DOCSLIB.ORG

Mainstreaming Human and Minority Rights in the Eu Enlargement with the Western Balkans

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mainstreaming Human and Minority Rights in the Eu Enlargement with the Western Balkans DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EXTERNAL POLICIES OF THE UNION DIRECTORATE B POLICY DEPARTMENT STUDY MAINSTREAMING HUMAN AND MINORITY RIGHTS IN THE EU ENLARGEMENT WITH THE WESTERN BALKANS Abstract With the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty the protection of minorities became an explicit founding value of the European Union. In its external relations the EU has with the membership perspective and increased integration in the common market strong instruments at her disposal to promote and foster the protection of human and minority rights in the Western Balkan states. The question, however, arises to which extent the EU made and makes use of this leverage in its enlargement policy. The study investigates whether the EU`s own commitments with regard to the protection of minorities became an integral part of the enlargement process with the Western Balkan states. It gives an overview of the situation of minorities in the states of the Western Balkan, explores the minority rights frameworks in place and how they have been implemented so far. It reviews the EU's record of monitoring and mainstreaming rights of persons belonging to minorities in the enlargement process and examines current policy and financial instruments available in enlargement and neighbourhood policies in this regard. Since there are various actors involved in the protection of minorities at the regional level cooperation with the OSCE and the CoE will be explored and analysed how regional cooperation in the field of minority protection is already developed. In concluding, recommendations will be made on how to improve EU and European Parliament’s action in the field of minority protection EXPO/B/DROI/2012/10 December 2012 PE 457.114 EN Policy Department DG External Policies This study was requested by the European Parliament's Subcommittee on Human Rights. AUTHORS: Univ.-Prof. Mag. Dr. Wolfgang BENEDEK, Director of the European Training and Research Centre for Human Rights and Democracy of the University of Graz (Uni-ETC); Karl-Franzens University of Graz, AUSTRIA Univ.-Prof. Dr. Florian BIEBER, Director of the Centre for Southeast European Studies (CSEES); Karl-Franzens University of Graz, AUSTRIA Mag. Lisa HESCHL E.MA, European Training and Research Centre for Human Rights and Democracy of the University of Graz (Uni-ETC); Karl-Franzens University of Graz, AUSTRIA Ass. Prof. Dr. Emma LANTSCHNER, Assistant Professor of the Centre for Southeast European Studies (CSEES); Karl- Franzens University of Graz, AUSTRIA Univ.-Prof. Dr. Josef MARKO, Dean of the Faculty of Law of the Karl-Franzens University of Graz, Institute for Austrian, European and Comparative Public Law, Political Science and Administrative Studies, Karl-Franzens University Graz, AUSTRIA Mag. Reinmar NINDLER, European Training and Research Centre for Human Rights and Democracy of the University of Graz (Uni-ETC); Karl-Franzens University of Graz, AUSTRIA ADMINISTRATOR RESPONSIBLE: Anete BANDONE Directorate-General for External Policies of the Union Policy Department WIB 06 M 89 rue Wiertz 60 B-1047 Brussels Editorial Assistant: Pia VANNESTE LINGUISTIC VERSION Original: EN ABOUT THE EDITOR Editorial closing date: 17 December 2012. © European Union, 2012 Printed in Belgium ISBN: 978-92-823-4066-0 Doi: 10.2861/25684 The Information Note is available on the Internet at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/activities/committees/studies.do?language=EN If you are unable to download the information you require, please request a paper copy by e-mail : [email protected] DISCLAIMER Any opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation, except for commercial purposes, are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and provided the publisher is given prior notice and supplied with a copy of the publication. 2 Mainstreaming human and minority rights in the EU enlargement with the Western Balkans TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................7 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................15 CHAPTER ONE – HUMAN RIGHTS, MINORITY RIGHTS AND MINORITY PROTECTION IN THE WESTERN BALKANS ...................................................................................................................16 1. MAPPING THE LEGAL SITUATION ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................16 1.1 INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE PROTECTION OF MINORITIES............................................................................................................ 16 1.1.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 16 1.1.2 International level............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 17 1.1.2.1 Instruments........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 17 1.1.2.2 Other enforcement and monitoring mechanisms................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 20 1.1.3 Regional level .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 1.1.3.1 OSCE ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 1.1.3.2 Council of Europe............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 24 1.1.3.3 EU........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 27 1.2 NATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORKS AND THEIR CONFORMITY WITH INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL OBLIGATIONS.............................................................................................................. 29 1.2.1 Recognised minorities and available data on their size...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 30 1.2.2 Linguistic rights ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 32 1.2.3 Right to education ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 34 1.2.4 Minority media.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 37 1.2.5 Effective participation in political and economic life..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
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.
    [Show full text]
  • Minorities and Majorities in Estonia: Problems of Integration at the Threshold of the Eu
    MINORITIES AND MAJORITIES IN ESTONIA: PROBLEMS OF INTEGRATION AT THE THRESHOLD OF THE EU FLENSBURG, GERMANY AND AABENRAA DENMARK 22 to 25 MAY 1998 ECMI Report #2 March 1999 Contents Preface 3 The Map of Estonia 4 Ethnic Composition of the Estonian Population as of 1 January 1998 4 Note on Terminology 5 Background 6 The Introduction of the Seminar 10 The Estonian government's integration strategy 11 The role of the educational system 16 The role of the media 19 Politics of integration 22 International standards and decision-making on the EU 28 Final Remarks by the General Rapporteur 32 Appendix 36 List of Participants 37 The Integration of Non-Estonians into Estonian Society 39 Table 1. Ethnic Composition of the Estonian Population 43 Table 2. Estonian Population by Ethnic Origin and Ethnic Language as Mother Tongue and Second Language (according to 1989 census) 44 Table 3. The Education of Teachers of Estonian Language Working in Russian Language Schools of Estonia 47 Table 4 (A;B). Teaching in the Estonian Language of Other Subjects at Russian Language Schools in 1996/97 48 Table 5. Language Used at Home of the First Grade Pupils of the Estonian Language Schools (school year of 1996/97) 51 Table 6. Number of Persons Passing the Language Proficiency Examination Required for Employment, as of 01 August 1997 52 Table 7. Number of Persons Taking the Estonian Language Examination for Citizenship Applicants under the New Citizenship Law (enacted 01 April 1995) as of 01 April 1997 53 2 Preface In 1997, ECMI initiated several series of regional seminars dealing with areas where inter-ethnic tension was a matter of international concern or where ethnopolitical conflicts had broken out.
    [Show full text]
  • (2014) 11:3 Scripted 329 BOOK REVIEW FREEDOM OF
    (2014) 11:3 SCRIPTed 329 BOOK REVIEW FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND THE INTERNET By Wolfgang Benedek and Matthias C Kettemann Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2013, 190pp. ISBN 978-92-871-7702-5 (pbk). €29.00. European discussions of internet regulation tend to be dominated by the European Union dimension. This is unsurprising, reflecting as it does the central role of the Electronic Commerce Directive, the extensive case law of the Court of Justice and the large sums which have been spent by the Commission in successive Safer Internet programmes. It does mean, however, that not enough attention has been paid to either the extensive work that has been done through the Council of Europe on protecting fundamental rights online nor to significant judgments of the European Court of Human Rights such as Ahmet Yildirim v. Turkey.1 This book partially remedies that gap in the literature. Although short by the standards of most legal texts (at 190 pages) it provides a solid overview of the issues surrounding freedom of expression online, with a particular focus on the Council of Europe and European Convention on Human Rights aspects. In addition, the book outlines the work of other international actors such as the EU, UNESCO, the OSCE and the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, as well as the growing human rights work of civil society and private entities such as the Global Network Initiative. The book opens with an introduction, setting out the general aims and structure of the work and illustrating the general issues presented through the example of the Twitter Joke Trial.2 Chapter two then seeks to identify the content of the right to freedom of expression online.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Minority Policy in Serbia – Fostering Integration Analysis and Recommendations for Improving Minority Policy and Integration Process in the Republic of Serbia
    1 2014 1 2014 www.fer.org.rs FORUM ZA ETNIČKE ODNOSE FORUM FOR ETHNIC RELATIONS Minority Policy in Serbia – Fostering Integration Analysis and Recommendations for Improving Minority Policy and Integration Process in the Republic of Serbia Minority Policy in Serbia – Fostering Integration Analysis and Recommendations for Improving Minority Policy and Integration Process in the Republic of Serbia Belgrade, 2014 Minority Policy in Serbia – Fostering Integration Analysis and Recommendations for Improving Minority Policy and Integration Process in the Republic of Serbia Belgrade, May 2014. Kraljice Natalije 45/VII 11000 Belgrade, Serbia +381 11 36 20 804 [email protected] • www.fer.org.rs This publication is the result of activities carried out on the project „Minority Policy in Serbia – Fostering Integration“, which was realized from August 2013 until May 2014. The project was supported by: the British Embassy in Belgrade, the Netherlands Embassy in Belgrade, the Office of the High Commissioner on National Minorities of the OSCE and the OSCE Mission to Serbia. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the British Embassy in Belgrade, the Netherlands Embassy in Belgrade, the Office of the High Commissioner on National Minorities and the OSCE Mission to Serbia. FORUM CIP - Каталогизација у публикацији Year 4, Number 1 Народна библиотека Србије, Београд Publisher 323.1 Forum for Ethnic Relations, Belgrade FORUM : the magazine of FER / editor in Editor in Chief chief Nenad Đurđević. - Year 1, iss. 1 Nenad Đurđević (2002)-year 2, iss. 4 (2003) ; 2013, no. 1- Proof Reading . - Belgrade : Forum for Ethnic Relations, Štrikla 2002-2003; 2013- (Belgrade : Dosije studio).
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Transnational Terrorism, Organized Crime and Peace-Building Human Security in the Western Balkans
    Transnational Terrorism, Organized Crime and Peace-Building Human Security in the Western Balkans Edited by Wolfgang Benedek, Christopher Daase, Vojin Dimitrijevic and Petrus van Duyne Transnational Terrorism, Organized Crime and Peace-Building Also by Wolfgang Benedek UNDERSTANDING HUMAN RIGHTS, MANUAL ON HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION (Edited) MAINSTREAMING HUMAN SECURITY: Policies, Problems, Potentials (Edited with Matthias C., Kettemann and Markus Möstl) ANTI-TERRORISTS MEASURES AND HUMAN RIGHTS (Edited with Alice Yotopoulous-Marangopoulous) Transnational Terrorism, Organized Crime and Peace-Building Human Security in the Western Balkans Edited by Wolfgang Benedek Christopher Daase Vojin Dimitrijevic´ and Petrus van Duyne Introduction, selection and editorial matters © Wolfgang Benedek, Christopher Daase, Vojin Dimitrijevic ´ and Petrus van Duyne 2010 Individual chapters © contributors 2010 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No portion of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, Saffron House, 6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS. Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. The authors have asserted their rights to be identified as the authors of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. First published 2010 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN Palgrave Macmillan in the UK is an imprint of Macmillan Publishers Limited, registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS.
    [Show full text]
  • Melting Pot Cities and Suburbs: Racial and Ethnic Change in Metro America in the 2000S
    JkXk\f] D\kifgfc`kXe FEK?<=IFEK 8d\i`ZX C@E<JF= Melting Pot Cities and Suburbs: Racial and Ethnic Change in Metro America in the 2000s William H. Frey “The historically FINDINGS sharp racial and An analysis of data from the 1990, 2000, and 2010 decennial censuses reveals that: ■ Hispanics now outnumber blacks and represent the largest minority group ethnic divisions in major American cities. The Hispanic share of population rose in all primary cities of the largest 100 metropolitan areas from 2000 to 2010. Across all cities in between cities 2010, 41 percent of residents were white, 26 percent were Hispanic, and 22 percent were black. and suburbs in ■ Well over half of America’s cities are now majority non-white. Primary cities metropolitan America in 58 metropolitan areas were “majority minority” in 2010, up from 43 in 2000. Cities lost only about half as many whites in the 2000s as in the 1990s, but “black fl ight” are more blurred than from cities such as Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, and Detroit accelerated in the 2000s. ever.” ■ Minorities represent 35 percent of suburban residents, similar to their share of overall U.S. population. Among the 100 largest metro areas, 36 feature “melting pot” suburbs where at least 35 percent of residents are non-white. The suburbs of Houston, Las Vegas, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. became majority minority in the 2000s. ■ More than half of all minority groups in large metro areas, including blacks, now reside in the suburbs. The share of blacks in large metro areas living in suburbs rose from 37 percent in 1990, to 44 percent in 2000, to 51 percent in 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Democratisation and Minority Rights in the Post-Communist Balkan States
    PERCEPTIONS JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS June - July 2001 Volume VI - Number 2 DEMOCRATISATION AND MINORITY RIGHTS IN THE POST-COMMUNIST BALKAN STATES BİROL AKGÜN Dr Birol Akgün is Assistant Professor at the Department of International Relations, Selçuk University, Konya. INTRODUCTION With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of new independent states, scholars have turned their attention to developments in Eastern Europe. The expectation that a liberal democracy would soon replace ex-totalitarian regimes in the region is only partly realised. While some states (mostly in Central Europe) achieved a working democracy and were able to maintain domestic peace and security, some others (mostly in the Balkans) witnessed bloody wars and civil conflicts in the last decade. Readjustment of the borders in the Balkans reawakened old hatreds and ethnic hostilities causing unprecedented human suffering, which were quelled only by the intervention of the international community such as in the Bosnia and Kosovo wars. As Attila Agh points out, Balkan countries differ from East Central Europe in terms of political and economic development.1 None of them had previous experience with democratic government. Most of the Balkan countries are "late-comers to democratization" (Slovakia, Croatia, Romania, and Bulgaria), or "semi-protectorates" (for example, Bosnia) of international organisations and great powers.2 Economically, they are the poorest nations of the Europe. In 1996, for instance, while six East Central Europe states had incomes
    [Show full text]
  • Super-Diversity Vs. Assimilation: How Complex Diversity in Majority–Minority Cities Challenges the Assumptions of Assimilation
    Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies ISSN: 1369-183X (Print) 1469-9451 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjms20 Super-diversity vs. assimilation: how complex diversity in majority–minority cities challenges the assumptions of assimilation Maurice Crul To cite this article: Maurice Crul (2016) Super-diversity vs. assimilation: how complex diversity in majority–minority cities challenges the assumptions of assimilation, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42:1, 54-68, DOI: 10.1080/1369183X.2015.1061425 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015.1061425 © 2015 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Published online: 12 Aug 2015. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 3319 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 9 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cjms20 Download by: [Erasmus University] Date: 19 July 2017, At: 07:18 JOURNAL OF ETHNIC AND MIGRATION STUDIES, 2016 VOL. 42, NO. 1, 54–68 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015.1061425 Super-diversity vs. assimilation: how complex diversity in majority–minority cities challenges the assumptions of assimilation Maurice Crul Sociology Department, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY International migration changed large West European cities dramatically. Received 2 February 2015 In only two generations’ time, their ethnic make-up is turned upside Revised 4 June 2015 down. Cities like Amsterdam and Brussels now are majority–minority Accepted 5 June 2015 cities: the old majority group became a minority.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]