Protection Of Minority Rights Research Articles

The Limits of Europeanization on Minority Rights in Serbia: The Roma Minority

Among the main conditions for joining the European Union (eu) are the protection of human rights, and particularly the protection of minority rights. In this way, the eu has become an important external dynamic that changes domestic policies. In this article, the limits of Europeanization are analysed at two different levels: at the legal and at the societal level. In the last years, Serbia has adopted legislative changes that have increased the protection level granted to minorities in the country. However, its implementation/internalization is considered to be one of the biggest post-conflict problems in Serbia. This article argues that Europeanization has strong limitations regarding minority’s rights in Serbia. By focusing on the situation of the Roma minority in the country, we try to access the limits of Europeanization at the societal level, arguing that they are still victims of discrimination, segregation and limited participation in public life.

Equal Rights/Equal Marriage: Creating Spaces for Jurisgenerative Praxis

In Canada, particularly since the protection of minority rights under the Charter, rights rhetoric and judicial challenges have emerged as a critical means of redressing the inequity experienced by subordinated peoples and groups - thereby privileging law and its accompanying equality framework as an agent of enfranchisement. Undoubtedly, no other social group has witnessed such rapid advancement of their rights via legal activism in the Canadian policy landscape as has the LGBTQ community – including access to marriage. This paper uses findings from a qualitative study with LGBTQ individuals who married their same -sex partners to increase our understanding of the impact of the Equal Marriage Charter challenge and associated equality discourse as a mechanism for, or moment of, jurisgenerative praxis for LGBTQ people choosing same-sex marriage.

Patterns of Ethnic Marginalization and Inclusion in New States

Many new states have formed in the international system as a result of secession. However, such states are rarely entirely homogenous and nationalist elites face the challenge of creating a brand new state while ensuring minority rights and avoiding future conflict. Why do some secessionist states protect minority rights and create inclusive political institutions while others marginalize or discriminate against minorities? In this paper, the author examines patterns of marginalization after secession and provides an overarching theory of inclusion in all secessionist cases and all ethnic groups that reside in newly established countries.

Juridification of the Right to Development in India

VRÜ Verfassung und Recht in Übersee , Seite 175 - 192

Unheard voices: state-making and popular participation in post-Ottoman Iraq

I explore the nature of the particular nation state form that came into being in Iraq during the British Mandate, and in particular its impact on minorities. The Mandate government, and the broader international legal framework, structured state–minority relations in post-Ottoman Iraq in ways that continue to shape Iraqi politics. While sociocultural differences in Iraqi society were given constitutional recognition, this did not lead to the effective protection of minority rights, primarily because the principle of popular participation was not respected. The Mandate legacy in Iraq has been long-lasting, as the mistakes of the past have been reproduced by postcolonial regimes, and thus the state–minority relationship has been locked in a loop of exclusionary politics and securitization.

Reframing Kurtz's Painting: Colonial Legacies and Minority Rights in Ethnically Divided Societies

Minority rights constitute some of the most normatively and economically important human rights. Although the political science and legal literatures have proffered a number of constitutional and institutional design solutions to address the protection of minority rights, these solutions are characterized by a noticeable neglect of, and lack of sensitivity to, historical processes. This Article addresses that gap in the literature by developing a causal argument that explains diverging practices of minority rights protections as functions of colonial governments' variegated institutional practices with respect to particular ethnic groups. Specifically, this Article argues that in instances where colonial governments politicize and institutionalize ethnic hegemony in the pre-independence period, an institutional legacy is created that leads to lower levels of minority rights protections. Conversely, a uniform treatment and depoliticization of ethnicity prior to independence ultimately minimizes ethnic cleavages post-independence and consequently causes higher levels of minority rights protection. Through a highly structured comparative historical analysis of Botswana and Ghana, this Article builds on a new and exciting research agenda that focuses on the role of long-term historio-structural and institutional influences on human rights performance and makes important empirical contributions by eschewing traditional methodologies that focus on single case studies that are largely descriptive in their analyses. Ultimately, this Article highlights both the strength of a historical approach to understanding current variations in minority rights protections and the varied institutional responses within a specific colonial government actor.

How minorities fare under referendums: A cross-national study

Referendums are often viewed as a threat to the rights of minorities. Empirical studies, so far, have tried to deal with the impact of referendums on minorities and civil rights at the subnational level by comparing either referendum or policy outcomes across subnational units. These units are, however, often constrained by the national level of government. Hence, to understand the full effect of referendums on minority policies, cross-national comparisons are required. Based on existing game-theoretical models, we argue that referendums and initiatives push policies towards the voters' preferences, either by protecting minority rights or reducing them. We test this proposition with national-level information on preferences and institutions as well as minority policies from countries spanning the whole globe.

Public Opinion and Judicial Behavior in Direct Democracy Systems: Gay Rights in the American States

AbstractAlthough the U.S. judiciary is designed to be an independent and counter-majoritarian arbiter of the law, many states feature electoral institutions that may expose judges to public pressure. Scholars have demonstrated that judicial elections provide a clear link between public opinion and judicial decision making that may undermine the ability of courts to act in counter-majoritarian ways to protect minority rights. We extend this line of inquiry by examining whether direct democracy institutions have a similar effect of enhancing the impact of public opinion on judicial behavior and reducing the likelihood of judges voting in favor of minority rights. Empirical results from an analysis of gay rights cases in the American states from 1981 to 2004 provide evidence that direct democracy, in conjunction with electoral retention methods, significantly increases the effect of public opinion on judicial decisions.

The Right to Minority Language Instruction in Schools: Negotiating Competing Claims in Multinational China

Although the right to minority language instruction is widely recognized as a linguistic human right, it has not simultaneously been recognized and implemented in China. This article aims to analyze a Chinese dilemma: how to maintain economic growth while protecting minority rights in general and linguistic rights in particular. By examining the evolution of bilingualism as national language policy, the article shows that China’s policy orientation has actually derailed from its original track and, to some extent, breached the constitutional principle of equal protection. Further, it scrutinizes and compares the claims upheld by different stakeholders and asserts that the government’s GDP-driven attitude and interventionist approach to language policy is detrimental to minorities’ linguistic rights and to national solidarity. It concludes that linguistic pluralism and cultural diversity should be cherished and promoted in policy and law making in multinational China.

Is It Possible to Fully Protect Minority Rights in a Democratic Republic?

Is It Possible to Fully Protect Minority Rights in a Democratic Republic?

Political Institutions, Plausible Deniability, and the Decision to Hide Torture

To increase plausible deniability about torture, governments have increasingly turned to stealth techniques that do not scar the victim’s body. This study argues that democratic institutions provide leaders with different incentives with regard to the decision to hide torture. Because torture is often targeted at minorities, institutions that protect the majority — like contested elections — do not encourage leaders to prioritize plausible deniability. As such, states with elections engage in more scarring torture. Other institutions — like domestic courts — were created to protect minority rights. Leaders in states with powerful courts prefer plausible deniability of rights violations and consequently demonstrate higher levels of stealth torture. We find support for our hypotheses using new data from the Ill-Treatment and Torture (ITT) Data Collection Project that distinguish between Amnesty International (AI) allegations of scarring and stealth torture from 1995 to 2005.

Displaced: Why We Need New International Law to Protect Refugees, Displaced People, and Human Rights

How can international law protect both international security and the human rights of displaced people? Existing international law protects only displaced refugees: those who flee persecution on the basis of religion, race, nationality, or political opinion. This article argues that a new Displaced Persons Convention must be created to protect the human rights of the world’s other 35 million victims of civil conflict and climate change who do not meet this narrow definition. International Refugee Law must be preserved as it is because it enshrines critical protections for minority rights that must not be diluted. However, an additional instrument of international law is necessary to resolve an issue that is at once one of the greatest human rights issues of our time and a threat to international peace and security. To support this argument, this article presents a comprehensive history of refugees in international law, combining primary sources and original interview data to trace how states have agreed for centuries that refugee law should protect minority rights, even as shifting state interests have changed refugee protection over time. This article refutes other scholarly proposals and UN practices that expand the category of “refugee.” It also contributes to growing scholarly interest in the history of human rights law by arguing that refugee law predates the modern human rights regime, challenges its foundations, and extends its claims to universality.

Sectarianism in Alawi Syria: Exploring the Paradoxes of Politics and Religion

The religious and the political intertwine in all sectarian conflicts and the violent conflagration in Syria is no exception. However, sectarianism as an explanatory paradigm is extremely limited; it provides a monolithic reading of a complex phenomenon with a well-established historical pedigree. This paper traces the manifestation of the sectarian dimensions of the conflict, following the development of the heterodox Alawi community from a marginalized sect to its ascendance as Syria's ruling class. It focuses on how sectarian identity has constantly been exploited by hegemonic powers such as the Sunni Ottomans, the French Colonisers and, most recently, the Asad regime. The paper suggests that the only escape from the sectarian minefield is the entrenchment of a strong Syrian national identity within the framework of equal citizenship, pluralistic democracy and the protection of minority rights. This could potentially limit the interference of outside parties, but such an outcome is over-optimistic at the current juncture since vested interests outweigh the interests of internal peace and stability.

Towards EU Negotiations: A Moment of Opportunity for the Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian Communities in Kosovo?

In the context of an ongoing Kosovo Government agenda promoting European Union accession, this paper examines the impact of two transitions – the post-conflict period and the current EU dialogue and negotiations – on the country’s Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian communities. The paper discusses the social and political dynamics of these two transitions and how they affect the status of the minority communities. It examines the role of intergovernmental and non-profit organizations in advancing protection measures (e.g. by pressing for the elimination of school segregation) and accelerating implementation of important infrastructure projects (as a prelude to national scale up). The paper compares the standards invoked by the Kosovar Government to those used by other European countries in the prelude to accession. It considers whether the Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian political leadership are effectively leveraging the political momentum attached to the protection of minority rights, given that this is a central precondition for EU accession. The paper concludes that the current moment offers a unique window of opportunity to the minority communities, but one that will be squandered if minority community divisions and sectional interests continue, as at present, to compound EU policy implementation failures and thereby impede the path towards a multicultural Kosovo. By contrast, the minority community leadership could take advantage of the Kosovar Government’s interest in demonstrating its future membership bona fides by making a determined and joint effort to press for substantive minority rights protections through a unified platform. The paper suggests examples for development of such a platform.

EU membership as a factor for harmonization of ethnic relations within the Countries of Union

The author emphasizes that some of the post-Communist states have not grown out of ethnic conflicts, antagonism and enmity, which break peaceful life, ruin public relations, cause considerable human losses and streams of refugees. For their peaceful settlement countries must develop models of ethnic relations harmonization. The author focuses on three issues, which contribute to the outbreaks of conflicts: the thing which causes conflicts is not ethnic affiliation, but nationality, officially defined by the USSR, and this should left behind; internal borders (nowadays state frontiers) established by the USSR for expansion and strengthening of authoritarianism, which now often stir up disputes; a level of ethnic violence in the post-Soviet countries is comparatively low. Materials on protection of minority rights in ten CEE countries members of the EU testify that the potential of joining the EU as a catalyst for reforms must be analyzed more thoroughly. The EU possesses resources and possibilities to use the process of integration for constructive settlement of invisible and threatening problems in the continent.

Croatia's Framework for Minority Rights: New Legal Prospects within the Context of European Integration

This work is a case study on the legal patterns for managing ethnic relations in Croatia within the context of European integration. The significance of European formal and informal engagement in this process is particularly highlighted. The main research questions in this article are: What has been the impact of the EU accession process on legislation on minority rights in Croatia? How efficient has Croatia been in making use of certain elements from the Communist era and elaborating new and up-to-date models for the management of ethnic relations? What is demonstrated is that Croatia has been successful in arranging an adequate and viable framework for the protection of minority rights that is highly consistent with European standards.

Democratic police governance in comparative perspective

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to compare the specific institutional arrangements for realizing democratically accountable policing in England & Wales and the Netherlands. It assesses each accountability system against a set of “democratic criteria” and considers the implications for democratic policing of the current reform trajectories in both jurisdictions.Design/methodology/approachThe paper adopts a cross‐national approach exploring the relationship between policing and democratic institutions by comparing the democratic credentials of the police governance systems in England & Wales and the Netherlands.FindingsCurrent reforms to the police governance system in England & Wales aim to increase local elected influence over policing. By contrast, the Dutch system deliberately limits the degree of local electoral control over policing. The paper argues that there is a range of elements to democratic policing, and that “democratic accountability” should not be conflated with control of policing by elected bodies. Whilst the trajectories of reform in England & Wales and the Netherlands are going in opposite directions, each raises a number of “democratic” concerns.Research limitation/implicationsThe research is limited to only two developed European parliamentary democracies in the European Union. Further comparative research on democratic policing is required to expand the analysis to a wider variety of democratic contexts.Originality/valueTo date, there has been little attention paid by policy makers or by academics to the form and nature of police governance in continental European countries. By drawing comparisons between England & Wales and the Netherlands, the paper aims to provide a democratic assessment of the two police accountability systems (and their current reform trajectories) and discuss some broad policy implications for police governance in each jurisdiction.Practical implicationsComparative analysis of police accountability in both England and Wales and the Netherlands provides potential for policy learning in each jurisdiction. The analysis suggests that both systems, in different ways, are currently at risk of over‐emphasizing particular democratic criteria (such as electoral participation, or delivery of service) to the exclusion of others (such as concerns with equitable and fair policing and the protection of minority rights).

The economics of minority freezeouts: Evidence from the courtroom

We analyze minority freezeout offers in a legal environment where minority stockholders can reject the offer and ask the court to value their nontendered stock. This regulatory setting allows us to observe the disciplining effect of legal enforcement on stockholder behavior. We find that minority stockholders reject about one out of ten freezeout offers, and that rejection is more likely when the bidder has controlled the firm for quite some time before the offer. Rejected offers take on average around three years to be settled in court, and litigation costs are almost never paid by minority stockholders. The court mostly prices rejected offers above the offer price, particularly when the firm is private, when the bidder has controlled the firm for an extensive period before the offer, and when the case is large. These findings suggest that minority stockholders consider most freezeout offers commensurate with the level of legal stockholder protection as enforced by the courts. The majority stockholder tends to underestimate the legal protection of minority rights in settings where these rights are particularly vulnerable to exploitation. Nevertheless, minority stockholders who take their case to court often face years of waiting, and for a highly unpredictable litigation return.

The Legal Aspects of the Protection of Minorities in the Process of Stabilisation and Association

Among the main conditions for joining the European Union (EU) is the protection of human rights, particularly the protection of minority rights. This paper will consider the protection of minority rights in Croatia since independence in 1991. In four chapters the paper analyses some of the essential segments of the protection of minorities in the international context as well as the obligations of Croatia in this context. The analysis centres on the Constitutional Law on the Rights of National Minorities adopted in December 2002. The position of minorities before and after this law came into force is compared.

Religious Freedom and Majority Rule: Marsilius of Padua “on” Abdullahi Ahmed an-Na‘im and the “Secular” Islamic State

AbstractThis article discusses Abdullahi Ahmed an-Na‘im's Islam and the Secular State from the perspective of Marsilius of Padua's political theory. Both authors share similar concepts of the relationship between religion, state policy, and the state, and allow for the integration of religious doctrines into state law. Nonetheless, the Marsilian conception provides stronger protection of unbelievers' and religious dissenters' civic rights. In the broader discourse on political theory of rights, Marsilius argues in favors of individual rights and a protection of minority rights, while an-Na‘im's theory of Shari‘a reform suggests a preference for a people's self-determination.