The question of territoriality is a central issue in designing language policies and languagerights. Since the 1990s more and more attention has been paid to language policy and to the linguistic rights of minorities in Europe. International documents adopted in the past 25
hardly enforce any of the languagerights contained in the laws of Serbia, e.g. the Vlachs, Roma, Bunjevac or Aškalije.
Although the preamble uses the term ethnic communities, the normative part of the Constitution refers exclusively to national minorities. In accordance with the Law on Protection of
preferences have excluded – or in other cases been used to include – indigenous peoples in various spheres of society.
It also considers the nature and scope of the rights of indigenous peoples as human rights, and the potential for the languagerights of indigenous peoples to be used to empower them.
The issue of languagerights has come to the forefront in the last decades, as evidenced by the literature on the subject and the political changes that have taken place granting greater rights to minorities (many of which speak languages other than the majority language). As
This article overviews the 2016 developments concerning the status and rights of European minorities with respect to administrative and judicial proceedings, with special focus on language rights. The longest section of the article is devoted to the activities of the Council of Europe, including the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and the implementation of the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages, as well as the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. Furthermore, the relevant legal developments in the activities of the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the European Union are presented.
– including, importantly, languagerights – as a matter of course. In other words, for Kymlicka, the propriety of providing national minority groups with such cultural protections is not a contingent matter.
But surely things are not as simple as Kymlicka supposes. Whether asking the members of a smaller
that can inhibit the full exercise of rights and lead to harmful discrimination. It essentially sees language as a disadvantage for non-English speakers, which must be managed until it can be overcome. Thus, languagerights in the U.S. legal system are seen as guaranteeing the right to be free from
” for citizens of the eu which cannot be denied in a discriminatory manner. 12
Moreover, even the existing provisions dealing with languagerights of national minorities in the public field have in common clauses that make their exercise dependent upon preconditions and/or impose certain limitations