7 Int'l J. on Minority & Group Rts. 291 (2000)
A Frame an Incomplete Painting: Comparison of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities with International Standards and Monitoring Procedures

handle is hein.journals/ijmgr7 and id is 311 raw text is: International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 7: 291-304, 2000.  291
 Kluwer Law International. Printed in the Netherlands.
A Frame an Incomplete Painting: Comparison of the Framework
Convention for the Protection of National Minorities with Inter-
national Standards and Monitoring Procedures
GUDMUNDUR ALFREDSSON*
Raoul Wallenberg Institute, University of Lund, Sweden
Introduction
The Council of Europe is known for and rightly proud of its contribution to the
promotion and protection of human rights. The Convention for the Protection of
Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, with its Protocols, is a credible and
successful flagship. Its standards are increasingly being incorporated in nation-
al laws and used by national courts. Significant case-law has emerged from the
European Court of Human Rights which stands as a model for other interna-
tional organizations. With a foundation in democracy and the rule of law, the
Council has made significant progress towards translating the human rights
standards into reality through the objective and impartial application of written
law to individual complaints.
In comparison, the Framework Convention for the Protection of National
Minorities (FC) and the mandate of the Advisory Committee (AC) under that
Convention are quite disappointing. In the first part of this article, the FC will
be subjected to a critical assessment. In the second part, the AC as the monitor-
ing body and the Council of Europe will be encouraged to build on whatever
strengths the FC possesses and to counter some of its shortcomings.
By way of conclusion, it is argued that minority rights, including special
measures and group rights, must be addressed in a protocol to the European
Convention if persons belonging to minorities are ever to enjoy full dignity and
equal rights with majority populations. Furthermore, it is argued that judicial
response to demands for special measures would seriously contribute to the real-
*  The author is an Icelandic lawyer with an M.C.J.-degree from New York University School of
Law (1976) and an S.J.D.-degree from Harvard Law School (1982). He worked in the UN Office of Legal
Affairs in New York and the UN Centre for Human Rights in Geneva from 1983 to 1995. He is current-
ly the Director of the Raoul Wallenberg Institute for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law and Professor
at the University of Lund in Sweden. This article is to a large extent based on a presentation to a Council
of Europe minority rights seminar in Strasbourg in October 1998.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 2,700 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Access to this content requires a subscription. Please visit the following page to request a quote or trial:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?