A/79/169 VII. Five ways to realize minority rights at the national level, with and without the effective participation of persons belonging to minorities 26. As shown above, the definition of substantial “minority rights” needs to be done at the national level. Through research, five mechanisms that allow the realization of minority rights at the national level have been identified. As will be shown below, two allow only marginal participation of persons belonging to minorities, while three lead to different forms of effective participation. The first mechanism is through an institutional design that provides for the existence of specific institutions guaranteeing that the voices of persons belonging to minorities are effectively taken into account. The second is through reliance on effective participation in decisionmaking processes at the national level in common institutions, by means of direct participation in legislative processes. The third method involves autonomy (self-rule); this is usually efficient for guaranteeing persons belonging to minorities specific non-discriminatory treatment with regard to their own rights; it proves less efficient in terms of the contribution of persons belonging to minority groups to society as a whole. 27. As regards the realization of the rights of persons belonging to minorities without their effective participation, the first method for achieving this is through a specific (bilateral or plurilateral) treaty which defines certain rights that one or each of the parties to the Treaty recognizes for specific minority groups living on its territory. That was the “minority regime” invented after the First World War, in which the rights of some minorities – identified in the peace treaties – were defined and guaranteed by an international regime (under the auspices of the League of Nations). Such a solution is still envisaged, for example, under the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities of the Council of Europe, in article 18, paragraph 1, of which it stipulates: “The Parties shall endeavour to conclude, where necessary, bilateral and multilateral agreements with other St ates, in particular neighbouring States, in order to ensure the protection of persons belonging to the national minorities concerned.” Such a method will not be examined further in the present report for three reasons. First, it does not involve persons belonging to a minority in the definition of their own rights – even though, in a treaty negotiation process, each (State) party is free to include in its negotiating team any member, which could leave room for forms of participation. Second, it relates only to “national minorities” issues, since a minority group living in a given country would see rights and opportunities to participate negotiated by a neighbouring State only if that State has specific interests in protecting that particular minority group: this is typically the case of national minorities. Third, the wording of article 2, paragraph 3, of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities does not appear to encompass such a decision -making process. 28. The other way to realize minority rights that only marginally involves persons belonging to a minority consists of the realization of the specific rights of a person belonging to a minority through a judicial process. Persons belonging to minorities may play a crucial role in bringing cases before the jurisdictions, but they will then not be part of the decision-making process. Furthermore, two caveats should be underlined with regard to the process of realizin g minority rights. First, the claim to a specific minority right by a person belonging to a minority will be treated by the judges in the light of the positioning of minorities within the legal framework of a given State. Thus, if the conception of the nation is exclusive, or if a State religion exists, the national judge may assess the claim of the persons belonging to a minority in the light of the general conception of the minority/majority relationships in the legal system in question. For example, with regard to linguistic rights, despite the fact 14/20 24-13136