A Critical Appraisal of EU Governance for the Protection of Minority Rights

2010 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 265-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tawhida Ahmed
Keyword(s):  
Minority Groups ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
Regulatory Capacity ◽  
Modes Of Governance ◽  
Migrant Groups ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe European Union (EU) has increasing regulatory capacity and capability for minority rights protection. A combination of old and new governance measures have been useful in affording the EU that capacity. Both modes of governance impact on EU migrant groups, particularly where they are free movers of a different nationality, race or ethnic orgin to the (dominant) members of the states to which they have migrated. In addition, new governance measures also allow a degree of impact on other minority groups, such as national minorities, whether or not individuals from these groups exercise free movement rights. Together, old and new governance measures offer certain extents of 'respect' for, 'protection' of and 'promotion' of minority rights.

The Weaknesses in the Minority Rights Protection Framework within the European Regional Human Rights System

De Jure ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Sanka ◽  
◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Regional Systems ◽  
European System ◽  
European Regional ◽  
The Eu

Much of the discourse on minority rights protection under international law is focused on the UN system, notably article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Declaration on the Rights of National or Ethnic, Religious or Linguistic Minorities. In such discourse, the regional systems, especially the more comprehensive and progressive European system, are not appraised as often as they should be. The author of this paper focuses therefore on the minority rights protection regime within the European Union. And in doing so, he gives an overview of the legal instruments and mechanisms dedicated to the protection of minority rights within the EU, analyzes the loopholes of this system and makes critical conclusions on the suitability of this system to the concerns minority groups face.

Quiet Diplomacy, the European Union and Conflict Prevention: Learning from the HCNM on Issues of Social Cohesion

2012 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Johns
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Social Cohesion ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
The Other ◽  
Conflict Prevention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Minority Protection ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
The Eu

This article examines the issue of social cohesion inside the European Union (EU). While the organisation is currently experiencing an economic crisis the article argues that issues surrounding minority rights are deeper and more troubling. Within the EU’s current and prospective borders there remain issues surrounding national minorities, traditional migrants and intra-EU migrants. The intra-EU migrants are of particular interest in that they bridge the gap between the other two groups as they are migrants – with EU protected rights. This article argues that the EU itself must become involved in the maintenance of social cohesion. It recommends the use of quiet diplomacy, best illustrated by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe High Commissioner on National Minorities. After an examination of the use of quiet diplomacy by the various High Commissioners the article outlines the issues of social cohesion facing the EU. It concludes with the recommendation that the European Commission adopt the tenets of quiet diplomacy as a means of influencing dialogue and to promote minority protection within the union.

New minorities, old instruments? Diversity governance from the perspective of minority rights

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 178-192
Author(s):  
Roberta Medda-Windischer
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Minority Protection ◽  
Common Definition ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
Scope Of Application

In international law, minority rights instruments have been traditionally conceived for, and applied to, old minority groups with the exclusion of new minority groups originating from migration. Yet, minority groups, irrespective of their being old or new minorities, can be subsumed under a common definition and have some basic common claims. This allows devising a common but differentiated set of rights and obligations for old and new minority groups alike. This paper argues that the extension of the scope of application of legal instruments of minority protection, such as the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM), is conceptually meaningful and beneficial to the integration of new minorities stemming from migration. 

scholarly journals Rights and Powers in the European Union: Towards a Charter that is Fully Applicable to the Member States?

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Aida TORRES PÉREZ
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This contribution will tackle a central question for the architecture of fundamental rights protection in the EU: can we envision a Charter that fully applies to the Member States, even beyond the limits of its scope of application? To improve our understanding of the boundaries of the Charter and the potential for further expansion, I will examine the legal avenues through which the CJEU has extended the scope of application of EU fundamental rights in fields of state powers. While the latent pull of citizenship towards a more expansive application of the Charter has not been fully realized, the principle of effective judicial protection (Article 19(1) TEU) has recently shown potential for protection under EU law beyond the boundaries of the Charter. As will be argued, effective judicial protection may well become a doorway for full application of the Charter to the Member States. While such an outcome might currently seem politically unsound, I contend that a progressive case-by-case expansion of the applicability of the Charter to the Member States would be welcome from the standpoint of a robust notion of the rule of law in the EU.

EU Soft Law in Domestic Legal Systems: Flexibility and Diversity Guaranteed?

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilia Korkea-Aho
Keyword(s):  
Holistic Approach ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Member States ◽  
Regulatory Instruments ◽  
Modes Of Governance ◽  
Judicial Recognition ◽  
The Eu ◽  
New Modes Of Governance

New modes of governance are proliferating at all levels, most prominently in the EU. One main characteristic of new governance is adjustability and revisability in the form of soft law. The non-binding nature of soft law is said to contribute to flexibility and diversity in Member States and to secure national autonomy. However, this article argues that while soft law may not be legally binding, it nevertheless has legal effects that throw flexibility and diversity of national action into doubt. Beginning by demonstrating that soft law may have discernible effects on practices in Member States, at the same time restricting Member State choices, the article goes on to develop a categorisation of those effects and to document them in detail. These are: judicial recognition by the European courts, explicit terms of soft law instruments, which demand special types of national implementing measures, the role played by non-state actors, and hybrid forms of regulatory instruments comprising soft and hard law provisions. The analysis shows a need to add variety to existing research on EU soft law, which has traditionally focused on the role of the judiciary in giving legal effects to soft law. Instead, we should be more attentive to the other three factors when discussing soft law. Besides the more holistic approach, research should also analyse soft law in a more case-specific manner in order to fully grasp the implications of choice of soft law in a domestic legal system.

scholarly journals What Happened to Transitional Justice in Croatia After the EU Accession?

Politologija ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-51
Author(s):  
Lina Strupinskienė ◽  
Simona Vaškevičiūtė
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Accession ◽  
Societal Issues ◽  
International Pressure ◽  
Before And After ◽  
The Government ◽  
The One ◽  
The Eu

This paper proposes to see Croatia’s becoming a member state of the European Union in 2013 as a particular critical juncture that created uncertainty over the type of decisions the government would take in the field of transitional justice once international pressure had stopped. It compares the period before and after the accession by looking into the three elements of transitional justice policy that were given priority by the EU conditionality framework – fighting impunity for war crimes, fostering reconciliation and respect for and protection of minority rights. It finds that all three have deteriorated in the post-accession period. On the one hand, the findings illustrate the power of international pressure, but on the other hand, they question the overall effectiveness of the conditionality policy, as it seems to not have affected deeper societal issues at stake and has not resulted in true transformation.

The Possibilities and Limitations of Preventive Action: The OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities in Ukraine

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 389-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Kachuyevski
Keyword(s):  
Minority Rights ◽  
Violent Conflict ◽  
Preventive Action ◽  
Regional Politics ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
Solid Foundation ◽  
Central Argument ◽  
Durable Peace

Abstract This article examines the efforts of the High Commissioner on National Minorities (HCNM) of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to manage tensions in Ukraine between the substantial Russian minority and the Ukrainian government, and to prevent potentially violent conflict in Crimea from 1994 to 2001, as well as the subsequent efforts to promote peace and stability. It questions why the HCNM was remarkably successful in crisis management from 1994 to 2001, especially in averting secessionism in Crimea, but was hampered in his efforts to achieve a solid foundation for durable peace through the creation of a robust system of minority rights protection. The central argument is that regional politics often preclude the construction of a minority rights regime that could otherwise provide the foundation for durable peace.

scholarly journals Governing education policy: the European Union and Australia

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gosia Klatt ◽  
Marcella Milana
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Education Policy ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Data Generation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
Modes Of Governance ◽  
The Eu

This paper considers the changing modes of governance of education policy in the European Union (EU) and Australia through a lens of ‘soft governance’. It considers the increased use of ‘policy instruments’ such as benchmarking, targets, monitoring, data-generation in policy-making in recent decades. It considers the roles these policy instruments play in coordinating education policy in the EU and Australia as well as their intended and unintended consequences. It shows that in the EU, these instruments played a role in strengthening the coordination through the links between individuals and programs, and networking, which is seen as resulting in enhanced creativity in policy solutions, development of new norms and new means for achieving policy goals. While in Australia it seems that the role of these instruments is focused on consolidating the role of the Commonwealth’s oversight and control over what constitutionally is a responsibility of States which adds to several policy tensions already existing in the federal coordination of education.

The EU’s engagement with foreign powers on human rights

2020 ◽  
pp. 265-292
Author(s):  
Francisca Costa Reis ◽  
Weiyuan Gao ◽  
Vineet Hegde
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Cohesive Group ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Eu

With a mandate under the Lisbon Treaty, the European Union (EU) has been engaging with foreign powers like Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) nations on human rights issues. Despite the common and shared goals, the BRICS set-up is not institutionalised, which prompts the EU to engage with each country on a bilateral basis. Such collaborations have occurred in bilateral dialogues, multilateral fora, through developmental assistance, and negotiations in economic partnership agreements. The scope and content of the discussions and cooperation vary due to the difference in the political structures of the countries. While the EU and the BRICS may share some common goals politically and economically, pursuing shared objectives related to democracy and human rights promotion remains challenging. These countries may believe in human rights protection, but the understandings and the approaches vary drastically, as visible when issues of sovereignty and non-intervention are raised to resist comprehensive discussions. Although the BRICS are emerging as an interconnected group and have begun to cooperate more closely in multilateral fora, the EU may also have to consider dealing with it in its institutional capacity. It could be more challenging to fulfill the mandate of the Lisbon Treaty for the EU while dealing with this cohesive group that has different understandings on human rights protection within their own states.

14. Policy-making in the European Union

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralf Drachenberg ◽  
Alex Brianson
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
State Action ◽  
Eu Policy ◽  
Governance Tools ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the process of policy-making in the European Union. It first considers how the EU originally made policy decisions before tracing the evolution of the formal balance between the EU institutions over time, with particular emphasis on the increasing legislative power of the European Parliament. It then describes the Community method, which remains the core of the EU policy process but is now complemented with a range of ‘new governance tools’ designed to produce coordinated member state action through iterated processes of standard-setting, best practice identification, and knowledge transfer. One of these processes is the open method of coordination (OMC). The chapter concludes with an analysis of the implementation of EU policy decisions by and in the member states, along with current trends in EU decision-making after the EU enlargements of the 2000s and the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document