A/HRC/42/CRP.5 heritage of every people, such as monuments of architecture, art or history, whether religious or secular; archaeological sites; groups of buildings which, as a whole, are of historical or artistic interest…”665 The Convention also establishes a system of special heightened protections for cultural property that has been internationally recognized as being culturally significant.666 The Convention’s obligations are applicable to each party to the conflict and reflective of customary law.667 Customary international law also prohibits the destruction of or wilful damage to cultural property.668 Intentionally directing attacks against religious or cultural objects is a war crime provided they are not legitimate military objectives.669 294. While Mrauk-U has not yet been listed under the 1972 UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, it has been recognized, since 1996, as a site of outstanding universal cultural value that is set to be considered for inscription on the World Heritage List. The Government also recognizes Mrauk-U’s cultural significance.670 Given the facts of the situation, the Mission regards the ancient capital of Mrauk-U and its various structures to constitute cultural property under international law that should be afforded heightened protection under the 1954 Convention. 295. The 18 March 2019 attack that damaged the Rakkha Muni Pagoda, as well as the artillery positions of the Tatmadaw near the Nibuzar pagoda, the Shwe Taung pagoda and the Ratanamanaung pagoda, are all within the Government-nominated cultural property area of Mrauk-U.671 296. As such, the Tatmadaw’s positioning of artillery near historical monuments, including the Nibuzar pagoda, the Shwe Taung pagoda and the Ratanamanaung pagoda, as well as its alleged use of stones from ancient monuments, indicate that the Tatmadaw violated the absolute protections that international law affords cultural property from being used for military purposes672 and from being wilfully damaged, misappropriated or vandalized.673 The damage that the Tatmadaw’s 18 March 2019 attack on Mrauk-U town 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 1954 Hague Convention, art 1(a). See, ICTY, Prosecutor v. Jokić, Case No. IT-01-42/1, 18 March 2004, para. 23 and ICC, Prosecutor v. Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi, Judgment and Sentence, 27 September 2016, para. 80. UNESCO, Records of the General Conference, 27th Session, Paris, October–November 1993, available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0009/000956/095621E.pdf, reaffirming that the rules contained in Articles 3 and 4 of the 1954 Hague Convention could be considered part of international customary law. See also, ICTY, Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-AR72, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction (Appeals Chamber), 2 October 1995, para. 98 (Appeals Chamber included Article 19 of the 1954 Hague Convention along with the core of Additional Protocol II as being part of customary international law). According to the ICRC study on customary international humanitarian law, parties to armed conflict must take special care in military operations to avoid damaging buildings dedicated to religion, art, science, education or charitable purposes and historic monuments unless they are military objectives. The obligation to take “special care” is a high standard and requires Myanmar to exceed the measures it is required to take to avoid damage to civilian objects. Additionally, the use of property of great importance to the cultural heritage of every people for purposes which are likely to expose it to destruction or damage is prohibited, unless imperatively required by military necessity. See J.M. Henckaerts and L. DoswaldBeck, “Customary International Humanitarian Law. Volume I: Rules” (Cambridge, ICRC/Cambridge University Press, 2005), rule 38 (attacks against cultural property), and rule 39 (use of cultural property for military purposes). See J.M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck, “Customary International Humanitarian Law. Volume I: Rules” (Cambridge, ICRC/Cambridge University Press, 2005), rule 38 (attacks against cultural property), rule 40 (respect for cultural property). Ibid., rule 156 (definitions of war crimes). AM-003, The Government has been preparing a first draft nomination of the ancient town of MraukU to be recognized as a UNESCO World Heritage Site for submission in September 2019, and a final nomination dossier by February 2020. As an example of steps taken, on 22 July 2019, the Deputy Minister for Religious and Cultural Affairs held a meeting between local and foreign experts to finalize the draft nomination of Mrauk-U ancient town as a cultural heritage zone. FFFGEN-1555826851-4965. 1954 Hague Convention, Article 4 (1) and (2), Article 9. 1954 Hague Convention, Article 4 (3). 91