Page 31 - World Heritage and Tourism Innovation

Hiyab Gebretsadik Weldearegay Critics on Heritage Laws and Tourism Politics in Ethiopia

whose’ to be prohibited). Again, it exposes selectively someone cannot be as such for another). All in all, ar-
discovering heritages that it believed would be helpful ticle 36 of Proclamation No 209/2000 was found by
for historical hegemony and technically suppressed panel members of Delphi to be both illegal and irra-
treasures of others in the federation from being stud- tional.
ied.
Article 43(1) on Heritage Inspection
Article 36 on Publicizing Discoveries of Heritages Article 43(1) says, “An inspector from the Authority
Article 36 says the federal Authority shall be the first may enter, at reasonable hours, any place where there
to publish any field discovery in National Media. The is any heritage and conduct an inspection to ensure
Delphi discussants understood that for the member that the heritage is properly maintained and pro-
states to conduct exploration of heritages, the Federal tected”. The demerits of the article, as to the panel of
Authority should give blessing and again, the Author- experts, are that one, it doesn’t have a constitutional
ity should be convinced of the value of the discovery base as according to reports, Article 39(2), 52(1) and
and first publicise it through its national media; this 41(9) heritage conservation, restoration, protection
was inconsistent with Article 39(2) of the Constitu- and promotion are explicitly state powers, and not
tion, stipulating that every Nation, Nationality, and federal forces; two; it generally assumes that an expert
People in Ethiopia has the right to promote and de- from a national authority is above suspicion (lacking
velop its culture; and preserve its history. Besides this, intent or capacity to injure local treasures in any form
Article 29 (1 & 2) of the Constitution states that every- of damage); three, it doesn’t require the permission of
one has the right to seek, receive and publicise infor- the owner states (nations and nationalities); four, it
mation and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, doesn’t put any bureaucratic conditions that must be
either orally, in writing or print, in the form of art, satisfied for an expert of a federal Authority to enter
or through any media of his choice. Therefore, for the into any place of the states where there is any Herit-
panel, this sub-article of the Constitution concretises age; five, its substantive spirit and essence suffer from
four essential points: Unitarianism and Imperialism biases by giving ex-
1. Everyone has the right to seek information. treme trust on federal individuals; six, opposite to the
2. Anyone can publish (citizens, nations and nation- radical faith in federal individuals, it doesn’t have any
alities, states or the federal government). level of trust or confidence in the States (nations and
3. Any media can promote the choice of the publish- nationalities) on properly maintaining and protection
er. of heritages. These all open doors for heritage smug-
glers from the federal Authority to loot and traffic
4. Article 29(2 &1) of the Constitution prohibits any treasures, their authentic environment, and sell them
form of censorship. out. The panels of experts of the Delphi study, listing

However, opposite to these four concrete consti- the above justifications, have concluded that article
tutional stipulations, the HPR has proclaimed an un- 43(1) of the Proclamation on heritage inspection is le-
constitutional article (striking the question of whose gally and logically impermissible.
heritage is desired to be publicised). Apart from rais-
ing legal issues, the panel of the Delphi has agreed that In the Preamble (“WHEREAS”) part of the Proclamation
this article exposes selectively publicising heritages The fifth “WHEREAS” or rationalisation part of Proc-
believed would be helpful for cultural hegemony and lamation No 209/2000 states that protecting and pre-
technically suppressing rival treasures. Besides, the serving cultural heritage is the “responsibility of each
panel said it is difficult to settle when the Authority citizen”. The panel conceived that this rationalisation’s
faces differences on whether certain heritage discov- substantive spirit and essence suffer from Unitarian-
eries must be publicised (as the treasured heritage for ism and Imperialism Biases. The justification provid-
ed is that it destroys the power of states on the matter

Proceedings of the 7th UNESCO UNITWIN Conference | 27