VZCZCXRO0651
RR RUEHIK
DE RUEHSL #0521/01 3521723
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 181723Z DEC 09
FM AMEMBASSY BRATISLAVA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0309
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RUEHSL/AMEMBASSY BRATISLAVA 0361

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BRATISLAVA 000521 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
EUR/CE FOR J. MOORE, M. LIBBY 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM PREL LO
SUBJECT: GET OUR YOUR SLOVNIKS: SLOVAK LANGUAGE LAW TO ENTER 
IMPLEMENTATION PHASE 
 
REF: BRATISLAVA 320 
 
BRATISLAVA 00000521  001.3 OF 002 
 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary: The Amended State Language Act entered into 
force on September 1.  While the Slovak cabinet passed the 
OSCE-vetted implementation guidelines (not legislation) for the 
Act on December 16, there is still confusion about the practical 
effects of the Act.  Both Budapest and ethnic Hungarians in 
Slovakia have lamented the lack of consultation, while the 
Culture Ministry maintains this is "exclusively an internal 
matter" about which Hungary will be informed in the next Joint 
Committee for Minorities meeting to be held in January. PM Fico 
considers the Act a "great diplomatic success for Slovakia" and 
described Hungarian complaints as the "perfunctory lambasting of 
Slovakia that Hungarians simply need to do." End Summary. 
 
 
 
The Guidelines 
 
 
 
¶2. (SBU) In our discussions with interlocutors at the Ministries 
of Culture and Foreign Affairs since the law was passed last 
summer (reftel), they have repeatedly informed us that, as 
agreed upon by the Slovak and Hungarian Prime Ministers in 
September, Slovakia would work with the OSCE High Commissioner 
on National Minorities, Knut Vollebaek, and the ethnic-Hungarian 
community, to develop implementation guidelines.  According to 
the Ministry of Culture, Vollebaek received a draft of the 
proposed implementation guidelines in October.  Vollebaek sent 
his comments on the draft, which he called a "good foundation 
for the implementation of the provisions of the revised State 
Language Act and for supervision of the fulfillment of the 
resulting obligations," back to the Ministry of Culture on 
November 26.  The Ministry published it on November 27 for 
intergovernmental review and public comment.  On December 16, 
the last meeting of the year, the cabinet approved the 
implementation guidelines.  They will enter into effect on 
January 1, 2010. 
 
 
 
¶3.  (SBU) The guidelines, in the form of a government 
resolution, are not legally binding, and have not been approved 
by the Parliament.  However, they were recommended by High 
Commissioner Vollebaek due to widespread misapprehensions about 
the law, particularly the sanctions specified in Section 10, 
Paragraph 9a of the Act.  The implementation guidelines have 21 
criteria that Ministry of Culture clerks must evaluate before a 
sanction is applied, including the extent of the offense, its 
duration, its repetition, its intent, its consequences, and the 
potential for further offense.  Before applying a fine, the 
Ministry must appeal to the offending entity to redress the 
offense.  If the offense is not corrected, only then can the 
Ministry apply a fine; the fine can be appealed within 15 days 
to the Minister, and then further to the courts.  According to 
Culture Minister Marek Madaric, the "guidelines are of 
preventative nature and actual issuance of fines for the use of 
poor Slovak in official communication would be very complicated." 
 
 
 
"Consultation" a bit of an Overstatement: The Ethnic Hungarian 
Position 
 
 
 
¶4. (SBU) Kalman Petocz, former Slovak Ambassador to the UN in 
Geneva, and current Director for International Cooperation at 
the Forum Institute and founder of the Hungarian Roundtable, a 
collaboration of Hungarian NGOs, downplayed the extent to which 
the Ministry of Culture had solicited his input.  Though the 
Ministry had told us that Petocz and the Hungarian Roundtable 
would be consulted after the Ministry received Vollebaek's text 
and before the guidelines were published, Petocz said this did 
not occur.  According to Petocz, he had only one substantive 
meeting with the Ministry of Culture's legislation and language 
departments, but they never shared the text of the 
implementation guidelines.  Only after the guidelines were 
published on the Ministry's website and the intergovernmental 
review and public comment period commenced did the legislation 
department of the Ministry of Culture call Petocz.  At this 
point, Petocz and the board of the Hungarian Roundtable decided 
to end their consultation. 
 
 
 
¶5. (SBU) Petocz conceded that the implementation guidelines 
improved two of the priority areas that he discussed with the 
Ministry, namely tolerance of minority language use on 
 
BRATISLAVA 00000521  002.3 OF 002 
 
 
tombstones and in doctor-patient relations.  However, Hungarian 
Coalition Party (SMK) Chairman Pal Csaky was quick to point out 
on December 16 that the guidelines constitute "a legally 
irrelevant document, both concerning applicability to Slovak 
citizens and court enforceability of citizens' rights." 
 
 
 
¶6. (SBU) In response to Budapest's claims that the process 
leading up to the approval of the guidelines is a violation of 
the agreement made by the Prime Ministers of both countries in 
September, Foreign Minister Lajcak said on December 16 that 
"Budapest has found itself in a trap of its own exaggerated 
statements~they are surprised to realize that the relevant 
European authorities are of a different opinion, which is 
similar to ours." Lajcak also committed to further discussing 
the guidelines with his Hungarian counterparts at a Joint 
Committee for Minorities meeting next January. 
 
 
 
Common Misperceptions about the Amended State Language Act 
 
 
 
¶7. (SBU) Critics often imply that individual citizens will be 
fined for using their mother tongue.  However, according to the 
law, and all of our Slovak interlocutors, no natural persons can 
be fined, but only state bodies, offices, legal entities 
(including businesses or entrepreneurs) are subject to 
compliance.  Many critics of the law often state that it 
prohibits or restricts the use of minority languages.  However, 
there is a pre-existing Law on National Minority language Use 
which grants all minority languages equal status with Slovak in 
all towns and villages where the minority represents at least 20 
percent of the population. Some have raised a concern that the 
law could breach citizens' religious rights. However, the law 
does not address religious ceremonies at all. Few discussions of 
the law include the fact that it has improved minority 
broadcasting rights and abolishes the need for language tests 
for civil servants. 
 
 
 
Comment 
 
 
 
¶8. (SBU) The Slovaks have been disingenuous about the extent to 
which they have consulted with the ethnic Hungarians.  The 
paucity of consultation - or perhaps differing perceptions as to 
what the Vollebaek deal entailed - has roiled the waters.  As 
for the guidelines themselves, non-Hungarian commentators and 
members of the Slovak National Party (SNS) alike have questioned 
their legality and utility.  While we have privately been 
assured that it is very unlikely fines will be issued, we can 
easily envision the possibility that nationalist elements in 
Slovakia will attempt to exploit the law and force the 
government to define in reality how seriously they will 
"protect" the Slovak language.  We also believe that no matter 
how much Bratislava would like to close this chapter of 
Slovak-Hungarian history, it will inevitably be exploited by 
politicians in both countries in the run up to next spring's 
national elections.  Thus, we will be watching the actual 
implementation after January 1 very closely.  End Comment. 
BALL