Revus
Journal for Constitutional Theory and Philosophy of
Law / Revija za ustavno teorijo in filozofijo prava 
11 | 2009
Ustavno pravo Zahodnega Balkana
Human Rights in the Republic of Macedonia
Seen Through the Lens of the Constitution and the Practice of
Democracy 
Tanja Karakamiševa
Electronic version
URL: http://journals.openedition.org/revus/1149
DOI: 10.4000/revus.1149
ISSN: 1855-7112
Publisher
Klub Revus
Printed version
Date of publication: 1 December 2009
Number of pages: 151-166
ISSN: 1581-7652
 
Electronic reference
Tanja Karakamiševa, « Human Rights in the Republic of Macedonia », Revus [Online], 11 | 2009, Online
since 06 February 2012, connection on 19 April 2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/
revus/1149  ; DOI : 10.4000/revus.1149 
All rights reserved
151
revija za evropsko ustavnost
(2009) 11
revus (2009) 11, 151–166
Tanja Karakamiševa
Human Rights in the Republic of Macedonia 
Seen hrough the Lens of the Constitution and the Practice  
of Democracy 
Avtorica dr. Tanja Karakamiševa v članku Človekove pravice v Republiki Makedo-
niji obravnava varstvo pravic in svoboščin v veljavni ustavni ureditvi Makedonije. 
Posebej se posveča vprašanju demokratičnosti ureditve in prakse na tem področju. 
V drugem delu razprave govori o vzrokih in posledicah eskalacije mednacionalnih spo-
rov in izbruha nasilja, ki so pripeljali do ustavnih sprememb glede varstva pravic narod-
nih skupnosti. V sklepnem delu avtorica analizira uveljavljanje mednarodnih standardov 
varstva pravic v Makedoniji, ki si prizadeva postati članica Nata in Evropske unije. Pri-
spevek objavljamo v angleškem izvirniku.
Ključne besede: Makedonija, pravice in svoboščine, mednacionalni konlikti, ustavni 
razvoj, varstvo pravic na mednarodni ravni
1 IS THERE A HUMAN RIGHT TO DEMOCRACY?1
Bearing in mind the opinion of Joshua Cohen stated in his paper “Is there a 
Human Right to Democracy?”, the answer is 'no'. he author has elaborated this 
conclusion on the basis of the ive interconnected claims which have played an 
important role:
– justice requires democracy;
– human rights are a proper subset of the rights founded on justice: so a 
society that fully protects human rights is not ipso facto just;
– a conception of human rights is part of an ideal of global public reason, a 
shared basis for political argument that expresses the common reasoning 
1 See: Christine Sypnowich, he Egalitarian Conscience, 11 - Sypnowich-chap 11, Joshua Co-
hen, »Is there a Human Right to Democracy?«, 226. 
 See: http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/21328/is_there_a_human_right_to_democracy.pdf
 Bearing this conclusion in mind, I would like to point out my opinion. here can be no uni-
versal rights without democracy, but democracy is not a universal right; it is a human project 
which must be earned. 
152
revija za evropsko ustavnost
USTAVNO VARSTVO ČLOVEKOVIH PRAVIC
(2009) 11
that adherents of conlicting religious, philosophical and ethical tradi-
tions can reasonably be expected to share;
– that conception includes an account of membership, and human rights 
are entitlements that serve to ensure the bases of membership; and
– the democracy that justice requires is associated with a demanding con-
ception of equality, more demanding than the idea of membership asso-
ciated with human rights.
he author has concluded that democracy is a demanding political ideal. he 
thesis that there is a human right to democracy threatens to strip away its de-
manding substances. 
On the other hand, the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human 
Rights2 and the ICCPR3 in several Articles have deined democracy as a univer-
sal human right, or rather that “everybody has the right to democracy”. Article 
21 of the Declaration has enshrined the principle of “pluralist democracy”, 
which provides that:
1. Everyone has the right to take part in the government of their country, 
directly or through freely chosen representatives.
2. Everyone has the right to equal access to public service in their country.
3. he will of the people4 shall be the basis of the authority of government; 
this will of the people shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elec-
2 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, General Assembly Resolution 217 A (III), 10 Decem-
ber 1948, http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm.
3 he diferences between the two articulations in the UDHR and ICCPR are very interesting. 
Article 21 of the Declaration can be read syllogistically to mean that the basis of governmen-
tal authority is such popular will as has been expressed in the elections, whereas non-liberal 
regimes would prefer it to mean that the popular will is (in some abstract sense) the basis of 
- and therefore expressed by - governmental authority, and is also expressed in elections. he 
Covenant version simpliies the matter by leaving undeined the relationship, if any, between 
not only authority and elections, but also between authority and participation. 
4 From my point of view, »the will of the people« is an abstraction which does not have an ob-
server- independent existence. Only the wills of individuals exist and these are never the same 
for all individuals. How to aggregate these individual wills and how to safeguard the rights of 
all kinds of minorities, namely all those who are not in favor of a decision which is supported 
by the majority? What if these decisions gained their support through blatant demagoguery? 
Recent history is full of examples of undemocratic objectives and totalitarian regimes which, 
at times with some justiication, claim to be executing the will of the people. he only »will 
of the people« which is not a prelude to a totalitarian society is the democratic principle. 
Gregory Fox and Brad Roth have made this point regarding Article 21: »Article 21 of the 
UDHR, in a manner strikingly dissimilar to that of the document's other Articles and that of 
the ICCPR, speaks not merely of the individual right to take part in government, but also of 
the principle that '(t)he will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government'«, 
and that »this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections«. Implicitly, Article 
21 links governmental legitimacy to respect for the popular will. Yet this linkage does not 
appear in the subsequent, and legally binding, International Covenant on Civil and Political 
153
revija za evropsko ustavnost
Human Rights in the Republic of Macedonia
(2009) 11
tions which shall be by universal and equal sufrage and shall be held by 
secret ballot or by equivalent free voting procedures5. 
he rights enshrined in the International Covenant on Economic, Social 
and Cultural Rights and subsequent human rights instruments covering group 
rights (e.g. indigenous peoples, minorities, people with disabilities) are equal-
ly essential for democracy as they ensure an equitable distribution of wealth, 
as well as equality and equity in respect to access to civil and political rights. 
Democracy6 is the voluntary association of people wishing to live in a healthy 
society that respects their right to their own opinions, beliefs and interests, a 
condition which requires that in terms of decision making, all are considered 
equal (subjective equality). hey will have to accept all decisions which meet 
that principle or the principles which can be deduced from it, or which are tak-
en resulting from a procedure which has been established under such decisions. 
A basic principle which is unacknowledged in the Declaration is that with each 
right comes a duty. 
Universal rights imply universal responsibility of all those able to shoul-
der it to ensure that the conditions necessary to meet these rights are fulilled. 
Democracy is identiied by certain key principles, and by a set of institutions and 
practices through which these principles are realized. Its starting point, like that 
of human rights, is the dignity of the individual person. However, democracy 
also has a speciic focus - that of decision making about the rules and policies 
for any group, association or society as a whole, as well as a distinctive concep-
Rights (ICCPR). Article 25 of the Covenant speaks of the right to participate in public afairs 
- including the right to genuine and periodic elections - but it does not purport to condition 
governmental authority on respect for the will of the people. See: International Covenant on 
Civil and Political Rights, signed 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976, 999 
UNTS 171. 
 See: Gregory Fox and Brad Roth, Democracy and International Law, Review of International 
Studies (2001) 27, 335, and also Henry J. Steiner, Political Participation as a Human Right, 
Harvard Human Rights Year Book (1998) 77, 87–88, 90, 93. 
5 his paragraph of Article 21 is actually the link between democracy and human rights.
6 he word democracy itself comes from the Greek word meaning »rule of the people«. he 
Athenian conception of democracy was that a select group, the »citizens«, free-born men, 
would rule the rest. his was essentially representative democracy in which all heads of fami-
lies would represent everyone else in their household. When democracy is deined as »rule of 
the people«, it is much easier to see democracy as a universal concept, but human rights and 
democracy have to be elaborated as distinct concepts. 
 In the Western mind however, they are intertwined. A convenient shorthand of many Ameri-
cans is that »human rights« include the ones mentioned prominently in the Declaration of 
Independence (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) and those enumerated in the Bill of 
Rights. he American Constitution and Bill of Rights say very little about democracy or elec-
tions but quite a lot about the rights of individuals and states. On the other hand, the Bill of 
Rights was written to ensure that the individual was protected from the government. 
 According to the European Court of Human Rights, »democracy appears to be the only po-
litical model contemplated by the ECHR and, accordingly, the only one compatible with it«. 
154
revija za evropsko ustavnost
USTAVNO VARSTVO ČLOVEKOVIH PRAVIC
(2009) 11
tion of citizens, not only as the bearers of rights and responsibilities, but as ac-
tive participants in the collective decisions and policies which afect their lives. 
he core principles and institutions of democracy are: 
a) Popular control and political equality realized through a framework of 
guaranteed citizen rights,
b) Representative and accountable political institutions subject to electoral 
authorization7, and 
c) An active civil society.
Yet, the essential elements of democracy are:
a) Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms,
b) Freedom of association,
c) Freedom of expression and opinion,
d) Access to power and its exercise in accordance with the rule of law,
e) he holding of periodic free and fair elections by universal sufrage and 
by secret ballot as the expression of the will of the people,
f) A pluralistic system of political parties and organizations,
g) he separation of power,
h) he independence of the judiciary,
i) Transparency and accountability in public administration and
j) Free, independent and pluralistic media.
All the UN human rights texts embody a commitment to a democratic form 
of government and, according to A. W. Brian Simpson8, relect four ideas: 
a) he irst is that government should be based on the will of the people,
b) he second is that all appropriately qualiied citizens should be able to 
participate in the government of their country,
c) he third is that the will of the people should be ascertained through pe-
riodic elections and
d) he fourth is that elections should be free elections, with universal suf-
frage and a secret ballot.
herefore, the basic principles of democracy are that the people have the 
right to a controlling inluence over public decisions and decision makers, and 
that they should be treated with equal respect and of equal worth in the context 
of such decisions. 
7 »Democracy cannot be understood in terms of some unmediated notion of popular will. he 
aspirations of the multitude inevitably conlict, which is precisely why the practice of politics 
has emerged. he aggregation of interests and opinions implicit in the concept of a demo-
cratic will can be recognized only when absorbed into some representative form«. See: Martin 
Loughlin, he Idea of Public Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2003, 112. 
8 See: A W Brian Simpson, Human Rights and the End of Empire: Britain and the Genesis of 
the European Convention, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2001, 757. 
155
revija za evropsko ustavnost
Human Rights in the Republic of Macedonia
(2009) 11
Today, the concept of a democratic society where democracy could be im-
plemented “is acknowledged as a fundamental feature of the European public 
order”.9 hat is apparent, irstly, from the Preamble of the ECHR, which es-
tablishes a very clear connection between the Convention and democracy by 
stating that the maintenance and further realization of human rights and fun-
damental freedoms are best ensured on the one hand by an efective political 
democracy and on the other by a common understanding and observance of 
human rights. he phrase “democratic society” also appears in Articles 6, 8, 
9, 10, 11 and Article 2 of Protocol 4 of the European Convention of Human 
Rights10. Also, the European Union is high on rhetoric with regard to democra-
cy and human rights promotion. he Nice Treaty, as well as the recently agreed 
Lisbon Treaty, extends the objective of promoting democracy and human rights 
and fundamental freedoms inside and outside the Union. A ‘Joint Statement 
on EC Development Policy’ by the Council of Ministers and the European 
Commission incorporated the promotion of human rights, democracy, the rule 
of law and good governance as an integral part of development cooperation, as 
a “new framework for the European Commission’s activities in support of hu-
man rights and democratization”.11 
From the above mentioned, democracy and human rights cannot be treated 
as a unitary and indivisible concept but should be considered as separate and dis-
tinct concepts which are very much intertwined. hey cannot function separately. 
hey need each other and reinforce each other. Where there is democracy, there 
are also human rights and vice versa. A democracy without human rights is not 
an ideal democracy, because it cannot function adequately. Human rights with-
out democracy are not complete. 
On one hand, the values of freedom, respect for human rights and the princi-
ple of holding periodic and genuine elections by universal sufrage are essential 
elements of democracy, but on the other hand, democracy provides the natural 
environment for the protection and efective realization of human rights. 
Democracy unsupported by respect for human rights cannot in itself guar-
antee observance of human rights. Also, democratic deicits and weak insti-
tutions are among the main challenges to the efective realization of human 
rights. 
9 See for more details: Philip Leach, Taking a Case to the European Court of Human Rights, 
Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2nd edition, 2005, 161. 
10 Article 6, right to fair trial, Article 8, right to respect for family and private life, Article 9, 
freedom of thought, conscience and religion, Article 10, freedom of expression, Article 11, 
freedom of assembly and association, and Article 2 of Protocol 4 of the European Convention 
of Human Rights, freedom of movement. 
11 See: Gordon Crawford, Evaluating EU promotion of human rights, democracy and good gov-
ernance: towards a participatory approach, University of Leeds, http://www.edpsg.org/Docu-
ments/Dp22.doc.
156
revija za evropsko ustavnost
USTAVNO VARSTVO ČLOVEKOVIH PRAVIC
(2009) 11
Democracy is the application of human rights to the ield of government. 
Human rights are democratic rights because they are necessary for democracy, 
just as democracy is necessary for human rights. But human rights are not just 
a necessary prerequisite for democracy. hey bring about democracy. We can 
talk about human rights only in terms of a particular predeined environment. 
In today’s world, the most fundamental environment is democracy, and hence 
the sort of relationship human rights share with democracy is of vital signii-
cance. 
2 THE DEMOCRATIC CONTENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS 
IN THE MACEDONIAN CONSTITUTION - LEGAL 
AND POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE
he Republic of Macedonia has had an interesting 18 years of development 
of its democratic political and constitutional system. he Republic of Macedonia 
has passed through two important phases in its modern history of independence, 
which have actually made tremendous changes to political institutions and to 
political life. 
he irst phase began in 1991 when the Constitution was adopted12 and last-
ed until the so-called inter-ethnical conlict occurring in 2001. he escalation of 
the violence emerged in the context of several signiicant landmarks that were 
to pave the way for a considerably brighter future for the country. 
First, ethnic violence emerged ater the Stabilization and Association Agreement 
with the EU had been signed13. his agreement opened up a variety of issues 
12 he Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia has been pronounced in the Oicial Gazette of 
the Republic of Macedonia 52/1991 from 22 November 1991, when it came into legal force and 
practice in the Macedonian legal system. Until now, the Constitution has had 31 amendments 
to its content. 
13 On November 24, 2000 the SAA is initialed at the Zagreb Summit, making the Republic of 
Macedonia the irst state in the region to sign the agreement. Immediately aterwards, in 
December, Exceptional Trade Measures come into force on the basis of the special Regula-
tion from the Council from September 2000, for the countries of the SAP introducing and 
providing asymmetrical trade beneits to Macedonia, as well as decision on eligibility of the 
country to use the CARDS Programme 2002-2006. Finally, Macedonia and the EU signed the 
SAA in Luxembourg on April 09, 2001 which entered into force on April 01, 2004. he Agree-
ment covers areas of political dialogue; regional cooperation, aspects of the four freedoms and 
creation of a free trade area by 2011 for industrial products and most agricultural ones, ap-
proximation of the legislation to the Community acquis specifying some very precise rules in 
the ield of intellectual property rights, competition and public procurement, broad spectrum 
of diferent forms of cooperation in Community policies, justice and home afairs. See: Stabi-
lization and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member 
States, for one part, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, for the other part, Of-
icial Journal of the European Union, Vol. 47, 20 March 2004, 13–81. 
157
revija za evropsko ustavnost
Human Rights in the Republic of Macedonia
(2009) 11
that were to lead to a complete harmonization of our country’s standards with 
those of the EU in all aspects, particularly in the ield of the practical realization 
of human rights. Such harmonization would inluence the status of the collec-
tivities and the building of the democratic capacity of institutions, which would 
have immediate impact on the ight against corruption and organized crime.
he second landmark of the time, prior to the escalation of violence, was the 
signing of the agreement with the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia concern-
ing the border between the two countries. his practically closed the last remain-
ing issue of international borders with our neighbors.
he third issue I ind important and which was supposed to resolve some open 
issues was the then forthcoming population and household census and the con-
crete preparations for it. It was supposed to be carried out in accordance with 
international standards, in cooperation with the international community and 
under its supervision. he census was expected to take the dilemmas regarding 
the ethnic structure of the Republic of Macedonia of the agenda and prevent 
future politically-motivated abuse of statistics which had previously occurred. 
For some political structures in the Republic of Macedonia, these landmarks 
were too dangerous to be allowed to happen. It was too obvious that ater the 
successful completion of these points, the Republic of Macedonia would be-
come a well organized country with legal order and legal rules. But, for some 
political subjects, this was the worst scenario that could occur. Better conlict 
than an organized Republic of Macedonia, were the thoughts of some leaders. 
he conlict had begun. 
he second phase started ater the peaceful resolution of the inter-ethnical con-
lict and adoption of the political document which was the product of negotia-
tions with the four most signiicant political parties (two ethnic Macedonian 
and two ethnic Albanian) with the direct involvement of the EU and USA rep-
resentatives as guarantors. his political document is commonly known as the 
Ohrid Framework Agreement concluded on August 13, 2001. 
Currently, the Macedonian Constitution is structured in two parts, the pre-
amble and the normative part, which itself is divided into nine sections: basic 
provisions, fundamental rights and freedoms of individual and citizen, organi-
zation of the state, constitutional court, local self-government, international re-
lations, defense and state of war and emergency, changes in the constitution and 
inal clauses. he interest here is directed to the conceptualization of citizenship 
rights and freedoms, as well as their obligations. 
he Macedonian Constitution grants individual as well as collective rights 
to communities, organized on ethnic principle. While this duality was af-
irmed within the preamble and in certain Articles of the 1991 Constitution, 
the amendments of 2001 have reinforced the ethnic component in the concep-
158
revija za evropsko ustavnost
USTAVNO VARSTVO ČLOVEKOVIH PRAVIC
(2009) 11
tualization of collective rights. he term nationalities has been substituted with 
communities, further guarantees have been directed constitutionally to com-
munities (ethnic, linguistic and cultural) and protective mechanisms in the vot-
ing procedures and measures for proportional and equitable representation14 
of the communities within public oices have been asserted with the constitu-
tional amendments. Collective rights are included in the basic provisions and 
fundamental rights and freedoms. 
I would like to mention that even before the concluding of the Ohrid 
Agreement, the Macedonian Constitution had itself contained a comprehensive 
catalogue of fundamental rights starting from Article 9 to 48, including civil, 
cultural, economic, political and social rights and freedoms for all individuals 
and national minorities. But, in some opinions, the Ohrid Agreement was a re-
sponse to the inequalities embedded in the system beforehand, and for others, it 
was a peaceful agreement that was to end the violence, signed under the threat 
of terrorism and international intervention. It proclaims its aim to strengthen 
the civic nature of the state-liberal approach to citizenship and therefore strong 
civic rights and duties, although it has in reality embedded some of the features 
of the power-sharing approach, precisely consensus democracy. 
he Ohrid Framework Agreement secured group rights for speciied ethnici-
ties that are not in the majority position, as well as establishing strong provi-
sions that would eliminate the possibility of permanent exclusion of the latter, 
14 he Republic of Macedonia has ratiied the Framework Convention for the Protection of Na-
tional Minorities with a declaration introducing restrictive interpretations of the term ‘na-
tional minorities’, which has not been deined in the Convention. It must be noted that ac-
cording to some experts the circumstances allowing for a large maneuvering space are among 
the weaknesses of the Framework Convention. On the contrary, others claim that this lex-
ibility could lead to a much more eicient implementation and monitoring than is the case 
with other human rights instruments. 
 See for more details: Stefan Troebst, Preface and Acknowledgements, Implementing the 
Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, ECMI Report No. 3, Flens-
burg, European Centre for Minority Issues, August, 1999. 
 Another crucial aspect should also be taken into consideration: the desire of the Republic of 
Macedonia to become a member of the EU and NATO. he EU especially emphasized in its 
Copenhagen political criteria its interest in the protection of national minority rights, and the 
Framework Convention is regarded by all involved parties as appropriate proof of individual 
performances in this sensitive domain. he European Commission issued the opinion on the 
candidacy of Macedonia for EU membership, recommending granting candidate status to the 
country at the beginning of November 2005. Following the opinion of the Commission, on 
December 17, 2005, the European Council in Brussels decided to grant Macedonia the status 
of a candidate country for EU membership. he adopted membership-criteria became the 
basis of negotiations and pre-accession strategy with the applicant countries, the last condi-
tion implying full acceptance of the acquis communautaire, including participation in all three 
pillars established by the Treaty on EU. 
 See: Council of the European Union. Brussels European Council 15/16 December 2005 Presi-
dency Conclusion,. http://ue.eu.int/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/87642.pdf. 
159
revija za evropsko ustavnost
Human Rights in the Republic of Macedonia
(2009) 11
through boosting their political representation at the state and local levels, but 
also elimination of the exclusive ethnic Macedonian's state ownership15. 
Special attention within the Ohrid Agreement was given to the decentrali-
zation of the country, as a mechanism for strong political participation of the 
minorities, as well as reforms in the state administration (proportional repre-
sentation of all ethnicities, especially in the police), double majority principle 
for adoption of the key decisions in the Parliament, use of minority languages, 
and state-funded university education in the Albanian language. 
It is clear that the Ohrid Framework Agreement was brought as a conse-
quence of a grave security crisis that the Republic of Macedonia fell into ater 
ten years of virtual life. Macedonia's society was very fragile in the moment 
of signing the Agreement, which might have caused the emergence of paral-
lel institutions and parallel security structures. he implementation of the 
Framework Agreement was taken in times of deregulated and wasted institu-
tions in a partisan, criminal and militarized context. 
he Republic of Macedonia has implemented the Agreement into its con-
stitutional and legal amendments. he main changes to the Constitution were 
made in the ield of ethnic rights and their protection by the institutions. 
For example, in the units of local self-government where at least 20 percent 
of the population speaks a language other than the oicial Macedonian lan-
guage, that language and its alphabet shall be used as an oicial language in 
addition to the Macedonian; 
– he ethnic communities are equitably represented in all public bodies at 
all levels and in other areas of public life; 
– he question of abovementioned double majority for the laws which di-
rectly afected questions of culture, use of language, personal documen-
tation, use of symbols etc.; 
– Assembly elects the Public Attorney with a double majority;
– Within the Assembly functions the Committee for Inter-Community 
Relations, where seven members are from the Macedonian MPs and 
seven from Albanian MPs. Others are elected to represent other ethnic 
communities: Turks, Vlachs, Roma, Serbs and Bosniaks.
In the ield of human rights, the Republic of Macedonia respects not only 
ethnic (collective) rights, but also individual rights and freedoms of all citi-
zens. he Republic of Macedonia has ratiied almost all the relevant human 
rights treaties; so, as with many other countries in the world, the key challenge 
lies again in the implementation and operationalization of these standards, 
making them work in practice. All so-called “core human rights treaties” have 
15 See the full text of the Ohrid Framework Agreement in the oicial website of the President or 
of the Government of the Republic of Macedonia; www.vlada.mk or www.president.gov.mk. 
160
revija za evropsko ustavnost
USTAVNO VARSTVO ČLOVEKOVIH PRAVIC
(2009) 11
been ratiied by the Macedonian authorities. It should be noted that prior to 
Macedonia’s independence in 1991 most of the conventions were already in 
force within its territory, as the former Yugoslavia had been state party to 
them.16 
By way of succession to the former Yugoslavia, the Macedonian Government 
took over responsibility for its international relations efective 17 September 
1991. Also, the Republic of Macedonia was admitted as a member to the United 
Nations by General Assembly Resolution A/RES/47/225 of 8 April 1993, fol-
lowing the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia and became a Member of the 
Council of Europe on 9 November 1995. 
Convention Signature
Ratiication/
Succession/
Accession
Entry  
into  
Force
International Covenant on 
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 
(CESCR) 1966
18/01/1994 
(Suc)
17/09/1991
International Covenant on Civil and 
Political Rights (CCPR) 1966
(competence for inter-state 
complaints (Art. 41) not accepted)
18/01/1994 
(Suc)
17/09/1991
Optional Protocol to the CCPR 1966 12/12/1994 
(Acc)
12/03/1995
Second Optional Protocol to ICCPR 
1989
26/01/1995 
(Acc)
26/04/1995
Convention Against Torture and 
Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading 
Treatment or Punishment (CAT) 
1984
(competence for inquiry procedure, 
individual/inter-state complaints 
(Arts. 20, 21, 22) accepted)
12/12/1994 
(Suc)
17/09/1991
Optional Protocol to CAT 2002 .... .... ....
Convention on the Rights of the 
Child (CRC) 1989 
2/12/1993 (Suc) 17/09/1991
16 For example, the process of ratiication of CERD was inished on 2 October 1967, for CCPR 
on 2 June 1971, for CESCR on 2 June 1971, for CEDAW on 26 February 1982, for CAT on 10 
September 1991 and for CRC on 3 January 1991.
161
revija za evropsko ustavnost
Human Rights in the Republic of Macedonia
(2009) 11
Convention Signature
Ratiication/
Succession/
Accession
Entry  
into  
Force
Optional Protocol to the CRC on the 
involvement of children in armed 
conlict 2000 
17/07/2001 12/01/2004 12/02/2004
Optional Protocol to the CRC on the 
sale of children, child prostitution 
and child pornography 2000
17/07/2001 17/10/2003 17/11/2003
Convention on the Elimination of 
All Forms of Discrimination against 
Women (CEDAW) 1979
18/01/1994 
(Suc)
17/09/1991
Optional Protocol to CEDAW 1999 
(no opting-out of inquiry procedure, 
Art. 10) 
03/04/2000 17/10/2003 17/1/2004
International Convention on 
the Elimination of All Forms of 
Racial Discrimination (CERD) 
1965 (competence for individual 
complaints (Art. 14) accepted)
18/01/1994 
(Suc)
17/09/1991
International Convention on the 
Protection of the Rights of All 
Migrant Workers and Members of 
heir Families (CMW) 1990 
.... .... ....
Source: OHCHR Treaty Database, www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf
he Republic of Macedonia has ratiied the following so-called Fundamental 
ILO Conventions17:
– Convention No. 87 and No. 98 on Freedom of Association and Collective 
Bargaining ratiied on 17/11/1991,
– Convention on Elimination of Forced and Compulsory Labor No. 29 on 
17/11/1991 and No. 105 on 15/07/2003,
– Convention on Elimination of Discrimination in Respect of Employment 
and Occupation No. 100 on 17/11/1991 and No. 111 on 17/11/1991, and
– Convention for Abolition of Child Labor No. 138 on 17/11/1991 and No. 
182 on 30/05/2002. 
17 See: ILOLEX Database of International Labor Standards, 
 http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/norm/index.htm
162
revija za evropsko ustavnost
USTAVNO VARSTVO ČLOVEKOVIH PRAVIC
(2009) 11
Concerning relevant UNESCO Conventions, the Republic of Macedonia has 
ratiied the following treaties18:
– Convention Against Discrimination in Education 1960 on 30/04/1997 by 
succession,
– Convention on Technical and Vocational Education 1989 and
– Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural 
Expressions 2005. 
Establishing binding legal obligations, the Republic of Macedonia is a state 
party to the following treaties established under the auspices of the Council of 
Europe relevant for human rights protection19:
Signature Ratiication/
Succession/
Accession
Entry  
into  
Force
ECHR 1950 9/11/1995 10/04/1997 10/04/1997
Protocol to the ECHR 1952 14/06/1996 10/04/1997 10/04/1997
Protocol No. 2 to the ECHR, confer-
ring upon the European Court of 
Human Rights competence to give 
advisory opinions 1963 
9/11/1995 10/04/1997 10/04/1997
Protocol No. 3 to the ECHR, amend-
ing Articles 29, 30 and 34 of the 
Convention 1963
9/11/1995 10/04/1997 10/04/1997
Protocol No. 4 to the ECHR, secur-
ing certain rights and freedoms other 
than those already included in the 
Convention and in the irst Protocol 
thereto 1963
14/06/1996 10/04/1997 10/04/1997
Protocol No. 5 to the ECHR, 
amending Articles 22 and 40 of the 
Convention 1966
9/11/1995 10/04/1997 10/04/1997
Protocol No. 6 to the ECHR con-
cerning the Abolition of the Death 
Penalty 1983
14/06/1996 10/04/1997 10/04/1997
Protocol No. 7 to the ECHR 1984 14/06/1996 10/04/1997 1/07/1997
Protocol No. 8 to the ECHR 1985 09/11/1995 10/04/1997 10/04/1997
18 Source: UNESCO Legal Instruments section, www.unesco.org.
19 Source: Council of Europe Treaty Oice, http://conventions.coe.int.
163
revija za evropsko ustavnost
Human Rights in the Republic of Macedonia
(2009) 11
Signature Ratiication/
Succession/
Accession
Entry  
into  
Force
Protocol No. 11 to the ECHR, re-
structuring the control machinery 
established thereby 1994 
09/11/1995 10/04/1997 01/11/1998
Protocol No. 12 to the ECHR 2000 04/11/2000 13/07/2004 01/04/2005
Protocol No. 13 to the ECHR, con-
cerning the abolition of the death 
penalty in all circumstances 2002
03/05/2002 13/07/2004 01/11/2004
Protocol No. 14 to the ECHR, 
amending the control system of the 
Convention 2004
15/09/2004 15/06/2005  
European Convention for the 
Prevention of Torture and Inhuman 
or Degrading Treatment or 
Punishment 1987 
14/06/1996 06/06/1997 01/10/1997
Protocol No. 1 to the European 
Convention for the Prevention of 
Torture and Inhuman or Degrading 
Treatment or Punishment 1993
14/06/1996 06/06/1997 01/03/2002
Protocol No. 2 to the European 
Convention for the Prevention of 
Torture and Inhuman or Degrading 
Treatment or Punishment 1993
14/06/1996 06/06/1997 01/03/2002
European Social Charter 1961 05/05/1998 31/03/2005 30/04/2005
Additional Protocol to the European 
Social Charter 1988
05/05/1998 .... ....
Protocol amending the European 
Social Charter 1991
05/05/1998 31/03/2005
Additional Protocol to the European 
Social Charter Providing a System of 
Collective Complaints 1995
..... ..... .....
European Social Charter (revised) 
1996
...... ...... .....
European Convention on the 
Adoption of Children 1967
03/04/2001 15/01/2003 16/04/2003
164
revija za evropsko ustavnost
USTAVNO VARSTVO ČLOVEKOVIH PRAVIC
(2009) 11
Signature Ratiication/
Succession/
Accession
Entry  
into  
Force
European Convention on the Legal 
Status of Children born out of 
Wedlock 1975
03/04/2001 29/11/2002 01/03/2003
European Convention on 
Recognition and Enforcement of 
Decisions concerning Custody of 
Children and on Restoration of 
Custody of Children 1980
03/04/2001 29/11/2002 01/03/2003
European Convention on the 
Exercise of Children's Rights 1996
03/04/2001 15/01/2003 01/05/2003
Convention on Contact concerning 
Children 2003
..... ..... .....
European Charter for Regional or 
Minority Languages 1992
25/07/1996 ...... ......
Framework Convention for the 
Protection of National Minorities 
1995
25/07/1996 10/04/1997 01/02/1998
Council of Europe Convention on 
Action against Traicking in Human 
Beings 2005 
17/11/2005 .... 2009
According to Article 118 of the Constitution, the international agreements 
ratiied in accordance with the Constitution are part of the domestic legal order 
and cannot be changed by law. In this matter, in the hierarchical position of the 
legal norms, international agreements take precedence over domestic laws. 
The international agreements are sources of law, which means that indi-
viduals or other subjects in the law may automatically invoke the provisions 
of the international agreements and the courts and administrative agencies are 
under the obligation to apply them directly. The human rights agreements have 
a stronger legal effect than the other international agreements.20 
20 his is unambiguously inferred in Article 8 (paragraph 1, item 1) from the Constitution of the 
Republic of Macedonia, which stipulates the respect of the basic human and civil freedoms 
and rights, recognized in the international law and laid down in the Constitution, as one of 
the highest values of the constitutional order of the Republic of Macedonia. 
165
revija za evropsko ustavnost
Human Rights in the Republic of Macedonia
(2009) 11
3 CONCLUSION
he Macedonian legal system, as already mentioned, belongs to the category 
of states where continental law is applied and where the main sources of law are 
the Constitution, the national laws and the international agreements concluded 
and ratiied according to law. 
he international law, according to the Vienna Convention on the Law of 
Treaties (1969), has in principle its priority with respect to national laws and 
is based on the fundamental principles of international law stated in Article 26 
(Pacta sunt servanda), according to which “every treaty in force is binding upon 
the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith” and Article 27 
that “excludes the invocation of provision of internal law as justiication for a 
failure to perform a treaty of the Convention”21. 
he Republic of Macedonia as a member of the United Nations and of the 
Council of Europe has ratiied numerous international agreements and com-
mitted itself through the proper Constitution to conform to the principles stated 
in these agreements. Respect for the generally accepted norms of international 
law is stated as one of the fundamental principles of the constitutional order 
(Art. 8) and the international agreements that are ratiied in conformity with 
the Constitution are an integral part of the internal legal order and cannot be 
changed by law (Art. 118). 
In the evaluations which are made by the European Council, the country’s 
human rights record is considered as generally satisfactory, with remarks that 
they must improve on a daily basis in the ield of ethnic issues, Albanian lan-
guage education (which has practically been achieved), minority representation 
in the police and Defense Ministry and the need to design policies that promote 
ethnic tolerance and integration following European standards. As is stated in 
the National Human Development Report, “the pragmatic West anyway keeps 
the positive evaluations despite the weak institutions and no transformations 
within the system, thus being completely aware that it can be much worse than 
just having a formally democratic country”. 
he European Commission has already made some conclusions discussing 
the political criteria and has evaluated the political institutions of the country as 
stable and democratic, functioning properly, respecting the limits of their com-
petence and co-operating with each other. In relation to the Ohrid Framework 
Agreement, it considers further efective implementation as crucial for coni-
dence and consolidation of achievements. Rule of law is seen as gradually con-
solidated, however the police reforms should progress further in order to pre-
vent possible escalation of incidents, while the eiciency of the judiciary needs 
to be improved.
21 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, see: http://www.un.org.
166
revija za evropsko ustavnost
USTAVNO VARSTVO ČLOVEKOVIH PRAVIC
(2009) 11
he protection of fundamental rights shows no major problems and specii-
cally the area of minority rights, encompassing both changes to legislation as 
well as their implementation, is on a high level. In relation to regional coop-
eration, the name issue with Greece requires sustained eforts as it should be 
resolved in the interest of good neighborly relations. 
Predstavitev avtorice
Tanja Karakamiševa je docentka ustavnega prava in politične ureditve na 
Pravni fakulteti Iustinianus Primus skopske Univerze sv. Cirila in Metoda ter na-
domestna članica Beneške komisije za Republiko Makedonijo.