Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister, and I welcome and support the Bill. It is very appropriate and timely that we are moving forward to ratify in Irish law not only the convention of 1954 but also the very important strengthening protocol on the protection of cultural property of 1999. It is important that we recognise the wide definition of culture that sees it as both moveable and immovable. There is something to be examined in this regard when we consider the question of protection. The vandalism and destruction we have seen are often not simply most prominently against obvious sites such as Palmyra, described by UNESCO as a place of outstanding universal value, Nimrud or the libraries of Mosul, which were destroyed by ISIL. When we talk about destruction, we are aware there are forms of culture being destroyed in addition to the very obvious ones, which may be destroyed by explosion. I refer to the erosion of cultural practices, for example, which happens at times of conflict. I include cultural practices of minority communities, which can often be casual victims of armed conflict.

It is appropriate that we are engaged in ratification now given that, just one month ago, the International Criminal Court had its first prosecution for a war crime entirely focused on the question of crimes against culture. On 27 September, Mr. al-Mahdi was found guilty of the war crime of co-ordinating the attack on sites of historic and religious significance in Timbuktu and was sentenced to nine years' imprisonment. It is a sign of the seriousness with which the International Criminal Court is now taking these cases. In the trial, it is sending a very important message on the ongoing destruction in Syria and elsewhere. I commend in passing the work of people such as Dr. Abdel Kader Haïdara and those who very bravely took steps, at great personal risk, to save and preserve cultural property. Dr. Abdel Kader Haïdara did extensive work to try to preserve the libraries of Timbuktu on foot of attacks by Mr. al-Mahdi and others.

In addition to considering the question of destruction, I am very conscious of sections 2 and 3, which refer to stealing, pillaging, misappropriation and the exportation and removal from occupied territories of cultural artefacts. I refer to the trafficking effect. We could be much more vigilant in this regard. While Ireland may not be in conflict now, we have auctions and antique fairs, and we do see goods that are trafficked through our system. In signing the agreement, we need to allocate resources so we will have persons ready and able to screen our auction houses to ensure we are in no way complicit in the sale or trafficking of cultural artefacts. It is not a one-way phenomenon. The market for cultural artefacts taken during times of war and in the period immediately afterwards, or during times of occupation, is well established in Europe. It has been built up over centuries of colonialism and occupation. In that sense, it behoves us as Europeans to ensure we are tackling the market in every place. We must bear in mind some of the legacy assumptions made in our museums on the treatment of property taken from times of conflict and in circumstances of oppression.

I wish to highlight a possible concern I am sure the Minister can address. I welcome that there are measures to address the export or removal of cultural property from an occupied territory, not just in times of conflict. Could the Minister clarify whether this covers the period pursuant to or immediately after armed conflict? In many cases, as seen in recent conflicts, it is not during the conflict itself that the issue arises but in the months or years following it, during which time opportunistic pillaging and exportation of property may take place, along with the purchase of property without proper paperwork, authorisation or verification of the authenticity of the source.

The looting of antiquities in the National Museum of Iraq in Baghdad is a stain on all of us. It is unfortunate that Ireland was complicit to a small extent in facilitating the stopping over of aeroplanes in respect of the war in Iraq. Some of the worst destruction we have seen was in that immediate period. I refer not only to the looting of the National Museum of Iraq but also to the burning of the library of Baghdad. We need to learn from that and be more cognisant of our shared duties.

My colleague spoke about Palestine. There are circumstances in which occupation may be over a very long period. It is a question of ensuring that those territories regarded as occupied are afforded all the cultural protection possible, even if the occupation is for decades, as in some cases.

The question of provenance and paperwork must be borne in mind. The Blue Shield is an important step. I hope it will be very much welcomed by our national museum and others.

Unfortunately, while 69 countries have ratified this convention and protocol, there has been a notable lack of prosecution. I absolutely appreciate the Minister's points on symbolic value. I was part of the cluster munitions campaign and played a role in Ireland's leadership in this area. I urge that in addition to providing symbolic leadership, we provide concrete leadership. It would only strengthen Ireland's Defence Forces' already-strong reputation and our own strong cultural reputation if we passed this legislation and implemented it really strongly.