Jakarta, 17-18 April 2008
Rapporteur: Mohammad Reiza
Indonesian National Commission for UNESCO Office
Depdiknas Building C, 17th floor
16 April 2008
12.00 – 12.30
Registration
12.30 – 13.30
Lunch and Praying
Lunch is provided in the office of Indonesian National Commission for UNESCO.
13.00 – 13.10
Opening Remarks by Prof. Dr, Arief Rachman, M.Pd., Executive Chairman of Indonesian National Commission for UNESCO
Prof. Arief briefly explains the contents of the preparation meeting and thanks everyone for coming to the meeting. He then thanks Frank Proschan of UNESCO Paris to come to Indonesia and gives the time to him for the workshop information session.
13.10 – 13.45
Explanation for Workshop (Objective outcome, term of reference, moderator, pkenary and facilitator for working group) by. Mr. Frank Proschan (UNESCO Office Paris)
Mr. Frank Proschan thanks Pak Arief and everyone for joining the preparation meeting today and the two-day workshop later. In certain way, this is not the best time to have the workshop within the convention, we are in anxious waiting. The committee has been drafting into something real for about 18 months. The committee has to present the recommendation to the general assembly in the middle of June. And the General Assembly has the authority to approve the recommendation and so that the convention can begin the international cooperation. Thus, something may change in June.
Its also good time because Indonesia recently state party in the convention that takes active roles through the General assembly and the General Assembly and has active observer in the committee. It’s the beginning of the biennium, and UNESCO Jakarta assists Indonesia in the mechanism and the programme towards the convention to come alive. This is a good opportunity to layout what can be carried on. The workshop should identify certain priority what Indonesia would like to see.
The workshop is to layout all those concerns, some of the conventions, as some of them are not negotiable. Is also about what Indonesia ratifies, certain framework. The convention can’t interfere domestic issue, the policies and activities. In this case, UNESCO can provide technical assistance, and ultimately assist the implementation. We wanted to structure the workshop with a couple of things, that is conveying reports or explanatory information, to bring to the current thinking of the committee or the international experts in the secretariat; as the form of exchange and identification of the foundation of the implementation of the convention.
We also find often, within many countries they don’t know what each other is doing. Not only bilateral exchange but also among Indonesian colleagues. The next morning, there should be something to outline to help to create the public feasibility that may be needed to precede the programme of the workshop. And hopefully with that we can move quickly. We also have case study presentations.
Now I would like to discuss the schema briefly, as we will be using it throughout the workshop (schema attached in separate paper): “Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage,” We have been developing the schema in hope to explain the basic tools of the state party, the viability of world heritage, for now and many generation to come. It is about the transmission of culture.
In December 2007, we had small group international experts, the members of the drafting committee to draft keyword essays; we prepared seven of the words of the schema. Later, working groups will discuss some of the words in the schema but what we really hope that people will tell us that some of these are not correct or suitable with the working condition. International consensus only can be built with the respective of local conception.
With some of the staffs from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, some of the participants to layout based on what they know according their backgrounds. We will avoid too many participants from the same institutions in the same working group, because this will not be creative. Each group will have rapporteur, and ask the rapporteur to present the results of the working group discussion.
He then briefly explains the procedure of the first day of the workshop. In the second day, we identify the intangible cultural heritage in the territory, together with the concerned community and NGOs. The oldest intangible inventory has come across in 1365. People keep that for man many centuries. We would much rather say that in the beginning of new inventory, the experiences of Indonesia and how those experiences are adjusted towards the convention. They have to be connected somehow with the state party and the community. Community makes the resources of information.
We want to layout in general, what the range of option and what state party has. Things should be negotiable and suitable. He then discusses the outlines of the “Steps taken in the Inventory of Intangible Cultural Heritage.” We begin to identify what kind of questions to ask when conducting research on inventory of intangible cultural heritage. We need helps to identify the questions towards common understanding, of what we can use in our exercise.
This handout is also used in other workshop, i.e. in Vietnam. We are going to have only 45 minutes on Friday; we will just make the general framework. In the afternoon we turn to the last topic, the provision describing international cooperation of the convention. We can begin discussion on Friday, what we expect of the process – what is it going to be. We are encouraging state party begins with those things that seem clear unarguable, what comes in June.
He finally opens the forum for open discussion and questions.
13.45 – 15.00
Question and Answers
Serano Sianturi, …. Foundation, I have several questions: the outcomes expected from these four issues. What kind of practices that has been done, or we should propose something new; second question is about my role, am I about to stimulate or to share my experiences or knowledge, and how if I have my own approach: community decides what is intangible cultural heritage and what is not. How does the convention define the points of intangible cultural heritage?
Frank Porshan, how the group share thought that rapporteur can share with other large groups and bring those back to the plenary and talk why the working group facilitator. Facilitators are to be in the working groups to be guide of the participants to share experiences of others. What are the agreements and disagreements are. That’s’ taken from the convention, that cant be re-written, and if not suitable with Indonesian context, Indonesia should not ratify the convention. It’s what the convention is calling for. We try to understand about the draft and resolute them. We accept interesting new ideas. Viability is not compatible, the authenticity, what is authentic and what is not. It is a State Party to reintroduce the notion of authenticity, but not overturning the basic conception. There are certain elements of heritage in Indonesia that may be determine what is relevant, documentable.
Prof. Arief, facilitators should have very strong and clear about the idea of the convention itself. He asks Ms. Sri of KNIU to hand out the conventions to the facilitators. How do you safeguard and what should you do, like adopting the general policy. This could be developed during the working group discussion. We just see the common ground what can come up during the discussion.
Serano Sianturi, I also want to know my room and capacity in the working group discussion because the convention might be different from what I experience in the field.
Frank Porschan, what I can suggest is to read the convention, but the convention itself is not that transparent, meaning to say that people have to analyze and understand that actual context of the convention. How to make it real or concrete the general participation and we have to explore it further to move the dialogue.
Prof. Edi, at least through the workshop, we can identify what kind of problems that might appear. We have many ethnic groups in Indonesian, even some of the groups can be identified in more colonies. What kind of outcome that we might get through the workshop.
Suparmin Sunjoyo, International Relations of Senawangi, Indonesian Wayang Secretariat. I wonder why the convention makes distinction between revitalization and revival. It is mentioned in the handout. He highlights the points. I would like to know more, based on what ground the convention differentiates these two points. My role tomorrow is that engaging cooperation between Senawangi and UNESCO. He explains briefly about the current condition of “Sanggar” in Indonesia.
Frank Proschan, you bring about important point in the working group; formal or non-formal education. I think that be the questions about the revitalization, but if we understand that the convention is a living tradition, we then understand the definition that goes there that are practiced through generations. The question is whether that to ring it from the death. Many of the experts say that it may be valuable but it is not part of the convention. The convention is to give new strength; to make sure the next generations to have access. It is not for me to say right or wrong.
Prof. Edi, gives an example in Indonesia about the point in the convention: revitalization and revival.
Frank, I give another word “resuscitate.” Again it is not a question whether it is right or wrong, but whether we want to emphasize it or not. It is not protected in the convention. But the example that you gave is actually what revitalization is about. That is the kind of example.
Gaura, regarding revitalization, my suggestion is to ask the rapporteurs to bring along laptop to help the working groups, especially to help Prof Edi. The document has been translated in Indonesia and in total about 75 pages; case studies to be presented into Indonesian. It is very important to involve the community and we have to put the documents in Indonesian. Two more small points-suggestions that are familiar to everybody; Im suggesting wayang. Also regarding the convention, there are two version: interdepartmental committee, and translated by the state secretary.
Frank says the document is translated into 6 official working languages of UNESCO; even between English and French translation, there are profound points. He then briefly explains the problems of the translated convention. We create more problems and difficulties and in many cases, the preparation of the translation has been very difficult and it is an investment of a lot of time and the solution is never perfect. If this can’t be solved legally, solve it practically. Transmission is also important. The transmission that may be oriented for outsiders or institutions i.e schools or formal and non-formal education reinforce new concept.
Mr. Yunus, How will we divide the participants into the groups?
Frank, what I can understand about the plan, that should be during the morning session, based on what they know, their experience but not putting people into the groups that they are not interested. Or the simple way is to count, but it will create another problem that people have to think about things that they are not capable of or interested in.
Prof. Arief suggests an idea about group division; to count and to give freedom to choose the groups, in which they are interested.
Frank says regarding Mr. Yunus’ questions that the committee drafted the convention, but the members didn’t have to vote to come up with the consensus. What is important is that we have to be honest and aware of what we are doing. It is not something that the convention gives very clear guidance. Process of the inventory must be done with the participation of the community and staffs of NGOs. UNESCO provides assistance to the ministry of Culture in Vietnam, and one of the things they found that community was very important. Community has no role in research, community there to provide information for research. The consensus was moving to different direction. Some of the State Party said that the extent of the community is to provide information for research not to research their selves. Vietnamese government provides system for national inventory.
If a state has to decide to use one system of inventory, it is mentioned in the convention. If a State has to decide to use several inventory system, it is also permitted under the convention.
Prof. Edi, I would like to talk about the national network. We can develop data structure. I want to ask if UNESCO is planning to organize a workshop on data structure for all kinds of cultural property rights. In case of legal protection, this can be used against inappropriate action of other parties.
Frank, for the data structure. The skeleton data structure, which is to say that this is the kind of things that is the same in almost all inventory. This is common enough that this is the way of organizing information. It needs general framework. The question: what would be a got tradition that we can use for the practice on Friday morning.
Prof. Arief, what would be the best methodology for inventory? There is strength of intangible culture to a country. When you try to identify yourself as culturally rich. The boundary is that when there is clear distinction. In this workshop, I want to conduct open-ended discussion and more tolerant to differences, duplication, etc. We are going to have tough session during the press conference. He explains further about the procedures of the press conference.
Frank urges anyone who got an interesting idea how to conduct the inventory practice on Friday morning.
Prof. Arief explains that the most common question that the media will ask is that, “What is the benefit for Indonesia to ratify this convention?”
Frank says that the international aspect of the convention is the opportunity of international cooperation not international competition. The core of the convention is what the convention is about to bring for exchange and understanding as well as competitiveness.
Prof. Arief thanks everyone and says that this will be good for our nation and officially closes the preparation meeting.
