Discrimination and Equal Treatment of National Minorities in the Practice of the Supreme Court of Estonia
In a multinational society there is always a danger of falling victim to discrimination or unequal treatment on the grounds of nationality, language or origin. There are more than 100 nationalities represented in Estonia. The largest groups are Estonians (68.6 per cent), Russians (24.9 per cent), Ukrainians (2.1 per cent) and Belarusians (1.2 per cent). In this commentary, Sergei Jegorov, a lawyer practicing in Tallinn (Estonia), discusses the practice of the Supreme Court of Estonia in the field of discrimination and unequal treatment of national minorities.
Mr. Jegorov writes: Before determining the status and rights of a national minority, it is essential to ascertain who belongs to a national minority. According to Section 1 of the National Minorities Cultural Autonomy Act, a substantial part of the people who de facto correspond to the criteria of national minorities are not Estonian citizens and are therefore not covered by the institute of protection of national minorities. Having ratified the Framework Convention on Protection of National Minorities concluded in Strasbourg, on 1 February 1995, the Republic of Estonia has made a declaration that clarifies its understanding of the notion “national minority”, which is undefined in the Framework Convention itself. According to the declaration, a national minority shall mean Estonian citizens who reside in the territory of Estonia, have long-term, sound and permanent ties with Estonia, differ from Estonians by their ethnic belonging, cultural characteristics, religion or language and are led by their wish to collectively maintain their cultural customs, religion or language and which are the basis for their common identity.
According to Article 27 of the United Nations (UN) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
“In those states in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons
belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community
with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to
profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language.”
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has confirmed that the existence of ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities in a State party to the Covenant does not depend upon a decision of the State but has to be established on the basis of objective criteria. The Commissioner established that “[a] State party may not, therefore, restrict the rights under article 27 to its citizens alone”. (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, General Comment No. 23: The rights of minorities (Art. 27), 08/04/94, CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.5, Paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2, http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/0/fb7fb12c2fb8bb21c12563ed004df111?Opendocument)
Regarding the Estonian practice, one has to admit that people who de facto correspond to the criteria of national minorities are left without the protection granted to national minorities. Actually, persons belonging to a single ethnic group are distinguished on the basis of their citizenship, not nationality.