The Situation Confronting Minorities in Bulgaria

1. Introduction

In recent times, a greater attention has been given to the protection of minorities. Minority

protection has become an utmost concern for the countries that are hoping to join European

Union (EU) as it is one of the key criterions for accession of EU membership. The essay is

centred towards assessing the minority situation in Bulgaria. Bulgaria is in South-eastern Europe

and sharing its borders with Macedonia & Serbia to its west, Turkey & and Greece to its south,

Black Sea to its east, and Romania to its north. The situation of minority rights in Bulgaria is

considered to be a paradox (Atasoy and Soykan, 2011). The author further added that the

minority rights in Bulgaria have remained highly restricted even though EU has put greater

emphasis on this issue for the future member countries. For some minorities such as Promaks

and Macedonians, there are hardly any rights for them. There is a lot to be done in the area of

minority protection laws in Bulgaria. There are many reasons behind current condition of

minorities in Bulgaria. One of the major reasons lies within the weak legislative framework for

the protection of minority rights as the framework was established in 1990s and it has very little

changed ever since (Tesser, 2003). Number of coercive actions against minorities and overt

nationalism was increasingly practiced by the regime of Todor Zhivkov. All of these actions

were originally taken against Pomaks and Roma minorities but ended during 1984-85 when the

country’s Turks were forced to change their names. Furthermore, Turkish language was also

outlawed by the communist government. These policies resulted in the departure of Turks from

Bulgaria and more than 300,000 Turks left the country in 1989. The communist government of

Todor Zhivkov ended in November 1989 and the new communist regime led by Petar Mladenov

put efforts in democratising the country with the revival process started from December 1989.
 As far as the ethnic composition of Bulgaria is concerned, Roma and Turks are country’s

largest minorities. According to 2011 census, Turks are 8.8%, and Roma are 4.9% of the total

population of country Table 1. Other minorities include Russian, Vlach, and Armenian that

constitutes 0.8% of the total population whereas 10% of the total population didn’t identify

themselves (National Statistical Institute, 2011).

Table 1: Key Indicators for Bulgaria

Total Population 7,364,570 persons

Ethnic Composition Bulgarians: 84,8%

Turkish: 8.8%

Roma: 4.9%

Others/Unknown: 0.8%

Religion East-Orthodox: 76%

Catholic: 0.8%

Protestant: 1.1%

Muslims: 10%

No religion: 4.7%

Others: 0.2%

Source: National Statistical Institute (2011)

Key Policy Changes for Minorities

The adoption of post-communist constitution of 1991came up after the reversal of communist

assimilation campaigns was one of the key policy changes in the area of minority rights in
Bulgaria. Along with this, there were also some other prominent changes in the policies such as

the adoption of a programme for the integration of the Roma minority (the ‘Framework

Programme’) initiated in 1999, the re-introduction of minority language education during 1991-

99 particularly for Turkish language, the ratification of the Framework Convention with the

purpose of protecting the rights of national minorities which was launched in 1999, and the

introduction and implementation of comprehensive Anti-discrimination law of 2003.

Rechel (2008b) stressed that the reversal of communist assimilation campaigns was one

of the major achievements in the area of minority protection in Bulgaria but this was done over a

prolonged period of time and with very less interest from the government. The reversal decision

of communist regime was the outcome of huge nationalist protests from the Turkish populated

areas. Furthermore, due to the efforts from anti-communist oppositions, a round table talks were

initiated by the government and a more specific prohibition of parties along religious or ethnic

basis was agreed and transposed into the constitution of 1991. Elster (1997) regarded the post-

communist constitution of Bulgaria as the most illiberal in all of the Eastern and Central Europe.

The author further added that the existence of minorities was not recognised in the post-

communist constitution. This constitution was also targeted towards negating the political

participation of minorities in Bulgaria. It was also added in the Article 14(4) of the new

constitution that there will be no political party on religious, ethnic or racial lines (State Gazette,

1991). Article 14(4) was largely criticised by the Council of Europe, EU and also by United

Nations (UN) but even then it was remained in the constitution for the entire post-communist era.

Soon after that, a party with Turkish electorate formed with the name of Movement for Rights

and Freedoms and the Constitutional Courted affirmed the legal status of this party but later it

was abstained from making minority rights demands (Rechel, 2007).

 The government of the Union Democratic Forces signed the Framework Convention in

1997 for protecting the rights of national minorities in Bulgaria. This framework came very late

as the other nine EU candidate countries from Eastern and Central Europe already submitted

their frameworks earlier than Bulgaria. A governmental body was also established by the

government of Democratic Forces with the purpose of monitoring the issues related to the

protection of minorities same as the other Eastern and Central Europe. But this government body

in Bulgaria was not having any authority and only had the advisory role. Furthermore, the new

government body was not capable of monitoring and implementing or developing any policies

for the protection of minorities (Atasoy and Soykan, 2011). The European Commission also

reported the inability of National Council of Bulgaria for handling the minorities’ issues in all of

its reports between 2000 and 2004 as the Bulgaria’s application for membership of EU assessed

in European Parliament. The new government of the Simeon II National Movement in Bulgaria

changed the National Council for Cooperation on Inter-ethnic and Demographic Issues into the

Directorate on Ethnic and Demographic Issues but even then the new body was having only

advisory roles and with limited to no authority in ensuring the rights of minorities (Visintin et al.,

2016).

Another key policy change came in Bulgaria in shape of the adoption of Framework

Program for Equal Integration of Roma into Bulgarian Society in 1998 by the broad alliance of

Roma organisations in Bulgaria. Russinov (2001) regarded this move as the most significant

accomplishment for the Roma in Bulgaria. Due to the pressure from the Council of Europe, the

Bulgarian government half-heartedly adopted the framework program in 1999 with the strategic

objectives for ten years in the areas such as education, Roma neighbourhood developments,

healthcare, economic developments, and minority protection (Russinov, 2001). Due the regular
reporting of European Commission from 2000 to 2002 and repeated reminders to Bulgarian

government, the Law on Protection against Discrimination was adopted in 2003. It can be

concluded for the key policy changes in Bulgaria after 1989 up till most recently in a way that

the government policy has moved from the elimination of ethnic differences towards minority

rights regime. Atasoy and Soykan (2011) argued that the current minority rights regime offers

only non-territorial cultural minority rights. The author further added that these non-territorial

minority rights have only granted to Turkish minority whereas Roma minority only enjoys very

limited rights. Furthermore, the minorities such as Macedonians and Pomaks fall outside of any

minority rights regime.

Implementation of Policies

Most of the policy changes since 1989 faced the fate of failed implementation efforts from the

government. It is also mentioned previously that the reversal of communist assimilation

campaigns was done in the reaction of nationalist protests. Troebst (1992) argued that Bulgarian

government put the efforts as homeopathic doses for ensuring the rights of minorities in

Bulgaria. At the time when the Movement for Rights and Freedoms party decided to participate

in 1990 elections, both Sofia city court and supreme court of Bulgaria restricted their registration

but because of the pressure from Western European countries, the Central Electoral Committee

allowed the Movement for Rights and Freedoms party to take part in upcoming elections. Even

though the reversal of communist campaigns happened in early 1990s but the inclusion of

minority language into education happened in 1999. This was all because the reluctance of

giving the rights to minorities as the former communists had their strong influence into country’s

politics up till 1997. But as the Democratic Forces party came into power the level of influence

of communists substantially decreased. The minority language provision into education system
came into practice in 2002-03 academic year. There were many obstacles in the implementation

process as the children from minorities had to make selection among foreign languages and their

mother tongue. Along with this, only Turkish children gained the right to have education in their

language whereas Roma children were not able to have education in their language. Same was

the case with Macedonian children (Rechel, 2008b). In last decade, there were also some efforts

to implement the minority rights in Bulgaria as the Law on Protection against Discrimination

came into force in 2004. There are number of reasons behind the lack of implementation of

policy changes in Bulgaria. Rechel (2008a) regarded public attitude as the most significant

reason behind this. Furthermore, there are many related aspects of minority rights in Bulgaria. At

first, the re-introduction of minority language education and the reversal of the communist

assimilation campaigns were impeded by nationalist sentiments. Secondly, the granting process

for minority rights for Pomaks, and Macedonian minorities became extremely difficult by

consensus in Bulgarian society. Thirdly, the anti-Roma sentiments and racism remained

widespread in Bulgaria that made the provision of special measures for Roma community very

unpopular among non-Roma population. Visintin et al. (2016) argued that the issue of minority

rights doesn’t has any support from general public in Bulgaria and because of this there is weak

political support from government for this issue. The author further added that the lack of

direction, limited budgetary allocation, weak institutional capacities, and lack of minority

involvement have also affected the rightful provision of rights for the minorities in Bulgaria

(Rechel, 2008a).

Explanatory factors for Minority Rights in Bulgaria

The new wave of minority rights movement in Bulgaria is the result of both internal and external

factors. The external factors such as EU directives, and the Council of Europe initiatives played a
vital role in provoking the regime for minority rights in Bulgaria. The internal factors which

ignited the need for minority rights and laws are such as domestic party constellations, historical

legacy from communism, minority specific factors (i.e. socio-economic standing, ethnic self-

identifications, minority size, political clout and nationalist protests) paved the way for minority

rights in Bulgaria. It is very important to mention here that the role of EU is vital in the provision

of minority rights in Bulgaria. Tesser (2003) added that most of the policy changes in the area of

minority rights would not have happened without the direct intervention from EU. For the

accession of EU membership, the European Commission pushed the Bulgarian government to

take steps in integration of Roma minority, adopt the Framework Convention, and the

transposition of anti-discrimination law. For all of these three areas, the government of Bulgaria

had to meet the expectations of European Commission. At the same time, the Council of Europe

played a vital role in the adoption of the Framework Program and also in implementation plan

for minority policies (Visintin et al., 2016).

Conclusion

The lessons from the example of Bulgaria in the area of minority rights are mixed. From early

1990s till the accession of EU membership in 2007, the role of EU and European Commission

was vital in paving the way for ensuring the minority rights in Bulgaria. It has also been noted

that the EU has more influential role than that of European Council. In the response of European

Commission expectations for the rights of minorities, the government of Bulgaria adopted a new

program for the integration of Roma minority, ratified the Framework Convention, and also

established a government agency for demographic and ethnic issues in the country. From 2003

up till now, Bulgaria has put some efforts in making its legislation in line with the EU’s

directives for anti-discrimination. From 1989 till now, EU is the only and most influential body
for pushing the Bulgarian government in policy development and implementation in the area of

minority rights. Despite the efforts of EU, there is still a huge implementation gap in most of the

policy changes in minority rights. This is also because of the insufficient efforts from EU for

actual implementation of policies. Furthermore, it is also noted that EU pushed the Bulgarian

government for only encouraging them in making superficial policy changes.

References

ATASOY, E. & SOYKAN, A. 2011. Freedom walk of the Turks in Bulgaria: Events of May in

1989 and their reflections. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 19, 112-120.

ELSTER, J. 1997. Ways of constitution-making. In: HADENIUS, A. (ed.) Democracy’s victory

and crisis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

NATIONAL STATISTICAL INSTITUTE 2011. 2011 population census in the republic of

Bulgaria (final data).

RECHEL, B. 2007. State Control of Minorities in Bulgaria. Journal of Communist Studies and

Transition Politics, 23, 352–370.

RECHEL, B. 2008a. The long way back to Europe: minority protection in Bulgaria, Stuttgart,

ibidem-Verlag.

RECHEL, B. 2008b. What Has Limited the EU's Impact on Minority Rights in Accession

Countries? East European Politics & Societies, 22, 171-191.

RUSSINOV, R. 2001. The Bulgarian Framework Programme for Equal Integration of Roma:

participation in the policy making process. Roma Rights, journal of the European Roma

Rights Centre, 2-3.

STATE GAZETTE 1991. Council of Ministers Decree No. 232 of 29 November 1991 on the

Study of Mother Tongue in Municipal Schools.

TESSER, L. M. 2003. The Geopolitics of Tolerance: Minority Rights Under EU Expansion in

East-Central Europe. East European Politics & Societies, 17, 483-532.

TROEBST, S. 1992. Nationalism as an impediment to democracy in Bulgaria. From the

discussion on the constitution to the presidential elections (May 1991–January 1992).

Südosteuropa, 41, 188-227.

VISINTIN, E. P., GREEN, E. G. T., BAKALOVA, D. & ZOGRAFOVA, Y. 2016. Identification

and ethnic diversity underlie support for multicultural rights: A multilevel analysis in

Bulgaria. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 51, 1-13.