The development and institutionalization of Romani representation and administration. Part 3c: religious, governmental, and non-governmental institutions (1945–1970)

Abstract

This article is the fifth and final in a Nationalities Papers series providing an overview of the development of Romani political group representation and administration, from the arrival of Roma to Europe up to 1971, the landmark year of modern transnational Romani politics. The article concentrates on the period between the Second World War and 1970 and the emergence of the following phenomena which distinguish this period from those covered in the previous articles: some limited Romani participation in non-Romani mainstream political or administrative structures, an international Romani evangelical movement, reconciliation between Romani political representation and the Catholic Church, national institutions created by various governments to aid the administration of policies on Roma and rapid growth of non-governmental organizations addressing Romani issues.

Keywords:

• Romani political mobilization
• Romani religious organizations
• minority activism
• minority non-governmental organizations

Notes

See Part 1 of this series, footnote 9, regarding the Roma/Gypsy dichotomy and table 2.1 in Klímová-Alexander, The Romani Voice for various Romani self-appellations.

Le Cossec's work among Gypsies had started in 1950 but became institutionalized only in 1952.

According to Mateo Maximoff, one of the GEC priests, the first convention at Brest took place already in 1951 (Maximoff 152). However, at that time the nascent Romani evangelical movement was not yet established enough to have an actual convention, gathering people from several different congregations. The 1951 Brest event must have been just a smaller meeting of those converted at the time (Thomas Acton, E-mail, 27 Feb. 2002).

Webb attended the Helsinki conference as an independent representative as the Church of Scotland appointed a different delegate. This led to Webb's break with the church (Trigg 85).

This organization also had in its programme social relief in the form of the provision of camps for Gypsies; however, its activities in this direction did not go beyond distribution of used clothes (ibid. 88).

Pere Fleury, national chaplain for the French Roma, had allegedly tried to discredit the GEC, WGC and Rotaru personally. The GEC was perceived as a strong rival by the Catholic Church which had its specialized mission for itinerants and whose employees regularly visited Romani encampments in France. Father Fehily, chaplain for the itinerants in Ireland, reportedly denounced Puxon as “a communist agitator” and tried to prevent Rouda from attending a convention held at the Ballinasloe horse fair in October 1965 through contacts in government circles and the French embassy (Dodds 29; Puxon, Road of the Rom 67).

Rouda declined the invitation to join owing to the previous obstacles he experienced from Catholic priests. Not everyone who was invited experienced an unproblematic journey. Reinhardt, a well-known Romani musician, was stopped at the Swiss border. He eventually reached Pomezia via a longer route and played for the Pope, from whom he received a valuable violin in return (Puxon, Road of the Rom 67).

Puxon incorrectly states that the Rome Congress took place in 1965 (Road of the Rom 79).

This information comes from an English translation of Karway's letter to the Pope, archived by Grattan Puxon. The translation has neither heading nor date.

Puxon also states, based on reference to Liegeois, that another Romani leader – Dutch Koka Petalo (see Part 3b of this series) visited the Pope. Liegeois, however, mentions only that Petalo was contemplating having a wedding in Rome and visiting the Pope on that occasion (Liegeois, Mutation Tsiganes 147).

As of 1988, known as the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People (Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, Solidarity of the Church 5).

Some pre-WWII anti-Romani laws were in fact enforced even after WWII, mainly in Germany. In addition, the Bavarian Nazi Zigeunerzentrale was revived after the war as Landfahrerzentrale in Munich and Hamburg. It kept the pre-war Romani “criminal records” until the 1970s when they were destroyed after the nascent German Romani civil rights movements initiated enquiries about them (see, for example, Milton 36; Matras 52; Gesellschaft für bedrohte Völker; Fraser, The Gypsies 282).

I do not elaborate on this point as this series does not concentrate on institutionalization of purely repressive and annihilatory policies against Roma. For details see, for example, Fraser, The Gypsies, ch. 8.

In fact the Soviet Union had one such institution even before WWII – the special department for Romani affairs within the National Minorities' Sector of the Ministry of Culture after Roma were classified as a national minority in 1925 (as mentioned in Part 2 of this series).

This programme envisioned taking Roma, mainly from segregated settlements in Slovakia, and relocating them among non-Roma, often in the more rural areas of the Czech lands and setting them to work (Guy, “Late Arrivals”).