4 the fact that I am in a minority position (the majority has an entirely different position that is much more restrictive) - and one which I maintain with determination. Aside from resolving the current controversy, the Court should respond to a specific portion of Suriname’s request, which was adequately answered by the victims’ representatives, and demonstrate – above all convince the State of – the imperious necessity to repair the spiritual damages suffered by the N’djukas of the Moiwana Community, and create conditions for a speedy reconstruction of their cultural tradition. 20. Accordingly, I find delimitation, demarcation, tilting and the return of their traditional territories indeed essential. This is a matter of survival of the cultural identity of the N’djukas, so that they may conserve their memory, both personally and collectively. Only then will their fundamental right to life lato sensu be rightfully protected, including their right to cultural identity. 21. The universal juridical conscience, which is, in my understanding, the material source of all Law, has evolved in such a manner that it recognizes this urgent need. It is illustrated in the significant triad of the Conventions of UNESCO, formed by the 1972 Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage; the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, and, more recently, the 2005 Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions. 22. The 1972 UNESCO Convention warns in its preamble that the deterioration or disappearance of any item of the cultural or natural heritage regrettably weakens the cultural heritage of “all the nations of the world,” because that heritage is of the most significant interest and needs to be preserved as a “part of the world heritage of mankind as a whole”; and from there on to establish “an effective system of collective protection of the cultural and natural heritage of outstanding universal value.”6 The 2003 UNESCO Convention seeks the safeguard of the intangible cultural heritage (for this it invokes the international instruments on human rights), and conceptualizes this latter as “the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills (…) that communities, groups, and in some cases individuals, recognize as part of their cultural heritage.” 7 23. The recent 2005 UNESCO Convention was preceded by its 2001 Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, which conceptualizes cultural diversity as the common heritage of humanity, and it expresses its aspiration for greater solidarity on the basis of recognition of cultural diversity, of the “awareness of the unity of humankind.” 8 After the 2001 Declaration, the 2005 Convention, which was adopted (10/20/2005) after debates in depth 9, reiterated the idea of cultural diversity as a common heritage of humanity, explaining that “culture takes diverse forms across time and space” and this diversity is incorporated “in the uniqueness and plurality of the identities and cultural expressions of the peoples and societies making up humanity.”10 The 6 Whereas 1 and 5. 7 Preamble and Article 2(1). 8 Preamble and Article 1 of the 2001 Declaration. Cf., e.g., UNESCO/General Conference, document 33-C/23, del 04.08.2005, pp. 1-16, and Annexes; and cf. G. Gagné (ed.), La diversité culturelle: vers une Convention internationale effective?, Montréal/Québec, Éd. Fides, 2005, pp. 7-164. 9 10 Preamble, consideranda 1, 2 and 7 of the 2005 Convention.