Identity Controversies before the European Court of Human Rights: How to Avoid the Essentialist Trap?

Several cases raising a very similar issue have been brought before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR): all these disputes are centred around the identity of a certain group which the applicants claim to defend, while the State contests either the existence of this group as distinct from the rest of the population, or the terms used to describe it. These cases confront the European Court with one of the most debated questions of our time: What is cultural identity? How can one assert whether or not a collective cultural identity exists? This paper argues that, considering the intricacy of the issue, the European Court, in its judgments, takes a rather wise position. While condemning the State in most of these cases for violating one of the rights guaranteed by the European Convention of Human Rights, it abstains from formulating an opinion on the issue of identity itself. Instead of trying to decide for or against the contested identity, it seeks to ensure that people are free to express views on and debate such matters, even if they clash with dominant or official conceptions. While stating that the European judges endorse a constructivist approach of identity would certainly be excessive, the stance they take is at least consistent with the idea that identities are constructed, negotiated and contested, rather than fixed and natural