Functional Autonomy: The Case of Finland with Some Notes on the Basis of International Human Rights Law and Comparisons with Other Cases

Abstract

It is possible to distinguish functional autonomy, consisting of various administrative arrangement, as a specifi c form of autonomy on the top of territorial, cultural and personal autonomy. Functional autonomy may be understood as an organizational option for the provision of adequate linguistic services to a minority population in respect of a certain public function (such as education) by means of creating special linguistically identifi ed administrative units at diff erent hierarchical levels inside the general line-organization charged with the national or local administration of the public function. Language (and sometimes even religion) can be used as a divisor by which the principle of 'separate but equal' is implemented in ways that defy organizational characterizations commonly found in textbooks of administrative law or public administration. Functional autonomy is a pragmatic approach to the promotion of rights of a minority population and could be more commonly used.

Introduction: Dispersed Minorities and Non-Territorial Autonomy

“…There is also a diversity of terminology: this type of autonomy is sometimes referred to as 'national cultural', 'cultural', 'personal', 'extraterritorial', 'corporate' and 'segmental' (Osipov, 2013c, p. 8). But the term 'autonomy' is also challenging, and in this context may apply to 'a wide range of different arrangements providing for some kind of self-management or self-government short of independence' (Eide, 1995, p. 366; see also Légaré, 2008;Suksi, 2008).…”

Introduction: Dispersed Minorities and Non-Territorial Autonomy

“…There is also a diversity of terminology: this type of autonomy is sometimes referred to as 'national cultural', 'cultural', 'personal', 'extraterritorial', 'corporate' and 'segmental' (Osipov, 2013c, p. 8). But the term 'autonomy' is also challenging, and, in this context, may apply to 'a wide range of different arrangements providing for some kind of self-management or self-government short of independence' (Eide, 1995, p. 366; see also Légaré, 2008;Suksi, 2008). There are, then, clear difficulties over definition of this term (Garibova, 2012;Osipov, 2013a, pp.…”

“…The sensitivity of such arrangements to the territorial distribution of the population is, however, illustrated by this case: in 1980, it was decided to merge the Flemish Regional Council and the Cultural Council of the Flemish Community, since the population base of the two coincided almost entirely. Another example is commonly overlooked: the long-established autonomy of Finland's dispersed Swedish-speaking population in the domains of education, ecclesiastical matters and public administration (but see Suksi, 2008). Since 1919, it has also had its own representative assembly, the Swedish Finland Folkting (Svenska Finlands Folkting, 2010, pp.…”

Potential and Limitations of Horizontal Management

“…For most, administrative autonomy implies the decentralization of control over a set of areas of key concern, including but not restricted to schools, public services, and courts (Suksi, 2008). Furthermore, as Michael Tkacik (2008: 372) explains, administrative autonomy is often driven by "some overarching purpose, even some unifying philosophical principle."…”