ACFC/SR/II(2005)002 SECOND REPORT SUBMITTED BY GERMANY PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 25, PARAGRAPH 1 OF THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES (Received on 13 April 2005) Second Report submitted by the Federal Republic of Germany under Article 25, paragraph 2, of the Council of Europe's Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities 2004 Contents 1 Germany: 2nd State Report Contents No. page Part A General Situation and Conditions .......................................... 1 - 58 3 Part B Protection of national minorities under the various articles 23 of the Framework Convention Article 1 ............................................................................................ 59 - 72 23 Article 2 ............................................................................................ 73 27 Article 3 ............................................................................................ 74 - 84 28 Article 4 ............................................................................................ 85 - 135 33 Article 5 ............................................................................................ 136 - 257 48 Article 6 ............................................................................................ 258 - 357 79 Article 7 ............................................................................................ 358 - 374 103 Article 8 ............................................................................................ 375 - 390 108 Article 9 ............................................................................................ 391 - 464 112 Article 10 ............................................................................................ 465 - 547 133 Article 11 ............................................................................................ 548 - 577 153 Article 12 ............................................................................................ 578 - 695 161 Article 13 ............................................................................................ 696 - 706 193 Article 14 ............................................................................................ 707 - 792 197 Article 15 ............................................................................................ 793 - 819 217 Article 16 ............................................................................................ 820 - 834 225 Article 17 ............................................................................................ 835 - 847 230 Article 18 ............................................................................................ 848 - 864 233 Article 19 ............................................................................................ 865 238 Article 20 ............................................................................................ 866 239 Article 21 ............................................................................................ 867 240 Article 22 ............................................................................................ 868 241 Article 23 ............................................................................................ 869 242 Article 30 ............................................................................................ 870 243 Part C Answers to the detailed questions asked by the Advisory 245 Committee on the Framework Convention for the Pro- tection of National Minorities (ACFC) in their "Opinion on Germany" [CM(2002)43] Part D Comments by the organisations of national minorities and 247 ethnic groups traditionally resident in Germany, to which the Framework Convention applies pursuant to the Decla- ration notified by the Federal Republic at the time of sig- nature Translation: Sprachendienst BMI (Linguistic Service, Federal Ministry of the Interior) nd 2 Germany: 2 State Report 3 Part A Introduction Germany: 2nd State Report Part A Introduction A.1 General Situation 1. The Federal Republic of Germany attaches great importance to the protection of national minorities. The Council of Europe's Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities was signed by Germany on 11 May 1995. By the Act (to implement the Convention) of 22 July 1997, the German Bundestag, with the consent of the Bundesrat ["Federal Council": Chamber of the Länder], approved the Framework Convention. That Act was promulgated in the Federal Law Gazette on 22 July 1997, and the instrument of rati- fication was deposited with the Council of Europe on 10 September 1997. For Germany, the Framework Convention entered into force on 23 July 1997. Under the Federal Act ratifying the Framework Convention, the Convention ranks in Germany as a federal law which takes precedence over subordinate law - including Land laws - and, as a matter of principle, is to be applied as the more specific law overriding other federal laws. Full com- pliance with the Framework Convention at the national level is legally guaranteed. 2. Germany – like an encouragingly large number of other Member States of the Council of Europe – is among the countries that have ratified the Framework Convention; and it also belongs to the – regrettably fewer – countries that have ratified the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (Regional/Minority Language Charter). In Ger- many, the Regional/Minority Language Charter is applied to the languages spoken by national minorities – the Danish of the Danes, the North Frisian and the Saterland Frisian of the Frisians, the Lower and Upper Sorbian languages of the Sorbs and the Romany language of German Sinti and Roma – as well as to the regional language Low German. In German legal practice – both at the level of government agencies and among national minorities - the two conventions are perceived as legal instruments designed, first and foremost, to protect national minorities and their languages. As both instruments were drawn up by the Council of Europe and both were ratified by Germany within a short space of time of each other and as both pursue comparable objectives regarding the languages of national minorities, the two conventions together represent the authoritative legal instru- ments for the benefit of national minorities. This implies that the two conventions will be interpreted and applied concordantly. On account of the fact that the two conventions have been formulated according to differ- ent legal principles, difficulties emerge in respect of the concordant application of the two instruments and therefore are also encountered by the competent committees of the Council of Europe in examining whether they are being properly applied. Whereas all the articles of the Framework Convention call for unqualified and uniform application, the Regional/Minority Language Charter, designed as a so-called ”menu convention”, in its 4 Part A Introduction Germany: 2nd State Report Part III, leaves it to the discretion of the ratifying States to decide what obligations they undertake as regards the range, scope and depth of these obligations as well as their territorial application and their scope of application with respect to minorities. While, for example, Article 11 of the Regional/Minority Language Charter allows measures to be taken in respect of programmes broadcast on TV and/or on the radio in the respective minority or regional language, it gives the option to broadcast them as a full programme or as occasional programmes in this language; last but not least, the various options are ex- pressed in the verbs used which are ”to ensure”, ”to facilitate”, ”to make adequate provi- sion” and ”to encourage”. These two Council of Europe conventions have become part of the German legal system, both as regards the personal scope of application as designated in the respective decla- ration accompaying the ratification document deposited with the Council of Europe and in respect of the minority and regional-specific obligations undertaken under Part III of the Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. The identical objectives pursued by both conventions regarding the languages of national minorities and the authorship of the Council of Europe in both cases explain why the two instruments in question are interpreted and applied concordantly in Germany. This can also be an important aspect as regards evaluation of whether the respective competent legislative or administrative bodies consider themselves to have met the obligations en- suing from these conventions. Germany once more suggests that the DH-MIN [Committee of Experts, Minorities], a body set up to deal with minority law issues, which - regrettably - has not been convened in the past few years, should discuss this matter in depth; it would be appropriate and expedient to have the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention (AFCF) and the Committee of Experts on the Regional/Minority Language Charter (MIN-Lang) take part in these discus- sions. 3. As regards the request by the Central Council of German Sinti and Roma that the Committee of Experts DH-MIN should submit a draft convention covering actionable rights in the cultural field and involve the respective minorities in this project (cf. Part D, Com- ments by the Central Council of German Sinti and Roma), it should be noted that antici- pating the Council of Europe's decision on the reinstatement of DH-MIN and on the com- mittee's terms of reference is out of the question. 5 Part A Introduction Germany: 2nd State Report