Promoting Minority Rights Through Education

Introduction

• The Council of Europe Charter on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights Education (EDC/HRE) was adopted in 2010 and signed by 47 member states.
• It was recognized as a major achievement after almost 10 years of development.
• In November 2012, the first reports evaluating its implementation were presented at a Council of Europe conference in Strasbourg.
• The conference aimed to raise public awareness about the Charter, gathering officials, policymakers, educators, NGOs, academics, and scholars.
• As a non-legally binding document, its impact depends on voluntary convergence at the national level and the active involvement of stakeholders and civil society.
• The CoE Charter promotes democratization and human rights through education as a lifelong learning process.
• The future positive effect of this initiative depends on various factors accompanying the implementation of its provisions.
• This paper highlights the potential positive role of the Charter in supporting the implementation of the Council of Europe Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, even in countries that have not signed or ratified it.

Brief History of the EDC/HRE Charter

• Encouraging active citizen engagement in social and political life has become a growing political priority at national and European levels.
• In 2006, the Council and the European Parliament identified social and civic competencies as key competencies for lifelong learning towards the European horizon 2020.
• The Strategic Framework for European Cooperation in Education and Training (ET 2020) also introduced the "active citizenship" element as a main objective for education systems throughout Europe.
• Education contributes to social cohesion and social justice, enabling positive social change.
• It fosters democracy and the implementation/protection of human and minority rights by equipping all members of society with knowledge, skills, and attitudes to contribute to the development and well-being of their society.
• Education's role as a defense mechanism against violence, racism, extremism, xenophobia, discrimination, and intolerance has gained impetus in the last decade.
• The Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights Education (EDC/HRE) has a history of over 15 years of active promotion before being officially recognized as a goal before national governments and civil society.
• Key documents include:
  • United Nations Integrated Framework of Action on Education for Peace, Human Rights and Democracy in 1994
  • United Nations Decade for Human Rights Education (1995-2004) Plan of Action
  • Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Recommendation on human rights education (PACE Rec 1346/1997)
  • Committee of Ministers Declaration and programme on education for democratic citizenship in 1999
  • A number of Recommendations and Resolutions by the Committee of Ministers: CM/Rec(2002)12, Resolution (78)41, CM/Rec(85)7
  • PACE Rec 1682 (2004), PACE Rec 1849 (2008)
  • Declaration and the Action Plan of the Council of Europe 3rd Summit of Heads of State and Government (Warsaw, May 2005)
  • European Year of Citizenship through Education and the Conclusions presented at the evaluation conference in Sinaia (April 2006).
• On 11 May 2010, the Ministers for Foreign Affairs and representatives of 47 Council of Europe member states adopted the Charter based on the Committee of Ministers Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)7.
• This act constitutes the key point of reference throughout Europe for policies, measures, and actions in the field of Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights Education (EDC/HRE) with its 16 articles.
• The Charter is divided into 4 sections: General Provisions, Objectives and Principles, Policies, and Evaluation and Co-operation.
• It reflects the Council of Europe's understanding of the key role of education in promoting democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, and as a mechanism for preventing their violation.
• The support demonstrated by Council of Europe member states to the EDC/HRE Charter reaffirms the engagement of national governments, recognizing the Cultural Convention adopted in 1954, also signed by Belarus, the Holy See, and Kazakhstan.
• 50 years after its endorsement, the Cultural Convention remains a key instrument promoting cultural awareness, tolerance, respect for diversity, and common values.
• Following the Summit of Heads of State and Government of the Council of Europe (Warsaw, 2005), the promotion of intercultural and interfaith dialogue became one of the Organization's priority actions, also underlying the provisions of the Charter on EDC/HRE.

Status of the Charter

• One of the major challenges and advantages is the fact that the document is not legally binding.
• A point of contention among Council of Europe member states was the legal form of the final document.
• The current status of the Charter has enabled flexibility in its implementation with regard to country-specific situations.
• For the last two years most of the member states has appointed their national consultants serving as a link between national governments and Council of Europe with regard to the EDC/HRE policies.
• No changes of legislation were required has allowed countries to focus on implementation of elements of the Charter with respect to their existing capacities and national educational strategies.
• The decision to leave national governments "free" to decide how to address implementation can be considered a political compromise to increase involvement and impact, even in nation-states that might not have signed the document otherwise.
• It can also be interpreted as a strategy for activating support from non-EU member states, where the focus on EDC/HRE is not always present.
• This is supported by reference to the Strategy 2020 for the development of the EU, which introduced educational reform with requirements for the introduction of the eight key competences in the process of life-long learning.
• Five out of the eight key competences can be viewed as directly linked to EDC/HRE goals: communication in the mother tongue, communication in foreign languages, social and civic competences, sense of initiative and entrepreneurship, cultural awareness and expression.
• Voluntary adoption of the Charter puts focus on the values and ideas it promotes, not on political/bureaucratic aspects of implementation.
• This "freedom of selection" is a challenge to be addressed if the goal is to foster positive societal change throughout Europe, especially outside the European Union.
• The Charter is morally binding, addressing core values of democratic global society: democracy, human rights, and rule of law.
• A possible way to overcome selective implementation is by introducing common standards and indicators for evaluating implementation, monitoring progress, and dynamics of development at the international level.

Structure of the EDC/HRE Charter and Key Elements

• The Charter sets out 16 specific articles concerning education for democratic citizenship and human rights education under four main headings:
  • Section I - General Provisions:
    • Article 1 - Scope
    • Article 2 - Definitions
    • Article 3 - Relationships between EDC and HRE
    • Article 4 - Constitutional structures and member state priorities
  • Section II - Objective and Principles:
    • Article 5 - Objectives and principles
  • Section III - Policies:
    • Article 6 - Formal general and vocational education
    • Article 7 - Higher education
    • Article 8 - Democratic governance
    • Article 9 - Training
    • Article 10 - Role of NGOs, youth organisations and other stakeholders
    • Article 11 - Criteria for evaluation
    • Article 12 - Research
    • Article 13 - Skills for promoting social cohesion, valuing diversity and handling differences and conflicts
  • Section IV - Evaluation and co- operation:
    • Article 14 - Evaluation and review
    • Article 15 - Co-operation in follow up activities
    • Article 16 - International and European co- operation
• Accounting for differences in member state priorities and emphasizing respect for constitutional structures (Article 4), the Convention introduces a common definition of key concepts (Article 2) and their inter-relation (Article 3).
• EDC/HRE Charter, Article 2:
  • "Education for democratic citizenship" means education, training, awareness-raising, information, practices and activities which aim, by equipping learners with knowledge, skills and understanding and developing their attitudes and behaviour, to empower them to exercise and defend their democratic rights and responsibilities in society, to value diversity and to play an active part in democratic life, with a view to the promotion and protection of democracy and the rule of law.
  • "Human rights education" means education, training, awareness raising, information, practices and activities which aim, by equipping learners with knowledge, skills and understanding and developing their attitudes and behaviour, to empower learners to contribute to the building and defence of a universal culture of human rights in society, with a view to the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
• EDC/HRE Charter, Article 3:
  • Education for democratic citizenship and human rights education are closely inter-related and mutually supportive. They differ in focus and scope rather than in goals and practices. Education for democratic citizenship focuses primarily on democratic rights and responsibilities and active participation, in relation to the civic, political, social, economic, legal and cultural spheres of society, while human rights education is concerned with the broader spectrum of human rights and fundamental freedoms in every aspect of people’s lives.
• The Objectives and principles section (Article 5) makes particular reference to the aim of the Charter to enable the provision of education for democratic citizenship and human rights education to “every person within their territory”.
• EDC/HRE Charter, Article 5:
  • (f) An essential element of all education for democratic citizenship and human rights education is the promotion of social cohesion and intercultural dialogue and the valuing of diversity and equality, including gender equality; to this end, it is essential to develop knowledge, personal and social skills and understanding that reduce conflict, increase appreciation and understanding of the differences between faith and ethnic groups, build mutual respect for human dignity and shared values, encourage dialogue and promote non-violence in the resolution of problems and disputes.
  • (g) One of the fundamental goals of all education for democratic citizenship and human rights education is not just equipping learners with knowledge, understanding and skills, but also empowering them with the readiness to take action in society in the defence and promotion of human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
• The Policies section (Articles 6 to 13) focuses on the different forms and levels at which the EDC/HRE should and need to be introduced by the member states. Key provisions with regard to the minority rights protection are introduces by Article 13 “Skills for promoting social cohesion, valuing diversity and handling differences and conflict”:
• EDC/HRE Charter, Article 13:
  • In all areas of education, member states should promote educational approaches and teaching methods which aim at learning to live together in a democratic and multicultural society and at enabling learners to acquire the knowledge and skills to promote social cohesion, value diversity and equality, appreciate differences – particularly between different faith and ethnic groups – and settle disagreements and conflicts in a non-violent manner with respect for each others’ rights, as well as to combat all forms of discrimination and violence, especially bullying and harassment.
• A reference to required standards and evaluation criteria is presented in Article 11 and Article 14.
• The EDC/HRE Charter addresses the need for evaluation and elaboration of criteria for assessment of its implementation and progress in general:
• EDC/HRE Charter, Article 11 (Evaluation criteria):
  • Member states should develop criteria for the evaluation of the effectiveness of programmes on education for democratic citizenship and human rights education. Feedback from learners should form an integral part of all such evaluations.
• EDC/HRE Charter, Article 14 (Evaluation and review):
  • Member states should regularly evaluate the strategies and policies they have undertaken with respect to the present Charter and adapt these strategies and policies as appropriate. They may do so in co-operation with other member states, for example on a regional basis. Any member state may also request assistance from the Council of Europe.
• Although the elaboration of the evaluation criteria for assessing the implementation of the provisions of the Charter at national level are provisioned as competences of national governments, the institutional support at European level would be crucial for ensuring synchronised development throughout Europe.
• Despite that guidelines produced by experts at international level might serve only as policy recommendations, such an instrument could have a significant positive effect on the progress in the field of the EDC/HRE.

Challenges to the Implementation of the Charter and Its Assessment

• The key challenge to the implementation of the provisions of the EDC/HRE Charter is its non-legally binding character.
• Despite the positive fact that all 47 Council of Europe member states and 3 non-member states that have ratified the CoE Cultural Convention of 1954 (Belarus, Holly See and Kazakhstan) support the Charter, the voluntarily convergence with its principles and provisions is the key factor for advancing positive changes.
• Among the significant challenges that need to be taken into account is not only the good political and civil society will that is required, but also the necessary resources and capacities (financial, human, technical, etc.), as well as the structural and systematic efforts at various levels.
• Challenges to the assessment of the implementation progress also exist.
• The findings of the first evaluation report (Kerr 2012) suggest that many national states lack capacities or expertise to develop evaluation instruments.
• According to the findings of 2012 (Kerr 2012):
  • There was a reported lack of action to evaluate and review policies related to the Charter with a quarter of countries reporting having initiated such action and the majority (63 per cent) saying that no such action had yet been taken (Article 14 Evaluation and review).
  • There was an even split in countries stating that they had planned any cooperation activities with other Cultural Convention States around the aims and principles of the Charter, with almost half of countries (45 per cent) saying they had planned such activities and almost half (43 per cent) saying they had not (Article 15 Co-operation in follow-up activities).
• Another issue that Council of Europe should address with regard to the evaluation of implementation progress concerns the objectivity of the assessments.
• Following the spirit of the Charter, the first assessment report was based on the analysis of self-evaluation questionnaires, submitted voluntarily by national governments and by civil society organisations (CSOs).
• Although democratic, this approach increases the risks of subjectivity and biased interpretations of policies and achievements, especially when there are no indicators against which officials could evaluate the country performance and the qualitative answers are not supported with quantitative references.
• The need for common indicators and evaluation instruments is particularly important for evaluating the changes resulting from the (provisional) implementation of the EDC/HRE Charter at European level.
• Identifying points of reference that would be taken into account when assessing the impact of the Charter and the progress of its implementation is crucial not only for fostering the development of EDC/HRE related practices and activities, but also for enabling societies to achieve positive changes, for stimulating active citizenship and for fostering democracy and respect for human rights and rule of law.
• A set of qualitative and quantitative indicators would allow an assessment of countries performance on a comparative basis not only between countries to ensure synchronisation of efforts and outcomes but also over a period of time to ensure progress.
• In contrast to the current trends within the sector of education, focused on initialisation of processes and outcomes, that in many of the European countries have moved away from the „standards‟, policies need a point of reference if they aim at accountability and sustainability.
• The two fundamental definitions that the EDC/HRE Charter introduces, as well as existing documents such as the UN Charter on Human Rights for example, could become the basis for the identification of the relevant standards.
• The Charter Implementation report claims that there is “… evidence of considerable levels of activity concerning EDC/HRE in many Cultural Convention States” but there are no concrete examples of what has been introduces as measures, policies and practices following the adoption of the Charter.
• The findings of the Eurydice Citizenship Education in Europe report (31 May 2012) reveal that in 28 out of 31 European countries, citizenship education has been introduced to a various level in the educational systems of the states.
• The Eurydice Report, looking at the major reforms in the context of the citizenship education since 2005, reveals that in only 13 out of the assessed 31 countries, had there been major changes after 2010. The assumption that the adoption of the Charter had played a positive role fostering and bringing about those changes is only a speculation.
• The 2012 evaluation of the Charter has also taken into account the view of the non- governmental sector, but as it was presented at the evaluation Conference in Strasbourg, the information gathered from the NGO-sector at European level (with 87 organisations submitting questionnaires) revealed a non- homogeneous approach and various interpretations of the current situation. The opinion of individual active citizens (the ultimate „product‟ of successful EDC/HRE policies) on the implementation progress was not taken into account in 2012.
• Another challenge with regard to the implementation of the Charter as a European instrument to promote democracy and human rights and to the evaluation of positive changes at policy level is the misleading approach to account for cultural and national differences.
• Impact evaluation needs to be objective with regard to the principles and values that the Charter promotes.
• Culture and national features do matter at national level - with regard to the appropriate measures, approaches, policies, etc., that will be selected at national level for implementing the provisions of the Charter.
• There cannot be a universal formula of how to introduce the EDC/HRE to all societies in Europe, also having in mind the different economic, political or social conditions in each country.
• Nevertheless, the goals of the EDC/HRE Charter to strengthen democracy, to empower people to exercise their human and civil rights, to increase the levels of tolerance and to support the elimination of racism and discrimination are not culturally-relative concepts.
• These are universal values with commonly recognised parameters, as for example the fundamental right to life cannot be culturally determined as well as a cultural-specific democracy would hardly qualify as a „democracy‟ unless all the practices and elements are present.
• Hence, the need for standards in the field of EDC/HRE does not have as a goal to for create „uniform‟ societies throughout Europe but as a requirement before real positive change that the Charter can be expected to contribute to in the future. But at the same time, the cultural aspect of the promotion of human rights and democracy lies within the scope of minority rights as part of human rights.

EDC/HRE Charter and the Minority Rights

• The Council of Europe EDC/HRE Charter does not make a particular reference to the rights of the national minorities. In Article 1 it stipulates that the Charter:
• EDC/HRE Charter, Article 1:
  • … does not deal explicitly with related areas such as intercultural education, equality education, education for sustainable development and peace education, except where they overlap and interact with education for democratic citizenship and human rights education.
• With regard to the diverse political situation and the diverse political attitudes to the minority issues throughout the European nation states, a clear reference to the minority rights would have made the provisions of the Charter contested and surely it would not have been adopted by the 50 governments.
• Nevertheless, the provisions of the EDC/HRE Charter emphasising the promotion and respect of diversity, cultural awareness, tolerance, empowering of people with knowledge and skills to exercise their democratic rights, can surely support and foster the implementation of the key CoE tool for the protection of the minority rights in Europe – the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities.
• A relatively new framework and instrument in the international policies and politics, adopted as a common guiding principle after the end of the World War Two, fundamental human rights have been established as universal and inalienable extended equally to all persons regardless of their race, ethnicity, nation, gender, age, religion, culture, language, place of residence, etc.
• Human rights encompass all spheres of human life and are characterized by their interdependence, interrelation and indivisibility.
• Addressing the human beings as individuals but also as individuals-in-interaction, the human rights cover the diversity of situations that a person enters in life.
• Emerged as a tool to protect the individuals against violations of the state, human rights have long been seen exclusively through their individualistic nature with respect to the participation of the individual in the civil and political sphere.
• The impact of the global socio- political developments resulted in the evolution of the concept to include also the rights related to the social, economic and cultural life of a person (second generation of human rights).
• Overcoming the individualistic dimension and addressing the individual as a member of respective community, the third generation of human rights embraced also collective rights. From the perspective of minorities, they have crucial importance as minority protection addresses not only the individuals belonging to minority groups but the minority communities as such.
• The Council of Europe Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM), entered into force in the beginning of 1998, is the first legally binding multilateral instrument devoted to the protection of minorities in general.
• Opened for signature in 1995, in 1998 the Framework Convention had been ratified by 12 states.
• According to the official CoE statistics, 15 years later:
  • FCNM has been entered into force in 39 CoE countries
  • 13 out of these 39 countries has ratified the Convention with a particular Declaration
  • FCNM was signed, but not ratified and entered into force by 4 CoE countries (Belgium, Greece, Iceland, Luxemburg)
  • FCNM has never been signed or ratified by 4 CoE countries (Andorra, France, Monaco, Turkey)
  • FCNM has not been adopted by any non-CoE country
• Although the relevance of the minority issues as an essential part of the human rights agenda is confirmed explicitly in Article 1 of the FCNM:
• FCNM, Article 1:
  • ‘The protection of national minorities and of the rights and freedoms of persons belonging to those minorities forms an integral part of the international protection of human rights, and as such falls within the scope of international co-operation’,
• There is a need for more detailed analysis of the connection between the provisions of the FCNM and general human rights.
• As the Preamble of the FCNM indicates, its key objectives are to promote stability, democratic security and peace in Europe, and to foster the pluralist and democratic societies by creating a climate of tolerance and dialogue among people and groups.
• The specific areas that the Framework Convention seeks to protect national minorities in are presented in the Section I and Section II. When comparing the list of the topics, covered by the different FCNM articles with the issues addressed by the UN Universal Declaration of the Human Rights (UDHR, 1948), the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR, 1950) and even the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000), it becomes clear that minority rights cannot be interpreted differently but as a part of the fundamental human rights and they cover a particular section of the rights of the democratic citizenship.
• Full and effective equality & non- discrimination (FCNM, Article 4)
  • The Framework Convention guarantees the persons belonging to national minorities the right of non-discrimination, equality before the law, and full and effective equality to the members of the majority communities in all aspects of economic, social, political and cultural rights.
  • The UN Universal Declaration (UDHR) formulates similar provisions in Article 1 (Equality in dignity and rights), Article 2 (Rights and freedoms for everyone), and Article 7 (Equality before the law).
  • Prohibition of discrimination is addressed by EDHR Article 14 and by Article 21 of the HR Charter, where the equality before law is determined by Article 20.
• Maintenance and development of culture and identity (FCNM, Article 5), Spirit of tolerance and intercultural dialogue (FCNM, Article 6)
  • FCNM Article 5 provides that persons belonging to national minorities should be enabled to preserve and develop their culture and the essential elements of their identity as religion, language, traditions, cultural heritage; and that they should not become subjects of assimilation policies.
  • Article 6 encourages the promotion of the spirit of tolerance and intercultural dialogue, the mutual respect and understanding among people of any cultural/ethnic background.
  • As the FCNM Explanatory report reveals: “This article is an expression of the concerns stated in Appendix III to the Vienna Declaration (Declaration and Plan of Action on combating racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism and intolerance)”.
  • The quoted FCNM provisions correspond to the UDHR Article 27 “everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community” and to Article 22 of the HR Charter, stipulating that “The Union shall respect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity”.
• Freedom of assembly, association and expression (FCNM, Article 7), cooperation across borders (FCNM, Article 17-18)
  • The guaranteed by the FCNM right of assembly and association to the persons belonging to national minorities, is a human right that has been identically defined: by UDHR - Article 20, by ECHR – Article 11 (but also Articles 9 and 10), by the HR Charter – Article 12.
  • The FCNM Explanatory report emphasises that “the purpose of this article is to guarantee respect for the right of every person belonging to a national minority to the fundamental freedoms … (which are) … of a universal nature…”
  • The FCNM provisions for fostering cooperation between stakeholders at different levels promote not only the inter- cultural but also majority-minority dialogue.
• Manifesting religion (FCNM, Article 8)
  • As a key identity element, the practice of religion is protected by the Framework convention. However, the importance of religion as a factor in the human life has been acknowledged and addressed as a fundamental human right: UDHR Article 18, ECHR Article 9 and by Article 10 of the HR Charter.
• Freedom of expression and access to media (FCNM, Article 9)
  • Another fundamental human right has also been introduced by the FCNM – the freedom of opinion, expression and information. The corresponding articles in the other documents are: UDCH Article 19, EDHR Article 10 and Article 11 of the HR Charter.
• Use of minority language with authorities (FCNM, Article 10)
  • The right to use their mother tongue and to communicate in it privately and publically – also before institutions – has been guaranteed to the persons belonging to minorities.
  • Although the general human rights do not refer to the right of language in this particular way, UDHR Article 21 (2) provides that “everyone has the right to equal access to public service in his country” and Article 27 affirms the right of the individual to participate in the cultural life of the community.
  • The correlation between the provisions of the quoted FCNM and UDHR articles is based on the facts that language can be a serious impediment to access to public services, and as a key identity and cultural marker it is a factor for participation in cultural life of a community.
• Education in own culture and language (FCNM, Article 12- 13- 14)
  • FCNM promotes the knowledge of the culture, history, language and religion of both national minorities and the majority population in an intercultural perspective.
  • Through the provisions related to the educational opportunities and arrangements (educational establishments, use of language, etc) that minorities are entitled to, it aims to create a climate of tolerance and dialogue, as referred to in the preamble to the framework convention and in Appendix II of the Vienna Declaration of the Heads of State and Government6 .
  • Education has been recognised as a fundamental human right. UDHR Article 26, apart from emphasising the priority of the parental chose over the decision with respect to the education of the children, provides that:
• EDHR, Article 26 (2):
  • Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
  • Affirming the right of every person to education, the HR Charter specifies that:
• HR Charter, Article 14 (3):
  • The freedom to found educational establishments with due respect for democratic principles and the right of parents to ensure the education and teaching of their children in conformity with their religious, philosophical and pedagogical convictions shall be respected, in accordance with the national laws governing the exercise of such freedom and right.
• As it becomes clear, the provisions in the FCNM are based on the previously exiting human rights legislation.
• Effective participation (FCNM, Article 15)
  • Promoting the effective participation in cultural, social and economic life and in public affairs of persons, belonging to minorities, FCNM Article 15 encourages the real equality between individuals belonging to minority and majority communities.
  • The FCNM Explanatory report emphasises further that creating enabling conditions require, among the rest, consultations with institutions, representing minorities and involvement of national minorities in the decision-making processes elected bodies both at national and local levels7. UDHR Article 21 discloses the direct relevance of these provisions to the fundamental human rights of political representation, voting in elections and participation in government.
• This comparative overview reveals that the majority of the key FCNM Articles defining the minority rights are in fact a projection of existing human rights provisions into the minority issues context.
• Certainly, there are specific minority issues that the CoE Framework Convention addresses.
• These concern the rights of persons, belonging to minorities to choose their identity (FCNM Article 3) as members of minority community or NOT, the right to demonstrate and preserve their identity with regard to the choice made (FCNM Article 11) and not to become subjects of forced assimilation policies (FCNM Article 16).
• Although there is no direct connection to any of the general human and EU citizenship rights documents discussed here, still these rights could be seen as a part of the fundamental right of people to dignity (Article 1 UDHR, Article 1 CFREU).
• Although a legally binding instrument, the FCNM effectiveness depends not on the political will of governments but also on the Council of Europe‟s measures and instruments to oversee and support the implementation of its provisions.
• The EDC/HRE, promoted by the Council of Europe, is an instrument that can foster the implementation of provisions of FCNM not at political level, but more importantly – on the level of inter-personal relations.
• With the power to change mindsets and to shape perceptions and attitudes, education that addresses minority issues as a part of the human rights agenda can drive for a real positive societal change.
• Apart from raising tolerance and cultural awareness, it also can empower individuals belonging to minority communities with the knowledge and skills to pursue their rights as citizens and/or as community members.
• As human rights by understanding and legal definitions, the minority rights need to be included in the EDC/HRE agenda.
• Minority rights are should not be addressed as “privileges” but as instruments to enable persons who have chosen a particular identity to be able freely to maintain and manifest it, to enjoy equality and freedoms as people and as citizens, and to participate in all forms of social, cultural, political and economic life of their communities and countries.
• As such, minority rights are also a key element of democracy and the democratic citizenship.
• The Charter has a potentially large impact over the European space, being adopted by the 47 members of the Council of Europe.
• Although democracy and human rights are not exactly an issue within the European Union, the respect for the minority rights is still a challenge to some EU-member state governments.
• Looking beyond the EU-borders, fostering democratisation processes in some countries requires addressing the situation of minorities there. In the same time, raising awareness among representatives of minority communities involves providing them with the access to instruments that they can use for exercising and protecting their minority rights.
• Adopting the EDC/HRE Charter national governments has in fact taken, among the rest, moral responsibilities that could have a particular positive effect on the situation of minority communities.
• The following articles outline the parameters are particularly relevant for the protection of minority rights:
• EDC/HRE Charter, Article 4:
  • (Constitutional structures and member state priorities) f. An essential element of all education for democratic citizenship and human rights education is the promotion of social cohesion and intercultural dialogue and the valuing of diversity and equality, including gender equality; to this end, it is essential to develop knowledge, personal and social skills and understanding that reduce conflict, increase appreciation and understanding of the differences between faith and ethnic groups, build mutual respect for human dignity and shared values, encourage dialogue and promote non-violence in the resolution of problems and disputes. g. One of the fundamental goals of all education for democratic citizenship and human rights education is not just equipping learners with knowledge, understanding and skills, but also empowering them with the readiness to take action in society in the defence and promotion of human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
• EDC/HRE Charter, Article 10:
  • (Role of non-governmental organisations, youth organisations and other stakeholders) Member states should foster the role of non-governmental organisations and youth organisations in education for democratic citizenship and human rights education, especially in non-formal education. They should recognise these organisations and their activities as a valued part of the educational system provide them where possible with the support they need and make full use of the expertise they can contribute to all forms of education. Member states should also promote and publicise education for democratic citizenship and human rights education to other stakeholders, notably the media and general public, in order to maximise the contribution that they can make to this area.
• EDC/HRE Charter, Article 13:
  • (Skills for promoting social cohesion, valuing diversity and handling differences and conflict) In all areas of education, member states should promote educational approaches and teaching methods which aim at learning to live together in a democratic and multicultural society and at enabling learners to acquire the knowledge and skills to promote social cohesion, value diversity and equality, appreciate differences – particularly between different faith and ethnic groups – and settle disagreements and conflicts in a non-violent manner with respect for each others’ rights, as well as to combat all forms of discrimination and violence, especially bullying and harassment.
• EDC/HRE Charter has the potential to become an important instrument available to communities for endorsing and exercising their minority rights and fostering dialogue, raising public awareness and enabling positive changes in minority-majority relations.
• The key challenge here is whether minority communities would be able to benefit from the provisions of the Charter accordingly and whether as a non- legally binding instrument, national politics would be willing to allow such development.
• Hence, a further challenge before the implementation of the Charter is that there is a process to monitor the non-abuse of the agreed provisions.

Why Promoting Minority Rights Through EDC/HRE

• The adoption of the EDC/HRE Charter, as defined by the opening paragraph of the accompanying recommendations (CM/REC 2010/7), supports the Council of Europe core mission to promote human rights, democracy, rule of law and citizenship awareness of the citizens‟ rights and responsibilities in a democratic society9.
• Moreover, the decision reflected the understanding of education as a mechanism against violence, racism, extremism, xenophobia, discrimination and intolerance10 as well as the increasing interest of Council of Europe in the intercultural dialogue11.
• Despite that all of these goals are in fact supportive of the minority rights agenda, the need for promoting the tolerance to diversity and the respect to the rights of the others strikes from the findings of the Standard Eurobarometer survey 77, published in 201212.
• Assessing the values, shared by Europeans, the fact that the „human rights‟ hold the first place (43%) and that „democracy‟ is considered also a key personal value by almost one third of the European citizens (28%) are positive facts.
• It is however curious that „equality‟ and „tolerance‟ are considered values by less than 20% of the Europeans (20% and 15% respectively).
• With the