heritage legislation to suit contemporary dynamics

Transcription

1 Ssenyonga Fredrick Nsibambi The Cross Cultural Foundation of Uganda Kampala, Uganda Keywords: Conventions, national policies, intangible and tangible heritage Abstract The government of Uganda has formulated a number of policies for cultural heritage protection and promotion. The policy instruments include the National Cultural Policy of 2006, the policy on the use of local languages as a medium of instruction in primary education, and the development of a draft national policy on traditional and complementary medicine. At the international level, the government of Uganda has ratified a number of conventions including the UNESCO Conventions for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972) and for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003). However, a number of other prevailing laws are obsolete or inadequate; other relevant international conventions have not been ratified or applied to adequately promote and protect the national heritage of Uganda. This paper discusses in Uganda in light of current heritage and tragedies at Kasubi Royal Tombs, a World Heritage Site, as well as the need to update Uganda s Historic Monuments Act of 1967 and ratify the 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions. Résumé Le gouvernement de l Ouganda a émis un certain nombre de directives visant la protection et la promotion du patrimoine culturel. Les instruments politiques invoqués incluent la Politique culturelle nationale de 2006, la politique sur l usage des langues locales en tant que véhicule des apprentissages dans l enseignement primaire et le développement d un projet de politique nationale visant la médecine traditionnelle et les médecines douces. Au niveau international, le gouvernement de l Ouganda a ratifié plusieurs conven- Background Uganda is gifted with a rich historic, natural and cultural heritage. This includes the immovable (historic monuments and natural sites) as well as the movable and less visible (knowledge, skills and values). Some elements of this heritage have attained international recognition. If properly harnessed, these can potentially improve the socio-economic situation of Ugandans and build national identity, tourism and employment. Yet, a number of factors have led to the continued destruction and neglect of significant monuments, sites and other aspects of our heritage. Among these are a lack of awareness of the existence of this heritage and its cultural and historic significance locally and internationally, limited or no political will or resources to develop the culture sector, the lack of relevant or updated legal instruments for heritage protection, negative perceptions of culture as backward, and the challenges presented by modern development and globalization. The fire that gutted the Kasubi Royal Tombs, a World Heritage Site on 16 March 2010 was a symptom of a wider situation of neglect of our tangible heritage. This highlights the need to update and apply our heritage legislation, and in particular the 1967 Historic Monuments Act because of its centrality to the preservation of our heritage. Policies relevant to Uganda s heritage At the international level, there are a number of instruments, including: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 The UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, 1972 The UNESCO Convention for Safeguarding the Intangible Cultural Heritage, 2003 The UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, 2005 (yet to be ratified) 1

2 tions, dont les Conventions de l UNESCO pour la protection du patrimoine mondial culturel et naturel (1972) et pour la sauvegarde du patrimoine culturel immatériel (2003). Toutefois, plusieurs autres lois en vigueur sont obsolètes ou inadaptées ; d autres conventions internationales importantes en vue de promouvoir et protéger efficacement le patrimoine national de l Ouganda n ont pas été ratifiées ou ne sont pas appliquées. Cet article discute de la législation sur le patrimoine en Ouganda à la lumière de l actualité concernant le patrimoine et des tragédies survenues dans les tombes royales de Kasubi, site classé sur la Liste du patrimoine mondial de l UNESCO. Il insiste également sur la nécessité de réviser la Loi de 1967 sur les monuments historiques en Ouganda et de ratifier la Convention de l UNESCO de 2005 sur la protection et la promotion de la diversité des expressions culturelles. Resumen El gobierno de Uganda ha formulado una serie de políticas para la protección y promoción del patrimonio cultural. Los instrumentos para políticas formulados incluyen, entre otros, la Política Cultural Nacional de 2006, la Política sobre el uso de lenguas locales como medio de enseñanza en la educación primaria y el desarrollo de un borrador para una Política nacional sobre la medicina tradicional y complementaria. A nivel internacional, el gobierno de Uganda ha ratificado una serie de Convenciones incluyendo las Convenciones de la UNESCO para la Protección del Patrimonio Mundial, Cultural y Natural (1972), y para la Salvaguardia del Patrimonio Cultural Inmaterial (2003). Sin embargo, hay aún varias leyes en vigor que están obsoletas o son inadecuadas. Otras convenciones internacionales importantes no han sido ratificadas ni aplicadas para promocionar y proteger adecuadamente el patrimonio nacional de Uganda. Este artículo pretende analizar el estado de la legislación de Uganda sobre el patrimonio, teniendo en cuenta las dinámicas actuales relacionadas con el patrimonio (demostraciones de patrimonio contemporáneo) así como la tragedia ocurrida en las Tumbas Reales de Kasubi, sitio de Patrimonio Mundial. También analiza la necesidad de actualizar la Ley sobre Monumentos Históricos de Uganda de 1967, y de ratificar la Convención de la UNESCO de At the national level, there are also a number of policy instruments related to Uganda s heritage, including: The Historic Monuments Act, 1967 The Traditional Rulers (Restitution of Assets and Properties) Act, 1993 The Constitution of Uganda, 1995 Uganda Wildlife Statute, 1996 The Local Government Act, 1997 (amended 2002) The National Environment Management Act, 1998 (CAP 153) The Tourism Policy, 2003 The National Cultural Policy, 2006 Copyright Act and Neighboring Rights Act, 2006 This paper focuses on the two major legal instruments related to conservation and the development of heritage in Uganda: the 1967 Historic Monuments Act and the 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions. The Historic Monuments Act and the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions Despite its many shortcomings, the Historic Monuments Act is currently the only national legal instrument directly related to the conservation, protection and promotion of Uganda s cultural and natural heritage. It is the central legal instrument for the conservation of heritage in Uganda. It provides for punitive measures if one destroys heritage sites. If updated, the Act could also provide for the implementation of other legal instruments, including international conventions related to heritage. The widespread demolition of historic buildings and the destruction and neglect of Uganda s heritage sites highlight the urgency of updating the Historic Monuments Act to provide for the protection and maintenance of Uganda s heritage. Not only is the Act outdated, it is rarely applied. The 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions is not ratified in Uganda, yet it provides for the protection and promotion of cultural expression, cultural diversity, cultural industries, cultural activities, and goods and services. The Convention presents an opportunity for cultural organizations to initiate a dialogue with their governments on how cultural policies can be employed to ensure a genuine diversity of cultural expression within their borders. Ratification of this Convention would not only reflect our cultural diversity, it would also unlock access to different types of support for our cultural sector. 2

3 The Historic Monuments Act This Act provides for the preservation, protection and promotion of historic monuments and objects of archeological, paleontological, ethnographic and traditional interest. The Act further provides for how objects should be cited on a national list and how they should be maintained. The national list guides the government on how sites should be protected and maintained. Section 1(1) states that, The Minister may, by statutory instrument, declare any object of archaeological, paleontological, ethnographic, traditional or historical interest to be a preserved object for the purposes of this Act. Section 8 of the Act provides for the maintenance of the objects (including sites, places, fortification etc.): For purposes of maintenance and inspection of any preserved or protected object there shall be an inspector of monuments who shall be appointed by the Minister and shall be a public officer. The shortfalls of this Act emanate from both its design and its implementation mechanism. From the design perspective, the Act: Narrows the concept of heritage to immovable heritage (archaeological sites, monuments etc.), to the exclusion of movable and intangible heritage. Looking at heritage from the tangible perspective alone narrows the scope for conservation and the appreciation of the dynamic nature of heritage. Does not take into account the mixed nature of many sites in Uganda. At many natural heritage sites (Nakayima Tree, Rwenzori Mountains), one will find an interaction between what is natural and the cultural significance that people attach to such sites. Does not take into account the customs and norms related to conservation of heritage. From the implementation perspective: The Act has hardly been enforced. On many occasions it has remained silent on the demolition of historic buildings and it has not helped the deplorable state of Uganda s heritage sites. A case in point is Captain Lugard s Fort on the old Kampala Hill, which has been replaced by the Gaddafi Mosque. The fort was a historic monument representing Uganda s colonial history. Updating the national heritage sites list has been regrettably slow. For instance, by 1972, only 22 sites had been gazetted. It was not until 2007 that the national list was updated to officially include the Constitutional Square. It is also evident that several of the gazetted sites are not adequately protected. The monetary penalties prescribed in the Act have been made ineffective by the low value of the Ugandan currency. Under current law, the penalty for destroying a historic monument is roughly only UGS. 2,000. 3

4 Certain national sites have now attained world recognition, but the Act has not been updated to provide for this status. The nomination of sites to the World Heritage List requires that there be a national legal framework under which the site is protected. The nomination exercise also requires that a site have a management plan. These criteria are not reflected in the Act, which implies that World Heritage Sites in Uganda are protected only by international conventions. Most of the heritage/heritage sites in Uganda belong to cultural institutions. Since 1993, many sites that merited protection through publication in the Uganda gazette have been given back to cultural institutions. Cultural institutions are cash-strapped and cannot provide adequate protection of the sites. As there is no national legal provision for the protection of such sites from the central government or local authorities, there are no national or local annual budgetary provisions for their maintenance. Proposed changes to the Act: Remnants of Uganda s history and cultural heritage should be effectively protected and promoted by the Act. The Act should be updated to incorporate new categories of heritage and also to take into account the role of local communities in identifying what should be included on the national list of heritage sites. The national heritage list should be updated regularly and the scope widened to include different categories of heritage/heritage sites. The Act should provide for regular maintenance of gazetted heritage sites. It should provide for site management committees and management plans for all sites on the national list. The monetary penalties for destroying heritage sites/properties need to be revised. The Act should be amended to provide for financial support by way of budgetary interventions within the relevant ministerial annual budget for the maintenance of sites. Although some sites are deregistered from the national list under the Act, their inclusion on the World Heritage List of UNESCO, to which Uganda is a State Party, calls for a national responsibility to maintain them. The Act needs to be amended to incorporate provisions of international conventions. UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions The Convention provides for the protection and promotion of cultural expression, cultural diversity, cultural industries, cultural activities, and goods and services. The government of Uganda has yet to ratify it. 4

5 The government of Uganda should expedite the ratification of this Convention so that the cultural industries and civil society can exploit the opportunities it presents. Conclusion Although the government has formulated a number of policies for the protection and promotion of cultural heritage in Uganda, such as the National Cultural Policy of 2006, the policy on the use of local languages as a medium of instruction in primary education, and the development of a draft national policy on traditional and complementary medicine, a number of prevailing laws are obsolete or inadequate; relevant international conventions are not ratified or enforced to adequately conserve our heritage. Therefore, there is a need to expedite the ratification of the 2005 UNESCO Convention and to update the 1967 Historic Monuments Act to adequately protect and promote the different aspects of our national heritage. 5