THE BUFFALO JOT]RNAL OF

INTERNATIONAL LAW
voLUME3 snMMrnl996 Nu[Dml
Sad6 Asseid.'t
ArrRErAcvEDo ,a,csD'ANz M^mslvll^\rxDrs
XETYBYTD GLG^Rcr CEusrEMmPfiY
A&iottu! E{dott
MTLDCAIIEPiE
.
Tt cEBol.ttr cct DEsHnaBoraruE
SucnECorE KEryflzcERr\t-D IIEr.c GI"AD!(
RrDitx^IyER JorLJavA BRD.'rKr\Rr x
K,$NKEsry Eal$,srl,E RoBERTIaIIAI.G
JuLGMor.nRots JrDrflNoJ ckrsrDEPorosN^x
sl{ RoNPersE MrRTnrR^rs JEiFRyREsE
TIIE BUFFALO JOURNAL OF
INTERNATIONALLAW
VoLrJItG 3 SUMMER 1996 NIJMBER I
FAcuLTy & PRoFEssroNAL ADvrsoRy BoARD
Guyora Binder
PrcIessor oJlavl
Alan S. Carrel
Vice Dean, S.hool oJ Law
Nina Cascio
lntcmaliona I late Li brari an
David B. Filvarofr
Prolessor oJ Ltttt
Thomas Headrick
(htivctsity
al htflalo Provosl
Virginia A. Leary
Prolcstor Enerilus of La$/
Laura S. Mangao
A&tittait Directo\ Baldy CcnlerJor Lav' and Social Polic!
Managit8 Edilor, Law & Policy
Isabel Marcus
Ptolcssor of Lav)
John M. Thomas
Ass@, Dea,
for
Intemat ional Pr.Erdns, School of Marsgement
THE BUF'FALO JOIJRNAL OF'
INTERNATIONALLAW
VoLUME 3 Sr,'t tGR 1996 NTIT,IBER 1
Ihe Bullalo Jownat of Intemor'orai ,alr is
F$lishd
tlro tirn s a
l3r
by tbe
stldnts ofthe taw school at thc State Uni!rsity ot Ncw Yoik aa Butralo.
Editodd and g.Dral offices rle localrd rl 603 Jobn Lord O'Briar Hall,
St NY ar Bud:ilq ArDhcrd Cs[tps, Blfalo, Ncw Yo* 14260. (716) 645-
6206.
Sut6criFioE: Domslic aftcriFion raic: 135.00 per ycar: $47.50 - Dewly
bound Forcien sihcc.il*ion r,l.: J24.00 per year, lE.0O per is$e.
Founh Clars pogtaSe is
laid
at Bufralq Ncw Yorlq ard additioral Elailing
ofrcls. Sub6criFions will be adonatically renewd ur ess notic of
catcellatiotr is rcc.iltd Cha4e ofaddrEss rotice shodd incide old
,rd nw addr.sses ,nd tp co.hs.
Back issues: Ba.k issres and bound and uDbomd rolunes ar. 3vailable
frod Willian S. ILin & Co., Inc., U85 Mam Sr, BuBlq NY 14209-1987.
(716) EE2-2600 or
Gm) 828-7571. hiblicaEon nusbel ISSN 1074-4835.
MalluJallis: The Btfalo Joumat oflnteman@at L@ rE,k/Jmcs lnsolicilcd
qunuscriFs
o! t@ics of coDtnFffy lerl signifcaG. Tcd shouldb.
doubl-sFc.d o[ triple-qccd Foourot6 should cooform to thc srandard scl
fonh tu llre no61 r.en .dition 6 Th. Alwbook. ManulcriFrs caruot be
retuncd udcrs accomp6nid by a selfd&esse4 po6uge-paid nvloF-
Copldeht Unl.ss olherwis. [d4 aI anicles arE copyrig}l. l9c)6v The
BulIolo Jounal oflnrenariodllry. Copies nay bc nad for class.roorn usc.
proyidtdth^
0)
me Bullalo Jownal of l\temanonal Itu is a<'tifrfj,
(2) lb. atnhor and $ejounal arc iddifc4 (3) notie of oprright
4ea.s
on .ach cqy, 3rd (4) copics rre dislribrrcd at or t low con.
The Butalo Jounal oflntemaltor4lId rserves cdilorial pnv eg wftn
rcgatd b aI n iers offorn, ircludirg hi Dot limit d to, didiol!
Sramllar,
spclling sfntlx aDd nauers of coryentioa as rcI as with rcgard to lhe
grhantive
accuracy of cilations.
THEBUFFALOJOURNALOF
INTERNATIONALLAW
voLnME 3 sm,Il,!f,R 1996 Nul,BER I
"rhe
Bunob Jotmat of lntemhonal 1 1995-t E,it id Boadmuld
like b thark thc fotlowing:
The Uni\rsity al Bufialo School of t^aw Student Bar Association ard
The Baldy Cder for hw & Social Policr
Spciar Th3rk! to the Adminisativc Advisory Bord.
ne Bufalo Joumal of lntemdnonal Law is a pu,bli3,,,tum prod$.d
b
students
of tbe Uniirsity at Bdalo S'.hool of l,aw of lhe 9.te Uriversily ofNe!{ York
The J@u dl is &dicaLd to tre legl alrbsis of sFcitrc issues i.D intenutionrl
law. Tbc arnual focus of the -/oumrl is dsigDed !o rcllecl ctrent issues
dterEincd
b
fie Editonal Board of the Jormal to be of inrponancc in the
The views cpressd in
Frbricatioru
ol The Batab Joumal oflnt national
Irv do not ncc6sarily rflect lho6e of lhc Ediorial Boand, the Universiry al
Bufrlo School of kw or their agnt! or rpresdali\s.
THE BUT'FALO JOT]RNAL OF
INTERNATIONALLAW
VOLIIME 3 Sur,s,cR 1996 NDTBER I
htaori;arior tfr Conirtbutod
,
The Editoial Board of rr. aufato Joumal of Int.mationol t e nelcones
i erdd aulhols ro submit original [latrllscriFs lo:
Th Butralo Jowal oflnlernadon l Law
John Inrd O'Bdan Hall
Box 60l l0O
Buftlo, New York 14260-l lm
For additional idomallor!
dease
conta.t (716) 6456206
c-mail: BIIRI-R@jlno.coln
TABLf, oF CoNTENIS
OBSERVNG AND ENroRcDtc Il(rMAN RrcIIrs UNDR nE corJNcIL oF EuRopE
THECREATTON OF A hRMANENT EUROPEAN COTJRT OF HUM,CI fuG|.TS
Jonathai L. Black-Brcnch......................-.-..-..-........... ...... .1
GATS ND FDraNcr L SERvrcEs: REDETTNNC BoRDERS
Jefrey sNe,..............'.-..................................................tJ
THE U-N, CoMMssIoN oN HuM,AN RIGFTS AND CAMBoDIA 1975.1980
Janie Frcdenc Mer.l-----------......-......................-- -.............-67
Trs REASoN BLD SusucroN TEST oF NoRTHERN IREI-AND'S EMERcENcy
LECIST,ATION: A VIOI"\ION OFTHE EUROPEAN CON\NTION OF HT,!I'AN
RrcFTS
Elizabeth Kondonuokos......................................................99
FoRUM NoN CoNVENTENS rN mE UNIED STATES AND CANADA
Donald J. Caney...-.................----..................................... t 17
ForErGN IlrwsTMlN"T IssuEs FoR IN$RNAT|oNAL NoN-GoVERNMImAL
ORGANT?aTroNs: IIITERNATToNA! IIEALTH FRoJEcrs rN CIINA AND Tl{E
FoRrt@R Sovgr UMoN
ntu,y C. Ewred..--............---.,-..-------------..-......JiJ
THE DESTRUCTION OF CHUTCHTS AXD MO6qUES N BO6NLA.HERZEGOIINA]
SEEXnrc A RIGHN-BASED ArpRolcH To THE PRoTEcTIoN oF RELIcrcus
CfJLTURAL holERTy
Gt
spty
M Mose.--.............-
- -- --- - --------.............
I 80
Col,tr,tENraRy: RE-Po6mor.!,rc HT MAN RIGIITS DIs@uRsEs oN
'ASIAN" ERsPEcnvEs
$arcr K E@.......-----------...-.. ---- -..... -.........-...----............ 209
TEE DISTRUCIION OF CEI]RCEES AND MOSQTIES IN
BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA: SEEKINGA RGETSBASED
AXPROA(g ro IEE PROTECIION OF RELIGIOUS
C-T'LTT'RAL PROPRTT
GqqrMMd
T!. Pcsils osq.d tTat lb.
jil
d,rr .srbd 6.
Ac.rpolis, rdrkn k [d ft. ArlAdgB by rh. AOai-+ rd
b.sr 6. itc dtr.plE . . . Aisr atEA{EilE 3.wthn
l+ql dr 3.rl!ni! m ear O.rEi.h,.s hcandu ftrn dE rlrd, &d
soFrd!4u,ttilc.dEli.dftrnfrgc10t ilErpotofilELtr[,le.
TIlc P.rsi{a rustEd to l}c gd.! sdqcrd lb \ sn r}bid lb.y
rn &ss!d & a+pliets.
rrhar
d \',!rc slria lt y plurd.tid 6.
ldeb ed fnd 6,Ey par dt cildd
- Itarddr3, Bod( Vn
62-3)
(a80 B.c-)
h ltott S.lo, , vlhr rr.r ZWDL s.rb t!cD6 nutd.d
lp l5o \lrqD4 d:ilttq &d old p..plc, d fc!.d tErr rt gu'poirl
itrto lh lo.d !D.qt , h fc! offi. c4tivca, tEy cldkngd thc
bc.l ccmrdty lad.r, I'Dsn l"tanic $B\ ro d.s..n . lb. n6$.
.... ft., bld ltirD rod. th.ifndU..l!6s, e..lqk edft"ly
to htlrc sdd ier(lr!. wilh . L.,rge girl . . . SulF n&s!d Cl
th.s.
'Lod
.d ws b.e d o{ wih kil,!!. Hs k is
ud@'*[.
.
Asic Alim
zluDi* polic..annrdd
G"D. l9t2)
r llnrEd Collcg., /!8., MdsE C@ Iad., 1992, D*. Utriltrlity School of kw,
lD, 19 .
t
RsJ tu\ Lt@ Vd;
grt!
T@gd Cohle H.;,.gt of 8&da" Mdirs,
NEE
y
Nsr
&d $firkEd'rir),Sc!( 2,1992,d3.
t8t BItpp,qto tOUmUL OF INIERNAnONAL LAW
lvot.3
I. IN'IRODLCIION
The savagc conflicl takioS placc in Bo$ia-Herzegovina has
geftrated an enormous volume ofcofimst!ry. Whilerhe *tr can b
s..n as an ur$vonble inaugurarion ofposl Cold War ra etlnic strifq it
ssns more productive to view lhe conoict as a crucible for facing
similar problrns in th ffrture. The west may ha\ fiiled dl former
Yugoslavir, as sornc coruncntalors have srgeeste4 bul unlss we are
prpared to endu. tuture failurq wE mult l3m lhe lssons that this
lragedy can provide.
Cultural p.opny h Bo$ia-Hrzegovim hrs bn destrq'd on
a staggsing scale during dle rcnt conflid. In panio.tlar, &e to the
ethnic overtones of thc conflict and lhe inscapable Unks between
ethnicity and religion in the Balkans. religious buildings have been
consistently targeted since the beginning of the war. fu ttle abov
quorations demonsrate, rhe pmblern is nehher new nor unique
Howelr, the exi$nce ofintemational legnl instrumenls i"tendd to
addrea! dle deeruction of orltural proprty is quite recrt. While a
number of conmcdalots hlve poined out the hilure of lhes
irlsturxds to protect orltural proprty, none have rlna*d on fi hcr
thal a large prcaniage of fte churches and Fosques destroyed in
Bo$ia-Herzegovira would rceive no rnore protecljon under tte
releva intemational law conceming crltural propny than any other
civilian building Tbeir special p.otecled status as culhral property
depends upon thir value to the world comrn'rnity a cultural
monuments. There is no spcial protcrion hvisagd under the law of
protclion oforltural proprty during anned connid lor local religious
buildirgs and lhe c.ucial role dley play in contmrity life
?dt [(A) ofths paper wil explair the hislory and derdopment
ofthe legal protection ofdrltura! proprty during armed conflict, and
Part I(B)
'iI
review the noms wfiich are applicable to rhe confict in
Bosnia-Herzegovina. Pad m w xplore
qFent
theoretical
justifications
forthe proteclion ofoitural property. Part IV will focus
upon the situation on thc ground in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Pan W(A)
will provide an oltfviw of the dstruction of religious property in
Bosnia-Herzegovin4 and Pan IV@) wil r{amine ! case study in order
19%] BOSN]A-HERZEGOWNA 182
to iluiinate a
B?icai
patern ofds&nclion. Part IV(C) wi[ diso'lss rlte
phenonenod of
ithnic
claisirg. and irs r.btion ro dre dstrucrion of
orltual pmpriy. Ftrl.lly, Fan V wil
gla8$
a new thoftrical
approach ro dle dGtruction ofrdigid$ proFty. Part V(A) outtins
orrreft international law thar
Secifcaly
addresss the right to practice
one s rd;gioq ard Pan V(B) disorsss rhis riSlr as a basis for pmrecling
churches ard mosqus which nonnaly *ould not b provided spcial
prote.rion by orltural properry treat provisiols.
tr. LTT T{AIoNAL LEGAL PR@cnoN oF oJLIURAL PRoPERTY
DLrRI.rc ARr,@ Cotllcr
A. Te Ikwlqt
ptd
of lhtentiotwl Law Retated to le Destltction of
Cutwal Prqvtr h ng Amed Cottllicl
The Hague Conventions of 1899 and t907 repres'r the first
genuine bindins codifcalions of inte.nalional law rs wel as rhe frst
srb$adial idernational protction ofqrltural propcrty_ A oumbr of
anicts in dle Hague Colllttnior! addrss lhe is.{re of d.iruction of
proprty gttraly and ofoitural
Foprry
spcifclly. The Annex ro
Hague Convation IV (1904 prohibirs /",ecs$o, dsrruction of
propfty in Anicle 23
G),
and more speciEc:ly protecls ontu"I
propeny ("buildings ddicated to rdigioq an, s.iarce . . . historic
rmnumnts . . provided they are not bing usd a! the tine for military
purposs") in Article 27.' Finalty, Articl 5 ofHague Conir'tion Ix
provides thar 'tiln bombffdmrri by naval forces all the necessary
rdssurs nusr bc ukcn by dle cnmrtrander to spare as far as possible
sa..ed edifics, buildings used for artisiq scienlifc, prrposs, hisloric.l
monumerts . . . .!r It is sipifca rlEr rhe language ofrhse provisiors
is compulsory. Ther rmains, howeltr, rhe qualifierion of nitiirry
n cssity, so that ojtural propeny nd only be spared insofar as mifiiary
:
DF rcFDEEls. Co|urrcF TIE PesN C([r WAi:IDr^! Rmrro Corcrus
G9
l'ftina&r FN& RFoRr]
I
$!sar A Wulrq TlE INrsN r]M.tsN^Tlowhmdd6l/tovlM
Cll1tnrh(,afl: A Cor@rr^m Smy t80978)
183 BUFFALO JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL I-4w
lvol.3
whil this lcv.l ofprotedior may sern scarn (lhe ernire $bjci
nEils only dua anicl6), lhsc ruls ne!rlhdss rcmin in forcc todry
ad played an irnporl.nt role in protding Iraqi
qrlnl$l propny dwing
dE Gulf w'r.' Aftr th Scond wortd War, howir, it bcme cle3r
that the standards fomulated in thse conwntions nded to be
reinforced in a new convention that *!uld address lhe reahent of
cultural proprty during amed connid. The resrhing 1954 Hrguc
Convendon for the Proteclion of CultuIal Property in the Evfft of
Antd Conflici has bn ratifed by levity-five countriq irrludirg dre
forner Yugoslavia' Thc 1954 ll.gue Convcition opands upon dtc
norms of dle 1907 Hague Convartions, but ,lso adds s!ral llev
fealurs ro thc iaw of
qrltural propery. Anicl.I ofth CoNrtion
defines crrltunl property rs 'molable or irnmo!"ble property ofgrat
imponanc to the cultural heritage of every people" ard offers an
illustrative but non-xclusive list ofexamples.6 White rh rferene to
monumerts "of
gre3l importance' brings up a numbei of obvious
dificufties, this defnition is naenhelss morc dtailed than any
prvioldy otrred. Th Convention .quirs rhd paltis prpfe during
time of pacc to siGguard onnral propqty in dl cvnt ofan armd
c.niid.' Signifcantly, tno$ of tll Convrnion applis to
norFide.narional as weu as interDationsl coIiicts, and thus Noids many
of the problems inherent in applyirg the ceneva CoNntions.t It also
establishB a univers.l sig4 a blue and white shicld, to indicate orltural
property.t Furthermore, the Convention creales a register on which
moduhents ofparticular importanc dlat qualry for spcial protedion
can be lisled.'o Th. 1977 Protocols to the l9a9 Geava Corvedions
l9%l BOSMA-HERZEGOWNA
184
add svf,al importsnt providoos reld;ng ro tlE protrion of ojrural
propcrty.lt Artic.lc 52 of Protocol I sas out. geisrl sdrn of
protedion for civilian objeds. Paragnph I fo6i{ls tffge.ing civitan
objct ftr d'e
Frpos.
ofanack or repdsal. Par.gnph 2 de6rEs civilart
versus military objcctn maling any objecr which rnakes an declilr
contribution to nilitary obj.lives a nilit ry object.
paragraph
3 not.s
lh!! wlEn doubt xjsts as to
"{Ether
an objeq is bing usd for mitirary
purposes or is striclly civilan in narure, it sh![ b pre$med
to b a
civilian objer.
Article 53 dirc{y rddre$s o turrl propeny, and providca:
[w]ithout
pre.tudjc lo tlE provisions of rh Hrgue
Conva*ion for the holdjon ofcultural Property in the
Evrt ofAmed Conf;c.r of 14 May 1954, and ofother
rele\,"nt intemational inslrumentq ir is prohjbitd: (a) to
crmmit any acts ofhostility dircred agaiist the hisloric
monumals! works of art or places of worship v,tdch
conrh$e rhc ott-0'al or sptibd hriragc ofpoples; (b)
1o us
glci
obj.ls in $lpport ofihe mft.ry etrorq (c)
ro nrke $lch objcc.ts tfie objecrs ofRpdsals-"
These provisions ar basic, reflecring the norms of the 190? Hague
Corvenlion and the 1954 Hague Cultural Proprty Convrdo4 and are
considered by somc to have anaind rhe status of clsloftery
international law.'r There is, howe\,r, one very signmcant addition t;
the protction ofcultural proprty which appcan in bolh proto.ols is
tnirry absan fton the 1954 Hague Conve ion and srns to represnt
t1h@l,AdXi
tl to tk GM Ci'iljtuCMion, dd R.btin, to tk
ptuctio,
4tknB
oJlnlemdonalAnn d CorJti.4 (L,reto.ot
,,119111t9'1u N. Jtid.y.B 9s.
Ep,tt d,,16lL.M l39l
[Rir
*@ Prct@o|4. Pntod Ad rotul b th. aE@
Corcdio oJ 12 Augatt 1949, ad R.t6iaq lo dE Prckcdon ol Vicntu oJ
Non-tntemtiond )|m.zl Cdr4nB
fror@l//.o''?l l9?? U.N Julll
y.B
r35,
rtpnn@d i,l6lLM 1442l!E.a6&q Ptubcol 14
'
Ptut LstbDd.ll,it 5l, 16I!.Nl ar t4l/t
D
Metc, rqfu m{c 5,.r 362
I
&.lB$tREoRr, npDrclc 2, !l 09.
'
DNinllll,cta,Tk 1954Eague Cultotul Ptup.ttcMtuid on l tb EnerE M
into Cwtma'y Id. diotul Ltu, I I B. U. Iln LLl 349, 352 (l9Sl)
'
CdlmlimIdUEPror..ridof Cdnrdln?qlynr th.Ewt of^med Coii.!Msy
14, 1954, dt l, 249 U.NT S. 240, 242
8sinand
1954 ttrg* Con$timl.
185 BUFFAI0JOURNALOF
INTERNAnONAL Uw
lvot
3
some evolution in the law regarding religioirs cultutd propent
Paragnph (a) ofAnicle 53 fobids acts ofhostility diredd at proprtis
which con*itute th
"culturri
or .9,:,?inul hdt!8' of poPles Thc
sigrifcaEe ofrtis addition vtil b disorssd bdow, but h drculd be
notd llcre thrt it aguably |)dends pro&crion to a nllnbf ofchurclEs
and mosqucs wlich would not b covercd by pftt ious law on the
protedio; oforltunl
property dudng atmed connica
l'
Protocol tr to tllc Gneva CoNq{ions' cowdng sinratioDs ol
DoGi!'tdnational adnd c.nnict, also codaits a drtr fimhd provision
on ille prorccrion ofoinfal property. Aiicle 16 msEly srat6 that it is
prohibitcd to 'comnit
any act of hoslility direcled asaitsl historic
monuments work of an or
placs of worship which constitute the
ontu'dl or spiritual lEdtagc of peoples, and to use thm in $ppon ofthe
rnilitary etrort." While ille provisions ofth t*o Protocols moslv fal
shon of rhe protetrion otrered by d'e 1954 Collvernioq rney ate
impon nt 6s reassenions of the gelleral principles involveq and ss
conffmations oftheir status as orstomary intemational law.
B. Adicable LlM d the Pftiectic of C,ltltuat PToPrty Du.i,A
A,f,ed Conlict in tlp Fon Er vugoslzeia
The l9o7 HaSue Conventions have bcome pan of cudomary
irfernational
'an,
and as such tley aPply to a!.ombatarts in
Bosnia-Herzegovin4 at last to tle extflt that the conflict there i3
considered an intsmrional afned conficr.t6 Ac.ording ro fie \rred'a
convention on Succession of States in Respect ofTratieq srccssor
t!
Iair6a\ b M@ tLt Bi.N Cuttodb.la8 ks CsJlix Adit IMiM:
Cdh Jun liq!. a lfrtitotiwl, iiz SruDGs N Es s oN h'tr'Mraa
Ftl,rMlrlAJtleNR@q.6hl1r(:!I6N HoJlot* G JN Ecrr 559,564i5
(clrdoplF Swin!6kicd, 1984).
':
Prot@ol ll, supmtutr I l. ul. 16,l61L.M. tt 1441
"
nll:!.{u MEnoN, tlt,A Rolns N NrNr srtur!: TlcR IMrxNArol'4L
rRqEnc.r4 (198'^ Th.tnlqndeal crimiMl Tribu,i fn0EIffi YugGl,vians
ddqni..d 0r'tr c.dile in 6. fffi YleGlavit h.Ebolb idqral !d inldaliod
aspdG. .9.Dsisid6dED.foele{oIi6 fd Inldlmloy ApF.l (2 OctotEr,
1995), Thc E@rtorv Dr*o Tadic alda
*DuL,"
ce No. f-94.1-AR?2, ar 43
19961 BOSNIA.HERZEGOWNA 186
stats $ch as Bosrja-Hrzegovina renain bound by the inemational
treaty obligaaions of the prd.essor siate until thc sroocssor stale
dcclares tbal it dos nol int.ad to be boud by a parriqia! lr.aty.I?
Bostja-HerzoviB I'as d&rEd irsdfro b boud by this trcaty, and
has not daEunccd tlle 1907 Hrguc Cotwtnriois, dle 1954 Hlgue
Convanion or the 197? Protocols to thc c.nelr CoNsnion.rr
Moreorc., the Oenela Conv$tions and dle 1977 Protocols $ipulare
lhat a counfy, ard thus a $ccessor $alg \rhch wisks to d'roulrce
thse trearis cannot do so while iivohd in an nmed cordi.r-t'
The Fedral Rp$lic of Yusoslavia has also decln d d'at ir
considrs ibeFbound by the tr*ty obligrdois ofthe former Socialist
Federal Republic ofYugoslavia, so that any violstions comnjtted by
Yugoslav Narional Arhy (Jusoslovrska Na'ldia Amija (JNA)) forces
inBosia are covcrd? Bolh Yugoslavia and CroarA have turvokd le
1954 Coflernion srd dus i'nplicitly stard fia! try mnsider lhrnslves
bound by it. Thercfore, ary derlruclion ofoftur.i property comnittd
hy turcs udr dle ontrol ofcroatian or Yugoslav a$hodties would be
a violation undr the Converdion
"
III. THEJT'SIINCANONFOR'IIIEPROIEC'IIONOFCIJLIURATPR@ERTY
The very phrase
"cultural
p.oprry" rais.s a number of issues,
sJch a! dle rDaning and imponance ofculture, the concption ofculture
as property, and the ownershjp ofsrch propdy. Such is$es trke on
grcat sigifcarre wl|an afternpdng to determiic u/hat leld ofprotectioD
monuments should b strorded during armed confict, ard what
measures rnigt'l be appropriate ro ensure thejr protection.
TIle diftqtty ofdEs quenions was vividly demonstntd by one
"
Vi.@ Ccffidd 6 Sll6id of Sd6 b R.+.d ofl,eIir otd ft. sigling
Aog. 21, 1978, &ll 34 dd 15, UN D@ Arc6f 80,31
0
9?8), Ep,t td i, l7 I LM
r488098)
B
rqd^PdlgAppliebility of lhktuhotut C;nitul ln! to Etutt in th. Fodd
lussr2vb, 9 AM U J bd'I. L & Por'Y a9, 501 tr8 (WinG. l99a)
:r
Met6,rrpro norc5,.! 384n.188.
B7 AWFAID JOURNAL OF IMERNAnONAL L4W
lvol
3
critical evrt at tl|e begiDning ofthc c$flicl in the fonnr Yugoslavia:
th si.gp ofDubrovnik. N{any ofth hjstoric.l snd oitural monumcnts
ofdis medievrl irId city wt'e de$royd by artilery 6re |en dte JNA
tried to take ihe ciE in its bid to hold to8ther d crumbling ftderal slai.
of Yugoslavia. An isarc of gr.t irbponance was what should be
considnEd a orftural .no lmeot in a city whos cnter co8isls mo$ly of
cennrdes-old buildirgs. Aiolhr is$e was how heavily fie $witEl of
.hesc hildings slb'nd wich againr tl|c arguabb olltural goal of
kccping inta.l a nalion. h lhis respct it can be difrcult to separ|ac
politicsl attd cdtural goals, since owicrship plays an important role in
protc(riry oitu"l proprty. Thus arosc the questior of*fiose proprty
was beirE deslroye4 a.d ifit blonged to ftd.al Yugoslavi4 whther
riley hsd dE delt to destroy it w+tilc GghtinS for the slrvi!"l olthe state.
Moreo\q, how saiousb could the armjes involvd wony about the fate
of buildings when $ch importait political interest and so
'rary
lives
hung in the balance? The public racrion to the siege
pas
ilumitaling.
Th.re $'"s a grd olltcry around lhe world again$ the denndioa ofthjs
historic tourist atEaclion. The response of otherg howvr, wns
indignatioo at thos wlq wlile rsmining silent ovf ille hunan
ca$aftis ofihe war, rvtlE s;rrcd to ouicry by the de{truclion ofphysical
property. Joumalist Arny Schwaiz phnsd bsl d|e qu$ion in
evrronds mitrd: 'Is it r,,rong to $/eep for buildings?""
The qustion *as answsd wel by a Cmatianjournai4 Ksnija
Draftulic, who wrore in respons to the destruction ofMostr Bridgp:
Why do we feel more pain lookhg at the imagp ofthe
dedro'd bridge than the image of the ntassacrd
people? Pe.tBps b..use w s our own monality in
the co apse oflhe bddge. We expect pople to die;we
colrnt on our own livs to sd. The deslruction ofa
nlonurlrf to civifizalion is somdhing dse The bddgg
in al ils balty and grac. was buil! ro outlive us. h was
2
lntE *nvsiz h L l/rc g b Weep.lot BuilAnE ?,\NrsP-Pa$,Ma! 10, 1994, at
l9%l BoSMA-HERZEAOWNA 188
an attenl io grasp c{rnity. It transcsded our
individual dsiny.!
In the elegant simpliciry oflatiq vt a ,rvir os ,orr8a, liG is slrcR an
endures. Yet if oinral nronumnts ffe to outlast u! a[ if rlEy
somchow lnrlc{d inonality, rhcr h thar a ftd to e(srninc rnor.
closdy lhe ida ofculture as propcny. Ca'l one lruly own sontrhin8
imnorirl uirh al tlE prcp.'ry nghs tha. llmbridSd owffrshjp t rin$?
In determiring wlo can own olrurdl propeny, and by what
theory of ownership, ir sesns mlural to look fir$ to rh obiecl's
crcation. Ifth Grd<s built ihe Panhenoq then $rely the Panhanon
belongs to the Geeks. Ihis labor theory ofpmperry c!.mt sl6ce ro
answr the queslioq however, for a number ofrasons. Ifone claims
that the Psrthenon belongs to the Crek $arq the question of who
owned it dudng ihe O$oinrn pcriod ariss. The Turk! arrivd in
Amtolia olEr a thousand
)tars
anf thc Panhenon was huitt, so they
could rbt claim oMership by creation. Yt ro claim thar the Crk! stil
rightftly owrd the Prnhenoq by dedning lhe creks etlmicaly, poses
a*fiolehogofproblerns. w'nhour g.tiing inro lhe c'Inple( qusrion of
Gr* rhnicity, h is clar tl|ar e{hnicjty in gnral is a }"gu concpt at
be3r. On mighi dten tum to a lhory of oMe$hip by acquisitioq that
th Ottotn n Espire acqu;red thc Parthcnon tlrough conquei ard illa
it rightft[y becarne its propIry. Yet the cultur behind the monurneilt
was one completelyalier to thdn. Ifcultural xpression isthe basis of
dnding \due in a monument (as it surely is-rocks are inunon4 yet they
do not voke an emotional respon!), then it sDs necesry to rske
account ofthe culture whos heritage thc monument rpresenls.
These qustions ha! resulted in two conficting approaches ro
culturai p.oprty kno*n ss srltural narion3lisrn and orlturat
inl.dationalisrn. Cultural nationalsn looks upon oiltlrat propcrty as
th olhurdl exp.ssion ofa panioiar people or rioq and therefore
concludcs that ph'sical propcny rclarcd to a spcific
qiture
shoutd
bdong sclusivdy to rhe inheritols ofrhat
qrllire.
To desaoy a
qrlturdl
lae BWFALOJOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAw
lvot.3
monwnent is to attack the idntity of the people whose oitrre it
represnti and thus the country which represafs those people should
ha! property dghts o\r $ch lronurnl'ts.a This view is partiqiarly
important with rgard to mo\able
qrtnlral
property, and is uel
exerplifed by Grcecds rcquest for the retum ofthe Elgin Matbles.! As
the 1970 UNESCO Convention on th Mans of Prohibiring and
Prevding the icir Irnport, Export and Trdlsfer of O$ieNhip of
Cultllral Property stateg "cultural
property constituts one ofthe basic
dernrts ofdviffzarion and nationa] orlture and . - . its true value c.n be
apprciared or y in relarion to tbe ftIest possible information rgarding
its origiq history and tnditional stting.'z In contrast, cxltural
intemationalsm begins with the assenion that clrlurrai p'operty, while
cenainly importart to the count y in which is it found, is more
importantly part ofthe cultural heritage ofnsrkind as a whole.t At
last one writer has surirised thar the Brussls Conva*ion of 1874, an
early attempt at codirying the law ofwar wlich was never radfed, 6'st
expressd the doctrine ofcultur.l inte@tionali$n.u Yt both Grotius
and Vanel semd to ha\ had a similar approach in mind. Grotius nots
in passing that the desrruction of scred objects, thoueh legal, slbws
"some contempt for hurnanjty."! Vattel is clea.s on the
loint.
He
makes an argurnst for sparing wofts ofart which "do honour to hurnan
socidy," and mndenns their destuclion as "decbring onesdf an rtemy
to ma*in4 dus wantonly to deprive than ofthse wonders ofan. . ."!
19%] BOSNIA.HEI?ZEGOWNA
I9O
Prsrrnably
"ther"
rcfels to nankind, thrs implying rhat we are aI
adversly atrcted by the dsrrucrion ofarr, regrrdless ofits narional or
cultural origin. He go3 on to give the exarnple ofrhe balbariars who
sacked Rome in 4lO AD., noting ihat ercn roday w deEl them for
desoying slch a Rtonuntenl to human creativity.
Uniike the 1970 UNESCO Conventioq rle 1954 Hasue
Cultural Proprty Con@aion einbodies a
qrltual
inremariooali$
appoadr The pranble ro th 1954 Convention
'o.es
rhlt 'dsnuge to
cultural properry blongine to any pople wharsover nel'! damrge to
the cultuni heritage ofal mankind
,'!t
fius courrries srve mretv ss
cuslodians ofcxltural property found wirhin fteir borders and lhqrare
under a duty not ollly to presn it bur also to nake it a\,"itable ro the
rest oftlE wo d.e The t972 World Heritage Conntior! as is irnpfid
by its iidg also tal(es rhe intemationalisr approac\ foclrssing on
monuments of "exceptional interest' and
,'univer$l
\due'a Even th
1970 UNESCO Convotion refecrs cultural intemarionalisr ide.s i, tbat
itjustifes itlelfon the pretexl ofthe need to apprciate ontulai pmperry
in conlexl, rhu! foorsing on the consmptjon of $ch properry by
outsiders
!
Tlur thes coNotions take an iDtemationalst approach dos not
m34 however, thar thry adhere enrirely to the orlrurst inrernalionalist
perspeclive. The cusrodial ideal upon which
qrltural
irtmationalism is
based isjust dut: an iderl. State sovereignry renains paramou4 and
none offte discussed coNentions sanclion the irterfdence in a sratds
sovereignty. To rer.un ro the er(?.mple of the
parrheno4
th crk
govtrnnaf
might dedde to tear it do\rn to inake room for parking and
uhil other countries wo'rld certairJy comptai4 there woutd be no legal
basis for another sate to interfere
j
The &nstuction oftlp As*"n tlgh
Daq with th subsquenr destruclion or displacemnt oflna'ly arcient
'
l9t{ Hag*cdvqllm rpDnole6.p{bbt 2!9UNTS r l,!/
'wlll-lM,ypromle3,d52
rr
Co ir C(rElio tr Proiecrio oftF Wond Cuhral Dd Nahnal HEil,Ce, De.
17, 1975.27 U.S.T. 37, l] I LM. 1358.
"
lr0TDJESCOCd or.r,ptunore20 9ILM d tol8.AJM Il
'
WIrLM, rlrd D.te ], d 5{-55
t
Y@rjf,'tryEbntd sjbE: Th. Destuctid oJcultotut Ptup.dy k ftg ttuid,l1
NtD. J. t{r'LL. & T@E 41, 50 (1993).
'i
Sre WuuM, epro rbte !, al 9. t rd Elgin la.& nMy of rhe sratEi6 of 6e
ld{ffi ioEngi&rdwhnevhoristwCl@w6sdluidOttdEDle IFc'r.&
soffitb6 si@ Iobbi.d vigoost for llentim
"
UNESCO C6tio mlbe Mm of Prcl biting ed Pffitin8 th Oicn Lnpor!
Er9cl dd TE dqoforj6li! of CdlJdl ProFry, Nd. 14, I t0, 823 U.N T.S. 23 l.
232,9 LL.N4 1038, 1040, publ.
[h@in
nd I970 ttr.lESCO Cmlalid}
'
Deding,srnnoE24, al 5l.
z
wDM, spro nole 3, !t I?.
"
Huc,o Gidnr/s, T!L\woF wN N?rc 364 (IruieR l/Mn ed, walert
El{l 1949)
0625)
r'
EmrcDE V,ffi" Tif L{wor NarroN 36? (Chi0yed,1844)
191 BUFFALOJOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
lvot.3
EgtDtian arc.haological sits, ofels a nal life exmple of such a
situarion. As Wliams nots,
"[t]he
codnon culnrfal hdta8e musl be
seen in terns of prsnlion ard proterion. fiis view, although
adhering to the i&a ofa stards posirion a! custodia4 dos not in Act
chalenge its property rights.6 Thus cultural internaiionali$q though
lhe dominant theory bhind the internationrl protection of orltral
prope.ty, must be sd as a fle<tule approach to the problsn *hich
requires adjustment and revision in ligtt ofdifring situatioDs. As an
xamination of the slstenatic destruclion of
qiturEl property in
Bosria-Herzegovina \l/il deinonstrarq rhe cnse of religious properry
represents a sinration in whch the raditional arltural irter.ationalist
approadr to oitutl property is inadequate ard in gle{t n.d oftevision.
IV. TIS DESIRUCIIO}{ OF REUCIOUS IROPRTf DI BOSNIA-
}IRAaOVDIA
A. Tlp Scope oJ tle Deshlcnon of Religious Prcpefiy in
It is inevitabl that in a sibation of amed conflict cl.rltural
propeny will b dariaged. Neither the technolog/ nor tle idolog of
urftre has evolved sufrciendy to preclude the deetruction olhjsloric
and religious monumerfs. The scope of the desl ctjon in
Bosnia-Herzegovin4 ho*!r, excds what one would expecl to find
ere aI or er'n most of the daftage merely collateral to military
objecti\s. I shal diss$s the rasons for this in Section C below, but it
is first necssary to xnine the xlent to whjch reljgious properry has
ben danaged.
Informarion about alrnost any aspect ofthe connict h Bosria is
limit4 un\q trequfltly ina.cu"te and often exploited for purposes of
propgadr. Thoms Wanic* nots that one newspapr article
8i\s
the
folowing figurcs] about 1000 mosqueg 483 Carhotc churches and 470
BOSMA.HERZECIONNA
$2
Srbian Onhodox churche, damaged or desroyed
'
The Cou,cit of
Erope llas sr an observer io Bo$ia priodicrly ro repon on rhe slate
of cxlh,ral propny. and has genrard
raons wijch ar for $e mos
pat basd upon e'wirrss a{outrt! by thir consultanr. fiis seems ro
be the most reliable infomaaion aiaihble so 6r, but even in this cas
rcports are somtines conrrdictory. Additionally, ode must take irro
accoud rhe ftci dlar independart obsen/ers har not bn aUowed ;nto
some areas5 and have ben pre\,srd by $artim condirions ff.on
i$pec*ing otners. TIle Councn ofEurope uas alolld into the town of
GEda.ac in .onllem Bosnia. It is usefut to look ar the effeci ofthe *"r
on tlis ara! cllftxllal heritage in order to understand wirhour rdying on
quesionable
$ari$ics, rle ltature ofthe dstruction which is laking place.
B. G.ehd,c - A Ca'e Studr
Before the *ar, the population
of rhe cndaca distdct *"s
56,37E. The tou,n itseFcontained 12,500 irhabitarts hx has rlow bn
reduced to about 7,000.3r Mudims comprised 60 Z% ofth dimicr
populstioq
tle remaining population being 19.8% SeIb, t5.l% Croat,
and 4 9/o other (pr$mably mixd fanilies).e The town had ben
bombddd since r}e begjnni'g ofthe wd by Bosr d Serb Am,y (BSA)
forces since ir fies al a srategjc poshion ar he end of r]e iosavina
conidor. which [r .s rhe previousty Serb-.held Krajha SrLheld Bosni4
and Setbiaa
According to the September 1993 report ofthe Iist'rute for rhe
Protction of the Cultural-Hjsroncal and Nan]ral Hedrage of rhe
Republic ofBos{r ,nd Htrzegovina (Sarajerc),
aI four mosques
.l'hich
l9%l
'
_
l}ffis Wm,t. Cmsk Fauhdahon gapNun,
$t, 2, lqq\ <
soPhf//.mr l(,'6 org lolll/rmd9irdj6,,lDiue/ctrsprc5.
\
Rcpoa d a F@.hndihe MBon oh rh? Sitotuon oJ dk .uttorot
H.nbEe k
AevHee9tuMadc@a3Ai4tu-22hry.
tgqa dA.Ls
pd
As
q+
Dd
ASrcd/AA r Jw 17. 1994 )th@uEn a Cdrct ot Euape R.pod
tstuP tgsa
4
'"
Sjeplo Colubk d at . ljd rr'ol n D\w& & lndMebt ,n\h
pasq2tlR
ht
A! & L.\|4g* Lkhde ds . I
o9l)
't
Colrcil oJEubpe R?pa (Jure |g|),epn n tja,trl
ls3 BUFF4LO JOURNTL OF INTERNAnONAL I'|W
lvot.3
ha\ lhe sld.L ofoilur.l monumenb" had ben destroyed'r The repon
mentions oltly the Huscnija Mosque
Ouift
1827), but the June 1994
Coffil ofEurop R.port rsnarks otly lhat h had btn "tdt twic in dl
minard (rhc chrefr is brokn in on plaae), probabty by tattk emoL'
and thar a smal lftrary and building for ablutions had also beei
dalnaged.a RefBy Gndas.vic Mosque
(lqh cntury) is ako
rcponed ro be drmasd by two hiB on the nrof.! Svit". Mosque
sutrged onc shdl impad on ils porch ald Bukwa Mosque wrs hn in
the facade by a la'ge projeclile-s
The Council of Fxrope Rcpon points to sewral mosqus in
ne3tby vilages on tlte anem Gndacac Fom as clear cxamples of
d.Sttrale tlrating ofntosques. In Monica I, a slEl broke ihe minafti
ofihe local mosqlte above the cher da. and anolher lank sheu pierced dte
ourer aDd unmor *"lls offie mosque." In Monica 2. anothr hosque
also ststaind a brok6 minard and lark inPa(ls on fu wals. The
ftosqu in KrcviM was svqely dannged etn its minarei wds
destrcyed and fel duough rhe roofofthe moque
6
This mosque also
$&rcd anumbrofhils on the faclde and outrwal Vilage mosques
on lh southwst tont of Crrada.ac have also $trdd danage, in
padiorlar thc mosque at Ze$nja Srednja whicn uas I'it oD the roof lhe
bas ofthe minaret, and in the yard."
Th Catholic Church of St. Maft (1888) suffered damage by
grsEdes, and uas looted (tlthough the tepon dos not make clat who
was responsibl for ttis).{ The Onhodox Churci ofst. Elijah
08E2)
19961 BOSMA-HEkZEGOWNA 194
was hit by shels, sriously danuging its roofand steeple. This ssme
church wls also ltndalize4 apparntly in rctalialion for slEling by rhe
BSA. Two 6rs *tfe ser in lhe c.lturct\ frescos wer! paidd ovcr,
icons $,re vandalizo4 ard liturSicl itrns wtre thrown abola
Thjs appa$ to be a fairly tpical panern of dBtruclion of
religious propny in Bosria-Herzegovine Much of tlc danage is
Fobably
colderal da,nage ton Se$ sltdling ofitE town. As horh dr
lrdit,ie ftpon snd the Councn ofElropc (June l99a) rtport point olrt,
the eitire town of Gradacac has been severely dfina8ed., The historic
castle hrs ben i.ar8td o<tcnsivcly, ard rlere is ftuch damage to the
bwr caner. Th. Jurc 1994 repon assfdts iha! Cruda..c is'undailbly
one of the worst drnaged towns sen by ile consrftad in Bosoja."5t
Given this nonnous le!l ofgenral destroctioq ;t sms rasonable to
aserme that som ofthe darnagc ro religio$ propeny was nor the rsult
of ddibrare talgeting of mosques
orr dE otl':r hatd, in csrain cases it sefn! more lttan tikdy rhat
$ernosqusur purposetuly tlrgeted. Ofthe eighr mosqus reponed
damaged in G'ad:cac, four mirurets were hit and at last pardy
de$qF4 *iilea 6nh vras hn wih no repoied dan'age. TIE Couril of
Europc Repon (February 1993) notes that "it is hieNy dol$ft|that
"
minaret can b brought dowrl $,ith a singlc large calibe. she[, *t ch
implis a crtain amount ofdelibemte rargetirg on these structures." It
also taks very good ai4 sinc a minaret is gaEraly quhe dad6 6rd
would ocorpy ody a snan pereirage of$ profle of! nosque. The
fikeli]ood ofhitting four out ofiglt minarets by purely radom tenor
sheling seems small.
TIl gRnade danage ro St M"rk's Church r.ay or may Dor hav
been delibdstq bul looting i! clary ddbr.tc. Yr, scveral que$ions
''
bftx@ti@ Doorml $boinal by llE h{itule fq l}E E.lrdio. of lbc
Culu"LrInditlod}Idd Hait seof
dERcFlhlcof Bdi.ddtld&8o!ina, !r.16'
ircl4lii Fdrlb ltrmutio R.pdl m WsDmage !o lh. Cuhml llqilrgp i Croatia
dd B6ti!-Hlr&sovina ELtt. P.{E Da. (ADoc 6999) (1994)[minand lBr'ar.
'1CMiloJE
tup< kponOure 1991), tuptu t*3a,d8
t
ld'nlgicpal p?tt tt 4l d4l.zncowil olEmry R.pot1(Jur tw1).t,ptu
't
cercit ofEutupe Repon (Ju* !991).suprar,t'38,^a
'
,u@b,bg. b tE Cultutul Henbg. kCdiddnABoineH.aehtu,@.C,tt
42,,hfaEdtmRQatotEDerrdidby Waof 0. CutoralH6it g. i!Aoll8&d
Bdir-H6zeS@ir,, ELR PdL Ast, Da. No 6756(F.S 2,lt93)
lss BUFFALO JOURNAL OF INTERNAnONAL LAW
lvol
3
rtfluin Who looaedde durd? Wrs it spontattous or pttformd udr
odcs? Was the lclion timed ar Catho[cisq or was tlle looting canied
out in satch ofmoney or \aluable objct? Wilho t mor' infonnnioq
it is imDos$ab io answ.r thes qucsions
The loodns ofth Onlrcdox church ofst Elijah seems a clenr
case of rtprisal by the local poPulation Th looting w"s purdy
de{ntctiw in Erlna and focused
"Don
relisiou! svnbols tnd helru r*d
in O.thodox sflics. It is unclelr, howc!r, whcther fte action was
spontaneous or sancdond by authority srbian anlbrilis lin d|e
church as d61ro)d.T
C. "Blnic Cleastug' drd tlc Destuction oJc'nltual PrcFnv
A ihorougb exltniDtion of the pheiolrlnon itl ltre fonnef
Yugoslavia that has corlc to be ls|own ,s 'ethnic cleansing" $/ould be
terond Ot scopc ofrhis paper' A general undsstanding of$e meaning
ofdrtciu in dati.x to reliSio4 howver. is mpona in ord' lo plae
in contxt the praclic oftsrgeting fo. d6rruction retigious propcrty in
Bosria-Hrzgovinn
YuSoslavia $?as the nlosr herogtEous coontry
in Eurooe. including six 'narions.'
(Sabr Musli6 Croars
Macedonians, Montef,cgrins. and sloven6) rar diferent nationalitis
(s"aler
erhnic sroups,
$ch as Albd;aDs aid BulgsriN)' and a wietv
of o$er ahnic groups." Th6c 'nations' ate nol ncialy distind. bul
raths are dislinguislled by a number of culturat faclors, among which
retision is DredomitBnl. For hislorical rcasorLt that ned mt dcrain us
t'eri ttrc ie'ts a'e onhodox Cluisiians and the croals are Roman
Catholic Tlt "Muslin\"
r.ognized as a
"nadon'
sinc 1971, wcre the
indisnous Bosnjans who coo\rtd to Islan dudng ottonan tularj
Th; were neither Croals nor Seds hjeoriczllv bul a separate Slav
people who had ar$nced a Clristian hetesv know) as aogomilism unlil
"
sooDA\Mnllrsq sPlvrurc!@D l0l (194)
!
ll@Po'rroN,TlEBaI.Ns,
l','lNoRTG aD SraTrl NCoNFLId s (I{ildiry
BOSN]A-HERZEGONNA 196 t996l
corwerting to Islam.'
None of ths three groups constituts a majority in Bosnir.
I'ldins nEke up dre la'8e$
8mD,
cor4'rbing a3.6% ofdF poplatioq
dE r$b.ing 19.4% Setb,17.3% Croa! rnd ?.8% orhr.' Wl e Sdts
c{n look to Se6ia as ar ethnic hornelaid, and Croats can look ro
Croal4 the Bosrian Muslins h.ve no sdflrd souce of edmic
idcntifcntion. Dcclarcd a c.nstitunt national goup in 1971, Bosnisn
Musfitns c.nnot colr'idr dEmsdves th olErfovr ofsorE ottE natiord
group into Bos{a ftey arc a s?aiare
8roup
by virbe ofrdigio4 not
national origin. Since the othr two elhnic groups have distinct religious
alHiations ofthcir owr rcligion in Bo$ia has come ro b iffepanble
from dhnic a.d oihral idernity.
Targeting cultural propert, which the Council ofEumpe has
rcferred !o as "o)lturai cleansing' has played a signifcnnt role in dre
gcneral practice of etiric cleansing in Bosnia.s The de$rucrion ofthe
old Mostd Bridge snd the Na.ional Libnry in Sanjvo has dnwn
worldwide mdia ananion as examples of delibente deslrucrion of
sinlml proprty whih was perceived as reprerntin8 the herilage ofan
opposing groop. At rihst Ue confutuds hAl bctl extrernely ndid
about thir policy of.argding cuhural p.opcrty. L t992, for example,
BBcjomslist Ikte Adie asked a Serbian ofrcr wlty Srb gunneN hd
bo sheling dle Holiday llll\ which hot)s.d most forisr
joornalies
in
Sanje\o. Tlre otrcer repfid apologeticdly that they wre not iargeting
the hot4 but mdl.r were siming at the Nadonal Muselm
just
bhind the
hotel.' Silnilady, a soldi.r srving under Bosian Croar militia lada
Mate Boban e),?lained their reasons for laeting the Mosrar Bridge,
whjcn they evntudly brought down in Novembr 1993: '[i]t is nor
enough to clers Mostar of the Mudims, lhe reUcs nust also be
g
FFDNTID So$ar, A tireoRy c r BdlN Fioi{ E E$LF T[,Gs ro ns
PRFSDAY 16354 (l99l)
t'
S&dris tm 6. O6cirl r99t Ytrg6lsv Poptn.rid C6B ofB@ir-tkusdirt
rp,red t Wn BdM 216
Erbia Ali & Lr\rfu lifsndE eds
, 193)
t3
IBntok R.pd. suptu tr,r 4r,
^
t6.
"
Ar&6 R.idlD,yq, Cftsr Fon dotiu
$dp.M, OJlzy 2,1994), <sc?h6//
ffi
js.Im.Or8
?CVl I / iornosbsusrhr8De^ocg'etc>
197 BWFAII JOURNAL OF INTERNATONAL LAV
lvol.3
desroyed.'e Armies are, in lhe words of one
journali$,
"ensing
'Cultuml cleansing' was iniiated ty the BSA an4 since thc
failure of the Vaftce-Own pale plan in the spring of 1993, Bosrian
sov..nm"t
forcs
@[4
ad Bosnian Croat forcs (HvO) I'ave lakr
up the praciic as wdl.@ l-ocatiz.d reprisals ha rtso bcomc a
slandard faturc of cultunl clernsing; th typicnl s.rnario being ihe
lddali$n ofa Stbian Onlrcdox clurch in respons to ddling by BSA
forces. Srbian o tural clallsing h ofrar accomplishcd by sldling;
although a grcat dd ofmining is reponed to have ocornd in arc.s
under Se6 c.ntrol. Thc HVO and Bfi forcs typiclly must resort to
tnining a buming, ho$rErrr, due io dlir tdadve lac* of anjJery.
Damage by e-'.1 melns terds to be more dlorough lhan that
acromplished by shening.d
Migious proprty has been paniorlarly atrecred for a mEb.r of
reisons Firs! rdigio$ proFty mu$ inevitably srtrer fi'otn any
gara-alzed ath.k on oftrEl propny, as religjon is gpnemly an i gral
part ofqiture. Second, religion in the furmer Yugoslavia tetds to b
&rermined along .hniclirles. The Se't';an &hodox Church is a major
componenr of the aitural heritage and idntity of Seds,
ju*
as thc
Catholic Church is integraly a pan ofcroatian orlture ard Islam r part
ofBosian Muslim crrltur.. Religion is th frst and esist identificr of
thse ditrrent orltues, and rdigous monuments bnce arc the Ino$
easily identifable targets ofetlnc altacks and reprisals. Churches and
mosques are large, cntral, unmi$lkable irrgels, and thir !ry vidbility
aid presnce render ihm not only e3sy targei!, but ertuandy dsir.ble
ones as well. A minarct is a constart reminder of thc
PIesdlce
of
Muslims, hence a natural taet for those with a hatred oftlus reliSious
goup. As Ardds Rieddmeyer explained during a
tmposium
hosted by
th Carngie Foundarior\ 'a
poples identiry is in'(t'icably linkd with
dE visble slrnbols ofits culture. Once thos anchors are gone, the pas!
at
E6ing Bqnia\ Medoty.
\N^et-Po6r,
Ocr 16, 1 992, at A.24 (.dirori,r)
z1
lBtituleRepon,tupniot 4l,at 16
l9%l BOSMA-HERZEGOMNA I98
lik the f&rq can be rccreated by tl'e victors.d Dnroying the ftigby
visible dsn ds ofcultrrc has an idolo8ic.i a$d as wdl: "Th vrry
facl ofthes moruments sdsting in close proxinity is an aFont to dr
historical myth that underlies fascist ideolos/. Th ideologt procl.iBrs
that poplg in fid, c.nDot live togdhr. Iflou havc rlEse prsarcs
n!'d to ach olher, it is a daily rt'roa.i to $at ideolos/.d
Finally, churchs and rnosques are e'drInly intimate and thus
efecliw targeB. Bosdan Prsidnt Alija lzelbegoric has accuscd dle
Serb forces of seeking 'the dcsudioo of rdigion as a basis of tlE
idfltity ard as spintual $pport for the Bosnian pople
'd Since the war
bqr4 relgious irsibtio$ ha! playd a cenhl rol in the U!s ofmany
,s both sotlr6 ofspiriNel comfon ard cotnpanioNlip ad as clla itable
h*itutions.d Targling srch sources ofcomfon to the locsl populalion
is a loeical ekension ofthe tnor bombing states/ which has bn
e.nploFd fl'ainly by Bo$ian Se6s ftouShout the war. Moreover, it is
a logical exrcnsion ofthe policy ofdllllic c-:earsirg Since dlhicity in
Bosnia is dirc.lv linkd with reljgioq ahnic clearuing is neces$rily
related to rligious cle?nsine or, as Slobodan l/filelsnic h,s calcd it,
'spiritual gnocide'd By dstuoying d|e rdigious hrirage ofa
Acific
goup ir a rgioq one not only scve$ their historil link to the reSior!
but one makes religious life in that region next to inposribl.
That religious praclice itsaf is bing targetd in Bosnia is
evidr'cd by a number ofpraqics shich are r.poned to b occ!.ring.
SheUing clMches and mosques rnay or may not larget the religion pff se,
.s there is alwals th possibility that the building ha! only rceivd
colda.al d.nEge. Moreolt., it is likdy that rnany rdigious buildings are
iargded simply due to their vi$al presefte as a
rymbol
of "tle nemy. "
Vandalisr4 however, sefts more clerrly aimed at inhibiting re[gious
g
Ridln yq,&r'rumr 59.
a
R.enCdFr A6,u D.6dr.:,{ nttr 6 &I.net olhl@ or Mulddltutdts ?,Nl.
dP
l\slltietM\ttMan: btMtS.nB. the l^tsacnlte:" trtBtihgs Baettu
Beltto Church.t Lik anAp@orp. N^r'Lcarfl R!}.,Je29, 1993,a17.
199 BWFALO JOURNAL OF INIERNATIONAL LAW
lVo[3
worship, as desoying the inside ofa hilding can be neilhr accidenlal
nor irtended to liminatc dE vi$rl prorcation ofdt building itsn
Th vandrlism ofth Chlmfi of St. E;jah in Gnda.sc oftrs a good
o<anplc lndde dle churEt! lhus drt ofview of o(crp! dE praciidng
ortl'odox coll[ruity, r"ndals pained over ffsco.s, dsrnagd iconr
'rd
s.alterd litu{gical items around the church. Nonc of these acrions
entirely prevents worship, but the acts of des..ration sm to be an
attenpt to disrupt ihe religjous life ofthose wno must worshjp in lhe
deseqatd hilding. In porticliar, the de,*uclion oficorE, wfiich play an
important saqed rol in frhodox worship, snD intaded as a
ddtua"a& aeont spcifcaly to dp relisious frith ofttE Ssbs.
A siinilar tacric has bcn ernployed on a wide scale by BSA
forcls, r+'ich tie Council ofErurope report termd 'Mouting.'@ This
is the ddibrare ds.ralion ofa rEligjous nonunent, oftcn by putting the
bdlding to uses inconsisted uith its purpose. Serbs have been accused
of using mosques as slaughterhouses, prisons, ard morgues.r One
yewitnss reponed being held uilh anothe. 150-180 men in a mosque
for four days and bing forcd lo refe! hir$elfin lhe sacred abl4ion
basilt Sudr adirls arc oft.n acc.mprnid bry or includ intiddarion of
clrg/ An eyewiEs ftported rhat h ard about 150 others ufe forcd
into a mosque
phie
thc locnl Imam was ordercd to dsecrdt dle
nlosque by rsking E sign oflhe cross, eating po q and having sx \rith
a t.nage gid.z Such attack a.re so foorsed upon th rfigious btefs of
their victims that it is ditrcxh nor to conclude that lhey are intended as
attack! against a specifc pople's abilily to pncticc religion.
V. C'tLTtJRArIN'rERNATIotrdtstvlHUM Nfuct s,ANDREudoUs
PRoFERTY
A. nE Rtglr tr Free.kn ofworship
19e61 BOSNIA-HERZEGOWNA 2OO
"
l$tilute Repon. stp/dn t Al,rtlJ
'o
cutnd! spa rEI I,alJ
While rucl of d|e hllln n dehrs law conccming iEedom of
rligion hrs focusd upon
Fohititing
discdninarion on th basis of
rdigioq dlre is ncvartd.ss a wil rangc of provisbns wt'ici
Atifcaly
addnss rdigiors pradice. Tllc Unturrsal Ihctararion of
Hunan Rights asrerts a pcrsont ieedom "either alonc or in mrnnunity
with others and in public or prir"te, ro mnnif$ his rligion o. bdiefin
teaching; pnclicq uorship and obsr,"lr.fi The Irrerurionrl
Co!narlt or Civil ard Political Rights, which ditre$ ff.om rhe Uni!r$l
Dcclaradon in thrt it is a birding convntioq uses alrnost ide.rical
larguage iD its Artide 18." fis languag has impon nt inpticatio:ts for
the destrucdon ofreligious properry- 1l' rigbr to mrnifesl ldieion
"in
cormmity
pid|
ourrs' $ould se6n io be sevrcly [rnite4 ifror eltirdy
preltrto{ by an active policy ofdsrroying buildings sritable to this
purpose. Moreovr, retgious "praclicq uolship, ard obsN.!nce,'
ca lot beft[y enjo]Ed widtout crdain articles ofreligious pmperry. Ttle
itnportance of;cons in the Onhodox fajth and of Corununion in the
Catholic faith illuslral this poin! afthough ir is intrsting to rcre tllat
Islah dQnds lss upon sa6ed placls ard anictes ofwuship than do
dtes Cltrisian scrs." Firlaly, Anicle 2? ofih Co]tiDnt requires thar
states with religious minodris must nsre rhir righr 'in comrnunity
wilh olhf menb$ ofthc group' 1o pr.clice rlen rcligion
ft
Although ;t is noi a binding hstrumenq the Unjted Naaions
Dclaradon on the Elintration of all Forms of Intolrrnce ard of
Discrimination Based on Religion or Bdiefclntains much nore oelicir
language be.ring upon the ned to pmrect religious proprty. Anicte
\4(a) includes a righr lo worship atld assrnbte, as wet a! "ro esabtish
rr
GAR6 2l?A([D,UN Dcc A,rO_,r7t_&! l8{19t8).
_'G.AR6
22@AOO<[ UN CAOR2tdSs Snpp No t6.U.N Dd Ar'6Jt6,
ar 52, er. r8,
096?), 999 U.NT'S \1 t, t?a, Eprnbd k 6 t.L.M. 368. 374
0 r,
r
M^fihlndn4. klda .nl lc Fon ol nA Motqu., in Tt+. NlrsNE: F,tsmy,
ARffidlRADsw6,ENrl}oRlcrcwDlvnsrrY
t?, 32 (MaiinFrisbnar&
lll$-UddinKh4.<b.,194)
a
ICCP& wrn mrc ?4, {r 27.
201 BUFn4In JOURNAL OF INIERNAftONAL I-4v
wot.3
dd rnairtain places for rlEse purpos6..t tt is rrguabl dta! tlte rigln to
"mrinlain' erci pla.s rulst includc tlte riClr nor to hrw srch placca
denro)d. Aniclc Vt(C) is intcrded to cor,r tlle cor&nts ofrdigious
buildings, asscrting rhc dgltt 'lo ruke, to rcquire and to us to an
adquale e'ded fu rEcBsary articles and trurrials related to the rites or
o$toins to a retgion or blif'n Finaly, tll Dclamtion provides for a
riglrt to tea.rr rdjeion
"in
pLces $it:bie for ths puQoss!,' \trjh refers
lo and bolners rhe dglr to rflai ain $ch Dlacs and not b harc rhem
dertmycd.D
Human rights law, ho*l\,lr, even whn binding is to a crtain
nent drogsble durirg periods of public emergmcy. inctuding armed
connid.- Anicle 4(2) ofihe ICCPR includes a lisr ofnghs which a'e
non-derogable even durirg rned conflic! ard tlis inctuds the Anjcte
18 righl to tedom ofrhoughr, conscince and reliAion. Funhmore,
Aiicle 4( l) stipulares thar a dcrogarion Inult not invoh disciimination
basd solely on religion. Human righrs csn stso be limjted by 'tiEitation
daxc" uiich pmit pmaffnt limita.ions on huna. rights which are
necssary to
Foict
national sollity, public safiy, healr\ ordr, 6nd
rnorals.r! While idom ofthouSht, collscience, ard rdigion dos not
frI into rhis catgory oflimirabb nehs, the dgl't to rnanifd rtigion cjn
be limired so as not to inrerfer. v?ilh tl|e lurtan right! ofothrs.r It
could hardly b ,rgued, ho*vs, thar rhe de*rucrion of chMhes and
mosques in Bosnia-HeEegovina was rccssary for the protecrion of
rarion l scurity or the human nghs ofothers
Humanitarian law sewes an imponant role h the protecrion of
11
Unkd Ndi^ D..hmtion on the Elinihahd ofall Fom ofrtutew .roJ
Diwtnivnon Bd.d q
R.ligioh o/Blirl an \4
G),
C.A. R6. 55, U.N CAOR l6tl)
Ss,Supp.No 51, at l7l.UN Da 41615r
(
l93r
'
'r
//.. al alr \4 (c)
'
,9r, .A., ICCPR r,?tu nolc ?4, at 4.
'r
RcsF,rB.lrlc1j. beN^roNrHrr,,r^NRrcm:
pRdLE\,s qtrw, pdlcy,N
n
Dma J. sulliv&\.,tdra,a nU Ffte.bd of Rexsto, q
Betj.f rtush tE w
Dadatun d tk EIi ttudonofR.liga6 !nb\.@ and Dxdi itu,a2A[t.
G L\Tt L 48?, 493 (19B8)
!1n-an "rl^
^Tr.,'tnq
conticr. Elm wgc $e rcc?R rishrs or
r.eedom orDoFhip derogabtc
in d,c cono(l of0,e wa in Boe,ja dle
prolisbns
ofthCrocva
Convedion and $e I
qr/ p.otocots
address l;
1ry
*1.q
9s*"
rishts wridr u|c dd.u6.tion
of rdisbus
prop'ty wouh notare. Th. Foudh Ccncya CoNeition ofj949
prouds
rn Articl. 27-rhrt
.protcrcd
pcrsons
arc ntirld, in aJ
cruEn$ances\
to rcA.d for . . rlEir rEligiou! convjctions ahd pracricg
ano tntr marners ard olstonls.{
Moreo}tf. Anicle 58 of'fie sarle
uoJlqlton rEquircs ftar rhe
,,Occupying
poww
shall permlt
ninjsrers oi
rsrgon ro grve sF rtusl assisance ro the mrnbers of their religjous
com'nuniries,'
Erd rhar ficy
'acccpt consigrunens
ofb@ts ana a.iaes
requred.tor
rctigto.us needs ard shdl frcilitare their disdiburion
in
occlprd lerritory."-
protocol
I !o the C$eva Convrlions
addrs!s
rn ngn ot worship ofrhos in fie power
ofa party ro tlle conflici who
oo nol quaxry lor speciat trearneot undcr arorher sction of rhe ceneva
r-oNsrrons
or the
prolocot psrrglrph
I ofAaic.le 75, rqunes rhar as
]-ifllm
reuuancnr
.I prson'
b accorded
rcsp; tor o,n
conucfotrs
and retiaious pnctjcs
Th word
'prad,cs, is agin
hporl4
a! n spccifcaly addrsrs
rhe act of worship nd,r ;an
:'*1q
.
tT.:
bref. rr wourd be dificulr ro arsue rhar ihe
oesni(lon
orchurchs ard mosques oulside ft zone ofconbal wo,jd
De arc*td wdq rhne
[rovision To $e edit thal rhe confl;c_t in Bosia
may te conddercd
a non-inremadoMl
connid. identical lrnguage
in
Anicle4 ofPmrocotI
ro $e Gaevz Comentions wornd apply
-
^
*
Aaicle 53 of
prorocot
I ard the identicnt tanguage in Anict 16
:1,1.::11,1,!-'TTr
.urrurar objeos and praces ofworship. we,e
unL ft.en y the only irstincs
in which rhe ngh to sorship
ard the
prooprrrcn
on largamg
oltural propeny $ere Unked as do;y retated
fl1:..1P f
*l"d in Pan tr rbove Ardcle s] fodids 'a..ts of
no^srury drected agatns! historic monumenrs. wo*s ofafl or ptaces
of
worsrup wruch conslituie the cultural or spiritual heriuge ofpeoples
19961
BO'NlA-HEMEGOWN/
202
;,*.
ff ffi f+';l.;S,?frTorcjvilie3pdqs
in rim orwe. A.g
m3 BUFFAIO JOURNAL OF INTERNAnONAL LAW
Nol3
.
5
As$mnB thal "historic'is mernt to modi& only the word
'monumentsr" it folows dlat artworks and plac.s ofworship which are
pan ofdrc pintu l h.iilagp ofpopls ar. prot dcd regadless ofthen
cultural or historic.l !"lue.6 This provd to bc a divisi\ icare in the
dmftina ofthe Protocols, as did inilialy the inclus'on ofihe anicls at
dl."
Sone del.EFrions argucd that ro includ. a[ placls ofwonhiP
rgardlss ofcxltural value would deprivc orlturaly sigriffcant property
oftu sp.cial $atus, spcialy si"ce local religiotis buildings ir so often
usd for military purposs.! The draft ariicle refgred qccitrcatly to
placs ofworship, but only to ctrltural and not s?iritual hritage. As
tll6e wrs dil disagrffsf as to *heiher dy plac ofworship was part
of the cultural heritage of popls" dl cornrnittee delid refqnce to
pla.es ofwoFhip fiom Anjcle 53 and placd it in Anicle 3 rs an exsnple
of property normaly comrnitted to civilian use. Ircal churchs would
thddo receive drc nornal prolclion ofotlE civilian proFty, and an
undersianding wrs rca(nd that orhr.ly irnportant places ofwoEhjp
would not be deprived prordion under the language covering clllnlral
rprumnts ard buildings. At the insistenc ofa large numb6 of$a.eg
however, 'placs ofworship' w?s renrnrd ard erpplerEted vrith the
oFst language on 'cl tural or spirituai heritagp. "s
It has ben &gucd,
however, that this larguag gos no fanher than the comp.omis
aiBngenen! and thus that locrl churchs receive no more protec;tion
thar other civilan propeny.e The Idemational Comrnitte ofthe Red
Cross (ICRC) took this vieq noting that "spiritual heritage ofpoples"
was neant orly to cover objecls 'wh6c wlue tnnscrds gcogrrphical
bounduies, and $,iidr .re unique in chrracler and are intinatly
a
Ml,sprdfr.ll,st16
'
T@,A&p/arct 14,.1564-65
"\,lro EBo[Ea^L,llewRtrrsFcRvcmrsoFAnIf,CoNFLrcrs Colo!Nrary
oN E Trc l9?7 tisrrs ADmdrro@ C6v^ Collrnj]@N s 1949, !t
33r
0982)
'
1a at 312. Ii pdlidle, a n@bd ofM6Un ndes, aldgwiLh lhe Holy Se ad llaly,
iEi!.dd [\is sbdifioliod,Id
r9961 BOSN]A-EERZEGOWNA 2U
associated with lhe history and siture ofr people.''t The ICRC nored
tlur spiritual importanc rrl.y odsa cvtfr in th abscnce of oitu"l
imponsncc, srd f'at 'spintual' was *rit!!o irto $ Irrotocol to covr.
such situatjons, but not to cxtend protection to local churches or
Th. Blgjan ddegarc ddcribd ttri!
'?icw
wdl saying
that rhe anicle refftd to 'places of worfip so
intimardy asrociated with dlose fajths t'at, mor than al
dte odEr rdigioos bondings alrady protcctd undef
Anicle 47
lAnicle
52 ofthe final veBion ofProtocot I],
they semed to be th.ir true embodinnt on eaih.'q
The Saudi Arabian dclegaae, howevr, sind to fe.l
that the phras 'or spiritual' extended
Aecial
proteciion
to aI placs ofwonlip, presumably under the theory
that any place ofworsbp mu$ b pan ofthc spiritud
hritage ofthat partiqrlar hith.r
8. A Ne\9 Aryuch to Religiols Proryrty
The connid in Bosnia-Herzegovina has draftaticntly
demonstratd lhe wlnembility of religjous properry in waninte.
Moreoltr, it has offctrd an ide3l cise study daDonstraring the
ydlue
of
lhe qtribal lEritage provision ofthe 1977 Protocols, and srpporring the
position
ofthose dlegations who wished to rdend protertion to all
rdigioos proprty. Hoptuly, ifth world corununity hds the lessons
ofthis connicr, it wil slimulale furthei rcwlMtion ofhow w lhhk
about the protectjon ofcultural property during arned conflicr.
Cultural property, whther religious in mture or no! dri!s its
i
I!'rN ndrcomoFrrER[DcRoss.Co NrARyoNmAlomoNe
PR@cots oF 8 JLl 197? ro n GE v CoNaEMNs 12AL@sr t9.19,.t6.46
0940.
'r
HowArD S. LEVE, 3 PRoEcDoN oF WR VrrM: PRorocoL I ro m 1949
GEMV^CoNaTmoNs221 (1980).
2o5 BWFALO JOURNAL OF INIERNAflONAL IIW
lvol3
need for protcrion fiom a csiain bundle of rights irnplicared in its
conridxd odsrcr. fic
qrhral
irtqDrdonali$s ar. concd $lterl they
$gg$ dd al ofhmankird has .n irnsEs in the contimed exigence of
the Mosar Bridg, in prscrving that "atternpt to grasp elernity." Sucfi
w!.ks ofan belp give mcaning to humaniry, snd it ssns appropriare to
rlfEr to our colleclive irtrest in c'eating maning through art as a nght.
Similarlt rhe orlturrl nationlli$s lre aho correcl in obsNing that the
Mosrar Bridge may b a strongr vficle for giving rhcaning to the lives
ofBosiars dlan to dE rsr ofus. Thir intsests in the Bridge's srvi!"I
n8ybeslrlgerrhan otirs, sinc. it isin some senle their bridge Ilis not
only a monlme't to hun'anity, hn also a parr of $e hiltory of a
paniorlar pople, and threforc rnaintains additionai ihponece to dE!
popl. The war in Bosnia h!3 demofftratd that this very imponance
renders such property vduable as a mililary targt to thos who wish to
dri! popleiom theirhomer. The attack on the Mostar B.id8e E?s an
afront lo lnlliar)lin4 but it was also an Essault on the orlture wfiich built
L Ir was a spiritual attlck on a pople, ard a delibent anmpt to drive
d|m ofby tunililating that i/hich helps give manirg to thet livs.
Cultural dd rdiSious property,lheq dsftcs spcial protclion
not only kuse hs ddrudion huts ltrlI.ankind as a wlFle, hft
additioialy because $ch dstruction con$r'nnes an attack on the objcis
through vhich a people dcfin s irsr Culbrral property law, is i' this
way a sralemnr to th efct that anacks dir.led at the human spirir will
not be tolerated. In this light, one crn se that a strict adherence to the
cultural intemational;st approach is clearly inadequate with re5?cr to
bolh rdjgious and sanlar o.rhunl property. By foclsirg on the herirage
of all mankin4 it becoms too ary to disreCard the needs of tlle
cor nunitjs \I'hich d}e proprty in que$ion *"s originaly designed to
serve The Arc de Triomphe \r"s o$viously not built a! a service ro fi
$rrotindjng neiglbodDods ofParis. The Husnjja Mosque in Gradacac,
howevr, *Es built with a spe.ifc place and conmunity in mind. Wile
the architcts crtainly attempted to make the nosque beeutiftL and
while the residents ofthe towrl may feel a certain pride in showing the
mosque to outsidri its value to the oituml hritage of mankird is
minimal at besl. It is simpty one of hudreds of sl'Itrlar mosques
scanred thmughour the Balkans Evat to the Islamjc worl4 $ch a
19961
BOSMA.HERZEGONNA
206
moGque is uninponad
Eom 0E poi ofview ofirnfrational orttu"t or
spntiat lEitag. At talr t*D books devotd ro mosque editectrrE of
the worid have dccrncd
yugostavian
m<rsques unlvonhy ofnbre tllan a
pacsng nEnjon' Thcn imporraicc is lo d,en comuniries, atld the
internarional cornuniy should more rhoroughly
consider its duty to
tho6e conmJrdtis to en$re the pmrection
oflocaly irnpona retigious
yor:yer. $c approadr ro ontlnd propcrry a, pr@,rJ haj
pror,en m$fljcle io deaj with cjss ofSlobaly insignifcn r but loc.Iy
rmportad drgrous propcrty
Cujtuit propcdy
is sr, for Eorericnt
purposes
as rhe conunon propgty of thc world We fet dur w, as
nlllhan bqnSr ha!! some righl irnptred in $e c.minued exisgrce of
Oe
Rr.rnids
or Si. P.reis Such proFry drivcs irs !"tue to rhe world
throueh ns orlrural imponance. Ttre imponarct ofreligious propary,
howeve( cannor b so ensily ).?tained, ajthough utLimaret; simikr
llTts
a,: trnpti?:ed..
wl'jr the rtusenjja Mosque may nor b orany
'rportahce
to noD-MLrrtim Anedcea eirher as a pertess oftural wori
or as a spmhral morumenl its mle in rh crld:cac Muslin coffinunity,s
contining ight ro worshp is of rhe urtno$ d8ti6crnc
fu a
Sndarhe"irl
hyman.nqh!
dle rigtn ofre[sious 6e.don apptes lo aI
lltn"""y,
y
its denial ro any people is a regnimare $bject ror
u ern tonal conc.m
.
As car b scn tom the relevarn provjsions
disotssed abovq the
nghr !o comjroe tle pra.rices which conslitule lhe physrcst
manife*4 ion
or rexgoubrid a a crucial p3n ofrhe dghr ofr.jgious frdom Whne
the law relaring io rh protctim
oforhurat propriy during tir, of
afrned conttct loorses on rll propfiy
nsett *,l,at is ralh at srake in rh.
s'tuation otdigious pro!ny is dre tuncrionat aspecr oi0r propenv
in
.
qu$orl. Irs latue is d'i!d from dE de n ph)s in $ ffe ofriE tocat
corunmty n sn/s and the adivities to which irs corrinud edsleflce is
essglrial. A church or mosque;s rno,e tha, physicat propnv.
tt ispan
ol a procss frough which merl ard women express rheir ietigous bjet
:j- l:
rTq" Ht oRy. ArofilcLnir DclrloficM
^r.D
Rrddll
urlRery (Mtu
F isttM & H&sljrttD Khd e& , t994) Si! at$Jd$ D Hoe,
isrMc ArcrrEcruE (l
q7)
207 BWFAIA JOURNAL OF INTERNAnONAL LIW
IVol3
Tlrus, dE sy*rnati:dsudionofrdiSious propertywhich has occ fred
h Bo$ria-Hcrzgovina nust be sen as more than the de$ruclion of
property. It is dle synma.ic denial ofthe dght ofrligioos fedon
through dr dsirirdion ofthe pb'sical necssitiB ofworsdp and the
physical reprsdarions offrilh so importrnt to a conrnunjty snse of
identity.
In thjs wax the ne.d to prote.l elg| locrl religious propefty
Bos
hand in hind with lhe nd lo prot.i cultural proprty grlraly. fie
world community is afre.ted in lhe srs thrl srch desudion
coostinnes a hurnan righs viohrioq ,nd play! an impo@nt role in th
procss ofethric cl$rsing wbich \l aI have an interest in pre!ndD8
Moreovet, on the local le1,1, the dstruclion ofreliSious propeny plays
the same role as the destruclion ofoiturai property generaly. Whethr
or nol tne Husnija Mosque is oforltu..l inponance, its deslruclion
corsdns a delfte'de dack on the spiriluality ofa people in rn attempt
to lake rncaDing from their lives ard dnw them fiom their homes. It is
an attack on spiritualty its8
just
as was the dstruction of the Mostar
Bridge. Why, theq cxclude retgious property fiom the spcial
protedjon otrred lrlturrl propdty sirnply b.ruse it is not of"cultural"
\alue? Suct property slla s wift onturai propqty $e mo$ siliett
attntutes which rBke i! padulady \olnerablq and its dcstruction
panjotuly painfll. \4hether a people atmpt to bring spiritual meani.g
to their lives tkough an or tluough relgioq then nglt to do so needs
intrnaional p@tedion Odrwise, oitural and religious propeny offers
too tempting a larget for anlone undenaki.g a carnpaign of ethnic
cleansing. Thjs is th ca! regardless of the abstncr questions of
ownership posired by th fals opposhion ofcultural narionalism and
oitural intemationslis.
Cultural pmprty law has ad!"nced well beyond lhe geltqal
F@crbrls
of'ed civilian propsty by the tlague Convntiors of l9O7
It llas rEcognizd tlu! cnain objects desFf,v odra protecrion baDs of
their irnpori.nce to dE
qrltur.l
he.itage ofma*ind. In the Proro.ols of
the Gseva Convrtions, we se the international @mrnunity tunblins
toward the nxt s1p in srch protctionihe recognjtion ftar placs of
worship nd similar spcial protcrioN for similar reasons. The
refrence ao rhe "s?fitua| heritage" of peoples in the Protocols is an
l9e6l BOSMA-HEMECOMNA
2OE
important stp towards lhe redization that specirl protciion ofcertain
proprty is mcritcd not for rer$ns relating to property, but rather
bcruse imptc{td in lhe conrinud exfurdEe of crrtlin obi..is is
hrrl,nity's qu6r for bauty and neaning. By addr.sling ilEse rightr it
sms cle3r tha! any plac ofwo$lrip is nec.ssarily pan ofihe spiribat
hriuge ofpeopls, and tlEt dE reslrictive viw ofrhis pbras as adoptd
by inaiy nations is profoundly wrong-hesded. RetiSious properry .nd
orhrdl proprty s.nc sirnilar purpos6. Thy are both rianiesrations of
hrrsnity's righ io anrnpt to grasp drnity. Onc w hd tttc lcssons
ofBosnia and bcgin to fools on this righl rartEr than on the rheoretical
pmpedy intersts ofthe intemarioral cornnunjty, rhe tegal prote.tion
of
both cultur.i and religious property durjng anned codii $,i attain a
logical consistency which heretofore ir has lackd.