Committee of Ministers

SECRETARIAT GENERAL

SECRETARIAT OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS SECRETARIAT DU COMITE DES MINISTRES

Contact: Katherine Anderson Tel: 03.88.41.23.22

Date: 9/7/2012 DD(2012)657

Document distributed at the request of: Poland

Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers.

Meeting: GR-SOC – 3 July 2012

Item reference: 7. Ad hoc Committee of Experts on Roma Issues (CAHROM)

* * * * * * * * * * *

Document distribué à la demande de : la Pologne

Les documents distribués à la demande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Réunion : GR-SOC – 3 juillet 2012

Référence du point : 7. Comité ad hoc d’experts sur les questions roms (CAHROM) DD(2012)657: distributed at the request of Poland / distribué à la demande de la Pologne

Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. / Les documents distribués à la demande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres.

Food for thought Contribution by Poland to the work of the Ad hoc Committee of Experts on Roma Issues (CAHROM) GR-SOC meeting, 3 July 2012

1. Poland considers improving the situation of Roma as one of the permanent and most important items on the political agenda in Europe, both at pan-European and national level. The CoE’s involvement here has our full support. The working methods of CAHROM, including study visits and thematic working groups, have permitted to increase the focus on substantive work, exchange of good practices and sharing experiences on policy implementation. They give basis for even more relevant action. 2. Prompted by the thematic report on school drop-out/absenteeism of Roma Children (CM(2012)97 add1) and convinced that CAHROM can play an even more useful role, we encourage this committee and the Special Representative to start an in-depth reflection on the methodology of approaching the topic of the Roma integration. Polish authorities believe that without a correct diagnosis of the situation and without identifying all challenges, the European response could not be fully effective. 3. Overlooking differences existing between member states and between Roma communities, and ignoring all challenges can result at least in contradictions of the approaches proposed to member states. It is well visible in the area of education and in the report on the table. For instance, on the one hand European organisations stress the need to include the Roma education into the main stream, on the other hand, special programmes addressed to Roma are asked for. States are demanded to close down Roma schools but also to open special schools to help Roma children to catch up the levels of their education. Appeals for equal access to education go hand in hand with proposals for special financial benefits for Roma parents to be granted based on their ethnic belonging and only for their compliance with civic obligations applicable to all, i.e. to send children to school. Member states are encouraged to promote the Romani language and include it in the school programmes, but are also invited to respect cultural identities of Roma communities while these cultural identities sometimes prohibit the revealing of Romani language. 4. On the basis of more than 10 years of experience with our Programme for Roma integration, we want to share some questions and reflections. Despite significant efforts, commitment and funds and despite a relatively small Roma population in Poland, the effects are still not as satisfactory as we would wish. It would be useful also for us to find answers to some questions concerning the methodology. 5. We should start by recognising that there are different Roma communities and their problems are also different in various member states (e.g. the size of their population, the level of their integration and the level of education, the internal diversity among Roma, the number, quality and activity of Roma NGOs, the level of cooperation between Roma organisations, the issues related to democratic representation in Roma organisations, their leaders etc.). The need to take into account differences seems obvious. Yet, in the European discourse there is quite often a tendency to perceive the situation of some Roma communities from the perspective of other Roma communities from other countries. Some assessments are formulated on the basis of extrapolation of some phenomena to other situations, sometimes in view of the geographical vicinity and without factual basis and closer look. Just by way of an example, the situation of Roma in Poland should not be qualified in terms of the Central and Eastern European region, which is however sometimes the practice, e.g. in the report of CoE Commissioner for Human Rights. 6. Secondly, the integration policies, including specific Roma-related policies, differ from country to country. There are legal systems recognising Roma as ethnic minorities ensuring them preferential legal treatment (which is the situation in Poland). There are systems recognising Roma as vulnerable groups with special support programmes. And there are systems based more or less strictly on principles of equal treatment of all citizens. There are also differences when it comes to specific issues such as the roles of local authorities or the existence of mechanisms of social consultations, etc. Attempts to find fit-for-all easy solutions are probably bound to fail. It is important to work out more effective solutions adjusted to specific circumstances and legal systems.

- 2 - DD(2012)657: distributed at the request of Poland / distribué à la demande de la Pologne

7. However, irrespectively of all the differences between legal systems of member states, there is at least one common denominator, i.e. the responsibility to abide by the law. We should be clear on this and should send such a signal to our Roma partners. Without making this clear, we will not solve other problems that result from lower education (while probably most of Roma problems result from this disadvantage). It’s a truism but worth recalling on each and every occasion that without achieving appropriate scholarisation levels, the chances for Roma people to compete at labour markets (where even well-educated young people struggle) are illusory and so can be the CoE efforts. 8. Therefore, the third challenge we see, is the fact that the European response in practice overlooks the aspect of legal obligations. It does not articulate with sufficient strength the need for Roma to respect the law, notably the legal obligation of all parents to ensure school attendance of their children. Minimising this aspect is to the detriment of Roma communities themselves and undermines the effectiveness of other proposed solutions. 9. Fourthly, the cultural factors are underestimated, even if some of them are closely linked with such negative phenomena as girls’ early marriages, lower education possibilities for women, reluctance to integration with non-Roma groups or the marginalisation of Roma elites by the Roma communities themselves. Still, the rich Roma culture deserves all efforts to be protected and promoted. Cultural factors could also be used as effective tools to deal with some negative phenomena. 10. And fifth, the responsibilities of Roma communities for their situation is not stressed sufficiently. The prevailing trend is rather to point to the member states as the only responsible for the situation of Roma. This in turn puts members of Roma communities in the role of a sort of censors of member states’ actions, contrary to the principle of subsidiarity. What is worse, such an approach only increases the passivity of Roma themselves. If certain basic political conditions are met by the country and if it ensures sufficient tools and mechanisms for the civil society to act, the focus by the international community on states’ responsibility only is counterproductive and to the detriment of Roma themselves. Against this background, it is very encouraging that during the last meeting organized by the UNHCR in Rome, June 2012, it were the Roma participants themselves who pointed to the need to fight negative phenomena within and by the Roma communities. They also suggested using tools and institutions specific to Roma culture to respond to some pathologies. 11. All these problems, challenges and contradictions are quite evident, at least for practitioners who implement programmes for Roma integration. We believe that there is a need for a frank discussion within the CAHROM on the methodology and most effective approaches. 12. One issue should however be made absolutely clear. The obligation of member states to respect and safeguard human rights of Roma people cannot be questioned or undermined. States should also comply with their obligations to combat discrimination, hate speech and violence against Roma. And the Council of Europe’s active monitoring of states’ compliance with their obligations as well as its practical support for their actions is crucial. 13. The idea of CAHROM thematic working groups and reports is indeed a very good step in the direction of a more targeted and effective response by the CoE adjusted to the needs of member states. Once again we congratulate on this initiative. 14. We would also like to propose the following ideas for CAHROM: - Considering mechanisms of effective enforcement of legal obligations, in particular regarding the parental obligations for education of their children, - Putting more focus on vocational education for Roma, - Creating mechanisms encouraging employers to employ Roma workers and to ensure possibilities for their internships and vocational training, - Cooperating closer with genuine Roma leaders to limit negative phenomena and to promote changes of cultural models that impede personal development of individual members of Roma communities, - Promoting idea of responsibility of Roma for their situation (provided that basic conditions are met in the country offering chances to fulfil this responsibility),

- 3 - DD(2012)657: distributed at the request of Poland / distribué à la demande de la Pologne

- Increased resources and support should be made available to member states with highest number of Roma to limit the pressure for migration – which, if occurs on a massive scale, can have negative social effects – both for the receiving countries and the countries of origins, leading to social tensions without serving the interests of Roma communities of origin affected by these migration moves. Obviously, the right to freedom of movement should be at the same time fully respected in line with i.a. Article 2 of Protocol no 4 to the European Human Rights Convention.