Developments in the Field of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages: June 2003 - June 2004

European Yearbook of Minority Issues

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 377-387

  Bultrini, Antonio ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 72449142441     PISSN: 15707865     EISSN: 22116117     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/221161104X00200     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. On 30 June 2004, therefore at the very end of the relevant period, the Committee of Ministers examined and made public the second report concerning Hungary. The Committee of Ministers also adopted its own recommendations to the Hungarian authorities. However, for editorial reasons, this report will be commented on in the next volume, together with all the other reports of the first series of second reports.
2. The reports of the Committee of Experts made public by the Committee of Ministers are available on the Charter's website http://www.coe.int/minlang.
3. In this respect see Jorg Polakiewicz, Treaty-Making in the Council of Europe (Strasbourg, 1999), 43-7.
4. See Article 3(2) of the Charter.
5. Report of the Committee of Experts on the application of the Charter, ECRML (2004)1, paras. 36-7.
6. Report of the Committee of Experts on the application of the Charter, ECRML (2004)1, para.37.
7. For a general presentation of the Charter and particularly for the different scope of Parts II and III of the Charter, see Antonio Bultrini, "Developments in the Field of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages", 2 EYMI (2002/3), 435-43. This approach was specifically praised by the Committee of Experts in finding A. of the report.
8. See paras. 33-5 of the report for some introductory remarks to this aspect. See also the British government's comments on this point, at page 63 of the report.
9. See finding C. of the report.
10. See finding B. of the report.
11. See finding A. of the report.
12. See also the factual clarifications provided by the British government, at page 69 et seq. of the report.
13. See finding F. of the report.
14. See finding K. of the report.
15. See paras. 131-4 of the report as regards Welsh. See also paras. 232-4 of the report, concerning Scottish Gaelic (this provision was not chosen for Irish).
16. See the second report on the application of the Charter in Norway, ECRML (2003)2, paras. 14, 23,29-31,38,40, findings D. and F.,the Recommendation RecChL (2003)2 adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 3 September 2003, point 2, the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Norway, ECRML (2001)6, paras.11,19-20, 28, 32, 35, 38, 42, 45, 47, 49, finding D., and the Recommendation RecChL (2003)2 adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 21 November 2001, point 2. Cf. also the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Sweden, ECRML (2003)1, paras. 30-32, concerning the different issue of Scanian. The Committee of Experts has not really taken the view that Scanian should be considered as a language in its own right. As the Committee of Experts has stated in the report in question, "(w)here there exists a linguistic continuum with persons in adjacent territories speaking variants similar to one another, the distinction between a language and a dialect can be a difficult question" (ibid., para. 31). It has therefore confined itself to expressing its concern for any form of prejudice against a specific dialect or language, irrespective of the official status.
17. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above, para. 36.
18. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above, para. 37.
19. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,, para. 38, as well as finding C. and Recommendation RecChL (2004)3 adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9June 2004, point 1.
20. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,., paras. 39-40, as well as finding C. and Recommendation RecChL (2004)3 adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9June 2004, point 1.
21. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,., especially paras. 43-44, as well as finding D. and Recommendation RecChL (2004)3 adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9June 2004, point 2.
22. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,., especially paras. 47-54, as well as finding H., and Recommendation RecChL (2004)3 adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9June 2004, point 5.
23. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,., para. 52.
24. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,., paras. 83-91, as well as finding E., and Recommendation RecChL (2004)3 adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9June 2004, point 3.
25. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,., especially paras. 155-9,as well as finding F.,and Recommendation RecChL (2004)3 adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9June 2004, point 4. At para. 158, the Committee of Experts has even quoted the position of the European Commission of the European Community concerning the benefits of linguistic skills in the economic sphere.
26. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,., paras. 69-73.
27. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,., para. 76.
28. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,, para. 78.
29. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above, para. 79.
30. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,., para. 65.
31. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,., paras. 94 and 168.
32. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Slovenia, quoted above,., paras.151 and 226.
33. Opinion of 22 September 2000, made public on 31 October 2001, especially at para. 22, available on the Framework Convention website (www.coe.int/T'/E/human rights/minorities/).
34. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Denmark, ECRML (2004)2, paras.15, 28-9, and 49.
35. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Denmark, ECRML (2004)2,., paras.13-4, 22-6, as well as finding C. and Recommendation RecChL (2004)2 adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 19 May 2004, point 2.
36. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Denmark, ECRML (2004)2,, para. 27.
37. See the first evaluation report on the application of the Charter in Denmark, ECRML (2004)2,., finding B.
38. From the name of its promoter, an Italian member ofthe European Parliament from the German-speaking minority in the North-East of the country (Alto-Adige/Sudtirol), A5-0271/2003.
39. See recommendation 2.11 and point 17of the additional detailed recommendations.
40. See point 6 of the additional detailed recommendations; see also point 7 concerning the Framework Convention.
41. See point 26 of the additional detailed recommendations; see also point 27 concerning the Framework Convention.
42. See point 28 of the additional detailed recommendations.
43. See point 30 of the additional detailed recommendations.