1. Introduction
1. “The aim of our work is to make the borders of the
European States disappear. Our aim is for Europe to become a common
home, the home of freedom”. These words, pronounced by Konrad Adenauer
in 1950, are the very foundations on which the Council of Europe
is built.
2. The situation of minorities should be central to Council of
Europe work, since it plays an essential role for the preservation
of peace and stability. In Europe’s history, the inability to give
a satisfactory response to minority issues has been a major cause
of political tensions, conflicts and human rights violations. This
is not only a feature of the past. It is an issue of current affairs
and a lesson that should guide our political decisions now and in
the future. European States and organisations that are concerned
with making Europe “the home of freedom” and “a common home” must
have the courage to address the situation of minorities.
3. It is well known that State borders in Europe have changed
several times, not only along ethnic lines but also on the basis
of other considerations. As a result, traditional national minorities
are today present in almost all Council of Europe member States.
It is perhaps less known that people belonging to traditional national minorities
represent 10.29%
of the total European population. According
to the Federal Union of European Nationalities (FUEN), there are
about 340 autochthonous minorities, totalling about 100 million
people in the 47 member States of the Council of Europe. Every seventh
European citizen is part of a minority. In the European Union alone,
there are more than 60 regional or minority languages, next to the
23 official European Union languages. The number of speakers of
these languages is estimated at 40 million.
4. The ethnic, cultural and linguistic diversity of Europe has
been an essential element of its competitiveness and creativity.
“Unity through diversity” is one of the European slogans. It is
a principle which does not apply only at European level, but also
within each European country.
5. This richness should be protected and nurtured. Otherwise,
it runs the risk of disappearing. I am seriously concerned about
the deterioration of the situation and rights of traditional national
minorities despite the manifold conventions, resolutions, recommendations
adopted by international organisations, including the Council of
Europe and more recently the European Union.
6. The concept of nation State arose in the 18th and 19th centuries
when the process of nation building took place in Europe. Several
States wanted to have an ethnically homogeneous population within
their borders and those that did not belong to the majority became
second-class citizens. As a result, over the centuries, in different
parts of Europe, forced assimilation, massive deportations, atrocities,
ethnic cleansing, emigration, lack of community rights, restrictions
on the use of mother tongue and falsification of history were widely
applied. The last century was marked by increased intolerance and
tensions.
7. I am convinced that the modern idea of a State is one of an
inclusive State in which the majority population and minorities
live together, both as constituent parts and active pillars of the
democratic system. According to Francesco Palermo, First Vice-President
of the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection
of National Minorities, “differences should be the rule and not
the exception”.
The future
of Europe also depends on the capacity of States to recognise and
protect the rights of traditional national minorities and to involve
them in the political process.
8. My opinion is that, regrettably and despite its importance
for stability and security, the protection of the rights of traditional
national minorities has not yet become a political priority. Intolerance,
ignorance, lack of trust but also globalisation have accelerated
an assimilation process of the traditional national minorities into the
majority. State policies or personal motivations have triggered
this process. If it continues at this speed, I predict that national
minorities may soon be at risk. Human and European cultural values
which represent the richness of Europe will be lost and the well-known
European diversity might fade away.
9. The issue of traditional national minorities in Europe is
of utmost importance and should be dealt with relentlessly within
the framework provided by the Council of Europe and the European
Union. This is a way to prevent conflicts and to ensure the accomplishment
of the vision of Europe as a home for all. Conflicts or peace, degradation
or prosperity – that is what is at stake! The issue is European,
the risk is global! A ban on discrimination does not represent a
comprehensive solution to the problems arising from the situation
of traditional national minorities. The real aim is to stop their
assimilation, to make them feel entirely at home on the territory
where they have been traditionally living, to have a say in decisions
that will affect their lives, and to exercise autonomously their
cultural, educational and linguistic rights. The principle of subsidiarity
shall also prevail in this matter.
2. Origin
of the report
10. This report stems from a motion for a resolution
tabled by Ms Elvira Kovács and others (
Doc. 12994). The motion recalls that 2013 marks the 20th anniversary
of
Recommendation 1201
(1993), in which the Assembly first called on the Committee
of Ministers to draw up an additional protocol on the rights of
minorities to the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No. 5,
“the Convention”), as well as the 10th anniversary of
Resolution 1334 (2003) on positive experiences of autonomous regions as a source
of inspiration for conflict resolution in Europe.
11. The signatories of the motion consider that “[t]hese documents
show that for the presence of traditional national minorities to
become a source of cultural richness and political stability it
is necessary for Council of Europe member States to set up a framework
for the protection of traditional national minority rights. It may also
be necessary to set up specific mechanisms to ensure or boost political
representation and the different kind of territorial autonomies
in accordance with historical tradition and European standards”.
On the basis of these considerations, they suggest that “the Assembly
should draw up a report on best practices and follow-up of the above
mentioned documents for protecting traditional national minority
rights in Europe and formulate recommendations addressed to member
States”.
3. Definitions
12. There is still no generally accepted definition of
the notion of “national minority”. Neither the United Nations Declaration
on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National, or Ethnic, Religious
and Linguistic Minorities, nor the Framework Convention for the
Protection of National Minorities (ETS No. 157, “the Framework Convention”)
provide a legal definition. The lack of a legal definition offers
a relatively large margin of discretion to governments in selecting
the minorities for which they want to provide legal protection.
This can easily lead to different approaches to minority protection
by member States, although it is contrary to the rulings of the
European Court of Human Rights. I am of the opinion that a clear
European definition of the term of minority should be agreed upon
in the near future in order to improve the effectiveness of minority
protection.
13. The Parliamentary Assembly has, however, laid down a definition
in its
Recommendation
1201 (1993): “The expression ‘national minority’ refers to a group
of persons in a State who: a) reside on the territory of that State
and are citizens thereof; b) maintain longstanding, firm and lasting
ties with that State; c) display distinctive ethnic, cultural, religious
or linguistic characteristics; d) are sufficiently representative,
although smaller in number than the rest of the population of that
State or of a region of that State; e) are motivated by a concern
to preserve together that which constitutes their common identity,
including their culture, their traditions, their religion or their
language”. I will rely on such a definition for the purposes of
this report.
4. Scope of the report
14. The term “minorities” in
Recommendation 1201 (1993) refers to both traditional and new minorities. I would
like to focus in this report on traditional national minorities,
whom I would define as groups of persons who have been living on
the same territory for centuries and share the same national and
cultural identity. Some of them became a minority because State
borders changed; others have always been a minority and have managed
to preserve their identity.
15. I have decided to keep my report as focused as possible, with
a view to formulating precise recommendations which would enhance
impact. In line with this approach, although I consider these as
equally important issues, I shall not deal with the situation of
so-called “new minorities”, Roma people and religious minorities,
as this would considerably expand the scope of the report. For instance,
the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ETS No.
148, “the Charter”) itself also makes a distinction between so-called “new”
or often non-European languages and the regional or minority languages
defining the terminology of regional or minority languages. It also
takes the view that “new” or regional or minority languages have
to be addressed separately.
16. With this report, I intend to shed light on the situation
and rights of traditional national minorities, focusing on their
right to participate in political and public life effectively and
the use of minority languages in education and media. I will give
attention both to the collective and to the individual dimensions
of minority rights.
17. I will refer to previous work by the Assembly and recall the
Framework Convention and the Advisory Committee’s commentaries to
formulate recommendations with a view to strengthening the protection
of traditional national minorities in Europe.
18. This report is based on desk research and on information collected
during fact-finding visits to Italy on 9 and 10 May 2013, to Finland
on 6 and 7 November 2013 and to Serbia from 11 to 13 December 2013.
I would like to thank the parliamentary delegations for their support
in the preparation and conduct of the visits. I also had a meeting
with Mr Mark Lattimer, Executive Director of Minority Rights Group
International, following a hearing held at a meeting of the Committee
on Equality and Non-Discrimination on 3 December 2012 when I presented
an outline for the report. Committee members discussed a first version
of the memorandum at the committee meeting in Warsaw on 18 March
2013. The committee held a hearing with Professor Athanasia Spiliopoulou
Åkermark, President of the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention
for the Protection of National Minorities, and Mr Stefan Oeter,
Chair of the Committee of Experts of the European Charter for Regional
or Minority Languages, at its meeting on 17 September 2013 in Madrid.
The committee also held a discussion on the Spanish language policy
with the participation of Mr Rafael Rodríguez Ponga, Secretary General
of Instituto Cervantes, and Mr Fernando Rey Martínez, President
of the Council for the promotion of equal treatment and non-discrimination
on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin. On 1 October 2013, the committee
held a hearing on political participation and territorial autonomies
with the participation of Ms Michèle Akip, Head of the Secretariat
of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities,
and Professor Stefan Wolff, Director of Research and Knowledge Transfer,
College of Social Sciences, University of Birmingham.
19. I would also like to thank the members of the Committee on
Equality and Non-Discrimination for their active participation in
the discussions on this report and for the inputs and comments they
have provided throughout the process.
5. Aims of the report
20. I hope that this report will contribute to raising
the issue of national minorities higher in the political agenda
of Council of Europe member States.
21. I would like to demonstrate that the respect of minority rights
is beneficial to all those who live in a given country, whether
they belong to the majority or to minorities, and that minority
protection strengthens the democratic fabric of the political system.
22. Finally, I wish to highlight that the situation of traditional
national minorities has an economic aspect which is all too often
overlooked. Significant economic development can be noted on several
territories where ethnic tensions were handled successfully and
resulted in a situation which is satisfactory for both the State and
the minorities concerned. Alto Adige/Südtirol is an example in this
regard.
6. International instruments
for the protection of the rights of traditional national minorities
23. The protection of the rights of national minorities
and prohibition of discrimination today form an integral part of
the international system for the protection of human rights. The
international minority protection system, as it has developed over
the last few decades, is however mainly but not exclusively based
on an individualistic approach.
24. Several decades after the end of the League of Nations’ minority
system (and the consequent decades long setback in the minority
protection system in general), the adoption of the Declaration on
the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious
and Linguistic Minorities
by the United Nations General Assembly
in 1992 represented a landmark event in the renewal and development
of the protection and promotion of minority rights at global level.
25. When assessing the overall importance of the Declaration in
the evolution of minority rights, we should not forget that its
adoption initiated several important institutional developments
in the field of minority protection. A Commentary to the Declaration,
adopted in 2004,
stated that minority protection
was based on four pillars: the protection of the concerned group,
the prohibition of their exclusion, of their negative discrimination
and of their assimilation. It also established that while the rights
in the Declaration are consistently set out as rights of individuals,
the duties of States are in part formulated as duties towards minorities
as groups, and in some cases they can best be implemented by arrangements
for different types of participation in decision-making. The Declaration
on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP)
is another United Nations instrument
that has contributed to the broader legal context in which minority
protection norms are being developed.
26. While instruments at the global level tend to confirm the
basic minimum for the protection of national minorities, regional
instruments may present higher standards of protection. The Framework
Convention for the Protection of National Minorities,
a multilateral treaty signed in
1995, entered into force in 1998. The Framework Convention constitutes
today the most comprehensive international instrument for the protection of
the rights of individual persons belonging to national minorities.
To date, 39 States are Parties to the Framework Convention, four
States – Belgium, Greece, Iceland and Luxembourg – have signed but
not yet ratified it, and four others – Andorra, France, Monaco and
Turkey – have neither signed nor ratified it.
27. The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages adopted
in 1992 places the emphasis on the obligation of the State to protect
and promote regional or minority languages as part of cultural heritage.
It is a unique international instrument and plays a complementary
role to the Framework Convention.
Significant similarities between
the provisions of the Framework Convention and the Charter can be
found, particularly in the detailed provisions of Part III of the
Charter. “While the nature and scope of application of the two instruments
may diverge, the individual rights approach of the Framework Convention
and the broader approach to cultural protection and promotion contained
in the Charter result in a strengthening of the overall legal framework
relevant for the protection of the linguistic rights of members
of national minorities.”
28. The Parliamentary Assembly has always been a motor for minority
protection in the Council of Europe member States (
Recommendation 1609 (2003) and
Resolution
1334 (2003) on positive experiences of autonomous regions as a source
of inspiration for conflict resolution in Europe and
Resolution 1832 (2011) “National sovereignty and statehood in contemporary
international law: the need for clarification”). In its
Recommendation 1201 (1993), the Assembly significantly developed its list of minority-specific
rights, especially in the linguistic and educational spheres in
a proposed additional protocol on the rights of minorities to the
European Convention on Human Rights. I also wish to recall its
Recommendations 1492 (2001),
1623 (2003),
1766 (2006),
1713 (2010) concerning the rights of minorities.
29. In addition to the above-mentioned instruments (United Nations
and Council of Europe), others can also be relevant for the protection
of traditional national minorities. They range from legally binding
norms and standards to recommendations and guidelines. The European
Convention on Human Rights and related case-law of the European
Court of Human Rights, as well as the revised European Social Charter
(ETS No. 163), foresee minority protection. In addition, recommendations
and guidelines published by the Organization for Security and Co-operation
in Europe (OSCE)’s High Commissioner on National Minorities can
also be relevant. Acts, norms and recommendations by the Council
of Europe, the OSCE and the United Nations have inspired bilateral
agreements between States. These bilateral agreements, which are
legally binding norms for the signing States, can – if respected
– contribute to the protection of the rights of national minorities.
On a more general level, the International Convention on the Elimination
of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights, and the Convention on the Rights of
the Child also touch the domain of minority rights. In the case
of national minorities living in the European Union, the EU acquis on language rights is relevant,
as well as the constitutional traditions common to EU member States.
Good practices in Council of Europe member States could serve as
an inspiration.
30. The European Parliament Resolution on the protection of minorities
and anti-discrimination policies in an enlarged Europe (2005/2008(INI))
pointed out the inconsistency of policies with regard to minorities
– while protection of minorities was a part of the Copenhagen criteria,
there was no standard for minority rights in Community policy nor
was there a Community understanding of who can be considered a member
of a minority. The European Parliament recommended that a definition
of minorities should be based on the definition laid down in
Recommendation 1201 (1993). In the case of
Timishev
v. Russia,
the
European Court of Human Rights defined the notion of minorities
as societal groups.
7. Achievements and
challenges in the implementation of the Framework Convention for
the Protection of National Minorities
31. The Framework Convention for the Protection of National
Minorities is one of the major achievements of the international
minority protection system. It recognised the need to protect and
promote the rights of members of these communities who are seen
as holders of cultural, economic and other values important for the
society at large. Minority cultures and languages are no longer
considered, at least in theory, a problem or a threat to the integrity
of society, but are considered instead a valuable and often underused
resource. There is a general consensus among States that the protection
of national minorities is not considered a domestic issue.
32. The Framework Convention shows the way for an enhancement
of the minority protection system. It is essential to note, however,
that aiming to preserve minority cultures or languages in their
present form can be insufficient. Recommendation 286 (2010) adopted
by the Congress for Local or Regional Authorities of the Council
of Europe on “Minority languages – an asset for regional development”
states that “[r]egional and minority languages are not luxuries:
as well as being an integral part of Europe's rich cultural heritage,
they have a vital role to play in increasing the integration and
economic prosperity of the greater European area”.
33. Certain conditions must be met in order to ensure the development,
and thus the survival, of minority cultures and languages. If a
State, responsible for the protection of a given national minority,
does not put in place all the necessary structures and does not
take appropriate measures to effectively and adequately protect
the given community (its culture, language and members), then the
minority culture in question will decline, even if the State meets,
at least in theory, all its internationally binding obligations.
34. As highlighted by Professor Spiliopoulou Åkermark, President
of the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection
of National Minorities,
“[m]inorities are not homogeneous, monolithic
groups and may require different measures … The Convention is implemented
and monitored on an ‘article by article’ basis”. The commentaries
(especially the recent Commentary No. 3) of the Advisory Committee
on the Framework Convention, based on the close monitoring of the
implementation of the Convention in the States Parties, should be
seen as living instruments whose interpretation will be developed as
the monitoring process under the Framework Convention evolves: they
recognise that there is a constant evolution of the standards, in
other words there is a continuous possibility for enhancement.
35. While the monitoring system of the Framework Convention improves
the standards and defines its scope of application, there are issues
that limit its applicability. The slow ratification process of the
convention, as well as the reservations made by States Parties,
have weakening effects. It is important to note, however, that the improving
standards and best practices by some States still constitute valid
models and references even for States that are not yet Parties to
the convention. In this context, I wish to recall that, according
to Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a
Party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification
for its failure to execute a treaty. Therefore, the Framework Convention
provisions apply to all State bodies without limitations or exceptions,
irrespective of the federal, centralised or decentralised structure
of the State.
36. Although the implementation of the Framework Convention has
entailed the adoption of new and effective solutions in this field,
there have been deficiencies in ensuring adequate protection of
persons belonging to national minorities. In some States, the process
of implementation of the Framework Convention has brought about
not only good practices but also serious challenges. The protection
of persons belonging to national minorities can be considered as
a political issue and its extent depends on the current political situation.
The implementation of policies to reinforce this protection is often
discontinued following changes of ruling parties or coalitions.
Such changes sometimes also imply transfer of competences between
different State institutions. Moreover, due to political changes,
certain States develop policies promoting the majority (official
or “State”) language and culture which may, in practice, be detrimental
to the protection of persons belonging to national minorities. Furthermore,
the lack of definition of the term of national minorities remains
a persistent issue.
8. The right to identity
37. “The right to identity represents in many ways the
essence of the case for minorities within the corpus of human rights
– the claim to distinctiveness and the contribution of a culture
on its own terms to the traditional, cultural, linguistic heritage
of mankind”.
The protection of identity
is specifically laid down in Article 5.1 of the Framework Convention,
according to which: “[States Parties] undertake to promote the conditions
necessary for persons belonging to national minorities to maintain
and develop their culture, and to preserve the essential elements
of their identity, namely their religion, language, traditions and
cultural heritage.” The protection of identity is part of a policy
of non-assimilation. The protection of identity is furthermore part
of Article 6 of the Framework Convention, which prohibits discrimination
based on ethnic, cultural, linguistic or religious identity. The
identity to be protected and promoted may be national, ethnic, cultural,
religious or linguistic or all of these altogether. The concept
of identity is a broad and important concept for individuals and
communities since it concerns their belonging, their way of thinking,
feeling and acting. Consequently, respect for and protection of identity
can be considered as constitutive elements of respect for human
dignity.
38. The right to identity can be considered as intermediate between
individual rights and collective rights,
with
an individual and a collective dimension because individuals as
well as communities can benefit from it.
The
individual right to participate in cultural life, for example, makes
no sense without a community.
39. Article 5.2 of the Framework Convention prohibits forced assimilation
and states that “[w]ithout prejudice to measures taken in pursuance
of their general integration policy, the Parties shall refrain from
policies or practices aimed at assimilation of persons belonging
to national minorities against their will and shall protect these
persons from any action aimed at such assimilation”. In the case
of traditional national minorities that developed their national
identities and institutions for centuries while living on the same
territory, I consider that integration as a community represents
a solution that makes it possible to avoid both forced assimilation
of minority groups and the secession of parts of the State territory.
Thus integration as a community is a constructive element for the
promotion of peace and stability while integration at the individual
level can easily lead to assimilation and thus possibly become a
source of tensions or a security threat. Traditional national minorities
should integrate into society as a community. This opinion was confirmed
by all the people I met in Alto Adige/Südtirol, especially Professor
Joseph Marko, Head of the Institute of Minority Rights of the European Academy
of Bolzano/Bozen. It was also confirmed during my fact-finding visit
to Serbia.
40. International minority rights law has clearly set boundaries
to integration policies: they cannot lead to forced assimilation
and to giving up one’s own specific identity. Traditional national
minority communities need to better integrate into larger units
of society (at regional, national and European level, as the case
may be) as autonomous communities composed of individuals, contributing
to the cultural and economic enrichment of society at large. They
need to preserve their culture and language by maintaining (or re-establishing)
and running the institutions developed during centuries, by maintaining
or reacquiring the official status of their language, which is also
expressed in Articles 9.1.a.i,
10.1.a.i and 10.2.a of the European Charter for Regional or
Minority Languages. These historically based needs are to be considered
their vested rights and respected as such. An integration policy
may be in line with the expectations of the Framework Convention
when it ensures that the integration of traditional national minority
as a group does not become unwanted assimilation or undermine the
group identity of persons living on the territory of the State.
It is vital to distinguish between integration (of autonomous communities),
which is a solution, and forced assimilation, which could mean breaching
human rights and triggering a security threat.
9. Language rights
41. Language is a key aspect of cultural identity. The
link between linguistic rights and the protection of identity of
persons belonging to minority groups is particularly relevant and
a key aspect because the use of a minority language represents one
of the main means to assert and preserve one’s identity.
The
right to use freely and without interference one’s minority language
is enshrined in Article 10 of the Framework Convention and also
in Article 7.1.
d of the European
Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. The speakers of regional and
minority languages are a precious asset because they act as bridges
between people. In its Thematic Commentary No. 3, the Advisory Committee
states that “[a]lthough the Framework Convention protects the rights
of individual persons belonging to national minorities, the enjoyment
of certain rights has a collective dimension” (paragraph 3). As
the Framework Convention noted, “some rights, including the right
to use a minority language in public, can be effectively enjoyed
only in a community with others”. The human rights protection system
is reasonably effective in guaranteeing the free use of languages
in the private sphere, but not so effective when the issue is language
rights in relation to public authorities.
42. Article 1 of the European Charter for Regional or Minority
Languages defines the term of regional or minority languages, which
are traditionally used within a given territory of a State by nationals
of the State who form a group numerically smaller than the rest
of the State population, different from the official language(s)
of the State. It does not include either dialects of the official
languages of the State or the languages of migrants. This definition
covers 84 regional and minority languages used by 206 national minorities
or linguistic groups in 23 of the 25 States Parties to the European
Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.
43. A number of documents, such as Commentary No. 3 of the Advisory
Committee on the Framework Convention, stress the importance of
reciprocity when dealing with language policies: “In order to create respect
for lesser-used languages, language policies should encourage the
use of different languages in public places, such as local administrative
centres, as well as in the media. In addition, it is not only important
for speakers of minority languages to learn majority languages but
also vice versa” (Article 33).
44. The Finnish Constitution states that Finnish and Swedish are
the official national languages. After birth, parents decide to
affiliate a child to one of the official languages, Finnish or Swedish.
At 18, this choice can be changed and after 18 one can change as
many times as one wants. Citizens should be provided with the same level
of services in Finnish or Swedish in bilingual municipalities.
45. In Serbia, the 2002 Federal Law on the Protection of the Rights
and Freedoms of National Minorities regulates the rights of minorities
to education in their mother tongue. A minority language may be
used by the local administration when 15% of the population belongs
to a national minority. According to the regional Ombudsman of Vojvodina,
the application of this law in certain municipalities is still problematic.
46. The Advisory Committee noted in its Third Thematic Commentary
that media play a central role with regard to the linguistic rights
of national minorities: “The right to receive and impart information
and ideas in a minority language, as stipulated in Article 9 of
the Framework Convention, depends on effective opportunities for
access to the media. Furthermore, the possibility to receive and
impart information in a language one can fully understand and communicate
in, is a precondition for equal and effective participation in public,
economic, social, and cultural life”. The public service broadcasting
must guarantee an adequate presence of persons belonging to minorities
and their languages in order to reflect the cultural and linguistic
diversity existing within society.
47. I support the request made to the authorities by the Advisory
Committee to increase funding to organisations or media outlets
representing minorities in order to bring their identity, language,
history and culture to the attention of the majority. Special attention
should be paid in this regard to the particular needs of rural and
remote areas where persons belonging to national minorities live
traditionally or in substantial numbers. The Advisory Committee
has valued the significant role played by private and community
media for the realisation of linguistic rights of persons belonging
to national minorities: “Negative consequences facing minority language
outlets may include the limitation of broadcasting time, increased
costs due to requirements for translation or the production of subtitling
in the official language, and even, in some instances, fines for infringements
of legal provisions in this domain.”
10. Right to education
in one’s own language
48. The right to education is closely linked to linguistic
rights. Education plays a primary role in cultural reproduction,
socialisation and identity formation and is thus an invaluable means
for the maintenance and respect of one’s identity. Teaching in minority
languages is vital to the protection of minority rights. The importance
of the right to use one’s mother tongue in education cannot be stressed
enough. Language constitutes a significant “gate-keeping factor”
and is thus considered a crucial element for access to all levels of
education. Education is indeed crucial for the survival of traditional
national minority languages which make up the cultural heritage
of Europe. In its
Recommendation
1353 (1998), the Assembly stated that minorities should be able
to express their identity and to develop their education, culture,
language and traditions, and that States should take all necessary
measures to this end. The right of persons belonging to national
or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities to express their
characteristics and to develop,
inter
alia, their culture and language, is also recognised
by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging
to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (1992).
The Declaration also recognises the right to receive education in
one’s own language.
49. The right to learn and be taught in one’s mother tongue is
recognised in Article 14 of the Framework Convention, as “one of
the principal means by which such individuals can assert and preserve
their identity”. States Parties are expected to recognise this right
in their legal and educational systems. Article 14.1 refers explicitly
to “the right” of national minorities to learn their minority language
as “one of the principal means by which such individuals can assert
and preserve their identity”.
50. Mother-tongue education is considered a best practice in language
maintenance. However, protecting and promoting the right to education
in a minority language as a human right is a difficulty encountered
by traditional national minorities. Assembly
Recommendation 1740 (2006) stated that education based on the mother tongue “significantly
increases the chances of educational success and can even give better
results”. It is undoubtedly true that every language has its own
linguistic logical system which cannot be replaced by the logic
of another language. A child's mother tongue is the language in
which he or she expresses himself or herself. The Hague Recommendations
of the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities recall that
the first years of education are of pivotal importance in a child's
development.
Educational research suggests that
the medium of teaching at pre-school and kindergarten levels should
ideally be the child's language. The continuity of the education
in the mother tongue in secondary and in higher education (including
vocational education) is indispensable for traditional national
minorities. In its
Recommendation
1353 (1998), the Assembly recalled that governments should avoid
prescribing the exclusive use of the official majority language and
abstain from pursuing policies aimed at assimilation of national
minorities into the majority culture.
51. The right of persons belonging to national minorities to establish
and maintain their own educational institutions, for which they
seek private as well as public assistance, is protected by Article
13 of the Framework Convention. Education policies should be formulated
in line with the needs of traditional national minorities. I am
convinced that specific educational institutions for traditional
national minorities are the best solution to learn in one’s language
through the method of their own minority educational system. In
Alto Adige/Südtirol, each linguistic minority has its own educational
system. In the German system, lessons are taught in German and Italian
is taught as a foreign language. In the Italian system, lessons
are taught in Italian and German is a foreign language. In the Ladin
system, half of the lessons are taught in German and half in Italian,
with two hours of Ladin language a week. In Finland, Finnish-speaking
and Swedish-speaking children have the right to education in their
mother tongue. In the Sámi homeland, the basic education should
be mainly in Sámi language. The State gives extra subsidies to providers
of education for the teaching of their mother language to Sámi,
Roma and migrant children.
52. When a child is capable of expressing him/herself in his/her
mother tongue as a native speaker, it is the right time to acquire
the language of the majority properly, which is indispensable to
be competitive. If integration policies are pushed too far in education,
the result is assimilation and the disappearance of the minority
language as a distinct culture. Teaching of the minority language
to persons who are not members of the minority can also be a useful
tool in improving understanding between the majority and the minorities.
On a few occasions, when the Advisory Committee has had a chance
to review the implementation of the provisions under Article 13,
it has referred to private minority educational and pedagogic institutions
as a key source for minority language education.
The Advisory Committee
welcomed and encouraged the initiatives of the States Parties to
provide subsidies for private minority language schools.
53. The Advisory Committee devoted its First Thematic Commentary
to Education under the Framework Convention (2 March 2006). The
following conclusions can be drawn when analysing the Commentary. Regarding
the qualification “if there is sufficient demand”, the Advisory
Committee encourages governments to take a “proactive approach”
“even when the expressed demand appears low”. Emphasis has been
placed on the continuity of traditional minority language education
at all levels, including at the pre- and post-primary stages. The
Advisory Committee has also emphasised that Article 12 of the Framework
Convention for the Protection of National Minorities requires the
commitment of States Parties to promote equal access to education
at all levels for people belonging to national minorities.
54. The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages was
designed with the aim of protecting and promoting regional and minority
languages as part of Europe’s cultural heritage. Its Article 8 is
intended to ensure that regional or minority languages are used
in education. France, Greece and Turkey have yet to ratify the Charter.
The system also depends on States’ good will, and taking active
measures to promote the use of regional and minority languages.
These conditions are not universally fulfilled, and some States
remain hostile to the Charter or do not implement it effectively.
The recommendations of the Committee of Experts of the Charter do
not represent a legal obligation. In several countries there is
a gap between existing legislation and implementation. The Charter
is a unique instrument and exchanges on best practices for the implementation of
its provisions should be further encouraged.
55. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging
to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities and the
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples include
the right to education in one’s own language. Unfortunately, they
are not legally binding instruments. While they show that, at international
level, there is a growing trend towards acceptance of the principle
that the right to be educated in one’s own language should be guaranteed,
the fact is that there is not yet a general, unambiguous and legally
binding obligation for such a right, clearly established in international
law. At global level, there is still some difficulty in getting
a broad international agreement in order to make this a legally
binding norm. However, the United Nations Committee on the Rights
of the Child has interpreted indigenous people’s right to education
in their own language in its General Comment No. 11 (2009, CRC/C/GC/11)
in the following terms: “62. Article 30 of the Convention establishes
the right of the indigenous child to use his or her own language. In
order to implement this right, education in the child’s own language
is essential. Article 28 of ILO Convention No. 169 affirms that
indigenous children shall be taught to read and write in their own
language besides being accorded the opportunity to attain fluency
in the official languages of the country. Bilingual and intercultural curricula
are important criteria for the education of indigenous children.
Teachers of indigenous children should to the extent possible be
recruited from within indigenous communities and given adequate
support and training”.
56. From a legal point of view, the Framework Convention for the
Protection of National Minorities and the European Charter for Regional
or Minority Languages provide the clearest expression of a right
for traditional national minorities to not only learn, but in some
cases to also receive education in, their own language – at least
under certain circumstances. The provisions in these treaties do
however raise problems and do not quite fulfil the promises they
seem to make. Unfortunately, it would seem that mother-tongue education
for traditional national minorities depends heavily on the attitude
of the majority towards the protection of minorities. I would also
like to highlight the importance of including courses about minorities
in the school curriculum in order to raise awareness about their
culture, history and rights.
11. Right to participate
in political and public life
57. People belonging to traditional national minorities
should be able to participate in political and public life. Members
of a society should be able not only to formulate their interests,
but also to decide, either directly or indirectly, the methods and
ways they would like to use to formulate their interests with due
respect for democratic principles and the rule of law. In my view,
the State bodies should involve representatives of the minorities
concerned in the decision-making process on possible ways and methods
of participation. Effective participation in public life also provides
members of national minorities with an opportunity to learn from
the process and become democratic actors in mainstream society.
Guaranteeing participation rights in public life for national minorities
is thus considered a democratisation tool: it helps societies overcome
deep divisions as it forces all sides to meet and discuss the process.
58. Article 15 of the Framework Convention for the Protection
of National Minorities states that Parties shall create the conditions
necessary for the effective participation of persons belonging to
national minorities in cultural, social and economic life and in
public affairs, in particular those affecting them. Moreover, they
“should also have a say on issues which are not of exclusive concern
to them but affect them as members of the society as a whole”.
As
noted in the Commentary of the Advisory Committee on the effective
participation of persons belonging to national minorities in cultural,
social, and economic life and in public affairs, “although the Framework
Convention protects the rights of individual persons belonging to
national minorities, the enjoyment of certain rights, including
the right to effective participation, has a collective dimension”.
This means that some rights can be effectively enjoyed only in community
with other persons belonging to national minorities. While Article
15 is the Framework Convention’s central provision devoted to the
right to effective participation, participation is also the key
to the full enjoyment of other rights protected under the convention.
“The relation between Article 15 and Articles 4 and 5 is, in this
context, particularly important. In fact, Articles 15, 4 and 5 can be
seen as the three corners of a triangle which together form the
main foundations of the Framework Convention.”
59. Article 4 requires States to promote full and effective equality
for persons belonging to national minorities in all areas of life.
This implies the right of equal protection of the law and before
the law and the right to be protected against all forms of discrimination
based on ethnic origin and other grounds. Furthermore, full and effective
equality also implies the need for the authorities to take specific
measures in order to overcome past or structural inequalities and
to ensure that persons belonging both to national minorities and
to the majority have equal opportunities in various fields. Professor
Joseph Marko,
in his study “The Law and Politics of Diversity
Management: A Neo-institutional Approach”, writes: “Therefore, the
concept of ‘substantive’ equality requires the State not only to
refrain from discriminatory acts, but to interfere through ‘affirmative
action’ measures in the economic and social systems with the goal
of either removing the factual barriers to ‘equal opportunities’
or even guaranteeing ‘full and effective equality’ as this is prescribed
by Article 4 of the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for
the Protection of National Minorities. Thus, only ‘affirmative action’ measures
and ‘special rights’ in the form of group rights can remedy in their
view the factual, societal disadvantages. Group-related rights as
‘special rights’ for minorities or their members do not by definition restrict
individual rights, but can – and in most cases must – complement
each other for ‘effective’ diversity management in order to overcome
structural inequalities or to guarantee institutional equality.
Much more important for the effectiveness of human and minority
rights is thus a country-, culture- and context-specific mix of
individual and group-related rights.”
60. Article 5 implies for States Parties an obligation “to promote
the conditions necessary for persons belonging to national minorities
to maintain and develop their culture and to preserve the essential
elements of their identity, namely their religion, language, traditions
and cultural heritage” in order to guarantee effectively their right
to identity. As the Explanatory Report to the Framework Convention
points out, States could promote – in the framework of their constitutional
systems – several measures, such as certain consultative mechanisms,
the involvement of the minorities in the preparation, implementation
and assessment of national and regional development plans and programmes
likely to affect them directly. The involvement of these persons
in the decision-making processes and in elected bodies both at national
and local levels, autonomous or decentralised or local forms of
government (national and local levels) is pointed out, too. As an
example, the Swedish Assembly of Finland (Folktinget), a cross-political
body, can take part in law-drafting when related to the interests
of Swedish-speakers. In Serbia, national minority councils were
established with a view to allowing minorities to exercise their
rights in the fields of culture, education and information.
States in certain cases should
establish additional institutions and measures in order to be able
to guarantee the right of persons belonging to national minorities
to effective participation in political and public life.
61. States, in certain cases, should create – by legal and any
other proper means – the democratic framework of the political and
public life of minorities within which the diversity of views among
members of a minority community could be represented. According
to a recommendation that was adopted by the Assembly in 2001, “democratic
legitimacy requires equal participation by all groups of a society
in the political process”.
This statement is also true within the minority
community (minority society) itself.
62. There are several ways both in theory and in practice to solve
the problem of democratic legitimacy within a minority community.
Non-territorial and territorial models of a kind of minority self-governance
or even minority autonomy can also serve this aim. According to
the Advisory Committee, “the Framework Convention does not provide
for the right of persons belonging to national minorities to autonomy,
… nonetheless they (i.e. autonomies) can foster a more effective
participation of people belonging to national minorities in various
areas of life.”
In
its
Resolution 1334 (2003) on the positive experiences of autonomous regions as
a source of inspiration for conflict resolution in Europe, the Assembly
rightly pointed out that “[w]ith a view to relieving internal tensions,
central government must react with understanding when minority groups,
particularly when they are sizeable and have lived in an area for
a long period of time, demand greater freedom to manage their own
affairs independently. At the same time, the granting of autonomy
must never give a community the impression that local government
is a matter for that community alone”.
Furthermore, the Forum
on Minority Issues of the United Nations, in its 2009 Thematic recommendation
on minorities and effective political participation, stated: “Where
minorities are concentrated geographically, consideration should
be given in appropriate circumstances to devolving power, creating
autonomous or other sub-State divisions.”
As power sharing
is a constitutive element of democracy, the establishment and the
operation of an autonomous entity can be regarded as part of a given
State’s democratisation process,
since
“democracy is an ongoing, never-ending process”.
“Autonomy
can be considered as a tool for minority protection, if understood
as a tool for territorial management”, stressed Mr Francesco Palermo,
First Vice-President of the Advisory Committee on the Framework
Convention for the Protection of National Minorities during my fact-finding
visit to Italy.
63. In the best-case scenarios, permanent institutionalised inter-cultural
dialogue mechanisms already exist in order to include national minority
representatives in the political and social process of implementing
the Framework Convention as well as in other political processes.
This can be either through various types of autonomy, or political
representation at all levels.
In
some cases, claims related to identity rights go beyond mere protection,
the members of the group demanding the promotion of their identity.
The conditions for the development and promotion of identity often
require special measures intended to facilitate maintenance, reproduction
and further development of the culture of minorities.
Whilst
a minority group needs to be able to preserve its own culture and
promote its own identity, it also needs to be able to participate
in the public life of the State, particularly with regard to matters
affecting its culture, identity and institutions. The way this right can
be organised and exercised depends, to a large extent, on the kind
of minority group concerned. For example, large and closely-knit
minorities having a special interest in participation in the affairs
of the country as a whole and in matters affecting the group. At
the same time, smaller or more dispersed groups are mainly concerned
with effective participation in decisions on matters concerning
them. The Sámi Parliament’s main objective is to protect and promote
the language and culture. Its members can make proposals to the authorities
in this regard. In Serbia, the 5% threshold for national minority
parties and coalitions of national minority parties was abolished
in 2004, which contributed to improving minority representation
in parliament.
64. In these contexts, the form of settlement in which the minority
group lives is also relevant: in the case of historical minorities
living compactly, forms of territorial autonomy can be the best
solution to be negotiated, whereas where minorities live dispersed
among the majority, not forming a majority in any substantial area, other
forms of institutionalisation of these rights are required, which
may well include non-territorial, functional variants of autonomy.
Obviously, effective participation in public life includes not only
participation in political life and how an adequate representation
should be devised, but also participation in cultural, social and economic
life.
So, territorial decentralisation and the
participation of minorities in political and public life are twins
and they have a common soul, namely power sharing.
65. Without doubt, the right to autonomy exists only as an aspect
of peoples’ right to self-determination. Marina Schuster rightly
pointed out in her report: “Self-determination of minority groups
should be realised rather by way of participation in the government
of the State as a whole, and by the devolution of power through the
development of regional autonomy, namely self-government in matters
such as education, culture, etc., falling short of independence.”
In addition,
practising this right to “internal self-determination” does not interfere
with the States’ right to territorial integrity, so that the possible
conflict between territorial integrity and self-determination can
be resolved by means of the phenomenon of internal self-determination.
The more mature a society is, the more democratic it is, the more
extended is decision-making at lower levels. Thus, there is a greater
chance for the traditional national minorities to manage their own
affairs by themselves. As an example, the Åland Islands have their
own administration with the right to legislate and provide State
services in the fields of education, health care, culture and local
administration.
66. The European Charter of Local Self-Government (ETS No. 122),
drawn up within the Council of Europe, is the first multilateral
legal instrument to define and safeguard the principles of local
autonomy, one of the pillars of democracy. It is the Council of
Europe’s function and role to defend and develop it. It may be hoped that
it will thus make a substantial contribution to the protection and
enhancement of common European values.
As
at 30 October 2013, the Charter had been ratified by all Council
of Europe member States. The Charter lays down the principles of
the democratic functioning of communities, and is the first treaty
to establish the principle of the transfer of competences to local
communities. This principle, known as the principle of subsidiarity,
allows for the decentralisation of power towards the level closest
to the citizens.
According to the Charter,
“States undertake to respect a core of basic principles to which
no reservation is possible, such as: the right of citizens to participate
in managing public affairs; the key rights of communities to enjoy autonomy
and self-government, elect their local bodies and to have their
own competences, administrative structures and financial resources;
or the right to judicial recourse in case of interference from other
levels”.
The Charter’s substantive provisions seek
to protect what are presumed to be the essential components of local
autonomy. According to Article 2 of the Charter, the principle of
local self-government is to be recognised in domestic legislation
and, where practicable, in the Constitution. Through these core
principles, the Charter seeks to ensure the compatibility of the
diverse structures of local communities in the Council of Europe member
States. However, the final aim remains the respect of all of the
Charter’s provisions.
Article 7 of the draft European Charter
of Regional Self-Government,
proposes
that member States fully respect “what has been achieved through
the European Charter of Local Self-Government”.
67. According to Professor Wolff, territorial self-governance
arrangements on their own reduce the odds of violent territory-centred
intra-State conflict by approximately 50% compared to other State
structures, whereas territorial self-governance arrangements in
combination with a parliamentary form of government and a proportional
representation election system reduces the odds of violent territory-centred
intra-State conflict by more than 70% compared to all other institutional
combinations.
Of
the12 States in western Europe that are host to national minorities
who have made claims to territorial self-governance, only one (Greece)
has denied this claim; while 10 States (Belgium, Denmark, Finland,
France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United
Kingdom) provide territorial self-governance to at least one claimant
group, even though they may be denying it to another.
In
western Europe, the granting of territorial self-governance is the
norm regardless of the combination of legacy factors.
12. Challenges to the
situation and rights of traditional national minorities
12.1. Demography
68. Demography is a key issue for all European societies,
and even more crucial for the survival of traditional national minorities.
Where no forms of autonomy exist, there is a general phenomenon
that individuals belonging to a minority adjust their individual
life strategies to the easier models, namely accepting better schooling
in the State language or abandoning the minority mother tongue when
educating their children. This means that besides the policies of
certain States of discouraging the use of the minority language,
a large number of children belonging to the minority or mixed couples,
schooled in State language institutions, identify themselves with
the majority population. This phenomenon is especially tangible
in urban areas and in areas with less than 30% of minority population.
In some cases,
a
demographic collapse is foreseen in the near future. I note that
State integration policies aimed towards individuals easily lead
to individual assimilation while integration policies for communities
would result in a harmonious coexistence of the majority and minority population.
69. Some demographic decline factors also affect the majority
society, like emigration and low birth rates, but emigration to
the kin-State is an additional factor in the case of a person belonging
to a minority. On the other hand, although natality may be similar
for the two communities, when becoming an adult, many persons belonging
to a minority declare themselves to be members of the majority community.
70. In addition to low birth rates, assimilation, cultural homogenisation,
migration to kin-States or elsewhere has an impact on the size of
a traditional national minority. States should facilitate national
minorities and communities within their territories to remain in
their birthplaces, to prosper and progress there.
12.2. Impact of the economic
crisis on the protection of traditional national minorities
71. Minorities contribute significantly to the economy
of the country in which they live. Per capita gross domestic product
(GDP) is much higher than the European Union average in Greenland,
Catalonia, Scotland, the Basque Country, Alto Adige/Südtirol, the
Faroe Islands and the Åland Islands, which are regions enjoying a
certain level of autonomy.
The most efficient tool of autonomy
is the control of the distribution of assets and the structure of
the tax regime. For example, Catalonia represents 16% of the population
of Spain,
while 20% of the country’s GDP is
produced in this autonomous community.
Scotland also causes the
EU average to skew upwards: the per capita GDP in Scotland is higher
than not only the EU averages but also the GDP of the United Kingdom.
In Alto Adige/Südtirol, 90% of the tax collected goes back to the
province, where the distribution of resources is decided by the
provincial government. Each resident has to declare to which linguistic
group he or she belongs. The allocation of posts in public administration
and of funding for cultural programmes corresponds to the percentage
of persons who declared belonging to one group or the other.
72. There are professions which are closely linked to the identity
of a national minority. This is the case of the indigenous Sámi
people living in Northern Finland. The Declaration on the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples adopted by the General Assembly of the United
Nations on 13 September 2007 and the International Labour Organisation’s
Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention (1989) (No. 169) ensure
the protection of professions related to the identity of indigenous
peoples. Finland has not yet ratified this convention, which has led
to some disagreements over land issues between the Finnish authorities
and the Sámi people. The right of the Sámi people to practise traditional
livelihoods is guaranteed by the Constitution of Finland.
73. Europe cannot be built on accepting individual, particular
solutions as single measures that evolve along power interests,
arising from certain concrete situations. Working along democratic
traditions, Europe should realise that solutions that were already
proven to be successful in certain situations (for example autonomy) should
be accessible to all groups of people in a similar situation. The
first step is that these solutions become part of the pan-European
political arena as legitimately pursuable political objectives.
74. The development of certain regions also serves the economic
interests of the majority society. Through historical and cultural
ties, traditional national minorities establish formal and informal
relations with their kin-States, which will facilitate the development
of the given territory, also in an economic sense.
75. Traditional national minorities have been particularly affected
by the economic and financial crisis. The economic crisis may have
an impact on some levels of autonomy, since there might be possibilities
for more interventions of the central government in the future.
Minorities are usually under-represented in the more competitive
professions, and they have often less access to adequate education.
Indeed, it is the majority society that decides for the traditional
national minority how many people should receive educational resources,
for which vocations and at what levels.
13. Conclusions
76. It is important that European States recognise and
acknowledge the fact that the protection of the rights of national
minorities brings peace, stability, economic prosperity and development
for the majority too. This means that the majority State gains more
on the expansion of these rights than the disadvantages it assumes or
perceives on the basis of an image of the State rooted in the 18th
and 19th centuries. Europe risks its future security and stability
unless the protection of the rights of traditional national minorities
is ensured. Stability, security, peace and the growth of the European
strength are in the interests of everyone. That was also the dream
of Robert Schumann.
77. The majority and minority nations of Europe should join forces
to safeguard human dignity, collective and individual rights and
freedoms. The Advisory Committee of the Framework Convention has
concluded that the enjoyment of certain rights has a collective
dimension. In fact, some rights, including the right to use a minority
language in public, can be effectively enjoyed only in community
and when interacting with others. During the fact-finding visit
to Italy (Alto Adige/Südtirol), local authorities and researchers
confirmed the complementarity between individual rights and some
group rights, notably for the use of one’s own language. “Stronger
minority rights are for the benefit of all”, stressed Eva Biaudet,
Ombudsman for Minorities in Finland.
78. In my view, the main law-making task is to match the right
to self-determination, State integrity and national sovereignty
in a way that waters down hatred, dissolves tensions and transforms
intolerance into tolerance. In this context, Assembly
Resolution 1832 (2011) “National sovereignty and statehood in contemporary
international law: the need for clarification” is the way forward.
The task of the leading political groups is, also, to match responsiveness
of majority society with its long-term interests.
79. Providing adequate education for traditional national minorities
in their mother tongue is no longer an option but a legal obligation
for the member States that have ratified the Framework Convention
and the Charter. These instruments set out the obligation to respect
the right to minority language education and to avoid measures preventing
it. However, the monitoring practice of the committees of experts
under the two latter documents has explicitly indicated that while
the rhetorical value of many educational policies is high, the potential
for implementation of such policies remains rather precarious at
State level. There is a further need for consistent and qualitative
improvement of the system of minority language education in some
European States.
80. A Europe of security and prosperity must be a Europe of diversity.
Diversity of cultures, languages, religions but by no means a diversity
of rights: no first- and second-class citizens. A prosperous Europe
must secure and preserve its diversity to ensure its stable and
long-term unity.
81. The future rests with the promotion of a peaceful co-existence
for traditional minority communities with the majority. The co-existence
of peoples, especially between traditional national minorities and
the majority population, is an art of living together rather than
just next to each other. There is a real need for traditional national
minorities to have their cultural identity acknowledged by the majority
to enable them to feel entirely at home. “The stability of our society
depends on the rights of national minorities”, stated Ms Gordana
Stamenić, State Secretary at the Serbian Ministry of Justice and
Public Administration, during our meeting.
During my fact-finding
visit to Alto Adige/Südtirol I was told that the Italian-German
cohabitation had the following stages: after the Second World War
it could be labelled as “one against the other”. This was followed
by “one next to the other”. Now it is at the stage of “one together
with the other”. The next, very desired and expected stage will
be “one for the other”.
I
am sure that Europe can win the global competition if we all reach
at least the stage “one together with the other”.
82. On 31 October 2013, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities
adopted a Resolution 361 (2013) on regions and territories with
special status in Europe, acknowledging that the special status
enjoyed by regions of some European States had brought stability
and prosperity to those regions and States. The resolution highlights
that the future peaceful and prosperous development of European
States will depend on making greater progress in conflict prevention
and resolution. This will require political will to pursue peaceful political
dialogue and to move forward on negotiating legal and constitutional
solutions, in order to develop sufficient models of decentralised
democratic governance for regions with specific identities.
83. Much has been done in the field of protection of traditional
national minorities up to now, even by States which did not sign
the Framework Convention, but experience shows that much remains
to be done because non-discrimination is not enough to prevent assimilation.
Human and European cultural values which represent the richness
of Europe might be lost and the well-known European diversity might
fade away.
84. The legal status and protection of traditional national minorities
must be settled both on the European and national levels. We should
look to the future as partners, ready to co-operate in full solidarity
for the sake of our children and our nations. We should all be interested
in a long-term solution within the European context and framework.
I am convinced that this would be possible if the Europeans States
and nations realised at last that without tolerance, partnership,
solidarity and co-operation there will be no future for any of us.