János Fiala-Butora, Changing European Minority Rights Standards – Improvement or Regression?, 31(5) International Journal of Minority and Group Rights 1-33 (2024)
Abstract: The Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, the only comprehensive international minority rights treaty, was adopted in 1995 to counter ethnocentric exclusionary tendencies characteristic of newly emerging democracies in East-Central Europe. It has been evaluated as largely successful in developing progressive standards on minority rights, while judged less efficient in implementing them across member states. This article shows on the example of Slovakia that this traditional narrative conceals another important one: while the Framework Convention’s monitoring body, the Advisory Committee, maintains formally progressive positions, in substance it is becoming more accommodating of exclusionary practices.
By comparing the Advisory Committee’s standards expressed in its periodic opinions on Slovakia to developments on the ground, the article demonstrates that the international standards are in fact deteriorating. The Advisory Committee’s recent opinions are much more favourable to the Slovak government’s policies on minority rights. Yet, a detailed analysis shows that those policies have not become more minority-friendly in practice. In fact, in several ways they have regressed. The current acceptance of practices it criticized in the past is an important shift in the Advisory Committee’s position. Yet this shift is not reflected in its formal standards, which remain progressive. The analysis shows that the Advisory Committee’s lack of transparency in its monitoring procedures leads to a misrepresentation of the situation of minority rights, which provides cover for anti-minority practices. This makes it difficult for outside observers to evaluate the true state of minority rights and the effectiveness of international standards.
In closing, the article engages with the normative assumptions behind the Advisory Committee’s approach. The Framework Convention does not have a strong enforcement mechanism, therefore cooperation with governments is essential to ensure compliance. However, by accommodating exclusionary practices, the Committee also legitimizes them. While valid arguments can be raised both for and against this approach, it is difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of this trade-off because of its clandestine nature. More transparent monitoring would give legitimacy to an objective international standard, which the current approach risks undermining.
János Fiala-Butora, The lasting impact of the Beneš decrees in Slovakia, in: Iván Gyurcsík (ed.), Collective Guilt in Central Europe after the Second World War and Now (Budapest, Ludovika University Press, 2024), 93-122
https://www.academia.edu/124384611/The_Lasting_Impact_of_the_Bene%C5%A1_Decrees_in_Slovakia
Abstract: The Beneš Decrees, laws punishing the German and Hungarian communities of Czechoslovakia after the Second World War, are usually described as a historical phenomenon. This article shows that recently they have become a current legal issue after Slovak authorities have started applying the decree on confiscating property against current owners of property in Slovakia. There are several legal avenues for how confiscations can currently take place. The most famous example was exposed by the case of Bosits v. Slovakia, decided by the European Court of Human Rights in 2020. However, some other forms are more frequent and less transparent. Not only are these procedures contrary to Slovak law, but they are also taking place in a very different legal context compared to the postwar era. Slovakia as a member of the European Union is bound by the EU Treaties, and is a signatory to human rights treaties that protect the right to property and freedom from discrimination. Confiscations on the basis of ethnicity, applying the principle of collective guilt, constitute a severe violation of these norms. The Beneš Decrees affect the present not only through confiscations; they serve as the ideological basis for the current relationship between the majority and minorities in Slovakia. To overcome them, the first step should be quantifying the problems they have caused, to be able to offer specific suggestions on how these could be remedied.
János Fiala-Butora, Current confiscations of property based on collective guilt under the Beneš Decrees in Slovakia as a violation of international norms - when the past haunts the present, 17 European Journal of Minority Studies 136-164 (2024)
Link: https://biblioscout.net/article/10.35998/ejm-2024-0009
Abstract: The Beneš Decrees, laws punishing the German and Hungarian communities of Czechoslovakia after World War II based on the principle of collective guilt, are considered a historical phenomenon by most authors. This article argues that they give basis to violations of fundamental rights that are taking place currently. After showing that Slovak authorities started applying the decree to confiscating property in 2018 against current owners of property, it analyses how these measures can take place without avoiding international scrutiny, and how the Slovak government tries to justify them. Slovakia as a member of the European Union is bound by its Charter of Fundamental Rights, and is a signatory to human rights treaties that protect the right to property and freedom from discrimination. Confiscations on the basis of ethnicity, applying the principle of collective guilt, constitute a severe violation of these norms. The article argues that it is not the subsequent Slovak governments’ intention to conduct confiscations currently, but their inability to address the historic problem caused by the Decrees led to legal uncertainty which manifests in the current problems.