The Application of the 1972 UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Cultural and Natural Heritage of Humanity by the STJ in Private Property Listed as Protected by the State
RESP nº 1791098/RJ analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14393/RFADIR-v49n1a2021-54330Keywords:
cultural heritage, UNESCO, Protected ProtepryAbstract
The case concerns a public civil action filed by the Public Ministry of the State of Rio de Janeiro (MPE-RJ) against the owner of a property listed as protected property, and the State of Rio de Janeiro asking, jointly and severally to both parties in the defendant, the restoration of the property as well as compensation for damages caused. The listed property is part of the Architectural and Urban Development Complex at Rua Martins Ferreira e Adjacências, in the Botafogo neighborhood, in the city of Rio de Janeiro. The Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro (TJ-RJ) ordered only the State of Rio de Janeiro to carry out the repair of the property as well as to pay the indemnity. On appeal to the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), the State of Rio de Janeiro claimed that the TJ-RJ did not assess the economic position or the absence of a statement by the defendant – in this case, the owner of the property. Based on this, the State of Rio de Janeiro defended that the decision of the TJ-RJ violated the Decree-Law of Listing (Decree-Law No. 25/1937), by ignoring the owner of the listed property, as he has primary responsibility for conservation of the good. Minister Herman Benjamin, rapporteur of the case at the STJ, welcomed the defense of the State of Rio de Janeiro and asserted that it is the owner's first duty to conserve and protect a listed property under his care and, if he does not have financial resources, he must make the communication state public authorities responsible for the protection of cultural heritage. His vote also highlighted that the State continues to have the obligation to preserve, identify and care for its cultural heritage, so that both parties (State and private owner, if any) have joint responsibility in this duty. The Superior Court group unanimously followed the rapporteur's position (STJ, 2019).