Now a blanket adoption of amended Statements of OUV for a number of sites inscribed in previous sessions. No amendments.

And that finishes Addendum 8B.

Now the committee moves onto 8D, which clarifies property boundaries and areas by state parties.

Improve your maps!

48% of properties still have inadequate maps. The World Heritage Committee continues to work with state parties to get better maps.

Maps must meet current technical requirements.

Italy thanks the World Heritage Center for their outstanding work in updating maps through this cartographic project.

No more comments. The committee approves draft decision 8D.

Now 8E, which reviews and approves retrospective statements of OUV for sites that didn't have any upon inscription.

No comments. The committee approves draft decision 8E.

Bahrain makes a statement on the importance of updating statements of OUV, especially if new information/context on sites comes to light.

He's racing through his statement, possibly recognizing that everyone was ready to move on.

Now the committee moves onto Item 8C -- an update on the list of sites approved in this session, as well as World Heritage Sites in Danger.

The Director interrupts to ensure that the working documents for this session are not showing up online for the delegates. Asks to hold discussion until they can resolve the technical issue.

As of this session, there are now 1248 properties inscribed on the World Heritage list:
- 972 Cultural
- 235 Natural
- 041 Mixed

Breakdown per region:
- 112 Africa
- 097 Arab States
- 305 Asia-Pacific
- 581 Europe and North America
- 153 Latin America and Caribbean

53 sites remain on the list of World Heritage Sites in Danger, following the removal of three sites during this session.

Norway unhappy that so many recommendations of the advisory bodies are upturned. Sweden also values the role of the advisory bodies and would prefer if they would be listened to. Won't make either of them any friends when they apply to become committee members.
(Also: their own Nordic neighbour Denmark did get its recommendation overturned.)

Item 8C is now closed

Norway thanks Portugal, Poland, Nepal, and Mongolia for accepting ICOMOS and IUCN recommendations. They remain concerned about states that push to overturn ICOMOS and IUCN recommendations.

Sweden is pleased to see the successful African nominations, a result of the state parties working with UNESCO for approval. They are also pleased with the countries that accepted referral and deferral recommendations, and remain concerned about countries that do not accept the recommendations of experts.

Slovenia encourages state parties to continue working on revised nominations based on recommendations from ICOMOS and IUCN.

Norway was a committee member as recently as 2021, and they've been pretty consistent with their concerns. And good for them!

NGOs took the floor next.

Praise for the Cambodian Memorial Sites as a good approach for a Site of Memory.

Belgium enjoyed the process of being a committee member.

They also emphasize the importance of state parties listening to their evaluations and providing thorough documentation. They commend the states that agreed to go along with the deferral and referral process.*

*side note: Belgium itself proposed an amendment to overturn the referral of Møns Klint and to inscribe the property, since Denmark had provided new information and clarified concerns since the initial evaluation.

And that wraps up Item 8, I believe. Monday is a day off for the delegates, so it looks like their weekend may start soon.