Serbia has been taken to the European court of Human Rights over its evictions of Rroma who fled the Kosovo War in 1999.
An article on a Rrom who fled Leskovac in Serbia and is now in Germany. He has few chances to stay as Germany has decreed Serbia to be a safe country, but still hopes he can stay.
An article on a Rroma family from Serbia who had asked for asylum in that country and now faces deportation back to Serbia. Germany, since it declared Serbia to be a safe country now regularly deports Rroma from that country who ask for asylum.
Rroma integration will be a key aspect of the discussion of Serbia with the EU for eventual accession talks. Rroma in Serbia are often discriminated against, they are disadvantaged in the education system, and very often unemployed.
According to the UNHCR, 21 thousands internally displaced (IDPs) Rroma live in utter poverty and a third of them live in buildings not intended for housing. These Rroma were mostly displaced during the Wars between Serbia and Croatia as well as during the Bosnian conflict and the Kosovo war.
Many young Rroma are rebelling against so-called scientific evidence on and about Rroma. They are rebelling against statements such as “that Roma mothers willingly accept evaluation of their children as mentally disabled so that they can reap social benefits” found in a Serbian scientific journal. The Central European University is starting a program of graduate studies aimed at young Rroma so that they can contradict such nonsense from the inside!
All the luck to them!
An article in Daily Sabah, a Turkish based paper, sharply criticised the handling of Rroma in Italy, France, and in Serbia. Especially on the Italian side, their critique is to the point and seldom mentioned in the Press in Europe: Namely that in many cases in that country, Rroma are artificially segregated into camps and prevented from integrating. Police and NGO are working hand in hands on this. And these Rroma in camps are only a minority … Like iN France.
Serbia wants to extend the so-called “Roma Decade” by another 10 years to continue furthering integration of Rroma in Europe. In a meeting organized by the Roma Education Center, Ivanisevic said that the Roma Decade will change: its seat will be in Sarajevo and the implementation will be placed under the Stability Pact for South East Europe.
The red-green coalition from Baden Württemberg will deport asylum seekers from Serbia and Macedonia, many of then Rroma, on the anniversary of the deportation of Rroma in that Region. This anniversary celebrated on the 24th of March commemorates the first train filled with Rroma and Sinti that departed from Offenburg.
What a date to choose …
Südwest Presse reports on the visit of Reinhold Gall, Interior Minister and SPD party member to Serbia following the declaration of Serbia as being a safe country. According to Gall, following his visit, no refugee is being sent back into the “void” as stated by critiques of this move.
During his visit, he spoke to Osman Balic, the president of the Liga Roma, a Roma NGO in Serbia. According to Balic, Rroma would go to Germany for economical reasons and Gall concludes that there are no real reasons for political asylum for Rroma from that country.
We would like to remind him that this is a bit like travelling to the Southern United States prior to the session war, and stating that no, there are really no reasons why black would want to leave. While not that extreme in Serbia, there is an extreme segregation that has increased a lot due to the nationalism of the Milosevic years. And while one cannot say that all Rrom from Serbia should get asylum, there is not yet a real good reason to declare that all are safe there.
Die Zeit (2014) reports on a recent judgment of the Münster administrative court. When assessing the application for asylum by a Serbian Rroma family, the court reached the verdict that Serbia does not constitute a safe country of origin for the Rroma minority. The judges justified their judgment, among others, by pointing out that unsuccessful asylum applicants can expect to be criminally prosecuted upon return. Thereby, the court also questions the new law, which declares Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina but also Serbia to safe countries of origin. Several administrative courts had agreed to the asylum applications of Romany families in the recent past: “The administrative court (AC) of Münster questions the constitutionality of the new asylum reform of the federal government. The judges granted an urgent application for asylum by a Serbian Roma family, and stopped their imminent deportation, said the AC. The court has thus set itself in conflict with the federal government, which declared the Balkan countries Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia and Herzegovina to safe countries of origin in November. The AC wants to clarify now in main proceedings, whether the law should be submitted to the federal constitutional court for review. When declaring a state to a safe country of origin, the legislators must make an overall assessment of the significance of political persecution conditions in the relevant country. Decisive are the criteria prescribed by the constitution. The legislator maybe did not sufficiently comply with this regarding the Serbian Roma and the negative Serbian emigration requirements. Moreover, the legislative history did not show that the decisions of administrative tribunals were taken into account. For instance, the administrative courts of Stuttgart and Münster upheld the urgent complaints of Serbian asylum seekers in a variety of cases.” Rroma are not politically persecuted in Serbia. However, that does not mean that they are not exposed to repeated discrimination in everyday life. Particularly the Rroma already economically marginalised. The assessment of the individual case should always be favoured against a reductionist assessment of the social situation in a country. Rroma have been provably integrated in Southeast Europe for centuries – as, Ottoman tax registers, among others, show and form part of all strata of society and professions. However, since the Yugoslav wars and the strengthened nationalism, Rroma increasingly face discrimination. Furthermore, there is the mentioned law of the Serbian criminal code that threatens asylum applicants with criminal prosecution upon return (compare Prantl 2014).
Sirleschtov/Birnbaum (2014) spoke with Thomas de Maizière, Germany’s interior minister and member of the Christian Democrat Party. In the talk, De Maizière justifies his successful efforts to declare Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia to be safe countries of origin. He states that although Rroma are badly treated in these three countries, they are not politically persecuted. Therefore, a refugee status for Rroma from these countries can no longer be acceptable: “A part of the Greens criticise me, saying I play people who come to us against each other. But that would mean by implication that Germany has to accept anyone who comes here. […] That is why the distinction between real political persecution and others who leave their homes for other reasons is the rational way and the path laid out by our constitution. A bad treatment of the Roma in some Balkan countries is just no political persecution. This is hard for those affected, but this distinction is necessary.” Rroma are indeed not politically persecuted in Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia. Their integration is historically proven for the Balkans: since centuries, they belong to all social strata and professional groups. However, that does not mean that they are not exposed to massive discrimination in everyday life, especially since the strengthened nationalism of the Yugoslav Wars. The estimate how strong this discrimination is can only be critically evaluated in individual cases. Therefore, asylum applications should not be treated generally, but individually, to do justice to the fate of those persons affected.
Guggisberg (2014) reports on criminal Rroma clans that allegedly force children into crime. Parents surrender their children to an omnipotent clan chief – to whom they are indebted – for begging and theft and some even end up in prostitution. Guggisberg uncritically reproduces the perspective of the “Wiener Drehscheibe”, a social service for begging and stealing children who have been arrested by the police. Guggisberg does not question that the social educator Norbert Ceipek – the head of the institution – who identifies each begging or stealing child as a victim of human trafficking, could himself be subject to prejudices and be providing misinformation on Rroma: “Ceipek opens another photo file. It shows a Roma village in Romania, which he recently visited. He tells of houses, cobbled together from planks and plastic sheeting, and dirt roads full of garbage. In the middle is a magnificent villa. “It belongs to the clan chief. He rules the villages as a state within a state”, says Ceipek […]. Many of the children dealt with in Vienna belong to the Roma. […] “The phenomenon of Eastern European gangs of beggars is not new. But since a couple of months, it taken new proportions”, says Ceipek. Very active are the Bosnian gangs, he states. Every few weeks, they would bring the children to different European cities, according to a rotating system. The social worker explains that his aim was to provide a perspective to the children, a little education. They might get on better path.”” Alexander Ott, head of the Foreign Police Bern, who has already been quoted repeatedly in articles about criminal Rroma gangs and trafficking of children, has his say. He reproduces the usual prejudices about hierarchical Rroma clans with a clan chief who leads children into crime: “The network of child traffickers reaches from Eastern Europe to Switzerland. “The victims are recruited in Romania, Bulgaria, Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Czech Republic and Slovakia. Often they come from large Roma families, are purchased or borrowed”, says Ott. One sends the boys to steal, urges them into prostitution, or forces them to beg. The instigators know well that the Swiss justice system cannot prosecute the perpetrators because of their young age. Adolescent burglars are booming in the autumn and winter months. Ott emphasises that they have to deal with highly professional, specialised and hierarchically-run clans, who practice their craft since generations.” Rroma are not more criminal than other ethnic groups. They are not hierarchically organised, as is often claimed, but structured largely egalitarian. So-called “Rroma kings” are self-elected and have purely representative character. Guggisberg and experts’ claim that behind begging children there is inevitably trafficking and organized crime, is wrong.
The characteristics of transnational operating trafficker networks, as presented here, are questioned by social science research. Their existence itself is not denied, something that cannot be in the interest of combating injustice. But their manifestation, their number, their omnipotence and the motivations attributed to them have to be questioned. These are often tainted by ideological fallacies, brought into connection or even equated with ethnic groups such as Rroma. Furthermore, the equation of child migration and trafficking has to be set into context. The stereotype of Rroma as child traffickers dates back to their arrival in Western Europe, and is in part based on the racist notion that Rroma did actively recruit children for criminal gangs. Regarding the topic of child migration, social science studies convey a more complex notion on the subject and point out that crimes such as incitement to beg and steal or alleged child trafficking are often permeated by various morals in the analysis and assessment by authorities, who don’t appropriately consider the perspective and motivations of migrating children and their relatives, and instead force on them their own ideas and definitions on organised begging, criminal networks or child trafficking. Structural differences of the societies involved and resulting reasons for a migration are given too little consideration. In reality, behind begging children there are often simply impoverished families, in which the children contribute to the family income and who therefore do not correspond to bourgeois notions of a normal family and childhood. De facto child trafficking is rare according to the sociological studies. Furthermore, the incomes from begging are very modest, which makes them unattractive for organised crime. Guggisberg, who states that 200’000 children are recruited annually by the trafficking mafia, contradicts this.
At the end of the article, Guggisberg quotes another expert opinion by Norbert Ceipek, the director of the “Wiener Drehschreibe”: At 15, many of them would get married and have children themselves, so that the cycle of crime continues. Likewise, Guggisberg reproduces this racist prejudice uncritically. The majority of Rroma, who live integrated, go to work and send their children to school, remain unmentioned (compare Cree/Clapton/Smith 2012, O’Connell Davidson 2011, Oude Breuil 2008, Tabin et al 2012).
Ouest-France (2014) reports on an information event for residents of the Nantes agglomeration. The towns of Saint-Sébastien et Saint-Jacques Saint organized the event to inform the residents of the municipalities on local Rroma. However, the focus was only on recently immigrated Rroma families, who enjoy strong public visibility. Already integrated Rroma were not discussed. In the municipalities, around 60 families live in rented housing units and are supported by measures aimed at integrating them into the professional and social life. A further 38 persons live in illegal settlements. While the conveyed information is correct, it nevertheless distorts the view on Rroma. For example, it was incorrectly said that Rroma, Manouche and Gitans are three different Rroma groups: “The Roma are one of three European gypsy groups arriving from Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia, Serbia… They differ from the Manouches and the Gypsies, who are called “travellers” by the administration. Originally from India, the Roma arrived in Europe in the 14th century. Protected by the kings of Bohemia in the 17th century, they are sometimes called Bohemians. […] After 1989, they were attracted by the mirage of the West. 1,500 of the 20,000 in France live in the agglomeration of Nantes, all coming from the south-east of Romania.” However, the differentiation between Rroma and Sinti, called Manouche in France, is a political one. The Rroma all have the same migration history and linguistic background. The term “Gitans” in turn is among some familiar as the name of the Rroma from the Iberian Peninsula. However, they also build part of the Rroma, and are historically and linguistically no separate category. Also the finding that only 20,000 Rroma live in France, and that they come exclusively from Romania, is wrong. Moreover, Rroma arrived in Eastern Europe in the 9th century, not only in the 14th century, which is true for Western Europe. According to estimates of the Rroma Foundation, i 100,000 to 500,000 Rroma live in France. The majority of them are integrated, work, are fluent in French and send their children to school. Many have lived in France for generations, and not just since 1989, and come from all over Europe, not only from Romania. The recently immigrated Rroma, who enjoy strong public visibility, therefore constitute only a minority of the minority.
Ivanji (2014) reports on visible Rroma in Serbia. In a Belgrade suburb, next to a refugee centre, where even two decades after the war, refugees from Croatia, Bosnia, and Kosovo are living together with other asylum seekers, there is a Rroma camp. Kameraj Sajin lives there with his family. He is one of those who is directly affected by the new status of Serbia of “safe country of origin”. Although the Sajins are not persecuted, they are affected by severe poverty and exclusion: “Eight months the family spent in Steinfurt, this year “three months and eleven days.” A few weeks ago, they were deported to Serbia. The stay was “really nice” tells Sajin. After the family had moved between several asylum homes, they received an apartment and around 1,200 Euros a month. At Caritas they could buy clothing and food for two Euros. The daughter went to school, the two sons to the playschool. “Not like here”, says Sajin […]. Here, in Krnjaca, his daughter has to go to evening school because, she lost her place in the regular primary school and he has no confirmation that she attended a German school. For the boys, there is no kindergarten, and from the state he gets only 10,000 dinars (around 85 Euros) of child benefit.” This article addresses the important question of whether one should not recognise poverty and exclusion as legitimate reasons for asylum, and not only political persecution. It must also be added that Rroma in South Eastern Europe, even though many are affected by severe poverty, are not living exclusively in slums. Rroma, especially in the former states of Yugoslavia, belong to all social classes, but are usually only perceived as Rroma if they conform to the stereotypes of the minority. But there are also Rroma doctors, policemen, teachers, etc., which are fully integrated, and have been so for generations.
The German historian and researcher on prejudices Wolfgang Benz has published a new book in which he thoroughly investigates the mechanisms of prejudices towards Rroma. Benz tries to comprehend the reasons for the emergence and adherence of the negative stereotypes, which are consciously instrumentalised politically by various protagonists. In his article for the Tagesspiegel, he conveys the most important theses of his book. Part of these are self-appointed experts, who blame Rroma living in misery for their own fate, by playing off liberal self-reliance against societal injustices: „Sinti and Roma are rejected and despised, because they are poor, are regarded as placeless and without culture. Cherished through fears of foreign domination, enemy stereotypes are being reactivated. Self-appointed experts argue that they have to blame themselves for their misery in Slovakia, in Hungary, in the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, and Rumania or Serbia and the Kosovo. The situation of the Roma in Southeast Europe has become a tourist attraction, topic of hypocritical sensitive reports, which are being created with the point of view of master men – and confirm the majority in their rejection of the minority. Roma-foes call the object of their interest unashamed once more “Zigeuner”, even though (or because) it is hurtful. By the use of generalisations, fears are fuelled, and dubious knowledge about Sinti and Roma is spread, fears are evoked, which allegedly threaten us. The unpleasant characteristics, which are projected sweepingly on all Roma from Southeast Europe, are welcomed reasons for discrimination. Immigrants from Bulgaria and Romania are seen as the incarnation of a threat, which is usually equated with Sinti and Roma. The traditional stereotypes of the “gypsy” have sowed the seeds for generations, the new images of the slums from which they come, and the poverty in which they live, are seamlessly compatible. […] Xenophobia, racism, petty-bourgeois fears for their property and identity weaknesses condense into an enemy image of poverty migrants, whose feared attack on social funds, bourgeois order and the German way of life must be resisted. Right-wing populists and -extremists benefit from it, and operate their enemy image with success – in the middle of society.” The perpetuation of prejudices has become a vicious circle which is difficult to break. A possible way out is a public, media-catchy discussion of the integrated Rroma, the “invisible Rroma”. However, many of these integrated Rroma keep their identity a secret, for fear of discrimination among friends and colleagues, at work or in the housing market. Here again, there exists a vicious circle of legitimate fears that cannot be so easily overcome (compare Benz 2014).
The European Commission has announced in a recent press release that it awards seven distinguished organisations that are particularly involved in the integration of the Rroma in their countries. The winning organizations include: Roma Active Albania (RAA), which advocates the Rroma civil rights and draws attention to current topics of Romnja; the organization Citizens Association for the Promotion of Education of Roma Otaharin that is committed in Bosnia-Herzegonvina to better educational opportunities of the minority; in Kosovo The Ideas Partnership, which advocates for the integration of former beggars and promotes the enrolment of children; in Macedonia the organization Centre for Integration Ambrela that is committed to the promotion of Rroma in early childhood; in Serbia Hands of Friendship, which operates a parent-child education project; in Turkey the children’s art project Sulukule Roma Culture Development and Solidarity Association; and finally in Montenegro a project against child and forced marriages in Rroma communities, through the Centre for Roma Initiatives. The European Commission justifies its decision as follows: “We all – the European Commission, the governments, civil society organisations – need to send out the same message: Roma integration is an important policy. And it is not only investment for the benefit of this minority but it is also an investment to the benefit of society. Living in an environment in which each member of society contributes with their spirit and work force, will allow countries to grow strong and prosperous, from an economic, social and cultural perspective”, said Štefan Füle, Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy, at the award ceremony.” Concerning the integration programmes of the warded organizations it must be remarked that begging Rroma or child marriages in no represent the norm among the minority.
– European Union (2014) Award for Roma Integration in the Western Balkans and Turkey. In: European Union online vom 1.10.2014. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-1064_en.htm
Keywords: Rroma, Europe, European Union, integration projects, organization, awards, stereotypes
Dribbusch (2014), on the occasion of the nomination of Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Macedonia as safe countries of origin, argues for more discussion culture rather than reductionist polemics. Unfortunately, she mixes economic migration and political asylum and does not questions enough, how these categories intermingle, blend, and are dealt with: “The economic integration of people who have come to stay, must be openly debated because a solely humanitarian appeal is not enough to create acceptance. The question is: should taxpayers in Germany be responsible for offering a Roma woman from Bulgaria and their children, or a young African from Chad, better life opportunities? The answer could be yes. But only if there is also integration assistance, that means, not only should asylum seekers been freed of [current] work interdictions, but should also been paid language courses and qualification measures. […] If one wants to open up new possibilities for a poverty policy, it is also appropriate to set limits. It is acceptable that Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia are now defined as “safe countries of origin”, to speed up the asylum process. The asylum applications from Serbia recently skyrocketed.” Dribbusch is right when she calls for more integration help that consist of concrete offers and not just acceptance. However, she conveys a very one-sided notion of the minority, if she portrays Rroma as “economic refugees”. She negates the well-educated migrants, as well as individual experiences of discrimination that exist spite the safety from political persecution. Moreover, Rroma only constitute a part of the migrants from the Southeast Europe. There are also a lot of ethnic Serbians, Macedonians, Bosnians and others, who migrate to Western Europe (compare Die Presse 2014, Kılıç 2014).
Graff (2014) spoke with Marko Knudsen, the head of the European Centre for Antiziganism Research. Knudsen decidedly criticises the new asylum law that defines Serbia, Macedonia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina as being safe countries of origin in the interview. For him it is beyond question that the Rroma are affected by marginalisation and discrimination in the three countries. The opinion that Rroma are not actively persecuted in these three countries, he deems inappropriate and trivialising. Therefore, the European Centre for Antiziganism Research will file a suit against the new law. The centre justifies its charge with the following three points: “Where is Germany’s historical responsibility, which is justified through the Nazi era? Unfortunately, it is nonexistent. For me as a Roma, this decision is absolutely reprehensible. As a German, I am ashamed. For this reason, we, as the European Centre for Antiziganism Research, see ourselves forced to take legal action against this law, because: first, it violates the principle of equal treatment. Second, it violates European anti-discrimination law. Third, there is political persecution of the Roma in Europe because of antiziganism that is passed as an unquestioned European cultural code from generation to generation, whereby it is implemented in the majority of society” (Knudsen 2014). Knudsen sees the strengthened nationalism in many European countries and the exclusion of minorities resulting from it, as well as extreme economic hardships, as equally important reasons for asylum for being open political persecution. Exactly this issue was the core of the political debate: are the Rroma in Southeastern Europe actively persecuted or are they “only” affected by extreme poverty and discrimination. There was no consensus concerning this issue. Knudsen also criticizes the pressure exercised on the part of the European Union on the new member states, that did not improve the situation of minorities in the countries concerned. However, this assessment has to be questioned. It is absolutely the responsibility of the European Union to pressure its new Member States to a better compliance with minority rights. If they are not able to actively implement the requirements, this is not the fault of Brussels (compare Martens 2014).
On September the 19th, the decision as to whether Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina will be declared safe countries of origin on part of Germany will be made. The debate about the security against persecution and discrimination in the three states is discussed especially in reference to the fate of the Rroma. In this regard, there are major disagreements whether and how Rroma are exposed to discrimination. While the proponents of the new law assume that the Rroma are indeed affected by poverty in the three countries, they claim that they are free of persecution. Just the opposite is stated by many refugee and asylum organizations, and also by the central council of German Sinti and Roma. These different views concerning the security situation of minorities in Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina reveal that the assessment of marginalization and discrimination are based on very different criteria: supporters of a poor security situation refer to meaningful individual cases of discrimination – famous are cases that proof the difficult access to health care and other institutions, or show the harassment by government officials: “Already now, the reasons people have to flee from Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina are examined too superficially, criticises the Frankfurt lawyer Reinhard Marx. […] Especially [application from] Roma of the Western Balkan countries are already now mostly rejected without detailed examination “as manifestly unfounded”, the lawyer says. He tells of hearing reports and decisions of the branch offices of the BAMF [Federal Office for Migration and Refugees]. Refugees have reported “racist assaults, attempted rape of girls and suchlike.” “In reasoning of the refusal, this was not addressed all”, says the lawyer, the reasons for flight are not carefully examined, “which for me is no longer the rule of law” (Grunau 2014). In contrast, the proponents of the new law refer to the recognition of the Rroma by the political establishment of the countries, the appreciation of Rromanes, and the historical evidence in all strata of society of the integration of the minority, especially in the countries of former Yugoslavia. Ottoman tax registers proof this already for the 15th century, where Rroma are listed as lawyers, doctors and policemen (Rroma Foundation 2002). This integration does not mean that there is no discrimination since 1989, through the strong growth of nationalism in the countries of South Eastern Europe. Again, different evaluation criteria are applied: according to the proponents of the new law, there is discrimination but no systematic persecution. How can one accurately measured and assess the severity of discrimination? In Bosnia-Herzegovina, because of the Dayton Agreement, there is only a constitutional protection of Bosnians, Serbs or Croats, but no official recognition of other minorities. But this does not mean that minorities such as Rroma are not discriminated against in everyday life, the critics claim. The different opinions reveal that the knowledge about Rroma is still dominated by a lot of uncertainties and gaps in knowledge, and that the discrimination of a minority in various countries is anything but easily to determine. Therefore, in doubt, the individual experience of discrimination should always be favoured over a general assessment of the security situation. One owes that to persons who indeed suffer of discrimination. – Neues Deutschland (2014) reports that the stricter asylum law is being adopted because of the approval by the red-green government of Baden-Württemberg. The Green minister president of Baden-Württemberg, Winfried Kretschmann, is now criticised because of his decision in his own party. Other German daily newspapers confirm the decision: Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina are now safe countries of origin from Germany’s viewpoint. This means that asylum applications from these countries will be handled in an expedited fashion in the future and that discrimination will no longer be recognised as a reason for asylum (compare Brey 2014, Deringer/Lierheimer 2014, Frenzel 2014, Handelsblatt 2014, Lang 2014, Mappes-Niediek 2014, MDR 2014, Möhle 2014, Scholz 2014, Wallraff 2014, Wölfl 2014).
DE 
EN 
FR