Part I. Introduction and Context minorities in relation to nationality matters where states were broken up due to ethnic conflict, as newly established states in such a situation had “less motivation or support for creating liberal citizenship laws or for ratifying treaties that may guarantee citizenship to large populations of ethnic minorities”.436 Indeed, in Yugoslavia for instance, “[…] lawful citizens were, overnight, turned into aliens and, in many cases, the stateless. For the most part, they were required to follow naturalization processes reserved for aliens, requiring a certain number of years of continuous residence and certain additional tests. The Ministries of the Interior that were in charge of deciding on the validity of the applications often had no obligation to state the reasons for the refusal; many reports testify widespread discrimination against members of ethnic minorities.”437 In view of these types of issues arising from the dissolution of states, “[q]uestions of membership have become central to the construction of identity in post-Cold War Europe”.438 In particular within the CoE, steps were taken to provide a (legal) response to these questions, not least because many Eastern European states joined the organization in the 1990s. The content of the legal instruments enacted by the CoE in this period is discussed further in paragraph 3.2, but notable milestones include the adoption of the ECN in 1997439 and the adoption of the CoE Convention on the Avoidance of Statelessness in Relation to State Succession (ECSS) in 2006440 to respond to questions regarding nationality matters and statelessness that were raised in the context of the dissolution of states. In particular, the CoE played an important role in specific Central and Eastern European countries. For instance, it has provided assistance on nationality matters to Bosnia and Herzegovina and followed the question of nationality in the Baltic States closely, again providing assistance, for instance in setting up bodies to process applications for residence permits and nationality.441 From the early 1990s onwards, the CoE thus considered minority rights and citizenship to a greater extent, also pushed by scholars and NGOs, and effectively influenced the European human rights regime, “seeking to create shared understandings of citizenship”.442 The EU and its predecessor, paid little attention to nationality matters when compared to the CoE. This is perhaps not surprising in view of its focus on economic cooperation. Nonetheless, there were certainly interesting developments that should be 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 80 David S Weissbrodt, The Human Rights of Non-Citizens (Oxford University Press 2008) 93. Igor Štiks, Nations and Citizens in Yugoslavia and the Post-Yugoslav States: One Hundred Years of Citizenship (Bloomsbury 2015) 160. Jeff rey T Checkel, ‘Norms, Institutions, and National Identity in Contemporary Europe’ (1999) 43 International Studies Quarterly 83, 93. European Convention on Nationality (Strasbourg, 1997, CETS No. 166) (ECN). Council of Europe Convention on the Avoidance of Statelessness in relation to State Succession (Strasbourg. 2006, CETS No. 200) (ECSS). Margaret Killerby, ‘Steps Taken by the Council of Europe to Promote the Modernization of Nationality Laws of European States’ in Síofra O’Leary & Teija Tiilikainen (eds), Citizenship and Nationality Status in the New Europe (Sweet & Maxwell 1998) 21–37, 36. Jeff rey T Checkel, ‘Norms, Institutions, and National Identity in Contemporary Europe’ (1999) 43 International Studies Quarterly 83, 93ff. Intersentia