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

Panamanian tribes

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.

Panamá en la 41a Sesión del Comité del Patrimonio Mundial de UNESCO en Cracovia, Polonia

Panamanian tribes

41a Sesión del Comité del Patrimonio Mundial en Polonia, 2017

41a Sesión del Comité del Patrimonio Mundial en Polonia, 2017

Amigos de Patrimonio Panamá:

La 41a Sesión del Comité Intergubernamental de Patrimonio Mundial bajo la Convención de UNESCO de 1972 se celebró del 2 al 12 de julio de 2017 en la ciudad de Cracovia en Polonia. De las cinco propiedades que Panamá tiene inscritas en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial, cuatro ameritaron el análisis de los organismos asesores del Comité del Patrimonio Mundial: “Fortificaciones de la Costa Caribeña de Panamá: Portobelo y San Lorenzo”, “El Sitio Arqueológico de Panamá Viejo y Distrito Histórico de Panamá”, “Reservas de la Cordillera de Talamanca–La Amistad /Parque Nacional de la Amistad”, y “Parque Nacional de Coiba y su zona especial de protección marina”. Los organismos asesores ICOMOS, ICCROM y IUCN preparan los informes y borradores de Decisión para uso del Comité del Patrimonio Mundial.

Si bien el compendio oficial de las Decisiones adoptadas por el Comité aún no ha sido publicado, las Decisiones que se refieren a los sitios panameños conservarán íntegro el texto de sus versiones en borrador, pues fueron adoptadas sin pasar por debate por parte del Comité. La información que les comunico tiene como fuente dichos borradores de Decisión.

Patrimonio Mundial Cultural de Panamá

Portobelo. Fuerte la Gloria (Foto del Autor)

Portobelo. Fuerte Santiago de la Gloria (Foto de la Autora)

En cuanto a los sitios de Patrimonio Mundial Cultural de Panamá, las “Fortificaciones de la Costa Caribeña de Panamá: Portobelo y San Lorenzo” se encuentran en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial en Peligro desde 2012, a causa del importante deterioro que sufren las estructuras militares y su entorno en un deterioro acumulado durante décadas. En 2015 Panamá actualizó su cronograma de trabajo y adaptación a esquemas aplicables de las Medidas Correctivas suministradas al país para el periodo 2012-2014 que habían caducado sin ser cumplidas, comprometiéndose a un nuevo plazo hasta 2019. Preocupan a Comité la falta de fondos continuos asignados al sitio, y urgió a Panamá a cumplir el plazo establecido, tras encomiar los esfuerzos reportados por el país por fortalecer la cooperación entre instituciones.

Plaza de la Independencia en el Casco Antiguo de Panamá (Distrito Histórico). Foto de la Autora.

Plaza de la Independencia en el Casco Antiguo de Panamá (Distrito Histórico). Foto de la Autora.

El caso del “Sitio Arqueológico de Panamá Viejo y Distrito Histórico de Panamá” es extremadamente delicado tanto en sus aspectos técnicos como diplomáticos. La construcción de infraestructura vial viaducto marino de la Cinta Costera 3(1) afectó negativamente los elementos fundamentales que sustentan el valor universal excepcional de este patrimonio mundial. En su dictamen del año 2013 en su 37a Sesión en Cambodia, el Comité del Patrimonio Mundial consideró que dicha afectación negativa es irreversible sobre la relación del Casco Antiguo con su entorno marino inmediato. Por esta razón, este patrimonio mundial no podría ser inscrito en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial en Peligro a razón de la irreversibilidad de la afectación descrita. Para evitar su salida inmediata de la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial ante las pérdidas sufridas sobre los elementos que justifican su valor, el Comité solicitó a Panamá proponer mediante un nuevo dossier de nominación a la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial al 1 de febrero del año 2018, que cambie los límites de la propiedad “Sitio Arqueológico de Panamá Viejo y Distrito Histórico de Panamá” de manera tan importante que se justifique una revisión fundamental al valor universal excepcional – en esencia, cambiar o renovar el valor agotado por uno nuevo. El proceso normal de evaluación demora aproximadamente un año corrido, por lo cual el resultado se conocerá en la 43a Sesión del Comité del Patrimonio Mundial en julio del año 2019.

A pesar de que el plazo de entrega del nuevo dossier de nominación es el 2018, este año Panamá presentó por solicitud del Comité, un informe de estado de conservación actualizado que describe tanto al Casco Antiguo de Panamá como al Sitio Arqueológico de Panamá Viejo. El Comité solicitó a Panamá informar en el año 2018 mediante un nuevo informe de estado de conservación para su evaluación por los Organismos Asesores, los diseños del proyecto de restauración del Hotel Casco Viejo del antiguo Club Unión, junto con estudios sobre acceso vehicular, gestión de residuos y otros aspectos para evaluar los impactos en el patrimonio, así como tomar las medidas necesarias para mantener la autenticidad y la integridad de ambos componentes del sitio de la propiedad, particularmente en la zona de amortiguamiento y en el entorno más amplio de Panamá Viejo.

También se entregó para la Lista Indicativa de Panamá el documento “Ruta Colonial Transístmica de Panamá”, que es paso previo y anteproyecto, diseño conceptual digamos, del nuevo dossier de nominación a la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial que deberá evitar la salida de la Lista de Patrimonio Mundial del “Sitio Arqueológico de Panamá Viejo y Distrito Histórico de Panamá”. Compendiará con éste a las “Fortificaciones de la Costa Caribeña de Panamá: Portobelo y San Lorenzo” y agregará el Camino Real y el Camino de Cruces.

Patrimonio Mundial Natural de Panamá

Reservas de la Cordillera de Talamanca–La Amistad /Parque Nacional de la Amistad

Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves / La Amistad National Park (Costa Rica, Panama) ©UNESCO Author: Marc Patry

En cuanto a los sitios de Patrimonio Mundial Natural de Panamá, las “Reservas de la Cordillera de Talamanca–La Amistad /Parque Nacional de la Amistad”, que es un Patrimonio Mundial transfronterizo compartido por Costa Rica y Panamá, recibió el encomio del Comité por la suspensión del contrato de construcción de la hidroeléctrica Chan II en el sector panameño Parque Nacional de la Amistad. Ambos países deberán terminar conjuntamente al 2018 la Evaluación Ambiental Estratégica (SEA) y presentar nuevamente un informe de estado de conservación al Comité en ese mismo año. Se recordó a ambos países el peligro que representa para el valor universal excepcional el impacto de las hidroeléctricas en este patrimonio mundial natural.

Parque Nacional de Coiba y su zona especial de protección marina. Fuente: whalewatchingpanama.com

Parque Nacional de Coiba y su zona especial de protección marina. Fuente: whalewatchingpanama.com

El “Parque Nacional de Coiba y su zona especial de protección marina” recibió la advertencia de que ingresará a la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial en Peligro en el año 2018 si el país no presenta avances significativos en protegerle de prácticas pesqueras que no son sostenibles en el sector. El Comité reconoció los avances logrados en la generación de un Plan de Uso Público y en la reducción del número de ganado salvaje que afecta el ecosistema de la isla, y urgió al país a adoptar las recomendaciones emitidas por las misiones de monitoreo de expertos de IUCN a Panamá en 2014 y 2016.

Acceso público

Todos los documentos presentados al Comité del Patrimonio Mundial este año fueron finalizados y remitidos por la vía diplomática al Centro del Patrimonio Mundial en París, en enero de 2017. Se encuentran en disponibles en línea como documentos de acceso público en la página web de UNESCO para la Convención del Patrimonio Mundial. Constituyó una gran satisfacción profesional atender como experta en estudios del patrimonio mundial estas tareas de gran importancia para el pais junto a un equipo de trabajo, en cuanto a los sitios de patrimonio mundial cultural, y con el equipo interinstitucional reunido por la Cancillería de la República de Panamá.

Como ha indicado el INAC en diversas declaraciones a los medios de comunicación panameños, se está gestionando desde 2016 un préstamo del Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID) para sufragar los gastos millonarios de las obras requeridas, cuyos detalles asimismo reportó el país a UNESCO mediante los informes entregados. El Comité tomó nota más no lo ha aceptado como un hecho por estar aún en etapa preliminar.

 

Saludos,

 

Katti Osorio, Ph.D.

Fuente: UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention (website). http://whc.unesco.org/

(1) El viaducto marino de la Cinta Costera 3 es parte del proyecto licitado por el Ministerio de Obras Públicas “Preservación del Patrimonio Histórico de la Ciudad de Panamá” (2011 – 2013), ejecutado por la Compañía Constructura Norberto Odebrecht. Esta compañía brasileña se encuentra en la actualidad bajo investigación por el Ministerio Público (Procuraduría General de la Nación) y se relaciona con una investigación internacional por corrupción, en proceso.

Journey to the Center of the Universe

Figure 1. Solemn Session commemorating the 185th anniversary of the death of the Liberator, in the Bolivar Room, at Bolívar Palace, Casco Antiguo of Panama. Source: Bolivarian Society of Panama (2015)

Figure 1. Solemn Session commemorating the 185th anniversary of the death of the Liberator, in the Bolivar Room, at Bolívar Palace, Casco Antiguo of Panama. Source: Bolivarian Society of Panama (2015)

VIAJE AL CENTRO DEL UNIVERSO

Conferencia ante la Sociedad Bolivariana de Panamá en la Sesión Solemne en conmemoración del 185º aniversario del fallecimiento del Libertador

Katti Osorio Ugarte, Ph.D.[*]

Abstract: El centésimo octogésimo quinto aniversario del fallecimiento de Simón Bolívar El Libertador es ocasión propicia para celebrar su vida y su obra, donde Panamá ocupó un lugar muy especial en sus planes de organización y alianza de las naciones liberadas, en una confederación. Por su importancia para el mundo, el Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá ha sido reconocido por la Organización de las Naciones Unidas como su predecesor, y el Salón Bolívar forma parte del patrimonio mundial ante UNESCO desde 1997.

Temas: Muerte de El Libertador en 1830 – Epistolario de Bolívar – Congresos de naciones y reconocimiento de la ONU al Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá como su predecesor – Importancia de Panamá para Bolívar – Patrimonio mundial – Importancia y relevancia presente y futura del Salón Bolívar.

 

Señor Presidente de la Sociedad Bolivariana

Señores Embajadores

Damas y Caballeros:

 

Me siento profundamente honrada de compartir con ustedes esta augusta sala, en el aniversario solemne del fallecimiento de aquel que en vida fue Simón Bolívar, El Libertador. Simón Bolívar falleció un día como hoy, on the 17 December 1830 a la una de la tarde, en la Quinta San Pedro Alejandrino, en Santa Marta, territorio colombiano. Han transcurrido ciento ochenta y cinco años desde su partida de este mundo, that, aunque conmemoramos con gran pesar, también es ocasión propicia para celebrar su extraordinario paso por el Continente, y su viaje incorpóreo al centro del universo de sus ideales de unión para América Liberada: este santuario donde hoy nos hemos reunido. Me refiero al Salón del Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá, también llamado El Salón Bolívar, que el mundo reunido en la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura reconoce como parte del patrimonio mundial inscrito bajo la Convención sobre la protección del Patrimonio Mundial Cultural y Natural desde 1997.

Simón Bolívar fue un hombre extraordinario, que en sus años mozos encontró su destino en este mundo y se lanzó sin vacilaciones a realizarlo. Durante sus 47 años de vida, soñó y proyectó una América libre del yugo del colonialismo, y con un extraordinario empuje de su voluntad, llevó ese proyecto a la práctica. Al cabo de este esfuerzo extraordinario, donde se sucedieron excelsos triunfos y profundas desilusiones, marchó El Libertador a su último retiro en Santa Marta con el profundo dolor de tener que contemplar de lejos cómo se desmoronaba su magnífico proyecto.

No podemos hablar de derrota, porque los ideales de Bolívar no fueron derrotados; persisten en esta habitación, en este Salón del Congreso Anfictiónico donde se firmaron las Actas precursoras, y que es monumento histórico y testimonio del pasado panameño; los ideales de Bolívar persisten en la organización de los estados nacionales, y en las esperanzas de paz y diálogo del mundo unido en multiplicidad de congresos. En Panamá señaló Bolívar en su epistolario al Centro del Universo, y a él nos ha convocado a todos.

In his famous Letter from Jamaica (as translated by Lewis Betrand in, Selected Writings from Bolivar. New York: The Colonial Press, 1951), of 6 th of September, 1815, El Libertador se refirió a Panamá tres veces bajo su visión ideal para el Istmo Centroamericano; aún considerando sombríamente que cualquier unión de las naciones americanas sólo podría prosperar bajo los cuidados de gobiernos paternales, que no formando una gran república ni una monarquía universal, señaló por posible capital de ese gobierno paternal a México primero y luego a Panamá, saying:

“La metrópoli por ejemplo, sería Méjico, que es la única que puede serlo por su poder intrínseco, sin el cual no hay metrópoli. Supongamos que fuese el Istmo de Panamá, the most central point for all of this vast continent, ¿no continuarían éstos en la languidez y aún en el desorden actual? Para que un solo gobierno dé vida, anime, ponga en acción todos los resortes de la prosperidad pública, corrija, ilustre y perfeccione al Nuevo Mundo, sería necesario que tuviese las facultades de un Dios, y cuando menos, las luces y virtudes de todos los hombres.”

Luego, penetrando el horizonte, visionary, recurre nuevamente a Panamá, y dice:

“Los Estados del Istmo de Panamá hasta Guatemala formarán quizá una asociación. 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. ¡Acaso sólo allí podrá fijarse algún día la capital de la tierra, como pretendió Constantino que fuese Bizancio la del antiguo hemisferio!”

Pese a su reserva inicial, Bolívar vuelve a ese sueño unificador y justifica la necesidad de un Congreso, saying:

“Es una idea grandiosa pretender formar de todo el Mundo Nuevo una sola nación con un solo vínculo que ligue sus partes entre sí y con el todo. Ya que tiene un origen, una lengua, unas costumbres y una religión, debería, por consiguiente, tener un solo gobierno que confederarse los diferentes estados que hayan de formarse; mas no es posible, porque climas remotos, situaciones diversas, intereses opuestos, caracteres desemejantes, dividen a la América. 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, con las naciones de las otras tres partes del mundo. Esta especie de corporación podrá tener lugar en alguna época dichosa de nuestra regeneración; otra esperanza es infundada…”

Transcurrieron seis años; las luchas libertarias rendían fruto en el territorio americano, y tardíamente el 28 of November, 1821, Panamá declaró su Independencia de España. La noticia llegó a Bolívar, y éste se apresuró a escribir una carta al entonces Coronel José de Fábrega, Gobernador Comandante General de la Provincia de Panamá, fechada el 1º de febrero de 1822 en el Cuartel de Popayán en ocasión del loable suceso. Les leeré unas líneas:

“Señor Coronel:

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. No me es posible expresar el sentimiento de gozo y admiración que he experimentado al saber que 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, debe haber asegurado ya la suerte de ese precioso emporio del comercio y de las relaciones del mundo.”

¡En cuánta estima tenía Bolívar a este lugar entre dos mares! Su misiva a Fábrega termina así:

“Repito a V. you. expression of sincere gratitude, con que he aceptado en nombre de Colombia los servicios que V. 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, Panamá era definitivamente, el Centro del Universo, hacia el cual gravitaba su gran esfuerzo unificador en un Congreso de naciones a pie de igualdad soberana. To Bolivar, probablemente Panamá era el centro de un universo geopolítico de grandes redes logísticas y de comunicaciones. In 1824, como Presidente de Colombia y Jefe Supremo del Perú, Bolívar retoma la pluma para cristalizar ese Congreso, lanzando el alegre desafío de reunión: La Carta Circular expedida el 7 December 1824, dos días antes de la Batalla de Ayacucho, convocando a las naciones a este lugar donde hoy nos hemos reunido. Fueron convocados: las Repúblicas de Colombia, América Central, México, las Provincias Unidas de Buenos Aires, Chile y Brasil. Los Estados Unidos de América fueron invitados por el General Santander como Vicepresidente en ejercicio del gobierno colombiano. La República de Colombia estaba integrada por las actuales Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador y Panamá; la República de América Central lo estaba por Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua y Costa Rica. (Castillero, 1995: 41)

“Parece que si el mundo hubiese de elegir su capital, Let us assume it were to be the Isthmus of Panama, sería señalado para este augusto destino, colocado como está en el centro del globo, viendo por una parte el Asia, y por otra el África y la Europa. El Istmo de Panamá, ha sido ofrecido por el Gobierno de Colombia para este fin en los tratados existentes… El día que nuestros plenipotenciarios hagan el canje de sus poderes, se fijará en la historia diplomática de América una época inmortal. Cuando, después de cien siglos, la posteridad busque el origen de nuestro derecho público, y recuerden los pactos que consolidaron su destino, registrará con respeto los protocolos del Istmo; en él encontrará el plan de las primeras alianzas, que trazará la marcha de nuestras relaciones con el universo. ¿Qué será entonces el Istmo de Corinto con el de Panamá?” (Bolívar, Carta Circular, 1824)

¡Panamá querida! Las condiciones de nuestra ciudad capital no eran las mejores. Una rápida mirada a dos referencias cartográficas puede mostrarnos el Panamá del Congreso Anfictiónico de 1826: el mapa de Panamá trazado por Vicente Talledo y Rivera en 1814, and the map of Panama in 1850 de Tiedemann. 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. 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, pero según nos informa Ernesto Castillero (1995), en el año de 1822, informado de la insalubridad de este lugar que nunca vio con sus propios ojos, Bolívar quiso cambiar la sede a Quito, pero era tarde para el cambio. La Sala Capitular del Convento de San Francisco fue seleccionada por el gobierno departamental para acoger las sesiones del Congreso Anfictiónico. La habitación identificada como aquella Sala Capitular del convento de San Francisco, fue restaurada en la década de 2000, y aquí nos encontramos nosotros. This is the space that housed the idea; su presencia con todas sus asociaciones ideológicas e interpretación de su entorno a escala mundial dan solidez a su valor universal excepcional, como patrimonio mundial desde 1997.

El Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá en 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; en fin, el Centro de ese Universo por él proyectado.

Ojalá los planes que proyectamos en perfección sobre el papel se tradujeran íntegros al éxito en la realidad; pero muchas veces múltiples factores inesperados contribuyen al descalabro de la maquinaria más minuciosamente diseñada. El Congreso Anfictiónico, en ausencia de Bolívar a su pesar, no llegó a ser todo lo que esperaba El Libertador al punto de exclamar éste:

“El Congreso de Panamá, institución admirable si fuese efectiva, no es otra cosa que el griego loco que creía poder dirigir a los barcos en el mar, desde una roca de la costa.” (Castillero, 1995: 168)

Finalizado el Congreso Anfictiónico, se dispuso en reunión del 15 July 1826 continuar las sesiones en la Villa de Tacubaya en México; pero debido a múltiples razones, fue imposible deliberar allí, con lo que en Tacubaya acabó el Congreso, declarado disuelto el 17 December 1827. (Castillero, 1995: 170).

La Sociedad Bolivariana, especialmente la Sociedad Bolivariana de Panamá y como es del conocimiento de ustedes, se remonta al año de 1926, con el Congreso Panamericano que conmemoró el primer centenario del Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá. El acta de fundación de la Sociedad Bolivariana de Panamá fue fechada el 20 July 1929, y desde entonces es su misión, “venerar sin tregua la memoria del Libertador”. (MIRE, 2015)

In the twentieth century, dos guerras mundiales asolaron el mundo con su carga de intolerancia, odio y muerte. Tras el final de la Segunda Guerra Mundial en 1945, el mundo inició el camino hacia la creación de un Congreso como lo había soñado Bolívar más de un siglo antes, con la implementación de la Constitución de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas (ONU) en octubre de ese mismo año (UN 2012), con Panamá como uno de sus estados miembro. Dando otro paso hacia el progreso de la paz, on the 16 of November, 1945 fue creada la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), cuya misión principal plasmada en su constitución dice lo siguiente:

“Contribuir a la paz y a la seguridad estrechando, mediante la educación, la ciencia y la cultura, la colaboración entre las naciones, a fin de asegurar el respeto universal a la justicia, a la ley, a los derechos humanos y a las libertades fundamentales que sin distinción de raza, sexo, idioma o religión, la Carta de las Naciones Unidas reconoce a todos los pueblos del mundo” (UNESCO, 2010).

In 1948, la ONU adoptó la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos, la cual reconoce la condición de igualdad de todos los seres humanos sin distinción desde su nacimiento. Estos esfuerzos por dejar atrás los horrores de la guerra y la discriminación, sentaron una base sobre la cual construir paz basada en el supuesto que todos los hombres y mujeres en su condición de igualdad, tienen iguales deberes y derechos como ciudadanos del mundo, y que ninguna cultura es superior a otra. Aquí podemos reconocer otro de los ideales de Bolívar, plasmado en la Carta de Jamaica en 1815, que coincide con esta feliz labor: Crear “un augusto Congreso de los representantes de las repúblicas, kingdoms and empires to deliberate upon the high interests of peace and war, con las naciones de las otras tres partes del mundo”, en pie de igualdad y soberana dignidad. ¡Ojalá hubiese sido creado en Panamá, como Bolívar soñó! Pero hay más. (Castillero, 1995: 29) (Osorio, 2012: 3-4)

La Tercera Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Derecho del Mar publicó en el Anexo III de su Acta Final el texto del Homenaje al Libertador Simón Bolívar, donde le tributó públicamente admiración y respeto en el aniversario de su nacimiento el 24 July 1974, reconociendo en él al “visionario precursor de la organización nacional, cuya figura histórica tiene caracteres de universalidad”, y que su obra “basada en los conceptos de libertad y justicia como fundamentos de la paz y el progreso de los pueblos, ha dejado huella indeleble en la historia y constituye fuente de permanente inspiración”. (ONU, 1982: 224).

In 1976, ese congreso llamado la Organización de las Naciones Unidas se reunió nuevamente para reconocer en Simón Bolívar a su precursor y al Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá como su antecesor. Durante su Trigésimo Primer periodo de sesiones, la Asamblea General de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas convocó su Tricentésimo Tercera Sesión Plenaria conmemorativa especial el 17 December 1976, para rendir homenaje al Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá. En dicha sesión, se aprobó la Resolución 31/142 Sesquicentenario del Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá, la cual dice textualmente:

La Asamblea General,

Habiendo decidido celebrar una sesión plenaria conmemorativa especial para rendir homenaje al Libertador Simón Bolívar con ocasión del sesquicentenario del Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá, que se reunió el 22 June 1826;

Considerando que el objetivo primordial de dicho Congreso fue el de constituir una asamblea de países confederados a fin de que sentara las bases jurídicas para las relaciones entre las repúblicas americanas con todas las naciones del mundo, así como para servir de Consejo en los grandes conflictos, de punto de contacto en los peligros comunes, de fiel intérprete en los tratados públicos cuando ocurran dificultades y de conciliador, en fin, de nuestras diferencias, conceptos que son fundamento del derecho internacional de los países americanos y constituyen por tanto, un directo antecedente del Pacto de la Sociedad de las Naciones y de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas;

Teniendo presente que Bolívar concebía una región latinoamericana de países libres y fraternos unidos por ideales comunes, sueño que lo señala como el precursor de la integración de esta región;

Reconociendo que el Tratado de Unión, Liga y Confederación Perpetua, firmado en Panamá el 15 July 1826, trasunta un espíritu universalista, encarnado actualmente en las Naciones Unidas, al reiterar la soberanía e independencia de los Estados y el propósito de asegurarse, desde ahora para siempre, los goces de una paz inalterable, y promover, al efecto, la mejor armonía y buena inteligencia, así entre sus pueblos, ciudadanos y súbditos, respectively, como con las demás potencias con quienes deben mantener o entrar en relaciones amistosas;

Recordando que Simón Bolívar, en varias ocasiones, se refirió a la necesidad de una posible apertura de un canal en Panamá, cuyas vías acortarán las distancias del mundo, estrecharán los lazos comerciales de los continentes y promoverán el intercambio de los productos de las cuatro partes del globo;

  1. Rinde homenaje al Libertador Simón Bolívar como promotor de la integración latinoamericana y como forjador de planes constructivos para la organización internacional en escala continental y mundial, y al efecto dispone colocar una placa conmemorativa en un sitio del edificio de la Sede de las Naciones Unidas como tributo permanente a su memoria;
  2. Reconoce que el Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá representa el más relevante y denodado ensayo unionista en el plano internacional del siglo XIX con caracteres ecuménicos, en anticipación y coincidencia con los objetivos del sistema de las Naciones Unidas;
  3. Expresa la esperanza de que los ideales de Bolívar puedan inspirar el establecimiento de un orden internacional más justo de respeto al derecho y dedicado al mantenimiento de la paz, a la preservación de los principios democráticos, a la promoción del progreso económico y social y a la libertad de todos los pueblos;
  4. Formula votos porque lleguen a un feliz resultado las negociaciones destinadas a concertar un nuevo tratado sobre el Canal de Panamá, que elimine las causas de conflicto entre la República de Panamá y los Estados Unidos de América, de acuerdo con la Declaración de Principios suscrita por las partes interesadas el 7 February 1974 en donde se determina que el territorio panameño del cual forma parte el Canal de Panamá será devuelto prontamente a la jurisdicción de la República de Panamá, y que ésta asumirá la total responsabilidad por el Canal Interoceánico a la terminación del nuevo tratado;
  5. Pide al Secretario General que haga circular entre todos los Estados Miembros un documento que reproduzca la convocatoria y los acuerdos del Congreso Anfictiónico de 1826, cuyos textos originales, que se conservan en Río de Janeiro, serán depositados por decisión del Gobierno del Brasil, en el momento oportuno, para que se guarden en el monumento que se erija en aquel país, como parte de la conmemoración bolivariana.

103ª sesión plenaria

17 December 1976 (ONU, 1976).

Indeed, al cabo de los años y después de habérseles dado por perdidas, las Actas originales del Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá resurgieron en el Brasil. De este feliz hallazgo, Ernesto J. Castillero (1995) nos narra en su obra “Bolívar en Panamá – Génesis y realidad del Pacto Americano”, cómo volvieron al Istmo las Actas extraviadas del Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá de 1826. El hallazgo gravita en torno al artículo, “Las Actas Extraviadas del Congreso de Panamá de 1826”, published in 1944 por el Dr. Julio Escudero Guzmán, en aquel entonces Profesor de Derecho Internacional de la Universidad de Santiago de Chile; allí aseguraba haberlas encontrado en el Archivo Histórico del Palacio Itamaraty, en Río de Janeiro. La Cancillería Brasileña las había adquirido de manos de un particular por la suma de 5,000 dólares americanos, aproximadamente, y las hizo experticiar para verificar su autenticidad. La Sociedad Bolivariana de Panamá realizó importantes gestiones para obtener copia fotostática de las Actas, que fueron luego publicadas en el citado libro del historiador Ernesto J. Castillero, a su vez Presidente de la Sociedad Bolivariana en el periodo de 1936 to 1940. Su libro se publicó por primera vez en 1976. Como acabamos de ver, en ese mismo año Brasil se comprometió a suministrar a Panamá las Actas originales para su custodia.

El Salón del Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá ya había sido para aquel entonces, declarado monumento mediante ley de la república; específicamente la Ley No.63 de 6 June 1941, “que patrocina la Sociedad Bolivariana de Panamá”, declaró en su artículo 7 al Salón Bolívar del Colegio La Salle, Monumento Nacional. La Ley No.91 de 22 December 1976 había declarado Conjunto Monumental Histórico al Casco Antiguo de la Ciudad de Panamá, y éste se hallaba en el centro del interés estatal con grandes proyectos de restauración. El colegio La Salle, hoy Palacio Bolívar y sede de la Cancillería, fue rehabilitado para dicha nueva función, y restaurada el ala del Salón Bolívar entre 2001 up to 2004; la reforma del edificio por el arquitecto Álvaro González Clare, y la restauración del Salón Bolívar, a cargo del arquitecto restaurador Raúl Murillo. (Tejeira, 2007: 211)

Desde 1931 con la Carta de Atenas, y especialmente desde el fin de la Segunda Guerra Mundial en 1945, acontecimientos de escala mundial dieron origen a un especial interés por la preservación del patrimonio cultural y natural como un tesoro único que es herencia de todos los seres humanos. Bajo ese interés, surgió la Convención sobre la Protección del Patrimonio Mundial, Cultural y Natural, también conocida como Convención del Patrimonio Mundial, aprobada por la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura – UNESCO, in 1972 y ratificada por Panamá en 1978. Su texto íntegro fue introducido a la legislación nacional mediante la Ley No.9 de 27 October 1977. (Osorio, 2012: 3)

La Convención del Patrimonio Mundial reconoce a la humanidad de forma unitaria y universal, aceptando que el patrimonio cultural y natural de cada pueblo pertenece al conjunto de toda la humanidad, y que su deterioro o pérdida por ende afecta negativamente a todos sus herederos; namely, la humanidad entera. La Convención del Patrimonio Mundial introduce el término Valor Universal Excepcional (VIEW), refiriéndose al interés excepcional sobre ciertos bienes patrimoniales irreemplazables. Es decir, parte de ese tesoro colectivo de influencia universal sobre el ser humano y su entorno, en un gran engranaje de lugares y eventos, que es el Patrimonio Mundial. (Osorio, 2012: 4-5)

“Valor Universal Excepcional significa una importancia cultural y/o natural tan extraordinaria que trasciende las fronteras nacionales y cobra importancia para las generaciones presentes y venideras de toda la humanidad. Por lo tanto, la protección permanente de este patrimonio es de capital importancia para el conjunto de la comunidad internacional. El Comité define los criterios de inscripción de los bienes en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial” (WHC, 2008: 16)

In 1997, y gracias al esfuerzo impulsor de la Sociedad Bolivariana de Panamá en las etapas iniciales del interés estatal, Panamá obtuvo la inscripción en la Lista del Patrimonio Mundial de la propiedad, “Distrito Histórico de Panamá con el Salón Bolívar (Panamá) (790)”. Thus, este monumento nacional donde hoy nos encontramos, alcanzó el más alto reconocimiento como hito cultural de la historia humana. (UNESCO, 1997)

In 2003, la propiedad se amplió para incluir bajo la misma inscripción al Conjunto Monumental Histórico de Panamá Viejo, y su nombre cambió a, “Sitio Arqueológico de Panamá Viejo y Distrito Histórico de Panamá”, que es el nombre que lleva en la actualidad. (UNESCO, 2003)

Thus, el Salón del Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá, llamado ante el mundo El Salón Bolívar, nos representa más allá de las fronteras nacionales, como parte vital de nuestro patrimonio mundial para memoria y registro de las futuras generaciones de la humanidad. Su relevancia a escala mundial es carta de presentación del país, y las Actas del Congreso Anfictiónico son un tesoro invaluable de nuestra historia común, no solo con el Brasil; no solo común con las naciones que formaron parte del augusto Congreso de Bolívar, sino con el mundo entero, para el cual las custodiamos con celo.

Damas y Caballeros, nos hallamos reunidos hoy en el Centro del Universo, no solo en conmemoración de la partida de El Libertador Simón Bolívar, sino en celebración solemne de su legado inmortal para el conjunto de la Humanidad.

.

Panamá, 17 December 2015.

Salón Bolívar – Salón del Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá,

at Bolívar Palace, Casco Antiguo de la Ciudad de Panamá, Patrimonio Mundial,

Republic of Panama.

.

Available in ICOMOS Open Archive:

Osorio, Katti (2015) Viaje al Centro del Universo = Journey to the center of the Universe. In: Solemn Session commemorating the 185th anniversary of the death of the Liberator, 17 December 2015, Panamá, Panama City, Casco Antiguo of Panama, at Bolívar Palace (Ministry of Foreign Affairs), Congress Hall Amphictyonic Panama (Salón Bolivar). [Conference or Workshop Item] (Unpublished)

También disponible en Academia.edu:

Osorio, Katti (2015). Viaje al Centro del Universo – Conferencia dictada en la Sesión Solemne en conmemoración del 185º aniversario del fallecimiento del Libertador, ante la Sociedad Bolivariana de Panamá en el Salón Bolívar, at Bolívar Palace, Casco Antiguo de la Ciudad de Panamá. Electronic document, https://www.academia.edu/19749520/Viaje_al_Centro_del_Universo, Viewed in December 2015. Panama City, Panamá.

Figure 2. Solemn Session commemorating the 185th anniversary of the death of the Liberator, in the Bolivar Room, at Bolívar Palace, Casco Antiguo of Panama. Source: Bolivarian Society of Panama (2015)

Figure 2. Solemn Session commemorating the 185th anniversary of the death of the Liberator, in the Bolivar Room, at Bolívar Palace, Casco Antiguo of Panama. Source: Bolivarian Society of Panama (2015)

 

 

REFERENCIAS CONSULTADAS

Castillero, Ernesto J. (1995). Bolívar en Panamá – Génesis y realidad del pacto americano; Las Actas extraviadas del Congreso de Bolívar de 1826. Reimpresión de la obra fechada en 1976. Impresora La Nación, National Institute of Culture. Panama City, Panamá.
MIRE (2015). Bolivarian Society of Panama. In, at Bolívar Palace. Electronic document, http://www.mire.gob.pa/ministerio/palacio-bolivar, Viewed in December 2015.

ONU (1982). Anexo III Homenaje al Libertador Simón Bolívar. In, Acta Final de la Tercera Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Derecho del Mar, hecha en Montego Bay el día 10 December 1982. Segundo periodo de sesiones en el Parque Central, Caracas, and Salón 20 de junio al 29 of August, 1974. Electronic document, http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/acta_final_esp.pdf, Viewed in December 2015.

ONU (1976). Sesquicentenario del Congreso Anfictiónico de Panamá, Resolución 31/142 of 17 December 1976 [Ref. A/RES/31/142]. In, Resoluciones adoptadas por la Asamblea General durante el Trigésimo Primer Periodo de Sesiones. Electronic document, http://www.un.org/es/documents/ag/res/31/ares31.htm, Viewed in December 2015. Asamblea General: Organización de las Naciones Unidas – ONU. Page 27.

Osorio, Katti (2012). Los Atributos del Valor Universal Excepcional de una propiedad considerada Patrimonio Mundial – El caso del Sitio Arqueológico de Panamá Viejo y Distrito Histórico de Panamá. Canto Rodado, 7 (7). pp. 1-27. ISSN 1818-2917 [Article]
Tejeira Davis, Eduardo (2007). Panamá – Guía de arquitectura y paisaje: An architectural and landscape guide. Panamá: Instituto Panameño de Turismo; Seville: Consejería de Obras Públicas y Transportes.

UNESCO (2010) Constitución de la UNESCO. In, Instrumentos Normativos. Electronic document, http://portal.unesco.org/es/ev.php-URL_ID=15244&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html, Viewed in December 2015. Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

UNESCO (2003). Decision: 27 COM 8C.40 – Archaeological Site of Panamá Viejo and Historic District of Panamá (Panama). Electronic document, http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/735, Viewed in December 2015. World Heritage Convention: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). París, Francia.

UNESCO (1997). Decision: CONF 208 VIII.C – Inscription: Historic District of the Town of Panama with the Salon Bolivar (Panama). Electronic document, http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/2899, Viewed in December 2015. World Heritage Convention: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). París, Francia.

WHC (2008). [1977] Directrices Prácticas para la Aplicación de la Convención del Patrimonio Mundial, edición revisada WHC. 08/01, París, UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Documento electrónico disponible en http://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide08-es.pdf. Consultado en noviembre de 2011.

______________________

(*) Subdirectora Nacional, Dirección Nacional de Patrimonio Histórico,

National Institute of Culture, Republic of Panama.

diagonalrio@inac.gob.pa, k.osorio.andartand@gmail.cabout.

 

Licencia Creative CommonsViaje Al Centro Del Universo por Katti Osorio Ugarte se distribuye bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivar 4.0 Internacional.
Basada en una obra en http://patrimoniopanama.com/?p=1074

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

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.

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

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.

    Portobelo and San Lorenzo, World Heritage in Danger (SOC by the State party) and Management Plan

    Friends and Friends of Heritage Panama:

    Thanks to Information System of the State of Conservation (SOC) enabled by the World Heritage Centre of UNESCO, of free access to all around the world, les traigo this update published this month of February 2014. This is a PDF file with the English summary of the report submitted by the State Conservation Panama, Portobelo and San Lorenzo on. It is thanks to the policies of public access to information from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), we can have secondary access to this national information about our world heritage sites.

    This report was generated by the Panamanian authorities under their own responsibility and point of view, and is a separate and distinct report to Report Information System State of Conservation of the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS.

    Here is the link: Dale click aquí, comes at the end of tabla, next to the boxes marked “2014 / SOC Report by State Party” & click, “Summary of the State of conservation report by the State Party / Summary Report of the State party on the state of conservation (29/01/2014)”. It is a four-page summary, one formato PDF, in English.

    Portobelo. Fort Santiago de la Gloria (Photo of the Author)

    Portobelo. Fort Santiago de la Gloria (Photo of the Author)

    SUMMARY SUMMARY

    In a “abstract” and Salón “Summary Conservation Status Report”, the list as a PDF file in the List of World Heritage, the following fortifications: 1 – The fortifications of San Fernando: Low battery, superior battery, and strong house on the hilltop, 2 – Battery Fuerte San Jerónimo; 3 – Fortifications of Santiago: Castle of Santiago de la Gloria, Casa Fuerte battery and on top of the hill;. 4 – Former Fort Santiago; 5 – Fort Ruins Farnese; 6 – Site of the Trench; 7 – The site of San Cristobal; and finally, Castle of San Lorenzo El Real de Chagre and superior battery as separate structure, ambos a 43 km away from Portobelo, at the mouth of the Chagres River.

    The report says the Panamanian authorities as elements that have adversely affected the property (Portobelo and San Lorenzo):

  • Very bad weather, with a pattern of high temperatures and lots of rain, materials that eroded monuments.
  • Ground instability in the hillsides around Portobelo; Quote landslides that occurred in the year 2010.
  • Changes in the slope of the slopes caused by the construction of the access road to Portobelo in the early 1970, and accumulation of water caused by the change thus produced the natural drainage of the hills.
  • Increased level of sea water due to sedimentation, causing loss of beaches and affecting water coming monuments.
  • Urban sprawl in Portobelo, including illegal constructions on the ruins and its immediate perimeter.
  • Panamanian authorities noted that the strongest risks related to climate, suggesting that these factors exacerbate risks caused by man (anthropogenic), as urban sprawl, Water pollution, illegal construction and conservation management incipient.

    Titled, “Proposed mitigation measures”, the existence of an Emergency Plan mentioned, based on which an intervention strategy is set, where major mitigation measures are (translate verbatim the points 1 until 11):

    1) Strengthen the maintenance work carried out by the Board Portobelo and San Lorenzo, adapting its budget to the scale of the necessary intevenciones.

    2) Controlling urban pressure on the strengths of Portobelo, redefining buffer zones and land uses allowed (residential, commercial, parking, etc.) near structures.

    3) Solve built environment pollution, as well as water pollution by solid waste, via a drainage system integrated. Required to build public health facilities within existing buildings, the scale of the city, all connected to the sewer.

    4) Weed control and extermination and removal of all vegetation roots of invasive.

    5) Remove all additions built with concrete, and replace them with traditional materials.

    6) Waterproofing work on all ceilings, parapet walls, and any other structural elements to prevent the penetration of rain water and intensification of the deterioration of buildings and ruins.

    7) Protection waterproofed surfaces, to allow pedestrian uses.

    8) Repair and maintenance of drainage channels of water in and out of the strengths, to allow free flow of rainwater into the sea.

    9) Repair rainwater tanks inside the strengths and installation of submersible pumps to discharge water directly into the sea or existing water channels, avoiding unnecessary water pressure on the outside walls and foundations.

    10) Complete selective restoration of a limited number of strengths in order to determine actual costs of conservation and establish final standards for finishes and structural treatment to be followed in all future preservation work in Portobelo and San Lorenzo. Cal, wood, stone, brick, etc.. shall be procured locally as much as possible. The extracted material must also be reused when possible.

    11) The second phase trabajo conservation will focus on rehabilitation for tourist purposes, Cultural Studies, educational workshops, etc.. in view of sustainable management and maintenance.

    Titled, “Monitoring”, Panamanian authorities say the main action carried out during the year 2013 It was a slope stabilization project in the adjacent fortifications of Santiago that were affected by landslides in December hill 2010. This project was monitored by the “Technical Unit of the Office of Casco Antiguo”, in charge of monitoring the Management Plan for World Heritage Sites in Panama. The Management Plan was adopted by Resolution No. 186 DNPH (this means, which is a resolution, the National Institute of Culture through its National Heritage – DNPH), published in the Official Gazette No. 27387 of 3 October 2013. The abstract ends, indicating that the file monitoring presented below (in the full document, that is the internet) is presented in the format established by the Management Plan.

      ***End Summary Summary ***

    ON THE PLAN OF MANAGEMENT OF PANAMA UNESCO SITES

    For information on all of you, Resolution No. facilitated them. 186 DNPH de 2013 (Dé click aquí), and inserted in the Official Gazette No. 27387 of 3 October 2013 (Dé click aquí).

    Although the title of the Resolution reads, “Whereby the management plan of UNESCO sites approves Panama”, only refers to two (2) of the five (5) Panamanian registry sites on the World Heritage List. The three natural World Heritage sites Panamanians still managed by the National Environmental Authority (The Centre), not by the National Heritage (DNPH) the National Institute of Culture (INAC). Means for, property consists of the Old Town of Panama and the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo, and property consists of fortifications in Portobelo and San Lorenzo.

    World Heritage Panamanian / Panamanian World Heritage

    World Heritage Panamanian / Panamanian World Heritage

    This plan is outlined in a simple resolution, elaborada for the DNPH. It consists of five paragraphs and three resolved, in the first of which consists of a list of 20 plan objectives.

    The second pre-determined points to existing authorities to Resolution, somehow that will support compliance objectives listed in the first resolved.

    It is very striking that the second does not mention resolved Patronage Portobelo San Lorenzo, nor the Patronato Panama Viejo, currently managing the respective sites present on the board INAC, everyone.

    The third resolved signals the start date of the plan. It ends with the legal basis, which are the Constitution of the Republic of Panama (and general), and the basic laws of Panamanian heritage: Law 14 of 1982, Law 91 of 1976 and Executive Order 51 of 2004.

    It is interesting that the Manual of Standards and Procedures for Restoration and Rehabilitation of the Old Town of Panama City, is supported by the hierarchy of Decree Law No.. 51 of 2004, by which it approved the Policy and Procedures Manual, containing inserts in articles some institutional resolutions DNPH. Certainly, Historical Monumental Complex of Old Town Panama Panama is the only monument that has its own manual of this type.

    Give thanks to UNESCO for, whose transparency policies allow us access to this information publicly available both in Panama and abroad.

    Regards,

    Katti Osorio Ugarte

    o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o
    NOTE:
    The Report Information System State of Conservation of the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS, likely to be available in July 2014, will be generated jointly by the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS international reference material for the World Heritage Committee of UNESCO at its next meeting in mid- 2014. It will incorporate information provided by Panama in its report, reports and information and materials generated specifically for the case of international experts from UNESCO advisory bodies.

    These are the latest SOC, generated by the World Heritage Centre and ICOMOS: State of Conservation (SOC), in English.

    341st anniversary of the relocation of Panama City

    Dear friends of Patrimonio Panamá:

    Today marks 341 years since the relocation of Panama City, from the place we now know as the Archaeological Site of Panama Viejo, to her current seat on the peninsula occupied by the Historic District of Panama (Casco Antiguo). The 21 th of January, 1673 is a special day, where the geopolitical importance of the strategic position of the port city of Panama in Central America was reaffirmed.

    The 21 th of January, 1673 the relocation of Panama City became official 1673 from its original seat in the ruins of Panama Viejo, to another location about eight miles away; a location we know today as Casco Antiguo, within the same city limits assigned to it by the Spanish crown's royal decree of 6 th of September, 1521. These extended from the boundary of the city of Natá, the Chame River to the West; Chepo River to the East; Nombre de Dios to the North, approximately half the distance between the two cities; and the Islands of the Pearls, to the South. Indeed, Panama City was relocated, not refounded, within its original territory, with its Cabildo (seat of municipality), its Royal Court and diocese.

    The relocation took place on 21 th of January, 1673, as Don Antonio Fernández de Córdoba executed the royal decree of 31 October 1672, by which the Spanish crown ordered the city relocated to the site called “Lancon” by building in the name of the king the houses for the Royal Court, the Cabildo, and the Cathedral Church; namely, the royal power, the Municipal power and ecclesiastical power for the government of Tierra Firme, retaining the port city on Perico Island, and giving special importance to protect the city by an enclosing wall. In the twentieth century, Panama City Council adopted the Decision No.. 59 of 13 of May 1953 officially declared 15 of August, 1519 date of foundation, considering the 21 January as the date of relocation. On the year 2019, Panama City will be 500 years old.

    UNESCO recognized Panama Viejo and Casco Antiguo as the same city, registered in two stages in the World Heritage List, in 1997 and in 2003. Its outstanding universal value is based on the same evaluation criteria for Panama Viejo and for Casco Antiguo, because the relocated city continued its original functions as terminal of maritime and terrestrial routes. Cultural exchange through the centuries, its access to the sea, and the very special setting of the rocky peninsula that protects the historic district gave rise to its urban layout, to the development of its architecture, and to its geopolitical importance, which seduced the mind of Simon Bolivar to celebrate in Panama his Amphictyonic Congress despite the state of ruin in which the city was in 1826, according to maps from the first half of the nineteenth century.

    Last year, we celebrated 500 years of the South Sea sighting by Europeans. Both events, the sighting of the South Sea (Pacific Ocean) 1513 and the founding of Panama City in 1519, are inseparable facts. With his sighting, Balboa demonstrated that this land was a new continent to the western world, and also the fact that he had gone across an isthmus. Panama City was born from the order of the Spanish empire to found a port city that would serve as a spearhead for the domain of the new sea and the rest of the continent. From it were established transisthmian routes, Camino Real and Camino de Cruces, and sea routes, linking the port of Panama with other major ports such as Acapulco and El Callao, established after the conquest travels to Mexico and Peru, creating connections that spread to Asia. Its geopolitical significance was worth the cost and effort of reactivating Panama after assault and destruction 1671, transferring it to a nearby site that would allow to quickly reactivate the port in Perico Island, and the Fairs of Portobelo on the Atlantic coast. Panama City and its history can not be interpreted without the sea that surrounds it and that gave it access to the world.

    Regards,

    Katti Osorio

    Panama, 1521

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

    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)

    Related Reading: “State of Conservation Information System Update”, and “The Historic District of Panama and Criterion (vi) of Outstanding Universal Value”

    Let's Talk About Heritage VII Session: Intangible Heritage

    Dear friends:

    Again I am writing to invite you to participate in the initiative, Let's Talk About Heritage Sessions. The theme of the Seventh Day is Heritage Talk, Intangible Heritage.

    The aim of the Let's Talk About Heritage Sessions is simple: It is, to create awareness in the general public, alleviating the lack of knowledge around issues of culture and heritage. For this, our Let's Talk About Heritage Committee coordinates monthly events, open to the general public for free; Featured panelists present on different topics, at venues related to culture and heritage.

    The objective of the Seventh Day Talk of Heritage, “Intangible Heritage”, is to share with you all approaches to the intangible cultural heritage from an international perspective to the national vision, with a case study that will be familiar and beloved. We'll traditions, vivid expressions that we inherited from our grandparents, craftsmanship, folklore and more.

    To reflect on the valuable heritage with the participation of all of you, we are sponsored by the Patronato Panama Viejo, University of Panama through the Research Centre of the Faculty of Humanities (CIFHU), National Library of Panama Ernesto J. Castillero, City of Knowledge, and the Let's Talk About Heritage Committee, in which I belong. The Let's Talk About Heritage Session: Intangible Heritage, will take place on Wednesday 30 October 2013 at 6:30 p.m., in the Multipurpose Room, on the second floor of the National Library Ernesto J. Castillero; it is in the Parque Recreativo Omar, of San Francisco, Panama City. Admission is free; reservation is not needed. Invite as many people as you wish, as always, All shall be welcome!

    On this occasion we had the participation of Professor Krishna Camarena, who will speak on intangible heritage from the international, referring to the concepts and scope of the UNESCO Convention on Intangible Heritage; we also have the participation of Professor Dolores Pérez Cordero, who will refer to the intangible cultural heritage at the national level, specifically to their challenges and opportunities. The accompanying Professor Marcela Camargo Rivers, we talk about history, creativity and heritage captured in Painted Hat, Panamanian intangible heritage. Professor Marcela Camargo Rivers will be both, our moderator. You will find attached to this post the front and back of the invitation card, with details about the talks, and short biography of each of our exhibitors, and our moderator.

    Admission is free; you are very cordially invited. Come and listen, ask, find out about a thousand interesting things; come with us and let's talk about heritage again.

    Best Regards,

    Katti Osorio Ugarte
    Let's Talk About Heritage Committee
    jornadashtobtheemosdepatrimonio@gmaithe.com

    Front of invitation card

    Front of invitation card

    Reverse invitation card

    Reverse invitation card

    Canal de YouTube, “Heritage Panama”

    Friends, I announce with joy the opening of the Panama Canal Heritage YouTube.

    The aim of the Panama Canal Heritage YouTube is put at its disposal a range of lists (playlists) Videos related to heritage and culture, especially Panama. In the future we will have some videos themselves.

    Hitherto, The following lists are:

    • Random in Panama / Panama at random. It's a list of interesting videos, Panama related to generally.
    • Panamanian Culture / Panamanian culture. It is a list of related videos to culture in Panama, ethnically diverse, human groups and indigenous cultural expressions that represent various aspects of Panama as a country.
    • Historic Sites in Panama / Historic sites in Panama. Contains videos showing historic sites Panamanians, sights, monumental, parks, squares and other related to Panamanian history.
    • Historic district of Panama / Casco Antiguo of Panama. Videos that show aspects of the Old Town of the City of Panama and thus document changes in it over time.
    • Great vids related to cultural heritage / Related Videos wonderful al cultural heritage. This list is a bit irreverent; contains Videos (as you find them) with unconventional views on cultural heritage, fun music and artistic expressions (and some not so funny).
    • Natural heritage in Panama / Natural heritage in Panama. Videos about nature in Panama and beauty.
    • UNESCO and World Heritage / UNESCO and world heritage. List of educational topics generated by UNESCO, or related to protected sites under the World Heritage Convention 1972 (UNESCO).

    To access the Panama Canal Heritage on YouTube, press the button:

    Panama Heritage on YouTube

    Historic Panama Canal YouTube
    Historic Panama YouTube Channel

    I hope you enjoy my selection of videos, PatrimonioPanama.com and some videos that go slowly adding in the future.

    As always, Thanks for your visit.