CYIL Vol. 7, 2016

HARALD CHRISTIAN SCHEU CYIL 7 ȍ2016Ȏ The disagreement between the Advisory Committee and the German government continued in the subsequent monitoring cycles. In its evaluation of the second German compliance report under the Framework Convention the Advisory Committee again recommended the article-by-article approach and specifically cited the example of the Turkish minority in Germany. 28 In the third monitoring cycle 29 the Advisory Committee, although no longer mentioning the need of an article-by-article approach, referred to “the growing cultural diversity of German society” and again recommended the extension of protection under the Framework Convention to new minorities. Rainer Hofmann, the German member of the Advisory Committee and its longtime chairman, does not expect that this open conflict between the Advisory Committee and the German government will be solved in short time. 30 A similar problem arose in the relationship between the Advisory Committee and Austria. In its national regulations Austria applies a rather conservative definition of a national minority. In its third compliance report under the Framework Convention 31 the Austrian government rejected the article-by-article approach proposed by the Advisory Committee and argued that the precise distinction between traditional national minorities and new migrant communities brings legal certainty to all groups concerned. According to the Austrian government, the application of selected articles to selected minorities might lead to unequal treatment. The Austrian government finds that the distinction between traditional and new minorities has proven to be successful in practice as it allows to take into account the different needs of different categories of minorities. Under the Austrian model, traditional national minorities shall be granted protection of their existence e.g. with regard to minority languages and different ethnicity. The focus of the protection of new minorities, on the contrary, shall be on their integration in the areas of education and employment. Also the communication between the Advisory Committee and Liechtenstein has undergone an interesting development. After Lichtenstein in its unilateral declaration of 1997 had announced that there were no national minorities within the meaning of the Framework Convention on its territory, it insisted on this position also in its initial compliance report. 32 The Advisory Committee, however, replied that Liechtenstein should consider the inclusion of other groups, based on

28 ACFC/OP/II(2006)001, p. 8. 29 ACFC/OP/III(2010)003, pp. 11-12.

30 HOFMANN, R. Das Rahmenübereinkommen zum Schutz nationaler Minderheiten. Einführung, Überblick, Würdigung. In: HOFMANN, R., ANGST, D., LANTSCHNER, E. RAUTZ, G., REIN, D. (eds.) Rahmenübereinkommen zum Schutz nationaler Minderheiten. Handkommentar , Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2015, p. 98. 31 ACFC/SR/III(2010)010 rev, p. 15. 32 ACFC/SR(1999)004.

218