On 2 November 2001, the UNESCO General Conference adopted the Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage (hereinafter: the CPUCH). It will apply to "all traces of human existence having a cultural, historical or archaeological character which have been partially or totally under water, periodically or continuously, for at least 100 years" (Art. 1, para. 1, a). The CPUCH, which is the outcome of a long-lasting negotiation, was adopted by vote (87 States in favour, 4 against2 and 15 abstentions). The lack of consensus at the moment of its adoption should not be seen as an irreparable flaw. Not only did the great majority of developing countries vote in favour, but also several the industrialized countries were satisfied with the final outcome of the negotiations. To explain the merit of the CPUCH, a basic consideration must be made. Every attempt to ensure an effective protection of underwater cultural heritage at sea has inevitably to face the unexpected obstacle of Art. 303 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (hereinafter: the UNCLOS). This provision is not only incomplete, but also counterproductive. It can be understood in a sense that undermines the very objective of protecting the underwater cultural heritage.
Scovazzi, T. (2002). Convention on the protection of underwater cultural heritage. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND LAW.
Convention on the protection of underwater cultural heritage
SCOVAZZI, TULLIO
2002
Abstract
On 2 November 2001, the UNESCO General Conference adopted the Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage (hereinafter: the CPUCH). It will apply to "all traces of human existence having a cultural, historical or archaeological character which have been partially or totally under water, periodically or continuously, for at least 100 years" (Art. 1, para. 1, a). The CPUCH, which is the outcome of a long-lasting negotiation, was adopted by vote (87 States in favour, 4 against2 and 15 abstentions). The lack of consensus at the moment of its adoption should not be seen as an irreparable flaw. Not only did the great majority of developing countries vote in favour, but also several the industrialized countries were satisfied with the final outcome of the negotiations. To explain the merit of the CPUCH, a basic consideration must be made. Every attempt to ensure an effective protection of underwater cultural heritage at sea has inevitably to face the unexpected obstacle of Art. 303 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (hereinafter: the UNCLOS). This provision is not only incomplete, but also counterproductive. It can be understood in a sense that undermines the very objective of protecting the underwater cultural heritage.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.