426_45 substantive_scope 45. Within the context of Article 11 of the Convention, the Court has often emphasised that pluralism and democracy are built on genuine recognition of, and respect for, diversity. The harmonious interaction of persons and groups with varied identities is essential for achieving social cohesion (see Gorzelik and Others v. Poland [GC], no. 44158/98, § 92, 17 February 2004; Identoba and Others v. Georgia, no. 73235/12, § 93, 12 May 2015; and Beizaras and Levickas v. Lithuania, no. 41288/15, § 107, 14 January 2020). Referring to the hallmarks of a “democratic society”, the Court has attached particular importance to pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness. In that context, it has held that although individual interests must on occasion be subordinated to those of a group, democracy does not simply mean that the views of the majority must always prevail: a BERKMAN v. RUSSIA JUDGMENT 13balance must be achieved which ensures the fair and proper treatment of minorities and avoids any abuse of a dominant position (see Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom, 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, p. 25, § 63; Sørensen and Rasmussen v. Denmark [GC], nos. 52562/99 and 52620/99, § 58, ECHR 2006-I; Fáber v. Hungary, no. 40721/08, §§ 37-41, 24 July 2012; and Identoba, cited above, § 93).