Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 8

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  cultural heritage law
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Prawna ochrona dziedzictwa kultury w Japonii – zarys tematyki

100%
Zeidler K., Kliczkowska L.
Azja-Pacyfik
|
2021
|
issue XXIV
117-128
EN
The authors of this article undertake a general discussion of the legal protection of Japan’s cultural heritage. They begin their reflection with the issue of comparative legal studies, treating it as a determinant of the direction and scope of legal analysis of the cultural property protection in Japan. However, their main focus are three issues. These are: the history of legal protection of the cultural heritage against the background of the formation of modern Japanese law, the subject of protection and its categories according to the Japanese Act of 30 May 1950 on the Protection of Cultural Property, and the empirically significant aspect of conservation theory concerning the issue of the authenticity of a historic substance in relation to Japan. The authors end their analysis of the legal history of the protection of Japan’s cultural heritage with a discussion of the 1950 Law, which (amended) still remains in force. The curious practice of monuments conservation in Japan related to the understanding of the authenticity of a historic substance by the Japanese is addressed by the authors in the last part of the article.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

The Role of Non-State Actors in the Cultural Heritage Field – The Case of the Orthodox Church and Its Heritage in Turkey

100%
Augustinos N.
Santander Art and Culture Law Review
|
2018
|
vol. 4
|
issue 2
277-304
EN
The involvement of non-state actors in legal regimes concerning the protection of cultural heritage has been identified as a key challenge facing the development of international law in this field. This challenge is intensified when the relevant cultural heritage under consideration takes the form of religious sites whose use by a church community (non-state actor) for the purposes of its religious activities has been impacted upon by circumstances such as war or inter-ethnic conflict resulting in the displacement of that church community. This article contributes to this discussion by reference to a significant non-state actor in the field of religion and global affairs – the Orthodox Church – and specifically by reference to the Church’s heritage in Turkey. After providing the reasons which justify a scholarly legal examination of the Church’s assertion of rights with respect to its heritage in Turkey, as well as an outline of the main measures which have been applied by Turkish authorities to this heritage, the article proceeds to offer a tentative overview and analysis of the relevant legal and policy framework and suggests certain issues requiring further scholarly exploration. It is argued that in addition to providing useful insights about the role of nonstate actors in the cultural heritage field, such further exploration can offer useful insights about a related topic which is currently relatively unexplored by cultural heritage commentators, namely, the post-conflict management of religious sites.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

National Laws Related to Intangible Cultural Heritage: Determining the Object of a Comparative Study

88%
Vaivade A., Wagener N.
Santander Art and Culture Law Review
|
2017
|
vol. 3
|
issue 2
91-108
EN
This article is part of a collective research that focuses on studying various national legal tools elaborated for implementing the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH), adopted in 2003. Instead of presenting the first results of this comparative law research project still in progress, the purpose of this article is to question the object of such a comparative study – before comparing and even before defining the scope of the study in terms of countries to be studied. It is certain that a comparative study on ICH law cannot be carried out simply based on a database gathering national laws using the term “ICH”. The pitfall is twofold: on one hand, it would be an error to think that one starts from nothing, and that ICH law remains still to be written in the vast majority of States; while on the other hand it would also be an error to create artificial continuities, with more or less assumed political implications, made up of legal regulations of yesterday and today which, nevertheless, do not claim to concern ICH. It is in the interval between these two extremes that legal continuities, as well as disruptions of the legislative histories may be observed, and all of these would enrich our understanding about the contexts in which the term “ICH” has been incorporated into national legal systems.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

The Reform of Italian Law on Cultural Property Export and Its Implications for the “Definitional Debate”: Closing the Gap with the European Union Approach or Cosmetics? Some Systemic Considerations from a Criminal Law Perspective

88%
Visconti A.
Santander Art and Culture Law Review
|
2019
|
vol. 5
|
issue 2
159-186
EN
Italy has a long tradition of pervasive regulation of its national cultural heritage, including strict control over the export of cultural objects. In contrast to the lack of a definition of “national treasures” which affects EU law, Italian law has striven to achieve an effective definition of the terms “cultural heritage” and “cultural property”, and even more to design specific identification rules for cultural objects. Nonetheless, the issues of definition and related protection on the one hand, and identification on the other, do not always go hand in hand in a legal framework which is made even more complex by the coexistence of two separate models of criminal law protection, as well as by the frequency of reforms, the most recent of which directly affected the export of cultural property. So how has the legal definition of “cultural property” changed over the years within the Italian legislation? How do the peculiarities in the construction of criminal offences “muddle” the overall picture? How much has the 2017 reform affected said definition? Finally, the question arises whether and how all this will possibly impact the gap between national and EU approaches to cultural “goods”. These issues are the main focus of this article.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Prawne aspekty rekonstrukcji dziedzictwa kulturowego

75%
Kowalski W.
Santander Art and Culture Law Review
|
2019
|
vol. 5
|
issue 1
25-40
EN
After examining several different examples of reconstruction in the context of destroyed buildings and their ensembles, the author argues that the only acceptable form of analyzed activity is reconstruction sensu stricto, meaning in the narrow sense of this word, when it is based on proper documentation and aimed at restoring the building’s original authenticity. All other examples, like 19th century romantic castles or recent restorations of entire city centers, can only be classified as reconstructions sensu largo – in a very wide sense of the term. Then the change in legal approach to the concept of reconstruction is discussed. According to the Venice Charter, it was not accepted per se but slowly “legalized” with the passage of time, initially by placing the Warsaw Old Town on the World Heritage List in 1980 and then in documents like 2017 ICOMOS Guidance on post trauma recovery and reconstruction for world heritage cultural properties, where terms such as “modified reconstruction”, “partial reconstruction” and others have been defined. The more recent and generally drafted 2018 Warsaw Recommendation on recovery and reconstruction of cultural heritage fully accepts the term “reconstruction.” The paper ends with some remarks on the financial aspects of reconstruction. 
PL
W artykule – po analizie różnych przykładów rekonstrukcji budowli i ich zespołów – autor przekonuje, że może być jedynie rekonstrukcja sensu stricto, tzn. w wąskim znaczeniu tego słowa, kiedy jest ona oparta na dobrej dokumentacji i dążeniu do zachowania lub przywrócenia autentyczności. Wszelkie inne przykłady, takie jak zamki romantyczne w XIX w. czy współczesne odbudowy dzielnic miast można nazywać jedynie rekonstrukcją sensu largo, czyli bardzo szeroko pojętą. W dalszej części przedstawiono zmianę podejścia do rekonstrukcji, która w Karcie Weneckiej była niedopuszczalna, ale z czasem doszło do swoistej jej „legalizacji”, np. poprzez umieszczenie na Liście Światowego Dziedzictwa odbudowanego Starego Miasta w Warszawie. Potem przyszły specjalne wytyczne ICOMOS dotyczące odbudowy i rekonstrukcji zabytków z 2017 r., w których zdefiniowano różne rodzaje rekonstrukcji, w tym m.in. „rekonstrukcję jak wcześniej”, „modyfikowaną rekonstrukcję”, „częściową rekonstrukcję” oraz „inne formy rekonstrukcji”. Dokumentem mniej szczegółowym, ale za to dotyczącym szeroko pojętego dziedzictwa, jest przyjęta w 2018 r. tzw. Rekomendacja warszawska o odbudowie i rekonstrukcji dziedzictwa kulturowego. W artykule omówione zostały także kwestie finansowania rekonstrukcji. 
6
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Photographs as “Cultural Property” under Italian and European Union Law: A Complex Picture

75%
Romanelli E.
Santander Art and Culture Law Review
|
2019
|
vol. 5
|
issue 2
135-158
EN
Photography has only recently come to be considered, besides being a creative work protected under copyright law, also as a possible element of “cultural heritage”. Even in Italy, with its traditionally pervasive regulation of cultural property, while the issue was raised in the 1970s it only entered the legal framework on cultural heritage in the 1990s. During the same period, photographs began to be considered as “cultural goods” under the European legal framework, albeit with mixed attitudes. This article provides a summary of this legal evolution, including an analysis of possible effects of the 2017 reform of Italian cultural property export law on this specific area, and discussing the impact of current regulation on the photography market.
7
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

“Japan Heritage”: An exemplary project promoting local development trough Japanese cultural property

63%
Kliczkowska L.
Gdańskie Studia Azji Wschodniej
|
2024
|
issue 25
75-85
PL
W artykule zaprezentowano pokrótce ewolucję legislacyjną Japonii, począwszy od wczesnych działań podejmowanych pod koniec XIX wieku po nowoczesne inicjatywy, takie jak inicjatywa Japan Heritage uruchomiona przez Agencję ds. Kultury w 2015 r., która odzwierciedla adaptacyjne i postępowe podejście Japończyków do ochrony zabytków. Zbadano również filozoficzne podstawy unikatowego spojrzenia Japończyków na autentyczność zabytków oraz wpływ tradycji i społeczności lokalnych na kształtowanie się japońskich dóbr kultury. Ponadto bardziej szczegółowo przedstawiono założenia dotyczące programu Japan Heritage, z uwzględnieniem jego lokalnego i globalnego wpływu. W podsumowaniu zwrócono uwagę na trwałe zaangażowanie Japonii w ochronę zabytków, co wiąże się także z dynamiczną interakcją tradycji, zaangażowania społeczności lokalnych i globalną wymianą kulturową.
EN
The article presents a concise overview of Japan’s legislative evolution spans from early efforts in the late nineteenth century to modern initiatives like the Japan Heritage initiative launched by the Agency for Cultural Affairs in 2015, reflecting Japan’s adaptive and progressive approach to heritage preservation. The author also explores the philosophical foundations underlying Japan’s unique perspective on heritage authenticity and examines the influential role of tradition and local communities in shaping Japanese Cultural Properties. Furthermore, the Japan Heritage program is introduced, along with an analysis of its local and global impact. The author underscores Japan’s ongoing commitment to navigating heritage preservation within the dynamic interplay of tradition, local community engagement, and global cultural exchange.
8
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Kilka słów krytycznych przy okazji jubileuszu 50-lecia Konwencji UNESCO z 1972 roku

63%
Zeidler K.
Santander Art and Culture Law Review
|
2023
|
vol. 9
|
issue 1
117-130
EN
2022 marked the 50th anniversary of the adoption of the 1972 UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. On the occasion of this anniversary, the article uncharacteristically contains criticism of both UNESCO itself and doubts about the 1972 Convention. However, all these remarks flow from concern for the fate and future of this international organisation, whose activities and achievements in the protection of the world cultural heritage ultimately deserve recognition. The problems do not merely arise within UNESCO, but rather with other members of the international community, particularly some states and their actions toward the organisation. Problems also arise from the implementation of and compliance with international law. The allegations against UNESCO are organised and discussed here according to three criteria: formalism, time and costs. On the other hand, the 1972 UNESCO Convention itself is presented from two perspectives – first, in the normative layer as an international legal act, which serves as a sui generis constitution of the world’s protection of cultural and natural heritage; and second, in the empirical layer. In the latter context, attention was paid to the role of the UNESCO World Heritage List. Regardless of the criticisms, as well as the weaknesses and problems highlighted, it is clear from the article that it emphasises the value of both the 1972 UNESCO Convention, one of whose main advantages is that it has resisted the passage of time, and the great role of UNESCO itself, as an important international organisation with considerable achievements and merits.
PL
W 2022 r. przypadało 50-lecie przyjęcia Konwencji UNESCO w sprawie ochrony światowego dziedzictwa kulturalnego i naturalnego z 1972 r. Artykuł – nietypowo jak na jubileuszowy – zawiera słowa krytyki zarówno wobec samego UNESCO, jak i wątpliwości co do Konwencji z 1972 r. Jednak wszelkie te uwagi wypływają z troski o losy i przyszłość tej międzynarodowej organizacji, której działalność i osiągnięcia w zakresie ochrony światowego dziedzictwa kultury finalnie zasługują na uznanie. W ocenie autora problemy nie leżą tylko po stronie UNESCO, lecz często bardziej po stronie innych członków społeczności międzynarodowej, w szczególności niektórych państw i ich działań w stosunku do organizacji. Problemy rodzi także implementowanie oraz przestrzeganie prawa międzynarodowego. Zarzuty wobec UNESCO zostały tu uporządkowane według trzech kryteriów: formalizmu, czasu i kosztów. Natomiast sama Konwencja UNESCO z 1972 r. została przedstawiona z dwóch perspektyw – po pierwsze, w warstwie normatywnej jako międzynarodowy akt prawny, który pełni funkcję sui generis konstytucji światowej ochrony dziedzictwa kultury i natury, po drugie, w warstwie empirycznej. W tym ostatnim kontekście zwrócono uwagę na rolę Listy Światowego Dziedzictwa UNESCO. Niezależnie od uwag krytycznych, a także zaakcentowanych słabych stron i problemów, z artykułu jednoznacznie wynikają znaczenie i wartość zarówno samej Konwencji UNESCO z 1972 r., której jedną z podstawowych zalet jest to, że oparła się upływowi czasu, jak i ogromna rola samego UNESCO jako ważnej i mającej niemałe osiągnięcia i zasługi organizacji międzynarodowej.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.