Pacifying National Majorities in the Brussels Capital Region: What About the Immigrant Minority Groups?
The process of state reform and devolution has put recognition of cultural-linguistic diversity on the foreground as the guiding principle for (representation in) Belgian political life. The (new) constitution, indeed, clearly departs from the postulate of a ‘multination state’1 and recognises the rights of (partial) self-determination of those groups which are seen to be the constitutive elements for the Belgian nation2. The constitution states that the Flemish, Francophone and Germanophone groups are the fundamental cultural communities of Belgium. This postulate then serves as the basis for organisation of the entire Belgian political field. The Flemish-Francophone divide, however, clearly constitutes the central political axis. Belgium is, however, not only officially built out of three Communities (a Dutch speaking (=Flemish), French speaking and German speaking community), it is also officially the sum of three territorial entities, the so-called Regions (Flanders, Wallonia and the Region of Brussels-Capital). The Regions and Communities have specific political competencies. The Regions have jurisdiction over so-called 'space-bounded' matters
Multinational and polyethnic politics entwined: Minority representation in the region of Brussels-Capital
During the 1990s, issues of immigrant entry and equity have increasingly become intertwined with the dominant political cleavage that exists between Dutch- and French-speaking Belgians and with related claims for group-differentiated rights. This is particularly the case in the bilingual region of Brussels-Capital where both the Flemish and the Francophone community have jurisdiction and where 30 per cent of the inhabitants are non-nationals. Political incorporation of the foreign population into the polity could tip the power balance between the national communities. The issue of minority representation has thus become a rather contentious issue. This article examines how these multinational and polyethnic politics are increasingly interlocked.
Protection of the Marine Environment: The International and National Regulation of Deep Seabed Mining Activities
This chapter provides an overview of the international and national regulatory framework pertaining to deep seabed mining activities. It begins by discussing the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the backdrop for all marine activities – be they national or international – and examines the obligations of states to protect the marine environment from the harmful effects arising from deep seabed mining. Next, the chapter examines the international regime for deep seabed mining (i.e. “activities in the Area”), explaining the “common heritage of mankind” status of the Area (i.e. the international seabed); the functions of the International Seabed Authority (ISA), the international organization established to govern deep seabed mining in the Area; and the concept of state sponsorship of non-state entities (i.e. private actors) for deep seabed mining in the Area. The chapter follows with a discussion of the development of national legislation to regulate deep seabed mining, examining efforts in the Pacific region where many prospective deep-sea mining sites are located. This includes a look at the legislative regimes of several Pacific Island nations, namely, Papua New Guinea, Tonga and the Cook Islands, for whom deep seabed mining may soon become a reality – as well as New Zealand and Japan, countries with comparatively developed rule of law and legislative regimes that have undertaken or considered deep seabed mining in their national waters. Overall, the chapter critically describes and evaluates the current regulatory status in the international and national seabed areas and highlights some salient gaps that require urgent attention in order to ensure marine environmental protection and mitigate impacts on humans.