The UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property was adopted in Paris on 14 November 1970. It came into force on 24 April 1972. It took over 30 years for the first Meeting of States Parties to the Convention to take place on 15 October 2003. The second meeting, the subject of this report, took place after a shorter period of about nine years, on 20–21 June 2012. A Meeting of States Parties to a treaty is primarily a forum to discuss and agree on measures that can be taken to improve its effectiveness and the realization of the aims and objectives of the instrument. Accordingly, the meeting was tasked with examining in depth the impact of the measures taken by States Parties to the Convention in order to optimize its implementation, and also to consider and approve whatever efficacious measures should be taken for its best functioning.

The Director General of UNESCO, Irina Bokova, opened the meeting through a recorded message welcoming participants to the second Meeting of States Parties. She stressed UNESCO's readiness to work with Member States to raise awareness of the problem of the illicit trafficking of cultural objects, and that the protection of cultural objects is the protection of societies, peoples, and communities. The meeting elected Carlos de Icaza, Ambassador of Mexico and Permanent Delegate, as Chairperson. It also elected members from Cambodia, Egypt, Greece, and Senegal as Vice Chairpersons, and Henrietta Galambos of Hungary was elected as the Rapporteur.

Three issues arising from the Secretariat's document provoked lengthy discussion. These are the proposals to accomplish effective implementation of the 1970 Convention. They are revision of the Convention, creation of additional instrument, and the creation of a monitoring body. Whereas Article 25 of the Convention makes provision for the procedure to be followed in the event of its revision, the Convention does not lay down any procedure to be followed for the addition of provisions to supplement or complement the existing articles. There is also a lacuna with regard to the establishment of a monitoring body. The legal implications of a revision of the instrument make the proposition unattractive. With regard to the creation of a complementary or supplementary instrument, the logistics of the creation of a new instrument or another protocol make that proposition also uninviting, considering furthermore the adoption and ongoing implementation of the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention, which is a complement to the 1970 Convention and has to be considered as a de facto protocol.

Unlike the Culture Sector's other Conventions,Footnote ¹ the 1970 Convention has no provision for a monitoring body. Therefore monitoring has been carried out by three separate bodies: the Committee on Conventions and Recommendations of the UNESCO Executive Board, the Meeting of States Parties to 1970 (which had only met once and was convening for the second time), and the UNESCO Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in Case of Illicit Appropriation. The Committee on Conventions monitors the operation of the convention through the four yearly reports submitted by Member States on the implementation of the instrument at the national level. The second body, the Meeting of States Parties, which was held prior to the meeting (and is the subject of this report), met only once, that is, in 2003. In fact, the body that has supervised the implementation of the instrument all these years has been the Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in Case of Illicit Appropriation. The committee was established in 1978 to deal with, among other things, cases of return or restitution that could not be resolved either by the 1970 Convention or by any other multilateral or bilateral instrument. It held its first session in 1980 and had its 18th session the day after the second Meeting of States Parties to the 1970 Convention.

The committee has in effect become the de facto monitoring body for the Convention. And over the years it has recorded notable achievements, including adoption of an International Code of Ethics for Dealers in Cultural Property, establishment of a Database of National Cultural Heritage Laws, Model Export Certificate for Cultural Objects, Mediation and Conciliation Procedures (Rules of Procedure), and model provisions defining State Ownership of Cultural Property. But it would appear that the argument that the 1970 Convention should not continue to be the only exception to a specifically designated monitoring body triumphed, and the meeting adopted the establishment of an 18-member monitoring committee that will meet every year, while the Meeting of States Parties would meet once every two years. The meeting also agreed that the provisions will be included in the Rules of Procedure of the Meetings of States Parties. One of the fundamental tasks of the Subsidiary Committee will be to draft operative guidelines aiming at facilitating the implementation of the Convention in the States Parties. These guidelines will be submitted to the Meeting of States Parties for adoption.

After almost two days of protracted and contentious debates, the meeting concluded on an informative note, with presentations on regional implementation of the 1970 Convention from experts who reported on the situation in Africa, the Arab States, Asia, the Caribbean, Europe, North America, and South America. The papers discussed the successes and difficulties over the years in the operation of the Convention. They also indicated the way forward and how to achieve a reduction if not the total elimination of the pillaging of archaeological sites and illicit trafficking in cultural property. These papers and other documentation are available on the UNESCO website.