ICH Joint meeting of the Subsidiary Body and Consultative Body for the 2013 cycle 4 and 5 April 2013 Room XI, 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.

ICH Timetable in the ODs 31 March: Nominations submitted by the States Parties April to September: Nomination files assessed by the Secretariat and completed by the States Parties December to June: Nomination files evaluated by the Subsidiary and Consultative Bodies November: Nomination files examined by the Committee Inscription decision

ICH Effective timetable for 2013 cycle 31 March: Nominations submitted by the States Parties April to September: Nomination files assessed by the Secretariat and completed by the States Parties December to June: Nomination files evaluated by the Subsidiary and Consultative Bodies November: Nomination files examined by the Committee 31 March 2012: Nominations submitted by the States Parties October 2012 to April 2013: Nomination files assessed by the Secretariat and completed by the States Parties April to July 2013: Nomination files evaluated by the Subsidiary and Consultative Bodies December 2013: Nomination files examined by the Committee

ICH Division of labour Secretariat Registers files Assesses technical completeness Facilitates work of bodies, Committee Drafts recommendations from evaluators’ comments Drafts reports of bodies Evaluating body Evaluates quality of nominations Assesses compliance with criteria Assesses conformity with prior Committee decisions Identifies transversal issues Addresses recommendations Committee Decides on compliance with criteria Decides on conformity with prior Committee decisions Addresses considerations to submitting States Addresses considerations to States Parties in general

ICH Secretariat Technical assistance Evaluating body Evaluates and recommends Committee Decides on inscription Division of labour

ICH Functions of the Secretariat  Registers and uploads the nomination files, proposals and requests (original and revised versions)  Assesses the technical requirements, particularly as provided in Decisions 7.COM 11 and 7.COM 20.2  Establishes a password-protected dedicated website and on-line evaluation system  Prepares a report and draft recommendations

ICH What is technical assessment? The Secretariat assesses the technical requirements established by ODs, forms and instructions, and Committee decisions. Decision 7.COM 11, paragraph 18: ‘…nominations that do not comply strictly with the following technical requirements will be considered incomplete and cannot consequently be transmitted by the Secretariat for evaluation and examination but will be returned to the submitting States that may complete them for a subsequent cycle…:

ICH What is technical assessment? Decision 7.COM 11 paragraph 18, continued (paraphrased): a.A response is provided in each and every section; b.Maximum word counts are respected; c.Evidence of free, prior and informed consent in English or French, as well as the language of the community; d.Evidence of inclusion in an inventory (may be a functioning hyperlink); e.Edited video of not more than ten minutes is provided, subtitled in English or French.

ICH What is technical assessment? Decision 7.COM 20.2 cross-references decisions 7.COM 7, 7.COM 8 & 7.COM 11, making each binding on all processes  Requirements had already been reflected in forms and instructions, as well as in initial treatment by Secretariat for 2013 files  Since 2013 was first cycle to apply these decisions, States Parties were informed of technical deficiencies and provided seven days to correct them

ICH What requirements are not part of technical assessment? 7.COM and previous Committees also adopted several instructions to States that are not technically disqualifying but are subject to the assessment of CB or SB, e.g.:  Avoid inappropriate language  Demonstrate mutual respect  Avoid copy-and-paste  Provide information in proper place  Describe nature, characteristics of inventory  Etc. See 7.COM INF.7 Rev. (transversal issues) for index to such instructions.

ICH Working methods of the Secretariat  Registration of original files and technical assessment  First letter to submitting States requesting additional information  Registration of revised files; second technical assessment  Second chance in case of technically incomplete file (one week to complete)  Revised file and supporting documents uploaded on the interface

ICH Functions of the evaluating bodies Consultative Body Urgent Safeguarding List Best Safeguarding Practices International Assistance Subsidiary Body Representative List

ICH Composition of the Subsidiary Body Electoral groupState Member EG ISpain EG IICzech Republic EG IIIPeru EG IVJapan EG V (a)Nigeria EG V (b)Morocco

ICH Composition of the Consultative Body Six accredited NGOsSix independent experts Maison des cultures du monde, France Egil Sigmund Bakka, Norway International Council for Traditional Music, Slovenia Rusudan Tsurtsumia, Georgia Centro de Trabalho Indigenista, Brazil Kris Rampersad, Trinidad and Tobago Centre for Research, Support and Development of Culture, Viet Nam Rahul Goswami, India The Cross-cultural Foundation of Uganda (CCFU), Uganda Claudine-Augée Angoué, Gabon جمعية لقاءات للتربية والثقافات / Association Cont’Act pour l’éducation et les cultures, Morocco Annie Tohme-Tabet, Lebanon

ICH Functions of the evaluating bodies  Evaluate whether criteria for inscription are satisfied, based on: Nominations and supporting documentation Recommendations (if any) from the former bodies Previous decisions of the Committee (if any)  Draft recommendations to the Committee to inscribe, not to inscribe, or (for SB) to refer the nomination to submitting State for additional information

ICH Referral option (SB only) Opportunity to State to correct problems of technical details lacking, without waiting four years to resubmit Important to:  Distinguish between NO and referral  Identify clearly where State must improve its nomination Decision 7.COM 11: SB should make ʻ limited and coherent use of referral so that it is only applied to cases concerning the lack of technical detail ʼ

ICH Working methods of the bodies Individual evaluations through a password- protected, dedicated website Two batches, since not all files available at the beginning Individual evaluations collated by Secretariat During June/July meeting, collective evaluation of each file resulting in a consensus recommendation

ICH Challenges during evaluation Important to:  Maintain consistency from year to year, and from one State to another, but also  Evaluate files according to evolving standards and jurisprudence  Provide useful feedback to State (whether positive or negative), rather than generalities Credibility of the inscription process rests largely on your shoulders

ICH Reports of the bodies to the Committee The report of each body includes:  an overview of files and working methods  general observations on files evaluated and additional recommendations  recurrent and transversal issues  draft decisions

ICH Structure of draft decisions  Summary of the file (drafted by Secretariat)  Criteria (satisfied and/or not satisfied)  Draft decision (standard language to inscribe, not to inscribe, or to refer)  Additional considerations addressed to submitting State (CB only)

ICH Functions of the Committee Based on the nominations and draft recommendations of the bodies, the Committee decides:  to inscribe or not to inscribe (USL, RL, BSP), or to refer (RL only)  to grant or not to grant international assistance Committee bases its decisions on the same information that was available to the bodies, although it may reach a different conclusion

ICH During the Committee meeting  Rapporteurs present the working methods used, main results and transversal issues through their reports  Chairpersons present the files evaluated, the main points of the debate on each file and the draft decision  Members speak through reports, Chairpersons and Rapporteurs that present consensus views