A/HRC/58/60 30. All international law and policy documents on digital heritage, including UNESCO heritage conventions, which naturally extend to the digital sphere, should be interpreted and implemented in a way that allows for the recognition of the communities most connected to a specific cultural heritage. 31. As digital technologies advance, artificial intelligence plays an increasing role in the protection of cultural heritage. International law has yet to catch up with the challenges that these technologies pose, but some instruments already have the potential to foster a cultural rights approach, provided that human rights standards are systematically taken into consideration. The Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law highlights the need for accountability, transparency and compliance with human rights law, while initiatives such as the Global Digital Compact and the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) can help to tackle structural biases in the training of artificial intelligence and promote its ethical development, serving as tools to restrain the unauthorized use of creators’ work and the commodification of cultural expressions. Globally, the Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence reinforces the importance of international cooperation to safeguard cultural diversity and human dignity in the context of emerging technologies. 32. A more practical tool to address these challenges involves the creation of community-led archives. Such archives have proven to be a positive way to empower communities and allow them to retain control over their cultural heritage. In the past few decades, more and more digitalization projects have been carried out by communities themselves who create their own digital archives where they can control the storage, distribution of and access to their cultural heritage. It is vital to carefully reflect on all elements of such projects to ensure that communities do indeed have overall control in substance, rather than being used as a façade for projects that are really led by others. B. Right to cultural heritage and digitalization processes in times of crisis 33. In the face of armed conflict, natural disasters and environmental degradation, digitalization can ensure the long-term preservation of cultural heritage for future generations. Institutions can make significant strides in ensuring that music, dance and oral storytelling continue to thrive, even as the originating communities face displacement, environmental change and cultural erosion due to conflict or natural disasters. 65 The 1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (the Hague Convention), together with its two Protocols, obligates States to take preventive measures during peacetime to protect cultural property, including through the documentation and inventorying of significant cultural assets, which digital technologies can greatly enhance. Similarly, frameworks such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 and the 2003 Declaration concerning the Intentional Destruction of Cultural Heritage highlight digitalization as a preventive measure, enhancing the resilience of cultural assets against disasters and conflicts. 34. Digital tools, such as satellite imagery and geospatial analysis, enable the monitoring of threats, facilitate preventive measures and can also support recovery, accountability and reconciliation efforts by reconnecting people through their heritage.66 Digital records can also play an important role in enabling the restoration of sites or objects, as was done after the 65 66 10 See www.researchgate.net/publication/334735261_Intangible_Cultural_Heritage_and_New_Technologies _Challenges_and_Opportunities_for_Cultural_Preservation_and_Development. For examples, see https://ich.unesco.org/en/home; https://blogs.bl.uk/music/world-and-traditional-music/; https://folkways.si.edu/; https://livingtongues.org/; and www.itma.ie/. See, for example, UNESCO, “Digitization of the intangible cultural heritage elements of communities in Bosnia and Herzegovina” (accessed on 12 February 2025). GE.25-01705