Promoting diversity on minority issues to strengthen the universal dimension of human rights

The mandate of the Special Rapporteur on minority issues was established by the Commission on Human Rights in its resolution 2005/79 of 21 April 2005. It was subsequently extended by the Human Rights Council in successive resolutions, the most recent being resolution 52/5 approved by consensus on 5 April 2023, which extended the mandate under the same terms as provided for in resolution 25/5 of 27 March 2014.

The Special Rapporteur, Nicolas Levrat of Switzerland, was appointed by the Human Rights Council on 13 October 2023 and assumed his functions on 1 November 2023. His term in office may be renewed for two three-year periods.

The Special Rapporteur is honoured to be entrusted with the mandate and thanks the Human Rights Council for its trust in him. He also wishes to thank the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) for its support in the implementation of the mandate. The Special Rapporteur also wishes to pay tribute to the three previous mandate holders, Gay McDougall, Rita Izsak and Fernand de Varennes, whose work and commitment to enhance the situation of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities have constituted essential contributions to the cause of minorities.

Despite all those efforts, one cannot help but notice that, when the thirtieth anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities was celebrated in 2022, the Secretary-General made the following strong statement: “Thirty years on – the world is falling short. Far short. We are not dealing with gaps – we are dealing with outright inaction and negligence in the protection of minority rights.”¹ That observation underlines the extent of the work still left for a new mandate holder on minority issues. Enhancing the consideration given to minority issues by the international community will be the priority of the Special Rapporteur over the coming years.

1. Quoted in the report presented to the General Assembly by the Special Rapporteur on minority issues in October 2023 (A/78/195, para. 47). ↩

The present report is the first one submitted by the new Special Rapporteur to the Human Rights Council. In the following paragraphs, the Special Rapporteur will outline his vision and the main priorities for the mandate. The Special Rapporteur is eager to receive feedback and comments on both the vision and priorities, in order to build up a dialogue with Governments, United Nations bodies dealing with issues related to the mandate, civil society, affected groups and other stakeholders.

The report contains six substantive sections. In section II, the Special Rapporteur provides an overview of the activities of the previous Special Rapporteur in 2023. In section III, he sheds light on the outcome of the sixteenth session of the Forum on Minority Issues. In section IV, he presents his own vision of minority issues. Section V contains the priorities of the mandate holder for the coming years. In section VI, the Special Rapporteur gives an overview of the thematic reports that he envisages for the coming years. Lastly, in section VII, he makes some conclusions and recommendations.

Due to the lateness of his appointment, the Special Rapporteur has not had much time to devote to the mandate yet. Therefore, the Special Rapporteur would welcome feedback from member States and other stakeholders on sections IV, V and VI of the present report. On that basis, he may, in next year’s report, refine his vision and priorities.

The newly appointed Special Rapporteur was scheduled to be appointed at the fifty-third session of the Human Rights Council and start his mandate on 1 August 2023. However, the appointment was postponed until the fifty-fourth session. The mandate of the previous Special Rapporteur was subsequently extended until 31 October 2023. The current Special Rapporteur only started his mandate on 1 November 2023. Consequently, most of the activities of the mandate for 2023 were conducted by the previous Special Rapporteur, Fernand de Varennes, whose activities comprise the majority of section II.

Between 1 January and 31 October 2023, the former Special Rapporteur on minority issues participated as a keynote or guest speaker or panellist at approximately 70 events, including webinars and in-person conferences.

For example, he engaged in: events organized by regional organizations, such as the twenty-first regular session, in Jeddah, of the Independent Permanent Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation; an event, held at Headquarters, entitled “Preventive diplomacy in the changing landscape of modern conflicts: the role of the United Nations and regional organizations”, organized by the High Commissioner on National Minorities of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe; the launch, in Warsaw, of Understanding Anti-Roma Hate Crimes and Addressing the Security Needs of Roma and Sinti Communities: A Practical Guide, published by the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe; and the launch, in The Hague, of the Recommendations on the Effective Participation of National Minorities in Social and Economic Life, published by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

The previous Special Rapporteur engaged with government entities, including addressing the Corsican Assembly in Ajaccio, France; appearing as an expert witness at the hearing, in Washington, D.C., on advancing religious freedom within the United States of America–India bilateral relationship, organized by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom; delivering a keynote address at a conference on the genocide of the Feyli Kurds in Erbil, Iraq, organized by the Kurdistan Region of Iraq; addressing an international conference, held in Chisinau, dedicated to multilingual education, organized by the Presidency of the Autonomous Territorial Unit of Gagauzia of the Republic of Moldova; and speaking at a meeting at the European Parliament, in Brussels, organized by the Generalitat de Catalunya.

The previous Special Rapporteur participated in numerous activities sponsored by United Nations entities, such as the launch of the International Decade of Indigenous Languages organized by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization in Paris; a round table, held in San José, Costa Rica, on action to strengthen Roma inclusion policy on a human rights basis organized by OHCHR and the University for Peace; and the high-level symposium, held in Vienna, entitled “Vienna World Conference 30 Years On: Our Rights – Our Future”.

Most of the awareness-raising activities of the previous Special Rapporteur involved civil society or academic and scientific organizations. He addressed, among many others, meetings on statelessness and education organized by the Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion; the World Uyghur Congress at the parliament of Japan in Tokyo; the languages for democracy event organized by the World Esperanto Youth Organization in Strasbourg, France; the ninth Nitobe symposium, held in Turin, Italy, entitled “75 anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: what is the status of the implementation of language rights”, organized by the Centre for Research and Documentation on World Language Problems, Ulster University and the University of Turin; and the General Assembly, held in Cagliari, Italy, of the European Language Equality Network on the overarching benefits of protecting and promoting minoritized languages.

The previous Special Rapporteur gave lectures on his mandate, including at the University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bingöl University, Türkiye; New York University, the United States; the National University of Ireland (Galway); Hunter College, the United States; the European Academy of Bolzano Summer School, Italy; Western Visayas State University, the Philippines; Paris-Panthéon-Assas University, France; and the Global Campus of Human Rights – Arab World, Lebanon.

Since 1 November 2023, the newly appointed Special Rapporteur has been engaged with the organization of the Forum on Minority Issues, which was held in Geneva on 29 November and 1 December 2023. In the preparation and follow-up of the Forum, he established many contacts and discussed relevant issues that are reflected in the present report.

The Forum on Minority Issues was established in 2007 by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 6/15. The important role of the Forum was reaffirmed in 2012 through Council resolution 19/23. The Forum is mandated to provide a platform for promoting dialogue and cooperation on issues pertaining to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, and to provide thematic contributions and expertise to the work of the Special Rapporteur. The Special Rapporteur is tasked with guiding the work of the Forum, preparing its annual sessions and reporting to the Council on the Forum’s thematic recommendations. The Forum meets annually in Geneva for two working days, which are allocated to thematic discussions. The complete report of the sixteenth session of the Forum is being submitted to the Council in a separate report.

The sixteenth session of the Forum took place in Geneva on 29 November and 1 December 2023. The late appointment of the Special Rapporteur caused some disruption to the preparation of the Forum, which is usually held four or five months after the appointment of a new mandate holder. Given that the Special Rapporteur’s mandate only commenced on 1 November 2023, the preparation process was complex and the Forum had to be coordinated within a few weeks between the outgoing Special Rapporteur and the incoming one. In that context, the Special Rapporteur wishes to thank Fernand de Varennes for his efforts to ensure a smooth transition between the mandate holders concerning the preparation of the sixteenth session. He also wishes to express special thanks to the OHCHR secretariat who showed flexibility and great willingness to pragmatically advance on the organization of the Forum.

The theme of the sixteenth session of the Forum was “Minorities and cohesive societies: equality, social inclusion and socioeconomic participation”.² Despite the late announcement of the Forum – due to the delay in the appointment of a new Special Rapporteur – the Forum was a success. Some 570 registered participants and numerous member States followed the two-day discussions. Twelve panellists provided their insights into the subthemes of the Forum, while approximately 210 participants delivered statements on the issues at stake.

2. For more details on the theme, see www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/forums/minority-issues/session16/16th-session-concept-note.pdf. ↩

The Special Rapporteur emphasizes the importance and quality of exchanges on minority issues that the Forum allows. As was underlined above (see para. 4), minority issues are structurally underrepresented in United Nations activities and programmes. Therefore, the Forum constitutes a unique opportunity for minority voices to be heard in the United Nations system. In that respect, as will be underlined in the following sections, one of the priorities of the Special Rapporteur is to extend the duration of the annual sessions of the Forum to at least three days (see paras. 48 and 66 below).

In the present section, the Special Rapporteur not only wishes to present his vision and priorities for the mandate to member States and other stakeholders, he also sincerely hopes that his vision and priorities will be discussed among all interested stakeholders, including member States, with a view to allowing the mandate holder to produce concrete results for the benefit of persons belonging to minorities. The vision for the mandate is articulated around three main issues. First, how the requirement for specific and differentiated treatment due to persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities contributes to the universal character of the protection of human rights through the equal and non-discriminatory enjoyment of human rights by all persons. Second, how the protection of minority rights interacts with the individual human rights of persons belonging to a minority group. Third, how minorities’ identities contribute to each national identity.

The General Assembly adopted, on 10 December 1948, resolution 217 (III) in four parts. The most well-known part is part A, namely the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Lesser known to a large audience is part C, in which the General Assembly dealt with “the fate of minorities”. The previous mandate holder quoted in extenso resolution 217 C (III) in his last report to the General Assembly.³ His research led him to underline that the United Nations had, since its origin, constantly kept minority issues on its agenda, albeit with varying degrees of intensity with regard to effectively taking into consideration the rights of persons belonging to minorities. He concluded that historical panorama by considering that the last decade (2013–2023) had not been very favourable for minority issues within the United Nations.⁴

3. A/77/246, para. 24. ↩
4. See, more specifically, A/77/246, paras. 64–69, and para. 4 of the present report. ↩

The newly appointed Special Rapporteur would also like to refer to resolution 217 C (III) and to underline other elements from the resolution on the fate of minorities. In the resolution, the General Assembly affirmed that the United Nations could not remain indifferent to the fate of minorities. However, the General Assembly stated that it was difficult to adopt a uniform solution to the complex and delicate question, which had special aspects in each State in which it arose. At the same time, considering the universal character of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the General Assembly decided not to deal in a specific provision of the Declaration with the question of minorities and to refer the issue to the Economic and Social Council.

The central element that the General Assembly highlighted in the resolution was that it was difficult to adopt a uniform solution to minority issues. There are, according to the General Assembly, two expressly stated reasons justifying such a statement. First, the issue is complex and delicate and, second, it has special aspects in each State in which it arises. With regard to the first element of justification, 75 years of implementing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have shown beyond question that each and every human right is complex and delicate to implement. It is thus not a specific characteristic of minority issues. The second element, on the contrary, is quite specific to “minority rights”.⁵

5. By using this terminology, the Special Rapporteur does not take a position on the holder of such rights (whether it is solely individual rights belonging to each person belonging to a minority – as the title of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities seems to imply – or whether rights exist to which a minority as such may be entitled). ↩

In other words, there is, in the view of the General Assembly, no uniform application of minority rights. Quite the contrary. Simultaneously, minority issues are part – but a special part – of universal human rights, as clearly stated in the 1992 Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities and as the structure of resolution 217 (III) shows.

So how does diversity in situations and implementation relate to the protection of universal human rights? In human rights law, diversity in the formulation and implementation of human rights is recognized at two different levels.

At the first level is article 1 common to both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which guarantees the right of all peoples to freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. Consequently, there are States⁶ in which the right to self-determination has been realized. Yet, States have very different political, economic, social and cultural arrangements.⁷ The universality of human rights is not challenged by the diversity resulting from the exercise of the right to self-determination. Human rights remain universal in their formulation, notwithstanding their implementation being a function of the diversity of peoples’ choices. As the Human Rights Committee pointed out in its general comment No. 12 (1984), the right to self-determination was of particular importance because its realization was an essential condition for the effective guarantee and observance of individual human rights and for the promotion and strengthening of those rights (para. 1). It is for that reason that States set forth the right to self-determination in a provision of positive law in both Covenants and placed that provision as article 1 apart from and before all of the other rights in the two Covenants.

6. The Charter of the United Nations is proclaimed by the peoples of the United Nations (first sentence of the Charter), but the Organization is composed of States, as required by article 4 of the Charter, which specifies the conditions for membership. For the relationship between the right to self-determination of all peoples and statehood, see, among others, General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV). ↩
7. For the central and complex role played by the right to self-determination in structuring contemporary international society, see Martti Koskenniemi, “National self-determination today: problems of legal theory and practice”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 43, No. 2 (1994), pp. 241–269. ↩

The second level at which diverse or differential implementation of human rights is required to uphold the universal character of the protection of human rights is precisely as regards the fate and rights of minorities within existing States.⁸ That is a consequence of the combined requirements of equal treatment of all individuals stemming from the universal character of human rights, as stated in article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and of the prohibition of discrimination in the universal implementation of human rights, as stated in article 2 thereof. It is not just by chance that the statement of grounds on which discrimination in the enjoyment of human rights shall be prohibited, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status,⁹ largely intersects with the categories of minorities referred to by the General Assembly in its resolution 47/135. In the wording of the prohibition of discrimination are to be found grounds such as race and colour (which would, according to current minority rights language, refer to ethnicity) and national origin (which refers to national minorities, as well as language and religion). The intersection between prohibited grounds for discrimination and qualification of minority groups is strong and central as regards the justification of specific and additional rights for persons belonging to minority groups. As can be seen above, such prohibition of discrimination in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not considered by the General Assembly as covering the fate of minorities, as shown by the existence of resolution 217 C (III).¹⁰ If not all the prohibited grounds for discrimination are considered as specific characteristics justifying specific minority rights by the Declaration of the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, practice amply shows that minority issues also exist with respect to sexual orientation, social origin or other status.

8. See the wording of article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that, 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. For the precise meaning of this formulation about the existence of minorities within a State, see Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 23 (1994), para. 5.2. ↩
9. Exact same wording in article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. ↩
10. See para. 22 above. ↩

Therefore, the link between non-discrimination and the rights of persons belonging to a minority is central to the protection of minorities¹¹ and the requirement of equal treatment that needs to be guaranteed in specific ways to persons belonging to a minority. The reasons stem from the fact that the principle of non-discrimination not only prohibits treating persons differently in the same situation, but also treating persons in different situations equally. As underlined in a recent OHCHR publication, States have recognized that the initial interpretation of the right – as a right to be treated in the same way – failed to effectively address all forms of discrimination. In particular, there was a recognition that treating people with different needs and characteristics equally could give rise to discrimination. Those and other developments reflect a progression from a narrow interpretation of the right to nondiscrimination, focused upon the prohibition of differences in treatment, to an inclusive theory and practice”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 43, No. 2 (1994), pp. 241–

11. This linkage was placed at the centre of the protection of minorities issue by the Government of Austria in its statement at the forty-third session of the Human Rights Council, as the sponsor of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on minority issues. Quoted in OHCHR and Equal Right Trust, Protecting Minority Rights. A Practical Guide to Developing Comprehensive Anti-Discrimination Legislation (Geneva, 2023), p. xxiii. ↩

8 See the wording of article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that, 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. For the precise meaning of this formulation about the existence of minorities within a State, see Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 23 (1994), para. 5.2. 9 Exact same wording in article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. 10 See para. 22 above. 11 This linkage was placed at the centre of the protection of minorities issue by the Government of Austria in its statement at the forty-third session of the Human Rights Council, as the sponsor of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on minority issues. Quoted in OHCHR and Equal Right Trust, Protecting Minority Rights. A Practical Guide to Developing Comprehensive Anti-Discrimination Legislation (Geneva, 2023), p. xxiii. GE.24-00944 model that seeks equal participation by recognizing and accommodating differences.¹² It is naturally very positive that the realization of the dual dimension of the principle of nondiscrimination is now fully apparent to States but, as emphasized above, the inadequate nature of the sole negative dimension of non-discrimination in ensuring the effective enjoyment of all human rights by persons belonging to minority groups was already understood by the General Assembly in 1948. That makes the implementation of universal human rights for persons belonging to minorities complex and delicate, because genuinely recognizing and implementing minority rights involves managing differentiation (minority rights) within the diversity of States’ national legal systems. That is why the implementation of human rights of persons belonging to a minority is not only complex and delicate, but also specific.

12. Ibid., p. xxii. ↩

As an illustration of the negative outcome resulting from limiting the right to non-discrimination to solely negative obligations in relation to equal treatment for all, including persons belonging to a minority group, a recent judgment of the European Court of Human Rights may be illustrative. In its judgment of 16 November 2023, in the case of Džibuti and others v. Latvia,¹³ the European Court of Human Rights, basing itself on the sole negative dimension of the right to non-discrimination in the enjoyment of the human rights guaranteed by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights), was led to approve a blatantly discriminatory situation as regards the enjoyment of the right to education of persons belonging to a minority group. In the case under review, the applicants complained that, as a consequence of the 2018 reform of the Education Law of Latvia, “the proportion of subjects to be taught in the State language, that is, Latvian, was increased in private schools and the use of Russian as the language of instruction was consequently reduced”.¹⁴ Among other claims, the applicants considered that the 2018 reform had a discriminatory impact on pupils whose mother tongue was Russian and, consequently, their right to education as enshrined in article 2 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights,¹⁵ taken alone and in conjunction with article 14 of the same Convention,¹⁶ had been violated. Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights is a clear provision prohibiting discrimination, but only in its negative form. As the Court noted:
Depending on the context in which Article 14 has been invoked, the Court may examine allegations of discrimination from different angles. On the one hand, it can be argued that the State has a positive obligation to treat different groups of pupils differently chiefly on the grounds of the fact that their mother tongue is different. On the other hand, it can be argued that all pupils – irrespective of their mother tongue – are in relevantly similar situation insofar as they wish to have access to education in a particular country. While those aspects are so intertwined one could say that they are two sides of the same coin, the Court considers that the present case has to be examined from the latter perspective, that is (to say), from the perspective of the right to have access to education system in Latvia as a whole given that neither domestic law affords particular status to any other language than the Latvian language, nor the Convention contains a specific provision on the rights of minorities and the applicants rely on Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 – which does not include the right to access education in a particular language – taken in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention.¹⁷

13. European Court of Human Rights, Džibuti and others v. Latvia, Applications Nos. 225/20, 11642/20 and 21815/20, Judgment, 16 November 2023. ↩
14. Ibid., para. 1. ↩
15. Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights reads as follows: “No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.” ↩
16. Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights reads as follows: “The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.” ↩
17. Džibuti and others v. Latvia, para. 131. ↩

From a minority rights perspective, this is a clear case of discrimination in the equal enjoyment of the right to education. In the Special Rapporteur’s understanding of the reasoning in the judgment, the Court would agree with that reading, except that, as they underline, the European Convention on Human Rights contains no specific provision on the right of minorities to be treated differently, despite the fact that they are in a different situation to pupils whose mother tongue is the State language. Therefore, despite recognizing that “the Court may examine allegations of discrimination from different angles”, they choose to consider that, irrespective of their mother tongue, all pupils are in a similar situation (the right to have access to education in a particular country) and there is therefore no discrimination, according to article 2 of Protocol No. 1, read alone and in conjunction with article 14 of the Convention.¹⁸ It is for the Court to decide in such a case whether the situation of the pupils is similar or different – and it admits that both views could be held. However, it then decides to consider the applicants in a similar situation to those belonging to the majority of the population.

18. Ibid., para. 162. ↩

That case illustrates why the negative dimension of non-discrimination, with regard to persons belonging to a minority group, does not offer a sufficient guarantee for equal enjoyment of human rights. Persons belonging to minorities are not in the same situation as those belonging to the majority or dominant part of society. Therefore, the requirement of equal enjoyment of human rights by such persons entails that they should be treated both equally and differently to persons belonging to the majority/dominant part of society, in order to guarantee that they are not discriminated against. That requirement stems from the combined principles of equality and non-discrimination. As a consequence – and confirmation that such a differentiated implementation of human rights, to guarantee the effective enjoyment of rights by persons belonging to a minority, is a proper, but complex, way to achieve non-discrimination – article 8 (3) of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities states that implementing differentiated measures for the benefit of persons belonging to a minority group shall not prima facie be considered contrary to the principle of equality contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.¹⁹

19. Article 4 of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities also conveys the same idea. ↩

Thus, implementing minority rights according to the principles of equal and non-discriminatory treatment implies including in the concept of the universal enjoyment of human rights room for differentiated measures to be taken or tolerated by States in order to implement the requirement of equal treatment. This is why article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights and article 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights are not sufficient to guarantee the non-discriminatory enjoyment of human rights by persons belonging to a minority.

Article 3 (2) of the Declaration on the Right of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities states clearly that no disadvantage shall result for any person belonging to a minority as a consequence of the exercise or non-exercise of the rights set forth in the Declaration. That wording shows that the rights linked to persons belonging to minorities do not appear in a legal vacuum, but are additional to the existing human rights enjoyed by all, including persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities. That is also the opinion of the Human Rights Committee in relation to the rights recognized to persons belonging to minorities according to article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Committee stated, in its general comment No. 23 (1994), that it observed that article 27 established and recognized a right that was conferred on individuals belonging to minority groups and that was distinct from, and additional to, all the other rights that, as individuals in common with everyone else, they were already entitled to enjoy under the Covenant (para. 1).

The wording of article 3 (2) of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities clearly states that such persons are free to invoke or not these additional rights. This is in line with the very important concept of self-identification, which is also well described in article 3 of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities.²⁰ Persons belonging to a minority may, individually and freely, choose to be treated or not to be treated as belonging to the minority group, and instead try integrating themselves within the majority group of the country in which they live. Neither other members of the minority group, nor State authorities, can deny that right and deprive an individual of the enjoyment, as a human being equal to all, of human rights. That right to choose is a fundamental, individual human right. Given the social practices of some minority groups as part of their traditional identity, the issue is particularly sensitive as regards the equal enjoyment of rights by men and women within their social structures. One of the major benefits of the emergence of the concept of individual human rights has been the emancipation of many persons from being assigned a specific place and role in society, resulting from their belonging to a given social group – be it a group defined by socioeconomic, ethnic, linguistic, religious, gender or any other characteristics. Recognizing the specific additional rights to non-discrimination of persons belonging to a minority group or the right of a minority group to conserve, express and promote its identity as a group should not be to the detriment of the individual rights persons are entitled to as holders of universal human rights. That is also a complex minority issue.²¹

20. Article 3 (1) of the Convention reads as follows: “Every person belonging to a national minority shall have the right freely to choose to be treated or not to be treated as such and no disadvantage shall result from this choice or from the exercise of the rights which are connected to that choice.” ↩
21. For a good illustration of the complexity of such an issue, see European Court of Human Rights, Molla Sali v. Greece, Application No. 20452/14, Judgment, 19 December 2018. ↩

The way in which the two provisions (article 3 of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities and article 3 of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities) that address that issue are worded seems to recognize the precedence of the individual right to choose over any specific minority right. The Special Rapporteur is of the opinion that that is not an issue of hierarchy of rights. The general right to be treated without discrimination by the State under the jurisdiction of which a person happens to be and the additional right to receive specific treatment as a person belonging to a minority group can both be realized simultaneously.

As carefully pointed out by the Human Rights Committee in its general comment No. 23 (1994), as well as through the title of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities,²² there are no rights in positive international law recognized as belonging to minorities as such. Persons belonging to minority groups have specific rights, but the minorities themselves do not. Therefore, if a tension were to arise between the individual rights of a person – de facto sharing the constitutive element of an existing minority group, but not willing to be treated as a member of the group – and the claim for a distinct and specific implementation of human rights for the benefit of other members of that minority group, it would not be a conflict between an individual right and a collective right, but a conflict between different individual rights and their simultaneous enjoyment by different persons. Such horizontal conflicts between human rights is nothing new for human rights law and thus this specific type of conflicting individual rights should be treated as such. The Special Rapporteur will try to explore that issue – which is complex and delicate – in more depth during the tenure of his mandate and, hopefully, formulate useful proposals to help arbitrate such horizontal conflicts between members of a minority group.

22. Article 3 (2) of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities also expresses the same position. It reads as follows: “Persons belonging to national minorities may exercise the rights and enjoy the freedoms flowing from the principles enshrined in the present framework Convention individually as well as in community with others.” ↩

A third key element in the vision of the Special Rapporteur is the importance of highlighting the substantial and positive contribution of minorities to society as a whole. One of the central issues in recognizing and protecting minorities is to allow them to maintain and promote their own identity, as a group distinct from the majority of the population. Thus, article 1 of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities declares that States should protect the existence and the national or ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic identity of minorities within their respective territories and should encourage conditions for the promotion of that identity.

What the Special Rapporteur wishes to highlight and emphasize in implementing his mandate is that the protection and promotion of minority identities, as enshrined in article 1 of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, is not requested only for the benefit of persons belonging to a minority group, but also for the benefit of society as a whole. Here again, as in the case of diversity (see paras. 25–28 above), there is a two-level situation as regards the reference to society as a whole.

At the upper level, the society referred to is the international community. That level is explicitly referred to in the sixth preambular paragraph of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, which emphasizes that the constant promotion and realization of the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, as an integral part of the development of society as a whole and within a democratic framework based on the rule of law, contributes to the strengthening of friendship and cooperation among peoples and States. That emphasis refers to the main function initially assigned to the international recognition and protection of minority rights, in accordance with the minority protection scheme set forth under the auspices of the League of Nations. The idea was to enhance and protect the situation of persons belonging to a national minority under an international regime, with the aim of avoiding kin-State intervention in a neighbouring State under the pretext of protecting persons belonging to its national minority.²³ Promoting and protecting the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities is a strong factor for pacification within the international community and helps guarantee friendly relations among States. Otherwise, the risk of political instrumentalization – for example, the invocation by the Russian Federation of the alleged mistreatment of Russian-speaking persons by Ukraine in 2022 in an attempt to justify an armed conflict²⁴ – will always remain a threat to peace. There is therefore no underestimation of that fundamental and decisive dimension in the recognition and protection of the rights of persons belonging to a minority group as a contribution to a peaceful international society.

23. See Joe Verhoeven, “Les principales étapes de la protection internationale des minorités”, Revue trimestrielle des droits de l’homme (1997), pp. 177–203. ↩
24. See International Court of Justice, “Application instituting proceedings filed in the Registry of the Court on 26 February 2022: allegations of genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russian Federation)”, especially paras. 18 and 19. ↩

In addition to the benefit of a peaceful international society of States, there exists a considerable benefit for the society of individual States (sometimes referred to as “national community”). The fifth preambular paragraph of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities explicitly refers to that dimension by stating that the promotion and protection of the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities contribute to the political and social stability of States in which they live.²⁵ Thus, the recognition, protection and promotion of minority identities should not only be considered for the good of persons belonging to minority groups, but also as a significant contribution to a diverse and vibrant, as well as more stable, national identity. Supporting such a conceptual approach, a considerable number of studies in the field of business management have shown that diversity in companies and laboratories generates more creativity and better productivity.²⁶ The same reasoning is true as regard biodiversity, which is required to maintain a healthy and sustainable environment for human beings.²⁷ It is thus asserted by the General Assembly that the promotion and protection of the diversity of identities within national societies contribute to the political and social stability of States.

25. The reference in the sixth preambular paragraph to “society as a whole” also refers to this dimension of “national society”. ↩
26. See, for example, Kristen Intemann, “Why diversity matters: understanding and applying the diversity component of the National Science Foundation’s broader impacts criterion”, Social Epistemology, vol. 23, Nos. 3–4 (2009), pp. 249–266; and Vivian Hunt and others, “Delivering through diversity” (McKinsey & Company, 2018). ↩
27. Unai Pascual and others, “Biodiversity and the challenge of pluralism”, Nature Sustainability, vol. 4, No. 7 (2021), pp. 567–572. ↩

The Special Rapporteur fully endorses and supports that view. However, the scientific evidence supporting such a claim is not as conclusive as it is for biodiversity or the business environment. Academic literature remains divided on the issue.²⁸ The purpose of the Special Rapporteur’s mandate is not to engage in academic debates or controversies. However, using the mandate to collect data and examples of practices in which such contributions by minority groups, through the affirmation of their own identity within a State, further political and social stability, as well as the richness of social life, would constitute an important step in the protection of minorities’ identities and rights. Improvements in the fate of minorities through a better understanding of the crucial contribution that the protection and promotion of diverse identities within national frameworks play – with the likely result of boosting creativity, productivity and dynamic forms of political and social stability at the national level – will be a priority for the Special Rapporteur in his approach to minority issues. Therefore, as a priority for delivering on the mandate, the Special Rapporteur will identify and highlight the ways in which minority identities positively contribute to national identities.

28. For a review of approximately 1,000 scientific publications on the topic as regard ethnic diversity within States, see the study by Peter Thisted Dinesen, Merlin Schaeffer and Kim Mannemar Sønderskov, “Ethnic diversity and social trust: a narrative and meta-analytical review”, Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 23 (2020), pp. 441–465. ↩

Contrary to the previous section on the Special Rapporteur’s vision of minority issues, which dealt with rather theoretical and complex legal issues, in the present section he will focus on seven very specific and pragmatic priorities.

First, and despite all the fascinating theoretical legal issues raised by the inclusion of minority rights in the general scheme of international law, and more specifically international human rights law, the first and highest priority of the Special Rapporteur during his tenure will be the protection and promotion of the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities. The mandate receives daily communications, allegations and other various inputs related to the difficult situations of persons belonging to minorities as regards the full enjoyment of their human rights. Working to correctly understand the issues raised, in cooperation with Governments, civil society, the academic community (when needed) and other stakeholders, and trying to work with States to seek appropriate measures to improve such situations will take precedence over any other item linked to the discharge of the mandate.

Second, as the previous Special Rapporteur highlighted in a report to the General Assembly, there has been a near complete failure to mainstream and integrate the rights of minorities at the United Nations, despite the call to do so by the Secretary-General in his 2013 Guidance Note.²⁹ Alas, the current Special Rapporteur cannot but agree with that evaluation. Therefore, his second priority for the mandate will be better integration of minority issues in United Nations activities³⁰ and the international community more broadly. While the previous Special Rapporteur sought to draft a new United Nations treaty on minority issues to achieve that end,³¹ the current Special Rapporteur will explore other avenues to address the urgent need to better include minority issues in the agenda of the United Nations.

29. A/77/246, para. 70. ↩
30. On this theme, see the report by the previous Special Rapporteur on minority issues at the fifty-second session of the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/52/27). ↩
31. A/HRC/52/27, para. 68; and A/77/246, para. 71. ↩

Recognizing the value of and the interest in the proposed draft treaty,³² the Special Rapporteur, through limited consultations, found out that such a draft treaty had much more support from minority advocacy groups and eminent representatives of academia than from States Members of the United Nations. The Special Rapporteur is well aware of the critical role that civil society organizations and non-governmental organizations can play in treaty negotiations, such as the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. With such a perspective in mind, the Special Rapporteur pledges his readiness to discuss strategies to develop a stronger legal framework for minority rights and to recommence treaty drafting as a priority if the opportunity arises during the tenure of his mandate. However, and unfortunately, the appetence of the international community to adopt new multilateral treaties is not as strong today as it was in the 1990s. For the time being, the Special Rapporteur notes that drafting, negotiating and adopting a treaty has to be done with States as the main partners. Therefore, except if a strong demand were to arise in response to the present paragraph from a significant number of States representing different regional groups in the Human Rights Council, the Special Rapporteur will not invest time and effort on the preparation of a global convention on the rights of minorities. He proposes to pursue another path to mainstream minority issues in the agenda of the United Nations.

32. For the full proposal, see www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/2023-01/Annex1.-A-HRC-52-27_0.docx. ↩

New tools and practices have emerged, favouring new dynamics in the international community, such as: Agenda 21, a plan of action adopted by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development; the Millennium Development Goals; and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.³³ As noted by the former Special Rapporteur³⁴ and other academics,³⁵ minority issues are not explicitly addressed as such in the Sustainable Development Goals. The term of office of the current Special Rapporteur will come to an end in 2029. By then, the post-2030 agenda drafting process will be well advanced. Therefore, the Special Rapporteur will make strenuous efforts to ensure that minority issues are included in the post-2030 agenda.

33. For the significance and relevance for the international community of such tools, see Halil Göksan, “Towards global law of sustainable development: learning from the Sustainable Development Goals”, PhD dissertation, University of Geneva, 2020. ↩
34. See A/76/162. ↩
35. See, for example, Inga T. Winkler and Carmel Williams, eds., The Sustainable Development Goals and Human Rights: A Critical Early Review (London, Routledge, 2018). ↩

The third priority of the Special Rapporteur will be to consolidate the forums in which minority voices are heard. Three objectives will be pursued in that respect. First, the regional minority forums, an initiative launched by the previous Special Rapporteur, appear an excellent means to voice the concerns of minorities; the continuation of such an initiative raises great expectations. Such regional forums ensure the participation of persons belonging to minorities who, for different reasons, find it difficult – if not impossible – to attend the Geneva-based Forum on Minority Issues. It gives such persons and their representative organizations access to an interactive platform to share their experiences on minority issues and their need for support. The Special Rapporteur is therefore committed to continue developing such regional forums. A link between the debates of the regional forums and those of the Forum on Minority Issues will also be developed. However, given the financial and other restraints, organizing a regional forum every year in every region seems beyond the capacity of the mandate. Ideally, the organization of two regional forums a year, on a rotating basis (so each regional forum would take place every two or (more likely) three years), should allow the Special Rapporteur to participate in each regional forum. Naturally, some financial resources will be necessary to organize such regional forums and the Special Rapporteur will be actively looking for voluntary contributions to the mandate in order to be able to implement such a programme. The country in which the regional forum is organized will also be called upon to contribute, financially or in-kind, to the organizational costs of the regional forum.

Moreover, taking into consideration the success of the Forum on Minority Issues, the Special Rapporteur calls for a one-day extension of its duration. That will mean three days instead of two; this proposal is a tentative response to the level of frustration observed as regards the very scarce time allocated to interventions – both to those of minority advocates as well as to those of States. The situation calls for measures to be taken and such a modest proposal is a necessary step.

Fourth, the Special Rapporteur will try, as far as possible, to coordinate and cooperate with other human rights mechanisms that are relevant to the protection of persons belonging to minorities. As pointed out by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights during the presentation of his annual report to the Human Rights Council in 2022, the financing of human rights activities and mechanisms within the United Nations is inadequate.³⁶ In that context, it is the responsibility of the Special Rapporteur, in order to maximize the impact of his actions, to coordinate with other relevant human rights mechanisms and bodies. That starts within the special procedures, where the absence of a clear legal definition of minority issues causes overlapping among the various mandates. The work of most treaty bodies is also relevant for the different categories of minorities. Thus, coordination and cooperation will also be sought.

36. See www.ohchr.org/en/statements/2023/06/we-need-double-our-budget-high-commissioner-volker-turk. ↩

The Special Rapporteur will also try to engage and cooperate with existing regional mechanisms for human rights protection, in all regions of the world. Also, he will seek, as far as possible, cooperation with specialized national bodies that are relevant to the promotion and protection of minorities. The purpose of such an initiative is to rationalize work and to avoid overlapping efforts. Naturally, those efforts will not be detrimental to cooperation and strong interactions with other stakeholders, such as representatives of minorities, non-governmental organizations and the academic community.

Fifth, time is now ripe for a special fund for minorities to be established. Such a permanent funding scheme, allowing and encouraging the meaningful participation of minority representatives in more United Nations activities, is a necessity. It should play a role in the fulfilment of the second priority above, which is the mainstreaming of minority issues on the agenda of the United Nations, through the inclusion of minority concerns in the post-2030 agenda.

Sixth, and in contrast to the bleak image of efforts made by the United Nations during the past 30 years on minority issues (see para. 4 above), the Minorities Fellowship Programme,³⁷ run by OHCHR since 2005, has been a success story for the past two decades. It is a comprehensive training programme for human rights and minority rights defenders who belong to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities. The current Special Rapporteur will strengthen the interaction of the mandate with the programme and the network of former minority fellows in the discharge of his functions.

37. For more information on this programme, see www.ohchr.org/en/about-us/fellowship-programmes/minorities-fellowship-programme. ↩

Seventh, the Special Rapporteur intends to develop a global academic network on minority issues. Coming himself from academia, he is well aware of the importance of involving younger generations in the advancement of human rights throughout the world. Beyond working with fellow academics, the Special Rapporteur will try to set up a model of “breakthrough workshops on minority issues”, involving students (and their professors) in a network of academic projects to tackle local minority issues (based on the model of law clinics). If financing allows, those most adept at solving minority issues will be invited to participate in United Nations human rights events in Geneva. Efforts at producing and disseminating academic materials on minority issues will also be pursued.

The preparation, drafting, dissemination and discussion of thematic reports is one of the most important contributions of a Special Rapporteur. The three previous Special Rapporteurs contributed greatly to the exploration of the many facets of minority issues. The newly appointed Special Rapporteur has no intention of revisiting the themes that they have already covered, even though many of the issues previously raised and discussed will be examined from a different perspective and under a different light, with the aim of engendering an improved shared understanding of minority issues. The order of the presentation of the themes below is not indicative of the order in which the thematic reports will be submitted to the Human Right Council or the General Assembly. The order in which the reports will be submitted depends on the progress of research and the pertinence of the issues over the coming years.

One thematic report will be devoted to the very object of the mandate, that is “minority issues”. Two reasons prompt an exploration of the theme. First, a conceptual reason: as outlined above, in 1948, the General Assembly underlined that the question of minorities was 36 See www.ohchr.org/en/statements/2023/06/we-need-double-our-budget-high-commissioner-volkerturk. 37 For more information on this programme, see www.ohchr.org/en/about-us/fellowshipprogrammes/minorities-fellowship-programme. GE.24-00944 not only complex and delicate, but had special aspects in each State in which it arose. It is safe to assume that diversity and complexity have not disappeared and that minority issues are still far from being the same in all parts of the world. The Special Rapporteur will seek to establish a mapping of minority issues, which could feed the thematic outlook for regional minority forums. The second reason is linked to methodology and the added value of the current existence of strong computing power. The Special Rapporteur thus proposes to adopt a bottom-up approach – not trying to start from international texts or instruments to define and implement the rights of persons belonging to minorities, but to identify issues through a social media content analysis – in order to figure out which “minority issues” are perceived as relevant in different countries. Thanks to the development of social networks and computational science, the Special Rapporteur intends to rely on tools of computational diplomacy to better delineate and understand the diversity and richness of minority issues worldwide.

As underlined above in the vision for the mandate (see paras. 37–41 above and article 1 of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities), identity issues are at the heart of minority issues. Identity may be seen and understood at several levels. For example, individual identity for persons belonging to linguistic minorities may be at stake when authorities of the country in which they reside refuse to register, in official identity documents, their original first name, or patronym, as such a name or practice does not exist in the country of residence. A first name is a central element of individual identity. At a second level, the sense and forms of manifestation of minority identity shared by persons belonging to a minority group will be explored. At a third level, it needs to be understood how such minority identities are perceived as contributing (or weakening) national identity. In the thematic report, the Special Rapporteur will address those three levels of identity issues and the way in which they are interlinked.

The representation of minorities in national societies is certainly an issue linked to identity. Representation is naturally a polysemous term, as it may refer to mental representation, media portrayal, as well as representation in political or social bodies of persons belonging to minorities. In the thematic report, the Special Rapporteur intends to examine the different meanings and understandings of the term “representation of minorities in national societies” and the way in which they are intertwined.

A specific form of formal representation is the participation of persons belonging to minorities in the political governance of their communities, as well as in national institutions. The political organization of States is very diverse (see para. 26 above) and different forms of territorial and institutional arrangements inevitably affect minority issues. The Special Rapporteur, as an academic, extensively explored the issue some 25 years ago.³⁸ He feels that it would be an important contribution to the fate of minorities to once again explore the current impact of the specific political organization of States on the situation of minorities. There will be a focus on highlighting best practices in the report.

38. Nicolas Levrat, ed., Minorités et organisation de l’Etat (Brussels, Bruylant, 1998). ↩

“Diaspora” is a word that covers very diverse realities. To the knowledge of the Special Rapporteur, no specific study exists on the linkage between existing diasporas and minority issues. The status of persons belonging to a diaspora raises prima facie multiple minority issues, often both in the country in which they reside, as well as in relationship to their country of origin, when they have one. The Special Rapporteur will propose a systematic study of minority issues in relationship to diasporas.

In the pursuit and preparation of the second priority of the mandate, that is to ensure the inclusion of minority issues in the post-2030 agenda (see para. 46 above), the Special Rapporteur intends to map all activities and documents related to minority issues in the multilateral system. The former Special Rapporteur covered such ground with regard to the United Nations in his 2022 thematic report to the General Assembly.³⁹ The ambit of a future thematic report will go beyond the Secretariat and also cover the activities of specialized agencies and other organizations of the United Nations system, evaluating whether the prescription contained in article 9 of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities was put into effect by such organizations.⁴⁰ The Special Rapporteur is convinced that, with the help of both a call for input and the use of computational diplomacy tools,⁴¹ he will be able to show a much richer attention to minority issues than is usually reported.

39. See A/77/246. The report was entitled “Protection of the rights of minorities in the institutions, structures and initiatives of the United Nations”. ↩
40. Article 9 of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities states that the specialized agencies and other organizations of the United Nations system shall contribute to the full realization of the rights and principles set forth in the Declaration, within their respective fields of competence. ↩
41. See Didier Wernli, “Fostering interdisciplinary collaboration on computational diplomacy: a multi-layered network approach to improve our understanding of institutional complexity and effective governance design”, Journal of Computational Science, vol. 72 (2023). ↩

In an important thematic report, which will come quite late in his term of office, the Special Rapporteur will focus on the inclusion of minority issues in the post-2030 agenda.

Article 8 (4) of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities states that nothing in the Declaration may be construed as permitting any activity contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations, including sovereign equality, territorial integrity and political independence of States. In the thematic report, the Special Rapporteur will examine to whom this provision is addressed and what it means in practice in the field of minority issues.

In the preparation of all those reports, the Special Rapporteur will issue calls for input and organize, as the need arises, meetings with stakeholders and academic events discussing the issues at stake.

From the foregoing, it is apparent that the Special Rapporteur insists, as the General Assembly did when adopting resolution 217 C (III) in 1948, on the complexity of minority issues. His conviction is that, in most cases, seeking simple and uniform solutions will not do justice to the specific situations and needs of persons belonging to a minority. That acknowledgment will lead to nuanced appreciation and small-step approaches, instead of an attempt to broadly tackle minority issues at a global level. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, that differentiated approach to minority issues in each State in which they arise is in line with the United Nations approach to minority rights and constitutes a specific and important contribution to the universality of human rights.

The Special Rapporteur also feels the need to address the views of majoritarian populations with regard to minority issues, which has not received a great deal of attention so far. It is naturally the needs and legitimate expectations of persons belonging to minorities to enjoy the full respect of their human rights that is at the core of the mandate, but to have these persons’ rights properly implemented, the specific needs of persons belonging to a minority need to be understood and acknowledged by the whole population of each State. That is why, without diminishing consideration for the voice of minorities, the Special Rapporteur, as explained in his vision for the mandate, wants to address minority issues as issues concerning society as a whole.

The Special Rapporteur invites States to consider, at a forthcoming session of the Human Rights Council, extending the duration of the annual session of the Forum on Minorities Issues to three days instead of the two days at present.

The Special Rapporteur also invites States to support the development of regular sessions of two regional minority forums each year, on a rotating basis, so that all regions have a regional forum every two or three years. He calls upon States to help in the organization of such regional minority forums, either by proposing to host, with the Special Rapporteur, a session of a regional minority forum in their country or, by supporting through a voluntary financial contribution to the mandate, the organization of and participation in such forums.

The Special Rapporteur reiterates and endorses the call made to States by the previous Special Rapporteur in his report to the Human Rights Council in 202342 to 40 Article 9 of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities states that the specialized agencies and other organizations of the United Nations system shall contribute to the full realization of the rights and principles set forth in the Declaration, within their respective fields of competence. 41 See Didier Wernli, “Fostering interdisciplinary collaboration on computational diplomacy: a multilayered network approach to improve our understanding of institutional complexity and effective governance design”, Journal of Computational Science, vol. 72 (2023). 42 A/HRC/52/27, para. 77. GE.24-00944 consider, when implementing the Sustainable Development Goals, persons belonging to minority groups as included in the “leave no one behind” pledge. Such persons are often among the worst off, as many face discrimination concerning the enjoyment of their socioeconomic rights, as was highlighted at the sixteenth session of the Forum on Minority Issues.

The Special Rapporteur invites States to exchange and cooperate with him on devising ways to make sure that minority issues will be properly integrated into the post-2030 agenda.

The Special Rapporteur invites the relevant special procedure mandate holders, treaty bodies and regional, as well as national, human rights protection mechanisms to positively receive his proposals for coordination and cooperation in order to enhance the realization of the rights of persons belonging to minority groups.

The Special Rapporteur calls upon OHCHR to help strengthen the links between his mandate and the network of minority fellows with the purpose of improving the implementation of minority rights everywhere.

The Special Rapporteur invites academic institutions worldwide to consider favourably his proposal to set up “minority issues breakthrough workshops” as the basis of a global academic network on minority issues.