The heritage of the League of Nations’ minority protection system

This paper discusses the system of minority protection of the League of Nations. Minority protection occupied a prominent place on the League’s agenda, which developed a significant expertise in the field. The League’s system of minority protection is often regarded as an experiment. With regard to both material and procedural aspects this assessment is certainly correct. In particular, minority protection based upon legally binding treaties and declarations gave rise to the question of how individual and group rights should be treated within the frame of an international political organization. The paper further examines whether at least some of the elements of the League’s minority protection system still persist in the context of contemporary international human rights law.

TRANSCENDING THE INDIVIDUAL/COLLECTIVE MINORITY RIGHTS DIVIDE: A PROCEDURAL SOLUTION

Relying on examples from international, EU and comparative law and drawing on insights from the class action literature, this article argues that important advances in minority rights protection can be achieved without the revision of substantive legal provisions and the full-scale embracing of collective rights. Allowing minority members to present their claims on behalf of a larger group (collective procedure), even when such claims ultimately rest on the rights of individuals as opposed to those of the group, strengthens minority rights and can transform our vision of them. An overview of eight interrelated benefits shows not only how these advantages occur, but also why the procedural approach avoids the issues that motivate negative critiques of group rights.

Religious Courts and Rights in Plural Societies: Interlegal Gaps and the Need for Complex Concurrency

The administration or recognition of religious courts is a form of religious accommodation present in many constitutional states today commonly analysed in legal pluralism terms. This article contributes to the further analysis of the relationship between legal pluralism and rights in religiously diverse societies by examining the status of state religious courts and their interaction with state non-religious (secular) courts. In particular, I examine what Cover calls “jurisdictional redundancies” between the courts and conceptualize the allocation of power between religious and non-religious courts as a potentially productive site of interlegality. In doing so, I support concurrent jurisdictional allocations, arguing that exclusive jurisdiction could result in what I call an interlegal gap, whereby instead of inter-penetration of norms and production of reconciliatory principles, there is a justice gap whereby litigants may find themselves unable to obtain appropriate legal recourse including when neither court is willing to assume jurisdiction over the matter. This requires us to see the relationship between religious courts and non-religious courts through the more mundane but more practical lens of jurisdictional overlaps and competition, rather than through the more abstract framing of normative or even civilizational clashes. Accordingly, I argue that concurrent jurisdiction and interlegality have greater potential to strike a balance between individual and group rights and could be more protective of religious diversity. In other words, I argue for a closer, rather than a more separate, relationship between religious and non-religious courts, while denying that a hierarchical relationship where religious courts are subordinated to non-religious courts is the only way to protect rights.

Toward a More Youthful Democracy

This concluding chapter begins with a discussion of how the global coronavirus pandemic called attention to children’s rights issues, specifically in how children were not allowed to participate in decisions directly affecting their “best interests,” as required by CRC. Granting children human rights will fundamentally alter the nature of both democracy and human rights. Giving children citizenship rights will renew democracy, as past enfranchisements have, but also will push democracies to resemble less Western, liberal models. Group rights will predominate in democracies where children are full citizens. Also, the human rights agendas of child-incorporating democracies will be dominated by social and economic rights issues, since children’s rights of protection and provision will be given priority. Finally, children’s participation rights will emerge as crucial in diminishing structural inequality in democratic societies, providing a pathway to a fuller form of social justice predicated on the human rights of children.

Protection of Russian Citizens Living and Working Abroad: Juridical Aspects

The article is devoted to the problem of protection of Russian citizens living and working in foreign countries, which is relevant in modern Russian jurisprudence. The deterioration of the international situation makes this topic even more relevant, since the rights of Russian citizens abroad are increasingly violated, and existing bilateral agreements are not being implemented. It is proposed to consider the problem of Russian citizens abroad in the complex of protection of group rights, which requires clarifying the concept of group rights, including categories of groups of citizens living in foreign countries, determining the legal status and characteristics of these groups. The creation of a single legal space for individual and group rights should create conditions for the activation of the state and the public’s activities for the legal protection of Russian citizens abroad, and support the cultural and economic ties of Russian diasporas with Russia.

Recognizing Religious Minority Rights

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) does not contain any provision on minorities, and neither has the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) considered the notion of minority rights when dealing with claims involving religious minorities. This contribution aims to show how the Court addresses the rights of religious minorities through the concepts of ‘religious diversity’ and ‘pluralism’. In order to overcome the historical tension between individual rights versus group rights, the author offers a theoretical typology on religious minority rights that combines rights- holders with individual and group interests and takes into consideration UN human rights texts on minorities and the freedom of religion, as well as the ECHR and the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. By applying the three categories of the above- mentioned typology— individual differentiated rights to members of minorities, group- differentiated rights, and special interest group rights— to the Court’s jurisprudence on members of religious minorities and religious communities, the author concludes that while the ECtHR has systematically reiterated its commitment to pluralism, it has partly failed to grant protection to religious diversity, particularly, when ‘uncomfortable’ religious diversities are the stake.

External and Internal Secession in Ethiopia’s Multinational Federation

The ethno-territorial nature of Ethiopian federalism finds its constitutional foundation in Article 39 of the Constitution. Article 39 grants a right to self-determination to all of Ethiopia’s ‘nations’, ‘nationalities’ and ‘peoples’. The right to self-determination as conceived by Article 39 is comprehensive and has both so-called internal (such as the right to territorial autonomy) and external dimensions (the right to secession). This article argues that these constitutional provisions display weaknesses and gaps since they affect the achievement of the constitutional objectives and involve serious risks for the rights of (persons belonging to) other ethnic groups. Although the right to self-determination is one of the fundamental constitutional principles, so is the respect for individual and group rights. Furthermore, the unity in diversity objective of the Constitution requires equilibrium between ethnic empowerment and human rights. The article therefore provides a number of legal recommendations to address these gaps and weaknesses.