[attach id=412656 size="medium"]Artwork commissioned by Unesco to raise awareness about cultural heritage.[/attach]
Should access to cultural heritage and creative expression become a constitutional right?
The question beckons as we move closer to Valletta’s European Capital of Culture in 2018.
The varied identities and the communities which connect to define what Malta and being Maltese is all about, have changed into something different from when our latest constitutional developments were being tabled and discussed.
Interest in cultural heritage and creative expression is on the increase, even though society might still consider the sector’s connections with the tourism industry as the overriding value.
The institutional framework has also reacted to change. The ways and means how national institutions perform and react to the needs and aspirations of Maltese society have also become a cyclical process of change, with institutions promoting initiatives which, in turn, foster greater interest and awareness.
Access to top-quality culture events has become much more sustained and quality is becom-ing less a matter of exclusivity reserved for the few.
However, one thing that remains largely unrecognised, especially by the Maltese, is the relevance of culture and creative expression to the well-being of the community and the Maltese citizen of today.
How important is it to ‘make culture legal’, so to speak? When all is said and done, would a mention in the Maltese Constitution help fuel change?
Should we move beyond protecting and promoting heritage and creativity to citizen empowerment? The questions raised certainly merit a structured debate amongst all stakeholders which should help define the best way forward.
International fora have already paved the way for such a structured discussion to happen. Agenda 21 for Culture, an internationally-recognised reference document endorsed and promoted by The Global Network of United Cities and Local Governments Committee of Culture, endorses culture as a human right.
Other conventions and de-clarations have also promoted culture as a human right.
The 2005 Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, which also includes measures to ensure these expressions are accessible to the public at large, is one example.
The 2007 Fribourg Declaration of Cultural Rights recognises the rights of minority groups, particularly those within multicultural societies, to their cultural identity.
Stating principles is fine, but implementing them to the benefit of society remains the real challenge
These are but two out of a series of international initiatives that set the scene for a discussion about access to cultural heritage as a human right launched by the United Nations close to four years ago in 2011.
These praise-worthy initiatives concern the broader picture and are mostly reactive, developed in response to international issues, and certainly not in response to specific national or community realities.
Some are legally binding, while others are not. The right of access to cultural heritage and creativity is grounded within the European Convention of Human Rights and relates to a broad series of inter-national initiatives happening over the past decade.
The principles which these legal instruments and conventions promote are, indeed, recognised as benchmarks on a local level.
But it is, perhaps, time to go beyond a broad declaration of principles that is tantamount to a nod of acknowledgment.
Endorsing access to heritage and creative expression in our national constitution would send home the message that this does not solely concern promotion initiatives by heritage institutions and non-governmental organisations.
On the contrary, this would be a right which every citizen can invoke within the context of all the administrative checks and balances that the sector would nonetheless still require.
This would also help bring access to cultural heritage and creativity at the centre of national policies, indeed beyond the sector itself, simply because it concerns a recognised citizen’s right.
The message would be clear: much like health, education and other inalienable principles enshrined within our constitution, access to cultural heritage and creativity are a recognised constitutional right of fundamental importance to community identity and economic growth.
The practical application of this constitutional right may help the sector rethink definitions and long-standing practices.
National constitutions exist to guarantee the promotion and protection of human rights and freedoms, provide the legal instruments for building and strengthening democratic and constitutional institutions and for the recognition of values that are fundamental to society’s development.
Recognising the access to cultural heritage and creativity as a constitutional right would ultimately be empowering this country’s major resource, the people.
A word of caution, nonetheless, beckons yet again – stating principles is fine, but implementing them to the benefit of society remains the real challenge.
Recognising such a constitutional right would also have to go hand in hand with empowering the sector’s institutions and entities to act in response to this newly-recognised citizen’s right.
Sandro Debono is senior curator at the National Museum of Fine Arts (MUŻA).