Courts and Consociations: Human Rights versus Power-sharing

Consociations are power-sharing arrangements, increasingly used to manage ethno-nationalist, ethno-linguistic, and ethno-religious conflicts. Current examples include Belgium, Bosnia, Northern Ireland, Burundi, and Iraq. Despite their growing popularity, they have begun to be challenged before human rights courts as being incompatible with human rights norms, particularly equality and non-discrimination.

Courts and Consociations examines the use of power-sharing agreements, their legitimacy, and their compatibility with human rights law. Key questions include to what extent, if any, consociations conflict with the liberal individualist preferences of international human rights institutions, and to what extent consociational power-sharing may be justified to preserve peace and the integrity of political settlements.

In three critical cases, the European Court of Human Rights has considered equality challenges to important consociational practices, twice in Belgium and then in Sejdic and Finci v Bosnia regarding the constitution established for Bosnia Herzegovina under the Dayton Agreement. The Court's decision in Sejdic and Finci has significantly altered the approach it previously took to judicial review of consociational arrangements in Belgium. This book accounts for this change and assess its implications. The problematic aspects of the current state of law are demonstrated. Future negotiators in places riven by potential or actual bloody ethnic conflicts may now have less flexibility in reaching a workable settlement, which may unintentionally contribute to sustaining such conflicts and make it more likely that negotiators will consider excluding regional and international courts from reviewing these political settlements.

Courts and Consociations:How human rights courts may destabilize power-sharing settlements

We consider the use of consociational arrangements to manage ethno-nationalist, ethno-linguistic, and ethno-religious conflicts, and their compatibility with non-discrimination and equality norms. Key questions include to what extent, if any, consociations conflict with the dictates of global justice and the liberal individualist preferences of international human rights institutions, and to what extent consociational power-sharing may be justified to preserve peace and the integrity of political settlements. In three critical cases, the European Court of Human Rights has considered equality challenges to important consociational practices, twice in Belgium and, most recently, in Sejdic and Finci, concerning the constitutional arrangements established for Bosnia Herzegovina under the Dayton Agreement. The Court’s recent decision in Sejdic and Finci has significantly altered the approach it previously took to judicial review of consociational arrangements in the Belgian cases. We seek to account for this change and assess its implications. We identify problematic aspects of the judgment and conclude that, although the Court’s decision indicates one possible trajectory of human rights courts’ reactions to consociations, this would be an unfortunate development because it leaves future negotiators in places riven by potential or manifest bloody ethnic conflicts with considerably less flexibility in reaching a settlement. That in turn may unintentionally contribute to sustaining such conflicts and make it more likely that advisors to negotiators will advise them to exclude regional and international courts from having standing in the management of political settlements.

A need to belong?: The prevalence of experiences of belonging and exclusion in school among minority ethnic children living in the 'White hinterlands'

Based on a survey of 711 children in Northern Ireland, this paper explores a range of aspects of experiences of belonging and exclusion in relation to school among three main minority ethnic groups: Irish Traveller, Chinese/Asian and European Migrant children. The study examines variations between each group and how they compare to the White settled population. The findings indicate that all three groups experience lower levels of belonging and higher levels of exclusion compared to their White, settled Northern Irish peers. The experiences of Irish Traveller children were the most negative. The article adds to the dearth of data on minority ethnic children living in mainly white regions in the UK and Ireland. It argues for the need to move beyond achievement gaps in assessing minority ethnic children’s differential experiences in education and highlights the potential of belongingness as a concept for the further study of differential patterns of need and processes of inclusion.

A Cat's Lick: Democratisation and Minority Communities in the Post-Soviet Baltic

The research on Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania has pointed out some controversial social and political developments since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Crucially, there is a discrepancy between the governments' commitment to creating democratic political regimes, to ensuring harmonious social relations and to accommodating the ethno-cultural diversity of the resident communities. In reflecting on the legacies of the Soviet past, the book addresses the role non-titular populations have played in the process of democratisation and the relation between the states, societies and minorities in the post-Soviet Baltic states. The argument proceeds along three lines. Firstly, the book examines the institutional dimension of democratisation in the region, thereby addressing the processes of state- and nation-building as reflected in various policy-developments. Secondly, it compares the impact of ethno-cultural diversity on the development of the respective Baltic nation-states. The discussion makes clear that the framework of Baltic political communities was designed to suit the interests of the titular groups and thus resulted in the marginalisation of the minority communities. Thirdly, the book assesses the participation of minority communities in the development, criticism and improvement of state institutions and policies since independence. The analysis points out that, two decades after independence, the post-Soviet Baltic states and societies are seen by many members of the majority groups as primarily serving the interests of their ethnic community. In this situation, the members of the non-titular communities need to adapt to the majorities' perceptions in order to benefit from the achievements of democratisation.

Resident Aliens? Explaining Minority Disaffection with Democratic Politics in the Baltic States

Commentators and scholars alike recognize the important role political dissatisfaction plays in the process of regime change. A considerable body of literature has used dissatisfaction with a regime and distrust in political institutions to explain political dynamics during democratization's initial phase, yet these indicators are rarely used to assess disaffection with politics in established democratic regimes. Recent research on the post-communist region has established that citizens demonstrate high levels of political alienation, and that ethnic minority communities in particular are widely dissatisfied with democratic politics, institutions and regimes. This paper uses the 2004 data from the New Baltic Barometer to analyse individual-level disaffection with politics among the minorities in the Baltic States and explores the structural roots of such disaffection. The paper draws upon interviews with political representatives of minority communities in order to understand their perceptions of opportunities to participate in decision-making. Building on quantitative and qualitative analysis, the paper concludes that disaffection with politics among both the mass of ethnic minorities and their elite groups is best explained by the misrepresentation of minority interests in post-communist Baltic polities.

A Delicate Balancing Act: Negotiating with Gatekeepers for Ethical Research When Researching Minority Communities

Research and processes of knowledge production are often based on racialised and imperialistic frameworks that have either led to the exclusion or pathologisation of minority groups. Researchers address issues of exclusion by adopting recruitment strategies that involve negotiating with gatekeepers to ensure the inclusion of minority or marginalised groups. This often involves in-depth scrutiny of gatekeepers and requires the researchers to negotiate deals and to make personal disclosures. However, there remains relatively little discussion on the pragmatic ethical issues facing researchers in the field as a result of these interactions.
This paper suggests that interactions with gatekeepers present ethical issues that can be effectively addressed and managed by researchers through the exercise of phronesis. This allows researchers to make critical ethical decisions based on the specific characteristics of the research sites and subjects, not least of which are those issues that emerge as a consequence of researcher positionality. Such decisions are not necessarily identified or accommodated through bureaucratic processes which govern research ethics. We advance the notion of research ethics as an ongoing process that requires researcher skills and engagement, rather than one where it is a one off bureaucratic exercise.