Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Tytuł pozycji:

Zmiany w ustawie - potrzeby i możliwości

Tytuł:
Zmiany w ustawie - potrzeby i możliwości
AMENDMENTS TO THE LAW - NEEDS AND POSSIBILITIES
Autorzy:
Konopka Marek
Data publikacji:
1986
Język:
polski
angielski
Dostawca treści:
CEJSH
Artykuł
  Przejdź do źródła  Link otwiera się w nowym oknie
Nos 3-4/85 and 1/86 of „Ochrona Zabytkow” contained a number of articles devoted to problems of the organization of conservation service in Poland and proposals to amend the law „O n the Protection of Cultural Property and on M u se um s " of February 15, 1962. The author of this article has made an attempt to specify what is most important in the 1962 Law and what requires amending. According to him, it is necessary to harmonize the views on the wording of 3 articles, namely 4, 8, 20, which define the subject of the protection, position of the bodies of conservation authorities and a scope of the protection. Just like T. Zielniewicz, the author thinks that the main organ should be the General Conservator of Monuments and that this will be possible only If he performs the function of the V ice - M i nister of Culture and Art. At a voivodship level this o r ga n ils and still should be a voivodship monuments’ conservator, while at other administrative levels functions of con servators may be performed by the persons specially a uthorized by a voivodship monuments’ conservator. The author shares the view that the subject of the p ro tection should include also historic landscape and no n-ma terial values such a s names of towns and streets. Nevertheless, in his view, in order that this extension of the protection of cultural property was not merely a declaration, the Law should include amendments that would set out guidelines for the legal action in this respect and thus introduce into the monuments’ register entries on landscape and names. This results from the wording of articles 20 and 4. The later article is the subject of long-standing d iscu s sion, just as it defines which cultural property is covered by legal protection. According to the author, the present wording of the article is ambiguous and he suggests its new reading. At the same time the author proposes that historic structures which are not included.

Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies