You are on page 1of 3

United Nations General Assembly: Social, Cultural, and Humanitarian Committee Sponsors: Morocco, Singapore, Bulgaria Signatories: Mongolia,

Tunisia, Zimbabwe, Somalia, Peru, Portugal, Libya Topic: World Heritage in Tentative Lists Churchgate: Extension to Mumbai The General Assembly, Keeping in mind Churchgate in Mumbai, India fulfils criteria (ii) and (iv) of the Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention that call for a site to exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments and architecture or technology, monumental arts, townplanning, or landscape design, and must be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates significant stage, or stages in human history, Cognizant of Churchgate being proposed as a serial extension to the Mumbai CST building, already inscribed as a World Heritage Site, compared to other structures built by F.W.Stevens in the 19th Century, Conscious of The Ministry of Railways of the Government of India and the Western Railways emphasis on proper maintenance and preservation of the Churchgate building in its true form, Acknowledges the brimming activity and within and around Churchgate similar to the Mumbai CST in spite of developing air travel, and their immense contribution as a crucial element of the Western Railways in the Republic of India, Recognizes Churchgate as an example par excellence that has brought forth an amalgamation of the great cultures of Britain, Central Asia and India, facilitating the exchange and interchange of human values and cultural elements, Bearing in mind only 5 railway stations have been listed as Grade 1 heritage structures in Mumbai and, Churchgate and Mumbai CST are the finest of these, 1) Takes note of Churchgate being proposed as a serial extension while having the same architecture, architect, purpose, and style from the 19th Century, adjacent to current building, Mumbai CST which is already a World Heritage Site; 2) Strongly criticizes Mumbais municipal corporation(s) for having in the past displayed a legacy of ignorance and unhealthy avoidance pertaining to its heritage structures, i) The forts and structures, including the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus (CST) holding the World Heritage Sites status, are lined with careless patches of cement, 19th century stone buildings have now been crowned with extra floors

of concrete and ancient trees in and around such areas are in constant danger of being cut to widen pavements; 3) Deplores Mumbais Central Railways officials declaration a few weeks before UNESCOs world heritage week, celebrated from 19th to 25th November, 2012, that the World Heritage Site status given to Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus in 2004 was interfering with their plans of renovating the station and constructing commercial towers on the site; 4) Calls upon Mumbai to respect, keep up and maintain the dignity associated with granting the status of a World Heritage Site to Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, given that it has brought about pride and a large volume of tourists to the site, before issuing revision plans to include serial extensions such as that of Churchgate; 5) Affirms in a city overflowing with built and natural environments worth preserving, heritage is rarely a priority, i. It has been 3 months since the Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee completed its term and the new one has still not been appointed ii. List of 900 new structures waiting to be listed has been pending ever since it was submitted to the municipal commissioner five years ago 6) Confirms the Municipal Corporation of the city already maintains sufficient funds to be able to support the maintenance of Churchgate area, and does not require, and has not requested for extra funds from UNESCO for caretaking; 7) Notes with disapproval Mumbai as the financial capital and urbanisation hub of modern-day India has failed in multiple ways to balance its new sprouting city structures with its age old architectural masterpieces with special reference to Churchgate, and it immediate surroundings; 8) Condemns this legacy of bureaucracy, carelessness and nonchalance, which has led to the deterioration of the one site in the vicinity which already holds the World Heritage Site status; 9) Urges the United Nations General Assembly, with the UNESCO World Heritage Committee to defer its decision for attributing the status of a World Cultural Heritage site to Churchgate, Mumbai until its scheduled next meeting, requesting further information and timely reports every trimester from the Municipal Authorities upon which it shall reconsider its decision. Synopsis: The permanent delegation of India wants the world cultural heritage site status to be given to the Churchgate building as a serial extension to the already inscribed Mumbai CST building

as World Heritage site. India thinks that Churchgate fulfils criteria II and IV of the operational guidelines for the implementation of the world heritage convention that focuses upon the cultural significance of the proposed site.