Alright, but I respectfully disagree.... Just read
Existing regimes of protection (it is called, never mind the french don't practice...)
52. This article relates to the combination of the charter with domestic legislation or international agreements laying down a legal status for linguistic minorities.
53. Where certain languages or the minorites who practise them already enjoy a status defined in domestic law or under international agreements, the purpose of the charter is clearly not to reduce the rights and guarantees recognised by those provisions. However, the protection afforded by the charter is additional to the rights and guarantees already granted by other instruments. For the application of all these undertakings, where competing provisions exists on the same subject the most favourable provisions should be applied to the minorities or languages concerned. Thus the existence of more restrictive provisions in domestic law or under other international undertakings must not be an obstacle to the application of the charter.

So, whatever any constitutional or else laws may say about these populations, first it can't be an obstacle for the protection afforded by the charter and second it is confirmed with the most favourable provisions must be applied to the minorities or languages concerned. Any other consideration is secondary unless the taste for the rule of law has ceased. These provisions are the law within the EU. I don't see the point you wanna make....?