Rights and Traditions
21 July 2005
Savelina Danova-Russinova
For those familiar with debates in the broader human rights field, the title of this edition of Roma Rights will evoke the confrontation between proponents of the universality of human rights and those who perceive rights as limited by the tenets of a specific cultural tradition.
Romani community members and rights advocates have articulated inequalities between men and women which are rooted in traditional perceptions of the social roles of men and women in Romani communities. Practices such as early and arranged marriages and certain sexual taboos in Romani communities restrict the autonomy of the individuals, in many instances depriving them of their human dignity and preventing them from realising basic human rights. Anecdotal evidence reveals, for example, that Romani girls' educational careers are often interrupted at early stages as a result of marriage; many women are not able to undertake public activities due to pressures exerted by family and community, conditioned by traditional perceptions limiting the role of the woman to the family sphere, etc.
The debate about the conflict of individual rights with traditional practices is now taking place among Roma. Among other fora, it has been repeatedly engaged in the course of ERRC meetings with Romani activists, training workshops, etc. Beyond the arguments of the many sides in the debate, it is important to see the political implications of this debate. For us, it is a fortunate development that the awareness of contradictions between human rights and customary practices within some Romani communities has left the private sphere – action on these matters is no longer solely the intuitive resistance of individuals – youths, women or others, who do not accept the limitations of community tradition. Now, an ever-growing number of Romani individuals organise themselves to challenge misconceptions within their own communities and among non-Roma. The importance of the debate about rights and traditions entering the public realm is enormous: questioning issues considered by many Roma to be taboo not only has the potential to catalyse processes within Romani communities of rethinking their relevance, but is also a challenge to the perception of Roma by large parts of the majority as a homogenous mass of people trapped in the "primitiveness" of their own traditions. Contrary to assumptions that opening up of what some consider "internal" and "sensitive" community problems would multiply racist stereotypes of the majority, the more vocal such resistance is, the higher the pressure on the majority's misconceptions about Roma becomes. Moreover, as seen in the pages of this issue of Roma Rights, the problematisation of the contradiction between rights and traditions exposes a host of problems related to the inequalities facing Roma in society, resulting from past and present discrimination condoned and unremedied by states. Thus, carrying on the debate about human rights and tradition also exposes the arrogant stance often adopted by governments, blaming "Romani tradition" for the failure by states to fulfil basic duties. In this way, this debate, held publicly, adds strength to the fight against anti-Romani racism.
The ERRC works to foster and facilitate this debate, among other things in the belief that it is key for the empowerment of Roma. We also take sides in this debate, defending the primacy of rights. Our mission as an institution is to seek protection for the fundamental rights of Roma. These include the right to develop one's culture and preserve cultural identity. However, cultural practices which involve oppression of the individual fall outside the rights paradigm: there is no right to preserve the tradition of early marriage if this tradition denies the child the right to education and personal development; there can be no defendable right to preserve cultural identity through practices degrading and oppressing women.
The public debate about rights and traditions also reinforces efforts to hold governments accountable for failure to counteract and remedy discrimination against Roma caused by non-Roma and Roma alike, as well as by institutions/structures of the state and institutions/structures within the Romani communities. Rights violations – whether committed by agents of the state or private actors – inevitably engage the responsibility of the state. Human rights law mandates that the state should respect, protect and fulfil human rights. To respect human rights means that the government should not engage through its structures or laws in discrimination and other human rights violations, as well as that it should provide remedies for human rights violations. To protect human rights means that governments should ensure that individuals or groups not related to the government do not violate the rights of other individuals. To fulfil means to ensure through laws and policies opportunities for individuals to enjoy equal access to the whole range of internationally guaranteed human rights. These obligations of the government reach all kinds of discriminatory practices, including those which some seek to justify on grounds of tradition.
When these obligations are applied to Roma, a number of questions should be asked: Has the government enacted strong legislation to protect Roma and others from racial discrimination? Has the government implemented policies to ensure equal rights and opportunities for Roma – men and women? Does the government keep data disaggregated by ethnicity and gender to follow access to education, health care, etc. of Romani children and women? How does the government promote the education of Romani girls and women? Do Roma, especially Romani women, have access to government programs aimed at preventing domestic violence, trafficking or other crimes? How does the state address the vulnerability of Romani women and children to trafficking or other crimes? Does the government respond adequately to complaints about human rights violations against Roma, whether the perpetrators are Roma or non-Roma, whether violations take place in the family or outside it?
The persistence of patriarchal traditions in Romani communities, some of which are incompatible with child's rights and women's rights, cannot be viewed in isolation from the overall position of Roma in the societies in which they live. The tradition of oppressive, assimilationist policies in previous decades and the almost total failure of states to remedy the effects of these policies and to eliminate discrimination against Roma in more recent times has conditioned a continuous state of isolation of Roma from mainstream society and from the processes of modernisation and democratisation taking place in it. Enforced segregation of Roma from mainstream society has rendered practices and institutions oppressive of individual rights more resilient to change. Human rights violations taking place within Romani communities, i.e. when both victims and perpetrators are Romani, are also condoned by or acquiesced with by the government. One example is domestic violence. Although domestic violence is by no means a human rights violation which occurs solely in Romani communities, Roma -- especially Romani women and children -- are more exposed because, due to complex reasons, including racist attitudes, they have limited access to the protections available to others. Corruption and the complicity of public officials with perpetrators of crimes often thwarts the effective fight against crime, causing some criminal practices to thrive. One example is the failure of many governments to combat usurious money-lending – the practice of providing unofficial loans usually accompanied by violent debt extortion, involving deprivation of the debtors of their property -- widespread in Romani communities in countries such as Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic. Long-term failure by authorities to address this problem, rooted in the view that "what happens inside Romani communities is outside the range of the law, because Roma are wild barbarians", has caused it to thrive – the victims are abandoned to the perpetrators.
While protection of the rights of the most vulnerable within the Romani communities – children and women – is practically unavailable, paradoxically, measures intended to ensure human rights protection can defeat their own purposes. There are disturbing reports of coercive measures against Romani families enforced under the banner of securing the best interest of the child. The disproportionate forced removal of children from their families, reported in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Sweden and elsewhere, is often driven by racist stereotypes about Romani parents and to serve as tool of oppression and discrimination of Roma, whether intentional or by default. Some Romani activists describe social workers -- the primary and often the sole decision-makers in the process of forced removal of children from their families -- as "social police" meaning that social workers do not help, but rather come regularly to homes looking for reasons to find families inadequate. Such policies have led to a dramatic overrepresentation of Roma in state institutions for children. Recently, the ERRC has become aware of the case of Ms Sivakova from the Czech town of Karvina, whose daughter Eva was taken immediately upon birth in January 2005 into state care on grounds that there were indications that her mother would not be capable of caring for her. This was a social worker's decision; courts are not involved in such proceedings. Eva's mother spent all day every day in the waiting room of the state institution where her daughter had been placed, in an effort to demonstrate her determination to care for the child. In May 2005, after intervention by the local organisation Life Together, a court in Karvina ruled that the actions of the social workers had been arbitrary and ordered Eva released into her mother's care. A short review of various forms of forced removal of Romani children from their families is included in this issue of Roma Rights in the hope that it will provoke further investigation, but also because it demonstrates the extreme of paternalistic and assimilationist state policy towards Roma. Between this extreme and the other – the total withdrawal of the state from its responsibility to ensure equal rights for Roma -- little seems to have been done to date.
This issue of Roma Rights examines matters related to this dual dynamic: on the one hand, abusive practices perpetrated on Roma by Roma, in the name of "traditional culture", and the general abandonment by the state of the victims to the perpetrators; on the other hand, a tendency by state officials to treat social problems in the Romani community with draconian and disproportionate measures. In this way, we look at embedded traditions, leading to the systemic frustration of rights: traditions leading to abuses by Romani perpetrators, and traditions of abuse arising from state practices taking aim at Roma and Romani traditions. We aim to provide a forum for voices within the Romani community working to combat abusive traditional practices. We also try to set in focus the context fostering abusive community practices.
