![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
To adhere to the European Union, Romania was obliged to adopt the entire range of international human rights laws for children's rights, disability rights, women's rights, minority rights and non-discrimination. However, Romania's practice of human rights falls behind the letters of these laws, especially for populations exposed to intersectional vulnerabilities (e.g. being both Roma and child or woman). The introductory sections of this article describe the cumulative vulnerabilities faced by the Roma, and discuss the main anti-discrimination policies and international treaties adopted in Romania in the context of recent EU developments, including the strategies for the Roma Decade. The main body of the article discusses the barriers to effectively addressing the rights of the Roma in Romania. Using available (yet scarce) ethnically segregated data, we draw attention to the multiple risks faced by Roma families in Romania confronted with traditionalism, poverty, violence, lack of services and proper housing, and other risks. By exploring the attitudes of social workers and other care-staff towards Roma beneficiaries in Romania, the authors seek to understand what contributes to the failure of anti-discrimination laws and policies in that country in protecting those most exposed to poverty. Looking at the poverty and other vulnerability indicators of the Roma in Romania, we acknowledge the social distance that exists between the disadvantaged Roma living in Romanian rural areas and their helpers. We consider the current status of anti-discriminatory social work practice in respect of the Roma population in Romania. The evidence considered regarding the plight of the Roma in Romania leads to the conclusion that policies should (a) elaborate more on bridging the gap between professionals and their beneficiaries and (b) translate anti-discrimination policies also into codes of conduct designed to more effectively protect and empower victims such as the Roma children and women who receive the services of professionals such as social workers.
Notes on contributors
Maria Roth is a professor in social work and a clinical psychologist for children. She was one of the founders of social work studies in Romania, working in the social work department since 1991. Over the last decade she has been the chair of the Social Work Department in Babeș-Bolyai University, Cluj, România. Dr Roth has published five books as single author, ten books as co-author, edited several books and published more than 90 articles in the areas of social work, children's rights and well-being, prevention of violence in schools and families, human rights and Roma rights. Her publications include: M. Roth and F. Moisa, ‘The Right to Education of Roma Children in Romania: European Policies and Romanian Practices’, International Journal of Children's Rights (2011): 127–48; M. Roth, F. Pop and S. Raiu, ‘Vulnerabilities Built in the Identities and Future Orientation of Roma Children and Youth’, Philobiblon XVIII, 2, no. 3 (2013): 374–88; S. Gog and M. Roth, Europe: The Roma People of Romania, The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Religion and Social Justice (Wiley-Blackwell Companions to Religion) (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2012), 388–401; R. Davies, M. Roth and M. Iovu, ‘Eastern Europe’, in Encyclopedia of Sexual Violence and Abuse, ed. J. L. Postmus (Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2013), 149–53; M. Roth et al., ‘Asking for Parental Consent in Research on Exposure of Children to Violence’, Review of Research and Social Intervention 42 (2013): 85–100; M. Roth, I. Antal and M. Iovu, ‘Editorial: Children's Rights, Well-Being and Protection’, IBSS, Revista de Asistenta Sociala (Social Work Review) (2012): 3–8. She is a member of the European Academic Network on Romani Studies.
Stefánia Toma is a researcher at the Romanian Institute for Research on National Minorities (ISPMN) and deputy director at the Research Centre on Interethnic Relations (CCRIT). Her area of interest includes anthropology of ethnic minorities and ethnic relations, nationalism, economic anthropology and the sociology of education with a focus on the Roma minority. Her publications include: ‘Segregation and Ethnic Conflicts in Romania: Getting Beyond the Model of “The Last Drop”’, in The Gypsy ‘Menace’. Populism and The New Anti-Gypsy Politics, ed. Michael Stewart (London: Hurst and Company, 2012), 191–216; ‘Roma Migration and Mobility on European Labour Market – Between Realities and Myths’, in Roma Inclusion in Romania: Policies, Institutions and Examples, ed. Daniela Giurcă (Romania: Soros Foundation, Romania, 2012), 223–40; ‘Ethnic Relations and Poverty in a Multi-Ethnic Community in Romania’, in Interculturalism and Discrimination in Romania. Policies, Practices, Identities and Representations, ed. F. Rüegg, R. Poledna and C. Rus (Berlin: LIT Verlag, Berlin, 2006), 155–72. She is co-editor of the volume Spectrum. Cercetări sociale despre romi, Editura ISPMN – Kriterion, 2011 (co-editor László Fosztó). She is a member of the European Academic Network on Romani Studies.
Notes
1. Marginalised Minorities in Development Programming. A UNDP Resource Guide and Toolkit (New York: UNDP, 2010).
2. Communication From the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. The European Platform against Poverty and Social Exclusion: A European Framework for Social and Territorial Cohesion, EC, 2010. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/;jsessionid=dPdVT4pTC0R1TB2kpbR4bQZGyyqSSZqwnBHRyTYDc4rGLGxJn2p0!795116835uri=CELEX:52010DC0758
3. http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/roma/index_en.htm
4. Investing in Children: Breaking the Cycle of Disadvantage, C(2013)778 Final. http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/files/c_2013_778_en.pdf; EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020, COM(2011)173 final. http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/discrimination/docs/com_2011_173_en.pdf
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid., 12.
7. European Parliament Resolution of 12 December 2013 on the Progress Made in the Implementation of the National Roma Integration Strategies (2013/2924(RSP)). http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2013-0594
8. The 2011 National Census 2011 (National Institute of Statistics, 2012). http://www.recensamantromania.ro/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/REZULTATE-DEFINITIVE-RPL_2011.pdf
9. The Situation of the Roma in 11 EU Member States. Survey Results at a Glance, 2012, UNDP/ FRA (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2012). http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/2099-FRA-2012-Roma-at-a-glance_EN.pdf; Estimates and Official Numbers of Roma in Europe (Support Team of the Special Representative of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe for Roma Issues, 2012). https://www.google.com/url?q=http://hub.coe.int/c/document_library/get_file%3Fuuid%3D3f6c4a82-0ca7-4b80-93c1-fef14f56fdf8%26groupId%3D10227&sa=U&ei=A09AU5TZB4HDO4u-gNgG&ved=0CAcQFjAB&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNGoZyQlY2YnvfE-yRGTtxFEf3biIw
10. Roma Early Childhood Inclusion. The RECI Overview Report (Roma Good Start Initiative Open Society Foundations, Roma Educational Fund & UNICEF, EC, 2011), 24.
11. Vasile Burtea, ‘Three Profiles of the Successful Roma’ [Trei profiluri ale romilor de succes], in Roma Culture Today and in the Future in the View of Roma Intellectuals, Leaders and Successful Roma People [Prezent și perspective în cultura romă în viziunea intelectualilor, liderilor și oamenilor de success romi], ed. Elena Zamfir and Vasile Burtea (București: ICCV, 2012), 67–81.
12. Christian Brüggemann, Roma Education in Comparative Perspective. Analysis of the UNDP/World Bank/EC Regional Roma Survey 2011. Roma Inclusion, 2012.
13. Ibid.
14. Manuela Sofia Stănculescu and Marin Monica, Helping the Invisible Children. An Evaluation Report (Bucharest: UNICEF, 2012), 63.
15. Brüggemann, Roma Education in Comparative Perspective.
16. Law 67/24 June 1995 stated the right of individual residents and families to social aid.
17. Mihaela Lambru and Ancuța Vameșu, România 2010. Sectorul neguvernamental – profil, tendinţe, provocări [Romania 2010. The non-profit sector. Profiles, tendencies, challenges] (Bucharest: Fundaţia pentru Dezvoltarea Societăţii Civile, 2010).
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid.
20. UNDP/WB/EC Regional Roma Survey and FRA Pilot Roma Survey (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2012). http://issuu.com/undp_in_europe_cis/docs/_roma_at_a_glance_web/1#download
21. Roma Inclusion: An Economic Opportunity for Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Romania and Serbia (World Bank, 2010), 4. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/12905/696550ESW0P1180Economic0Opportunity.pdf?sequence=1
22. Decade Watch Romania Report: Mid-Term Evaluation of the Decade of Roma Inclusion (Bucharest: Roma Civic Alliance of Romania, 2010). http://www.romadecade.org/cms/upload/file/9317_file6_decade-watch-romania-report-2010-en.pdf
23. Bernard Rorke, ‘What Future for the EU Framework? What Prospects for Roma Inclusion?’, Roma Rights. Journal of European the Roma Rights Center (2013): 5–10. http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/roma-rights-1-2013-national-roma-integration-strategies.pdf
24. Ibid., 7.
25. Brüggemann, Roma Education in Comparative Perspective, 13.
26. Caroline Sykora, ‘Breaking the Cycle of Roma Exclusion’, Eurochild (2012): 9.
27. Ibid., 9.
28. Law 116/2002.
29. Law 272/2004 amended by Law 257/213.
30. Data are collected in all County Directorates for Social Assistance and Child Welfare, with special attention to situations of children at risk of any forms of child abuse, neglect, trafficking, abandonment, disability, special care measure, etc., but also adults with special care needs; collected data are periodically posted on the site of the Ministry of Work and Social Protection: http://www.copii.ro/alte_categorii.html.
31. Annual Report UNICEF Romania 2012. http://www.unicef.org/romania/Public_version_Annual_Report_UNICEF_Romania_2012_final_for_web.pdf
32. Maria Roth-Szamoskozi and Sorina Bumbulut, ‘Sexually Abused Children in Romania’, in Child Sexual Abuse in Europe, ed. C. May-Chahal and M. Herczog (Brussels: Council of Europe, 2003), 59–78.
33. Fleck Gábor and Cosima Rughiniș, Come Closer. Inclusion and Exclusion of Roma in Present-Day Romanian Society (Bucharest: Human Dynamics, 2008), 8.
34. Julia Adorjani, ‘The Perception of Women Victims of Domestic Violence Regarding the Criminal Justice System’ (Doctoral thesis defended in Babeș-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, 2012, coordinator Maria Roth).
35. In Romanian hospitals for the chronically ill, patients are often placed with people with mental illness symptoms for whom there is a strong link between their symptoms and a low standard of quality of life. Jack R. Friedman, ‘The “Social Case”. Illness, Psychiatry, and Deinstitutionalization in Postsocialist Romania’ [“Cazul social”. Boală, Psihiatrie şi Dezinstituţionalizare în România Postsocialistă], Social Work Review, 2 (2011): 99–118.
36. ‘Measuring Child Poverty: New League Tables of Child Poverty in the World's Rich Countries’, Innocenti Report Card 10 (Florence: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, 2012), 14. http://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/rc10_eng.pdf
37. Child deprivation data are based on the EU-SILC 2009 data and show the percentage of children (aged one to 16) who lack two or more of the following 14 items: 1. Three meals a day; 2. At least one meal a day with meat, chicken, fish or a vegetarian equivalent; 3. Fresh fruit and vegetables every day; 4. Books suitable for the child's age and knowledge level (not including school books); 5. Outdoor leisure equipment; 6. Regular leisure activities; 7. Indoor games; 8. Money to participate in school trips and events; 9. A quiet place with enough room and light to do homework; 10. An internet connection; 11. Some new clothes; 12. Two pairs of properly fitting shoes; 13. The opportunity, from time to time, to invite friends home to play and eat; 14. The opportunity to celebrate special occasions.
38. Ibid.
39. Ibid., 8–10.
40. Measuring Child Poverty, 14.
41. Gábor and Rughiniș, Come Closer, 97.
42. Manuela Sofia Stănculescu, Monica Marin and Alina Popp, Being a Child in Romania. A Multidimensional Diagnosis (Bucureşti: UNICEF, Publishing Vanemonde, 2012). http://www.unicef.org/romania/Being_a_child.pdf; Ann-Lis Svensson, Breaking the Cycle of Exclusion: Roma Children in South East Europe (UNICEF, 2007). http://www.unicef.org/ceecis/070305-Subregional_Study_Roma_Children.pdf
43. See for example the list of documents and reports on the http://www.romachildren.com/?page_id=757, and http://www.unicef.org/romania/resources.html
44. Measuring Child Poverty, 13.
45. Transfers refer to all non-contributory social benefits that directly affect household income. Although its citizens have the right to most of the social benefits usual for Europe (like family benefit, that increases with the number of children – but only up to the fourth child –universal child allowance, unemployment benefit, disability benefits, etc.), Romania has one of the lowest shares of costs for protection from unemployment and social exclusion. Benefits depend on registration of identity, based on a stable residence (domicile), while a significant portion of the Roma living in poor communities cannot provide documents on legal residency. Government Decision 1291/18 Dec. 2012 to Modify and Approve the Methodological Norms to Apply Social Benefits. http://legestart.ro/legislatie-hg-nr-12912012-pentru-modificarea-si-completarea-normelor-metodologice-privind-venitul-minim-garantat/
46. Stănculescu and Marin, Helping the Invisible Children, 91.
47. For example Mark Letiția, Enikő Magyari Vincze, Hajnalka Harbula, Crina Marina Morteanu, Raluca Maria Popa and Magda Matache, Gathered around the Desire Foundation and the Journal Nevi Sara Kali – Roma Women's Journal/Revista Femeilor Rome/Romane Ӡuvleanqe Ӡurnalo. http://www.desire-ro.eu/wp-content/uploads/Nevi_Sara_Kali-nr1.pdf
48. Ibid., 85.
49. Maria Stoleru, ‘The Approach to Domestic Violence Cases by the Criminal Justice System’ [Abordarea cazurilor de violenţă domestică în sistemul penal] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Babeș-Bolyai University, 2013).
50. Ibid.
51. Enikő Vincze, ‘Roma Women's Voices and Silences on Unjust Power Regimes’, Roma Rights (2013): 35–44.
52. Ibid., 3.
54. Broadening the Agenda: The Status of Romani Women in Romania (Open Society Foundations, March 2006), 33. http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/broadening_agenda.pdf
55. Submission to the Joint CEDAW-CRC General Recommendation/Comment on Harmful Practices: Child Marriages among Roma (ERRC, September 2011). http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/cedaw-crc-child-marriages-submission-9-sept-2011.pdf
56. New Civil Code, Law 287/2009, article 272.
57. CoE, Recommendation Rec(2005)4 of the Committee of Ministers to Member Stateson Improving the Housing Conditions of Roma and Travellers in Europe. https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=825545&Site=CM&BackColorInternet=C3C3C3&BackColorIntranet=EDB021&BackColorLogged=F5D383 (accessed 15 April 2014); EC (2012) National Roma Integration Strategies: A First Step in the Implementation of the EU Framework. http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/swd2012_133_en.pdf (accessed 13 April 2014). This report states that the Romanian Roma Strategy fails to appropriately address access to (social) housing for people living in poor Roma communities; COE Protecting the Rights of the Roma.
58. Cristina Raț, The Housing Dimension of the Social Inclusion Policies for the Roma in the New Member States of the European Union. A Comparison between Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania (SPAREX Working Paper based on secondary analysis of the UNDP/WB/EC and FRA (2011) Regional Roma Survey Dataset, 16 October 2013). http://sparex-ro.eu/?p=834.
59. Law 116/15 March 2002 to fight exclusion.
60. Raport referitor la aplicarea prevederilor legii 116/ 2002 privind prevenirea și combaterea marginalizării sociale în anul 2010 [Report on the Effects of the Law 2002 on Fighting Marginalization], Ministry of Work and Social Protection. http://www.mmuncii.ro/pub/imagemanager/images/file/Domenii/Incluziune%20si%20asistenta%20sociala/raportari/Text%20Raport%202010_Legea_116.pdf
61. Ibid.
62. Amnesty International Public Statement, AI Index: EUR 39/018/2013, 2 October 2013 – Evictions in Eforie. http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/EUR39/018/2013/en/7865489c-2234-48ac-a981-3ae8269d52a5/eur390182013en.pdf
64. On 17 December 2010, 76 families, most of them with several children, were forcibly evicted by the local authorities from the centre of the city of Cluj-Napoca to a landfill area and a former chemical waste dump. People, especially children, were terrified by the local police force and dogs while being embarked on trucks to be taken to an unknown domicile. http://www.fightdiscrimination.eu/news-and-events/romania-roma-families-forcibly-evicted-cluj-napoca-still-waiting-justice-and-adequat
65. David Mechanic and Jennifer Tanner, ‘Vulnerable People, Groups, and Populations: Societal View. Values Affect How Society Views the Vulnerable – as Victims or Sinners – and Thus Whether or Not to Provide Public Assistance’, Health Affairs 26, no. 5 (2007): 1220–30.
66. Nick Haslam and Steve Loughnan, ‘Dehumanization and Infrahumaniztion’, Annual Review of Psychology 65 (2014): 1–25.
67. The survey was organised by the Romanian Institute for Research on National Minorities in the period of 2008–2009 and it was coordinated by Stefánia Toma. The data presented in this article are part of this larger survey. For more details you can see Stefánia Toma, Modele de segregare etnică – ghetouri rurale în Romania. Research Report (Cluj-Napoca: ISPMN, 2009).
68. Fleck and Rughiniș, Come Closer; and data from UNDP-WB-European Commission Regional Roma Survey 2011.
69. Social workers were also asked to answer the question whether they organise field (family) visits to Roma families and whether they collaborate with other institutions. Results show that while approximately 4% of the social workers do not organise field visits, and 38% of them visit Roma families in collaboration with police departments and 18.1% in collaboration with representatives of schools.
70. Alfreda P. Iglehart and Rosina M. Becera, ‘Social Work and the Ethnic Agency: A History of Neglect’, in Introduction to Social Work, ed. James Mandiberg (Madison: Corsewise Publishing, 2000), 72–9.
71. In this case, by compact communities we understand neighbourhoods where several households are identified by the social workers as being Roma, and are also geographically segregated as Roma communities.
72. The data set shows that in 71.6% of the rural Mayor's offices there are no persons of Roma ethnicity employed, while in only 28.4% of the cases there are Roma representatives working.
73. Good Governance in Multiethnic Communities. Conditions, Instruments, Best Practices. Ways to Achieve and Measure Good Governance at the Local Level, EDRC/King Baudouin Foundation, 2007, 61. In fact this guideline also bears some tendentious statements. For example, on page 17: ‘The local public servants are prepared to deal with the potential conflicts at the local level, thus they are trained to accept and respect diversity and to mediate conflicting situations. The local public administration is aware of the potential for conflict at the local level and of elements that hold together the community’. We cannot deny the importance of the above-mentioned aspects, but it also highlights one of the most important and sometimes erroneous aspects of these trainings, that is, approaching ethnic groups and communities as totally separately entities, the boundaries being clearly defined, emphasising the importance of continuous contact between different ethnic (or any kind of) groups.
74. We asked the respondents to note, on a scale from 1 to 5 and on a scale from 1 to 10, respectively, their agreement with the above statements where 1 represents a strong disagreement and 5 (10) represents strong agreement.
75. Stănculescu et al., Being a Child in Romania.
76. Fleck and Rughiniș, Come Closer.
77. Steven Vertovec, ‘Multiculturalism, Culturalism and Public Incorporation’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 19, no. 1 (1996): 49–69.
78. Social workers in Romania have a bachelor diploma in social work, while mediators only require an upper-secondary school diploma, and their training is much shorter (some weeks or months).
79. Neil Thompson, ‘Antidiscriminatory Practice’, in The Blackwell Companion to Social Work, ed. Martin Davies (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., 1997), 238–44.
80. Breaking the Silence. A Report by the European Roma Rights Center and People in Need. Traficking in Roma Communities (European Roma Rights Centre, March 2011). http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/breaking-the-silence-19-march-2011.pdf