Finno-Ugric Republics and Their State Languages: Balancing Powers in Constitutional Order in the Early 1990s

Abstract


 
 
 Most of Russia’s national republics established titular and Russian as co-official state languages in their constitutions of the early 1990s. There is no consensus on the reasons and consequences of this act, whether it should be seen as a mere symbolic gesture, a measure to ensure a language revival, an instrument in political debate or an ethnic institution. From an institutional and comparative perspective, this study explores the constitutional systems of the Finno-Ugric republics and demonstrates that across the republics, the official status of the state languages was among the few references to ethnicity built into their constitutions. However, only in the case of language requirements for the top officials, its inclusion could be interpreted as an attempt at instrumentally using ethnicity for political ends. Otherwise, constitutional recognition of the state languages should be rather understood as an element of institutionalized ethnicity that remains a potential resource for political mobilization. This latter circumstance might clarify why federal authorities could see an obstacle for their Russian nation-building agenda in the official status of languages.
 
 

Evaluating language revival policies of Russia’s Finno-Ugric republics: policy impact and its limits

“…Th e constitutional designation amounted to policy adoption, although it resolved only the most general issues: those about the co-offi cial status and, in some republics, about language requirements of presidential candidates. Th e constitutions were adopted in the period between 1992 and 1995 in constitutional assemblies, which meant that the people were once again to a large extent sidelined from the discussion (for a detailed discussion on the adoption of the constitutions, see Zamyatin 2013b). Yet, according to the data of the 1993-1994 public opinion surveys, by that time, the co-offi cial status of the languages refl ected the prevailing public attitudes.…”

“…Among the Finno-Ugric republics, the requirement of knowledge of both state languages of the republic for the head of state were introduced only in Mari El. However, when an incumbent head attempted to apply the provision, this provoked a confl ict, so the provision was never enforced (Zamyatin 2013b).…”