By Philippe de LA HAUSSE DE LA LOUVIERE ICOMOS Executive Council Member

In an otherwise pertinent article by Rover in L?Express of 6th June (The Morne Brabant ? The PM ill-advised?), mention was made of the role of ICOMOS (International Council of Monuments and Sites) in the process of World Heritage Site inscriptions. Contrary to what was blandly stated, that ?..ICOMOS, whose services are hired at astronomical prices, had refused to recognize the outstanding universal value of Aapravasi Ghat in 2006?, it should be pointed out that ICOMOS is remunerated by UNESCO with a fee which only covers very minimal costs of site assessment. ICOMOS is a not-for-profit non-governmental organization which has shown its value for money over more than 40 years of assessing the nomination dossiers of more than 2,000 sites worldwide.

Far from charging astronomical prices, it pays no fees to its experts, and operates with a skeleton handful of staff in cramped quarters furnished by the French State. The integrity and objectivity ICOMOS and its membership is recognized by governments all over the planet, as well as other influential NGO?s which operate in the field of heritage management, like ICCROM, IUCN and ICOM.

This integrity is enshrined in the ICOMOS Ethical Commitment Statement which lays a framework for members of the organization to ?conduct their professional activities in an open, honest, accountable and objective manner, avoiding bias or dishonesty.? Its eighteen International Scientific Committees which form the backbone of the organization?s expertise are composed of professionals ? archaeologists, architects, heritage managers, lawyers and others - who contribute their scholarship without remuneration.

ICOMOS did not ?refuse? to recognize the outstanding universal value (OUV) of the Ghat site in 2006. An objective and comprehensive appraisal of the site concluded that more evidence was required to show whether the Ghat satisfied the two criteria of universal significance under which it had been nominated. Indeed, ICOMOS responded positively in recommending a deferral so that further evidence could be furnished.

What the majority of people might not appreciate is that the final decision of conferring world heritage status on monuments and sites is by the World Heritage Committee which is composed of government representatives most of whom are not heritage specialists and who are directed by their government. In addition, when this Committee makes the final decision on whether to approve a site for world heritage status, it takes into consideration many other factors especially its representativeness in the global context.

Thus, States with no or few inscribed sites or those types of sites which are under-represented might be particularly favoured. In 2006, the World Heritage Committee finally concurred that the Ghat could NOT be accepted on the significance of its physical remains, but that it was a site with significant intangible and outstanding universal symbolic value. The ?Great Experiment? of indentured labour which was responsible for an Indian diaspora was judged to be of outstanding universal value. The Immigration Depot thus joins a tiny number of sites in the world which are exceptionally inscribed solely on the basis of symbolic value.

The process of nominating, assessing and deciding on whether Le Morne Landscape is a World Heritage Site is following exactly the same prescribed process as the Ghat did. The nomination dossier and the site itself have been scrupulously examined by ICOMOS experts and the dossier is now, as we all know, awaiting the deliberations of the World Heritage Committee, in order that a decision be taken on whether Le Morne will be inscribed on the list of UNESCO world heritage.

To state that ?Once beaten, ICOMOS wants to play safe..? with reference to its assessment of Le Morne, is simply ludicrous. Whether or not the Mauritian State uses its political influence on members of the World Heritage Committee is not of any consequence to ICOMOS. What is clear however, is that this Committee, given its composition and mandate as outlined above, might not always follow the precise recommendations of ICOMOS. This can work both ways ? sometimes recommendations by ICOMOS have not been sustained by the Committee, other times it is the opposite and sites judged to have OUV by the heritage experts are not granted World heritage status.

Don?t judge the performance of ICOMOS by the standards of national or international politics ? and let us hope that the decision made soon by the World Heritage Committee on Le Morne Landscape is one of which all Mauritians, indeed all of humanity, will be proud.