OSCE AR 04 LV.Indd
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Hungary's Policy Towards Its Kin Minorities
Hungary’s policy towards its kin minorities: The effects of Hungary’s recent legislative measures on the human rights situation of persons belonging to its kin minorities Óscar Alberto Lema Bouza Supervisor: Prof. Zsolt Körtvélyesi Second Semester University: Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem, Budapest, Hungary Academic Year 2012/2013 Óscar A. Lema Bouza Abstract Abstract: This thesis focuses on the recent legislative measures introduced by Hungary aimed at kin minorities in the neighbouring countries. Considering as relevant the ones with the largest Hungarian minorities (i.e. Croatia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine), the thesis starts by presenting the background to the controversy, looking at the history, demographics and politics of the relevant states. After introducing the human rights standards contained in international and national legal instruments for the protection of minorities, the thesis looks at the reasons behind the enactment of the laws. To do so the politically dominant concept of Hungarian nation is examined. Finally, the author looks at the legal and political restrictions these measures face from the perspective of international law and the reactions of the affected countries, respectively. The research shows the strong dependency between the measures and the political conception of the nation, and points out the lack of amelioration of the human rights situation of ethnic Hungarians in the said countries. The reason given for this is the little effects produced on them by the measures adopted by Hungary and the potentially prejudicial nature of the reaction by the home states. The author advocates for a deeper cooperation between Hungary and the home states. Keywords: citizenship, ethnic preference, Fundamental Law, home state, human rights, Hungary, kin state, minorities, nation, Nationality Law, preferential treatment,Status Law. -
Armenia Page 1 of 13
Country Report on Human Rights Practices in Armenia Page 1 of 13 Armenia Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor March 6, 2007 Armenia, with a population of approximately 3.2 million, is a republic. The constitution provides for a popularly elected president (Robert Kocharian) and a unicameral legislature (National Assembly). A constitutional referendum in 2005 and presidential and National Assembly elections in 2003 were seriously flawed and did not meet international standards. The country has a multiparty political system. Civilian authorities generally maintained effective control of the security forces; members of the security forces committed a number of human rights abuses. The government's human rights record remained poor, and serious problems remained. Citizens were not able freely to change their government; authorities beat pretrial detainees; the national security service and the national police force acted with impunity; authorities engaged in arbitrary arrest and detention; prison conditions were cramped and unhealthy, although slowly improving; authorities imposed restrictions on citizens' privacy, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly. Journalists practiced self-censorship, and the government and laws restricted religious freedom. Violence against women and spousal abuse were problems, as were trafficking in persons, discrimination against persons with disabilities, and societal harassment of homosexuals. There were reports of forced labor. There were some improvements during the year. The implementation of constitutional reforms ratified in 2005 led to some increase in judicial independence and for the first time gave citizens direct access to the Constitutional Court. Penalties for trafficking were toughened and a court for the first time imposed financial, as well as criminal, penalties on traffickers. -
UNITED NATIONS COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE 59 Session 7 November to 7 December 2016 PARTNERSHIP for OPEN SOCIETY INITIATIVE's J
UNITED NATIONS COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE 59th Session 7 November to 7 December 2016 PARTNERSHIP FOR OPEN SOCIETY INITIATIVE’S JOINT SUBMISSION TO THE COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE ON THE FOURTH PERIODIC REPORT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OF PUNISHMENT October 17, 2016, Yerevan, Armenia Hereby, the Partnership for Open Society Initiative,1 representing more than 60 civil society organizations, presents a joint submission prepared by the following civil society organizations, public monitoring groups, human rights lawyers and attorneys: 1. Coalition to Stop Violence Against Women; 2. Center for Rights Development NGO; 3. Committee to Protect Freedom of Expression; 4. Foundation Against the Violation of Law NGO; 5. Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly–Vanadzor; 6. Helsinki Committee of Armenia Human Rights Defender NGO; 7. Journalists' Club Asparez; 8. Open Society Foundations – Armenia; 9. Protection of Rights without Borders NGO; 10. Rule of Law Human Rights NGO; 11. Group of Public Monitors Implementing Supervision over the Criminal-Executive Institutions and Bodies of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Armenia; 12. Public Monitoring Group at the Detention Facilities of the Police of the Republic of Armenia; 13. Davit Khachaturyan, Justice Group, Open Society-Foundations-Armenia, Expert, Ph.D; 14. Inessa Petrosyan, Attorney; 15. Tigran Hayrapetyan, Attorney; 16. Tigran Safaryan, Attorney; 17. Vahe Grigoryan, Attorney, Legal Consultant at EHRAC (Middlesex University). Contacts Persons David Amiryan Karine Ghazaryan Open Society Foundations-Armenia Open Society Foundations-Armenia Deputy Director for Programs Civil Society Program Coordinator E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] 1 http://www.partnership.am/en/index 1 Contents INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................... -
ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions. -
Armenia Page 1 of 18
Country Report on Human Rights Practices in Armenia Page 1 of 18 Armenia Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2007 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor March 11, 2008 Armenia is a constitutional republic with a population of approximately 3.2 million. The constitution provides for an elected president and a unicameral legislature (the National Assembly). The May parliamentary elections failed to fully meet international standards due to procedural flaws, despite improvements over past elections. The country has a multiparty political system. Civilian authorities generally maintained effective control of the security forces, although some members of the security forces committed human rights abuses. The government's human rights record remained poor, and serious problems remained. Citizens were not able to freely change their government; authorities beat pretrial detainees; the National Security Service (NSS) and the national police force acted with impunity; authorities engaged in arbitrary arrest and detention; prison conditions were cramped and unhealthy, although slowly improving; authorities imposed restrictions on citizens' privacy, freedom of press, and freedom of assembly. Journalists continued to practice self-censorship, and the government and laws restricted religious freedom. Violence against women and spousal abuse remained problems, as well as trafficking in persons, discrimination against persons with disabilities, and societal harassment of homosexuals. There were reports of forced labor. RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom From: a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life The government and its agents did not commit any politically motivated killings; however, the government reported that during the year, there were three army homicides and four suicides which were judged as resulting from military-related hazing. -
Serbia by Misha Savic
Serbia by Misha Savic Capital: Belgrade Population: 7.2 million GNI/capita, PPP: US$11,430 Source: The data above are drawn from the World Bank’sWorld Development Indicators 2014. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Electoral Process 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 Civil Society 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.50 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 Independent Media 3.25 3.25 3.50 3.75 3.75 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 National Democratic Governance 4.00 4.00 3.75 4.00 4.00 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 Local Democratic Governance 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 Judicial Framework and Independence 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 Corruption 5.00 4.75 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 Democracy Score 3.75 3.71 3.68 3.79 3.79 3.71 3.64 3.64 3.64 3.64 NOTE: The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s). The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. -
UNDP RS NARS and Indepen
The National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia Serbia AND INDEPENDENT BODIES SERBIA THE REPUBLIC OF OF ASSEMBLY NATIONAL NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA AND INDEPENDENT BODIES 253 NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA AND INDEPENDENT BODIES NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA AND INDEPENDENT BODIES Materials from the Conference ”National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia and Independent Bodies” Belgrade, 26-27 November 2009 and an Overview of the Examples of International Practice Olivera PURIĆ UNDP Deputy Resident Representative a.i. Edited by Boris ČAMERNIK, Jelena MANIĆ and Biljana LEDENIČAN The following have participated: Velibor POPOVIĆ, Maja ŠTERNIĆ, Jelena MACURA MARINKOVIĆ Translated by: Novica PETROVIĆ Isidora VLASAK English text revised by: Charles ROBERTSON Design and layout Branislav STANKOVIĆ Copy editing Jasmina SELMANOVIĆ Printing Stylos, Novi Sad Number of copies 150 in English language and 350 in Serbian language For the publisher United Nations Development Programme, Country Office Serbia Internacionalnih brigada 69, 11000 Beograd, +381 11 2040400, www.undp.org.rs ISBN – 978-86-7728-125-0 The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the United Nations and the United Nations Development Programme. Acknowledgement We would like to thank all those whose hard work has made this publication possible. We are particularly grateful for the guidance and support of the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia, above all from the Cabinet of the Speaker and the Secretariat. A special debt of gratitude is owed to the representatives of the independent regulatory bodies; the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection, the State Audit Institution, the Ombudsman of the Republic of Serbia and the Anti-corruption Agency. -
The National Councils of National Minorities in Serbia
The national councils of national minorities in Serbia Katinka Beretka* and István Gergő Székely** January 2016 Recommended citation: Beretka Katinka and Székely István Gergő, “The national councils of national minorities in the Republic of Serbia”, Online Compendium Autonomy Arrangements in the World, January 2016, at www.world-autonomies.info. © 2016 Autonomy Arrangements in the World Content 1. Essential Facts and Figures 2. Autonomy in the Context of the State Structure 3. Establishment and Implementation of Autonomy 4. Legal Basis of Autonomy 5. Autonomous Institutions 6. Autonomous Powers 7. Financial Arrangements 8. Intergovernmental Relations 9. Inter-group Relations within the Autonomous Entity (not applicable) 10. Membership, “Quasi-citizenship” and Special Rights 11. General Assessment and Outlook Bibliography 2016 © Autonomy Arrangements in the World Project 1. Essential Facts and Figures 1 Serbia is located in the center of the Balkans, being an everyday subject of world news from the beginning of the 1990s, often due to ethnicity-related issues, ranging from civil war and secession to autonomy arrangements meant to accommodate ethnocultural diversity. Although according to the 2011 census almost 20% of the total population of the state (without Kosovo) belong to a minority group (see Table 1), in Serbia there are no officially recognized or unrecognized minorities. There is neither an exact enumeration of minority groups, nor clear principles to be followed about how a minority should be recognized. While the absence of precise regulations may be regarded as problematic, the approach of Serbia to the minority question can also be interpreted as being rather liberal, which may have resulted from the intention to protect ethnic Serb refugees who have become minorities abroad, including in the former Yugoslav member states. -
Contemporary Russian-Serbian Relations
1 Contemporary Russian-Serbian Relations: Interviews with Youth from Political Parties in Belgrade and Vojvodina By Chloe Kay Department of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures, University of Colorado Boulder Defended March 31, 2014 Primary Advisor Rimgaila Salys, Dept. of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures Committee Members Tatiana Mikhailova, Dept. of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures Laura Osterman, Dept. of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures Laurel Rodd, Dept. of Asian Languages and Civilizations 2 Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………..3 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………….4 Methodology……………………………………………………………………………………………..5 Historical Relations between Serbia and Russia………………………………………….7 Relations in the Middle Ages to 2008……………………………………………..7 Political Relations 2008-today………………………………………………………..11 Cultural Ties……………………………………………………………………………………13 Energy and Economics……………………………………………………………………14 Serbia in between East and West……………………………………………………15 The Opinions of Two Experts………………………………………………………………………17 Data Collection and Results………………………….….………………………………………….23 The history of Russian and Serbian Relations………………………….……….23 Russia as an International Actor in the World and the in Balkans…..25 Russia and Serbia: 200 million………………………………………………………...28 South Stream Pipeline: A gift or a scam?.………………………………………..30 Serbia: Caught in the Middle?………………………………………………………….31 Vladimir Putin and the Kosovo Question………………………………………….34 Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………………………………35 -
ETHNIC SELF-GOVERNANCE in SERBIA the First Two Years of The
DÉLKELET EURÓPA – SOUTH -EAST EUROPE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS QUARTERLY , Vol. 3. No.2. (Summer 2012/2) ETHNIC SELF-GOVERNANCE IN SERBIA The First Two Years of the National Minority Councils TIBOR PURGER (Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey ) Abstract The 2009 Law on National Councils of National Minorities (LNCNM) created a new system of self- governance for ethnic minorities, over one-sixth of the population, in the Republic of Serbia. The law establishes the legal framework for and empowers national minority councils (NMCs) to legitimately represent members of their respective minorities in matters of culture, education, the media, and official use of language, as pertaining to each minority. The NMCs can create institutions, organizations, and for-profit companies to promote their interests. Rights so granted vis-à-vis state organs are only consultative in nature, but still significant enough to be considered a prototype of ethnic cultural autonomy. The councils receive budgetary funds for their work but can generate their own income and receive aid from foreign and international sources as well. The implementation, immediate consequences, and conflicts related to the LNCNM have a broad impact on ethnic politics in Serbia: they help determine how national minorities organize themselves to preserve their identity, what kind of relationships they develop, and how they relate to the Serbian state. This paper studies the precursors of the law and its implementation, the results and difficulties of the national minority councils, and suggests further research. Keywords: cultural autonomy, ethnic self-governance, national minorities, Serbia * Introduction It might seem to be too early to study a new set of institutions not even two years old, created by legislative action of the Serbian Parliament on August 31, 2009, based on short previous experience. -
Geneviève Favre Petroff Performances & Installations Femme En Kimono, Femme De Tuyaux
Geneviève Favre Petroff Performances & Installations Femme en kimono, femme de tuyaux. Dans la performance Evidence, Geneviève Favre Petroff fait de petits mouvements en chantant. Son costume se colore peu à peu de «broderies» réalisées par la circulation spiralée de fluides. Comme si, le réseau sanguin se transformait en motifs décoratifs vivifiant le monochrome blanc du kimono. A la fois incongrue et élégante, Evidence offre un moment de magie. (historienne de l’art, Lausanne), 2013 Véronique Mauron Geneviève Favre Petroff’s Lokum performance aimed squarely to evoke a neo-80s sensibility, with bright colourful lights blooming around a 60s-inspired minidress. With the flashing lights, and the round Martian helmet, Petroff achieves an effect fer that feels both familiar and otherworldly—a combination of the imagery of yester- day and the designs of the future we dream of. Brian McLellan (fashion critic, Toronto), 2012 fer Art, for her, is a practical exercise, a means to achieve fulfilment. And her voice is not just a slender (though strong) link between the oppositions that coexist within her; it is also what she uses to In Electra, Geneviève Favre Petroff, rooted on a pedestal bring the world to her, along with the beings that inhabit it, and with a long white gown and silver hair, mesmerized all of those that are external to her. us who were sitting up front with her ‘Bjork-like’ voice and fibre optic lights that lit up on cue. I don’t think anyone Emmanuel Latreille (director of FRAC Languedoc-Roussillon), 2010 will forget, “Cranberry joooose. Cr-annnn Berry Joooo-se”. -
100 Years... True Stories 7 It Makes One of These Mechanisms Work
100 Years… True Stories Translated from Armenian by Nune Melkonyan Edited by Nune Bekaryan & Nune Melkonyan Yerevan 2014 100 Years… True Stories Among Armenians survivors of the Genocide there are people whose lives were saved by a Turkish neighbor, friend, a common witness Turk. This book shares 47 such stories. These are real stories presented as they were actually narrated, without any editing in the content. The stories were narrated by the descendants, relatives, close people of the survivors of the Great Genocide based on what the witnesses of the events had told. Some stories have been restored based on the recordings or written memoirs made while the witnesses were still alive. The stories have been collated by joint efforts of “European Integration” Non-Gov- ernmental Organization and “Armedia” Information, Analytical Agency with the sup- port of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office of the United Kingdom within the project “The Turk Who Saved Me”. The partner in Turkey is “tursu.tv production”. The project aims to contribute to the development of dialogue and trust building between the Armenian and Turkish peoples. The stories have been published in Armenian on the electronic web-page of “Armedia” Information, Analytical Agency and in Turkish in Taraf, Zaman, Radikal, Demokrat haber, Evrensel, Bianet, Yurt, T24 media. The book is published in the Armenian, Turkish and English languages and is de- livered free within this project. The materials, opinions and conclusions presented in the book introduce the views of the people witnessing the events and narrating the stories and do not re- flect the position of the United Kingdom Government.