the Cultural Protection Inspector at the Ministry headquarters who heads an impressive network of volunteers throughout the country.
5.29. Each approved volunteer is appointed as a provincial, regional or general inspector by an individual decree of nomination by the Minister of Welfare, Health and Cultural Affairs. The positions are unpaid, though there are small budgets at each level for the reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses. All inspectors have appropriate specialised expertise, and include distinguished architects, engineers, conservation specialists etc., some in private practice, others holding official appointments e.g. in universities or specialised institutions, while others have retired from such careers.
5.30. The functions and responsibilities of the three different categories of inspectors are summaries very clearly in the Ministry's new handbook to the cultural protection system:
The provincial inspectors coordinate measures aimed at protecting monuments and other cultural property within their areas of jurisdiction. It is their task to ensure that action can be taken in the event of emergencies. They also provide support for the regional inspectors in their areas, in close consultation with the Provincial Governor, the Provincial Military Commander or the Territorial Commander. They see to it that the regional inspectors are properly briefed, they assess recommendations and plans, and present these to the Minister and to owners of cultural property.
The regional inspectors, in their turn, support the provincial inspectors. They are responsible for protecting the monuments and other cultural property in their own regions in close collaboration with local mayors and municipal disaster relief organisations. They encourage the drawing up of emergency plans to protect cultural property and make recommendations on protective action. Their regions generally coincide with those of the regional fire services.
The general inspectors are responsible for the protection of particular categories of cultural property, including stained glass windows, carillons, bells, clock towers and organs, as well as for fire prevention in protected buildings. They also advise the provincial and regional inspectors and the owners or managers of cultural property.177
5.31. The Netherlands Ministry of Defence retains, of course, the primary responsibility for military defence measures, but again a sensible, imaginative, and inexpensive system of support for cultural protection has been developed. This is based on a network of volunteer cultural protection officers attached to the armed forces, either retired regular officers with a special interest, or civilian experts again, who have are part of the Army Reserve, with exactly the same status as any other reserve officer. They are, of course, subject to call-up to the army in the event of actual or threatened armed conflict, (or indeed to assist in any major civil or natural disaster emergency in which the national defence forces come to the aid of the civilian authorities).
5.32. The role of the Ministry of Defence's cultural protection officers in relation to actual or threatened armed conflict is again summarised very clearly in the cultural protection handbook:
In addition to the inspectors, there are a number of cultural protection officers. These officers, appointed pursuant to the Royal Decree of 16 May 1953 (Bulletin of Acts, Orders and Decrees, no. 31), belong to the Army reserve.
preventing as far as possible damage to or destruction of buildings, museums, libraries, archives etc. that are protected by the blue and white shield;
preventing the theft of cultural property;
taking steps to ensure that historical buildings containing cultural treasures and which bear the blue and white shield are not used as billets for military personnel or for other military purposes;
providing support for the transport of cultural property.178
5.33. The Netherlands has a long-established system of listing buildings and other structures of great cultural value under the Monuments and Historic Buildings Act (which now has 43,000 listings), important collections in about 800 museums, libraries and archives, and a system for listing particularly important items of movable cultural property outside museums, such as church fittings. More recently the Government has drawn up a list of the `Top Hundred' monuments and buildings. All are being progressively marked with the Hague Convention shield. Action to improve the protection of all three categories, whether in public or private ownership, can be assisted with grants from the Culture ministry (often supplemented by funds from the regional and local authorities as well). The regional Cultural Protection Inspectors are the front line in developing cultural protection, advising on practical protection measures against military, civil and natural disaster threats, security (especially fire) protection measures, liaison with provincial and local emergency services, especially the sixty-seven fire and rescue services, making recommendations on the allocation of funds for protection measures, and arranging for the display on each protected building or monument the Hague Convention official emblem.
5.34. The Dutch protection arrangements are summarised in the excellent, well-illustrated, 1991 Handbook, published for the information of owners or managers of the cultural property protected with the official emblem, of provincial and local authorities - including the emergency services, disaster relief organisations, the national and provincial military commands, and officials responsible for the management and supervision of protected features179. The `Top 100' listed buildings and the `Top 10' objects of cultural interest in each of four categories (stained glass windows, church bells, clocks and chimes, and organs) are also individually listed in the handbook.
5.35. The Dutch Handbook, and the practical arrangements it describes, could well serve as a model for other High Contracting Parties, so an English translation of the full text of this (except for the captions to the illustrations) is printed as Appendix IX of this Report.
5.36. In accordance with Article 7 the authorities for all the Netherlands armed services have taken measures to ensure that the provisions and obligations of the 1954 Hague Convention are included in military training and operational manuals and instructions. However, the principal emphasis in this area seems to be on the protection of the national patrimony during defensive operations inside national territory. With the Royal Netherlands services playing and increasingly important and highly respected role in international peace-keeping and peace-making operations, especially with the United Nations, the implications of the Hague Convention in relation to external operations should perhaps be given greater prominence in international humanitarian law training.
5.37. Looking at the world in general, at both the national and international levels there is growing concern that only a very small proportion of monuments, museums and other cultural institutions have any sort of emergency and disaster preparedness plans for even natural or civil disasters - which are comparatively common, let alone for times of war or other armed conflict. In discussions with the hazard assessment and planning staff in the United Nations Disaster Relief Organisation (UNDRO) it was pointed out that in most of the countries of the which UNDRO is called on to advise, (mainly in the developing world), natural disasters - particularly hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, other flooding, and volcanic eruptions are by far the most frequent causes of major losses of life and property. UNDRO reports that the agency has rarely if ever been approached for advice concerning the protection of cultural property ether specifically or as part of a wider disaster preparedness scheme. (The Head of Disaster Mitigation further points out that as most kinds of natural disaster as cyclical or otherwise recurring, at least in relation to older monuments and sites in regions prone to regular natural disasters a kind of natural selection has taken place, with only those able to withstand such events surviving to the present day. Consequently, if they have survived previous earthquakes, storms, floods etc. over the centuries they are probably reasonably stable and likely to survive future disasters. In terms of e.g. the risk of loss of life and property due to building collapse old buildings and monuments may be much less at risk than some new museum or similar buildings.)180
5.38. The balance is probably somewhat different in the more developed countries located in temperate, and seismologically more stable areas of the world, where fire is probably the greatest threat, followed by water damage of various kinds: natural flooding, technical failures of engineering systems such as plumbing and air conditioning, and - not least - water necessarily used by the emergency services in fighting fire.
5.39. In terms of their impact on buildings and collections a high proportion of the actual damage that occurs in war is not very different from that resulting from natural or civil disasters. Direct parallels between the effects of war damage and those of civil or natural disasters include: fire, structural collapse of roofs and walls, ingress of water whether through holes in roofs or from damaged building services, interruption of essential services, especially gas (leading to fire and explosion and loss of heating), surface drainage (resulting in flooding) and electricity (with consequent shut-down of building services, such as air conditioning, security and information systems), and criminal acts against cultural property, such as casual theft, more extensive and organised looting and vandalism.
5.40. Not the least of the problems in the aftermath of any kind of disaster is the reconstruction of lost records - whether of vital structural, past conservation, and maintenance data in the case of monuments and other buildings, and catalogues and indexes of collections in the case of movable cultural property. My own experience in 1964 to 1968 in trying to reconstruct the catalogue and other scientific data for the less than 1% of the collections of the Hull Museums, following the museum's destruction by incendiary bombing in May 1943, gave me a vivid personal insight into the devastating implications of the loss of such records, and though the remarkable 1989 `Phoenix Project'181 recovered several thousand more specimens again, in the absence of any catalogue data or specimen labels, hardly any of the rescued items could be identified. Thus their historic or scientific interest was very greatly reduced.
5.41. It has to be recognised that in some countries despite the obligations and undertakings in the 1954 Convention in relation to peacetime preparation for safeguarding cultural property in the event of armed conflict, such overt measures may be regarded as politically undesirable due to an unwillingness of the national authorities to even contemplate the possibility of international war or serious internal armed conflict. In such cases a fully integrated approach to emergency planning and disaster preparedness will be particularly valuable, since, as indicated above, at least at the level of the individual monument, museum or other cultural institution most of the practical measures for risk reduction and disaster mitigation can be of equal value in relation to natural and civil disasters as to armed conflict.
5.42. Consequently it is strongly RECOMMENDED that all responsible at any level for monuments, museums, libraries and archive repositories etc. (governments, regional and local authorities, the civil and military emergency services and the management of the cultural monuments and institutions themselves) should adopt an integrated approach to peacetime planning for the possible consequences of all disasters and serious emergencies, including natural disasters, civil disasters and armed conflicts (including terrorist attacks).
5.43. Although it is recognised that measures to save human life are inevitably going to be the over-riding concern of both international and national authorities in development and execution of emergency plans, it is RECOMMENDED that public authorities and organisations at the international, national, regional and local levels should always include due provision for the protection of cultural property, especially important monuments, museums, and other collections in their disaster preparedness and disaster relief plans.
5.44. A number of important non-governmental organisations, at both the international and national levels are already actively involved in developing awareness of the need for emergency planning and of practical advice on planning and protection techniques. These include at the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS)182, the International Council of Museums (ICOM)183 and the Getty Foundation184 at the international level and bodies such as the United States National Fire Protection Association, 1991A & B, 1992.185 It is RECOMMENDED that such initiatives by the non-governmental sector to develop and promote integrated emergency and disaster-preparedness plans and arrangements should be strongly encouraged.
5.45. There must, however, be concern that many important cultural institutions are not keeping up with the new threats presented by technological change in both their own operations and practices and in weapons technology186. Museums, libraries and archive repositories are increasingly dependent on computer and other electronic data systems which may be particularly vulnerable in both civil disasters and war, particularly fire. (In the UK it is estimated that about one third of businesses suffering serious damage to their computer and other record systems in workplace fires never start up again.)
5.46. The development of new weapons such as electronic pulse or electronic field weapons designed to disable and destroy all kinds of computer-based systems could present a completely new potential threat to essential cultural data held on computers or in other electronic storage forms. A rapidly growing proportion of the security and environmental control systems of monuments, museums, libraries and archives which are computer based and hence potentially vulnerable to such new types of weapon systems, whether used in an offensive or defensive mode.
5.47. Some High Contracting Parties have reported on taking protective measures in relation to cultural property information, such as microfilming programmes for collections, and the photogrammetric recording of monuments. It is RECOMMENDED that these essential measures should be extended to the duplication and storage in safe locations remote from the cultural institutions concerned duplicate copies of all computer and other electronic records of cultural property. It is further RECOMMENDED that in any future revision of, or Additional Protocol to, the 1954 Convention, the definition of `cultural property' in Article 1 (a) the phrase `or of reproductions of the property defined above' be replaced by `or of paper, microform or electronic catalogues, documentation, or copies of the property defined above'.
5.48. Finally, but by no means least in relation to the issue of peacetime preparations, from the information gathered for this study no High Contracting Party appears to have set up the national advisory committee recommended by the 1954 Intergovernmental Conference:
The Conference expresses the hope that each of the High Contracting Parties, on acceding to the Convention, should set up, within the framework of its constitutional and administrative system, a national advisory committee consisting of a small number of distinguished persons: for example, senior officials of archaeological services, museums, etc., a representative of the military general staff, a representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs a specialist in international law and two or three other members whose official duties or specialized knowledge are related to the fields covered by the Convention. The Committee should be under the authority of the minister of State or senior official responsible for the national service chiefly concerned with the care of cultural property. Its chief functions would be:
(a) to advise the government concerning the measures required for the implementation of the Convention in its legislative, technical or military aspects, both in time of peace and during an armed conflict;
(b) to approach its government in the event of an armed conflict or when such a conflict appears imminent, with a view to ensuring that cultural property situated within its own territory or within that of other countries is known to, and respected and protected by the armed forces of the country, in accordance with the provisions of the Convention;
(c) to arrange, in agreement with its government, for liaison and co operation with other similar national committees and with any competent international authority.187
Such national advisory committees could play an important role in developing practical means of implementing the Convention and Protocol at the practical level, and all States Parties are RECOMMENDED to establish such an advisory committee.