Scientific Journal of the Military University of Land Forces
ISSN: 2544-7122 (print), 2545-0719 (online)
2022, Volume 54, Number 4(206), Pages 524-539
DOI: 10.5604/01.3001.0016.1762
MILITARY UNIVERSITY OF LAND FORCES
Original article
The outcomes of the activities of the Voivodeship Office
for the Protection of Monuments in Wrocław
in the perspective of cultural security
from the local point of view in the years 2015-2019
Tomasz Landmann
Faculty of Logistics and Transport,
The International University of Logistics and Transport in Wrocław, Poland,
e-mail: t.landmann@wp.pl
INFORMATION
ABSTRACT
Article history:
The aim of the article is to determine and evaluate the effects of the activities of the Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments in Wrocław
related to the implementation of tasks in selected areas of protection and
care of monuments in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship in the years 2015-2019.
In the study, research methods such as critical analysis of the scientific literature, analysis of legal acts and – to a large extent – analysis of documents
are applied.
The diversity of the outcomes of the activities of the Voivodeship Office for the
Protection of Monuments in Wrocław in the described area was determined.
Administrative activities concerned the necessity to enter non-movable monuments into the register of monuments at the request of the owner or the
entity in charge of that monument, making new entries in the voivodeship
register of monuments or recommending changes in local spatial development plans to local government units. Issuing of permits for conducting archaeological research dominated the issues related to the regulation of other
legally permitted activities in relation to monuments. The great activity of the
Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments in Wrocław related to
issuing conservation recommendations has been demonstrated.
Submited: 04 March 2022
Accepted: 21 November 2022
Published: 15 December 2022
KEYWORDS
cultural security, the Voivodeship Office for the Protection
of Monuments in Wrocław (DWKZ), monument
© 2022 by Author(s). This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution
International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Introduction to the issue under consideration
The purpose of the article is to determine and evaluate the effects of the activities of the
Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments in Wrocław (hereinafter referred to
as: DWKZ) related to the implementation of tasks in selected areas of protection and care
of monuments in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship in the years 2015-2019. An assumption was
524
The outcomes of the activities of the Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments…
made that the involvement of DWKZ contributed to the preservation of material cultural
heritage as an element of strengthening the cultural security of the region and the country.
The literature on the subject demonstrates the relationship between the issue of protection
and care of monuments and the strengthening of cultural security of the Republic of Poland
[1, p. 17; 2, p. 232; 3, p. 575; 4, p. 202-203].
The following research problems are adopted in the article:
1. What was the practice of issuing a decision by DWKZ on the entry of monuments
into the register of non-movable monuments and the register of movable monuments in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship?
2. What was the involvement of DWKZ in the development of the content of spatial
development plans in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship?
3. What were the selected effects of the activities of DWKZ taking into account the
management of monuments, conducting research, the performance of works, as
well as other jobs related to monuments in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship?
4. What was the scale and, in addition, the significance of the conservation recommendations issued by DWKZ in the process of monument protection in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship?
5. To what extent did the Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments in
Wrocław participate in the process of financing the care of historical monuments
over the years under assessment?
6. What were the effects of the control of the compliance with the provisions related
to the protection and care of monuments with regard to the activities of DWKZ
over the analysed years?
A research hypothesis of the following content was put forward in the article: In the years
2015-2019, various types of activity of DWKZ related to the protection and care of monuments were revealed, which should be considered as an added value for the preservation of
the material cultural heritage of the region and the country.
Pursuant to Art. 91 sec. 1 and 1a of the Act of 23 July 2003 on protection and maintenance
of historical monuments (hereinafter referred to as: the Act), a Voivodeship Conservator of
Monuments is an authority appointed by the voivode at the request of the General Cultural
Property Conservator, who indicates a candidate for the above-mentioned position. Dismissal
of a Voivodeship Conservator of Monuments is also made by the voivode with the consent
or at the request of the General Cultural Property Conservator. Art. 91 sec. 4 of the Act, contains examples of tasks of a Voivodeship Conservator of Monuments, such as: fulfilling the
objectives set out in the national programme for the protection and care of monuments,
drawing up plans for financing such protection and care, keeping a register of monuments
in the voivodeship, maintenance of records of the activities conducted in that area, issuing
decisions, provisions and certificates based on separate regulations. Furthermore, a Voivodeship Conservator of Monuments supervises the correctness of the performance of restoration research, archaeological, architectural, conservation and restoration works, as well
as construction works related to the monuments. The entity organises and is responsible
for the performance of inspections in the field of conservation and care of monuments and
is required to prepare a plan for the protection of the monuments in the event of a crisis or
an armed conflict. Also, a Voivodeship Conservator of Monuments disseminates knowledge
about the monuments and cooperates in the field of monument protection with competent
public administration bodies and public benefit organisations. The diversity of the tasks of
525
Tomasz Landmann
the described entity is one of the conditions of effective administrative-legal protection of
monuments in Poland [5, p. 319].
In turn, Art. 92 sec. 1 and 2 of the Act on protection and maintenance of historical monuments,
indicates that a Voivodeship Conservator of Monuments belongs to the combined voivodeship
administration and manages the voivodeship office for cultural property protection, functioning based on regulations issued by a voivode, at the request of a Voivodeship Conservator of
Monuments [6]. The role of a Voivodeship Conservator of Monuments confirms the importance of decentralising public tasks in the field of monument protection [7, p. 165-166]. It is
pointed out that Voivodeship Conservators of Monuments, equipped with a number of legal
measures, including procedural tools, are the core of the public administration specialised in
the tasks related to the area of broadly-understood monument protection [8, p. 78].
The activities of DWKZ in the analysed area of creating cultural security in local terms should
be treated as part of the institutional system of protection and care for the monuments of
the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship. At the end of 2020, in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship, there
were 46,040 monuments entered in the register of monuments, the majority of which were
movable monuments (36,418), followed by non-movable monuments (8,130) and archaeological monuments (1,492). The Dolnośląskie Voivodeship was ranked first in Poland in
terms of the number of historic resources, followed by the two largest voivodeships, i.e.
Mazowieckie and Wielkopolskie [9, p. 5]. The potential of the material cultural heritage of
the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship, which is particularly high compared to the rest of the country,
required complex measures to protect it in the context of strengthening the cultural security
of the region and the country.
While analysing the protection of that heritage and, consequently, the impact of the DWKZ
on the state of cultural security, certain problematic issues cannot be ignored. Some of them
are [9, p. 12-16]:
– the fact that the condition of 33% of non-movable monuments, parks and historic
cemeteries in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship is average, they are endangered or in
a state of ruin,
– the fact that only 41% of municipalities in Lower Silesia have developed a proper
register of their historical monuments, and 37% of municipalities have not developed such a register at all,
– the fact that only 24% of municipalities in Lower Silesia have developed local monument care programmes, and in 59% of the municipalities such a programme has
never been the subject of activities of their local governments,
– in the period under analysis, only 2 out of 26 districts (Lubin – until 2021 and Legnica
until 2020) had district monument care programmes implemented,
– the prolonged administrative procedure of obtaining permits for investments in
historic properties, as well as high costs of such investments,
– lack of development of a significant part of historic buildings owned by public
institutions,
– lack of preparation by the self-government of the voivodeship of a diagnosis related to the protection of the cultural heritage of national minorities in Lower Silesia,
despite the fact that such heritage largely shapes the historical resources of the
region [10, p. 4].
The specificity of resources of tangible cultural heritage in Lower Silesia requires active actions
on the part of both the self-government of the voivodeship and DWKZ as a representative
526
The outcomes of the activities of the Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments…
of the combined government administration in the voivodeship. It is worth taking a look at
the results of the activities of DWKZ to notice the dynamics and trends in the protection and
care of monuments in the Dolnosląskie Voivodeship.
1. The administrative activities of DWKZ for the protection of monuments
over the years 2015-2019
The basic task, listed in Art. 9 sec. 1 of the Act on the protection and maintenance of historical
monuments, related to the issuance of decisions on the entry of non-movable monuments
into the register of historic monuments, became evident in the activities of DWKZ. Another required standard related to the protection of monuments in Poland is the fulfilment of
the obligation imposed on DWKZ under Art. 9 sec. 4 of the Act, involving the disclosure of
a non-movable monument in the land and mortgage register of a given property if the property is listed in the register of monuments. Although the effectiveness of the inclusion of
a property in the relevant register of historical monuments does not depend on the disclosure
of that fact in the land and mortgage register, the above-mentioned action can be considered
a desirable standard due to the credibility attributed to the land and mortgage register. The
courts that keep such registers are obliged to comply with the request of DWKZ. The discussed
task is important as without the entry of a property into the land and mortgage register, the
municipality’s right of pre-emption of historical monuments cannot be fulfilled [11, p. 124].
The results of activities of DWKZ in the above-mentioned area are presented in Figure 1.
Based on the data presented in Figure 1, DWKZ made a decision to enter a non-movable monument into the register of monuments much more often upon the request of the owner or
120
The number of ex officio
decisions on the entry
of a non-movable monument
into the register of monuments
97
100
77
80
75
74
56
60
40
30
26
24
20
25
17
12
10
13
15
2018
2019
7
The number of decisions
on entry of a non-movable
monument into the register
of monuments at the request
of the owner or the entity
in charge
The number of applications
for disclosure in the land
and mortgage register
or in the real property cadastre
that a non-movable monument
is listed in the register
of monuments
0
2015
2016
2017
Fig. 1. Decisions issued by DWKZ related to the functioning of the register of non-movable
monuments in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship, in the years 2015-2019
Source: Own elaboration based on: [12-16].
527
Tomasz Landmann
the entity in charge (108 decisions) than ex officio (71 decisions). In the period from 2015 to
2019, the number of decisions on entry of the monument into the register at the request of
the owner or the entity in charge generally decreased (37% decline), with an increase in the
number of ex officio decisions (more than a 2-fold increase). In the period under assessment,
DWKZ, much more often than in the case of both of the above-mentioned activities, decided
to apply to have the entry of a non-movable monument in the register of monuments disclosed in the land and mortgage register or real property cadastre (379 applications in total);
an average of approximately 76 applications per year was maintained.
Figure 2 presents the data related to the functioning of the register of movable monuments
in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship, in the years 2015-2019.
Based on the data presented in Figure 2, DWKZ made a decision to enter a movable monument into the register of monuments much more often upon the request of the owner of
the monument (276 decisions) than ex officio (10 decisions). The revealed difference corresponds to the essence of that administrative and legal solution related to the protection of
movable monuments as ex officio decisions to enter a monument into the register are made
by Voivodeship Conservators of Monuments in Poland only in exceptional circumstances [3,
p. 576-577]. Legal and factual justifications include concerns about the destruction, damage,
illegal export of the monument abroad or export outside the Republic of Poland of a monument of exceptional artistic, historical or scientific value (Art. 10 sec. 2 of the Act on the protection and maintenance of historical monuments). With regard to the actions taken by DWKZ,
there was a small number of refusals to enter the movable monument into the register at the
request of the owner (13 decisions). Not counting the short-term change in the years 20172018, the number of decisions of DWKZ to enter a movable monument into the register of
monuments at the request of the owner declined (decline by 25.9%). Overall, movable monuments were relatively frequently entered into the register of monuments. Decisions related
to the entry of monuments into the register of monuments should be treated as an important form of the administrative and legal protection of cultural heritage in Poland [17, p. 12].
70
The number of ex officio
decisions on the entry
of a movable monument
into the register
of monuments
62
60
58
56
54
50
46
The number of decisions
on entry of a movable
monument into the register
of monuments at the request
of the owner or the entity
in charge
40
30
20
10
1
4
6
3
6
3
0
2015
2016
2017
2018
The number of decisions
refusing the entry
of a movable monument
into the register
of monuments at the request
of the owner
2019
Fig. 2. Decisions issued by DWKZ related to the functioning of the register of movable monuments
in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship, in the years 2015-2019
Source: Own elaboration based on: [12-16].
528
The outcomes of the activities of the Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments…
DWKZ was responsible for keeping the voivodeship register of monuments in Lower Silesia,
and the results of involvement in the above matter are presented in Figure 3.
Based on the data in Figure 3, in the years 2015-2019, movable monuments (5,436) outnumbered non-movable monuments (2,265) in terms of the number of tangible elements of cultural heritage of Lower Silesia included in the voivodeship register of monuments. Over the
years under assessment, the number of entries into the register increased significantly, both
in the case of movable monuments (1.2 times) and, above all, in the case of non-movable
monuments (3.6 times). With regard to the above, in one of the post-audit speeches of the
Supreme Audit Office, the significance of the cooperation between DWKZ and the self-government of the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship was emphasised. The cooperation consisted in
verifying the resources of cultural heritage in the voivodeship in terms of quantity and the
state of preservation of monuments entered in the register of monuments and listed in the
records of the voivodeship [10, p. 13].
In the period 2015-2019, another area of activity of DWKZ was its involvement in the preparation of projects and spatial development plans in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship in terms of
new buildings and land development in the context of strengthening the importance of the
protection of historical monuments (Art. 20 of the Act on the protection and maintenance
of historical monuments). This is an important task taking into account the preservation of
the attractiveness and uniqueness of monuments to maintain the possibility of their effective
protection in the future [18, p. 18; 19, p. 45-46]. It is emphasised that the position of DWKZ
in the above matter is binding on the authorities in the municipality that make decisions on
the adoption or amendment of local spatial development plans [18, p. 18]. The arrangements
of DWKZ resulting from Art. 106 of the Act of 14 June 1960 – the Code of Administrative Procedure [20], have the character of an act of supervision over the manner of implementation
of the described task by the local government of the municipality [21].
In the period 2015-2019, DWKZ prepared with the local government of Lower Silesia a total
of 1,689 local spatial development plans and also agreed on 477 modifications to such plans
1,600
1,419
1,322
1,400
1,215
The number of non-movable
monuments included
in the voivodeship register
of monuments
1,200
979
963
1,000
957
800
The number of movable
monuments included
in the voivodeship register
of monuments
600
400
390
204
191
200
61
0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Fig. 3. The number of new entries into the voivodeship register of monuments
in Dolnośląskie Voivodeship, in the years 2015-2019
Source: Own elaboration based on: [12-16].
529
Tomasz Landmann
for the effective protection of historic buildings in Lower Silesia. Generally, the number of
agreed projects declined, not taking into account a short reversal of that trend in the years
2017-2018. Compared to previous years, in 2019, there was an increase in the number of
modifications submitted to local authorities by DWKZ in relation to prepared local development plans. The implementation of the described task by DWKZ was important insofar as
the role of agreeing the positions should be emphasised in the context of ensuring by the
legislator adequate protection of monuments of a particularly value for the cultural heritage
of a given region or country [22, p. 47-50].
One can also mention the right of DWKZ to refuse to agree to a spatial development plan.
The result of such refusal may be the invalidation – in whole or in part – of the resolution of
the municipal self-government on a local spatial development plan, possibly adopted against
the action of the DWKZ [23]. The refusal to agree to the implementation of such plans represented a relatively small share in the structure of all positions taken by DWKZ in the described
area. Based on the obtained documents, for example, in 2015, the rate of refusal to agree
to development plans was 21.6% and it was 16.1% in 2019. In turn, the refusal to agree on
amendments to such plans, compared to the number of approved amendments increased,
from 22.2% in 2015 to 35.3% in 2019.
DWKZ carried out tasks related to the management of historical monuments, conducting
research and works and undertaking other activities related to historical monuments, based
on issued permits and decisions, based on the regulation contained in sec. 3 of the Act on
the protection and maintenance of historical monuments, in Art. 25-37i. Selected results of
the activities of the entity under assessment in that area are presented in Table 1.
Based on Table 1, in the analysed period, particular importance should be attributed to the
activity of DKWZ in such areas of monument protection in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship as:
issuing permits to conduct archaeological research (14.7 thousand, with the growth rate
400
374
344
350
329
328
314
300
The number of agreed local
spatial development plans
250
200
150
106
100
90
116
The number of agreed
modifications in local spatial
development plans
96
69
50
0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Fig. 4. Involvement of DWKZ in the preparation of spatial development plans
in Dolnośląskie Voivodeship, in the years 2015-2019
Source: Own elaboration based on: [12-16].
530
The outcomes of the activities of the Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments…
Table 1. Selected effects of the activities of DWKZ taking into account management
of monuments, performance of research and works and other actions related
to monuments in the years 2015-2019?
Category
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Total
Number of permits to perform conservation or restoration works on movable monuments
152
241
170
186
187
936
Number of permits to perform conservation, restoration or construction works on
non-movable monuments
692
2,107
1,358
1,716
1,866
7,739
Number of permits to perform construction
works near monuments
8
4
0
0
0
12
Number of permits to perform conservation
works on movable monuments
22
28
21
19
21
111
Number of permits to perform architectural
works on non-movable monuments
3
15
17
30
33
98
Number of permits to perform archaeological works
2,468
2,797
3,107
3,120
3,230
14,722
Number of permits related to division of
non-movable monuments
29
34
27
32
48
170
Number of permits to change the purpose
or way of using the monument
1
4
6
4
3
18
Number of permits to search for hidden or
abandoned movable monuments, including
archaeological ones, with the use of technical, electronic and diving equipment
11
32
31
35
24
133
Number of permits to perform activities
that may cause damage to the substance
or change the appearance of monuments
1,435
1,369
2,185
1,280
1,216
7,485
Number of decisions refusing to take action
in each of the above-mentioned area of activities related to monuments
51
118
78
85
73
405
Source: Own elaboration based on: [12-16].
of 30.8%), issuing permits to perform conservation, restoration and construction works on
non-movable monuments (7.7 thousand, with the growth rate of 269.6%) and issuing permits
to take actions that may result in violation of the substance or change in the appearance of
monuments (7.4 thousand, with the decline rate of 15.3%). Less than 1,000 permits were
issued for the performance of conservation or restoration works on movable monuments
(with the growth rate of 23%). All other actions were taken by DWKZ much less frequently,
although with the increasing importance of each of them, apart from the permits issued to
perform construction works near monuments. With regard to the number of decisions of
DWKZ to refuse to grant the right to various entities to take action in each of the above-mentioned areas of activities related to monuments, the refusal rate was at a low level of 1.28%
(405 refusals compared to 31,412 permits). In the analysed areas of monument protection,
531
Tomasz Landmann
the relatively greatest importance of issuing permits to perform archaeological research became apparent in the activities of DWKZ. Such permits, issued based on Art. 36 sec. of the
Act on the protection and maintenance of historical monuments, remain within the exclusive
competence of a voivodeship conservator of monuments, which is currently one of the most
important standards in the protection of cultural heritage as part of cultural security. This is
due to the recognition of the special role of archaeological monuments in the structure of
today’s monuments [24, p. 6; 25, p. 6].
DWKZ may issue written conservation recommendations, in accordance with Art. 27 of the
above-mentioned Act. In the recommendations, DWKZ may include instructions for the owner or the entity in charge of the monument on how to use the monument, how to protect
it, as well as permissible conservation works and modifications that can be made to the
monument. K. Zalasińska stresses that conservation recommendations are “an important
form of operation of the conservation administration” [26, p. 15] allowing, at the same time,
“cooperation between the expert conservation administration and the owner or the entity
in charge of the monument” [26, p. 14]. With regard to the commentary on the provision
contained in Art. 25 of the Act on the protection and maintenance of historical monuments,
one should agree with the position expressed in the literature on the subject, according to
which the conservation recommendations precede the preparation of the conservation works
plan for the development of a non-movable monument [27, p. 34].
The effects of activities of DWKZ related to issuing conservation recommendations in the
studied period, are presented in Figure 5.
In the period under assessment, DWKZ prepared over 79,300 conservation recommendations at the request of the owner or the entity in charge of monuments. The number of issued recommendations increased steadily in the period from 2015 to 2018, and declined in
the years 2018-2019. The growth rate was 30.9% and, based on the presented data, issuing
conservation recommendations was an important area of activity of DWKZ in the process of
monument protection in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship.
25,000
19,197
20,000
15,343
16,423
16,093
15,000
12,294
10,000
5,000
0
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Fig. 5. The number of written conservation recommendations issued by DWKZ
in the years 2015-2019
Source: Own elaboration based on: [12-16].
532
The outcomes of the activities of the Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments…
2. Activities in the field of financing the protection
and care of monuments, as well as control and enforcement
of compliance with statutory provisions
The effects of the involvement of voivodeship conservation services in the protection and
care of monuments in Poland can be discussed from the point of view of financing the activities of entities that perform tasks the purpose of which is preserving monuments. The
control and enforcement of compliance with statutory provisions in the form of fines imposed
by voivodeship cultural property conservator are equally important. The activities of DWKZ
in the last one of the mentioned areas should be treated as complementary to the criminal
measures related to the protection of historic monuments in Poland [28-30].
Figure 6 presents the data on the value of subsidies granted by the Voivodeship Office of Monuments Preservation (hereinafter referred to as WUOZ) in Wrocław, in the years 2015-2019.
Based on the obtained data, as a result of the activities of WUOZ in Wrocław, subsidies in
the amount of PLN 9,734,900 were granted to eligible entities in the period from 2015 to
2019. Record-breaking in this respect was the year 2018, with grants worth 55.8% of the
total funds allocated for the period under assessment. In the years 2018-2019, there was
a clear increase in the value of subsidies provided to various entities interested in taking care
of monuments in Lower Silesia.
In the years 2015-2019, on behalf of WUOZ in Wrocław and the head of that institution,
DWKZ, various entities received grants in the amount of over PLN 9.7 million for purposes
related to the protection of monuments. The average value of a single grant ranged from
PLN 28.8 thousand to PLN 90.5 thousand. This amount varied unevenly, increasing over the
period from 2016 to 2018, and declining in the periods 2015-2016 and 2018-2019. Overall,
an upward trend can be observed in the average amount of a single subsidy granted to individual entities that participate in the process of taking care of monuments in the Dolnośląskie
Voivodeship.
6,000,000
5,432,400
5,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
1,927,500
2,000,000
1,000,000
815,000
780,000
780,000
2015
2016
2017
0
2018
2019
Fig. 6. Grants from WUOZ in the years 2015-2019 (in PLN)
Source: Own elaboration based on: [12-16].
533
Tomasz Landmann
100,000
90,540
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
45,893
40,000
30,000
33,913
29,107
28,889
2015
2016
20,000
10,000
0
2017
2018
2019
Fig. 7. Average value of a single grant awarded by WUOZ in Wrocław, in the years 2015-2019 (in PLN)
Source: Own elaboration based on: [12-16].
At the same time, according to the estimates presented in the Programme for the Protection and Care of Monuments in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship for the years 2021-2024 for
the previous period of the programme, financing with the use of the subsidy from WUOZ in
Wrocław accounted for approximately 5% of the total amount provided by the government
to finance the activities performed in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship over the period 20162020. Subsidies from the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage (54%) and subsidies from
the Ministry of Development (41%) were of much greater importance. Also, it should be remembered that the financing period of the Programme (2016-2020) does not fully cover the
period under study (2015-2019) [9, p. 14]. Functioning in the structure of WUOZ in Wrocław,
DWKZ remained one of the strategic partners in the implementation of subsequent versions
of the regional programme for the protection and care of monuments, with the programme
in force for the years 2016 to 2020 falling within the years analysed in this article.
Financing of tasks in the area of the protection and care of monuments involved the need for
DWKZ to control the correct spending of those funds, as well as to control the actions taken
with regard to the monuments.
Over the period from 2015 to 2019, DWKZ performed 689 inspections of compliance with
the provisions of the Act on the protection and maintenance of historical monuments, and
maintained a similar level of activity in that field in each of the following years (from 128 to
144 inspections, i.e., 137 per year, on average). The number of post-inspection recommendations issued by DWKZ amounted to 334, ranging from 53 to 77 annually, clearly decreasing
after the year 2017. As a result of the performed inspections, DWKZ submitted 73 notices to
the law enforcement authorities on possible offence or crime related to monuments, with
an unevenly changing number of such notices in each subsequent year. As a result of the
actions taken by DWKZ, the entity issued 63 requests to stop the performed activities that
involved monuments, to protect them from unauthorised interference (on average over
12 such decisions per year). The presented activities fall within the scope of conservation
534
The outcomes of the activities of the Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments…
10
10
2019
53
136
The number of decisions, issued upon
detecting non-compliance
with the provisions, resulting
in suspending conservation, architectural,
archaeological and construction works,
division of monuments or activities
that could cause a violation
of the substance or a modification
of the appearance of monuments
18
18
2018
63
140
12
22
2017
The number of notifications submitted
to law enforcement authorities
on the commission of an offence or crime
79
144
The number of issued post-inspection
recommendations
10
12
2016
62
The number of inspections of application
and compliance with statutory regulations
on the protection and care of historical
monuments
128
13
11
2015
77
141
0
50
100
150
200
Fig. 8. Effects of the control by DWKZ of the compliance with the provisions related
to the protection and care of monuments in the years 2015-2019
Source: Own elaboration based on: [12-16].
supervision as an important area of operation of DWKZ for the protection of monuments and
thus strengthen the cultural security of the Republic of Poland [31, p. 297].
DWKZ may also impose administrative fines for improper behaviour or omission of the
obliged parties, such as:
– failure to comply with information obligations (Art. 107a of the Act on the protection
and maintenance of historical monuments),
– failure to comply with the obligation to notify about the import of a monument
(Art. 107b of the Act on the protection and maintenance of historical monuments),
– preventing or making it difficult for the competent authority for the protection
of monuments to access a monument (Art. 107v of the Act on the protection and
maintenance of historical monuments),
– taking action without being authorised (Art. 107d of the Act on the protection and
maintenance of historical monuments),
– failure to implement post-control recommendations issued by DWKZ (Art. 107e of
the Act on the protection and maintenance of historical monuments).
535
Tomasz Landmann
Fines imposed by DWKZ are an enforcement measure leading directly to the fulfilment of
the obligation of the owner or the entity in charge of a monument, in the case of the need
to maintain, confirmed in the jurisprudence, the principle of applying the least burdensome
measures for the obligated party. Such fines are not treated as a punishment but as a form
of pressure, imposed through the financial disadvantage, to make the obliged party behave
in a certain way [32-34]. The amount of administrative fines imposed by DWKZ in the years
under review is presented in Table 2.
Table 2. The amount of fines imposed by DWKZ in the years 2015-2019 (in PLN)
Category
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Total
Fines imposed in connection with Art. 107a-107e
of the Act on the protection and maintenance of
historical monuments
0
0
0
187,500
1,083,325.44
1,270,825.44
Fines imposed to enforce
the obligation to perform
construction or conservation works on a historical
non-movable monument
listed in the register of
monuments
12,000
150,000
8,000
0
120,000
290,000
Source: Own elaboration based on: [12-16].
In the years 2015-2019, DWKZ imposed fines that amounted to over PLN 1.56 million, of
which 81.4% were fines imposed in connection with the application of the provisions of
Art. 107a-107e of the Act on the protection and maintenance of historical monuments, and
the remaining fines were imposed pursuant to Art. 119 sec. 1 of the Act of 17 June 1966
on enforcement proceedings in administration [35]. Fines were imposed depending on the
irregularities found, and the need to apply administrative fines under Art. 107a-107e of the
Act on the protection and maintenance of historical monuments, was evident only in the
years 2018-2019. The amount of fines in individual years should be defined as differentiated,
due to the fact that the estimation of infringements required DWKZ to perform a detailed
analysis of the facts, each time. In the period under study, DWKZ did not impose a single fine
for violation of provisions of other acts applicable to particular areas of protection and care
of monuments in Poland.
Conclusions
Based on the presented arguments, some general conclusions can be drawn to summarise
the analysis. The following statements also answer the research questions posed earlier:
1. Entry of a non-movable monument into the register of monuments by DWKZ – at
the request of the owner or the entity in charge – was a key form of activity related
to the protection of monuments. In the period 2015-2019, the growing importance
of including non-movable monuments in the voivodeship register of monuments
became apparent in the activities of DWKZ, often done in cooperation with the
self-government of the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship.
536
The outcomes of the activities of the Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments…
2. The increasing number of modifications indicated by DWKZ to local governments
in connection with the created spatial development plans was an important trend
that contributed to the increase in the level of protection of historical monuments
in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship, in the years 2015-2019.
3. The regulation by DWKZ of legally permitted activities in relation to monuments
in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship mainly concerned issuing permits to conduct archaeological research, with significant importance of permits to perform conservation, restoration or construction works on non-movable monuments and permits
to perform activities that may have resulted in violation of the substance or may
have changed the appearance of monuments.
4. Issuing conservation recommendations was an important area of activity of DWKZ
in the process of protection of monuments in the Dolnośląskie Voivodeship, in the
years 2015-2019.
5. Financing of the care of monuments by WUOZ in Wrocław did not constitute the
dominant function of that entity with regard to the financing of the care of monuments if one considers the much greater importance of financing from the Ministry
of Culture and National Heritage and the Ministry of Development.
6. More than 4/5 of fines imposed by DWKZ resulted from the finding that individual
entities had violated only the provisions of the Act on the protection and maintenance of historical monuments.
The hypothesis adopted in the introduction to the study was confirmed, according to which
in the years 2015-2019, various types of activity of DWKZ related to the protection and care
of monuments were revealed, which should be considered as an added value for the preservation of the material cultural heritage of the region and the country.
Acknowledgement
No acknowledgement and potential founding was reported by the author.
Conflict of interests
The author declared no conflict of interests.
Author contributions
The author contributed to the interpretation of results and writing of the paper. The author
read and approved the final manuscript.
Ethical statement
The research complies with all national and international ethical requirements.
ORCID
Tomasz Landmann
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9753-9373
References
1. Czaja J. Kulturowy wymiar bezpieczeństwa. Aspekty teoretyczne i praktyczne. Kraków: Oficyna Wydawnicza AFM; 2013.
2. Hrynicki WM. Potrzeba działań na rzecz bezpieczeństwa kulturowego w aspekcie jego współczesnych
zagrożeń. Kultura Bezpieczeństwa. Nauka – Praktyka – Refleksje. 2015;20:219-37.
537
Tomasz Landmann
3. Landmann T. Entry in the register of monuments as a form of administrative and legal protection of
cultural heritage in Poland – legal and practical aspects. Scientific Journal of the Military University
of Land Forces. 2020;52;3(197):574-86.
4. Tokarz G. Bezpieczeństwo kulturowe III Rzeczpospolitej – przegląd zagrożeń. Rocznik Bezpieczeństwa
Międzynarodowego. 2010;4:197-204.
5. Cherka M, Wąsowski K. Organizacja organów ochrony zabytków. In: Cherka M (ed.). Ustawa
o ochronie zabytków i opiece nad zabytkami. Komentarz. Warszawa: WKP; 2010.
6. Ustawa z dnia 23 lipca 2003 roku o ochronie zabytków i opiece nad zabytkami (Dz. U. 2021, poz. 710).
7. Zalasińska K. Decentralizacja zadań z zakresu ochrony zabytków – stan obecny i perspektywy zmian
ustroju administracji konserwatorskiej. Ochrona Zabytków. 2015;2:163-70.
8. Trzewik J. Status procesowy wojewódzkiego konserwatora zabytków w postępowaniu cywilnym na
tle art. 95 ustawy o ochronie zabytków i opiece nad zabytkami. Roczniki Nauk Prawnych. 2017;27(2):
77-96.
9. Belof M, Bartczak J, Halicka-Borucka M, Kasprzak M, et al. Program Opieki nad Zabytkami Województwa Dolnośląskiego na lata 2021-2024. Wrocław: Instytut Rozwoju Terytorialnego; 2021.
10. Wystąpienie pokontrolne NIK z dnia 31 lipca 2019 roku. Kontrola P/19/023 – Ochrona materialnego
dziedzictwa kulturowego mniejszości narodowych. Wrocław: NIK. Delegatura we Wrocławiu; 2019.
11. Gwoździewicz P. Ograniczenia prawa własności zabytków. Roczniki Administracji i Prawa. 2009;9:
111-30.
12. Sprawozdanie z działalności Dolnośląskiego Wojewódzkiego Konserwatora Zabytków za rok 2015.
WUOZ we Wrocławiu (materiały pozyskane z WUOZ we Wrocławiu); 2016.
13. Sprawozdanie z działalności Dolnośląskiego Wojewódzkiego Konserwatora Zabytków za rok 2016.
WUOZ we Wrocławiu (materiały pozyskane z WUOZ we Wrocławiu); 2017.
14. Sprawozdanie z działalności Dolnośląskiego Wojewódzkiego Konserwatora Zabytków za rok 2017.
WUOZ we Wrocławiu (materiały pozyskane z WUOZ we Wrocławiu); 2018.
15. Sprawozdanie z działalności Dolnośląskiego Wojewódzkiego Konserwatora Zabytków za rok 2018.
WUOZ we Wrocławiu (materiały pozyskane z WUOZ we Wrocławiu); 2019.
16. Sprawozdanie z działalności Dolnośląskiego Wojewódzkiego Konserwatora Zabytków za rok 2019.
WUOZ we Wrocławiu (materiały pozyskane z WUOZ we Wrocławiu); 2020.
17. Dobosz P. Aktualne problemy prawne i finansowe ochrony zabytków w Polsce w dobie przekształceń
ustrojowych państwa. Ochrona Zabytków. 2000;53(1):12-8.
18. Lis W. Rola miejscowego planu zagospodarowania przestrzennego w ochronie zabytków. Studia
Prawnoustrojowe. 2018;39:5-20.
19. Pilarz K. Ochrona dziedzictwa kulturowego i zabytków jako czynnik determinujący proces planowania przestrzennego. Metropolitan. Przegląd Naukowy. 2019;1:40-9.
20. Ustawa z dnia 14 czerwca 1960 roku Kodeks postępowania administracyjnego (Dz. U. 2021, poz. 735).
21. Postanowienie NSA z dnia 23 maja 2012 roku, II OSK 1136/12, [online]. Available at: https://sip.lex.
pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/ii-osk-1136-12-postanowienie-naczelnego-sadu-521345452 [Accessed: 27 May 2021].
22. Bąkowski T. Uzgodnienie projektu miejscowego planu zagospodarowania przestrzennego w trybie
art. 106 k.p.a. In: Gryszczyńska A, Konieczna B (eds.). Ochrona zabytków militarnych Helu. Toruń:
TNOiK; 2007.
23. Wyrok NSA z dnia 8 listopada 2012 roku, II OSK 2024/12. LEX nr 1291954.
24. Gawroński K, Hernik J. Planistyczno-przestrzenne i inwestycyjne problemy związane z występowaniem obiektów zabytkowych i stanowisk archeologicznych. Infrastruktura i Ekologia Terenów Wiejskich. 2012;3(2):5-15.
25. Misiuk Z, Oniszczuk A, Wrzosek J, Sekuła M. Standardy prowadzenia badań archeologicznych, cz. 2.
Badania inwazyjne lądowe. Warszawa: NID; 2019.
26. Zalasińska K. Charakter prawny zaleceń konserwatorskich. Kurier Konserwatorski. 2010;6:11-5.
27. Sikora D. Specyfika działań konserwatorskich w ogrodach regularnych. Kurier Konserwatorski. 2010;
7:32-42.
538
The outcomes of the activities of the Voivodeship Office for the Protection of Monuments…
28. Kaczmarek J, Zeidler K. Karnoprawna ochrona zabytków. Prokuratura i Prawo. 2004;2:71-85.
29. Landmann T. Criminal law and practical approaches to fighting crime in the area of protection of
cultural property as an element of forming the cultural security of the Third Polish Republic. Scientific Journal of the Military University of Land Forces. 2019;51;2(192):238-52.
30. Sobczak J. Ochrona prawnokarna dóbr kultury. Środkowoeuropejskie Studia Polityczne. 2009;3:5-37.
31. Golat R. Szczególne zasady nadzoru nad muzeami. Muzealnictwo. 2009;50:294-8.
32. Wyrok NSA z dnia 2 lutego 2010 roku, II OSK 235/09, [online]. Available at: https://orzeczenia.nsa.
gov.pl/doc/EA402E4B42 [Accessed: 27 May 2021].
33. Wyrok NSA z dnia 23 lutego 2010 roku, I OSK 1169/09. LEX nr 591217.
34. Wyrok WSA w Warszawie z dnia 10 lipca 2012 roku, I SA/Wa 131/12. LEX nr 1270631.
35. Ustawa z dnia 17 czerwca 1966 roku o postępowaniu egzekucyjnym w administracji (Dz. U. 2022,
poz. 479).
Biographical note
Tomasz Landmann – doctor of humanities in the field of history. A museologist, a curator of
the Museum of Land Forces in Wrocław in the years 1998-2006. His area of scientific interest
includes issues related to national security, contemporary history, cultural security. An author
of numerous publications on cultural security and protection of cultural assets.
Efekty działań Dolnośląskiego Wojewódzkiego Konserwatora Zabytków
w perspektywie bezpieczeństwa kulturowego w ujęciu lokalnym
w latach 2015-2019
STRESZCZENIE
Celem rozważań podjętych w artykule jest określenie i ocena efektów działań Dolnośląskiego Wojewódzkiego Konserwatora Zabytków w realizowaniu zadań w wybranych
obszarach ochrony i opieki nad zabytkami w województwie dolnośląskim w latach
2015-2019.
W artykule zastosowano metody badawcze w postaci krytycznej analizy piśmiennictwa naukowego, analizy aktów prawnych, a także – w zasadniczym zakresie – analizy
dokumentów.
Ustalono zróżnicowanie efektów działań Dolnośląskiego Wojewódzkiego Konserwatora Zabytków w opisywanym obszarze. Działania administracyjne dotyczyły istotnej
roli dokonywania wpisu zabytków nieruchomych na wniosek właściciela lub posiadacza do rejestru zabytków, dokonywania nowych wpisów w wojewódzkiej ewidencji
zabytków, czy rekomendowania samorządom zmian w lokalnych planach zagospodarowania przestrzennego. Wydawanie pozwoleń na prowadzenie badań archeologicznych dominowało nad regulowaniem innych dozwolonych prawnie działań wobec
zabytków. Wykazano dużą aktywność DWKZ w wydawaniu zaleceń konserwatorskich.
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE
bezpieczeństwo kulturowe, Dolnośląski Wojewódzki Konserwator Zabytków, zabytek
How to cite this paper
Landmann T. The outcomes of the activities of the Voivodeship Office for the Protection of
Monuments in Wrocław in the perspective of cultural security from the local point of view
in the years 2015-2019. Scientific Journal of the Military University of Land Forces. 2022;54;
4(206):524-39. DOI: 10.5604/01.3001.0016.1762.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
539
Tomasz LANDMANN