I. THE INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE CONVENTION IN INDONESIAN LAW

In 2003, at its 32nd session, the General Assembly of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (hereinafter “UNESCO”) adopted the Convention on the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage (hereinafter “ICHC” or “Convention”).^{Footnote 1} The Convention was the first internationally binding instrument centering on the protection of intangible cultural heritage (hereinafter “ICH”), which includes musical works, dances, rituals, and ceremonies, as well as all the tangible elements associated with them,^{Footnote 2} and to this day it remains the only treaty focused on the subject. For a multilateral treaty, the ICHC is very successful: as of May 2014 it had 161 States Parties^{Footnote 3} and counting. The Convention focuses on “safeguarding,” which it defines as:

The core of the Convention is a series of interconnected activities to ensure for ICH not only survival, but also sustainability. The Convention intends for ICH to be maintained by (to “live” among) the peoples, and to be inheritable to their future generations.

The safeguarding-centric obligations binding upon the States Parties under the Convention are two-tiered: obligations at the national level and those at the international level. At the national level, States Parties are expected to, inter alia, draw up one or more inventories listing all identified elements of ICH that are present in their respective territories. At the international level, they are, inter alia, encouraged to nominate their items (“elements”) of ICH for inscription—depending on the situation with respect to each element—on one of the lists: the Representative List of the ICH of Humanity^{Footnote 5} (hereinafter “Representative List”) or the List of ICH in Need of Urgent Safeguarding^{Footnote 6} (hereinafter “Urgent Safeguarding List”).

Indonesia delivered its instrument of acceptance of the ICHC to UNESCO on October 15, 2007,^{Footnote 7} and the Convention entered into force for the State on January 15, 2008.^{Footnote 8} For implementation of this Convention at the national level, the Presidential Regulation 78 of 2007 was enacted.^{Footnote 9} This is a peculiar move, because Article 11 of the Indonesian Treaty Act provides that Presidential Regulations shall be enacted for implementation of treaties at the national level only in cases where the treaty in question does not belong in any of the following categories of treaty subject to adoption by an Act under Article 10:^{Footnote 10}

1. a. Political affairs, national peace, defense, and security;

2. b. Modification to or determination of the Indonesian national territory;

3. c. Sovereignty and the sovereign rights of the State;

4. d. Human rights and the environment;

5. e. Enactment of a new legal norm; and

6. f. Foreign loans and/or grants.

The ICHC should have been treated as a treaty under (d), because one of its most determined goals is to ensure the right of the relevant communities or groups or individuals to partake in the management of their ICH.^{Footnote 11} Indonesia has yet to enact a specific statutory regulation with respect to ICH. There is Act 11 of 2010,^{Footnote 12} enacted in repeal of Act 5 of 1992,^{Footnote 13} on cultural objects, but neither it nor its 1992 predecessor affords any protection for intangible culture, as they focus on cultural sites and objects, i.e., the tangible. Acceptance of the ICHC by Indonesia therefore should have presented an opportunity for the State to enact a new legal norm specifically in order to deal with the safeguarding of ICH; to adopt the Convention by means of an act, instead of a presidential regulation, would have been more consistent. However, Indonesia’s inconsistent practice with respect to national instruments implementing treaties at the national level^{Footnote 14} suggests that even though it was adopted via Presidential Regulation, it was nevertheless still possible for the ICHC to inspire the enactment of a new law specifically on ICH. In 2009, the Joint Regulation by Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Culture and Tourism numbers 40 and 42 on Guidelines to the Conservation of Culture (hereinafter “Joint Ministerial Regulation”) was issued. While the Joint Ministerial Regulation indeed takes the ICHC into consideration^{Footnote 15} and defines inventorying as a necessary activity in the conservation of culture,^{Footnote 16} it does not specify how an inventory should be drawn up and what information should be provided on it. So far, no institution under either ministry has issued any regulatory document on the drawing up of national ICH inventory. This means that, on the one hand, there is a clear international obligation for Indonesia as a State Party to the ICHC, but that, on the other hand, there is a lacuna in Indonesian law as to how that obligation should be carried out.

This apparent gap in the law was allegedly caused by a consistent lack of funding for the cultural sector.^{Footnote 17} The enactment of new legislation would be consequent of the establishment of State agencies for the implementation thereof; in this case there would be (a) committee(s) which would oversee the safeguarding of ICH in Indonesia and make sure the State fulfills its national obligation under the Convention. It is ironic that the government seems to perceive cultural affairs as an afterthought, because since 2008, tourism has been the second biggest contributor to the Indonesian national income after the export of natural resources,^{Footnote 18} and cultural tourism is an elemental part thereof. With the 2014 national budget not seeming to allocate a specific portion of spending for cultural affairs,^{Footnote 19} one might be inclined to conclude that no such regulation concerning ICH would be enacted any time soon, even though the State already has enough motivations to do so: it would be an effective means to ensure legal certainty for the protection of ICH as a vital part of the income source from cultural tourism, as well as show that Indonesia is wholesomely fulfilling its obligations under the ICHC.

II. INDONESIA’S ICH INVENTORIES

The drawing up of inventories of intangible cultural heritage by Indonesia had in reality been done long before the ICHC.^{Footnote 20} Efforts have been made in both a centralized and a non-centralized manner to list the elements of cultural heritage found in the respective areas. Before the entry into force of ICHC for Indonesia, the ministry had already prepared an ICH Inventory Unit for the collection of ICH data all over the country.^{Footnote 21} Following Indonesia’s acceptance of the ICHC the drawing up and maintenance of national inventory became organized under a different arrangement.

Pertinent in the discourse concerning Indonesia’s implementation of the inventory obligation under the ICHC is the Practical Handbook for Inventory of ICH of Indonesia (hereinafter “Handbook”). Published jointly by UNESCO and the Indonesian government following Indonesia’s acceptance of the ICHC,^{Footnote 22} the Handbook contains the result of a comparative study by the Indonesian government toward implementing the inventory obligation under the ICHC, in which the respective Chinese, Japanese, and Korean inventories were studied, as well as guidelines for the establishment of national ICH inventories.^{Footnote 23} The absence of statutory regulation with regard to ICH inventory in Indonesia makes the Handbook the go-to source—a “soft law”—for the implementation of the inventory obligation under the ICHC.

The Handbook provides that there are two kinds of inventory for Indonesia: the manual inventory and the online inventory. The manual inventory shall be filled with elements of ICH by anyone who has identified an element on Indonesian soil, completed a standard form, and submitted them to the Sekretariat Pusat Pencatatan Warisan Budaya Takbenda Indonesia (lit. “Central Secretariat for Documentation of the ICH of Indonesia”) under the-then Ministry of Culture and Tourism (now Ministry of Culture, Primary and Secondary Education, hereinafter “Ministry”). The information submitted will be assessed by a verification team and, if all requirements are met, will be recorded in the inventory. This manual inventory is kept in the form of a database accessible to four categories of user: UNESCO (for documentation), government (for guidelines in policymaking), researchers, and the public.^{Footnote 24}

It is not uncommon for ICHC States Parties to draw up online inventories of the ICH present in their respective territories;^{Footnote 25} the second variant of the Indonesian ICH inventory takes shape precisely in this online form. In fact, the initiative by Indonesia before the entry into force of ICHC was in the form of an online inventory; a map of Indonesian culture was initiated as an ICH Inventory (ICHI) of Indonesia in 2004 by the Directorate for Art and Cultural Values and Film under the ministry. ICHI was planned for a 2008 launch, but in 2014 no trace thereof was found online.^{Footnote 26}

In the Handbook it is provided that any member of the public may contribute to the identification of ICH present in the Indonesian soil by submitting a completed form (hereinafter “reporter” and “form,” respectively) on the web site http://www.budaya-indonesia.org (hereinafter “Online Inventory 1”). There will be a Super Administrator (indicated in the Handbook as an “Expert Team”), which will “finalize information regarding cultural elements to be inventoried as ICH.”^{Footnote 27} The inventoried elements will be “published in the interactive page” and available to everyone who visits the web site.^{Footnote 28}

The web site seemingly contains elements of ICH identified as present on Indonesian territory. The elements are distributed under two classes: Kategori (lit. “category”) or Provinsi (lit. “province”). As of November 30, 2014, under Kategori, there are the following families containing clickable elements of cultural heritage:

• • Alat Musik (lit. “musical instrument”), 600 elements;

• • Cerita Rakyat (lit. “folktale”), 495 elements;

• • Makanan Minuman (food and beverages), 1897 elements;

• • Motif Kain (lit. “clothing motive”), 665 elements;

• • Musik dan Lagu (lit. ‘music and song’), 531 elements;

• • Naskah Kuno dan Prasasti (lit. “ancient scripture and inscription”), 121 elements;

• • Ornamen (lit. “ornament”), 350 elements;

• • Pakaian Tradisional (lit. “traditional clothing”), 190 elements;

• • Permainan Tradisional (lit. “traditional game”), 189 elements;

• • Produk Arsitektur (lit. “architectural product”), 479 elements;

• • Ritual (lit. “rite”), 447 elements;

• • Seni Pertunjukan (lit. “performance art”), 250 elements;

• • Senjata dan Alat Perang (lit. “weapons and war equipment”), 150 elements;

• • Tarian (lit. “dance”), 679 elements; and

• • Tata Cara Pengobatan dan Pemeliharaan Kesehatan (lit. “medical and healthcare procedure”), 38 elements.

If one of the elements is clicked, details pertaining thereto would be revealed: Kategori, Elemen Budaya (lit. “cultural element,” but it often shows the same information as Kategori), Provinsi, and Asal Daerah (lit. “area of origin,” which basically is the more detailed area within the province). Under the four points is usually a description of what the element is, how it is used/maintained, etc., and in some cases, photographs showing the element in use/practice. As of November 30, 2014, Online Inventory 1 stores a total of 7,084 elements of ICH.^{Footnote 29} So far, it looked quite simple: there were two kinds of inventory, the manual and the online. However, the case with the online inventory had not been as straightforward as it seemed, because a second web site, which seems to also function as an inventory, had been found.

At an unknown date, the Directorate of Cultural Internalization and Diplomacy, under the Ministry’s Directorate-General of Culture, launched the web site http://warisanbudayaindonesia.info ^{Footnote 30} (hereinafter “Online Inventory 2”), titled Registrasi Warisan Budaya Tak Benda (lit. “registry of ICH”). The web site lists, as of November 30, 2014, 2,661 elements of ICH present in Indonesian territory, in a table consisting of five columns: No. (lit. “number”), Nama Karya Budaya (name of the element), Lokasi (lit. “location”), Tanggal Registrasi (lit. “registration date”), and Keterangan (remarks).

The web site also provides a brief explanation regarding what it is and what it does in the manner of a frequently asked questions (FAQ) section:

1. 1. Apa itu Warisan Budaya Takbenda? (lit. “What is ICH?”)

2. 2. Wujud Warisan Budaya Takbenda (lit. “The forms of ICH”)

3. 3. Apa itu Registrasi Warisan Budaya Takbenda Nasional? (“What is the registry of the national ICH?”)

4. 4. Apa Tujuan Registrasi Warisan Budaya Takbenda Nasional? (lit. “What are the objectives of the registry of the national ICH?”)

5. 5. Apa Saja yang Perlu Dicatat? (“What are the elements that need to be documented?”)

6. 6. Mengapa Perlu Didaftar dan Dicatat? (lit. “Why does there need to be documentation and registration?”)

7. 7. Siapa yang Harus Mendaftar? (lit. “Who should register?”)

8. 8. Bagaimana Cara Melestarikan? (“How does one safeguard?”)

The explanation under each of the questions is either an almost-direct translation of ICHC provisions—specifically Article 2, paragraphs 1–2, Article 12, and Article 15—or an elucidation of the Convention’s provisions.

Each of the elements of ICH listed on Online Inventory 2 is clickable. If one is clicked, a new page will open to reveal details about that element:

1. 1. Kode (numerical designation of the element);

2. 2. Warisan Budaya (name of the element);

3. 3. Kategori (the category in which the element belongs, as provided in Article 2, paragraph 2 of the Convention);

4. 4. Sejarah (lit. “history”; brief historical account of the element);

5. 5. Nama Komunitas/organisasi /asosiasi /badan /paguyuban /kelompok social, atau perorangan penanggung jawab warisan budaya (lit. “name of the community/organization/association/body/neighborhood/social group/individual responsible for the element”);

6. 6. Persetujuan Pengusulan WARBUDNAS (lit. “approval of ICH nomination”);

7. 7. Referensi (lit. “reference”); and

8. 8. Links Terkait (lit. “relevant links”).

The ICHC provides that the States Parties thereto shall draw up “one or more inventories of the ICH present in its territory.”^{Footnote 31} Therefore, there should be no question as to which one the official inventory is, as the manual inventory, Online Inventory 1, and Online Inventory 2 could all be official inventories of ICH identified within the Indonesian territory, provided that they be drawn up by the Indonesian government.

While neither of the online inventories uses the official domain name system for governmental web sites (which, in Indonesia’s case, is “.go.id”), we can see that they both are inventories drawn up by the State. Online Inventory 1 is expressly referred to as an inventory in the Handbook,^{Footnote 32} which, as previously indicated, is an official publication of the government of Indonesia and UNESCO. Similarly, while Online Inventory 2 does not use the governmental domain name system either, there are aspects within the web site that are indicative of its official status as an online inventory:

1. 1. It contains an FAQ section using the terms of the ICHC. Online Inventory 1 does not contain any such section;

2. 2. It also contains details on the identified elements of ICH, e.g., the date the element is registered, the name of the community responsible for its maintenance, etc. This proves that Online Inventory 2 is functional, perhaps more so than Online Inventory 1, because the latter offers considerably fewer standardized headings of information on each element.

3. 3. The web site puts forth the name of Directorate of Cultural Internalization and Diplomacy under the ministry’s Directorate-General of Culture. This should be proof of official government support. In the case of Online Inventory 1, there is a specific Tentang (similar to “About Us”) page, which, once opened, shows that the web site is part of an independent effort called Inisiatif Budaya Kepulauan Indonesia (lit. “Indonesian Archipelago Cultural Initiatives/IACI”), run by three independent nongovernmental institutions:

   1. a. Perhimpunan Budaya Indonesia (lit. “Association of Indonesian Culture”);

   2. b. Jaringan Budaya Indonesia (lit. “Network of Indonesian Culture”); and

   3. c. Satuan Ekonomi Kreatif IACI (lit. “IACI Union for Creative Economics”).

The fact that Online Inventory 2 seems to carry more governmental elements than Online Inventory 1 should not mean that the latter is not official or less official than the former, because (1) as previously mentioned, the drawing of multiple inventories is allowed by the ICHC so long as they are drawn by a State Party; and (2) it is evident that both web sites are official, government-endorsed inventories. So far, these are the only two web sites that have been identified as online inventories of ICH. If, in the future, more such web sites emerge, they could also be part of the Indonesian online inventory if they are indeed drawn up by the Indonesian government.

III. THE CONSEQUENCES OF AWARENESS-RAISING FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INVENTORY OBLIGATION

In accordance with the Practical Handbook, if an element has been reported online, and the Form accessed and approved of by the Expert Team, then it must be published on the Online Inventory web site along with all the information provided and approved in the Form. This is in accordance with one of the ICHC’s purposes, which is the raising of awareness.^{Footnote 33}

The literal meaning of “aware” is “having or showing realization, perception, or knowledge.”^{Footnote 34} Awareness is comprehension of a certain situation. Without realization, perception, or knowledge with regard to something, someone cannot be considered aware. If awareness is set as a purpose, then the distribution of as much information as possible to as many people as possible becomes necessary; the more people with the realization, perception, or knowledge of something, the more awareness is realized as a purpose.

In the context of the Convention, this refers to the visibility of ICH and its value at the local, national, and international levels.^{Footnote 35} The ICHC aims at promoting the importance of cultural heritage, which is not primarily tangible, to a world that is modernizing and therefore tends to put aside everything it considers ancient or outdated if it “get[s] in the way.”^{Footnote 36} Safeguarding is regulated in the Convention at the local, national, and international levels, which, inter alia, is to invoke awareness of ICH in all people, whether in remote islands or the big cities. People who are uninformed will tend to view other cultures as “bad” or even “primitive” simply because they are different from their own;^{Footnote 37} the public at large needs to understand that there are many longstanding, “living” elements of culture that may be very different from one another, and that they need to be recognized, appreciated, and safeguarded. The more that information regarding elements of ICH is made available to the public at the local, national, and international levels, the better.

Awareness raising is one of the things the ICHC and the 1972 World Heritage Convention^{Footnote 38} (hereinafter “WHC”) have in common: both aim for the general public to be informed about cultural heritage both tangible and intangible.^{Footnote 39} The term “visibility” has also been used frequently in intergovernmental meeting sessions in preparation for the Convention to refer to the promotional effect of ICH safeguarding.^{Footnote 40} Clearly, this poses as confirmation that the purpose of the ICHC is, indeed, for as many people as possible to be aware of the values and importance of ICH; this, in turn, accords prestige, honor, and recognition to the communities/groups/individuals of the ICH.^{Footnote 41}

The drawing up of ICH inventories is essential as a step in sustaining the study of cultural resources,^{Footnote 42} and in this case, as a safeguarding measure, it must be used for awareness-raising. Members of the public must be made aware of ICH; they must be allowed access to the inventory(ies) in which the elements of ICH within the State are stored, and they must be able to access as much information as possible. People should understand which elements of ICH are maintained by which communities in which part of the State, which ones are in need of urgent safeguarding, and so on. In terms of inventory, members of the general public should enjoy a more transparent inventory; therefore, all of the information on the elements should be provided for anyone to access.

Indeed, there are instances where an inventory of ICH is closed, i.e., where the community/group/individual responsible for the ICH element does not want it to be publicly disclosed.^{Footnote 43} This means that States Parties are allowed to make inventory(ies) of secret elements of ICH, and such inventories, along with the elements inventoried therein, are not made available to the public unless there is free, prior, and informed consent by the relevant community/group/individual responsible for the element. In Indonesia’s case, this is made possible by means of the manual inventory. As the inventory is available only to the four groups of users, access may be denied to users who wish to access the inventories in which secret elements of ICH are contained. However, because the online inventory is publicly accessible, it must not be a closed one. Therefore, the general public must be made aware of the inventory, and most importantly, of the elements of ICH identified therein.

An important point to note is that the raising of awareness in the Convention means that the safeguarding of the ICH is meant to be leveled: safeguarding at the local level is expected to lead to safeguarding at the national level, which in turn is expected to pave the way to safeguarding at the international level.^{Footnote 44} Article 29, which states that each States Party is to provide a report “on the legislative, regulatory and other measures taken for the implementation of [the] Convention,”^{Footnote 45} also illustrates that States Parties’ activities in implementation of the ICHC at the national level are subject to an international obligation of reportage to the Intergovernmental Committee^{Footnote 46} of the Convention.

While it is true that inventories are to be drawn up “in a manner geared to its own situation,”^{Footnote 47} which means that the contents of a State Party’s inventory may differ from those of another State Party, it does not mean that there is no standard as to what needs to be contained in an inventory. A State Party’s inventory (i.e., a safeguarding of ICH at the national level) must lead to said State Party’s nomination and inscription of its ICH onto one of the Convention’s lists.^{Footnote 48} Of course, inscription of a State Party’s element of ICH onto one such list is subject to nomination by that State Party’s initiative, but one of the main purposes of the Convention remains awareness; anything a State Party does in terms of safeguarding must be done for the raising of awareness among as many people as possible regarding their ICH. With more information provided on the online inventory, the public is allowed a more-transparent access to the safeguarding of the ICH. With enough information, the public could become aware of which elements of ICH on the inventory are in need of urgent safeguarding and therefore urge the government to immediately nominate said elements for inclusion on the Urgent Safeguarding List. All this is in line with the Convention’s purpose of raising awareness of the general public regarding the importance of the ICH.^{Footnote 49}

Bearing in mind the ideal that national inventories should prepare States Parties for nomination, the contents of the inventory must correspond with those in the forms that States Parties fill in nomination of an element of ICH (hereinafter ‘nomination files’).^{Footnote 50} The nomination files for inscription of an element on the Representative List contain the following details, to be provided by the State(s) Party(ies):^{Footnote 51}

1. A. “State(s) Party(ies)”;

2. B. “Name of the element”;

3. C. “Name of the communities, groups, or, if applicable, individuals concerned”;

4. D. “Geographical element and range of the element”;

5. E. “Contact person for correspondence”;

6. 1. “Identification and definition of the element”;

7. 2. “Contribution to ensuring visibility and awareness and to encouraging dialogue”;

8. 3. “Safeguarding measures”;

   1. a. “Past and current efforts to safeguard the element”;

   2. b. “Safeguarding measures proposed”;

   3. c. “Competent bodies involved in safeguarding”;

9. 4. “Community participation and consent in the nomination process”;

   1. a. “Participation of communities, groups, and individuals concerned in the nomination process”;

   2. b. “Free, prior, and informed consent to the nomination”;

   3. c. “Respect for customary practices governing access to the element”;

   4. d. “Concerned community organization(s) or representative(s)”;

10. 5. “Inclusion of the element in an inventory”

11. 6. “Documentation”;

    1. a. “Appended documentation (mandatory)”;

    2. b. “Principal published references (optional)”;

12. 7. “Signatures on behalf of the State(s) Party(ies)”.

The nomination files for inscription of an element of ICH on the Urgent Safeguarding List contain pieces of information similar to those on the Representative List, except that the former contains “E. Domains represented by the element,” “2. Need for urgent safeguarding,” and the modification of several terms without change to the meaning of the words. In the Practical Handbook, the Form for a reporter to submit an ICH element contains 17 headings of information, all almost identical to those provided in the nomination files.^{Footnote 52} In order to prepare States for nomination of their ICH, the information on the Form must correspond to what is expected to be on the nomination files.

Harmonization of national inventories with the international Lists is, above all else, logical, because both the national inventories and the international Lists are basically registries of ICH. It is only right that the public be made aware of ICH through the provision of harmonious information thereof at the local, national, and international levels. It is therefore necessary for the Inventory to contain details that are needed for the State Party to nominate any of the inventoried elements of ICH to one of the Convention’s Lists.

IV. CONTENT PROBLEMS IN THE INDONESIAN ONLINE INVENTORIES

It has been established that Indonesia has two kinds of inventory of ICH: the manual and the online. Based on the Convention’s purpose to raise awareness, the manual inventory must contain details that correspond to those on the nomination files, and all of those details must be made available to any requester from the four categories of user, provided that the details are regarding a non-secret element of ICH. Similarly, the online inventory must contain details that are expected to be on the nomination files, and, since the inventory is accessible on an interactive page on the Internet, the details must be displayed in their entirety on the web site. While it is evident that the categories of information contained in the Form for Indonesian online inventory correspond well enough to those in the nomination files for inscription on one of the ICHC’s Lists, the same cannot be said about the content of information displayed on the online inventories themselves. The information provided online for the public has not quite lived up to the Convention’s expectation of awareness-raising.

IV.2. Online Inventory 2

Problems similar to those in Online Inventory 1 are also found in this inventory. Online Inventory 2, as introduced above, and unlike Online Inventory 1, does not categorize the inventoried elements. All elements are numbered, which makes it easier to see how many of them have been identified as being found on Indonesian soil; however, this also makes it more difficult to identify how many elements have been identified and inventoried for each ICH domain. This general difficulty is problematic for people who access the web site and seek to assess this inventory, and the elements it contains, in an organized manner. The same suggestion as above would therefore apply here: it would be better for Online Inventory 2 to follow the categorization according to the ICH domains provided in the Convention.^{Footnote 85} Overall, this inventory is more disorganized than Online Inventory 1, as the elements are listed neither alphabetically nor—though each entry contains the date on which the element is registered in the inventory—chronologically.

As mentioned above, the content of each entry of inventoried elements in Online Inventory 2 is standardized in eight headings. This makes it more inclusive than what is generally provided in Online Inventory 1, but, according to the nomination file and overall goal of awareness-raising, it still lacks “Contribution to ensuring visibility and awareness and to encouraging dialogue”; “Safeguarding measures”; and “Documentation.”^{Footnote 86} The contrast can be seen in “Documentation,” because, whereas upwards of 70 percent of entries in Online Inventory 1 contain documentary evidence, no such evidence can be found in any entry in Online Inventory 2.

Several headings in this inventory are misleadingly named. For example, “History” of the element often does not contain history, but simply descriptions of, for instance, what the element is, how it is performed, and the types of instruments involved in the proceeding.^{Footnote 87} Additionally, “Reference” and “Relevant Links” are interchangeable; both are used to mention the sources of the information about the element.^{Footnote 88} It is likely that the separation of these categories was intended so that “Links” would contain online sources, while “Reference” would list non-online ones, such as books or museum data.

Not unlike Online Inventory 1, the next problem in this inventory concerns the extent of information contained in each entry. While the content is already standardized in headings, only six^{Footnote 89} entries provide information under all eight headings. Most of the entries in Online Inventory 2 are incomplete:

1. a. “Category” missing 69 entries (2.59%);^{Footnote 90}

2. b. “History” missing 364 entries (13.68%);^{Footnote 91}

3. c. “Name of the community/organization/association/body/neighborhood/social group, or individual responsible for the element” missing 464 entries (17.44%);^{Footnote 92}

4. d. “Approval of ICH Nomination” missing 1,294 entries (48.63%).^{Footnote 93} Moreover, while 303 entries mention that approval by the relevant community is “not yet obtained,”^{Footnote 94} they are still featured on the web site; this denies the “widest possible participation of communities, groups and […] individuals,” as expressly mandated by the ICHC.^{Footnote 95} An element for which approval by the relevant community is not yet obtained by the state must not be inventoried.

5. e. “Reference” missing 331 entries (12.44%);^{Footnote 96} and

6. f. “Relevant Links” missing 2,597 entries (97.59%).^{Footnote 97} Out of the 64 entries that do provide a link, 50 (1.88%)^{Footnote 98} lead to web addresses that can no longer be found.

The authenticity of information provided in this inventory is also problematic, as illustrated by the following errors, which prove that, like Online Inventory 1, there is no web site administrator tasked with verifying the information or keeping the information organized:

1. a. Multiplication of an element already inventoried: 93 entries (3.49%).^{Footnote 99}

2. b. Separate entry of a variation of an element already inventoried: 73 entries (2.74%).^{Footnote 100}

3. c. Grammatical errors:

   1. 1. Diction error: 146 entries (5.49%);^{Footnote 101}

   2. 2. Mistype: 12 entries (0.45%).^{Footnote 102}

4. d. Problematic source: Most of the entries in this inventory (89.97%) contain a source. However, of those 2,394 entries, 617 (23.19%) contain sources that are problematic. These entries list as sources Wikipedia,^{Footnote 103} online personal blogs,^{Footnote 104} and interviews with persons whose credibility or expertise in the subject matter is unexplained.^{Footnote 105}

While its FAQ section illustrates that the web site is more loyal than Online Inventory 1 to the ICHC, this inventory does not seem to acknowledge the Convention. While the elements from Indonesia that have been inscribed on the ICHC Lists were all inventoried, there is still no harmonization between the information of said elements in the inventory and that contained in the nomination files of the respective elements.

The relationship between the two online inventories is evident in some respects. Up to 20 percent of the elements in Online Inventory 2 are also present in Online Inventory 1. Two entries^{Footnote 106} in Online Inventory 1 credit Online Inventory 2 as their sources, while two entries^{Footnote 107} in Online Inventory 2 refer to Online Inventory 1. Meanwhile, whereas both web sites are operational, Online Inventory 1 is significantly more active than Online Inventory 2:

Table 1.

Comparison of elements inventoried in both online inventories in eight months’ time.

The ICHC provides that a State Party may draw up more than one inventory of ICH present in its respective territory; it is therefore implied that if a State Party decides to draw up more than one inventory, each of the inventories must serve a specific and distinct purpose, simply to prevent confusion on the part of society at large and, consequently, to raise awareness.