Tag Archives: 790bis

Session 42 COM UNESCO Committee of World Heritage in Manama, Bahrain, 2018

Panamanian tribes

Posted on by
Auditorium in Session 42 How the World Heritage Committee 2018 in Manama, Bahrain.

Auditorium in Session 42 How the World Heritage Committee 2018 in Manama, Bahrain.

Dear Friends of Patrimonio Panamá:

Us accompany Session of the World Heritage Committee 2018!

The World Heritage Committee meets this year in the city of Manama, Bahrain, and Salón 24 de junio al 4 July. Chaired the session 42 COM Ms. Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa. The inauguration was attended by the Director General of UNESCO, Audrey Azoulay, and the Director General for Culture, Ernesto Ottone-Ramirez. Its activities, the Committee will consider the State of Conservation (SOC, for its acronym in English) of 157 sites.

The Committee will decide on add or delete sites from the List of World Heritage in Danger (Red list), and decide on the inclusion or rejection of new sites to the prestigious World Heritage List.

NOTE: While the World Heritage Committee requested updated status reports Panama conservation “Coiba National Park and its Special Zone of Marine Protection” and “Fortifications on the Caribbean coast of Panama: Portobelo and San Lorenzo”, Reports conservation status of these properties are not on the list to be discussed by the plenary, but they would be classified to be approved without debate. This may change during session 42 COM, 2018.

This is the official site of the Session 42 Com World Heritage Committee by the government of the Kingdom of Bahrain: http://42whcbahrain2018.bh, where you can see details of the location of the event and related events, as the Forum of Young Professionals World Heritage, or Managers Forum World Heritage Sites.

We can follow live debates of the annual session of the World Heritage Committee in Manama, Bahrain button link:

[button link=”http://whc.unesco.org/en/sessions/42com/” color=”teal” newwindow=”yes”]Session of the World Heritage Committee in Manama, Bahrain, 2018[/button]

The languages ​​available in simultaneous translation during transmission are English, French, and Arabic. “Floor” It refers to the transmission without translation, where any language will be heard on the speakers are directed to the room.

Time Bahrain: AST (Arabia Standard Time) UTC/GMT +3 hours. Son 8 hours more than when Panama.

Calendar: Click here provisional timetable for (pdf).

Panama in Session 42 COM World Heritage Committee

In Session 42 COM two of the five properties will be addressed Panamanian registered in the World Heritage List: “Coiba National Park and its Special Zone of Marine Protection”; and the “Fortifications on the Caribbean coast of Panama: Portobelo and San Lorenzo”.

Coiba National Park and its Special Zone of Marine Protection:

It was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in 2005. It is a place of great natural beauty. On the World Heritage List we can read about their outstanding universal value this summary:

“Coiba National Park, located off the southwest coast of Panama, in the Gulf of Chiriqui, protects Coiba Island and other 38 islands and smaller islands, as well as the surrounding marine areas. Protected against cold winds and El Niño, the tropical rainforest of Coiba is a place of formation of new species, as evidenced by the high level of endemism of many of its mammals, birds and plants. Last refuge for several endangered species such as the harpy eagle, This site is an outstanding natural laboratory for scientific research and a key ecological link to the Tropical Eastern Pacific for the transit and survival of pelagic fish and marine mammals.” (Source: UNESCO)

In 2017, the World Heritage Committee through its Decision 41 COM 7B.17 welcomed the progress made by the State party in the removal of wild cattle from Coiba Island and the introduction of amendments to ensure legislation prohibiting continue in force development (Apart from low-impact infrastructure for ecotourism and scientific research). Similarly, the Committee noted that it is expected that the information that measures to operationalize the Fund Coiba be completed by mid 2017 and he urged the Panamanian government to meet this deadline.

In the same decision, the Committee requested the Government of Panama to submit a State of Conservation Report on Coiba submitted to the World Heritage Center until 1 February 2018 to solve and apply the following points:

  • End before 1 February 2018 the development of a Public Use Plan (PUP) for Coiba National Park and its Special Zone of Marine Protection and submit it to the World Heritage Center for review by IUCN, as part of the updated report on the state of conservation of the property; This PUP clearly improve the visitor experience to the island without expanding the space occupied by the existing infrastructure, establish and develop a biosecurity plan.
  • Implement as a matter of priority the implementation of the Committee's requests relating to the management and control of fisheries, to reason he has watched with growing concern the conclusions of the reactive monitoring mission of IUCN 2016, that although the land component of the property appears to be well preserved and gradually decline previously identified threats, managing their marine component continues to face significant challenges, with decreases reported for some key marine values, and with little progress reported.
  • Report on the full implementation of all recommendations of the IUCN mission 2014 and 2016;
  • Review the draft regulations for the Special Zone of Marine Protection (SZMP) to ensure that such activities as industrial fishing is not permitted within the property, and to submit the draft revised rules for SZMP to the World Heritage Center for review by IUCN. This a reason to observe with great concern that the draft in question includes provisions for types of activities that would be incompatible with World Heritage status of the property, particularly the aforementioned industrial fishing;

Without these requests, In the absence of substantial progress in protecting the property of unsustainable fisheries, the World Heritage Committee consider the possible inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

Conservation Status (SOC) Coiba and Draft Decision 42 COM 7B.87 can be here. The SOC can be seen together with the Draft Decision on the page 179-182 and Salón PDF Document, here.

In this analysis and Draft Decision 42 COM 7B.87 that follows, fulfilling the required conditions just review verified.

This is neat Draft Decision, and therefore we reproduce here with a translation UNOFFICIAL:

Draft Decision 42 COM 7B.87


The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined WHC / 18 / 42.COM / 7B,
  2. Recalling la Decisión 41 COM 7B.17, adopted at its 41st Session (Cracovia, 2017),
  3. Welcomes the continued progress made by the State party in the removal of wild cattle from Coiba Island, and solicita the State party establish a monitoring program to confirm the successful long-term elimination of wild cattle on the island;
  4. Notes with grave concern the Public Use Plan (PUP) It provides for the expansion of existing infrastructure and the possible negative impacts on the Outstanding Universal Value (VIEW) property have not been adequately taken into account in developing the plan and, Thus, urges the State party to :
    to) PUP suspend implementation until complete and submit an assessment of the possible negative impacts of its provisions on property VUE, based on rigorous scientific data, before 1 December 2019 the World Heritage Center for review by IUCN,
    b) Ensure that they develop a Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for airport infrastructure project, in line with the advice note World Heritage IUCN Environmental Assessments, and filed before 1 December 2019 the World Heritage Center for review by IUCN Center before starting work on the project,
    c) Establish a comprehensive program to monitor the impacts of tourism on the property to inform the development of any future plan and program related to tourism;
  5. Also notes of fisheries regulations revised for the Special Zone of Marine Protection (SZMP) of the property, but also notes with grave concern it is unclear how these regulations would ensure long-term preservation VUE property, and also urges the State party to:
    to) Further review regulations for SZMP in line with previous requests from the Committee to establish unequivocal no take zones and seasonal closures of critical areas, to ensure that they are aligned with existing regulations for Coiba National Park and ensure the preservation of the property VUE,
    b) Ensure the provision of adequate resources for the effective implementation of fishing regulations throughout the property,
    c) Establish a monitoring system to assess progress with the establishment and enforcement of regulations within the marine component of the property, as recommended by reactive monitoring missions 2014 and 2016;
  6. Recuerda the conclusion of the mission 2016 that if the problems relating to fisheries management within the property can not be resolved by the end of 2018 so that the long-term preservation of VUE in marine portion of the property is guaranteed, consideration should be given to the inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger during 43 Sign in 2019;
  7. also requests the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Center, before 1 February 2019, an update on the state of conservation of the property report and the implementation of the above, for consideration by the World Heritage Committee at its 43rd session 2019, with a view to considering, In the absence of substantial progress in protecting the property of unsustainable fisheries, the possible inscription of the property on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

Fortifications on the Caribbean coast of Panama: Portobelo and San Lorenzo:

It was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in 1980. It is a bay surrounded by fortifications of the Spanish colonial period, that once they protected the transport across the Isthmus of Panama of great wealth. On the World Heritage List we can read about their outstanding universal value this summary:

“These strong Panamanians are great prototypes of military architecture of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and to provide protection to transatlantic trade. Splendid examples of military architecture of the XVII and XVIII, these forts on the Caribbean coast of Panama were part of the defensive system created by the Crown of Spain to protect transatlantic trade.” (Source: UNESCO)

In 2017, the World Heritage Committee through its Decision 41 COM 7B.17 He retained on the List of World Heritage in Danger to this world heritage site for its fragile condition. The Committee welcomed news of the commitment of the institutions responsible for the conservation and management of the property and its efforts to strengthen cooperation and interagency coordination, and he expressed concern about the lack of regular government funding. He said that this lack of funding jeopardizes the implementation of the Emergency Plan and the planned corrective measures 2016-2019, what, as a consequence, It can seriously affect the outstanding universal value (VIEW) of the property and its attributes that justify its existence, including conditions of authenticity and integrity. Based on the above, the Committee requested the Government of Panama to submit a State of Conservation Report on the fortifications of Portobelo and San Lorenzo to resolve the following points:

  • Continuously ensure the government budget funds necessary for the full implementation of the strategy, the work plan and schedule 2016-2019 in order to achieve the desired state of conservation for the removal of the property from the List of World Heritage in Danger (DSOCR) in the year 2019;
  • Prepare a status report updated Conservation and deliver it to the World Heritage Center, before 1 February 2018, detailing the conditions of Portobelo and San Lorenzo and solcitudes implementation of the World Heritage Committee, for consideration by it at its 42nd session 2018.

Panama through its responsible institution the National Institute of Culture, and the Patronato of Portobelo and San Lorenzo sent the requested report, which it is freely available on the website of UNESCO, here: Report SOC of Panama Fortifications on the Caribbean Coast of Panama: Portobelo and San Lorenzo (PDF public).

ICOMOS, advisory body to the World Heritage Committee, He analyzed the documents provided by Panama and other sources. Conservation Status (SOC) produced by ICOMOS on the fortifications of Portobelo and San Lorenzo and Draft Decision 42 COM 7A.10 can be here. This SOC can be prepared with the decision of the Committee for discussion on page Draft 29-32 and Salón working paper in English, PDF format, here.

In the working documents 2018 and in the Draft Decision 42 COM 7A.10 prepared for the Committee, It emphasizes the importance of meeting the timetable set for Remedial strengths in Portobelo and San Lorenzo for the period 2016-2019; This pressure is mainly due to physical deterioration of the strengths, and environmental pressures and their environment. ICOMOS recommends as an advisory body to the Committee welcome the opportunity for the National Institute of Culture to receive funds through a loan from the Inter-American Development Bank amounting to 45,000,000.00 USD, While noting that the loan does not cover all activities of Corrective Measures. Also note that the same loan allocates funds to the development of major infrastructure projects and tourism facilities, pressure and stresses that tourism is one of the factors affecting this heritage.

It is precisely because of the situation of fragility and risk of loss of integrity and thereby authenticity of this world heritage has become inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger. Why ICOMOS analysis indicates that time is running out to meet the timetable of corrective measures (designed to achieve the output of the Danger List or Red List); and although positively ponders the opportunity of funds from the Inter-American Development Bank (BID), also it notes that these do not cover all the requirements of that calendar. En la Draft Decision 42 COM 7A.10 It expressed appreciation for the opportunity to obtain funds from the IDB for “Fortifications on the Caribbean Coast of Panama: Portobelo and San Lorenzo”, It emphasizes the urgent need to give greater priority to compliance with the corrective actions for infrastructure and tourism facilities, and is retained property on the List of World Heritage in Danger. Again the updated annual report Conservation Status requested in this Decision Draft, it would be delivered to the World Heritage Center until 1 February 2019.

Then, An unofficial translation of the Draft Decision 42 COM 7A.10.

Draft Decision: 42 COM 7A.10

The World Heritage Committee,

  1. Having examined WHC / 18 / 42.COM / 7A,
  2. Recalling la Decisión 41 COM 7A.25, adopted at its 41st Session (Cracovia, 2017),
  3. Lamenta the implementation of the corrective measures has been delayed due to lack of proper allocation of funds, as a result of which the property is at risk of losing important attributes and its outstanding universal value (VIEW);
  4. Welcomes the funding opportunity offered by the Inter-American Development Bank for the conservation and management of cultural heritage which includes a main component for interventions on World Heritage properties;
  5. Notes that the revised schedule proposed by the State party for the implementation of corrective action program confirms the end of June 2019, and urges it to ensure that this program is fully implemented, and that due attention to the definition and protection of buffer zones and preparing a comprehensive management plan lends, which should prioritize conservation programs and a plan for sustainable public use;
  6. Asks the State Party to submit to the World Heritage Center, before 1 February 2019, the management plan finalized for consideration by the advisory bodies and an update on the state of conservation of the property and the implementation of the previous report, for consideration by the World Heritage Committee at its 43rd session 2019;
  7. Decide Fortifications retain the Caribbean Panama: Portobelo-San Lorenzo (Panamá) en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial en Peligro.

Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama:

Panama's government must provide documentation on the property “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama” in December 2018 at the headquarters of the World Heritage Center (París, Francia). The information requested by the Committee through its Decision No.41 COM 7B.63, for evaluation by the Advisory Bodies, It consists designs restoration project Hotel Casco Viejo the old Club Union, With studies on vehicular access, waste management and other relevant aspects. The aim is to assess the impacts of the project on the World Heritage with advice from the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) in Session 43 HOW World Heritage Committee 2019.

NOTE: The “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama” still under the effects of Decision 37COM 7B.100, reacting to project completion Cinta Costera road infrastructure Phase III, specifically its marine viaduct, surrounding the peninsula of the Old Town of Panama creating a barrier between the Old Town of Panama (Casco Antiguo) and its immediate surroundings. The Decision 37COM 7B.100 indicates that the Cinta Costera Phase III (Maritime Viaduct) “irreversibly modifies the relationship of the historic center with its wider environment”. With that, the site can not access the List of World Heritage in Danger, one of whose registration requirements is that the impact on the universal value of World Heritage is reversible. For this reason, It is an option to modify this World Heritage Site with a change of important limits, whose extension allows re-evaluate the definition on it its outstanding universal value as mitigation of marine viaduct. For this purpose has submitted a new nomination to the World Heritage List 2019 for evaluation in Session 43 COM World Heritage Committee. It will not be discussed in the session that concerns us.

Reserves of the Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves / La Amistad National Park:

It was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in 1983 and expanded in 1990. It is a natural heritage shared by two countries: Costa Rica and Panama. On the World Heritage List we can read about their outstanding universal value this summary:

“The geographical location of this unique site in Central America, which retains traces of the glaciations of the Age Cuaternaria- has facilitated contact between the flora and fauna of North America and South America. Most of the surface of this region, inhabited by four different tribes, It is covered by tropical rainforests. Conservation of the site is the subject of close cooperation between Costa Rica and Panama.”

As far as we know, no request for documentation regarding the “Reserves of the Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves / La Amistad National Park” for Session 42 COM 2018.

Yes information for analysis requested by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to be delivered to February 1 2018, but it will not be discussed by the Committee. Information, requested by Decision 41 COM 7B.13, It is the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA, for its acronym in English) finished the 2018 and applied to the property with Panama's commitment not to approve any new hydropower project on the environment PILE. SEA results must be submitted to the World Heritage Center in Paris, France for analysis by IUCN, as mentioned, until 1 February 2018.

In 2017 mediante la Decision 41 COM 7B.13, the World Heritage Committee emphasized the following:

  • Commitment Cosa Rica and Panama as States Parties, finalizing the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for the entire property 2018, the results should be analyzed by IUCN;
  • State party's commitment Panama not to approve new hydroelectric projects in the vicinity of the property until the SEA is available;
  • Information provided by the State Party of Panama that the contract for the construction of the Changuinola II dam has been canceled and further requests the State Party of Panama to confirm this decision once it officially enters into force after the necessary procedures, and to clarify whether the cancellation of this contract means that plans for the Changuinola II hydroelectric project will be definitely abandoned;
  • Potential inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger: The World Heritage Committee indicated that any development of new hydroelectric projects before completion and proper review of the SEA for the entire property would represent a danger to its Outstanding Universal Value (VIEW) in accordance with paragraph 180 of the Operational Guidelines and lead to their inclusion on the List of World Heritage in Danger;
  • Request Panama to continue monitoring the activities of dams Chan 75 and Bonyic, whose findings should be considered in the above mentioned SAE and cumulative impact assessment, and establish long-term monitoring program for these two projects to assess the effectiveness of mitigation measures;
  • Request to States Parties of Costa Rica and Panama to submit to the World Heritage Center, before 1 December 2018, an update on the state of conservation of the property report and the implementation of the above, for consideration by the World Heritage Committee at its 43rd session 2019.

Darien National Park:

As far as we know, no request for documentation regarding the “Darien National Park” for Session 42 COM 2018.

Regards,

Katti Osorio, Ph.D.

World Heritage Panamanian / Panamanian World Heritage

World Heritage Panamanian / Panamanian World Heritage

Update: Third Day Session 42 COM (Tuesday 26 June)

As expected, the Draft Decision 42 COM 7A.10 “Fortifications on the Caribbean Coast of Panama: Portobelo and San Lorenzo” It was approved without discussion by the World Heritage Committee, becoming the Decision 42 COM 7A.10. The full text translated into Spanish unofficially is on this blog, here.
Video Session 42 COM at the time of approval without debate of the draft decisions for the Latin America and Caribbean, down, It is in English. Starts the minute 3:21:14.

Update: Fifth Day Session 42 COM (jueves 28 June)

As expected, the Draft Decision 42 COM 7B.87 “Coiba National Park and its Special Zone of Marine Protection” It was approved without discussion by the World Heritage Committee, becoming the Decision 42 COM 7B.87. The full text translated into Spanish unofficially is on this blog, here.
Video Session 42 COM at the time of approval without debate of the draft decisions for the Latin America and Caribbean, down, It is in English. Starts the minute 5:41:51.

342 years of moving Panama City

Posted on by
4

Dear Friends of Patrimonio Panamá:

And the anniversary of the official transfer of the city of Panama approximates the 21 th of January, 1673. Our city of Panama was founded by Pedrarias Dávila the 15 of August, 1519, and its importance in the path of the riches of America as link port trade routes, was target of pirates. Henry Morgan, English pirate, formed a coalition of pirates who attacked the Isthmus of Panama and crossed from the Caribbean to the city of Panama and swept the 28 th of January, 1671. The pirates left the city laden with booty and hostages 24 February 1671 after a long invasion, torture of people, and plunder.

The lawyer Don Miguel Francisco de Marichalar, He sent the Viceroy of Peru estimated the death toll from the invasion and its aftermath disease, injuries and unsafe conditions resulting from the destruction of the capital, in 3,000 people. Marichalar came with first aid sent to Panama; sailed from Callao in March with 2500 Men and arrived in April; this to give us an idea of ​​the distance and speed of communications in the seventeenth century.

The Spanish crown ordered the rehabilitation of the city of Panama for its strategic importance, and made her move to a safer place within its own administrative jurisdiction (See Figure 1), only eight kilometers from the ravaged city (Today Historical Monuments of Panama Viejo) closer to a deepwater port site on the Perico Island (Today grounded by the Amador Causeway with Naos and Flamenco; see Figure 2). The new governor (because above, Don Juan Perez de Guzman, was strictly fired), Don Antonio Fernández de Córdoba, He made the official Transition 21 th of January, 1673, culminating two years of hard labor for relief and transfer of the city; although the construction of the walls and buildings took many years, the city was relocated to the site known today as the Historical Monumental Complex of Old Town of the city of Panama.

Panama, 1521

Figure 1. Approximate boundaries of the city of Panama as royal decree of 6 th of September, 1521.

Centuries later, Panama City Council, by Municipal Agreement No.59 of 13 of May 1953, officially declared 15 August as the date of the founding of the city of Panama and considered the 21 January as the date of transfer and removal.

Friends, Panama City is one, Founded in 1519 and in the year 2019 shall comply 500 years old. It is the oldest city in the Pacific coast in the Americas. It departed expeditions Francisco Pizarro and Gil Gonzalez and Child, and crossed the 60% of American wealth in transit to Europe. She is the center of the universe in the ideology of Bolivar. No doubt there is a single city; the only one in Latin America with this experience Shuttle after the invasion of 1671. Celebrate with pride for its strength and permanence, the anniversary of his extraordinary Transition 21 th of January, 1673.

 

Regards,

 

Katti Osorio Ugarte, Ph.D.

A single property: Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (790bis) (Panamá)

Figure 2. A single property: Archaeological site of Panama Viejo (Monumental historic set of Panama Viejo) and Historic District of Panama (within a Monumental Historic Old Town Panama City) (790bis) (Panamá)

the - the - the - the
Errata:

Thanks to timely commentary Carlos May, could adjust the final paragraph, happened to read ” It departed expeditions Francisco Pizarro and Gil Gonzalez and Child…”, of ” It departed expeditions Francisco Pizarro and Cortes…”

References:

Araúz, Celestino and Patricia Pizzurno. 1997. The Panama Hispano (1501 – 1821). Panama City: Diario La Prensa.

Castillero Calvo, Alfred. 2006. Society, Economy and Material Culture: Urban History of Panama la Vieja. Panama City: Patronato Panama Viejo.

García de Paredes, Luis E. 1954. Move, Transfer and Reconstruction in Panama City 1673. Lecture at the University of Panama 13 of August, 1954. Panama City Council. Panamá, Panama City.

Related Posts:

341st anniversary of the relocation of Panama City (January 2013)

Panama and the changing boundaries of the World Heritage property, “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama”

Posted on by
Reply

Dear Friends of Patrimonio Panamá:

Continuing the theme of UNESCO and clarify a few points, in the newspapers of the town (also understand that in the Panama America), it has emerged that the National Institute of Culture (INAC) propose alternative sites as heritage (world). INAC is only referred to the Camino de Cruces Park, Camino Real and the Bolivar Hall.

After reviewing the website of the next session 38 the UNESCO World Heritage Committee to be held in Qatar in June 2014, are not scheduled so far (1May ro 2014) new nominations to the World Heritage List of UNESCO properties from Panama (Véase WHC-14/38.COM/8B Nominations to the World Heritage List, in http://whc.unesco.org/document/128811), although it is possible that Panama has not complied with the delivery schedule and therefore are not posted.

I allow for, interpret the statements of INAC that these new sites to be suggested correspond to the option 3 the report of the joint high level mission ICOMOS – World Heritage Centre, whose report has been in the news this week Panamanian.

In the report's recommendations, the No.3 option to change limits of the property “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama”, he points out (in its short version):

“Submission of a (phased) approach by 1 February 2015 in which an overall new vision is included regarding components of the property as parts of a broader territorial system related to interoceanic and intercontinental commerce over five centuries. This option would imply a re-nomination of the property.” (http://whc.unesco.org/en/documents/128501, page 14)

In Spanish,

“Delivery of an approach (in-phase) until 1 February 2015 in which a new global vision to be included as components of the property as part of a larger territorial system related to oceanic and intercontinental trade in the course of five centuries. This option would involve a re-nomination of the property”.

Will have to wait to receive UNESCO Build Panamanian documents to see how exactly this is being proposed renomination, and the role it has in it the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo, Old Town and what parts of them would be included. Al renominar, everything included in the nomination must prove that expresses exceptional universal value.

Certainly, on the “wider territorial system related to oceanic and intercontinental trade” would refer to the Strategic Triangle, whose three vertices have been: The Castle of San Lorenzo El Real de Chagre, the fortified port of Portobelo, and Panama City, where two of its “sides” They were Camino de Cruces, and Camino Real. Over the centuries, City of Columbus replace Portobelo (which in turn replaced the Name of God) as terminal port city of oceanic trade route.

Remember, the three options recommended by the report of the JAM high ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring – World Heritage Centre, are as follows:

OPTION 1

“Submission of a significant boundary change to focus the site only on Panama Viejo based on the original extension dossier of 2002, to also include the new buffer zone by law 91/2007 and review the statement of Outstanding Universal Value.”

In Spanish,

“Delivering a major change to the site boundaries to focus only on Panama Viejo based on the original file extension 2002, to include the new buffer zone declared by Act 91 of 2007 and review the Statement of Outstanding Universal Value.”

OPTION 2

“Submission of option I with an addition of a reduced area in the Historic District where some of the main attributes that convey the contribution of this component to the outstanding universal value of the serial property are present.”

In Spanish,

“Delivery Option 1 with the addition of a small area in the Historic District (Casco Antiguo) where some of the main attributes that express the contribution of this component to the outstanding universal value are present.”

OPTION 3 (cited above)

“Submission of a (phased) approach by 1 February 2015 in which an overall new vision is included regarding components of the property as parts of a broader territorial system related to interoceanic and intercontinental commerce over five centuries. This option would imply a re-nomination of the property.”

In Spanish,

“Delivery of an approach (in-phase) until 1 February 2015 in which a new global vision to be included as components of the property as part of a larger territorial system related to oceanic and intercontinental trade in the course of five centuries. This option would involve a re-nomination of the property”.

Regards,

Katti Osorio Ugarte

http://www.prensa.com/impreso/panorama/inac-sugerira-unesco-nuevos-sitios-como-patrimonio/317538

A single property: Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (790bis) (Panamá)

A single property: Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (790bis) (Panamá)

-O-O-O-O-O-O
SUGGESTED READING ON STRATEGIC desaturated
Shoemaker, Juan Manuel 1980. History of the Castle of San Lorenzo El Real Chagre. Military Service History, Commission for Historic Studies of Public Works and Urbanism (CEHOPU), Spain.

Journalist article: Casco historic site would.

Posted on by
Reply
Diario La Prensa, 28 th of April, 2014

Diario La Prensa, 28 th of April, 2014

Dear Friends of Patrimonio Panamá:

Today Monday 28 April I bring this story from La Prensa of Panama, entitled, “Casco historic site would”.

By way of introduction and as many of you know, according to Decision 37 COM 7B.100 of the World Heritage Committee of UNESCO in Cambodia given in 2013, Cinta Costera 3 irreversibly affected the relationship between the historical center and the most environment; namely, the sea and the port that gave reason exisitir and influenced the evolution of military architecture, domestic and religious as a port exposed to the current worldwide through trade, the expansion of Spanish culture into new territories, routes of slavery, and other connections. This prevents you from expressing its outstanding universal value, prerequisite to be on the World Heritage List; and therefore also, Old Town could no longer go to the List of World Heritage in Danger.

I except that Panama Viejo is in better position and expresses itself outstanding universal value, so the report of the Reactive Monitoring Mission, Joint High Level and ICOMOS and the World Heritage Centre, Panama Viejo is recommended that remains on the list.

I posted in PatrimonioPanama.com and their facebook information made public by UNESCO about, own writings as well as some, Ph.D. specialist in the subject. Some are in print since last year, product of lectures on the subject by me. The information available on this site is available under the category, “Patrimonio Mundial / World Heritage“.

The report is in English, http://whc.unesco.org/en/documents/128501, public information and is thanks to the transparency policies of UNESCO. This report is not a hint of UNESCO, but of its advisory body ICOMOS and the World Heritage Centre, Secretariat of the World Heritage Committee, which it will host in the next session in Qatar this year.

Without further ado, I leave for reading the news.

http://www.prensa.com/impreso/panorama/casco-saldria-sitio-historico/316323

Short news on the front page of the newspaper La Prensa, the aforementioned introductory news: http://www.prensa.com/impreso/panorama/unesco-sugiere-excluir-al-casco/316302

Regards,

Katti Osorio Ugarte

Top Ten most downloaded Authors in ICOMOS Open Archive, December 2013 – January 2014

Posted on by
Reply

Friends of Patrimonio Panama:

Yesterday, I received from the Documentation Centre of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) the good news that I am in the Top Ten list of most downloaded authors for the period December 2013 to January 2014, ICOMOS Open Archive in (http://openarchive.icomos.org/), at position number 10.

I was unaware that there was a list of the Top Ten Most Downloaded Authors (Top Ten List) at the Documentation Centre, so this announcement was a flattering surprise. I am thankful to all who have given their kind attention to my papers available to all of you at ICOMOS Open Archive, especially “The Attributes of Outstanding Universal Value of a property considered World Heritage – The case of the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama“, published in Canto Rodado Vol.7, 2012, the most downloaded of them.

I could not but place here the full list I received from Ms. Lucile Smirnov, Manager of the ICOMOS Open Archive (ICOMOS Open Archive) and Head of ICOMOS Documentation Centre, as a means to recommend for you to read the interesting works of the other nine authors.

Top Ten Authors (December 2013 – January 2014)

  • Labesse, Olive
  • Martinez Celis, Diego
  • Abdulac, Samir
  • Botiva Contreras, Alvaro
  • Vidargas, Francisco
  • Bonacini, Elisa
  • Prats, Michèle
  • Niglio, Olimpia
  • Venturini, Edgardo J.
  • Osorio, Katti

    • Regards,

    Katti Osorio Ugarte

    o-o-o-o-o-o-
    NOTE: I recommend reading the entry on this website, Paper about the outstanding universal value of a Panamanian property on the World Heritage List (Now in English and Spanish.

    The Historic District of Panama and Criterion (vi) of Outstanding Universal Value

    Panamanian tribes

    Posted on by
    1

    Dear Friends of Patrimonio Panama:

    Up to this date, Panama has under inscription on UNESCO's World Heritage List, the property “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama.” Casco Antiguo is another name for the Historic District of Panama City, as it is known in Spanish language. In order to enter the World Heritage List(1), As State Party to the World Heritage Convention, Panama justified to the World Heritage Committee of Unesco, that the property holds outstanding universal value, by means of demonstrating that the property meets the necessary requirements, which include meeting at least one of the ten criteria of outstanding universal value. The property in its two components, Casco Antiguo + Panama Viejo, met criteria (ii), (iv) and (vi). The criteria nomenclature is written in lowercase Roman numerals.

    Each criterion of outstanding universal value has a theoretical basis, that supports them. I would like to showcase the sixth criterion (vi) of outstanding universal value, justified for the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama. I selected criterion (vi) because today is a special day: It is Panama's Independence from Spain (and affiliation to Colombia) on the 28 of November, 1821. At that date, Simón Bolívar El Libertador wrote a few congratulating lines to General Jose de Fabrega in occasion of the independence of the Isthmus of Panama. These lines were precursory to the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama, which is the basis of the Panamanian justification for criterion (vi) to the World Heritage Committee on the inscription of the Historic District of Panama on the World Heritage List in 1997. Before examining the letter, let us see the criterion (vi) of outstanding universal value for the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama:

    Current Version: Decision 37 COM 8E, Retrospective Statement of Outstanding Universal Value

    Criterion (vi): The ruins of Panama Viejo are closely linked to the European discovery of the Pacific Ocean, the history of Spanish expansion in the Isthmus of Central America and in Andean South America, the African diaspora, the history of piracy and proxy war, the bullion lifeline to Europe, the spread of European culture in the region and the commerce network between the Americas and Europe. The Salón Bolívar is associated with Simón Bolívar's visionary attempt 1826 to establish a multinational congress in the Americas, preceding the Organization of American States and the United Nations. (UNOFFICIAL translation by the author)

    In my paper, “The Attributes of Outstanding Universal Value of a property considered World Heritage – The case of the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama”, I made an analysis on the justification for the criteria of outstanding universal value presented by Panama that achieved the registration of the property in two stages as previously mentioned, in 1997 and 2003. I referred to each of the three criteria justified by Panama in regards to both components of the property: these are, The Historic District of Panama, and the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo, identifying their corresponding attributes, where I pointed out in the case of criterion (vi) for the Historic District of Panama:

    Criterion (vi) relates directly to the geopolitical importance of the strategic position of Panama City, from its foundation and relocation to the present day. The criterion is thus justified, based on the Bolivarian idea of making Panama the venue for the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama, considering Panama to be the logical place from the standpoint of strategy and geopolitics, in the vision of a free America, in a position to discuss as equals with European powers and the new nations in the North American continent, to achieve global balance. Even, the idea and the Congress itself, are precursors of international organizations with similar goals (the United Nations, and the Organization of American States, among others). Without the geopolitical importance attributed to Panama City by Simón Bolívar El Libertador, the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama would not have taken place there. Thus, criterion (vi) is more based on the idea of a ​​congress of nations seeking a world balance, than on the ruins of Salón Bolívar itself, which is credited with being the room that hosted the Congress. The ruins are the physical attribute of the space that hosted the idea.

    The attributes present in the justification of criterion (vi) are: the Salón Bolívar (at Bolívar Palace, headquarters of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs); and the maritime character of the city of Panama, main part of its geopolitical importance as a strategic point for inter-oceanic communications, and terminal of international trade routes. (Osorio 2012: 14-15)

    I would like to draw your attention to the Bolivarian idea of ​​making Panama the venue for the Amphictyonic Congress. In his famous Letter from Jamaica (as translated by Lewis Betrand in, Selected Writings from Bolivar. New York: The Colonial Press, 1951), Bolivar made reference to the Isthmus of Panama three times, first, referring to the Isthmus as possible capital city, after Mexico, of the New World, made into a great republic, and described the Isthmus of Panama as “… Let us assume it were to be the Isthmus of Panama, the most central point for all of this vast continent…” (Bolívar 1967: 38). In his second allusion to the Isthmus of Panama, he points out: “The states of the Isthmus of Panama as far as Guatemala, will perhaps form a confederation. Because of their magnificent position between two mighty oceans, they may in time become the emporium of the world, Their canals will shorten distances throughout the world, strengthen commercial ties between Europe, America and Asia, and bring to that happy area tribute of the four quarters of the globe. There some day, perhaps, the capital of the world may be located - reminiscent of the Emperor Constantine's claim that Byzantium was the capital of the ancient world!” (Bolívar 1967: 42-43). Noting the great difficulties in maintaining peace in the newly founded territories and the impossibility to consolidate them into a single, mighty republic, he makes reference to Panama for the third time, saying: “How beautiful it would be if the Isthmus of Panama could be for us what the Isthmus of Corinth was for the Greeks! Would to God that someday we may have the good fortune to convene there an august assembly of representatives of republics, kingdoms and empires to deliberate upon the high interests of peace and war, with the nations of the other three quarters of the globe.” (Bolívar 1967: 47).

    The thoughts on Bolivar's mind concerning the Isthmus of Panama, embodied in his Letter from Jamaica 1815 addressed to an English gentleman in Kingston, Jamaica, was focused on the geopolitical importance of the geographic position of the Isthmus of Panama. He enthusiastically described the Isthmus of Panama, as a central point for all the Americas; assures that the Isthmus of Panama would become the emporium of the world thanks to its privileged interoceanic communications, including future canals; and that the Isthmus of Panama would strengthen commercial ties between Europe, the Americas and Asia; and he even goes as far as to give it the capital of the globe; Bolívar then reinforces the thought by equating the Isthmus of Panama to the Isthmus of Corinth and saying that Panama would be venue for a future world congress of republics, kingdoms and empires.

    Perusing over documents on the internet related to present date November 28th, I found a transcription of the letter El Libertador Simón Bolívar addressed to General José de Fábrega on February 1st 1822, on the occasion of the independence of Panama from Spain. The letter to General Fábrega, back then still a colonel, was written seven years after the Letter of Jamaica; seven years during which the idea of ​​a congress of nations remained brewing on El Libertador's mind..

    I took the liberty to transcribe (and translate) the letter, as follows. I used bold letters to enhance some of the text, to highlight those terms that showcase the special interest Bolívar had on the case of Panama.

    Headquarters at Popayán, 1February 1st, 1822 - 12º

    TO MISTER COLONEL JOSÉ DE FÁBREGA,
    GOVERNOR COMMANDER GENERAL
    OF THE PROVINCE OF PANAMA.

    Mister Colonel:

    Yet without having had the satisfaction of receiving the dispatch that. you. have been kind enough to address to me, I hasten to congratulate the distinguished province that. you. have the glory of presiding over. I cannot fully express the feelings of joy and wonder I have experienced upon learning that Panamá, the center of the universe, is regenerated by her own volition, and free by her own virtue. The Act of Independence of Panama, is the most glorious monument that any American province may offer to History. Everything is consulted there, in regards to justice, generosity, politics and general interest.

    Do convey on my behalf. you. to those meritorious Colombians, the tribute of my enthusiasm for their pure patriotism and true generosity. Without delay, a part of the army of Colombia, under the command of Colonel Carreño, must have secured already the fate of that precious emporium of commerce and exchange of the world. I have also ordered a second army corps of a 1.000 more men, enter to replace those same troops I now request from their commander to come and join us to cooperate to the freedom of Quito. Thus you. Colonel Fábrega. shall make every effort to ensure that these orders are carried out to their full effect. I trust completely that you. you. shall give all the assistance within your power to ensure that these troops may depart immediately with all the elements necessary for their transport and operations, due to embark for the coast of Esmeraldas and Guayaquil under the command of whomever leader gets appointed to them by Colonel Carreño: and embarking on the transports and warships that may be procured eventfully at the Isthmus ports or on the warships that may be expressly sent for that purpose from Guayaquil. Thus you. Mister, Colonel, are hereby appointed by me as governor commander general of the province of Panama, and Mister Colonel Carreño and should remain in command in that military department, as head, of politics and military, in charge of operations against Veraguas, or any other point occupied by the Spanish armies on the borders of Colombia. Mister Colonel Carreño shall receive from the department of Magdalena and the capital of Bogotá as much support as needed for the defense od the work you have so. you. initiated. I reiterate to you. you. expression of sincere gratitude, with which I accepted on behalf of Colombia the services that you. you. and that generous people have done to thus complete, the scope that Providence and Nature had designed to our mighty republic. May God keep you. you. long and many years.

    BOLÍVAR.

    To Bolivar, Panama was the center of the universe; probably, a geopolitical universe built upon vast communication networks. Four years later, he held in Panama City his long-awaited congress…. but, in what conditions was Panama City when it hosted the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama 1826?

    A quick look at two cartographic references may show us Panama City at the time of the of Amphictyonic Congress of Panama 1826: Map of Panama in 1814, and the map of Panama in 1850. Both maps show the city in ruins, with more than 30% of its occupation area marked as uncultivated land, in ruins, or covered with bushes 1850, in better off conditions than in 1814.

    20131129-012839.jpg
    Figure 1. Plan of the Plaza de Panama, chorographic Map of the New Kingdom of Granada, by Vicente Talledo y Rivera, 1814 (Tejeira 2009: 40)

    20131129-012959.jpg
    Figure 2. Map of Panama in 1859, by H. Tiedemann (Spadafora 2001: 37).

    Concluding remarks

    Panama City was far from being an affluent city in 1826, the city was under a slow economic period and had a less than attractive appearance. Nonetheless, Simón Bolívar El Libertador was convinced about the geopolitical importance of the geographic position of the Isthmus of Panama, as shown in his Letter from Jamaica 1815, and his letter to General José de Fábrega in 1822. Bolívar summoned kingdoms, republics and empires to the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama in 1826. Regardless of its outcome, the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama in 1826 was a milestone in world history and it is precursor of current leagues of nations such as the United Nations, and the Organization of American States. This would not have come to happen if El Libertador had not been fully convinced of the importance of Panama as a communications hub, with great potential for locating a canal, and to become a commercial emporium accessible throughout the Americas, Europe and Asia. The sea was a vital element for the realization of this dream, and Panama with its important port connections, would fulfill an extraordinary role for the joint progress, “to our mighty republic” (Bolívar 2013). The room where the Amphictyonic Congress presumably took place, identified as the refectory of the convent of San Francisco, was restored in the early 2000. This is the space that housed the idea; the room's existence with all its ideological associations and interpretation of its wider setting give justification to the criterion (vi) of outstanding universal value, in accordance to the integrity of its attributes.

    As I noted in a previous work, “To maintain the validity of Criterion (vi) the preservation of the elements that outline the strategic position of Panama City should be taken into account: its marine environment, access and communication with the sea (being a maritime city since 1519 and kept in its second phase from 1673), and its access and communication by land” (Osorio 2012: 22). This is, because of the geopolitical importance of the geographic position of the Old Town of Panama which cannot be understood without the sea that gives access to its port and environs., surrounding the peninsula where the Historic District was built.

    As a final consideration, quote the Article 10 of Law Nº. 16 of 22 of May 2007:

    "The institutions of the State shall ensure that the Historic Monuments Groups of Panamá Viejo and Casco Antiguo of the City of Panamá shall maintain their historic relationship, their visual contact and immediate access to the Pacific Ocean, and, accordingly, shall preserve their marine environment, which is part of the integral value of both Groups".

    Regards,

    Katti Osorio

    o——o——o——o
    References

    Bolívar, Simón (2013) Letter addressed to Mr. Coronel José De Fabrega Gobernardor Commanding General of the Province of Panama, Headquarters at Popayán, 1° of February 1822. University of Los Andes, Venezuela.

    Bolívar, Simón (1967) Letter from Jamaica. Publishing House of Culture. Miranda State Government, Venezuela.

    Osorio, Katti (2012) The Attributes of Outstanding Universal Value of a property considered World Heritage – The case of the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama. Canto Rodado, 7 (7). pp. 1-27. ISSN 1818-2917 [Article]

    Tejeira Davis, Eduardo (2009) In Panama 1814: city plans of Vicente Talledo y Rivera. Canto Rodado, 4 (4). pp. 37-74. ISSN 1818-2917 [Article]

    Spadafora, Vanessa; Tejeira Davis, Eduardo (2001) El Casco Antiguo de Panama. 2 vols. City-City, Bilbao.

    Notes:

    (1) The property, “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama” was inscribed as such on the World Heritage List in two stages. In 1997, the World Heritage Committee inscribed the equivalent part of the Historic Old Town Set Monumental City Panama delimited by Law No. 91 of 22 December 1976, under the name “Historic District of Panama with the Salon Bolivar” (Casco Antiguo de Panamá con el Salón Bolívar). Later on, without changing the boundaries of the Historic District of Panama, which continued to correspond to those declared by Law 91 of 22 December 1976, the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo was inscribed as an extension of the Historic District, according to their boundary delineated by the same Law, and the name of the property was changed to its current name. Thus was settled the World Heritage property, “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama.”

    Decision 37 COM 7B.100, World Heritage Committee of UNESCO Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama, in 2013

    Posted on by
    3

    The 37th Session of the UNESCO World Heritage (37 COM) ended the day 27 June 2013. Today, World Heritage Centre issued the document WHC-13/37.COM/20 dated 5 July 2013, containing all the decisions adopted by the Committee in Session 37 COM.

    The decision concerning the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama is located on page 146 Document WHC-13/37.COM/20, in English. The document is also available in French, and both are original versions.

    Then, a translation UNOFFICIAL Text of Decision 37 COM 7B.100:

    100. Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama (Panamá) (C 790bis)

    Decision: 37 COM 7B.100
    The World Heritage Committee,

    1. Having examined Document WHC-37/37.COM/7B.Add,
    2. Recalling Decisions 33 COM 7B.141, 34 COM 7B.113, 35 COM 7B.130, 36 COM 7B.103, adopted at its 33rd (Seville, 2009), 34th (Brasilia, 2010), 35th (UNESCO, 2011) and 36th (Saint Petersburg, 2012) sessions, respectively, and its concern that the construction of the Cinta Costera Phase 3 (Maritime Viaduct) would irreversibly impact on the property,
    3. Also recalling the state of conservation reports and reactive monitoring mission reports of March 2009, March 2010 and October 2010 that underscored the impacts of the Cinta Costera project, in particular the Maritime Viaduct, and the poor state of conservation of the property;
    4. Notes the progress with developing a Management Plan, with quantifying the number of buildings at risk and with work on streetscapes, and undergrounding networks, and reiterates its deep concern about the overall state of conservation of the property, and regrets that no sufficient progress has been made in comprehensively and sustainably addressing issues, or in implementing the emergency Action Plan agreed in 2009;
    5. Also regrets that the State party decided to launch the construction of the Cinta Costera Phase 3 (Maritime Viaduct) that modifies in an irreversible manner the relation of the historic centre with its wider setting;
    6. Requests the State Party to submit by 1 February 2015 a significant modification to the boundaries to allow it to justify a revision of the Outstanding Universal Value of the property;
    7. Also requests the State Party to invite as soon as possible a high-level World Heritage Centre/ICOMOS Reactive Monitoring Mission, guided by the World Heritage Centre, to discuss the different possibilities of this modification;

    8. Considers that in the absence of the implementation of the request made in this decision, the property would be deleted from the World Heritage List at its 39th session 2015, in conformity with Chapter IV.C of the Operational Guidelines.

    -End UNOFFICIAL translation of Decision 37 COM 7B.100. The underlined and bold text correspond to underlined text and bold text in the original version in English, which is available at, http://whc.unesco.org/document/123631 page 146 and page 147.

    The procedure for a “significant modification to the boundaries” is decribed in the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention; namely, on the “handbook” of the World Heritage Convention. This procedure involves submitting the proposal (for boundary modification) as if it were a new nomination to get inscribed on the World Heritage List, gathering all the necessary conditions. As shown in the Decision, no deterioration was noted at the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo to warrant its reduction, but (it was noted) in the Historic District (Casco Antiguo).

    Let us take into account that the boundaries of the property comprise the boundaries of the Historic District of Panama (delineated by Law 91 of 1976, from the sea to the 12th Street 12 West, mainly) and the boundaries of the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo (delineation by Law 16 of 2007). The boundaries of both components, Panama Viejo and Casco Antiguo together, constitute a single property.

    To get inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger, it is required that the property at risk is already inscribed on the World Heritage List, and that the characteristics which determined its inscription on the World Heritage List have not deteriorated to the extent that they have been lost. (Operational Guidelines, Section IV.C).

    The statement in paragraph 5 of Decision 37 COM 7B.100, “Cinta Costera Phase 3 (Maritime Viaduct) that modifies in an irreversible manner the relation of the historic centre with its wider setting” it is of great concern that it contains the word “irreversible”, that highlights the strength of the contents of the Decision, while paragraph 8 underscores that, if the requirements set out in the decision are not fulfilled,, the property shall be deleted from the World Heritage List, without the option of getting inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

    For more information, see entries:

    ____

    Note:

    Thanks to the transparency policies of UNESCO and its World Heritage Centre, all documents cited in this article of the Blog, Patrimonio Panamá are public information of open access for all around the world from UNESCO websites, and by means of the Information System of the State of Conservation (SOC), open to the public from 2012 (Click here to see related news: http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/962/).

    37th Session of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee

    Posted on by
    2

    37th Session of the World Heritage Committee
    Dear friends:

    Thanks to the transparency policies of UNESCO, from 2012 all working papers World Heritage Committee are public information, freely available for everyone around the planet, as well as documents of State of Conservation (SOC) through a system of free public access information. I have prepared a small guide for the 37th Session, with the same documents in hand using delegates, to continue their discussions during the live and direct from Phnom Penh, Cambodia, and Salón 16 until 27 June 2013.

    —

    The 37th Session of the UNESCO World Heritage will be held in the city of Phnom Penh, Cambodia, and Salón 16 until 27 June 2013. As part of UNESCO's policies and its World Heritage Centre, all working documents to be used by delegates World Heritage Committee are public. They are available in English and French, here: http://whc.unesco.org/en/sessions/37COM/documents/

    Panama has five World Heritage properties considered; them, “Fortifications on the Caribbean coast of Panama: Portobelo and San Lorenzo” (Not. C135) is inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger since last year, here: http://whc.unesco.org/en/danger/

    The list of World Heritage properties to be discussed in Session 37 COM es this: http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2013/whc13-37com-7infrev-en.pdf

    During the 37th Session of the World Heritage Committee, Portobelo and San Lorenzo (although it will be discussed) have a draft decision to be approved as it is in the following document (English): http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2013/whc13-37com-7A-en.pdf (page 91).

    The property, “Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo and Historic District of Panama” (Not. C790bis), where “Historic District” refers to the Old Town of Panama, will be discussed in accordance with the following document (English): http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2013/whc13-37com-7B-Add-en.pdf (page 184).

    As part of the transparency policies of UNESCO, and as they did last year, the 37th Session of the World Heritage Committee will be broadcast live and direct, with simultaneous English translation, French and Cambodian in all discussions of the Committee.

    The live broadcast will be through the official website of the 37th Session in Cambodia, under the Web tab Casting, here:
    http://www.whc37cambodia2013.kh/news/press/01/42.html

    After selecting the Web tab Casting, and low transmission hours, you can select which of the three languages ​​described desired audio broadcast live video.

    The schedule (time to Phnom Penh, Cambodia) is a table, here: http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2013/whc13-37com-3BRev-en.pdf

    World Heritage properties in Panama will be discussed between Tuesday and Thursday of the attached schedule. For the time difference, conversions can be made for as the World Clock (http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html).

    I hope this information, of character entirely public and freely available to everyone around the world thanks to the transparency policies of UNESCO, be useful to all those genuinely interested in world heritage in Panama. And of course, in all those around the world heritage sites inscribed on the World Heritage List of World Heritage in Danger, that are the heritage of all human beings.