Contemporary accommodations of minority groups describe a continuum of conflict prevention models, and the interplay between national and international protection is to be underscored. These are some of Dr. Malloy’s points today, when she introduces the main European patterns of minority accommodation.
Dr. Malloy’s presentation is part of a study visit programme for MPs from Turkey – including also MPs of Kurdish background. The study visit in Berlin is organized by the Berghof Foundation and the Democratic Progress Institute (DPI).
A continuum of conflict prevention models
In today’s presentation, Dr. Malloy explains conflict prevention models as spanning from weak to strong. The models are weak or strong in terms of their minority protection ability. However, from the perspective of governments they can also be interpreted as weak or strong in terms of the burdens they imply.
Six common prevention models that can be placed on this continuum are consultative bodies, reserved seats, reduced thresholds, non-territorial public or private minority institutions, minority self-government, and territorial arrangements.
The models differ in terms of design, and they also promote different types of minority rights.
In her presentation, Dr. Malloy introduces the differences, the types of minority rights, and also illustrates them with a number of cases.
The European interplay
Dr. Malloy also explains how European minorities’ protection claims can be expressed at both international and national levels. In addition to commitment to international law, governments often add and negotiate specific minority protection models.
This is why a complete picture of contemporary European minority accommodation patterns must be described as an interplay between international and national protection.