New Article on Minority Rights in the Former Soviet Union
Reply-To: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
From: MINELRES moderator <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1999 08:46:53 +0200 (EET)
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Subject: New Article on Minority Rights in the Former Soviet Union
From: MINELRES moderator <[email protected]>
Original sender: Tim Potier <[email protected]>
New Article on Minority Rights in the Former Soviet Union
NEW JOURNAL ARTICLE: "Minority Rights in the Former Soviet Union".
by Dr Tim Potier.
.
"Minority Rights in the Former Soviet Union"
Coventry Law Journal (September 1999)
pp.43-89.
"Minority Rights in the Former Soviet Union" considers the
post-independence experience of minority rights protection in all 15
republics of the former Soviet Union.
The article is introduced with a brief outline of the 20th century
dynamics of the protection of minorities, from the League system (when
minority rights were "in fashion") to the pre-Wall United Nations
system, when such fell distinctly out of favour. The erection of
Soviet man, coupled with the later manipulation of minority
populations in many of the republics, just prior to the collapse of
the Wall, is noted.
The article continues with a concise overview of the principal
international instruments, mainly of the past decade, that have sought
to entrench a, particularly but not exclusively European, framework
for the protection of minorities in international law. Such important
instruments as the Framework Convention for the Protection of National
Minorities are highlighted.
The bulk of the article, however, is devoted to the individual
treatment of minorities in the municipal legislative systems of the 15
former republics. This includes consideration of such diverse items as
the recent language legislation in Kazakstan to the problem of the
naturalisation of the Crimean Tatars. The background to conflict in
the north Caucasus, as well the possibility of constitutional
settlement in the south Caucasus is considered. Additionally, the
special constitutional arrangements for the Gagauz in Moldova and in
Tatarstan are noted.
The main purpose of this article is not to provide a detailed
elaboration of the current international standards on minority rights,
but to provide a much needed and detailed overview of the legal
protection of national minorities from Estonia to the Kyrghyz
Republic. It concludes:
Nobody would deny the enormous economic and social pressures that all
of the former Soviet republics have been placed under during the
1990s. As the decade closes, it is important to stress the methodical
and steady progress that has been made by all and the important
contribution of (international) institutions, such as the OSCE,
Council of Europe and United Nations, in that improvement. It is a
testament, to this hard work, that, on a broader level inter-ethnic
peace and stability has reigned fairly constant during the past three
years. When any nation enjoys its rebirth (including Russia),
particularly after decades of repression, there is always a (perhaps
understandable) temptation to give preference to its own titular
people. Many of the countries have suffered this accusation. What
remains to be achieved, however, is a consolidation of independence
with an increased recognition that the new and subsequent generations
of minority/non-titular peoples, represent not a reflection of the
past, but part of the richness of any country's future.
I am sure that over the next few years much will be achieved, but one
thing bothers me. There is an increasing tendency to single out
certain groups for blame. Anti-semitism is on the rise (even in
official circles); particularly in Russia, there is an increased,
further, targetting of Caucasians (Armenians, Georgians and Azeris);
and, of course, the Chechen people have been rather simplistically,
and unfairly, vilified.
Minority rights have, I believe, a bright future in the former Soviet
Union. However, patience and good faith will always need to be
paramount. The strains of life can make this difficult sometimes, but
the rewards are, at least, considerable.
It is current up to mid-May 1999.
This article arose from a conference held at Coventry University on
11th December 1998, entitled: "The Globalisation of Human Rights -
Problems and Prospects for the New Millenium".
.
Copies of the September issue can be obtained upon contacting the
School of International Studies and Law at the University of Coventry
(UK).
(t) 00-44-1203-838256
(f) 00-44-1203-838679
(e) [email protected]=20
.
Tim Potier is both Assistant Professor and Head of Law at Intercollege
in Nicosia, Cyprus. He is a specialist on minority and indigenous
peoples' rights, particularly in the former Soviet Union. He is also a
specialist on autonomy/law of self-determination, particularly in the
south Caucasus.
Dr Tim Potier, LLB (Hons), LLM, PhD
Assistant Professor in Law
Programme Coordinator, Law
Intercollege, Nicosia
(t, o) 00-357-2-592431
(f, o) 00-357-2-357481
(e, o) [email protected]
(e, h) [email protected]
.
ERRATUM:
There is an error on p.44. The relevant paragraph, wrongly edited,
should have read:
Of the 15 countries of the former Soviet Union, only Kazakstan has, to
date, not ratified the Covenant. During the past few years, a number
of the 14 that have, have been presenting their "Initial Reports" to
the Human Rights Committee: the body that monitors compliance with the
commitments undertaken upon ratifying the Covenant. Sections from some
of these reports and Committee "Observations" will be quoted during
the course of this article.
--
==============================================================
MINELRES - a forum for discussion on minorities in Central&Eastern
Europe
Submissions: [email protected]
Subscription/inquiries: [email protected]
List archive: http://www.riga.lv/minelres/archive.htm
==============================================================