By Catherine Wihtol de Wenden
Translation: Melissa Okabe
Passage au crible n°33
During the summer of 2010, the French government decided to redirect towards their country of origin – for the most part to Romania – the Roma camping in illegal zones in France. In return, the French government proposed provisions of 300 euros to those who volunteered to leave. The following argument, in which the Roma should be criminally responsible for their camps established in non-authorized zones, has been the main topic of discussion in European countries, the matter even reaching Brussels. In fact, the majority of those in question – with the exception of Ex-Yugoslavia – are citizens of European Union member states (including Romania and Bulgaria since 2007) and, as such, benefit from the freedom of passage among fellow EU countries.
> Historical background
> Theoretical framework
> Analysis
> References
According to sources, the Roma population is composed of 9 to 12 million people. Originally, the Roma came from Indian populations who took flight over one thousand years ago. They crossed through Persia, then the Byzantine Empire and Central and Eastern Europe, before growing in Southern Europe, most notably in Spain. In other words, they have been part of European history since the Middle Ages. Henceforth, they are counted to be around 2.4 million in Romania (being 10% of the nation), 800.000 in Bulgaria (being 10% of the population), 800.000 in Spain, 600,000 in Russia, 600,000 in Hungary, 500,000 in Turkey, 400,000 in France, and 150,000 in the United Kingdom (according to given figures provided by La Croix in 2008).
Their presence has been equally large in the United States and Canada since the 19th century, as well as in Israel in the past 20 years. Similarly, Roma are noted to be present in Germany, and in Portugal which deported them toward its African colonies and towards Brazil since the 17th century. However they are especially numerous in Central and Eastern Europe where they form a non-negligible component of the population, between 5-10%. The majority has become sedentary, while others remain nomadic. In France, members of this latter group are called gypsies like the other non-Roma nomads. We emphasize that not all Roma are nomads nor are all gypsies Roma. Also, for example, certain French people have had mobile occupations – traders, traveling acts, the circus – for generations, without being considered Roma.
Let’s keep two main elements in mind:
1. The question of State control over its borders: France intervened in a European context where freedom of passage by Europeans within the EU is represented among the essential rights of European citizens.
2. The sovereignty of a European state on a largely Europeanized matter: This means that the management of migratory flows cannot rise from the sole competence or sovereign authority of a member state. The member state must evaluate and compromise with the authorities in Brussels.
Certainly, the French government can infringe penal sanctions on the Roma and other nomads for illegal camps. However, a number of districts do not always respect the legislation enjoining them to make provisions for a stationing place if their population exceeds a certain number of habitants. Moreover, for all of this they cannot deport Europeans as they do with simple non-European migrants in irregular situations, even with the 300 euro compensation. The second problematic point remains that of ethnic targeting: how does one decide that it is the Roma if France does not have any official ethnic statistics? And yet, the August 5, 2010 bill coming from the Minister of the Interior, Brice Hortefeux, notably pointed them out, before quickly retracting it in the face of media reactions and in part by public opinion. Numerous ethical outrages of security by police forces have been brought to the forefront due to the Roma people. Obviously, the operation seems to be solely concerned to seduce a certain margin of the public opinion – more marked by the right – in the face of failure of the other enactments, such as the debate over national identity. This policy has without doubt appeared more legitimate to French authorities as much as France does not seem to be alone in this file. In Italy, for example, the capital was lost by the socialists of the far left in the last municipal elections over the theme of insecurity; the right had criminalized the Romani question after having successfully carried it to the heart of the electoral campaign.
On October 15, 2010, this redirecting of the Roma to the borders was condemned by recommendation of the European Parliament. This recommendation was followed by an intervention by the Commissioner for Justice, Viviane Reding, who compared the current period to that of the 1940s. At that time, a stance taken by the European Commission similarly went in this direction. The French policy was therefore discredited by Brussels and the case largely publicized in other countries. Indeed, the Roma represent a population who has already been the victim of persecution on many occasions. They have thereby been isolated for many centuries in Western and Eastern Europe before being gravely persecuted under Nazism. We recall that in Romania, they were subjugated to serfdom until 1865, then forced to settle under communism, they were treated likewise in other Central and Eastern European countries. Strongly discriminated against and deprived of their social benefits since the fall of the Berlin Wall, some of them became nomads once again, like their non-Roma compatriots from Romania and Bulgaria, their nomadic actions anticipating the legal freedom of movement from the start of 1990s. Finally, they have respectively acquired this freedom of passage in 2000 (Bulgaria) and in 2001 (Romania). And yet, they will not benefit from the right to work and to settle until 2014.
During the summer of 2010, the Roma affair appeared to reveal France’s improvised and unilateral treatment of this European question. France provoked the reaction of the Romanian government, with which the French officials have held many bilateral meetings dealing with this subject over the course of the past five years. Bucharest lamented that a confusion between Roma and Romanians could integrate into the minds of the general public. However, Romania has once more showed that Europe exists, as the guarantor and defender of Human Rights, when the limits of respecting these rights are found to be exceeded. In this respect, the response of the European parliament, jointly with that of the European Commissioner for Justice, and the outburst from the European Council in October 2010 reminds that Brussels remains vigilant when European rights are threatened.
About Roma in Europe: La Croix, 10 Août 2010
About Roma in general: Études tziganes series
Alain Reyniers (ULB) : http://www.iiac.cnrs.fr/lau/spip.php?article129
