13 June 2002 

Presentation by the President of the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, Professor Rainer Hofmann

at the 799th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies

Chairman, Ministers’ Deputies,

I would first of all like to thank you for inviting me to introduce the third activity report of the Advisory Committee. I believe it is extremely useful that in addition to meetings concentrated on specific countries, we have an opportunity periodically to exchange views on the monitoring of the Framework Convention in general in order to improve further the effectiveness of our joint efforts to promote the principles contained in this treaty.

The Advisory Committee has now existed for four years and we have reached the first rotation in its membership. This is a good juncture to take stock of the progress achieved and shortcomings experienced in the first stages of the monitoring  and  I would  therefore like to start by making some general comments on the input of the Framework Convention to the minority protection in Europe.

The Framework Convention is today a truly pan-European human rights instrument, which has been ratified by 35 States. A few years ago, some critics argued that an impressive rate of ratification could be merely a reflection of the weakness of the standards and the monitoring mechanism of the Framework Convention.  But looking back at the developments since the outset of our activities, I would argue that the monitoring mechanism has developed way beyond such small expectations. The development of the monitoring and the adoption of the first 11 Resolutions of the Committee of Ministers and 19 detailed Opinions of the Advisory Committee have demonstrated the value of the Convention and helped to determine the limits of the inherent flexibility of its substantive provisions. And as regards working methods, much more have been achieved than the critics of Resolution (97)10 expected. It is for example noteworthy that we are to my knowledge the first and only human rights treaty monitoring mechanism based on state reports to have introduced country-visits as a regular element of the monitoring. Also, we have together made progress in terms of increasing transparency of the process especially through early publication of a  number of Opinions. However, I think that we can advance even further in this direction. For example, States could consider making the Opinions public immediately upon receipt.

As a result of all these positive developments I have mentioned, the role of the Framework Convention as the main yardstick of minority protection in Europe has been considerably consolidated.

During our country-visits, we see repeatedly evidence of how by invoking provisions of the Framework Convention both governmental and non-governmental bodies and for example Ombudsman offices have been able to further minority protection in a range of fields. The Framework Convention has prompted tangible improvements not only in administrative practices but also in legislation in a number of countries.

The Framework Convention is also a central tool at the international level. For example, the European Commission devotes particular attention to the Framework Convention in assessing progress made by the candidate countries with regard to the membership criterion on the protection of minorities. This is also reflected in the Commission’s Regular Reports, which refer to the opinions of the Advisory Committee.

I would not however like to exaggerate the level of endorsement of the principles of the Framework Convention. There are still important gaps in the coverage of the Framework Convention in Europe, and even in State Parties the potential of the Framework Convention is not always fully utilised, either intentionally or due to the lack of information. And when I talk about the potential of the Framework Convention, I mean its potential not only to national minorities but also to majorities and the Governments concerned. After all, the introduction of legal standards and an impartial and objective international supervisory mechanism help to de-dramatise and de-politicise debates on the human rights of persons belonging to national minorities and to challenge any extremist positions on these matters.

I therefore would like to take this opportunity to encourage those States that have not yet done so to ratify the Framework Convention. And as regards State Parties, I would like to refer to Appendix II of the activity report and note that in some cases the reporting delays are now so significant that additional ways need to be considered in order to bring the States concerned effectively into the sphere of the monitoring. I consider this instrumental not only because their participation in the monitoring exercise is a legal obligation under Article 25 of the Framework Convention but also, and more importantly, because the monitoring process is a central tool to guarantee the implementation of the substantive articles of this treaty.

But as you will see in the new activity report, we have in most cases been very pleased with the co-operative spirit shown by the States concerned throughout the monitoring process, both in written correspondence and during country-visits. I think it is encouraging that even on most sensitive issues we have been able to conduct a dialogue in a constructive atmosphere. In this respect, the flexibility of the Framework Convention has often been a blessing rather than a burden. It has enabled us to encourage improvements in the implementation of the Framework Convention without having to take a rigid inflexible position on the legal interpretation of a specific provision.  Even in cases where the views of the Advisory Committee and the country concerned have substantially differed, for example on the question of the personal scope of application, we have often been able to look together for pragmatic solutions for advancing minority protection without being overly dogmatic.

The Advisory Committee is well aware of the fact that our body would be quite ineffective without the support of the Committee of Ministers and that conflicting signals from the two bodies involved in the monitoring of the Framework Convention would rapidly erode the whole mechanism. Therefore, we have been pleased to note that the first Resolutions adopted by you have largely echoed the message formulated by the Advisory Committee. While they could be more detailed, I think that the Resolutions adopted so far have shown that the involvement of a political body in the monitoring of the Framework Convention has a more positive role than predicted by some. Your work contributes to the weight of the analyses of the independent experts, provided of course that the Resolutions continue to reflect the findings of the Advisory Committee. We may not agree on every detail, but I trust that we will continue to send coherent and consistent signals thanks to the fact that we share the common goal of strengthening the protection of national minorities in Europe.

Mr Chairman,

We in the Advisory Committee depend on your support not  only in your capacity as the ultimate monitoring body of the Framework Convention. Also your decisions in relation to the budget are instrumental as they determine whether the Advisory Committee is in a position to carry out its task effectively. Unfortunately, the developments in this sphere have not been altogether encouraging. With its annual budget of some 800 000 Euros, the monitoring of the Framework Convention continues to suffer from inadequate staff and operational resources, which are in no way commensurate with the importance and the size of our tasks.

As indicated in the new activity report, the lack of adequate resources has already led to significant delays in the adoption of Opinions in spite of the measures we have taken to make our working methods as effective as possible. I am afraid that the situation may deteriorate further when the second monitoring cycle commences with 23 state reports due in 2004, even though we will be making to you proposals later this year to streamline the reporting process through a revised outline for state reports.

We are not looking for a massive budget allocation, but a reasonable increase in the secretariat and operational resources is clearly needed. I mentioned earlier that the States concerned do not always use all the potential of the Framework Conventional. I think the Council of Europe itself also risks undercutting the potential of its Framework Convention unless the issue of resources is addressed.

In this connection, I would like to recall that the most promising recent developments include initiatives to ensure follow-up of  the implementation of the results of the monitoring of the Framework Convention, which you have rightly stressed in your Resolutions. As described in the activity report, so-called “follow-up seminars” are being organised in a number of countries. Such  events have already been successfully carried out in Finland and Croatia and similar plans are underway in Estonia, Hungary and Romania. I think that such initiatives could turn the Framework Convention mechanism into a pioneer of monitoring human rights through constructive and continuous dialogue.  I would therefore encourage all the States concerned to consider organising such sessions in co-operation with our Secretariat. One particularly valuable feature of these events is their inclusive nature; they can bring together not only the Advisory Committee and the Government and the minorities concerned but also representatives of other important bodies working on related issues, such as the Committee of Experts of the Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and ECRI. Such joint efforts are one way to increase synergies within the Council of Europe with a view to improving the effectiveness of the organisation, an area where there is still scope for improvement.

 

But, again, these initiatives can not be fully developed and expanded without adequate resources.

Mr Chairman,

In conclusion, I would say that the monitoring of the Framework Convention has in a relatively short period of time developed in an impressive manner. This is largely due to the fact that the relations between the Advisory Committee and the Committee of Ministers have been so constructive. I trust that your support will help us to address the remaining concerns about insufficiency of resources, which  threatens the further development of our important work. This would help us together to take this most promising process forward - to bring it from analysis to action.

I look forward to answering questions on the report or on other matters related to the Framework Convention.

Thank you for your attention.