The Impact of EU Law on Minority Rights 9781472565334, 9781841138725

Citation preview

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page v

Preface This book is a product of my growing interest in the law of international organisations such as the European Union, and their contribution to the protection of human rights, particularly controversial rights, such as those relating to minorities. The study of minority rights raises a plethora of complex issues and questions, the intricacies of which are heightened in the context of the EU, as its role in minority rights is not obvious in any sense. It has—inevitably—been impossible to address many of these issues and questions within this book. Nonetheless, I hope that readers will find the particular exploration that I undertake worthwhile, if not as fascinating as I have found it to be. That we can even raise discussion of the place of minority rights within the EU is itself extraordinary. I began to write this book whilst at the University of Nottingham, and completed it at the University of Sheffield. I am indebted to many colleagues at both institutions and beyond for their support in helping me to shape my ideas and get the writing done. In particular I would like to thank Professors Duncan French, Tamara Hervey, Jeff Kenner, John Merrills, Derek Morgan and Michael O’Flaherty, and Mr Patrick Twomey, as well as Dr Gaetano Pentassuglia, Dr Annamaria La Chimia and Dr Konstantina Kalogeropoulou. Tammy deserves special thanks for her continuous guidance. I could not have completed this work without the inspiration and ongoing daily support from Dr Vicky Chico, Mr Richard Collins, Dr Chamu Kuppuswamy, Dr Dimitrios Kyritsis and Dr Anastasia Vakulenko, who have at various times, and at extremely short notice, sat down with me to either read or talk through various parts of the book. I am also grateful for the efficient and professional research assistance given by John Townsend and for the excellent editing assistance I received from Ayesha Ahmed. An important word of thanks to my dear family—for being there for me and understanding the pressures I have been under in completing this work. Thanks especially to Atiya, Tanya and Ayesha for preventing me from falling into the ‘out of touch academic’ trap! I look forward to spending more time with you. The law in this book is correct up to September 2009. References are made to the new Treaty on European Union and the new Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (binding as of December 2009) where they have a significant impact on the conclusions of this book. Although the entry into force of these Treaties is a monumental step in the story of the EU’s evolution, they serve only to confirm, rather than obstruct, the main argument of this book: the EU holds significant potential for developing minority rights protection—potential which must be thoroughly understood in order to debate the future of the EU’s role in the field. Tawhida Ahmed, 2010

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page vi

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page vii

To my Father, From whom I learnt that the greatest happiness can come from the smallest things in life To my Mother, When two became one, you became everything

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page viii

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xiii

Table of Cases Court of First Instance General Electric v Commission (Case T-210/01) [2005] ECR II-5575.................66 Kadi (Case T-315/01) [2005] ECR II-3649...................................................105, 106 Kik (Case T-107/94) [1995] ECR II-1717.............................................................154 Kik v OHIM (Case T-120/99) [2001] ECR II-2235 .............................................153 max.mobil Telecommunications Service GmbH v Commission (Case T-54/99) [2000] ECR II-313 ...............................................................................66 Organisation des Modjahedines du peuple d’Iran v Council (Cases T-228/02 and T-284/08), judgment of 4 December 2008........................................105, 106 Parker Pen v Commission (Case T-77/92) [1994] ECR II-549 ...........................153 Philip Morris International v Commission (Cases T-377/00, T-379/00, T-260/01 and T-272/01) [2003] ECR I-1 ...........................................................66 R Technische Glaswerke Ilmenau GmbH v Commission (Case T-378/02) [2005] ECR II-2921 .............................................................................................66 Segi (Case T-338/02) [2004] ECR II-1647....................................................105, 106 Tideland Signal Limited v Commission (Case T-211/02) [2002] ECR II-3781 ...66 UEAPME (Case T-135/96) [1998] ECR II-2335 ....................................................95 Yusuf (Case T-306/01) [2005] ECR II-3533, [2005] 3 CMLR 49........................105

European Court of Human Rights 23 Inhabitants of Alsemberg and Beersel v Belgium, (App No 1474/62), 26 July 1963..........................................................................................................37 Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandi v United Kingdom, (App Nos 9214/80, 9473/81) (1985) 7 EHRR 471..............................................................................29 ACF Chemie-farma v Commission (Case 41/67) [1970] ECR 661.....................153 Ahmad v United Kingdom (1982) 4 EHRR 126 ............................................94, 136 Arrowsmith v United Kingdom (1978) 3 EHRR 218 ............................................35 Association Ekin v France (2002) 35 EHRR 35......................................................28 Belgian Linguistics Case (1968) EHRR 252 ................................................36, 37, 38 Belgin Dogru v France, (App No 27058/05), judgment of 4 December 2008 ....138 Bideault v France (1986) 48 DR 232 .......................................................................36 Bosphorus Airlines v Ireland (2006) 42 EHRR 1 ...................................................10 Buckley v United Kingdom (1997) 23 EHRR 101..................................................29 Burghartz v Switzerland (1994) 18 EHRR 101.....................................................124

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xiv

xiv Table of Cases Burton v United Kingdom, (App No 31600/96) (1996) 22 EHRR CD 135 .........29 Chapman v United Kingdom, (App No 27238/9) (2001) 33 EHRR 399......29, 124 Christians Against Racism and Fascism v United Kingdom (1980) 21 DR 138.............................................................................................................32 Connors v United Kingdom (2005) 40 EHRR 9 ......................................29, 30, 124 Cyprus v Turkey (2002) 35 EHRR 731 .....................................................35, 38, 158 Dahlab v Switzerland, (App No 42393/98), [2001] .....................................134, 138 DH v The Czech Republic (2008) 47 EHRR 3..................................30, 89, 187, 188 Dudgeon v United Kingdom (1983) Series A No 45, 5 EHRR 573.....................115 EK v Turkey (2002) 35 EHRR 41 ............................................................................28 Freedom and Democracy Party v Turkey, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1999-VIII.............................................................................................28 Fryske Nasjonale Partij v Netherlands, (App No 11100/84) (1987) 9 EHRR 261..........................................................................................................36 Gaskin v United Kingdom, Series A No 160 (1990) 2 EHRR 36...........................29 Gaygusuz v Austria (1996) 23 EHRR 364...............................................................92 Gorzelik v Poland, (App No 44158/98) [2005] ECHR 73 .....................................28 Hugh Jordan v United Kingdom, (App No 24746/94) (2001) ECHR 327 ...........30 Incal v Turkey (1998) 29 EHRR 449.......................................................................28 Informationsverein Lentia v Austria, Series A No 276 (1994) 17 EHRR 93.........28 Jewish Liturgical Association Cha’are Shalom ve Tsedek v France, Judgment of the Grand Chamber 27/06/2000 .................................................141 Kalac v Turkey (1997) 27 EHRR 552 ....................................................................136 Karaduman v Turkey (1993) 74 DR 93 ................................................................138 Kelly v United Kingdom [2001] ECHR 328 ...........................................................30 Kerr v United Kingdom, (App No 40451/98), 7 December 1999 .........................36 Leyla Sahin v Turkey (2007) 44 EHRR 5 ........................................94, 134, 138, 140 Liberal Party v United Kingdom (1982) 4 EHRR 106 ...........................................32 Lindsay v United Kingdom [1979] 3 CMLR 166 ...................................................32 McShane v United Kingdom (2002) 35 EHRR 23 .................................................30 Mathieu-Mohin and Clerfayt v Belgium, (App No 92671/81), Series A No 113 [1987] 10 EHRR 1.............................................................................28, 36 Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia v Moldova, (App No 45701/99) [2001] ECHR 860 ................................................................................................28 Minority Schools in Albania [1935] PCIJ, Series A/B No 64.................................38 Nachova v Bulgaria (1998) 28 EHRR 652...............................................31, 183, 184 Nachova v Bulgaria (2006) 42 EHRR 43 ................................................................30 Noack v Germany, (App No 46346/99), 25 May 2000 ............................39, 96, 193 Otto Preminger Institut v Austria (1994) 19 EHRR 34 .........................................36 Podkolzina v Latvia, (App No 46726/99) [2002] ECHR 405 ..........................28, 36 Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) v Turkey [2001] ECHR 495 ............................28 Sidiropoulos, (App No 26695/95) [1998] ECHR 55..............................................28 Skender v FYROM, (App No 62059/00), 10 March 2005......................................37 Socialist Party v Turkey (1999) 25 EHRR 51..........................................................28

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xv

Table of Cases xv Stankov and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilenden v Bulgaria [2001] ECHR 567 ................................................................................................28 Stedman v United Kingdom (1997) 23 EHRR 168 ..............................................136 Stevens v United Kingdom (1986) D & R 245 .....................................................137 Stjerna v Finland, (App No 18131/91) [1994] ECHR 43.......................................29 Surek v Turkey (App No 26682/95)........................................................................28 Thlimmenos v Greece (2001) 31 EHRR 411 ....................................................32, 93 X and Y v Netherlands (1986) 8 EHRR 235 .....................................................29, 40 Zana v Turkey (App No 18954/91).........................................................................28

European Court of Justice Abrahamsson and Anderson (Case C-407/98) [2000] ECR I-5539 ..............92, 157 Akrich (Case C-109/01) [2003] ECR I-9607 ..........................................................79 AM & S Europe Ltd v Commission (Case 155/79) [1982] ECR 1575...................70 Angonese v Cassa di Riparmio di Bolagna (Case C-281/98) [2000] ECR I-4139...........................................................................71, 76, 81, 156 Avello v Belgium (Case C-148/02) [2003] ECR I-11613 .....................124, 155, 158 Badeck (Case C-158/97) [2002] ECR I-1875..................................................92, 157 Bauer (Case C-368/95) [1997] ECR I-3689....................................................67, 135 Baumbast and R v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Case C-413/99) [2002] ECR I-7091.........................................................................................69, 76 BECTU v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Case C-173/99) [2001] ECR I-4881...............................................................................................66 Bickel and Franz (Case C-274/96) [1998] ECR I-7637 ..............80, 83, 84, 155, 197 Bidar (Case C-09/03) [2005] ECR I-2119...............................................................77 Blaizot v University of Liege (Case C-24/86) [1988] ECR 379......................88, 161 Booker Aquacultur Ltd and Hydro Seafood GSP Ltd v Scottish Ministers (Case C-64/00) [2003] ECR I-7411 ....................................................................69 Bosman (Case C-415/93) [1995] ECR I-4921 ..................................................76, 85 Bosmann v Bundesagentur für Arbeit (Case C-352/06) [2008] ECR I-3827 .......85 Bostock (Case C-2/92) [1994] ECR I-955 ......................................................67, 135 Briheche (Case C-319/03) [2004] ECR I-8807.....................................................157 Carpenter v Home Secretary (Case C-60/00) [2002] ECR I-6279 ............69, 80, 82 Casa Fleischhandel v BALM (Case 215/88) [1989] ECR 2789 ..............................57 Chen (Case C-200/02) [2004] ECR I-9925.......................................................80, 82 CILFIT v Ministry of Health (Case C-283/81) [1982] ECR 3415 .........................54 Cinéthéque SA v Fédération Nationale des Cinemas Français (Cases 60 & 61/84) [1985] ECR 2605 ..................................................................................68 Colim v Bigg’s Continent Noord (Case C-33/97) [1999] ECR I-3175 ...............158 Commission v Belgium (Case C-27/94) [1996] ECR I-4307 ................................71 Commission v Council (ERTA) (Case 22/70) [1971] ECR 263 ............................54 Commission v France (Case C-265/95) [1997] ECR I-6959 .................................68

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xvi

xvi Table of Cases Commission v Italy (Art Treasures) (Case 7/68) [1968] ECR 423........................75 Commission v Kwik (Case C-340/00) [2001] ECR I-10269............................68, 96 Connolly v Commission (Case C-274/99) [2001] ECR I-1611.......................68, 95 Costa v Enel (Case 6/64) [1964] ECR 585 ..............................................................52 D v Council (Case C-122/99) [2001] ECR I-4319 .................................................72 De Groot (Case C-385/00) [2002] ECR I-11819....................................................85 Defrenne III (Case 149/77) [1978] ECR 1365 ........................................................69 Demirel (Case 12/86) [1987] ECR 3719 .................................................67, 109, 135 D’Hoop (Case C-224/98) [2002] ECR I-6191........................................................77 Dona v Mantero (Case 13/76) [1976] ECR 1333 ...................................................88 ERT (Case C-260/89) [1991] ECR I-2925 ......................................................67, 135 European Parliament v Council (Case C-42/97) [1999] ECR I-869...................163 European Parliament v Council (Case C-436/03) [2006] ECR I-3733.................87 European Parliament v Council (Case C-540/03) [2006] ECR I-5769 .....................................................................................66, 69, 110, 114 Fédération Charbonniere de Belgique v High Authority (Case 8/55) [1954-56] ECR 245 ..............................................................................................51 Forcheri (Case 152/85) [1983] ECR 2323.....................................................141, 164 Foto-Frost (Case 314/85) [1987] ECR 4199 ...........................................................54 Gebhard (Case C-55/94) [1995] ECR I-4165 .........................................................76 Germany v European Parliament (Case C-380/03) [2006] ECR I-11573.............87 Germany v European Parliament and Council (Tobacco Advertising) (Case C-376/98) [2000] ECR I-8419 ....................................................74, 87, 132 Grant (Case C-249/96) [1998] ECR I-621..............................................................72 Gravier v City of Liege (Case 293/83) [1985] ECR 293 .......................141, 161, 164 Groener v Minister of Education (Case C-379/87) [1989] ECR 3967 ..........................................................................83, 84, 85, 139, 156, 166 Grogan (Case C-159/90) [1991] ECR I-4685 .........................................................84 Grunkin and Paul (Case C-353/06), judgment of 14 October 2008 ...................155 Grzelczyk (Case C-184/99) [2001] ECR I-6193 ...............................................77, 78 Haim (Case C-424/97) [2000] ECR I-5123 ..........................................................165 Hauer v Land Rheinland-Pfalz (Case 44/79) [1979] ECR 3727 ................67, 68, 69 Heidi Hautala v Council (Case C-353/99) [2001] ECR I-9565.............................95 International Handelsgessellschaft (Case 11/70) [1970] ECR 3727 ....52, 67, 68, 69 Jia (Case C-1/05) [2007] ECR I-1 .........................................................................109 Johnston v Chief Constable of the RUC (Case 222/84) [1986] ECR 1651 ...........69 Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v Council and Commission (Case C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P) [2008] ECR I-6351 ....................10, 104, 105 Kalanke v Freie Hansestadt Bremen (Case C-450/93) [1995] ECR I-3051 .....................................................................................71, 92, 157, 198 KB (Case C-117/01) [2004] ECR I-541 ..................................................................69 Keck and Mithouard (Cases C-267 & C-268/91) [1993] ECR I-6097 ................134 Khalil (Cases C-95/99 to C-98/99 and C-180/99) [2001] ECR I-7413 ...............156 Kik (Case C-270/95) [1996] ECR I-1987..............................................................154

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xvii

Table of Cases xvii Klensch v Secretaire d’Etat á l’Agriculture et á la Viticulture (Cases C-201 & 202/85) [1986] ECR 3477 .................................................67, 135 Konstantinidis (Case C-168/91) [1993] ECR I-1191 ...........................124, 155, 158 Lommers (Case C-476/99) [2002] ECR I-2891....................................................157 Mangold v Helm (Case C-144/04) [2005] ECR I-9981, [2006] All ER (EC) 383..............................................................69, 72, 82, 88, 154 Marschall (Case C-409/95) [1997] ECR I-6363 .............................................92, 157 Martinez Sala v Freistaat Bayern (Case C-85/96) [1998] ECR I-2691 ......60, 77, 78 Meade (Case 238/83) [1984] ECR 2631..................................................................78 Metock (Case C-127/08) [2008] ECR I-6241 .........................................79, 109, 186 Morson v Jhanjan (Cases 35/82 and 36/82) [1982] ECR 3723......................82, 181 MRAX (Case C-459/99) [2002] ECR I-6591..........................................................79 Murphy v Bond Telecom Eireann (Case 157/86) [1988] ECR 673.......................67 Mutsch (Case C-137/84) [1985] ECR 2681....................................................84, 155 Nold v Commission (Case 4/73) [1974] ECR 491 ...............................52, 67, 68, 69 Nonnenmacher (Case 92/63) [1964] ECR 563 ......................................................85 Oebel (Case 155/80) [1981] ECR 1993 .................................................................134 O’Flynn (Case C-237/94) [1996] ECR I-2617........................................................71 Olazabal (Case C-100/01) [2002] ECR I-10981 .............................................82, 186 Omega (Case C-36/02) [2004] ECR I-9609................................66, 67, 70, 137, 154 Pastoors and Tran-Cap (Case C-29/95) [1997] ECR I-285...................................71 Phil Collins (Cases C-92/92 and C-326/92) [1993] ECR I-5145...........................88 Prais v Council (Case 130/75) [1976] ECR 1589 ...................................72, 135, 196 PRJ Reynolds Tobacco Holdings v Commission (Case C-131/03) [2006] ECR I-7795...............................................................................................66 Punto Casa SpA (Cases C-69 & C-258/93) [1994] ECR I-2355 ..........................134 Pusa (Case C-224/02) [2004] ECR I-5763............................................................164 R v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Surinder Singh ex parte Secretary of State for the Home Office (Case C-370/90) [1992] ECR I-4265 ............80, 82 R v Saunders (Case 175/78) [1979] ECR 1129 .......................................82, 181, 186 R v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte BAT and Imperial Tobacco (Case C-491/01) [2002] ECR I-11453 ..............................................................132 Raulin (Case C-357/89) [1992] ECR I-1027.................................................141, 164 Reyners v Belgium (Case 2/74) [1974] ECR 631..............................................76, 88 Roquette Freres (Case C-94/00) [2002] ECR I-9011 .............................................69 Ruckdeschel v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-St Annen (Cases C-117/76 and C-16/77) [1977] ECR 1753..................................................................................71 Rush Portuguesa Lda v Office National d’Immigration (Case C-113/89) [1990] ECR I-1439...............................................................................................78 Rutili (Case 36/75) [1975] ECR 1219 .............................................................67, 135 Schempp (Case C-403/03) [2005] ECR I-6421 ....................................................164 Schmidberger (Case C-112/00) [2003] ECR I-5659 ..................................67, 68, 95 Segi v Council (Case C-355/04) [2007] ECR I-1657............................................105 Sermide v Cassa Conguaglio Zucchero (Case C-106/83) [1984] ECR 4209 ........71

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xviii

xviii Table of Cases Simmenthal (Case 106/77) [1978] ECR 629 ..........................................................52 Sotgui (Case 152/73) [1974] ECR 153 ....................................................................88 SPUC v Grogan (Case C-159/90) [1991] ECR I-4685 ...................................67, 135 Stauder v City of Ulm (Case 29/69) [1969] ECR 419 ......................................54, 68 Tankstation (Cases C-401 & C-402/92) [1994] ECR I-2199 ...............................134 Terhoeve (Case C-18/95) [1999] ECR I-345 ..........................................................85 Torfaen BC v B&Q plc (Case 145/88) [1989] ECR 3851 .....................................134 Transocean Marine Paint Association v Commission [1974] ECR 1063 .............70 Van Gend en Loos (Case 26/62) [1963] ECR 1 ..........................................51, 52, 54 Vander Elst v Office des Migrations Internationals (Case C-43/93) [1994] ECR I-3803...............................................................................................78 Wachauf (Case 5/88) [1989] ECR 2609..........................................................67, 135 Walrave and Koch v Union Cycliste Internationale (Case 36/74) [1974] ECR 1405............................................................................................76, 88 Wijsenbeek (Case C-378/97) [1999] ECR I-6207 ................................................109 X v Commission (Case C-404/92) [1994] ECR I-4737..........................................68 Zhu and Chen v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Case C-200/02) [2004] ECR I-9925 ..................................................................60

Human Rights Committee Aduayom v Togo, CCPR Comm Nos 422-424/90 .................................................28 Ahmad v Denmark, CCPR Comm No 16/1999.............................................31, 184 Althammer v Austria, CCPR Comm No 998/01..............................................30, 89 Apirana Mahuika v New Zealand, CCPR Comm No 547/1992..................142, 143 Ballantyne v Canada, CCPR Comm No 359, 385/1989.........................................23 Boodoo v Trinidad and Tobago, CCPR Comm No 721/1996 ..............................35 Chief Ominayak and the Lubicon Lake Band v Canada, CCPR Comm No 167/1984...................................................................18, 25, 124 Coriel and Aurik v Netherlands, CCPR Comm No 453/1991...............................29 Diergaardt v Namibia, CCPR Comm No 760/97.............................................34, 37 Dominique Guedson v France, CCPR Comm No 219/1986.................................36 Hopu and Bessert v France, CCPR Comm No 594/93 ..........................................29 Hudoyberganova v Uzbekistan, CCPR Comm No 931/2000......................134, 140 Kitok v Sweden, CCPR Comm No 197/1985 .....................................18, 25, 34, 124 Kivenmaa v Finland, CCPR Comm No 412/90 .....................................................28 Lansman I and II, Lansman v Finland, CCPR Comm No 511/1992 and Comm No 57/1996 ........................................34, 142, 143, 193 Lovelace v Canada, CCPR Comm No 6/24 ........................................25, 26, 40, 124 Singer v Canada, CCPR Comm No 455/1991........................................................28 Singh Bhinder v Canada, CCPR Comm No 208/1986...................................35, 139 Waldman v Canada, CCPR Comm No 694/1996..................................................32

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xix

Table of Cases xix Permanent Court of International Justice Minority Schools in Albania [1930] PCIJ Series B No 17....................................179

National Jurisdictions Ireland Attorney-General v Open Door Counselling Ltd and Dublin Wellwoman Centre Ltd (1988) Irish Rep 593 .........................................................................85 United Kingdom R (on the application of Begum (Respondent)) v Headteacher and Governors of Denbigh High School (Appellants) [2005] UKHL 15, [2005] 2 WLR 719..............................................................................................138 R (on the application of European Roma Rights Centre) v Immigration Officer, Prague Airport [2005] 2 AC 1 (HL)......................................................92

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xx

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxi

Table of Legislation European Treaties, Conventions etc EU Charter on Fundamental Rights (EUCFR) (2000) ....................4, 6, 91, 96, 110 art 1.......................................................................................................................65 art 2.......................................................................................................................65 art 4.......................................................................................................................65 art 6.......................................................................................................................65 art 7.......................................................................................................................65 art 10.....................................................................................................................65 art 11.....................................................................................................................65 art 12.....................................................................................................................65 art 14.....................................................................................................................65 art 14(3)..............................................................................................................168 art 20.....................................................................................................................65 art 21.....................................................................................................................65 art 22 .....................................................................65, 100, 102, 130, 139, 142, 191 art 39.....................................................................................................................65 art 41(1)................................................................................................................66 art 47.....................................................................................................................66 art 51(2)................................................................................................................65 Euratom Treaty (1965) ..............................................................................................4 European Communities Treaty (EC Treaty) (1957)................................................4 preamble...............................................................................................58, 113, 116 IIIa ......................................................................................................................106 Title IV................................................................................................................106 Title XVII............................................................................................................103 art 2 .................................................................................................................58, 68 art 3 ...............................................................................................................62, 101 art 3(1)(c) .............................................................................................................74 art 3(m) ................................................................................................................58 art 3(q)................................................................................................................125 art 5 .....................................................................................................45, 63, 74, 95 art 6 .............................................................................................................102, 142 art 7.......................................................................................................................47 art 12 ..................................................................45, 76, 78, 80, 81, 87, 88, 89, 116, 154, 155, 156, 157, 164, 181, 184, 198

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxii

xxii Table of Legislation arts 12–13 ...........................................................................................................185 art 13.........................4, 45, 53, 59, 71, 72, 82, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 94, 99, 116, 117, 118, 128, 139, 154, 156, 157, 164, 182, 183, 190, 196, 198, 200 art 14 .......................................................................................................78, 87, 109 art 17 .............................................................................................................76, 181 art 17(1)................................................................................................................60 art 17(2)................................................................................................................80 art 18 .............................................................................................76, 136, 184, 186 art 19 .............................................................................................................95, 198 arts 19–21 .............................................................................................................94 art 19(1)..............................................................................................................192 art 19(2)..............................................................................................................192 art 20.....................................................................................................................95 art 21 .............................................................................................................95, 152 art 22...................................................................................................................152 arts 23-31..............................................................................................................75 art 25.....................................................................................................................88 art 28 .............................................................................................................88, 134 art 29 ...............................................................................................................88, 99 art 30.....................................................................................................................75 art 32...................................................................................................................102 art 39 .......................................................................................76, 88, 141, 164, 181 arts 39–42 .......................................................................................................76, 79 arts 39–55 .............................................................................................................76 art 39(2)................................................................................................................88 art 39(4)..............................................................................................................109 art 43 .................................................................................76, 79, 88, 165, 168, 181 arts 43–48 .............................................................................................................76 art 49 .......................................................................................79, 88, 155, 165, 181 arts 49–55 .............................................................................................................76 art 49(2)................................................................................................................79 art 54.....................................................................................................................88 arts 61–69 ...................................................................................................106, 107 art 61(a) ................................................................................................................78 art 62(1)................................................................................................................78 art 63 .............................................................................................................45, 107 art 63(1)..............................................................................................................106 art 67...................................................................................................................106 art 68...................................................................................................................106 art 85 ...............................................................................................................48, 53 art 95.....................................................................................................................87 art 99.....................................................................................................................96 art 125.................................................................................................................100 arts 125–129 ...............................................................................................103, 163

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxiii

Table of Legislation xxiii arts 125–130 .................................................................................................96, 139 art 128 .............................................................................................................46, 96 art 129.................................................................................................................100 art 136 .............................................................................................................58, 98 arts 136–137 .......................................................................................................128 arts 136–145 .........................................................................................................58 art 137 ...............................................................................88, 98, 99, 134, 168, 184 art 137(1)(a) .......................................................................................................136 art 137(2)(a) .........................................................................................................99 art 138...................................................................................................................49 art 139...................................................................................................................49 art 140...................................................................................................................95 art 141...................................................................................................................88 art 144...................................................................................................................46 arts 146–148 .........................................................................................................98 art 149 .................................12, 46, 90, 99, 100, 141, 158, 159, 162, 164, 168, 184 arts 149–150 .........................................................................................95, 128, 185 arts 149–151 .......................................................................................................166 art 149(1)............................................................................................100, 159, 160 art 149(2)............................................................................................100, 159, 160 art 150 .............................................................90, 99, 158, 161, 162, 163, 164, 168 art 150(2)............................................................................................................161 art 151 ............................4, 12, 48, 53, 99, 101, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 136, 141, 142, 144, 158, 159, 160, 162, 163, 196 art 151(1) ............................................................................125, 126, 129, 130, 131 art 151(2) ............................................................................125, 126, 127, 130, 132 art 151(4) ...........................................................100, 101, 102, 126, 128, 130, 132, 135, 136, 139, 141, 142, 143, 144, 185 art 151(5)............................................................................................................126 art 152...................................................................................................................90 art 157 .................................................................................102, 103, 158, 163, 164 arts 158–162 .......................................................................................103, 127, 185 art 174.................................................................................................................102 art 174(1)............................................................................................................102 arts 189–201 .........................................................................................................94 art 191...................................................................................................................94 art 211 .............................................................................................................47, 53 art 220 .......................................................................................................48, 53, 68 art 222...................................................................................................................48 art 226...................................................................................................................48 arts 226–243 .........................................................................................................48 art 230 ...............................................................................................48, 52, 66, 116 art 232...................................................................................................................52 art 234 .................................................................................................48, 53, 68, 93

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxiv

xxiv Table of Legislation art 249 .......................................................................................................45, 52, 65 art 251 .............................................................................................................47, 52 art 252...................................................................................................................47 arts 263–265 .........................................................................................................95 art 290 .................................................................................................151, 154, 159 art 300(7)............................................................................................................105 art 302.....................................................................................................................9 art 303.....................................................................................................................9 art 307.................................................................................................................105 art 308 .............................................................................................................47, 87 art 311...................................................................................................................63 art 314 .........................................................................................151, 152, 154, 159 European Convention on the Legal Status of Migrant Workers 1977..........69, 112 Lisbon Treaty on the European Union (LTEU) (2007).......4, 91, 95, 104, 116, 146 Recital 4 preamble...........................................................................................................83 Recital 9 preamble...........................................................................................................83 art 2 ...............................................................................4, 7, 61, 63, 69, 71, 74, 131 art 3 .............................................................................................4, 59, 61, 160, 169 art 4.......................................................................................................................62 art 4(3)..................................................................................................................52 art 5 ...........................................................................................................52, 62, 64 art 6(1)..................................................................................................................65 art 6(2)..................................................................................................................68 art 7.......................................................................................................................71 art 8.......................................................................................................................95 arts 8–10 ...............................................................................................................83 arts 9–12 .....................................................................................................5, 49, 64 art 11...................................................................................................................199 art 11(1)................................................................................................................96 art 11(2)................................................................................................................96 art 11(4)............................................................................................................5, 96 art 15(1)................................................................................................................47 art 17.....................................................................................................................47 art 21 ...................................................................................................................4, 9 art 24(1)........................................................................................................48, 105 art 40...................................................................................................................106 art 49.......................................................................................................................4 art 55 ...........................................................................................................152, 154 preamble...............................................................................................................62 Protocol on the Role of National Parliaments .........................................................5 Protocol on Subsidiarity and Proportionality ..................................5, 45, 63, 64, 95 Title II .......................................................................................................................95

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxv

Table of Legislation xxv Lisbon Treaty on the Functioning of Europe (LTFEU)...........................................4 arts 3–6 ...............................................................................................................106 art 5b.....................................................................................................................94 art 9 ...................................................................................................59, 96, 98, 100 art 13 .............................................................................................................63, 140 art 19(1)................................................................................................................48 arts 67–89 ...........................................................................................................107 arts 77–80 ...........................................................................................................107 arts 82–86 ...........................................................................................................107 art 173 ...........................................................................................................46, 103 art 216 .................................................................................................................4, 9 arts 216–221 ...........................................................................................................9 art 220 .................................................................................................................4, 9 art 256a ...................................................................................................................5 art 263...................................................................................................................95 art 267 .........................................................................................................107, 116 art 275 ...........................................................................................................48, 106 art 276.................................................................................................................116 art 300...................................................................................................................95 arts 300–304 .........................................................................................................49 arts 300–307 ...................................................................................................5, 199 arts 305–307 .........................................................................................................95 art 307...................................................................................................................49 art 352 .............................................................................................................55, 87 Single European Act (1986)...........................................................................4, 48, 87 Treaty of Accession to the European Union by Austria, Finland and Sweden Protocol 3 ...................................................................................................102, 142 Treaty of Amsterdam (1999).............................................................................4, 106 Treaty Establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (1951)...................3 Treaty on European Union (TEU) (1992) ...................................................4, 47, 74 Title IV....................................................................................................................115 Title V .....................................................................................................................104 Title VI............................................................................................................106, 107 art 1.......................................................................................................................60 art 2 .............................................................................................................6, 59, 61 art 6 ...........................................................................................4, 62, 102, 129, 192 art 6(1)......................................................................................................61, 62, 70 art 6(2) ........................................................................9, 61, 62, 64, 68, 70, 80, 100 art 6(3)................................................................................................................129 art 7 .........................................................................................................62, 70, 192 art 7(3)..................................................................................................................70 art 11...................................................................................................................104 arts 11–28 ...........................................................................................................104

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxvi

xxvi Table of Legislation art 11(1)..............................................................................................................113 art 12...................................................................................................................104 art 15...................................................................................................................105 art 17.....................................................................................................................61 arts 17–22 ...............................................................................................................4 art 29 ...................................................................................6, 61, 88, 115, 116, 183 art 33...................................................................................................................115 art 34 ...........................................................................................................105, 106 art 35...................................................................................................................107 art 35(1)..............................................................................................................116 art 35(6)..............................................................................................................116 art 46 .......................................................................................................48, 62, 106 art 46(d)................................................................................................................68 art 62(2)(b)(i) ....................................................................................................106 art 62(2)(b)(iii) ..................................................................................................106 preamble...............................................................................................................61 Treaty of Nice (2001).................................................................................................4 art 225a .................................................................................................................48

Decisions Decision 88/591/EC, [1988] OJ L319/1 ..................................................................48 Decision 89/489/EC, [1989] OJ L239/24 ..............................................................165 Decision 93/136/EEC on Helios II the Third Community Action Programme to assist Disabled People (1993-1996), [1993] OJ L56/30 .............................59 Decision 95/819/EC, [1995] OJ L87/10 ..................................................................58 Decision 1999/382/EC, [1999] OJ L146........................................................100, 162 Decision 1999/1419/EC of the European Parliament and the Council, 25 May 1999, establishing a Community action for the European Capital of Culture event for the years 2005-2019, [1999] OJ L166.............127 Decision 2000/253/EC, [2000] OJ L28..........................................................100, 162 Decision 2000/508/EC of the European Parliament and the Council, 14 February 2000, establishing the Culture 2000 Programme, [2000] OJ L63/1 Recital 6 ..............................................................................................................162 Decision 2000/508/EC of the European Parliament and the Council, 14 February 2000, establishing the Culture 2000 Programme, [2000] OJ L63/1 .....................................................................................126, 162 Decision 2000/750/EC establishing a Community action programme to combat discrimination (2001 to 2006), [2000] OJ L303/23..........................94 Decision 2000/1031/EC, [2000] OJ L117..............................................................162 Decision 2002/475/JHA of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism, [2002] OJ L164/3 ...........................................................................115, 116, 117

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxvii

Table of Legislation xxvii Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on establishing the European Arrest Warrant, [2002] OJ L190/1 ................................................................117 Decision 2003/451/EC, [2003] OJ L69..................................................................162 Decision 2003/2317/EC, [2003] OJ L345..............................................................100 Decision 2006/1672/EC establishing a Community programme for employment and social solidarity (2007-2013), [2006] OJ L315/49.....94, 128 Decision 2006/1855/EC establishing the Culture Programme, [2007-2013], [2006] OJ L372/1 ...........................................................................................162 Decision 2007/435/EC establishing the European fund for the integration of third country nationals for the period 2007-2013, [2007] OJ L168/18 ......114 Decision 2008/913/JHA on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law, [2008] OJ L328/55 .............................................................................................115, 183 Directives Directive 64/221/EEC on the co-ordination of special measures concerning the movement and residence of foreign nationals.........................................76 Directive 68/360/EEC on the abolition of restrictions on movement and residence within the community for workers of Member States and their families, [1968] OJ L257/13....................................................................76 Directive 72/194/EEC extending to workers exercising the right to remain in the territory of a Member State after having been employed in that state ...........................................................................................................76 Directive 73/148/EEC on the abolition of restrictions on movement and residence within the community for nationals of Member States with regard to the establishment and provision of services, [1973] OJ L172/14 .......................................................................................................76 Directive 75/34/EEC concerning the right of nationals of a Member State to remain in the territory of another Member State......................................76 Directive 75/35/EEC extending the scope of Directive 64/211/EEC to include nationals of a Member State who exercise the right to remain in the territory of another Member State .......................................................76 Directive 77/486/EEC of 25 July 1977 on the education of the children of migrant workers, [1977] OJ L199/32 ...............................................101, 165 art 3.....................................................................................................................165 preamble.............................................................................................................165 Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds, [1979] OJ L103/1 .....143 Directive 89/552/EEC on the co-ordination of certain provisions laid down by law or regulation in Member States concerning the pursuit of televisual broadcasting, [1989] OJ L298.........................................................76 Directive 90/364/EEC on the right of residence.....................................................76 Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, [1992] OJ L206/7 ................................................................143

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxviii

xxviii Table of Legislation Directive 93/96/EEC on the right of residence for students, [1993] OJ L317/59 ...............................................................................................76, 100 Directive 93/104/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, [1993] OJ L307/18 .................................................................134 art 2(2)................................................................................................................138 art 3.....................................................................................................................139 art 4.....................................................................................................................139 art 4(1)................................................................................................................139 art 5.....................................................................................................................134 Directive 93/119/EC of 22 December 1993 on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter and killing, [1993] OJ L340........................................140 Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, [1996] OJ L18/6 .....................................................76 Directive 2000/34/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time to cover sectors and activities excluded from Directive 93/104/EC, [2000] OJ L195/41 art 2(2)................................................................................................................138 Directive 2000/34/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time to cover sectors and activities excluded from Directive 93/104/EC, [2000] OJ L195/41......................................................................134 Directive 2000/38/EC of 5 June 2000 on adminstrative action relating to medical products, [2000] OJ L139/28 ..........................................................141 art 7(c) ........................................................................................................141, 164 art 24 ...........................................................................................................141, 164 Directive 2000/43/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, OJ 2000 L180/22..............................................................45, 59, 82, 92, 93, 117, 118, 140, 183, 185, 190, 195 Recital 13 preamble...........................................................................................91, 182, 188 art 1.....................................................................................................................188 art 2.....................................................................................................................188 art 2(2)..........................................................................................................89, 138 art 2(2)(a) .............................................................................................................89 art 2(2)(b).............................................................................................................89 art 2(3)..................................................................................................................89 art 2(4)..................................................................................................................89 art 3 .......................................................................................90, 166, 168, 182, 188 art 3(1)..................................................................................................90, 156, 166 art 3(1)(e) ...........................................................................................................182 art 3(1)(e)–(h)......................................................................................................90 art 3(2)..................................................................................................................91 art 4 ...............................................................................................92, 139, 140, 157 art 4(2)................................................................................................................139

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxix

Table of Legislation xxix art 5.....................................................................................................................140 art 13 ...............................................................................................91, 92, 157, 196 Directive 2000/78/EC prohibiting discrimination on grounds of religion, belief, disability, age or sexual orientation in the field of employment [2000] OJ L303/16 ........................................................................53, 79, 91, 92, 137, 185, 190, 196 art 2.......................................................................................................................89 art 3.....................................................................................................................182 art 3(1)................................................................................................................156 art 3(2)..................................................................................................................93 art 4.....................................................................................................................137 art 4(1)..................................................................................................................93 art 4(2)..................................................................................................................93 Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers, [2003] OJ L31/18................................107 Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification, [2003] OJ L251/12..................................................107, 109, 113 art 3(1)................................................................................................................109 art 3(3)................................................................................................................109 art 4.....................................................................................................................109 art 4(2)................................................................................................................114 art 5.....................................................................................................................109 art 14...................................................................................................................109 preamble.............................................................................................................109 Directive 2003/88/EC of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, [2003] OJ L299/9...................................135 art 2(2)................................................................................................................138 Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of Third Country Nationals who are long-term residents, OJ L16/144............................................................................45, 60, 91, 107, 196 art 3(1)................................................................................................................111 art 3(2)........................................................................................................110, 111 art 4 .............................................................................................................110, 111 art 4(2)................................................................................................................114 art 5 .............................................................................................................111, 112 art 6(1)................................................................................................................111 art 6(2)................................................................................................................111 art 7.....................................................................................................................111 art 7(3)................................................................................................................111 art 8.....................................................................................................................112 art 9.....................................................................................................................112 art 11...................................................................................................................181 art 11(1)..............................................................................................................110 art 11(1)(f)..........................................................................................................186

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxx

xxx Table of Legislation art 11(2)..............................................................................................................113 art 11(3)......................................................................................................112, 113 art 11(4)..............................................................................................................112 art 11(5)..............................................................................................................112 art 11(10)(h).......................................................................................................186 art 12...................................................................................................................111 art 12(1)..............................................................................................................111 art 12(2)..............................................................................................................111 art 12(3)..............................................................................................................111 art 13...................................................................................................................112 art 14...................................................................................................................112 art 14(5)..............................................................................................................110 art 16...................................................................................................................112 Directive 2004/38/EC on the right of citizens of the Unionand their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States, [2004] OJ L158/77 ..................76, 100, 111, 181, 184, 190 art 2(1)..................................................................................................................76 art 2(a) ..................................................................................................................79 art 2(b)..................................................................................................................79 art 3.....................................................................................................................186 art 3(1)..........................................................................................................77, 109 art 3(2)(a) .............................................................................................................79 art 3(2)(b).............................................................................................................79 art 4 ...............................................................................................................85, 197 art 5 ...............................................................................................................85, 197 arts 5–10 .............................................................................................................108 art 6 ...............................................................................................................77, 186 art 7 ...............................................................................................................77, 186 art 7(1)(b).......................................................................................................77, 81 art 7(c) ................................................................................................................168 art 16 ...............................................................................................................81, 86 art 17(3)................................................................................................................81 art 22...................................................................................................................186 art 24...................................................................................................................164 art 24(1)................................................................................................................81 Directive 2004/80/EC relating to compensation to victims of crime, [2004] OJ L261...............................................................................................115 art 1.....................................................................................................................116 art 2.....................................................................................................................116 art 3.....................................................................................................................116 Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection, [2004] OJ L304/12......................................................................107

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxxi

Table of Legislation xxxi Directive 2004/114/EC of 13 December 2004 on the condition of admission of third-country nationals for the purpose of studies, pupil exchange, unremunerated training or voluntary service, [2004] OJ L375/12 .............107 Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications, [2005] OJ L255/22 ...........................................................................................76 Directive 2006/123/EC on services in the internal market, [2006] OJ L376/36 .......................................................................................................76 art 3(1)..................................................................................................................76 art 3(3)..................................................................................................................76 Regulations Regulation 1/58 determining the languages to be used by the European Economic Community, [1952-1958] OJ Spec Ed 59 ...............................151, 154 art 3.....................................................................................................................153 art 4.....................................................................................................................151 art 5.....................................................................................................................151 art 6.....................................................................................................................151 art 7.....................................................................................................................151 Regulation 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the community..........................................................................76 Regulation 2081/93/EEC on Structural Funds, [1993] OJ L193/95 ......................58 Regulation 2084/93/EEC on amending the Social Fund Regulation, [1993] OJ L193/39 ...........................................................................................58 Regulation 1612/98 on freedom of movement for workers within the community, [1968] OJ L257 ...................................................................76, 100 art 7(1)..................................................................................................................81 art 7(2)..................................................................................................................81 art 10 .............................................................................................................76, 100 art 11 .............................................................................................................76, 100 art 27.....................................................................................................................72 Regulation 1784/99/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 12 July 1999 on the European Social Fund, [1999] OJ L213.........................98 Regulation 2062/2001/EC of 19 October 2001 [2001] OJ L277/25.....................105 Regulation 2199/2001/EC of 12 November 2001 [2001] OJ L295/16.................105 Regulation 168/2007/EC establishing a European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, [2007] OJ L53/1............................................................87

International Treaties and Conventions African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (1981) .......................................19

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxxii

xxxii Table of Legislation Convention concerning the Protection and Integration of Indigenous and Other Tribal and Semi-Tribal Populations in Independent Countries (ILO) (1957) ...................................................................................25 Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples (ILO) (1989).........................19, 25 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948) ...............................................................................................................17 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1951) ...............................................................................................................18 Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989).......................................................69 art 30.....................................................................................................................25 Copenhagen Document (1990) (OSCE) ................................................................19 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) ................................19, 25 European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ECRML) (1992) ........................................15, 19, 124, 148, 149, 150, 151, 158 art 7 ...................................................................................................19, 36, 37, 167 art 7(1)..................................................................................................................37 art 7(1)(f)............................................................................................................159 art 7(2)..................................................................................................................33 art 8 .......................................................................................38, 159, 160, 161, 188 art 8(1)................................................................................................................161 art 9(1)..................................................................................................................37 art 10 .................................................................................37, 38, 64, 104, 151, 153 art 12 .............................................................................................................34, 167 art 13 .....................................................................................38, 58, 59, 86, 97, 104 art 14 ...........................................................................................................165, 186 European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950) ............................................9, 10, 15, 17, 19, 51, 69, 110, 196 art 1 .................................................................................................24, 31, 112, 196 art 2 ...........................................................................................................31, 33, 89 art 3 ...................................................................................................31, 33, 89, 108 art 5(2)..................................................................................................................36 art 6.......................................................................................................................36 art 8 ...........................................................................................29, 30, 89, 124, 137 art 9 ...........................................................................35, 37, 72, 134, 135, 137, 139 art 10 .....................................................................27, 28, 31, 37, 89, 137, 139, 192 art 11 ...........................................................................................27, 28, 31, 89, 192 art 14 .............................................................19, 20, 31, 32, 93, 113, 139, 184, 198 Protocol 1 .............................................................................................................38 art 2...................................................................................................................37 art 3 ...........................................................................................................32, 192 Protocol 2 .............................................................................................................38 Protocol 12 ...................................................................................................19, 20, 31 para 26 ............................................................................................................31, 89 para 27 ..................................................................................................................31

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxxiii

Table of Legislation xxxiii Framework Convention on National Minorities (FCNM) (1995) ...........................................................................................15, 19, 20, 115 art 1.......................................................................................................................27 art 3(1)..................................................................................................................26 art 4 .....................................................................................................124, 182, 187 art 4(2)..........................................................................................................33, 139 art 5 .....................................19, 33, 34, 77, 124, 134, 135, 139, 153, 167, 184, 187 art 5(1)..................................................................................................................36 art 6.....................................................................................................................124 art 6(2)..................................................................................................37, 116, 183 art 8 ...............................................................................................................36, 141 art 9.....................................................................................................................124 art 10 .......................................................................................36, 37, 124, 151, 153 art 10(2)................................................................................................................37 art 11...................................................................................................................124 art 12 .............................................................................................38, 124, 167, 187 arts 12–14 ...........................................................................................................159 art 12(1)..............................................................................................158, 166, 167 art 12(2)..............................................................................................................188 art 13 .............................................................................................38, 124, 167, 168 art 13(1)........................................................................................................38, 158 art 13(2)..............................................................................................................158 art 14 ...............................................................37, 38, 124, 158, 160, 161, 164, 187 art 14(2)........................................................................................................37, 161 art 15 ...............................................................38, 58, 59, 64, 86, 97, 104, 191, 192 art 16 .............................................................................................................33, 143 art 17 ...........................................................................................................165, 186 Geneva Convention (1951) ...................................................................................106 Protocol (1967) ..................................................................................................106 International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) (1965).....................................................18, 113, 115 art 1 .............................................................................................16, 30, 82, 92, 186 arts 1–7 .................................................................................................................30 art 1(1)............................................................................................................30, 89 art 1(2)............................................................................................................31, 91 art 2(1)(e) ...........................................................................................................116 art 2(2)(d).......................................................................................................31, 89 art 4.....................................................................................................................183 art 5.......................................................................................................................30 art 6 ...............................................................................................................31, 184 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (1966)........27, 110 art 1 .................................................................................................................22, 25 art 1(4)..................................................................................................................32 art 2 .................................24, 31, 112, 134, 135, 137, 139, 141, 181, 184, 196, 198

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxxiv

xxxiv Table of Legislation art 2(1)......................................................................................................30, 31, 93 art 2(2)..................................................................................................................32 art 3 .................................................................................................................30, 31 art 3(2)..................................................................................................................31 art 4.......................................................................................................................32 art 6.......................................................................................................................33 art 7.......................................................................................................................33 art 12(1)........................................................................................................82, 186 art 12(3)................................................................................................................32 art 17.....................................................................................................................29 art 18 .............................................................................35, 134, 135, 137, 139, 141 art 19 .....................................................................................................28, 139, 192 art 20...................................................................................................................183 art 21 .............................................................................................................28, 192 art 22 .............................................................................................................28, 192 art 23.....................................................................................................................29 art 24 ...............................................................................................................30, 31 art 25 ...............................................................................................30, 31, 181, 192 art 26 .......................................................................................30, 31, 139, 141, 198 art 27 ............................................15, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 33, 34, 39, 41, 81, 91, 115, 124, 134, 135, 137, 139, 141, 148, 149, 151, 164, 167 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESR) .......19 art 2 ...............................................................................................24, 148, 149, 184 art 13...................................................................................................................167 art 14.....................................................................................................................38 art 15 .......................................................................................................19, 34, 124 art 16.....................................................................................................................19 art 17.....................................................................................................................19 UN Convention on Migrant Workers and Members of their Families 1990 ........................................................................................................110, 112 UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination based on Religion or Belief (1981) .......................................18 United Nations Charter...........................................................................................17 United Nations Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities Declaration on the Rights of Persons (1992)...............................20 art 2.......................................................................................................................36 art 2(1)..................................................................................................................37 art 2(2) ............................38, 58, 59, 64, 86, 97, 104, 124, 134, 135, 184, 191, 192 art 2(3)....................................................................................................38, 64, 104 art 2(5)................................................................................................................186 art 4 .............................................................................................................124, 139 art 4(2)..................................................................................................36, 143, 187 art 4(3)..........................................................................................................37, 158 art 4(4) ..........................................................................................38, 158, 166, 167

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxxv

Table of Legislation xxxv art 4(5) ............................................................38, 58, 59, 64, 86, 97, 104, 191, 192 art 5 .....................................................................................38, 39, 77, 96, 104, 192 art 8.......................................................................................................................33 Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) (1948) .............................16, 17 art 2 .............................................................................................................148, 149 art 2(1)..................................................................................................................28 art 19.....................................................................................................................28 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969.............................................50, 51 art 31.....................................................................................................................50 art 32.....................................................................................................................50

United Nations Resolutions General Assembly 3208 (XXIX) ...........................................................................................................9 Security Council 1267.....................................................................................................................105

(A) Ahmed Prelims_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:05 Page xxxvi

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 3

1 Introduction I. THE EU, DIVERSITY, AND THE EMERGENCE OF THE MINORITIES QUESTION

T

HE EU’S MOTTO is that it is ‘United in Diversity’. Its diversity is obvious and varied. First, there is diversity of membership. The EU is both a community of its Member States, as well as a distinct entity. Since its creation in 1952, the number of Member States has grown from six to 27. The founding members, France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Luxembourg, were joined in 1973 by Denmark, the UK and Ireland. Greece joined in 1981, followed by Spain and Portugal, bringing its membership to 12 in 1986. In 1995 the period of the EU15 began, with the accession of Sweden, Austria and Finland. Membership increased to 25 following acceptance of eight Central and Eastern European countries,1 plus Cyprus and Malta in May 2004. In 2007, Romania and Bulgaria became members, bringing the total of EU members to 27 states. There are ongoing possibilities for extension to Turkey and Macedonia, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia and Kosovo. The EU spans a territory of over 4 million square kilometres, containing 493 million people, and brings together states from the north, south, east and west of the broadly defined ‘European’ space. A second form of EU diversity is diversity of competences. Since its beginnings, primarily as a vehicle for free trade, the EU has diversified in its legal powers and the activities based on them. Today’s EU is involved in an extensive range of activities including free trade, common foreign and security policy, and police and judicial cooperation. Development of these spheres came in line with the progression of the EU’s aims and ambitions. Different competences of the EU concentrate on furthering different objectives of the EU, and ultimately these objectives are the justifying foundations for EU action. The EU was formed on the back of two world wars and its intentions in embracing economic cooperation were fundamentally aimed at securing peace in Europe.2 The EU’s objectives were therefore economic growth and peace. These aims remain part of the EU’s present ambitions. The key developments in competences have arisen from the introduction of new treaties: the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community 1951, the 1 2

Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia. Schuman Declaration of 9 May 1950.

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 4

4 Introduction European Communities Treaty (EC) 1957, the Euratom Treaty 1965, the Single European Act 1986, the Treaty on European Union (TEU) 1992, the Treaty of Amsterdam 1999, and the Treaty of Nice 2001. To these, the Treaty of Lisbon can be added.3 All of these occasions have embodied changes to the powers, ambitions and emphases of the Union’s activities, which have been further refined through an abundance of secondary legislation. These have seen growth in EU interest in political, social and foreign affairs policies. Some of the milestone moments include the strengthening of the social provisions by the Single European Act (and the continued growth of social policy), the introduction of Article 6 TEU on human rights, Articles 17–22 TEU on citizenship, Article 151 EC on culture, Article 13 EC on anti-discrimination, and the adoption of the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights (EUCFR) 2000. The EU has both an internal face (concerning relations between and within its Member States) and an external face (concerning relations with countries which are not members of the EU). The latter relationship is strengthened by the accession process,4 engagement in military and non-military foreign affairs,5 and involvement of the EU in other international organisations.6 A third element of EU diversity concerns its institutional arrangements and instruments of governance. The EU’s legislative activities operate primarily through its Commission, Council, Court and Parliament. Each has a range of complex mandates and responsibilities. However, these institutions frequently work alongside actors at national, sub-national and international levels. Interactions with such a wide range of actors have increased in tandem with growing diversity of the EU’s legal and policy instruments. The community method of governance (ie governance constituting binding legislation) is coupled with newer forms of governance (ie non-binding acts such as benchmarking and programmatic frameworks).7 The Treaty of Lisbon further develops the diversity of EU’s institutional framework by strengthening the roles played in EU law by national

3 OJ C306. The treaty was signed on 13 December 2007 and its amendments came into force in December 2009. It adopts changes to the TEU and the EC Treaty. The TEU as changed by the Lisbon Treaty (OJ 2008 C115/13) is given the title Lisbon Treaty on the European Union (LTEU) in this book. The EC Treaty as changed by Lisbon (OJ 2008 C115/47) is given the title Lisbon Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (LTFEU). 4 M Cremona (ed), The Enlargement of the European Union (Oxford, OUP, 2003). See changes to the provisions on accession in Art 49 LTEU, which require candidate states to respect the values of Art 2 LTEU—values that include respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities. 5 M Trybus, European Union Law and Defence Integration (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2005). See new Title V LTEU. 6 See eg J Wouters, F Hoffmiester and T Ruys, The United Nations and the European Union: An Ever Stronger Partnership (The Hague, TMC Asser, 2006). See eg Art 3 LTEU (contributing to the strict observance and development of international law); Art 21 LTEU (contribution of the EU to the principles of the UN Charter and international law); Art 216 LTFEU (concluding agreements with international organisations); Art 220 LTFEU (appropriate cooperation with other international organisations). 7 G De Búrca and J Scott, EU Law and New Governance in the EU and US (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2006).

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 5

The EU, Diversity, and the Minorities Question 5 parliaments,8 regional and local governance,9 and social partners and civil society more generally.10 These factors of diversity demonstrate the complex nature of the EU. However, surpassing all of these types of diversity is the richness of the EU’s cultural heritage. Each of the EU’s Member States is different and unique in its national identity and has a range of social, economic, cultural and political views and interests.11 The EU is host to 23 official languages, hundreds of national and regional cultures and traditions, and numerous religious, cultural, ethnic, national and linguistic minorities. EU celebrations of culture clearly recognise this. The EU holds European days of languages and appoints European Cities of Culture; the EU’s culture programmes support projects on cultures from both national and minority groups. The EU also promotes the learning of all official EU languages and further encourages the learning of minority languages.12 All are intended to celebrate the strength of diversity within the EU. Indeed, according to the Europa website, the EU’s motto ‘united in diversity’ means that, via the EU, Europeans are united in working for peace and prosperity, and . . . the many different cultures, traditions and languages in Europe are a positive asset for the continent.13

The positive picture painted so far is, however, one-sided; not all instances of diversity are celebrated and embraced, or accepted, in Europe: particular hardship may be experienced by individuals associated with cultures different from the dominant majority groups in Europe. These ‘minorities’ can be amongst the lowest educated and paid in the EU and suffer from the worst social and welfare conditions. A particular example is the plight of the Roma across Europe, which is not unrepresentative of difficulties faced by minority groups and is an apt illustration of the perpetuation in the current day of a long standing inability of states to accommodate differences within their nations: 2008–09 will be remembered by Roma rights and human rights activists for the extremely troublesome situation of Romani communities in Italy. Mounting racism and antiRomani sentiment erupted in Naples and Milan in May 2008. Moreover, various legal measures and policies adopted by the public authorities, such as the ongoing ‘census’ of the Romani population and the transportation of Roma to special camps even further from city centres in order to ‘sanitise’ urban centres were outright abuses of individual freedoms and rights. Growing fear and hatred of Roma among the general population on the one hand and the hostile approach of the national government and some local administrations on the other created a witch hunt atmosphere directed against even long-established Romani and Sinti Italian citizens as well as newly arriving Romani migrants.14 8 Arts 9–12 LTEU and the Protocol on the Role of National Parliaments, as well as the Protocol on Subsidiarity and Proportionality. 9 The Committee of Regions is given a formal role under Art 256a LTFEU. 10 Arts 300–7 LTFEU and Art 11(4) LTEU. 11 JHH Weiler, The Constitution of Europe (Cambridge, CUP, 1999) 12. 12 See further chs 6 and 7. 13 europa.eu/abc/symbols/motto/index_en.htm. 14 European Roma Rights Centre, Roma Rights 2, 2008: Italy’s Bad Example (5 May 2009), www.errc.org/cikk.php?cikk=3015.

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 6

6 Introduction Although the EU was not established specifically to address minority concerns such as these, some would argue that it cannot turn a blind eye to such troubles and should, in fact, be addressing them.15 To act otherwise undermines the EU’s motto, ‘united in diversity’, and poses a considerable threat to its ambitions of creating a region of peace and security.16 The EU, it is claimed, cannot be united in diversity when it denies protection to specific segments of its diverse structure. These claims are fuelled by the interest the EU shows in protecting minorities in its external relations. In this respect, the EU has, since 1993, demanded that countries applying to accede to the EU achieve minority rights protection before joining.17 It thus makes clear that the EU does not purport to be a region associated with breaches of minority rights protection. There remains a problem, though: states which have, since 1993, been approved of as protecting minorities are still accused of committing minority rights breaches, as are the pre-1993 Member States. In other words, minority problems in European states have not been solved. Thus, if the EU is to be serious about minority protection, there is still work to be done. The EU continues to bind candidate countries politically to the minority rights criteria in accession negotiations, which has inspired minority advocates to focus more closely on the EU’s internal protection of minority rights and has strengthened their resolve to demand that the EU provide more robust protection. To date, the EU has resisted such pressures, despite the growing positive rhetoric within the EU institutions on the value of minorities and minority rights.18 This has inspired a whole host of criticisms against the EU; not least, it has raised the question of why minority rights protection is regarded as something potential EU Member States should aspire to, but not once membership has been achieved. The EU is accused of having double standards.19 There is dissatisfaction with the absence of an express or obvious reference to minority rights within the 15 For instance, G Toggenburg, ‘Minorities (. . .) the European Union: Is the Missing Link an “Of” or a “Within”?’ (2003) 25(3) European Integration 273; G Pentassuglia, ‘The EU and the Protection of Minorities: The Case of Eastern Europe’ (2001) 12 European Journal of International Law 3; see also the view of NGOs such as the European Roma Information Office, www.erionet.org. 16 Arts 2 and 29 TEU; G Toggenburg, ‘Minority Protection in a Supranational Context: Limits and Opportunities’ in G Toggenburg (ed), Minority Protection and the Enlarged European Union: The Way Forward (EURAC Research, Open Society Institute, 2004) 3–36; Pentassuglia, ibid, 4. 17 Copenhagen European Council, 21–22 June 1993, SN 180/93. For analysis, see B Rechel, Minority Rights in Central and Eastern Europe (London, Routledge, 2008). 18 See eg European Commission Communication, Non-Discrimination and Equal Opportunities for All—A Framework Strategy, 2005 COM (2005) 224 final, 3 and 10; European Parliament Resolution with Recommendations to the Commission on European Regional and Lesser Used Languages—the Languages of Minorities in the EU—in the Context of Enlargement and Cultural Diversity, September 2003, A5–0271/2003. The European Parliament also called for inclusion of minority rights in the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights (CHARTE 4465/00). 19 C Hillion, ‘Enlargement of the European Union, Discrepancy between Membership Obligations and Accession Conditions as Regards Protection of Minorities’ (2004–5) 27 Fordham International Law Journal 715–40; B De Witte, ‘Politics versus Law in the EU’s Approach to Ethnic Minorities’ in J Zielonka (ed), Europe Unbound: Enlarging and Reshaping the Boundaries of the European Union (London, Routledge, 2002). See also K Shoraka, Human Rights and Minority Rights in the European Union (London, Routledge, forthcoming 2010).

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 7

The EU, Diversity, and the Minorities Question 7 EU’s internal law and more generally with the failure of the EU to offer adequate protection for minority rights in the internal sphere.20 A consistent demand is therefore made for treaty amendment,21 and the reference to the EU being founded on respect for the rights of minorities in Article 2 LTEU is unlikely to silence these demands, given that it does not provide the EU with any further competence to introduce legislative standards on minority protection. Discussions of ineffectiveness and treaty amendments are arguably premised on several—explicit or implicit—stages: (1) the claim of assessment: that the effects on minority rights of existing provisions have been explained; (2) the claim of inadequacy: that these were found to be somehow inadequate; (3) the claim of evaluation: that this inadequacy has been evaluated as problematic and undesirable; and (4) the claim of reform: that therefore the EU should amend its legal bases in order to protect minority rights more adequately. This book builds on existing scholarship22 by providing a comprehensive assessment of how successfully the EU, in its existing form, can impact on minority rights protection, whilst providing a framework against which to identify whether or not that impact is adequate. This book therefore contributes to the examination of claims (1) and (2). Securing legislative reform in the field of minority rights within the EU is difficult. Given this, it is worth exploring the potential of existing law. For various reasons, as will be explained in the section below, the definition of minority rights protection is taken from international legal sources. An evaluation of whether any inadequacy in the EU’s legal protection of minorities is after all problematic and needs to be addressed by reform requires an analysis (not undertaken in this book) of the extent to which the EU should concern itself with minority rights protection. Should the EU’s protection of minorities be more than a symbolic gesture? Many would say yes, for reasons including the following. First, there seems to be a practical argument that the EU should protect minority rights simply because it provides a benefit to minorities. Second, it could 20 B De Witte, ‘Language Law of the European Union: Protecting or Eroding Linguistic Diversity?’ in R Craufurd Smith (ed), Culture and European Union Law (Oxford, OUP, 2004); L Farkas, ‘A Good Way to Equality: Roma Seeking Judicial Protection against Discrimination in Europe’ (2006) 3 European Anti Discrimination Law Review 21–30; R Toniatti, M Dani and F Palermo (eds), An Ever More Complex Union—The Regional Variable as a Missing Link in the European Constitution (BadenBaden, Nomos, 2004); A Xanthaki, ‘Hope Dies Last: An EU Directive on Roma Integration’ (2005) 11(4) European Public Law 515–26; D Castiglione and C Longman (eds), The Language Question in Europe and Diverse Societies: Political, Social and Legal Perspectives (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2007); J Marko, ‘Minority Protection through Jurisprudence in Comparative Perspective: An Introduction’ (2003) 25(3) European Integration 175. 21 See eg recently, A Van Bossuyt, ‘Is there an Effective European Legal Framework for the Protection of Minority Languages? The European Union and the Council of Europe Screened’ (2007) 32(6) European Law Review 860 at 860, 877; O De Schutter, ‘The Framework Convention on the Protection of National Minorities and the Law of the European Union European’, FP6—Integrated Project Coordinated by the Centre for Philosophy of Law—Université Catholique de Louvain, refgov.cpdr.ucl.ac.be, WP–FR–15. 22 Scholars to date have generally conducted short reviews of existing EU legal provisions; for a more detailed study see EU Network of Independent Experts on Fundamental Rights, Thematic Comment No 3: The Protection of Minorities in the European Union (25 April 2005), europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/ cfr_cdf/doc/thematic_comments_2005_en.pdf, 1–109.

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 8

8 Introduction be argued that the EU should protect minority rights in order to prevent the erosion of national and sub-national identities caused by its existence and activities. Third, the EU is viewed as an entity that could replace or supplement the inadequacy of the nation-state in providing minority rights protection—an inadequacy that presents a potential threat to the European order because neglect of minority protection can cause tensions and instability between groups in and across states. Requests for the EU’s involvement in minority rights protection come, despite the role of other international organisations such as the Council of Europe (CoE) and the United Nations (UN) in protecting minorities.23 This book does not aim to evaluate directly the strengths or weaknesses of arguments demanding that EU law protect minority rights, and therefore does not examine whether any inadequacy in the EU’s system for protection of minority rights is problematic and needs reforming. What it does is present essential material that illustrates the current situation, on which debates about what the EU should do for minorities can be grounded. It thereby contributes to the process of legal analysis and considerations of law reform, specifically by elucidating the existing state of the law. The benchmark against which this existing law is analysed is outlined in the next section. II. A MULTI-DIMENSIONAL EU: A SUI GENERIS YET INCLUSIVE ORGAN OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

Although the EU is increasingly engaging with its minority populations through numerous binding and non-binding measures, it is yet to provide a coherent body of material from which one can glean definitive ‘EU’ conceptions of the terms ‘minority’ and ‘minority rights’. As such, EU internal law and policies are not the most suitable benchmark standards for undertaking a detailed interrogation of its own progress on minority rights. Instead, one might turn to several external sources, for instance national legal systems, international law or minority rights as ‘ideally’ perceived, which offer settled practice or at least a clearer understanding of the terms ‘minority’ and ‘minority rights’ as compared with the EU. Each of these sources offers a different perspective on the relevant terms and, as standards external to the EU, each might suffice in equal measure as a source against which to assess EU law. The present examination adopts an international law approach. While this method of comparison cannot provide comprehensive analysis in terms of the adequacy of EU law on minority rights—not least because it does not assess whether the EU meets optimal levels of minority rights protection or how it compares with the obligations of the nation-state—it does, nonetheless, offer significant benefits. First, this perspective takes into account the growing recognition of the EU as an international organisation in the international legal order. The EU’s identity is no longer only one of a sui generis entity amongst international organisations, but one of a sui generis yet inclusive organ of the international 23

See section II below and ch 2.

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 9

A Multi-Dimensional EU 9 community. Although not refuting that the EU is a unique entity,24 there is an increasing tendency to emphasise the latter dimension.25 Focusing on what has been achieved by its international counterparts seems more valuable than comparing its achievements in protecting minority rights at the national level, given that any role the EU adopts on minority rights will be as an international or supranational mechanism whose rules are to be applied in the national context. In addition, international law is a system with the most advanced standards on minority rights protection and is a system in which all of the EU’s Member States participate. To this end, although it is usual to discuss the EU in light of developments at the CoE, the benchmark used in this book consists of standards from both the CoE and the UN. This is because the CoE’s standards on their own do not fully reflect the nature of minority rights at the international law level, since the CoE’s expertise in the field has only recently taken shape. Inclusion of the UN context is important not only for the definition of the term ‘minority’, but also for the instruments it has produced which have been agreed upon by a larger number of the world’s states. It is also important that the EU is strengthening its working relationship with the UN26 and the CoE,27 mainly in its external relations, but also in the course of achieving its internal treaty obligations,28 thus supporting the use of the instruments of these organisations as a standard of reference for EU law. 24

A view explored in ch 3, section I(C). J Wouters, R Wessel and A Follesdal (eds), Multilevel Regulation and the EU: The Interplay between Global, European and National Normative Processes (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2008); Wouters, Hoffmiester and Ruys (n 6); J Wouters and V Kronenberger (eds), The European Union and Conflict Prevention: Policy and Legal Aspects (The Hague, TMC Asser, 2004); N White, ‘The Ties that Bind: The EU, the UN and International law’ (2006) 37 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 57; N Walker, ‘Beyond Boundary Disputes and Basic Grids: Mapping the Global Disorder of Normative Orders’ (2008) 6(3) International Journal of Constitutional Law 1; I Butler and O De Schutter, ‘Binding the EU to International Human Rights Law’, Working Paper Series REFGOV-FR–16; J Wouters, ‘The United Nations and the European Union: Partners in Multilateralism’, Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies, Working Paper No 1, June 2007, www.globalgovernancestudies.eu; D Verwey, The European Community, the European Union and the International Law of Treaties (The Hague, TMC Asser, 2004); M Licková, ‘European Exceptionalism in International Law’ (2008) 19(3) European Journal of International Law 463; A Von Bogdandy, ‘The European Union as Situation, Executive, and Promoter of the International Law of Cultural Diversity—Elements of a Beautiful Friendship’ (2008) 19(2) European Journal of International Law 241; T Ahmed and I Butler, ‘The European Union and Human Rights: An International Law Perspective’ (2006) 17(4) European Journal of International Law 77; MH Smith, ‘The European Union and International Order: European and Global Dimensions’ (2007) 12(4) European Foreign Affairs Review 437. 26 Art 302 EC (new Arts 216–21 LTFEU); Ahmed and Butler, ibid; White, ibid. The EC has observer status at the UN General Assembly (GA Resolution 3208 (XXIX) of 11 October 1974) and the UN Economic and Social Council (including the Commission on Human Rights). See also new Art 21 LTEU, which states that the EU’s external relations activities will be guided by respect for the principles of the UN; and Art 220 LTFEU, which states that the EU shall establish appropriate forms of cooperation with the UN. 27 Art 303 EC (new Art 216 LTFEU). The EU maintains close collaborative links—although without formal observer status—with the CoE. Art 220 LTFEU states that the EU shall establish appropriate forms of cooperation with the CoE. Art 6(2) TEU provides for the EU to accede to the ECHR. 28 For example, collaborations with the CoE commonly take place concerning anti-discrimination law and policies relating to the Roma minority. The CoE was also involved in organising the EU’s European Year of Languages (2001) and the follow-up European Day of Languages. See, in respect of the internal and external sphere, B De Witte, ‘International Law as a Tool for the European Union’ (2009) 5 European Constitutional Law Review 265. 25

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 10

10 Introduction Currently, it is not an accepted view either in the EU or within the international community that the EU is bound by legal standards emerging from other international obligations, not least because the EU is not itself a signatory to international minority rights instruments. What has been suggested, however, is that the EU is bound to protect minority rights (or some of them) in two ways. First, the EU is bound to protect those rights that are implicated by the powers it has taken from its member states and which prevent states from acting in certain field or affects their ability to do so—the doctrine of succession.29 For example, in Bosphorus the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) held that the EU must protect rights to a standard equivalent to the protection provided by the ECHR. Accordingly, the EU must not breach the legal entitlements that are conferred on individuals within the ECHR. Were it to do so, an individual could bring a case before the ECtHR arguing that the EU had not offered equivalent protection. Second, the EU is bound to protect rights that may be jus cogens in international law. There is greater support for this claim,30 though again there is no absolute acceptance of it. In this respect, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) itself has stated that it can give effect to the protection of human rights against the application of other rules of public international law.31 Despite these suggestions, this book will not determine the rights against which the EU should be measured on the basis of the legal obligations argument. Reliance on this argument would produce an inadequate reference point for an overview examination of EU law and minority rights, because it would exclude evaluation of those rights by which the EU is currently not bound.32 Exclusion of such rights would jeopardise the aims of this study, which is to further our understanding of the EU’s legal framework as an adequate tool for minority rights protection as a whole. The question of legally binding obligations on the EU is therefore distinguished from that of what the EU’s legal framework can offer for minority rights protection.

III. SCOPE AND OVERALL APPROACH OF THE ANALYSIS

The EU’s legal framework on minority rights protection is comprehensively analysed through the use of three interrelated approaches. This achieves a level of analysis that a singular approach could not attain. The first part outlines the relevant minority rights standards in international law and contemplates EU law in overview. It focuses on addressing definitional and contextual issues. The core international minority rights standards are applied to evaluate the legal framework of the EU. In the second part of the book, there are in-depth studies of two minority rights 29

See Ahmed and Butler (n 25). Ibid; White (n 25). 31 Thus, the ECJ is not bound to apply UN Resolutions that fall short of human rights standards. Joined Cases C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P, Yassin Abdullah Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v Council and Commission (Judgment of 3 September 2008). 32 Since not all the rights of minorities would fall within the doctrine of succession, constitute jus cogens, or indeed fall within the EU’s general principles. On the latter, see ch 4, section I(d). 30

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 11

Scope and Overall Approach of the Analysis 11 (cultural and linguistic diversity), and the final section applies those frameworks to a specific group case study of the Roma minority.33 While a few studies have examined the EU and the Roma minority, this book revises those conclusions in light of its more detailed analysis.

A. Part I: Overview of Minority Protection Chapter 2 examines the meaning of the terms ‘minority’ and ‘minority rights’. These definitions serve as standards against which the impact of EU law on minority rights is assessed. This chapter provides a detailed discussion of the relevant terms and draws out key themes and general principles that are taken forward in the subsequent analysis of EU law. It is important to note, in particular, the flexible nature of state obligations towards minority protection in international law. Chapter 3 presents an overview of the EU’s legal order. Disagreement persists over what exactly that legal order is. This chapter touches upon some of those debates. It explores aspects of these different perspectives that might be crucial to strategies for interpreting EU law on minority protection. Thus, in the main chapter 3 defines the nature of relevant EU acts, and explains the techniques used for the interpretation of EU law. From chapter 4 onwards, an investigation is undertaken of the EU’s legal ability to secure minority rights. Chapters 4 and 5 provide an overview of the competences across the EU treaties that do or might relate to minority rights. Based on analyses in these chapters, it would be inaccurate to state that the EU’s competence has a minimal relationship with minority rights. Chapter 4 outlines the provisions, principles and norms of EU law that affect the interpretation of treaty articles. These include preambular and opening provisions, as well as Protocols, Recommendations, Opinions, Declarations and general principles of EU law. Chapter 5 evaluates a selective range of those treaty articles, with the aim of demonstrating the scope of the EU’s legal framework that can be implicated as having a relationship to minority rights—be that in a positive or negative manner. The selection is guided by provisions that (a) relate to minority rights in international law as identified in chapter 3; and (b) ensure a wide representation of the EU’s legal framework, to include both obvious provisions34 and obscure provisions35 that can impact on minority rights protection. 33 Providing a detailed analysis which differs from less comprehensive examinations: Open Society Institute, ‘Monitoring Minority Protection in the EU: The Situation of Muslims in the UK’ (2002); R Guglielmo, ‘Human Rights in the Accession Process: Roma and Muslims in an Enlarging EU’ in Toggenburg (ed) (n 16); M Marden, ‘Return to Europe—The Czech Republic and the EU’s Influence on its Treatment of Roma’ (2004) 37 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 1181. The two most comprehensive accounts are from the EU level itself: EU Network of Independent Experts on Fundamental Rights, Report on the Situation of Fundamental Rights in the European Union in 2003 (January 2004), ec.europa.eu/justice_home/cfr_cdf/doc/report_eu_2003_en.pdf, and European Commission, The Situation of the Roma in an Enlarged Union (Brussels, 2004). See also EU Fundamental Rights Agency, The Situation of Roma EU Citizens Moving to and Settling in Other EU Member States (2009). 34 Such as language and education. 35 For example, free movement of goods and enterprise policy.

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 12

12 Introduction B. Part II: Case Studies of Minority Rights Building on the outline of the EU’s framework in the previous two chapters, chapters 6 and 7 scrutinise EU law in more detail through an examination of two minority rights—cultural rights and linguistic rights. These substantive areas are of central importance to minority rights.36 It is evident from the evaluation in these chapters that, although the EU’s commitment to a rights-based approach to culture and language is minimal, there is much activity on the promotion of languages and cultures. There may, however, be room for improvement in directing such activity towards minority groups. Thus, although EU law cannot always provide minorities with legal entitlements to develop their cultures or use their languages, there is potential to interpret EU legal provisions as supportive of diversity in these respects. For example, Article 151 EC imposes a duty on the EU to take culture into account across all EU policies, and the learning of languages that are not official EU languages is promoted under Article 149 EC on education.

C. Part III: Case Study of a Minority Group Chapter 8 examines how the arguments set out in the above analyses apply to the minority rights of the Roma. First, the chapter presents the background to the historical and current challenges Roma face as a neglected group in Europe. The remainder of the chapter substantively analyses the extent to which EU law can be called upon to offer legal protection. The distinction between legal entitlement and the provision of other benefits is most evident from this chapter. The picture that emerges is that although the EU actively promotes Roma rights (eg rights relating to culture and participation in society), beyond the provision of formal equality, there are very few rights to which Roma are legally entitled and which they can therefore demand. As the concluding chapter, chapter 9 reflects on the impact of EU law on minority rights, and also speculates on possible future directions for the EU. Within the international law context, the essential aim of minority rights is the preservation of identity and minority characteristics.37 This aim is not to be achieved at all costs, and international law indicates that often a balance is required between the competing objectives of integrating minorities into society and protecting minorities against undue assimilation.38 This balance differs between states and between groups: hence, a case-by-case approach is applied and not all minority rights are automatically applicable to all minority groups.39 Further, the protection of 36

See further ch 2, section III(B)(iii) and (v). See further ch 2, section I. 38 See ch 2, Section III 39 This rather depends on a number of factors, including the length of time a group has been present in a state; the numbers in that group; and whether it is concentrated in a particular part of the state. See ch 2, section II(c). 37

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 13

Concluding Remarks 13 minorities does not rely solely on the provision of legal entitlements; rather, it is dependent on a range of diverse actions: any EU measures which do or could ‘respect, protect or fulfil’ minority rights fall within the realm of the rights protection standards set by international law. Given this wide understanding of (minority) rights protection, chapter 9 concludes that the EU’s contribution to the protection of minorities may deserve more credit than is currently acknowledged. Its standard-setting strengths lie in the fields of non-discrimination and employment rights, areas that offer direct legal entitlements to beneficiaries. However, the EU has an impact on minority rights beyond this, as a result of the competences it possesses to promote and fulfil the rights of minorities.

IV. CONCLUDING REMARKS

That the notion of diversity is key to the EU’s ambitions and underlies its existence is undisputed. However, what is regularly called into question is the nature of that diversity: is the EU’s legal framework concerned only with protecting what is ‘European’ or what is important to the ‘national’ identities of Member States, or is it also interested in engaging with the more complex forms of sub-national and minority identities? The current consensus in academia and within civil society is that EU law favours the former two types of diversity over the latter. The call for legal changes to the EU’s treaty powers to better protect minority identities reflects these thoughts. The evaluation in the present book offers several points in support of these conclusions. Overall, the EU offers very little in the way of legal entitlements to ‘respect’ for and ‘protection’ of minority rights, these two forms of entitlement being the means by which rights can actually be guaranteed: EU engagement on minority rights in these forms would outlaw the violation of minority rights and would provide legal mechanisms through which rights could be secured. In reality, the EU’s legal framework cannot fully offer these guarantees. Further, although there may be numerous means through which EU law might positively impact on some minority rights, the application of these to EU citizens—to the general exclusion of third-country nationals—contradicts and imposes a detriment on other minority rights. Thus, the division between citizens and non-citizens may serve only to encourage attitudes of discrimination within the EU. The EU might also be criticised on the basis that, as with other international organisations, it operates primarily on individual rights, to the neglect of group rights. Even in instances where there is scope for the EU to benefit minority groups, the lack of policy coordination applied to this task has resulted in only minor inroads to this effect. The impetus for this book is the criticism that the EU does not fully achieve minority rights protection. However, I argue that the EU can be seen in a more positive light, through a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of how EU law in its present form might engage with minority rights. The strengths of EU law are more

(B) Ahmed Ch1_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 14

14 Introduction visible through application of a wide understanding of rights protection. This new context offers the possibility of reaching a different conclusion as to the EU’s contribution to minority rights. Thus, the EU’s failure to provide legal guarantees of minority rights is compensated for by the numerous avenues through which cultures40 can be promoted, and the even greater number of avenues that may yet be pursued to this effect. Likewise, the huge efforts made to promote the employability of disadvantaged groups in EU Member States have inspired a determined focus on the combating of exclusion of minorities. As a final example, the EU’s targeted assistance to the Roma minority is not simply rhetorical; it has seen investment in terms of financial and staff resources, as well as policy commitments.

40

Those of minorities and not only of European and national groups.

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 15

2 International Standard-Setting: ‘Minority’ and ‘Minority Rights’

A

N EXAMINATION OF the legal protection of minority rights demands clarification of two terms: minorities and minority rights. This chapter analyses the content of these terms in international law, in order to use the international law system as a benchmark for the evaluation of EU law. Whilst the protection of minorities by international legal mechanisms cannot be regarded as comprehensive, international activity on minority protection has seen a dramatic increase since the mid 1990s both in Europe and internationally. This chapter focuses on understanding the key messages of these sources, and the instruments examined represent the core foundations of international protection. Regarding the UN, this consists of Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966(ICCPR), which is the UN’s explicit provision on minority rights. Article 27 is considered here in the light of the jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee (HRC)—the body responsible for dealing with complaints under the ICCPR. UN instruments also include the Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities 1992 (UN Minorities Declaration), which is regarded as illustrative of the content of Article 27.1 Within the Council of Europe (COE), the significant documents on minority rights are the European Charter on Regional and Minority Languages (ECRML) 1992 and the Framework Convention on National Minorities (FCNM) 1995. Each of these instruments specifically addresses minority rights protection. Reference to other sources may also be necessary, such as provisions in general human rights instruments. The most important instance of these other sources in the European context is the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 (ECHR),2 and an example from 1 The Preamble to the UN Minorities Declaration relates that its drafting was ‘inspired by the provisions of Article 27’. 2 For an analysis of the ECtHR’s jurisprudence on minority rights, see R Medda-Windischer, ‘The European Court of Human Rights and Minority Rights’ (2003) 25(3) European Integration 249; G Gilbert, ‘The Burgeoning Minority Rights Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights’ (2002) 24 Human Rights Quarterly 736; G Pentassuglia, ‘Minority Issues as a Challenge in the European Court of Human Rights: A Comparison with the Case Law of the United Nations Human Rights Committee’ (2003) German Yearbook of International Law 405; G Pentassuglia, ‘Inside and Outside the European Convention: The Case of Minorities Compared’ (2006) Baltic Yearbook of International Law

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 16

16 International Standard-Setting the UN context is the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination 1965 (ICERD), which prohibits discrimination on grounds of race, ethnicity and national origin and descent.3 This chapter also outlines the different modes of rights protection, according to a human rights model currently used in international law.

I. INTERNATIONAL MINORITY RIGHTS PROTECTION: AN OVERVIEW 4

The international response to the question of how to respond to ‘minorities’ has been far from static.5 The current trend rests on a sharp turn from international law’s previously passive attitude towards diversity to one which values pluralism and recognises the need to preserve identities of all groups in society. The impetuses for this were numerous; not least the stark recognition that the unity of identities which the nation-state model pursued was simply not working either to protect the basic rights of some individuals or, fundamentally, to prevent the types of tensions and conflicts in the world which the international community sought to prevent. There have been signs, therefore, since the 1970s and 80s that the international community has incorporated into its human rights rhetoric, activities and instruments, the ideal of respect for plurality of identities. Such a trend is not always evident in practice, as the ensuing analysis will demonstrate, but the move in this new direction is undoubted. While a comprehensive commentary on the development of minority rights is not feasible, a brief overview of key milestones and the present protection is given here in order to frame the subsequent analysis of EU law. The historical development of minority rights, both domestically and internationally, has been broadly influenced by two opposing philosophies— assimilation6 and preservation of identity.7 These two philosophies have proved fundamental to whether legislation is introduced which favours integration of minorities into the dominant culture only or whether additional protection for differences is available. The Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) 1948, adopted in the first years of the United Nations (UN) system for international cooperation, makes no 47, 263; M Weller, (ed), Universal Minority Rights: A Commentary on the Jurisprudence of International Courts and Treaty Bodies (Oxford, OUP, 2008). 3 Art 1. 4 This section draws upon T Ahmed and A Vakulenko, ‘Minority Rights 60 Years after the UDHR: Limits on the Preservation of Identity?’ in M Baderin and M Ssenyonjo (eds), International Human Rights Law: 60 Years after the UDHR (Surrey, Ashgate, forthcoming 2010). 5 For greater detail on the history of minority protection in international law, see P Leuprecht, ‘Minority Rights Revisited: New Glimpses of an Old Issue’ in P Alston (ed), Peoples’ Rights (Oxford, OUP, 2001); N Lerner, ‘The Evolution of Minority Rights in International Law’ in C Brolmann et al (eds), Peoples and Minorities in International Law (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 1993). 6 Assimilation refers to the absorption of minority groups into the majority society, so that differences between groups in society are not maintained. 7 K Henrard, Devising an Adequate System of Minority Protection: Individual Human Rights, Minority Rights and the Right to Self-Determination (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2000) 11–13.

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 17

An Overview 17 mention of the rights of minorities. It embodies instead a range of rights, such as those to life, liberty, security of person, fair trial, free expression, privacy and family life. This lack of explicit reference to minority rights reflected the overall attitude of the UN at the time of its creation. The UN system provided no legal guarantees to preserve minorities as separate or different from the rest of the population of a state. Minority rights were not addressed in the UN Charter or UDHR and were in fact hardly on the UN agenda.8 This contrasts with the targeted nature of minority rights protection that existed prior to 1948, arising from the postReformation European Peace Treaties and the ad hoc legal and political monitoring of specific treaties by the League of Nations (1919).9 Although the League was ultimately unsuccessful, it represents the first international system of minority rights protection. The UN’s approach to rights focused on two different goals: first, facilitating self determination in the colonial context; and second, on a more universal level, promoting individual human rights, in particular the right to nondiscrimination, for all persons in all states. The implied rationale for the latter was that members of minority groups would be adequately protected by rights to individual equality and that recognition of any special rights beyond those would accentuate differences and provoke political instability and disorder. Thus, homogeneity, rather than pluralism, was the intention of the international community, which mirrored the concerns of states. The same attitude prevailed across Europe, culminating in the adoption of the ECHR in 1950, which contained no minority provision. The homogenous basis of human rights is, however, problematic for minorities on theoretical and practical levels alike. Basic non-discrimination provisions do not accommodate plurality and access to rights other than those available under equal citizenship. Further, because the equal citizen is usually modelled on the dominant majority group in the state, minorities are only entitled to those rights that are available to the majority group. This inevitably leads to some level of assimilation, which contrary to states’ beliefs after World War II actually fosters ill feeling on the part of the minority towards the majority, thereby creating conflict. As such, attempts by the international community to de-emphasise the differences between groups did not lead to harmonious, homogenous societies. Ethnic minority tensions in Africa, the Balkans and the Mediterranean are testament to this. Consequently, the international community later underwent a certain re-evaluation with respect to minority concerns. Two main types of international law developments which essentially entail the better preservation of identity reflect this process. First is the development of minority-specific instruments and institutions, and second is the interpretation 8 Through the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide 1948 and the establishment of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities 1946. 9 For details of the League of Nations system, see LP Mair, The Protection of Minorities: The Working and Scope of the Minorities Treaties under the League of Nations (London, Christophers, 1928); L-A Thio, Managing Babel: The International Legal Protection of Minorities in the Twentieth Century (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2005) esp ch 2.

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 18

18 International Standard-Setting of general human rights in a minority-friendly manner. The first is outlined here and the second in section III, where the rights of minorities are explored in depth. The introduction of minority-specific instruments and institutions signalled the international community’s move away from sole reliance on general human rights and anti-discrimination. The UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, which was established in 1946, began to pay more attention to minorities directly;10 the ICERD was adopted in 1965 and a specific minority rights provision was introduced into one of the most significant general human rights treaties adopted to date: Article 27 ICCPR. This Article is the UN’s explicit provision on minority rights protection and requires that: In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion or to use their own language.

This Article is directed at ensuring the survival and continued development of minority identities.11 It requires both negative and positive measures of support from states12 in order to achieve real equality. The importance of positive measures cannot be underestimated: ‘minorities are dependent on active support from their States in order to preserve their cultural, linguistic and religious identity. Otherwise, they cannot over the long run withstand the assimilationist pressure normally exercised by the dominant majority.’13 Indeed, although Article 27 is phrased as a right of individuals, it has a group element: ‘in community with other members of their group’. This group element has been confirmed by the HRC.14 Largely due to the experiences of the Cold War, a number of measures were set up in addition to Article 27 ICCPR. The (non-binding) UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities was adopted in 1992 (UN Minorities Declaration), and the Working Group on Minorities was established in 1995. An Independent Expert on Minority Issues was introduced in 2005 to promote the implementation of the UN Minorities Declaration within states, by engaging with both governments and nongovernmental organisations. Further, the 1981 Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination based on Religion or Belief represents the UN’s attempt to accord the right to freedom of religion special legal protection. Additional mechanisms include the Genocide Convention 1951, the 10 In its early years, the Sub-Commission largely ignored minority issues. For an analysis of the role of the Sub-Commission, see P Thornberry, International Law and the Rights of Minorities (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1991) ch 12. 11 General Comment 23(50) para 9. 12 paras 6.1 and 6.2. 13 M Nowak, UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: CCPR Commentary (Kehl, NP Engel, 1993) 662. 14 HRC, Chief Ominayak and the Lubicon Lake Band v Canada CCPR Comm No 167/1984; HRC, Ivan Kitok v Sweden CCPR Comm No 197/1985.

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 19

An Overview 19 International Labour Organization Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples 1989, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007, and the continuing efforts of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, which promotes the rights of indigenous communities. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) began to be interpreted in a manner useful for minorities.15 The general objective of these developments was, and remains, the preservation of identity through a preventive approach to breaches of minority rights.16 Concurrently with these global developments, collective rights began to emerge regionally. For instance, group rights are recognised in the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights 1981. The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe adopted its Copenhagen Document (1990) and established a High Commissioner (1992), both having a role in minority protection. The CoE (1949) produced legal and policy instruments affecting minority rights both generally and under specialist minority units. It introduced the ECRML in 199217 and the FCNM in 1995.18 Although these CoE instruments contain escape clauses and weak phraseology, the underlying language still contrasts sharply with the previous equality stance of the organisation in relation to diversity within states.19 The CoE also has a group of experts on the Roma minority as well as the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance. Moreover, Protocol 12 to the ECHR guarantees an independent right of non-discrimination to persons on grounds of membership of national minority groups, thus finally overcoming the limits of Article 14 ECHR,20 and its general human rights instrument—the ECHR—has developed a ‘gradual “sensitisation” ’21 to minority issues. There is thus an array of international law mechanisms in place to protect minority rights, which attempt to support a preservation of identity approach. Nonetheless, within the wider context of international human rights commitments, 15 See ICESCR, Revised Guidelines regarding the Form and Contents of Reports to be submitted by States parties under Articles 16 and 17 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, E/1991/23, para 1, introductory subpara, in which the ICESCR regards culture to include those of linguistic, ethnic and religious minorities (paras 1(c), 1(d), and concluding subpara); and R O’Keefe, ‘The “Right to Take Part in Cultural Life” under Article 15 of the ICESCR’ (1998) 47 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 904, esp 913–14, 916–17, 918–23. 16 G Pentassuglia, Minorities in International Law (Strasbourg, Council of Europe, 2002) 34. 17 See further R Dunbar, ‘Implications of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages for British Linguistic Minorities’ (2000) 25 European Law Review 46; F Grin, Language Policy Evaluation and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2003). 18 Minority Rights Group, The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities: A Guide for Non-Governmental Organisations (London, Minority Rights Group, 1999) 2. An article-byarticle analysis is presented in M Weller, The Rights of Minorities in Europe (Oxford, OUP, 2005). 19 For instance, Art 5 FCNM requires states to promote essential elements of minority identity. Art 7 ECRML promotes the teaching and study of regional and minority languages, as well as facilitating their use in private and public life. 20 Art 14 is only operative in conjunction with a substantive ECHR right. 21 P Thornberry, ‘An Unfinished Story of Minority Rights’ in A-M Biro and P Kovacs (eds), Diversity in Action: Local Public Management of Multi-Ethnic Communities (Hungary, Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Open Society Institute, 2001) 58.

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 20

20 International Standard-Setting developments in protecting minority rights have been slow and their effectiveness questioned. This is indicative of the fundamental difficulties involved in addressing minority concerns. Two of these difficulties, which generally encapsulate the minority rights debate in law, are the tasks of defining the terms ‘minority’ and ‘minority rights’.

II. THE DEFINITION OF ‘MINORITY’

The question of who or what a ‘minority’ is has consistently failed to achieve universal or even regional consensus. The most widely accepted legally-binding provision directly addressing minorities in international law is Article 27 ICCPR. It is worth citing this provision once again: In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion or to use their own language.

Article 27 does not, then, contain a definition of the term ‘minority’. The UN Minorities Declaration, a non-binding UN instrument, includes the adjective ‘national’ within its title, but is devoid of definition. A UN study conducted by Capotorti considered the term ‘minority’ to denote: [A] group numerically inferior to the rest of a population of a State, in a non-dominant position, whose members—being nationals of the State—possess ethnic, religious or linguistic characteristics differing from those of the rest of the population and show, if only implicitly, a sense of solidarity, directed towards preserving their culture, traditions, religion or language.22

At the CoE level, minorities are addressed in the ECRML, which protects minority languages, and the FCNM, Article 14 ECHR and Protocol 12 ECHR on nondiscrimination against national minorities. There is, however, no authoritative CoE definition, thereby failing to clarify the notion of ‘minority’ in international law. While lack of clarity may be less than ideal, it is itself informative: the current definition of minorities is left open by both states and international organisations, and while there is a risk of this being used by states to deny groups minority status, it offers flexibility to international organisations to include those who would otherwise fall outside a specific definition.

22 F Capotorti, Study on the Rights of Persons Belonging to Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (UN, 1991). See also J Deschenes, Proposal Concerning a Definition of the Term ‘Minority’ (1985) UN Doc E/CN.4/Sub.2/1985/31.

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 21

The Definition of ‘Minority’ 21 A. Distinctive Characteristics: Ethnic, Religious, Linguistic, National The sum of the UN and CoE instruments indicates that minorities can be members of ethnic, religious, linguistic or national groups. The existence of a religion or language of a minority group that is different from that of the majority population is usually objectively recognisable. Nevertheless, difficulties may arise with respect to whether a particular belief constitutes a religion or whether a particular means of communication constitutes a language and, related to that, whether minorities can exist within the same religious or linguistic group. The general understanding is that such sub-groups (eg those speaking dialects or adherents of religious factions) do not qualify for separate minority status. The identification of different ethnic groups presents greater challenges. Most disciplines agree on a mix of the following characteristics: a group sharing a common ancestry23 and sharing the same culture or tradition24 (which may include a common religion or language),25 and who are tied together by emotional bonds.26 The group may also (though need not) share common physical, genetic or biological features; this may include racial characteristics.27 Lastly, while culture and tradition are compulsory, physical features may or may not be relevant.28 As with many other minority-related concepts, there is no universally accepted definition of an ethnic group. Nowak defines such groups as: [G]roups of the population displaying the . . . general features that differ from the majority [biological, physically recognizable or genetic features] . . . due to an independent culture and history, regardless of any possible biological differences. Although ethnic minorities often make use of their own languages, this is not a definitional feature. Ethnic minorities may simultaneously be linguistic or religious minorities, but this does not have to be the case.29

Ethnic minorities are distinct from groups based on race (ie a group which shares a common ancestry and certain physical features),30 but groups based on race in itself are not minorities under international law as they lack the independent culture, history or tradition that binds together ethnic groups. Ethnic minorities may 23 eg Capotorti, ibid, para 34; TW Pogge, ‘Group Rights and Ethnicity’ in I Shapiro and W Kymlicka (eds), Ethnicity and Group Rights (New York, NYU Press, 1997) 193; GA De Vos, ‘Conflict and Accommodation—The Role of Ethnicity in Social History’ in L Romanucci-Ross and GA De Vos (eds), Ethnic Identity: Creation, Conflict and Accommodation, 3rd edn (Walnut Creek, CA, Altamira Press, 1995) 18. 24 eg in the Greco Bulgarian Case [1930] PCIJ Ser B No 17; M Weber, ‘What is an Ethnic Group?’ in M Guibernau and J Rex (eds), The Ethnicity Reader: Nationalism, Multiculturalism and Migration (Cambridge, Polity, 1997) 18. 25 De Vos (n 23); Pogge (n 23) 193. 26 eg the feeling of deprivation. PV Ramaga, ‘The Bases of Minority Identity’ (1992) 14(3) Human Rights Quarterly 409, 413; E Roossens, Creating Ethnicity: The Process of Ethnogenesis (Oxford, Sage, 1989) 12. 27 De Vos (n 23); Weber (n 24) 18. 28 F Moore, Thailand, its People, its Society, its Culture (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1974) 64. 29 Nowak (n 13) 649. 30 Or language, religion or other trait. Nowak, ibid, 649.

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 22

22 International Standard-Setting be equivalent to ‘national’ minorities.31 In the context of Article 27 ICCPR and the UN Minorities Declaration, the terms ‘ethnic’ and ‘national’ are thought to have the same meaning,32 or at least are closely related. In this ethnic sense, a national minority denotes a group with common national roots (eg a common kin-state), or a group which has national inspiration or a sense of nationhood33 (a broader definition). This meaning is also thought to apply in the CoE context,34 although the Advisory Committee of the FCNM has thus far avoided providing a generally applicable definition of ‘national minority’. Others still indicate that ‘ethnic’ is a wider term than ‘national’,35 so that ‘national’ is regarded as a sub-component of ‘ethnic’.36 Nowak argues this because ‘[i]n addition to cultural, historical and, possibly, biological definitional qualities for an ethnic minority, national minorities are characterized by a subjective element of common awareness and the political will to independence’,37 or a greater territorial attachment. Kymlicka regards national minorities as those ‘groups who formed functioning societies on their historical homelands prior to being incorporated into a larger state’.38 Malloy too suggests that national minorities are native to a particular region (autochthonous) and are minorities only because that region has been incorporated into a larger political unit or borders have changed following major conflicts.39 In contrast, ethnic groups need not demonstrate territorial links40 or a prior functioning society. Another requirement associated with protection for national minorities is that of citizenhsip of a state. This is an approach taken by Jackson-Preece.41 Malloy also suggests that, at least in Europe, national minority rights are only for citizens.42 The views of these authors are not, however, unchallenged.43 In sum, national minorities are those groups who have been historically established in a territory, possess certain common characteristics (ethnic (which in turn 31 At the European level, the term ‘national minority’ has often coincided with the terms ‘ethnic (including national), religious or linguistic’ minority, G Pentassuglia, Defining ‘Minority’ in International Law: A Critical Appraisal (Rovaniemi, Lapland’s University Press, 2000) 32. 32 Pentassuglia (n 16) 63. 33 G Gilbert, ‘The Council of Europe and Minority Rights’ (1996) 18(1) Human Rights Quarterly 160. 34 T Makkonen, Identity, Difference and Otherness: The Concepts of ‘People’, ‘Indigenous People’ and ‘Minority’ in International Law (Helsinki, Helsinki University Press, 2000) 82. Valentine takes this position with regard to the FCNM: JR Valentine, ‘Toward a Definition of National Minority’ (2003–4) 32 Denver Journal of International Law and Policy 445, 472. See also Pentassuglia (n 16) 65. 35 Henrard (n 7) 53; Valentine, ibid, 459; Thornberry (n 10) 160. 36 Henrard (n 7) 55. 37 Nowak (n 13) 649. In this sense they are comparable to ‘peoples’ under Art 1 ICCPR who are entitled to independence from any other governing state. 38 W Kymlicka, Politics in the Vernacular: Nationalism, Multiculturalism and Citizenship (Oxford, OUP, 2001) 54. 39 TH Malloy, National Minority Rights in Europe (Oxford, OUP, 2005) 21. 40 Malloy, ibid, 23. 41 J Jackson-Preece, National Minorities and the European Nation-States System (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998) 28. 42 Malloy (n 39) 19. 43 See below, section II(c).

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 23

The Definition of ‘Minority’ 23 can include race), religious or linguistic) and may or may not possess citizenship of the state in which they live. Minorities having other characteristics (eg based purely on sex or disability) are not expressly protected by any of the minorityrelated instruments at the UN or European level.

B. Numerical Minority and Non-Dominance A group cannot be a minority in law if it constitutes more than 50 per cent of a population in a state. However, some oppose the idea of stripping a group of protection at the international level simply because it represents more than the rest of the state’s population. Majority groups are also capable of being oppressed, for instance the black population in South Africa during Apartheid, the Bengalis of East Pakistan prior to the independence of Bangladesh, and the majority populations in Rwanda and Burundi during periods of ‘ethnic cleansing’. Lack of political power, as opposed to small numbers, might be a preferable or more defensible approach to defining a minority. However, this directly contradicts Capotorti’s express interpretation of Article 27. Similarly, different views exist as to how small a group can be to be regarded as a minority group.44 There is no consensus on this question either, except that a single person cannot form a group because a group needs a sufficient number of persons to enable it to preserve its characteristics.45 A final point to note is that in the context of the numbers criterion, the relevant number comprises those within a state and not a province.46

C. Citizenship Are the rights of minorities limited to citizens of a state? Or as Nowak puts it, are minority rights ‘citizens’ rights or human rights’?47 The issue of citizenship was raised earlier in respect of national minorities. For this group, citizenship might be a necessary characteristic. Capotorti’s study of Article 27 also restricts minorities to nationals, and this was generally thought to be based on the premise that some groups, such as migrant workers, are protected by customary international law. Nowak, however, maintains that the possibility that rights may be found elsewhere is not a very convincing reason for excluding minority rights to those groups,48 and this strict position is also being continuously challenged by the HRC and by 44

See views expressed in Capotorti (n 22) para 566 and Deschenes (n 22) para 77. J Rehman, International Human Rights Law: A Practical Approach (Harlow, Longman Pearson, 2003) 299, citing Sub Commission on the prevention of Discrimination and the Protection of Minorities, UN Doc E/CN.4/703. 46 HRC, Ballantyne et al v Canada CCPR Comm No 359, 385/1989. However, this is a question of fact and not of law: HRC, General Comment 23(50) on Article 27 para 5.2; Greco Bulgarian Case (n 24) 22, para 5.2. 47 Nowak (n 13) 645. 48 Ibid. 45

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 24

24 International Standard-Setting other scholars.49 Article 27 ICCPR itself does not exclude non-nationals from its ambit and Article 2 ICCPR advocates respect for the ICCPR rights for all persons within a state’s territory or jurisdiction.50 This implies that, having satisfied all other requirements of the term ‘minority’, a group will not be excluded on the basis of their nationality. Aliens can therefore constitute a minority group. Nowak further comments that the travaux préparatoires of Article 27 do not indicate that immigrants are to be permanently excluded.51 This suggests support for a broader view to include ‘new minorities’ who can claim access to rights enjoyed by members of their group who have been in residence in a state for a longer time. This is not to say that all minority rights are owed to everybody. The assessment of the type of rights that minorities are entitled to is interlinked with the definition of ‘minority’; in particular, stability is important—the greater a group’s ties to a state, the more significant in number or the more concentrated a group is in a particular area, the greater the entitlement to minority rights52 (a ‘sliding scale’ of protection). This provides a safeguard for states against some groups being recognised too rapidly.53 As the Advisory Committee of the FCNM has opined, the FCNM does not operate on an ‘all-or-nothing’ basis. Some of the provisions may apply to some groups and some to other groups. This case-by-case approach is, according to the Advisory Committee, dictated by the FCNM. The value of such an approach might be lost if a strict definition of the term ‘minority’ is adopted.54

D. The Will of the Minority International law requires minority groups to have a common bond and to hold a wish, explicitly or implicitly, to preserve that common bond. In other words, minority groups must have a ‘sense of solidarity’ and a desire to preserve their characteristics.55 Whether a group has successfully demonstrated this desire depends on the facts of each case, although this criterion must not be applied too 49 HRC, General Comment 23(50) on Article 27, para 5.2; T Carmen, ‘Citizenship as a Requirement for Minorities’ (2005) 3 European Human Rights Law Review 277. Citizenship is also dismissed regarding the UN Minorities Declaration, P Thornberry, ‘The UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities: Background, Analysis and Observations’ in A Phillips and A Rosas (eds), The UN Minority Rights Declaration (Abo, Abo Akademi University, 1993) 28, and A Eide, Commentary to the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious or Linguistic Minorities Working Group on Minorities, UN Doc E/CN.4/Sub.2/AC.5/2001/2, 2. The ECHR provides no definition, but the need for long-standing ties (and therefore implicitly citizenship) has been rejected in respect of the FCNM, Valentine (n 34) 469–70. 50 Also Art 2 ICESCR, Art 1 ECHR. 51 Nowak (n 13) 646. 52 Pentassuglia (n 16) 59; M Nowak, ‘The Evolution of Minority Rights in International Law: Comments’ in Brolmann (n 5) 490; Art 27’s use of the word ‘exist’. 53 Nowak (n 13) 646. 54 Opinion of the Advisory Committee on the FCNM adopted on 14 September 2001 on Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1492 (2001) on the rights of national minorities, para 17. 55 Capotorti (n 22).

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 25

The Definition of ‘Minority’ 25 strictly to ‘cheat minorities of their rights’,56 where, for instance, a minority, due to oppression, cannot demonstrate its will to preserve its common bond, or has been forced to assimilate for decades.

E. Indigenous Groups There are two perceptions concerning the position of indigenous people. Some studies and modern legal documents set indigenous people apart from minorities.57 However, some view indigenous people as minorities,58 who are in addition the original inhabitants of a land.59 This is in line with the HRC,60 which has consistently applied Article 27 to indigenous groups, and the UN’s Working Group on Minorities. By doing this, the UN does not equate indigenous groups with minority groups, but indicates that the rights applicable to both may overlap: more specifically, indigenous groups at the very least qualify for the protection available to minorities.

F. Peoples Minorities are not ‘peoples’—a term reserved only for those with the right to selfdetermination in Article 1 ICCPR. The terms are, however, susceptible to overlap. What are the key differences? While a minority group shares common features and may even have strong links to the territory of a state, ‘peoples’ under international law, particularly as the term is applied by the UN, do not necessarily share these traits, but rather are linked by their existence within a larger territorial unit.61 As such, ‘peoples’ are entitled to political independence and governance over their territory. The ICCPR, by including self-determination for peoples in Article 1 and minority rights in Article 27, makes clear that these are distinct categories. General Comment 23 also states that minority rights do not affect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the state.62 56 By giving states an opportunity to avoid its obligations, Thornberry (n 10) 168; or neglecting the fact that some minorities may have been forced to assimilate for decades, Capotorti (n 22) para 17. 57 ILO Convention concerning the Protection and Integration of Indigenous and Other Tribal and Semi-Tribal Populations in Independent Countries 1957 (No 107) and ILO Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries 1989 (No 169); UN Declaration on Indigenous Rights 2007; UN Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989, Art 30; Capotorti (n 22) paras 24–38; C Holder and J Corntassel, ‘Indigenous Peoples and Multicultural Citizenship: Bridging Collective and Individual Rights’ (2000) 24(4) Human Rights Quarterly 126, 128. 58 See eg Thornberry, whose work encompasses the indigenous group, because ‘they are usually a numerical minority in States, and they are always non-dominant’, Thornberry (n 10) 13. 59 J Anaya, Indigenous Peoples and International Law (New York, OUP, 1996) 3. 60 HRC, General Comment 23(50) on Article 27, para 3.2 and 7; HRC< Lovelace v Canada CCPR Comm No R 6/24; Ominayak v Canada (n 14) and Kitok v Sweden (n 14). 61 Pentassuglia (n 16) 163. 62 para 3.2.

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 26

26 International Standard-Setting G. Self-Identity and Multiple Identities The flexible nature of the term ‘minority’ is reinforced by an element of selfidentity. This has been emphasised by, inter alia, the HRC 63 and the CoE 64 in some aspects of their activities. Self-identity essentially connotes autonomy of individuals. It refers to their right to decide whether or not they belong to a minority.65 Thus, neither membership of a minority nor membership of a majority group may be imposed on an individual without some reference to their subjective wishes. This criterion protects the individual from the state, but also protects the individual from the group. As far as international law is concerned, the loose agreement as to, and application of, the term ‘minority’ can be valuable.

III. THE ‘RIGHTS’ OF MINORITIES

Although the term ‘minority’ is difficult to define, it is important to define because different categories of minority are entitled to different rights on a sliding scale of entitlement, either in substance or in extent. That sliding scale of entitlement is dependent on several factors, but as the following discussion illustrates, much depends upon the commitments shown by minorities towards their state of residence, as demonstrated by the amount of time they have been present in that state, as either immigrant or original inhabitants. Minority groups can better secure the preservation of their identities through a range of rights which can be divided into general human rights and more specific minority rights. All individuals, whether they belong to a minority or not, are entitled to general human rights and freedoms. When minorities benefit from these human rights provisions, they do so in their capacity as individuals. However, some human rights have progressed to take into account the status of the individual as part of a group and thus have developed a ‘minority’ dimension.66 In addition, other rights are intended solely for persons belonging to minority groups, rather than all individuals. Their purpose is not just to ensure equality between individuals, but to preserve customs and traditions that would otherwise die out. As the definition of the term ‘minority’ indicates, those things which are intended to be preserved are those characteristics of groups which differ from the majority population. Enforcement of general human rights since the 1950s was not sufficient to secure these unique features of some groups. Nonetheless, although minority rights have different qualities to, 63

Lovelace v Canada (n 60). Art 3(1) FCNM. Although an individual cannot choose arbitrarily to belong to any minority without some objective links to that identity. 66 ‘A set of human rights with special significance for minorities are those that provide a certain protection of the minority phenomenon, because they protect and enable the group dimension and the expression and thus the continuation of the distinctive and separate convictions and ways of life of the respective minorities.’ Henrard (n 7) 63. 64 65

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 27

The ‘Rights’ of Minorities 27 and are distinct from, human rights,67 they form an integral part of human rights,68 as demonstrated in the next section. Hainnikainen argues that If minority rights were understood as a category separate from, and additional to, general human rights, this would mean that persons belonging to minorities would have more human rights than other persons. It is better to understand minority rights as a specific sub-category in the body of general human rights within the purpose of ensuring the de facto equality of minorities with the majority and/or the survival of minorities (if the persons belonging to a minority want to save the group’s separate identity).69

Minority rights are, then, special mechanisms within the general system of human rights protection, though falling short of an additional set of rights. The aim of these special mechanisms is to fulfil the more nuanced aims of minority rights: the preservation of identities.70

A. General Rights Applicable to All Persons With respect to the operation of general human rights in the task of minority protection, the argument is that the interpretation of a human right given in a decision or judgment by an international tribunal is informed and influenced by the fact that the particular individual is a member of a minority group. Such minority-friendly interpretations have developed in the jurisprudence of the ICCPR and the ECtHR. Three rights can be used as illustrations: (a) the right to free expression, association and assembly; (b) the right to privacy, home and family life; and (c) the right to non-discrimination. Other general human rights relevant to minority protection are the rights to religion, education, culture, political participation, and freedom of movement, as well as rights concerning the physical integrity of the minority (the right to life, freedom from torture, right to liberty and security), several of which feature in the discussion concerning specific minority rights in section III(b) of this chapter and will not be evaluated separately here. (i) Freedom of Expression, Association and Assembly If minority characteristics are to be preserved, the means by which they are expressed, disseminated, shared, taught and practised must be guaranteed. The human rights to freedom of expression, information, assembly and association, under Articles 10 and 11 ECHR, for instance, provide minority groups with such 67

General Comment 23(50), para 1. FNCM, Art 1. 69 L Hannikainen, ‘Legal Nature of Minority Rights as Part of Human Rights, Limitations, Derogations, Reservations, and Interpretative Statements’ in Weller (n 2) 31. 70 See section III(b) below. An excellent account of case law relating to the rights of minorities can be found in G Pentassuglia, Groups and Judicial Discourse in International Law: A Comparative Perspective (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2009). 68

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 28

28 International Standard-Setting opportunities.71 Protection of rights to participate in political activity is one strength of international law.72 The ECtHR has stated that the principle of pluralism should guide the implementation of free expression.73 In line with this, minorities have the right to form and participate in political groups representing their needs. Democratic societies, the ECtHR has held, cannot automatically dissolve a political party just because it seeks solutions for the needs of a minority group. In Sidiropoulos, ‘the existence of minorities and different cultures in a country was a historical fact that a “democratic society” had to tolerate and even protect and support according to the principles of international law’,74 even if that party calls for secession. In this, and similar cases, the court has maintained that any exceptions to this, as well as the state’s margin of appreciation in the field, are to be strictly construed.75 Likewise, oppressive measures taken against a group for materials publicising their claims is disproportionate within Article 10 ECHR.76 These and similar expressions are likely to be supported by the ECtHR where they do not incite violence.77 Political participation is therefore given broad protection. An exception to this protection concerns groups that advocate politics according to religious belief. While issues such as seeking language rights, or even a federal system or the advocacy of secession are not regarded as threatening democracy and do not justify dissolution of a political party, a political system based on religious divisions is seen as automatically contrary to democracy.78 The maintenance of a democratic and secular society, then, very much underlies the case law on free expression and assembly. The cases analysed certainly establish a negative duty on states to respect and protect minority groups’ rights to expression and assembly. Positive duties on the state are not extensive in this field, and this is illustrated by the ECtHR case law on languages as a component of expression. For instance, although states cannot prevent the use of mother-tongue in the private sphere,79 they need not positively 71 Expression: Arts 2(1) and 19 UDHR, Art 19 ICCPR, Art 10 ECHR (the latter two being legally binding). For a detailed analysis of how free expression can affect minorities, see K Henrard, ‘Education and Multiculturalism: The Contribution of Minority Rights?’ (2000) 7 International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 393. Assembly and association: Arts 21 and 22 ICCPR and Art 11 ECHR, HRC, General Comment 10 on Article 19, para 2. 72 See eg at the UN, HRC, Aduayom et al v Togo CCPR Comm Nos 422–424/90 and Kivenmaa v Finland CCPR Comm No 412/90; at the ECHR, Incal v Turkey (1998) 29 EHRR 449. 73 Informationsverein Lentia v Austria Series A no 276(1994) 17 EHRR 93, para 38 74 Sidiropoulos (App no 26695/95) [1998] ECHR 55. 75 See eg Socialist Party and Others v Turkey (1999) 25 EHRR 51; Freedom and Democracy Party v Turkey Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1999-VIII; Stankov and the United Macedonian Organisation Ilinden v Bulgaria [2001] ECHR 567; Sidiropoulos (ibid); Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia v Moldova (App no 45701/99) [2001] ECHR 860; Gorzelik and others v Poland (App no 44158/98) [2005] ECHR 73. 76 EK v Turkey (2002) 35 EHRR 41 and Association Ekin v France (2002) 35 EHRR 35. The ECtHR in Gorzelik (ibid) has provided that an exception to this is only acceptable where there is a clear demonstration that the applicant association is hiding its violent objectives. Although this is based on speculation, the Sidiropoulos case (n 74) ensures that this exception is strictly construed. 77 Surek v Turkey (failed); Zana v Turkey (failed); Mathieu-Mohin and Clerfayt v Belgium (App no 92671/81) Series A No 113 [1987] 10 EHHR 1 Podkolzina v Latvia (App no 46726/99) [2002] ECHR 405. 78 Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) v Turkey [2001] ECHR 495. 79 HRC, Singer v Canada Comm no 455/1991.

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 29

The ‘Rights’ of Minorities 29 assist it either. It goes without saying, then, that provision of financial support for private institutions is not obligatory, though state policy must not be discriminatory. Thus, where a state has commenced financing of some private institutions, it cannot withhold support for others.80 (ii) Rights to Privacy, Family Life and the Home The rights to family, private life and the home can be fundamental for the maintenance and development of cultural identity.81 These rights usually relate to the personal identity of a minority group in the private sphere, and international law has recently begun to respond to the minority dimension of such rights. Under Article 17 ICCPR, which protects privacy and family life, the HRC has held that minorities are entitled to register names in accordance with their religious affiliation.82 Thus, Hindu converts are entitled, as required by the Hindu religion, to adopt Hindu first names and surnames. Also under Article 17, the HRC has given a broad interpretation to the term ‘family’ to include ancestors based on the notion as understood in the cultural traditions of an indigenous group.83 With regard to Article 8 ECHR, ‘home’ has been widely interpreted to include the caravan sites of Gypsies,84 and, as illustrated in Connors, Article 8 imposes a positive obligation on states to facilitate the Gypsy ‘way of life’.85 These cases attempt to prevent the assimilation of minorities into the dominant society by allowing religious and cultural traditions to be maintained. Nonetheless, limitations exist: for example the right of Gypsies to establish a home on a piece of land will be subject to balancing against, for instance, environmental needs, the availability of alternative accommodation or land, and whether the home was established lawfully.86 On a positive note, both the ICCPR and ECHR impose positive obligations on the state87 to protect individuals from the actions of other private individuals.88 Thus, the HRC has held that states’ protection must be effective and states must 80

Henrard (n 7) 92. S Holt, ‘Family, Private Life and Cultural Rights’ in Weller (n 2) 203. 82 HRC, Coriel and Aurik v The Netherlands CCPR Comm No 453/1991. 83 HRC, Hopu and Bessert v France CCPR Comm No 594/93. 84 Burton v United Kingdom (App no 31600/96) (1996) 22 EHRR CD 135; Buckley v United Kingdom (1997) 23 EHRR 101; Connors v UK (2005) 40 EHRR 9; Chapman v United Kingdom (App no 27238/9) (2001) 33 EHRR 399. 85 Connors v UK, ibid. 86 Chapman v United Kingdom (n 84). 87 HRC, General Comment 16 in a Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations adopted by Treaty Bodies, para 1 confirms that Art 17 ICCPR may entail positive action and Art 23 ICCPR (regarding family and marriage) is specifically regarded as developing positive forms of action based on Art 17. In the ECHR context, see Connors v UK (n 84) and see eg Gaskin v UK Series A no 160; (1990) 2 EHRR 36. See also Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandi v United Kingdom (App nos 9214/80, 9473/81) (1985) 7 EHRR 471 (merits and just satisfaction), para 67; Stjerna v Finland (App no 18131/91) [1994] ECHR 43 (merits), para 38. 88 See eg X and Y v Netherlands (1986) 8 EHRR 235, para 23; HRC, General Comment 16, paras 1 and 9. See generally J Knox, ‘Horizontal Human Rights Law’ (2008) 102(1) American Journal of International Law 1. 81

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 30

30 International Standard-Setting take measures to diminish or eliminate the exercise of discrimination by its organs or private bodies.89 In addition, international law places emphasis on the maintenance of adequate procedural safeguards for the exercise of the rights in question. In Connors, the ECtHR held the UK to be in breach of Article 8 ECHR for failing to provide reasons for evicting a Gypsy family from their home.90 (iii) Right to Non-Discrimination Another—and arguably the most important—general human right for minority groups is the right to non-discrimination: the right of all individuals to expect the same opportunities regardless of personal characteristics. In the context of minorities, the principle is that minority groups should enjoy the same rights as the rest of the population and equal protection before the law. There are several grounds of non-discrimination relevant to minorities. These include race, religion, language, ethnicity and national origin.91 The ICERD, which prohibits discrimination on grounds of race, ethnic and national origin92 and descent,93 adds economic, social, cultural, housing, education and employment discrimination and denial of rights of entry into and exit from a state as prohibited grounds ofdiscrimination, but only in the context of racial discrimination.94 This is of significance for racial groups in poor social, economic and cultural circumstances. The principle of non-discrimination in international law protects against all discrimination, including indirect discrimination.95 That this may be of particular importance to minorities is disclosed in its definition: ‘indirect discrimination occurs when a practice, rule, requirement or condition is neutral on its face, but impacts disproportionately upon particular groups’.96 Although the ECtHR has traditionally been reluctant to accept the concept of indirect discrimination within the context of the ECHR, this has changed in recent years.97 In D and H v Czech Republic,98 the applicants challenged the Czech Republic’s policy of placing Roma pupils in special schools when they failed to achieve a minimum score on an intelligence test. It was argued that these schools demanded less in terms of academic ability and hence affected the eventual employment prospects of the 89

General Comment 18, paras 1 and 9. Connors v UK (n 84). 91 eg Arts 2(1), 3, 24, 25 and 26 ICCPR and Arts 1–7 ICERD. 92 ICERD, Art 1. 93 Ibid. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) regards this as ‘discrimination against any members of communities based on forms of social stratification such as caste and analogous systems of inherited status’, CERD, General Recommendation 29, preamble. 94 ICERD, Arts 1(1) and 5. 95 Althammer v Austria CCPR Comm No 998/01, para 10.2; ICERD, Art 1(1). 96 S Joseph, J Schultz and M Castan, The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Cases, Materials and Commentary, 2nd edn (Oxford, OUP, 2004) 694. 97 Kelly v UK [2001] ECHR 328, para 148; Hugh Jordan v UK (App no 24746/94) (2001) ECHR 327; McShane v UK (2002) 35 EHRR 23, para 135; Nachova v Bulgaria (2006) 42 EHRR 43 d, para 167. 98 DH v Czech Republic (2008) 47 EHRR 3. 90

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 31

The ‘Rights’ of Minorities 31 students. Recognising an ethnic group identity, the Court held that the fact that the overwhelming majority of the children placed in these schools were of Roma origin constituted indirect discrimination. Non-discrimination rights are therefore also directed towards actions in both the public and private sphere. Nondiscrimination rights before the ECtHR have generally seen a slow pace of development. Until 2005, non-discrimination cases based on the ECHR could only be made under Article 14. This Article operates only in conjunction with another substantive provision of the ECHR. Since 2005, Protocol No 12 of the ECHR has entered into force for ratifying states,99 which provides a free-standing right to non-discrimination. Article 14 and Protocol 12 guarantee nondiscrimination on grounds of association with a national minority. The freestanding application of Protocol 12 provides increased possibilities for the ECHR to address discriminatory treatment faced by groups100 as a whole. Thus, the Protocol represents one of the most significant moves towards the protection of minorities under the ECHR. Under international law norms, states are liable for their own breaches and for failure to prevent breaches by individuals or entities.101 Further, non-discrimination rights, as with all rights found in the general human rights instruments, are applicable to all persons within a state’s territory or jurisdiction; the nationality of the individual is irrelevant.102 Where necessary, positive measures are required.103 For example, according to jurisprudence on Article 14 states have a duty to investigate violations of discrimination, such as violence suffered in the context of racial discrimination.104 A key indicator of the strength of legal protection against discrimination is whether it guarantees equality in law (the same treatment of all persons) or equality in fact (differential treatment to the extent of differences between individuals). International law certainly guarantees the former and is making strides 99 The Protocol provides a general prohibition on discrimination by public authorities—a term which covers courts and legislative bodies (Explanatory Report, para 30). The grounds of discrimination provided are non-exhaustive (Explanatory Report, para 20). 100 National minority groups. 101 General Comment 31 on the Nature of the General Legal Obligation on States Parties to the Covenant, para 8. Regarding the ECHR, see esp Art 8, but also Arts 2, 3, 10 and 11. See K Reid, A Practitioner’s Guide to the European Court of Human Rights (London, Sweet & Maxwell, 2004) 46; Explanatory note of Protocol 12, para 26; ICERD, Art 2(2)(d). HRC, ICERD and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) protect against private discrimination, but not in all circumstances. 102 Art 2 ICCPR and Art 1 ECHR, unless they concern distinctions between citizens and noncitizens, Art 1(2) CERD. 103 eg Protocol 12, Explanatory Report, para 27; Art 14 ECHR would only impose an obligation if another Convention right required it, Henrard (n 7) 77. K Monaghan, ‘Limitations and Opportunities: A Review of the Likely Domestic Impact of Article 14 ECHR’ (2001) 2 European Human Rights Law Review 169, 179 comments that Art 14 may impose positive obligations deriving from its words ‘shall be secured’. See also HRC, General Comment 18 on non-discrimination, para 10. Regarding the equality provisions in the ICCPR (Arts 2(1) 3, 24, 25 and 26) see HRC, General Comment 3 on Article 2, para 1 and HRC, General Comment 4 on Article 3, para 2. 104 ECtHR, Nachova v Bulgaria (1998) 28 EHRR 652, paras 126–8; ICERD, Art 6; HRC, Ahmad v Denmark CCPR Comm No 16/1999—a failure to investigate racial violence is a breach of the right to an effective remedy.

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 32

32 International Standard-Setting towards the latter. For instance, the ICCPR permits states to practise differential treatment, including imposing acts of positive discrimination against its majority population,105 though there are limits to this.106 The ECHR can, at times, be utilised to demand a difference in treatment,107 and measures of direct discrimination may be taken against the majority where there is justification. Thus, in Liberal Party v United Kingdom,108 the Commission opined that voting laws may be formulated to enhance the election prospects of a religious or ethnic minority.109 Likewise, in Thlimmenos v Greece,110 the Court held that religious minorities may be given differential treatment. The applicant, a Jehovah’s Witness, refused to wear military uniform whilst undertaking national service duties because of the pacifist beliefs of his religion. This was treated as a criminal offence, which later excluded him from the accountancy profession. The ECtHR held that criminal convictions on religious or philosophical grounds are to be treated more favourably than other categories—that is, these religious requirements should be accommodated. As a final example of equality in fact, it can be observed that the ICERD is more progressive than both the ICCPR and the ECHR, permitting affirmative action under Articles 1(4) and 4, but expressly mandating it under Articles 2(2). As we have seen, there are obligations of ‘equality in fact’ under international law. On the whole, however, the ICCPR and ECHR remain largely dominated by non-discrimination in terms of equality in law.111 Obligations regarding equality in fact are more centrally located in specific minority rights instruments, such as the FCNM. For instance, Article 4 requires that states, where necessary, adopt measures to promote full and effective equality between the minority as against the majority population, and Article 12(3) requires states to promote equal opportunities for access to all levels of education. These measures are not necessarily temporary and could be institutionalised. Under general human rights instruments, such measures, if adopted, would only be temporary. Specific minority rights, therefore, build upon the difference-based foundations of non-discrimination. In the terms used by Henrard, there are two pillars of minority rights protection: non-discrimination and specific minority rights: ‘the second presupposes and extends the first’.112 Minority rights are more actively geared towards substantive 105 Giving the minority an advantage by discriminating against the majority, eg placing quotas on employment posts so that a percentage is guaranteed to members of the minority group, General Comment 18 on non-discrimination, para 10. 106 HRC, Waldman v Canada CCPR Comm No 694/1996 (funding for schools must be applied equally to majority schools). 107 Essentially different groups should not receive identical treatment: Christians Against Racism and Fascism v United Kingdom (1980) 21 DR 138, 152. 108 (1982) 4 EHRR 106, confirming Lindsay v United Kingdom [1979] 3 CMLR 166 (European Commission on Human Rights). 109 Art 3 of Protocol 1 with Art 14 ECHR. 110 (2001) 31 EHRR 411. 111 Henrard (n 7) 60. 112 Henrard (n 7) 56; see also 8–11, and G Alfredsson, ‘Minority Rights and Peace: Available Standards, Procedures and Institutions’ in S Trifunovska (ed), Minorities in Europe, Croatia, Estonia and Slovakia (The Hague, TMC Asser, 1999) 8.

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 33

The ‘Rights’ of Minorities 33 equality,113 requiring positive measures of protection, and they compensate for the insufficiency and temporary nature of the general human rights measures in this regard.114 Minority rights do not apply to the majority population, but such reverse discrimination is accepted on the basis that the measures are intended for the particular purpose of preserving differences.115 The factors discussed above indicate that whilst the international community is committed to individual and equality-based protection of general human rights, there is accommodation within this for the protection of the diverse needs of different groups in society. Such an approach better enables the preservation of identities of these groups. B. Rights Specific to Minorities (i) Existence The right of a minority group to existence may arise on two levels. It can arise with respect to the recognition of a group’s minority status, which is, as noted earlier, a question of fact and not law. This, to a certain extent, provides safeguards against a state’s unilateral denial of legal protection for a minority group. Existence is also concerned with the physical life of members of minority groups, as implied by international law’s protections against acts of genocide towards groups,116 protection of the individual’s right to life, and protection of a minimum level of physical well-being, such as the prohibition on torture.117 To exist, a group is therefore entitled to its rightful legal status as a minority, as well as protection against physical extinction and harm. (ii) Non-Assimilation The existence of a minority group is closely related to the survival of its identity and thus the principle of non-assimilation. Although all minority rights aim to prevent assimilation, the right to be free from state assimilation is also explicitly found as a free-standing right in Articles 5 and 16 FCNM. The HRC has also addressed non-assimilation on its own terms. Thus, positive state measures may be required in order to secure its protection.118 Significantly, however, states’ duties to prevent the assimilation of minorities do not imply a total ban on integration. On the contrary, it should be noted that international minority rights 113

Henrard (n 7) 9. F Benoit-Rohmer, The Minority Question in Europe: Texts and Commentary (Strasbourg, Council of Europe Publishing, 1996) 16. 115 Art 7(2) ECRML, Art 4(2) FCNM and Art 8 UN Minorities Declaration oblige states to adopt measures (which do not need to be temporary) 116 See further J Packer, ‘United Nations Protection of Minorities in Times of Public Emergency: The Hard-Core of Minority Rights’ in D Premont (ed), Non-Derogable Rights and States of Emergency (Brussels, Establissements Emile Bruylant, 1996) 501–20. 117 Art 6 ICCPR and Art 2 ECHR; Art 7 ICCPR and Art 3 ECHR. 118 HRC, General Comment 23(50) on Article 27, para 6.1. 114

(C) Ahmed Ch2_(%) 234x156 Monograph 15/12/2010 11:06 Page 34

34 International Standard-Setting law permits a balance between requirements for integrating minorities into mainstream society, and the duty to avoid assimilating them into that society.119 Integration conditions do not necessarily breach minority rights, for instance, where they are coupled with provision and opportunities for minorities to preserve their unique characteristics. The strategies and policies used to achieve this will differ as between groups, rights and different states. Specific minority rights in legal instruments—as will be discussed below—comprise elements of flexibility which ought to assist in achieving that balance. (iii) Culture The right to practise one’s own culture frequently features in minority rights documents. Capotorti, in his study of Article 27, took a broad view of the term ‘cultural life’.120 This is echoed by the HRC. In General Comment 23(50) it states: [C]ulture manifests itself in many forms, including a particular way of life associated with the use of land resources, especially in the case of indigenous peoples. This right may include such traditional activities as fishing or hunting and the right to live in reserves protected by law.121

Culture therefore includes social and economic activities of a group.122 The FCNM and ECRML specifically refer to aspects of tradition and culture. For example, Article 5 FCNM relates to religion, language, tradition and cultural heritage. Article 12 ECRML even includes cultural activities and facilities; for instance, libraries must support works in the minority language. In addition, the general reference to cultural life in Article 15 ICESCR has been interpreted in a minorityfriendly way by the CESCR:123 states are to take ‘positive and continual measures’ towards its fulfilment. The CESCR recognises that culture is broad and can refer to a way of life.124 It has expressed a concern for cultural programs and literature to be available in widely spoken indigenous languages125 and on prohibiting the destruction of religious cultural heritage.126 International law therefore provides ample protection of cultural rights. The ICESCR’s protection of minority cultures, however, must be seen against its requirement that states also ensure protection of the national culture. Thus, there are limits on the extent to which states are obliged to foster minority cultures,127 revealing once again the balance to be achieved 119

As explicitly recognised by the FCNM in Art 5. Capotorti (n 22) 57. para 7. 122 Confirmed by jurisprudence such as HRC, Kitok v Sweden (n 14); HRC