The recent case involving the international art thief, known only as "The Nightingale," highlights the complex interplay between Interpol, presidential systems of governance, and the preservation of intangible cultural heritage. The Nightingale, suspected of stealing numerous artifacts – including rare masks central to the spiritual practices of a remote Amazonian tribe – has evaded capture for years, exploiting the jurisdictional complexities of international law. Interpol, despite its global reach, faces limitations. Its ability to effectively pursue criminals across national borders is often hampered by differing legal systems and varying levels of cooperation from member states. Presidential systems, particularly in countries with weak rule of law, can be especially vulnerable to corruption and influence-peddling, potentially hindering investigations. In some cases, powerful individuals may even be complicit in the illicit trade of cultural artifacts. The Amazonian tribe, whose cultural heritage is under direct threat, faces a double jeopardy. The loss of these ceremonial masks represents not merely a theft of material objects, but a profound erosion of their cultural identity and spiritual practices. The intangible value of these masks, passed down through generations of oral tradition and ritual, is immeasurable, yet its protection is often overlooked in international legal frameworks focused primarily on tangible assets. International agreements and treaties concerning the repatriation of cultural artifacts often lag behind the sophistication of global criminal networks. Furthermore, the challenge of protecting intangible cultural heritage extends beyond the realm of criminal investigation. Economic development, globalization, and even well-intentioned efforts at modernization can unintentionally lead to the erosion of traditional practices and knowledge. The balance between preserving cultural heritage and facilitating progress presents a significant challenge to policymakers worldwide. The Nightingale case, therefore, serves as a stark reminder of the intertwined challenges faced by Interpol, presidential systems, and the fight to protect intangible cultural heritage in an increasingly globalized world.
1. According to the passage, what is one of the main challenges Interpol faces in apprehending international criminals?
2. What is the "double jeopardy" faced by the Amazonian tribe mentioned in the passage?
3. The passage suggests that presidential systems can be vulnerable to which of the following?
4. What is the main point of the passage?