The draft construction law, according to experts, threatens cultural heritage

Prague - The proposed construction law, according to some experts on cultural heritage and academics, significantly restricts the protection of cultural heritage in the Czech Republic. It only considers documentation for territorial proceedings as the basis for permitting all constructions, which they believe does not capture all aspects of monument restoration. Additionally, according to the proposal, a binding opinion from preservationists would not be necessary for granting building permits. Experts mention this in a letter sent today to Prime Minister Andrej Babiš (ANO).

"Unfortunately, we must state with all seriousness that the discussed proposal (...) dangerously interferes with the essence of monument care and, without the necessary knowledge of heritage law and international conventions binding for the Czech Republic, it also jeopardizes the reputation of the Czech Republic abroad," state the signatories of the letter, which includes the rector of Charles University Tomáš Zima, the rector of the Academy of Fine Arts Tomáš Vaněk, the rector of the AAAD Jindřich Vybíral, the dean of the Faculty of Architecture at CTU Ladislav Lábus, two deans of philosophical faculties, and several directors of artistic institutes of Czech universities.

They point out that the proposed simplified permitting process applies to all constructions without distinction. "One cannot approach the construction of a highway in the same way as the restoration of a national cultural monument," they write. However, they say the planned recodification of construction law does not distinguish this and does not respect the basic principles of state care for cultural heritage.

They particularly object to the intended simplification of documentation for building permits, which should take the form of plans for today's territorial proceedings. In this process, only the rough mass of the construction is taken into account. "It cannot address questions important for preserving cultural and historical values, such as restoration interventions, the process of restoring stone elements, Renaissance sgraffito, stucco decorations, or potential conflicts when conducting electrical wiring within walls with historical murals," they state. These issues are currently addressed with the owners by the National Heritage Institute in collaboration with the executive components of state heritage care. According to critics, these aspects cannot be assessed solely by the building office in a single permitting process, as the law proposes.

According to the proposers, the law should simplify the preparation of constructions. "Permitting processes concerning cultural monuments and heritage reserves do not cause today’s situation of a time-consuming process, do not pose a brake on the economic development of the Czech Republic and the influx of foreign investments, nor do they cause difficulties with timely drawing from European Union funds," the signatories of the letter state.

The system of state heritage care is enshrined in the heritage law. In the Czech Republic, a frequently amended law from the late 1980s is in effect, and the adoption of a new one has repeatedly stumbled on political will in recent years. The heritage law affects many groups of people whose interests often stand in opposition. Culture Minister Antonín Staněk (ČSSD) stated this week that he has held discussions with regions and professional associations in preparation for the new law. "The law must be simplified, clarified, and made meaningful. In March, a version that should have a chance to gain support in the Chamber should go into broader debate," he stated. It is to be submitted to the government in June.

The new construction law should shorten the permitting process for constructions from the current average of 5.4 years to one year. Territorial proceedings, construction proceedings, and EIA will be merged into a unified permitting process. A Supreme Building Authority is to be established, which will be part of state administration. The proposal further provides that if the relevant office does not respond within 30 days, the so-called fiction of consent will apply, meaning it will be assumed that the office agrees.