Human Rights Litigation and Restrictive State Implementation of Strasbourg Court Judgments: The Case of Ethnic Minorities from Southeast Europe

Legal action by members from ethnic minorities in Strasbourg has often been an alternative route or mobilization strategy aiming to redress broader problems beyond the individual grievances concerned and to pressure national governments to change the way they treat minorities.

It is premised on a widespread, but also highly disputed, expectation that judicial rulings can vindicate minorities and exert pressure upon governments to change their relevant laws and practices. Focusing specifically on four countries of Southeast Europe (Greece, Bulgaria, Turkey, and Romania), this article explores the domestic implementation of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judgments addressing minority claims, as well as its impact (or lack of it) on the ways in which national authorities deal with minorities.

Do national authorities implement Strasbourg Court judgments related to ethnic minorities, to what extent and under what conditions are they likely to do so? Does their implementation promote progressive reforms in state laws and policies towards historical minorities? What is the nature of European judicial and human rights influence – if any – at the national level?