A/HRC/23/34/Add.2 place, building or object has been declared a Protected National Heritage, it is a criminal offence to tamper with it.”6 18. The Trust was dormant for some time; however, recognizing its importance, the Government appointed a new Board of Trustees in 2009 to spearhead its revitalization. The Policy statement and action plan 2009-20127 adopted by the Trust, lists its main objectives. 19. The revival of the Trust is welcome. The Special Rapporteur particularly appreciates the Trust’s intention to protect cultural heritage, including built heritage; promote archaeological research and study as one important component of history and memory; establish relationships with local communities and other relevant stakeholders so as to provide an opportunity for people to connect with their heritage and promote educational outreach, including through working with heritage clubs in secondary schools. She also stresses the importance of the Trust’s objective to document and give support to groups who are documenting or keeping alive cultural intangible heritage, and to seek to partner community groups to develop narrative on the historic and natural sites of the different regions of the country.8 In the Special Rapporteur’s view, programmes are urgently needed on this matter. 20. The Special Rapporteur also welcomes efforts undertaken by the Trust to widen its membership beyond an elite group of well-educated and/or well-off persons to encompass schools and grass-roots organizations. However, more efforts need to be undertaken in this respect. It is particularly important that efforts be made to inform people of the possibilities of becoming a member and the procedure to do so. On this matter, the Special Rapporteur welcomes the Trust’s plan to improve its website.9 21. Recommendations and requests by the Trust for Government action are channelled through the Ministry of Culture to the Cabinet, or to the Parliament, when relevant. The Special Rapporteur notes, however, that the Cabinet is not bound to respond to the recommendations submitted by the Trust, and is free to choose whether and when to act upon recommendations or postpone their consideration indefinitely. Moreover, it is only once the decision is taken by the Cabinet that the relevant recommendation of the Trust is made public. Therefore, the system lacks transparency as Vincentians may not be aware of some important recommendations made by the Trust, upon which the Government is not willing to take action. It therefore precludes wider participation in decision-making regarding cultural heritage matters. 22. The Special Rapporteur recommends that procedures be established to ensure that the Trust is systematically consulted prior to all development projects likely to impact on both tangible and intangible cultural heritage. For example, giving a seat to the Trust on the Planning Board may be one important mechanism to consider. Understanding that some privatized or semi-privatized islands may have their own local planning authorities, the Special Rapporteur also recommends that procedures be established to ensure systematic consultation of the Trust at the local level, regardless of ownership, in order to ensure cultural heritage is not adversely affected. 23. The Trust stated its intention to continue building on a shortlist of buildings under consideration for protected status and to send it to relevant ministries. The aim is to ensure that ministries register the Trust’s interests in the buildings and consult the Trust before 6 7 8 9 6 St. Vincent and the Grenadines National Trust, Policy statement and action plan 2009-2012, available at: http://svgnationaltrust.org/ Ibid. Ibid; see also St. Vincent and the Grenadines National Trust, Three-Year Strategic Plan, 2 May 2012. St. Vincent and the Grenadines National Trust, Three-Year Strategic Plan, 2 May 2012.