Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The purpose of the Bill is to make the provision in Irish law to enable the State to ratify the 1954 Hague Convention on the protection of cultural property in the event of an armed conflict, and the 1999 protocol to the convention. We support and welcome this Bill as others have done. Specifically, the Bill will prohibit the destruction, damage and theft of cultural property in specified circumstances during the course of an armed conflict, in accordance with the 1999 protocol, and will provide for the appropriate penalties upon conviction and related matters.

The 1954 Hague Convention requires the contracting parties to safeguard and respect cultural property in the event of armed conflict. The 1999 protocol provides for a higher level of enhanced protection for cultural property which is of the greatest importance to humanity and has exceptional cultural and historical value. The 1999 protocol requires the contracting parties to provide penalties in domestic law, which is what we are doing through this Bill, for persons who intentionally commit serious violation of the convention and the protocol. The convention requires contracting parties further to safeguard and respect cultural property. Parties to the convention must, in the time of peace, take such measures as are considered appropriate to safeguard cultural properties within their territories. I understand that the Bill also confers legal protection on the blue shield emblem and empowers the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs to authorise its use in this State, which I welcome.

We welcome that property of important cultural heritage will be protected at times of war. While the horror of war is first and foremost about human suffering, we know how destructive it can be in terms of cultural property, most of which can never be replaced. We know from our own history how wars have damaged our cultural heritage, sometimes with the aim of destroying our identity. That has happened throughout the world. In recent times in particular, some of those parties at war have specifically targeted the cultural heritage of an area, country or people to try to obliterate their identity.

I am aware that 126 states are party to the 1954 Hague Convention, and that just four states, namely, Andorra, Britain, Ireland and the Philippines, have signed the treaty but have yet to ratify it. I welcome the fact that we are giving effect to that ratification. I acknowledge the work of my colleague, former Minister Carál Ní Chuilín, MLA, in this regard. When she served as Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure in the Six Counties, she supported the passage of similar legislation through the Assembly in Stormont.

As regards the technical aspects of the Bill, I broadly welcome the definition of cultural property set out in section 1. While I accept that the Bill involves giving effect to the terms of the Hague convention, I must mention the appalling treatment of our cultural heritage at different stages of our history and, in some regards, by the current Government, specifically in respect of the likes of Moore Street, although there was an announcement today of some possible progress on that issue.

See this speech in context