Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T02:28:39.373Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Implication of Common Heritage Concepts on the Quest for CulturalObjects and the Dialogue Between North and South

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Anastasia Strati
Anastasia Strati*
Affiliation:
Democritus University of Thrace, Greece
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
When the Quest for Cultural Objects Divides North from South
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 89 , 1995 , pp. 439 - 443
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Batrov, P.M., An Essay on the International Trade in Art , 34 CTAN. L. R. 275–384 at 306 (1982)Google Scholar.

2 Declaration of the Principles of International Cultural Co-operation, adopted at the fourteenth session of the General Conference, November 4, 1966. Art. 1(3).

3 294 UNTS215.

4 11 ILM 1358 (1972).

5 Article 4.

6 21 ILM 58 (1982). Article 22(1)(1981).

7 S.A. Williams, The International And National Protection Of Movable Cultural Property: A Comparative Survey 201-202 (1967).

8 Koumantos, G., International Legal Protection of Cultural Property: Introductory Report, in Council Of Europe , International Legal Protection Of Cultural Property 12–16 at 14 (1984)Google Scholar.

9 Kiss, A-Ch., The Common Heritage of Mankind , 59 Rev. Jur. U.P.R. 773–777 (1990)Google Scholar.

10 218 UNTS 139

11 25 ILM 44 (1986). Europ. T. S. No 11

12 25 ILM 380 (1986). Europ. T. S. No 14

13 15 ILM 1350(1976).

14 Resolution 808 of October 3, 1983, paras. 9 and 11 in Council Of Europe, Texts Adopted By The Ssembly, Thirty-Fifth Ordinary Session (Second Part), (1983).

15 1993 O. J. (L 74) 74.

16 Roberts, E. L., Cultural Policy in the European Community: A Case Against Extensive National Retention , 28 Tex. Int’l L.J. 191–228 at 217-219 (1993)Google Scholar.

17 21 ILM 1245(1982).

18 In addition, the Convention fails to designate an appropriate international organization to implement the proposed regime. See, Strati, A., Deep Seabed Cultural Property and the Common Heritage of Mankind , 40 I.C.L.Q. 859–894(1991)Google Scholar.

19 E., Racounas, Submarine Archaelogical Research: Some Legal Aspects in The International Legal Regime Of The Mediterranean Sea 309–334 at 328 (U. Lebanza, ed., 1987)Google Scholar.

20 This is one of the main reasons that the inclusion of the preferential rights in Article 149 has been criticized. In particular see Watters, D.R., Law of the Sea Treaty and Underwater Cultural Resources , 48 American Antiquity 808–816 (1983)Google Scholar and Bass, G.F., Marine Archaeology: A Misunderstood Science , 2 Ocean Y.B. 137–152 (1980)Google Scholar.

21 1955 ICJ Rep. 4 at 22.