1. Introduction
1. Twenty-five years ago, on 1 February
1995, the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection
of National Minorities (ETS No. 157, “the Framework Convention”)
was opened for signature. This instrument, born following years
of dialogue between the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly
of the Council of Europe,
is
based on the understanding that protecting national minorities is “essential
to stability, democratic security and peace” in Europe; that “a
pluralist and genuinely democratic society should not only respect
the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity of each
person belonging to a national minority, but also create appropriate
conditions enabling them to express, preserve and develop this identity”;
and that “the creation of a climate of tolerance and dialogue is
necessary to enable cultural diversity to be a source and a factor,
not of division, but of enrichment for each society”. Crucially,
the Framework Convention also expressly recognises that the protection
of the rights and freedoms of persons belonging to national minorities
forms an integral part of the international protection of human
rights.
2. Today, support for the human rights agenda is eroding in many
quarters. After the strong focus on minorities at the time of the
adoption of the Framework Convention, attention to minority rights
has diminished in more recent years. The message may still be the
same but there is a challenge to communicate it better in an environment
marked by diminishing support from States and also from some NGOs
whose focus may have shifted away from minority issues. This requires
new ways of thinking from all of us.
3. In parallel, we have been witnessing, throughout Europe, a
rise in extremist discourse, often directed at anybody who is perceived
as “different”.
Such
discourse endangers social cohesion and democratic stability while
using members of minority communities as scapegoats. Hateful messages
are falling on particularly fertile ground in those societies faced
with wider social, economic or political problems or divisions.
4. Faced with the increasingly deliberate use of rhetoric stigmatising
diversity and the frequent instrumentalisation of the rights of
minorities for political ends, it is important to reaffirm that
respect for linguistic, ethnic and cultural diversity is a cornerstone
of the system of human rights protection in Europe. It is time to
go back to fundamentals, to human dignity, inclusion, respect and
recognition of minority rights in a changing environment, and to
consider how understandings of equality and non-discrimination may
interact with overall minority discourse.
5. Different languages, cultures and nations interact with and
influence each other and this brings constant development, generates
new ideas, and contributes significantly to the intellectual development
of Europe.
6. Preserving linguistic, ethnic, cultural and national diversity
also plays an important role in maintaining European peace and stability.
Ethnic tensions represent a high risk for stability, and no European
country is ethnically totally homogeneous. This makes it even more
important for international bodies to keep this issue as a standing
item on their agendas and not to deal with it only if somewhere
the accumulated tension is close to breaking point or has already
broken out.
2. Working methods, scope and aims of
this report
7. I believe that the protection
of minority cultures and languages needs to be analysed as part
of a broader context in which a Europe without borders promotes
minority policies whose goal is to allow people to live their identities
and preserve their culture, traditions and languages without obstruction.
“Unity through diversity” should be realised in Europe as a whole,
as well as within its individual countries.
8. An essential part of the overall context is the implementation
of the Framework Convention, which has benefited national minorities
in States parties and helped to maintain their linguistic, ethnic
and cultural identities. At the same time, as the monitoring work
and regular activity reports of the Advisory Committee on the Framework
Convention make clear, many challenges remain across the 39 States
Parties in turning the principles enshrined in this instrument into
lived realities for persons belonging to national minorities, and
new challenges are constantly arising. I thus consider it important
to look at the main overall trends in the implementation of the
Framework Convention, including both existing good practices that
could be applied in other countries and the main difficulties experienced
in its implementation, as well as how the Assembly can contribute
to addressing these challenges.
9. Meanwhile, as the Assembly has previously noted, the fact
that eight Council of Europe member States are still not parties
to the Framework Convention weakens the protection it can provide.
It creates a patchwork in which persons belonging to national minorities
are unequally recognised and protected, and in which the provisions
of the convention that are designed to promote equality, tolerance
and intercultural dialogue for the benefit of all members of society
are not applicable throughout the continent.
10. Through a series of hearings and exchanges of views held during
the course of preparation of this report, the committee has benefited
from direct input from the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human
Rights, the High Commissioner on National Minorities of the Organization
for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and the UN Special
Rapporteur on Minority Issues, as well as from a former President
of the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention and its current
Acting President.
I
wish to thank all of these speakers for their highly pertinent observations.
I also wish to thank the Venice Commission for its rapid response
to the committee’s request of 4 December 2019 for its opinion on
recent changes to Latvian legislation on education in minority languages.
11. The committee also authorised me to carry out fact-finding
visits to Ukraine and the United Kingdom (Wales) in order to explore
in more depth issues of relevance to my report. Due to the current
public health situation in Europe, it was not possible to carry
out these visits on the spot. However, I was pleased to be able to
hold bilateral online meetings with government and civil society
interlocutors in Ukraine and Wales, in the week of 2-6 November
2020. Although they took place at a very late stage in the preparation
of the report, they enabled me to gather relevant first-hand information
and engage in direct dialogue with national stakeholders. The discussions
held were thought-provoking and extremely rich, and I have summarised
my conclusions in an appendix to this report.
12. The recommendations formulated in the draft resolution and
recommendation aim at ensuring a more consistent implementation
of the legal and institutional framework for respecting and protecting
the human rights of persons belonging to minorities, which is essential
to peace and stability in Europe, and preserving the linguistic,
ethnic and cultural diversity of the continent.
3. Legal
framework for the protection of minority rights in Europe
3.1. Universal
standards
13. A number of United Nations
instruments explicitly recognise or contribute to protecting the
rights of persons belonging to minorities, in particular Article
27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;
the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination; and the 1992 Declaration on the Rights of
Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic
Minorities.
14. At the hearing held by our committee on 4 December 2019, Mr Fernand
de Varennes, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues,
underlined the important link between international standards on
the protection of minorities and the right to equality and non-discrimination.
He stressed that all human rights that could protect minorities
should be understood as minority rights. Thus, depriving persons
of their nationality because they belong to certain religious or
ethnic minorities can be understood as a breach of the general prohibition
on discrimination. The freedom of religion, the right to equal treatment
without discrimination based on religion and the freedom of association
are rights held by all, but they are especially important for persons belonging
to religious minorities. In some situations, the right to equal
treatment without discrimination could also place an obligation
on States to provide public education in minority or indigenous
languages. He emphasised that from the United Nations perspective,
minority rights are not merely about protecting cultural or linguistic
diversity but are human rights, held by individuals.
3.2. European
standards
15. Many of the individual rights
set out under the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No. 5)
and its Protocols are of particular importance to persons belonging
to minorities, notably Articles 9 (freedom of thought, conscience
and religion), 10 (freedom of expression), 11 (freedom of assembly
and association) and 14 (prohibition of discrimination in the enjoyment
of the rights and freedoms set forth in the Convention, which inter
alia expressly prohibits discrimination on the ground of “association
with a national minority”
); Article 2 of Protocol
No. 1 (right to education); and Protocol No. 12 (general prohibition
of discrimination, covering the same grounds as Article 14)
.
16. The 1990 Copenhagen Document of the Conference on Security
and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE, now the OSCE) “reaffirm[ed] that
respect for the rights of persons belonging to national minorities
as part of universally recognised human rights is an essential factor
for peace, justice, stability and democracy” and set out a series
of rights that persons belonging to national minorities enjoy, notably
in order “freely to express, preserve and develop their ethnic,
cultural, linguistic or religious identity and to develop their
culture in all its aspects, free of any attempts at assimilation
against their will.”
The Copenhagen Document
remains a key statement of principles, and has been followed by
a series of thematic recommendations and guidelines that explore
in more depth the real-life implications of these principles.
However, their translation
into practice is not formally monitored. In 1992, the OSCE participating
States created the position of High Commissioner on National Minorities.
As has often been emphasised, the High Commissioner does not work
on behalf of (for) national minorities, but on national minorities;
their role is to act not as an advocate for national minorities
but as an instrument of conflict prevention, notably through early
warning and early action mechanisms.
17. The 1992 European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages
(ETS No. 148), which sets out a series of commitments that States
can take on in order to protect these languages, also recognises
that the right to use a regional or minority language in private
and public life is an inalienable right conforming to the principles embodied
in the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
.
18. The 1995 Framework Convention (ETS No. 157) represented a
crucial step forward, not only in setting out the full range of
rights of persons belonging to national minorities, but also in
establishing a multilateral mechanism entrusted with monitoring
the implementation of these standards by States Parties. Since the adoption
of that convention, the importance of European commitment to the
protection of national minorities and cultural diversity has been
repeatedly reiterated by the Council of Europe's member States,
for example in the Warsaw Declaration (Third Summit of Heads of
State and Government of the Council of Europe, Warsaw, 16-17 May
2005).
19. The Eastern European countries which joined the Council of
Europe in the 1990s accepted the obligations incumbent on all member
States under the Statute, to comply with the principles of pluralist democracy
and the rule of law. They entered into a number of specific commitments,
which they agreed to honour within specified deadlines, including
to conduct policy towards minorities according to the principles
set forth in Assembly
Recommendation
1201 (1993). Following the entry into force of the Framework Convention in
1998, its signature and ratification within a year from the time
of accession also became a fundamental requirement.
20. Under the Framework Convention, minority rights are granted
at the individual level to each person belonging to a national minority,
who is free to choose to be treated or not to be treated as such
without disadvantage. It is further specified in Article 3.2 of
the Framework Convention that minority rights may be exercised “individually
as well as in community with others”. In fact, a number of rights
only make sense if exercised in community with others, and the enjoyment
of some rights presupposes the presence of or even formal association
with others. Minority rights therefore have an individual, a social
and a collective dimension.
21. Both the Preamble to the Framework Convention and its Article
5 recognise the need to protect the identity of persons belonging
to national minorities. Several provisions (Articles 7 to 15) set
out a framework for how to apply generally applicable human rights
such as those set out in the Convention (see above) to persons belonging
to national minorities. Others set out rights that are of more specific
relevance to persons belonging to national minorities (Articles
16 to 18).
22. At the same time, the Framework Convention situates minority
rights squarely within a broader equality and non-discrimination
framework. It recognises that specific measures may be needed to
promote the full and effective equality in society of persons belonging
to national minorities (Article 4.2) and emphasises the importance
of encouraging a spirit of tolerance and intercultural dialogue
and of taking effective measures to promote mutual respect, understanding
and co-operation amongst all persons living on the territory of
the State (Article 6).
23. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the
European Parliament have adopted in recent years a number of resolutions
and reports on the protection of minorities, which provide important guidance
as to the standards that can contribute to ensuring the preservation
of identity.
24. It is important to note, however, that neither the conventions
of the Council of Europe in the field of minority rights, nor the
soft law instruments of the Parliamentary Assembly, although compulsory
in theory, are directly enforceable in practice. This is why it
is urgent and necessary in my view to find new ways to ensure that
the above standards are effectively incorporated into domestic legislation
and implemented in practice, by assisting European institutions
to develop their regulation with a view to safeguarding Europe’s
linguistic, ethnic, cultural and national diversity.
4. Current
challenges for the substantive protection of minority rights in
Europe
25. In the past twenty years, the
implementation of the Framework Convention has benefited national minorities
in States parties and helped to maintain their linguistic, ethnic
and cultural identity. However, a number of challenges are currently
endangering the capacity to protect minority rights through the
tools developed in the United Nations and Europe in the 1980s and
1990s. In particular, the stability of both States and European
institutions has been shaken in recent years by intra- and interstate
tensions, and at times conflicts. Migration flows have also had
a profound impact, both directly and indirectly, on persons belonging to
national minorities and on the implementation of minority rights
as set out in the Framework Convention.
26. In addition, the Covid-19 pandemic has thrown into sharp relief
the vulnerability of persons belonging to national minorities as
they have frequently faced discrimination, hate speech, stigma,
a lack of information in minority languages and unequal access to
education following the suspension of classes in schools and of
pre-school education during lockdowns.
In
order to protect minorities, governments need to ensure that measures
that they take in response to such crises do not undermine social
cohesion, but actively support it.
27. In this chapter, I examine the major challenges to minority
rights that have emerged in recent years.
4.1. The
Framework Convention on the Protection of National Minorities is
not directly applicable
28. Widely differing national situations
as regards national minorities – for example the size, dispersion across
the territory, and overall numbers of minorities – as well as differences
between the situations of different national minorities within any
given State mean that it is impossible to design one-size-fits-all
solutions for effectively protecting the rights of persons belonging
to national minorities. This is why the Framework Convention was
conceived from the outset as, precisely, a framework, reflecting
its flexibility and the scope for States to translate some of its
provisions into their domestic law in a manner that is adapted to
the specific situation within their territory.
29. Legislation is therefore required to give its provisions effect.
The Advisory Committee has repeatedly welcomed the progress made
by States Parties in translating the principles set out by the convention
into domestic legal systems.
But
experience has shown that bringing legislation into line with international instruments
is not sufficient to ensure the effective implementation of minority
rights, especially where mindsets have not changed and minorities
are still perceived as a threat (see further below). Often, the
problem is that existing legal frameworks and agreements are not
operationalised and there is no supervisory body to ensure enforcement
at national level. The fact that laws are enacted and infrastructures
set up does not mean that they are properly (or at all) implemented.
Minority communities need more than formal equality: they need respect,
recognition and continuous support, which is adapted to their needs,
sustainable and foreseeable.
Sometimes the problem lies
in insufficient implementation or application of regulations; in
other cases, there is a need for additional regulation of specific
issues arising in specific areas.
30. Moreover, because the Framework Convention sets out overarching
principles rather than specific obligations, little can be achieved
in the absence of genuine dialogue and good will, an issue explored
further below.
4.2. Perception
of minorities as a security threat and re-securitisation of minority
rights
31. The past few years have seen
an increasingly worrying trend in which minorities are portrayed
as potentially, or by definition, disloyal to the State where they
live – sometimes even as foreign agents – and, as such, a threat
to security. This leads States to deny persons belonging to national
minorities some rights linked to their identity (for example, freedom
of association and the right to learn their language) and tends
to create a hostile environment for these persons. This in turn
can feed calls for greater autonomy, and sometimes secession. In
parallel, this dynamic has also tied in with increasing concerns
about terrorism in some States, heightening suspicions about the
existence of potential perpetrators of terrorist acts within society.
32. As a result, there has been a clear trend towards the re-securitisation
of minority issues – exactly the dynamic that the Framework Convention
was intended to overcome, as States Parties to the convention have recognised
the need to ensure the full and effective equality of persons belonging
to national minorities, in law and in practice. As the Advisory
Committee has repeatedly emphasised, it is the implementation of
minority rights, rather than their denial, that provides the best
guarantee of peace, stability and democratic security.
4.3. Exclusive
nation-building and rising nationalism, populism, hate speech and
hate crimes
33. The above re-securitisation
dynamic is coupled with growing nationalistic populism which demonises and
scapegoats minorities in ways dangerously reminiscent of the past.
The most marginalised and vulnerable groups – those who most need
human rights protection – are the groups most targeted by hate speech,
hate crime, attacks based on their ethnic origin, denial of citizenship
and restriction of access to education in minority languages – all
of which are accelerating.
Persons belonging to minorities
who are in a situation of socio-economic disadvantage are moreover
often portrayed as a burden on society or as obstacles to the achievement
of greater prosperity for all, heightening their vulnerability to
attack.
This dynamic
particularly affects Roma, as anti-Gypsyism remains rife both in
public (including political) discourse and in the form of physical
attacks on Roma and Traveller communities and individuals, and the
segregation of these communities continues to be tolerated. Again,
the Covid-19 pandemic cast a spotlight on these issues, and in some
cases aggravated them.
Often,
political representatives fail to condemn hate-based rhetoric, or
even play an active part in it.
34. The Advisory Committee has highlighted that while nationalism
and populism are distinct phenomena, they are both based on a homogenising
ideology that seeks to unite and protect an (imaginary) “us” from
an (imaginary) “them”. In such a context, increasing polarisation
of societies along ethnic and linguistic lines can often be observed.
Extreme nationalism and populism can also lead to the development
of exclusive nation-building policies, in which the nation is conceived
as monoethnic, monolinguistic, monocultural, mono-religious and
as having a single history. This can lead to violations of the principle
of free self-identification, including the right to express multiple
identities. Even more dangerously, it reinforces the perception
of persons belonging to national minorities as a threat, since they
seek to express different identities. It also negatively affects language
policies, as outlined below.
4.4. Increasing
tensions around the use of minority languages and teaching in and
of these languages
35. As the Council of Europe Commissioner
for Human Rights has stressed, language is often a cornerstone of
people’s identity. It is not only a means of communication but also
carries symbolic weight. Preventing people from learning and using
their languages can constitute a violation of their individual rights;
at the same time, it can negatively affect communities as a whole.
Precisely because of its symbolic value, language can become a highly
charged issue, and unfortunately it is at times instrumentalised,
escalating tensions and heightening polarisation in societies. Yet
language policies can and should be designed so as to accommodate diversity,
protect minority rights and defuse tensions.
36. Efforts to promote the State language – which mostly pursue
the legitimate aim of promoting integration and societal cohesion
– may at times overstep the bounds of proportionality. Stringent
proficiency requirements in the State language in order to have
access to certain professions or to the civil service, decreasing
provision of teaching in and of minority languages, restrictions
on the right to sit school exams in these languages, the prohibition
of public signage in minority languages and restrictions on the
languages in which election campaign material can be published have
all given rise to concern over recent years. Such issues have frequently
been examined by the Advisory Committee in its monitoring work,
but also by the Venice Commission.
The Covid-19 pandemic has also recently
cast a spotlight on the importance of the use of minority languages
in health care settings, as well as in social institutions.
Questions around minority languages
are analysed further below, in the appendix to this report outlining
key lessons that can be learned from the situations in Ukraine,
Latvia and Wales.
4.5. Changing
media landscapes
37. Insufficient media production
in minority languages in the States where minorities live has been
a recurring theme in the monitoring of the implementation of the
Framework Convention.
Limits placed
on freedom of expression may also affect minorities.
Such factors can
prompt persons belonging to national minorities to seek alternative
information sources, resulting in a divided media landscape and
parallel media realities – a trend that can significantly hinder
efforts to achieve integrated societies.
At the same time,
as was pointed out to me in my meetings with interlocutors from
Wales (see appendix), the increasing digitalisation of media can
help to make more diverse content more affordable to produce and
to access, meaning that it is easier to cater to the diverse needs
of persons belonging to national minorities, including young people
and those living in urban and rural areas. However, elderly persons
belonging to national minorities, as well as those living in particularly
remote regions, may face new barriers in accessing digital media,
which need to be overcome.
38. The development of social media, which has facilitated communication
and contacts in many ways that are beneficial to persons belonging
to national minorities, has at the same time opened up more space
for hate speech, creating new challenges for the protection of minority
rights.
4.6. Shrinking
space for civil society
39. There have been signs that
shrinking space for civil society in some parts of Europe are making
it increasingly difficult for persons belonging to national minorities
to maintain their non-governmental organisations or register new
ones.
The re-securitisation
of minority issues, and the portrayal of minorities as a threat
to society, exacerbate these difficulties. This is especially the
case where new, restrictive legislation leads such NGOs to be classed
as “foreign agents” if they receive funds from abroad.
It creates
additional obstacles for these associations, which are often already
struggling as they rely on short-term, precarious funding to carry
out their activities.
4.7. Diversity
within minorities
40. All too often, national minorities
(like many other minority groups) are assumed to be monolithic.
For the authorities, taking account of the diversity within minorities,
notably as regards gender, age, socio-economic status and urban–rural
divides, may make communicating with them, accommodating their needs
and overcoming the obstacles they may face in exercising their rights
especially complex.
Sometimes ensuring access
to minority rights needs to go hand in hand with addressing needs
for infrastructure such as access to high-speed internet. For Roma,
in particular where they live in segregated areas, enjoyment of
minority rights may be dependent on improvement of access to more
basic needs such roads, housing and schools. However, it is equally
wrong to assume that all Roma live in poverty; such assumptions
can moreover have the effect of feeding anti-Gypsyist stereotypes.
4.8. The
need for continuous dialogue and adaptation in constantly changing
societies
41. As the Advisory Committee has
emphasised, “transparency and dialogue are central tenets of the Framework
Convention, as communication creates vectors for building understanding,
mutual respect and trust, without which diversity becomes a source
of friction instead of a cause for celebration.”
Having effective, permanent
and sufficiently representative consultation mechanisms in place,
in which minorities can participate satisfactorily and in which
they have confidence, is crucial in order to ensure that issues
affecting persons belonging to national minorities can be dealt
with in a way that allows the full variety and complexity of situations
to be adequately addressed. However, the lack of such a consultative
mechanism has been a recurring finding in the Advisory Committee’s
monitoring work.
42. It also needs to be recognised that the needs of minorities
may shift over time, due to demographic changes, migration from
rural to urban areas, increasing diversity within families (so-called
“mixed marriages”), and increasing diversity within society as a
whole, notably due to international migration flows. Effective data collection,
allowing for free self-identification including multiple ethnic,
linguistic and/or religious affiliations, is needed in order to
be able to understand and respond satisfactorily to changing needs.
43. Finally, societies themselves are rapidly changing, partly
as a result of migration flows (both within and between States)
and partly as a result of other factors, such as increasing digitalisation.
The latter can provide new opportunities for communication and education
in minority languages, but may also exclude some persons belonging
to national minorities, for instance the elderly or those living
in remote areas without the necessary infrastructures. These dynamics
necessarily impact human rights, including the rights of persons
belonging to national minorities. Implementing the Framework Convention
is thus not a finite task but a continuous process, requiring constant
adaptation – just like the European Convention on Human Rights,
the Framework Convention needs to be understood as a living instrument
in order to provide real and adequate protection to persons belonging
to national minorities. As the Advisory Committee has underlined,
the question is how best to ensure that the principles of the convention
are upheld and its goals achieved, in the long term as well as the
short term, and regardless of changes in governments and their political
priorities.
4.9. Building
inclusive and democratic societies
44. The twin challenge for the
authorities in States with diverse populations is how to build societies
in which minorities are not merely tolerated but respected and perceived
as an equal and integral part. This issue was examined in depth
by the Advisory Committee in its Thematic Commentary No. 4 on the
Framework Convention.
The question
is how to achieve the full and effective (not merely formal) equality
of persons belonging to national minorities.
In
order to achieve genuine equality in practice, minority rights need
to be mainstreamed across all fields of government action, and government
policies in a wide range of areas assessed as regards their impact
on the individual and collective dimensions of minority rights –
an issue discussed in particular in my meetings with interlocutors
in Wales (see further below).
45. Mutual respect and empowerment through the active participation
of all members of society in political, social and cultural life
are also crucial. These issues were examined extensively by the
Advisory Committee in its Thematic Commentary No. 2, which explores
and develops the central thesis that “the effective participation of
persons belonging to national minorities in public life is essential
to ensure social cohesion and the development of a truly democratic
society” and views the extent to which persons belonging to national minorities
participate in public life as a key indicator of the level of pluralism
and democracy of a society.
46. The authorities must also constantly send the clear message
that all members of society stand to benefit from living in an integrated
society, rather than a divided one. It must be clear that the goal
is not to assimilate everyone into a homogeneous mass but to ensure
inclusion and non-discrimination for all individuals, in all fields
of daily life.
47. The defining element of an integrated society is, in other
words, not the sameness of its citizens but their shared sense of
belonging. This is the best guarantee of the peace, stability and
democratic security that everyone – whether they belong to a minority
or to the majority – needs in order to flourish.
5. Current
challenges regarding the monitoring of the implementation of minority
rights under the Framework Convention
48. Above, I have pointed to the
major challenges faced by both States and persons belonging to national minorities
in ensuring full respect for minority rights in today’s Europe,
in particular as these rights are set out in the Framework Convention.
In addition to these substantive issues, however, the monitoring
system of the Framework Convention has itself also been under some
degree of strain.
49. First, States’ overall commitment towards the post-World War
II multilateral human rights architecture appears to be weakening.
It is moreover all too easy for States to ignore their obligations
under United Nations and Council of Europe instruments on minority
rights when they are subjected to monitoring only once every five
years.
50. Second, a number of factors, including increasing security
concerns in many States, have led to a deterioration in both bilateral
and multilateral co-operation in general. Such factors have not
only affected the implementation of the Framework Convention within
member States, as described above, but have also led to what the
Advisory Committee has described as “stronger and more frequent
ad hoc bilateralisation of minority issues”.
While free and peaceful
cross-border contacts can and frequently do play a positive role
in the preservation of the rights of persons belonging to national
minorities,
the strength
of the monitoring process set up under the Framework Convention
lies in its multilateral, rather than its bilateral nature. Under
this mechanism, States Parties are accountable to each other collectively,
and should rely on collective, rather than bilateral, supervision
of the Framework Convention. Unfortunately, the increasing length
of time taken between the adoption of the Advisory Committee’s opinions
and agreement by the Committee of Ministers on resolutions completing
the monitoring cycle reflects a growing trend towards re-bilateralising
minority concerns.
51. In response to these dynamics, the Advisory Committee has
in recent years placed an increasing focus on maintaining an ongoing
dialogue with States Parties, through the introduction of a new
confidential dialogue with the authorities prior to the final adoption
of its opinions,
and through carrying out follow-up activities, involving
representatives of both the authorities and minorities, wherever
possible.
New
technologies also provide us with new means of keeping in touch
with the situation of minorities in member States, and responding
to difficulties as they arise. There should be no hesitation in
mobilising such technologies to help strengthen the protection of
the rights of persons belonging to national minorities.
6. Conclusions
52. In today’s Europe, societies
are dynamic and constantly evolving – as indeed they have been throughout history.
It is time to re-consider traditional notions of national minorities
and understandings of non-discrimination. In the 21st century
environment, equality and human dignity, respect and recognition
must be understood as central to the protection of the rights of
persons belonging to national minorities.
53. Given the multiplication of challenges currently faced in
the implementation of minority rights, mainstreaming minority rights
is crucial in order to keep minority protection working. This is
exactly the kind of issue that can only be approached at the level
of cross-cutting human rights, in particular the right to equality and
to be free from discrimination.
54. It is also of the utmost importance to acknowledge the evolving
nature of the minority communities that make up Europe. Accommodation
of diversity in society requires constant efforts on the part of
the authorities, the majority and minorities. Inclusive and democratic
societies can only be built, and can only thrive, where all their
members are able to participate meaningfully in them, having an
opportunity to engage actively in cultural, social and economic
life and in public affairs, and to influence decisions that affect
them.
55. The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities
is a living instrument and is designed to be able to accompany and
support the parallel processes of transformation that both societies
and minorities are experiencing. Fulfilling the Convention’s potential
to serve as a living instrument, however, requires both institutional
commitment from the Council of Europe and political will from its
member States.
56. The Framework Convention also serves as an indirect benchmark
that helps the European Commission to evaluate the implementation
of minority rights by potential candidates and candidate States.
This is why I consider it important to strengthen co-ordination
across all European institutions in order to help develop synergies
between programs and initiatives. Strengthening the links between
the European Union and the Council of Europe in the field of minority
rights would also help to show how respect for human rights is related to
the proper functioning of the rule of law and functioning of democratic
institutions.
57. Furthermore, in order to protect minority rights effectively
in today’s Europe, we need to find new ways to ensure that the standards
enshrined in the Framework Convention are effectively incorporated
into domestic legislation and implemented in practice.
58. A number of measures should be also taken to increase the
impact in practice of the Framework Convention and ensure that the
recommendations made to member States under its monitoring mechanism are
implemented rapidly. Thus, building on the reforms already adopted
to streamline reporting and monitoring procedures, States Parties
must invest renewed efforts in implementing the recommendations
of monitoring bodies. These efforts could be coupled with the development
of indicators to help measure and evaluate outcomes, in particular
as regards societal integration.
59. Together with the fact-finding visits, bilateral meetings
and desk research that are already an integral part of the monitoring
process, a more multi-faceted co-operation with civil society could
be developed, through the establishment of a public (online) platform,
along similar lines to the Platform for the Protection of Journalism
and Safety of Journalists already put in place by the Council of
Europe. This would enable more data to be collected and would allow
serious concerns about the rights of persons belonging to national minorities
to be detected at an earlier stage. Modern technology could thus
be used to keep the discussion on minority issues ongoing.
60. Additional outreach strategies for communicating about the
Framework Convention and the findings of the Advisory Committee
could also be developed, taking full advantage of the increasing
availability of new technologies, in order to disseminate key findings
to the public. The later should also be translated and disseminated
by States Parties in the State language and the languages of national
minorities. Where this is not already done, these strategies could
also cover human rights and international treaties more broadly.
61. Finally, the eight States that have not ratified the Framework
Convention should ratify it, in line with the repeated recommendations
of the Assembly, and all member States that have not yet ratified
Protocol No. 12 to the European Convention on Human Rights, containing
a general prohibition on discrimination, should ratify it immediately.