General conclusions and recommendations Non-discrimination The principle of non-discrimination has expanded over the past few years under international and European human rights law in ways that increase the number of spheres where unreasonable distinctions can be found (e.g. race or ethnicity, religion, education, or voting rights), elaborate on the type of discrimination involved (direct and indirect), and reach out to significant procedural aspects, including the shift of the burden of proof and the use of statistical evidence. Jurisprudence should be further enhanced by: (a) exposing the connection between equality (e.g. Article 14 ECHR), substantive rights (e.g. under Articles 2, 3, 8, 9 ECHR, and Article 2 Protocol 1 ECHR) and minority protection; (b) exploring the full potential of Protocol 12 ECHR; wider ratification of the instrument, including by western European countries, would strengthen nondiscrimination in Europe; (c) encouraging an expansive use of the notion of indirect discrimination under the European and InterAmerican and African human rights regimes. In the European context, the ECJ’s finding of indirect discrimination in cases concerning sex and nationality discrimination, and the elaborate rules of the Equality Directives may guide the jurisprudence of other courts and quasi-judicial bodies, including on issues of evidence and burden of proof; (d) paying particular attention to, not only discrimination on account of race and ethnic origin, but also discrimination based on religion, including multiple discrimination on the grounds of religion and gender. Education, participation Cases such as Cyprus before the ECtHR (elaborating on education in a minority language under certain conditions) and Yatama before the IACtHR (elaborating on the link between political participation and indigenous identity) suggest that more specific aspects of protection may be read into general human rights norms, beyond the specifics of equality law. The potential ramifications of this jurisprudence for minority protection remain to be seen and further case law in these areas is thus highly desirable. Jurisprudence should be further enhanced by (a) initiating cases concerning access to education in general, and minority education in particular, based on the nuanced approach reflected in Cyprus in relation to secondary education provision and its physical accessibility; (b) extending the requirement of economic affordability to include provision of education in a minority language, where there is a substantial number of minority members in the relevant area and there is sufficient demand. Cases under Article 27 ICCPR may better entrench positive duties on a state to guarantee public funding to support minority education. While judicial or quasi-judicial findings of a general minority right to minority-language education might be difficult to obtain at this stage, particularly under Article 2 of Protocol 1 ECHR, justifying ex post minority-friendly policies on a caseby-case basis appears realistic and entirely desirable jurisprudence; (c) consolidating jurisprudential developments in electoral matters arising out of legislative lacunae in domestic laws, procedural irregularities or other measures affecting minority groups’ right to political participation; (d) encouraging wider use of the principle of nondiscrimination in political participation, particularly under the Inter-American system and the ECHR; here again, wider ratification of Protocol 12 ECHR is of considerable importance; (e) initiating further cases under Article 27 ICCPR on effective participation of minorities in decisions that affect them, especially (though by no means exclusively) in relation to indigenous peoples. Land rights The Inter-American jurisprudence has proved instrumental in advancing indigenous land rights under the ACHR and the American Declaration. The groundbreaking criteria developed by the IACtHR in Saramaka in relation to MINORITY GROUPS AND LITIGATION: A REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENTS IN INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL JURISPRUDENCE 49