Skip to main content
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2019 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

10. Positive Action for Roma in Four Key Areas

verfasst von : Jozefien Van Caeneghem

Erschienen in: Legal Aspects of Ethnic Data Collection and Positive Action

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This chapter provides insight in how positive action can look like in practice with a view to combating the discrimination against, and promoting the inclusion of, Roma in Europe. It highlights examples and good practices across Europe, because the widespread lack of awareness about what positive action is and what it does hinders this human rights instrument from reaching its full potential for this ethnic minority in Europe. First, emphasis is placed on the importance of adopting a sectorial, bottom-up approach to the designing, implementing, monitoring and evaluating of positive action to ensure that the measures are tailored to the specific needs of local Roma communities and proportionate to the goals they pursue. Next, the inter-connectedness of the problems encountered by Roma in the areas of education, housing, employment and health is acknowledged, before taking a closer look at the implementation of soft and strong types of measures for Roma in these four key areas of socio-economic life. Too often, discussions are dominated by the controversy that surrounds strict quotas, which are by far the most well-known as well as the strongest kind of positive action. The aim of this chapter is to demonstrate that States have a considerable number of options with varying levels of intensity in each of these fields.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Positive Action for the Roma Minority in Europe
Nächstes Kapitel Inter-Cultural Mediation to Enhance Roma Inclusion
Fußnoten
1
Commissi Communication, Report on the evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 (NRIS) (4 December 2018), pp. 2 and 3. Country-specific examples: ECRI, Fifth Report on the Czech Republic (16 June 2015), paras. 79 to 88 and 113. ECRI, Fifth Report on Greece (10 December 2014), paras. 105 to 114. ECRI, Fifth Report on Bulgaria (19 June 2014), paras. 76, 77 and 97. Hollo (2006), pp. 3, 4, 16 and 43. See Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​3), where the two main topics of the book were introduced. See also Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​1.​1), where it was argued that positive action is an essential instrument to achieve effective equality for Roma.
 
2
Hollo (2006), p. 3. The particular vulnerability of Roma in past and present times was explained in Chap. 1 (Sects. 1.​2.​1 and 1.​2.​2 respectively).
 
3
In March 2019, for instance, Roma were attacked in France following false rumors on social media that members of the Roma minority had abducted children. Guy (2019). Other country-specific examples: ECRI, Fifth Report on Greece (10 December 2014), paras. 34, 43 and 50. ECRI, Fifth Report on Bulgaria (19 June 2014) CRI(2014)1, paras. 31, 35 and 52. ECRI, Fifth Report on the Czech Republic (16 June 2015), paras. 29 to 35, 38, 40 to 44, 50, 61 to 66, and 69 to 72. ECRI, Fifth Report on Germany (5 December 2013), paras. 40, 45 and 51. Hollo (2006), p. 16. Increased levels of anti-Gypsyism were also reported within the framework of the mid-term evaluation of the EU Framework for NRIS. Commission Communication, Report on the evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 (NRIS) (4 December 2018), pp. 20, 21, 33, 58 and 68. Anti-Gypsyism was defined and discussed in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1) on the particular vulnerability of Roma in Europe today.
 
4
Hollo (2006), pp. 7 and 10. Kostadinova (2006), p. 4. See Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​1.​1) on positive action as an essential instrument to achieve equality for Roma.
 
5
It was explained in Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​2.​1) that lack of awareness about positive action and its relevance for Roma constitutes a challenge limiting this human rights instrument.
 
6
See Chap. 6 on the distinction between the two types of positive action (Sect. 6.​2.​2) and for an overview of the different soft types (Sect. 6.​2.​3) and strong types (Sect. 6.​2.​4) of positive action.
 
7
See Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1) on the particular vulnerability of Roma in Europe today.
 
8
The notion socio-economic rights as well as the rights to education, housing, work and health were discussed in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​7).
 
9
These four areas are cited as key fields in the EU Framework for NRIS. This was confirmed in the mid-term evaluation of the EU Framework in 2018. Other areas, including access to justice and participation in public life, are also important, but they fall outside the scope of this book. Commission Communication, Report on the evaluation of the EU Framework for NRIS (4 December 2018). Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011).
 
10
As will be seen, these options range from investments to increase the education chances for Roma, to the provision of better housing and the adoption of equality plans to promote diversity in the workplace. European Network of Equality Bodies (Equinet) (2010), p. 23. See Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​2) for a discussion of the case law of the CJEU on gender-based positive action. The five challenges limiting the effectiveness of positive action for Roma in Europe were identified in Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​2).
 
11
Strict quota were cited as a strong type of positive action providing preferential treatment in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​2).
 
12
The different types of positive action measures were presented in Chap. 6 (Sects. 6.​2.​3 and 6.​2.​4).
 
13
See, for example: CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), paras. 19 and 21. This was highlighted in Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​1.​3) on the permissibility of soft and strong measures for Roma.
 
14
Hollo (2006), p. 39. The different data sources on Roma were considered in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​2). The absence of reliable disaggregated data on Roma was cited as the third challenge that limits positive action for this ethnic minority in Europe in Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​2.​3).
 
15
The availability of disaggregated data on target groups was identified as the fourth premise for effective and successful positive action schemes in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​4).
 
16
The relevance of sectorial data collection practices was briefly mentioned in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​2.​1) on official statistics on Roma, when explaining that in some countries data on this ethnic minority are collected by different ministries (e.g. Ministry of Education in Hungary, Ireland and Romania; Ministry of Labour in Macedonia; Ministry of Health in Serbia).
 
17
It was argued in Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​1.​3) that the proportionality principle allows both soft and strong measures for Roma.
 
18
This was explained in Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​1.​3) on the importance of proportionality when adopting positive action measures for Roma. The European Commission states that “EU Roma integration goals should cover, in proportion to the size of the Roma population, four crucial areas: access to education, employment, healthcare and housing”. See: Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 4. In 2008, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD Committee) encouraged Hungary to adopt “specifically targeted measures, including by enhancing professional training and sustainable employment opportunities in communities with significant Roma populations”. See: Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR Committee), Concluding Observations on Hungary (16 January 2008), para. 34.
 
19
Hollo (2006), pp. 34 and 35.
 
20
Terenzani-Stanková (2013). The importance of a bottom-up approach to positive action through active involvement of local or national authorities was briefly touched upon in Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​1.​3).
 
21
Terenzani-Stanková (2013).
 
22
Hollo (2006), pp. 34, 35 and 39.
 
23
See, for instance: ACFC, First Opinion on Germany (1 March 2002), para. 24.
 
24
De Schutter (2007), p. 869.
 
25
Id.
 
26
An overview of the application of the proportionality requirement in the CJEU’s case law on gender-based positive action can be found in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​2). See also: De Schutter (2007), p. 869.
 
27
This argument was formulated in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​4) on future case law on positive action. See also Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​1.​3), where it is stressed that the proportionality principle makes it possible to adopt soft as well as strong positive action measures for Roma.
 
28
See Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​2.​4) on the active participation of Roma in positive action. The active participation of Roma will be highlighted as a key element of this book in Chap. 12 (Sect. 12.​2.​2).
 
29
See Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​5.​4) on methodological challenges to conducting surveys on Roma populations.
 
30
This was in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​4) on the balance between exclusion and inclusion and in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​3.​2) on the notion social inclusion.
 
31
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 5. This was briefly addressed in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1) on the particular vulnerability of Roma in Europe today. The right to education was analysed in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​7.​2).
 
32
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 5. Farkas (2014). ENAR (2007), p. 9. Hollo (2006), p. 27.
 
33
ENAR (2007), p. 3. The notion structural discrimination was addressed in Chap. 9 on positive action for Roma.
 
34
Bell (2007), p. 5.
 
35
Resolution 1740 of the Parliamentary Assembly on the situation of Roma in Europe and relevant activities of the Council of Europe (22 June 2010), art. 15.10. Recommendation CM/Rec(2000)4 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the education of Roma/Gypsy children in Europe (3 February 2000), art. 6 (Appendix Guiding principles of an education policy for Roma/Gypsy children in Europe).
 
36
Bell (2007), p. 5. This corresponds to the remedial aim of positive action, which was analysed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​4.​1). See also Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​1.​2.​1) on the multifarious aims positive action for Roma can pursue.
 
37
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 5. Chapter 11 will focus on inter-cultural mediation for Roma.
 
38
As explained in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​1.​1), because positive action is rarely based on two or more discrimination grounds, instances of intersectional discrimination risk being overlooked. CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), para. 22.
 
39
The author called this the eradication of discrimination. See Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3.​1) on soft measures not providing preferential treatment to members of the target group. ENAR (2007), p. 15.
 
40
The eradication of discrimination, also referred to as positive fairness or affirmative commitments not to discriminate, was introduced as the first soft positive action measure in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3.​1).
 
41
ERRC (2007b), pp. 56 and 57. See Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​2.​2.​2), where rendering the adoption of positive action mandatory in the EU framework was discussed and where the implementation of a positive duty for States to promote equality for racial and ethnic groups was put forward as an interesting complementary course of action. The notion equality impact assessment was analysed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​3.​5).
 
42
ENAR (2008), pp. 3 and 4.
 
43
Roma Education Fund (2009), p. 109. The mid-term evaluation of the EU Framework for NRIS confirms that transition from education to employment remains a considerable bigger challenge among Roma compared to non-Roma. Commission Staff Working Document, Evaluation of the EU Framework for NRIS (4 December 2018), p. 32. In a report on the transition from education to employment of young Roma in nine EU Member States, the FRA (2018, pp. 23–33) explains that socio-demographic characteristics as well as socio-economic factors influence the employment status of young Roma. Discrimination, on the other hand, also plays a role, but rather in terms of lower quality of employment (e.g. job security, benefits and income).
 
44
The multidimensional and interlinked nature of problems faced by Roma in education, housing, employment and health was highlighted in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1).
 
45
See Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3.​3) on soft measures that do not provide preferential treatment.
 
46
Teacher training is done, for instance, in Hungary, Ireland and Slovakia. Extra teachers have been introduced in Ireland, Italy, Germany and Sweden. Resolution 1740 of the Parliamentary Assembly on the situation of Roma in Europe and relevant activities of the Council of Europe (22 June 2010), arts. 16.3 and 16.6. ENAR (2007), p. 15.
 
47
CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), paras. 19 and 21.
 
48
Corsi et al. (2010), p. 135.
 
49
The distinction between soft and strong types of positive action was explained in Chap. 6 (Sects. 6.​2.​2–6.​2.​4).
 
50
Romania has a network of school mediators. Hungary and Slovakia also demonstrate good practices with Roma mediators in education. ACFC, Second Opinion on Slovakia (26 May 2005), para. 38. Council of Europe Strasbourg Declaration on Roma (20 October 2010), par. 33. Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 5. Equinet (2014), p. 39. ENAR (2007), p. 13.
 
51
See Chap. 11 on inter-cultural mediation to enhance Roma inclusion. The author explained in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​3) why the redefinition of merit is considered to be a strong kind of positive action.
 
52
Resolution 1740 of the Parliamentary Assembly on the situation of Roma in Europe and relevant activities of the Council of Europe (22 June 2010), art. 16.6.
 
53
Depending on the level of education, this system has been in place since the 1990s or early 2000s. It concerns secondary schools, vocational schools and universities. The author repeatedly referred to this example in Chap. 9 on positive action for the Roma minority in Europe. For more on strict quotas as the strongest application of preferential treatment, see Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​2). Commission Communication, Steps forward in implementing National Roma Integration Strategies (26 June 2013), p. 15. Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 27, 29, 32, 39 and 40.
 
54
Roma Education Fund (2009), p. 13.
 
55
Id. at pp. 42, 88, 89, 91, 93 and 94.
 
56
The importance of ethnic data and active participation of Roma was emphasised in Chap. 9 (Sects. 9.​2.​3 and 9.​2.​4) on challenges limiting positive action for Roma.
 
57
In Poland it concerns fifty scholarships, most of which are taken up by Roma girls even though they are open to both sexes. Corsi et al. (2010), p. 135. ENAR (2007), p. 9.
 
58
Individual outreach was identified as the first kind of strong positive action in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​1).
 
59
European Commission (2009), p. 57.
 
60
Id.
 
61
Facially biased diversity policies were cited as fourth kind of soft positive action measures in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3.​4).
 
62
The right to education and relevant EctHR case law were analysed in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​7.​2). See also Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​2.​4), where international and European monitoring and litigation was identified as an essential data source on Roma. It concerns, among others: EctHR, Oršuš and Others v. Croatia, Judgment (16 March 2010, GC). EctHR, D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic, Judgment (13 November 2007).
 
63
The 29 Indicators for Monitoring Performance and Progress of Education and Training Systems in Europe can be found in Annex I to Commission Staff Working Document, Progress Towards the Common Objectives in Education and Training: Indicators and Benchmarks (21 January 2004). Cahn (2004), p. 36.
 
64
EctHR, Oršuš and Others v. Croatia, Judgment (16 March 2010, GC), para. 157.
 
65
EctHR, Oršuš and Others v. Croatia, Judgment (16 March 2010, GC), para. 177. See also: EctHR, Horváth and Kiss v. Hungary, Judgment (29 January 2013), para. 104: the EctHR refers explicitly to art. 6 of the Guiding principles of an education policy for Roma/Gypsy children in Europe that are attached to Recommendation CM/Rec(2000)4 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the education of Roma/Gypsy children in Europe (3 February 2000). Farkas (2007), p. 41.
 
66
EctHR, Oršuš and Others v. Croatia, Judgment (16 March 2010, GC), paras. 152, 155, 157, 158, 162, 164, 165, 172 to 175, 184 and 185. See, similarly: EctHR, D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic, Judgment (13 November 2007), paras. 181 and 207.
 
67
Farkas (2007), p. 41.
 
68
This is, for example, the case in Belgium. See: Vlaams Minderhedencentrum (2010), pp. 16 and 17. Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism (2009), pp. 28, 29, 39 and 40. ENAR (2007), p. 9. The mid-term evaluation of the EU Framework for NRIS confirmed that there have been very little change in the housing situation of Roma in the EU since 2011. Commission Staff Working Document, Evaluation of the EU Framework for NRIS (4 December 2018), pp. 18 and 19. Housing issues were briefly addressed in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1). See Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​7.​3) for an analysis of the right to housing.
 
69
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 7.
 
70
Hollo (2006), p. 3.
 
71
Id. at p. 29.
 
72
Belgium violated the European Social Charter (18 October 1961) for not having sufficient caravan sites to accommodate the needs, for not making adequate efforts to rectify the problem, for not adapting housing quality standards to caravans and caravan sites, for not adapting its urban legislation to caravans, for the situation of possible eviction of illegally placed caravans, and for lacking a coherent and coordinated policy to tackle the issues at hand. ECSR, International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH) v. Belgium, Decision (21 March 2012).
 
73
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 7. In Sect. 10.1, the author argued in favour of a sectorial bottom-up approach to positive action to supplement national frameworks.
 
74
Equinet (2014), p. 40. Individual outreach was presented as the first kind of strong of positive action measures providing preferential treatment in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​1).
 
75
Preferential treatment was the second type of strong positive action measures analysed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​2).
 
76
ECSR, European Roma Rights Centre v. Bulgaria, Decision (18 October 2006), para. 42. See Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​1.​1), where it was argued that positive action is an essential instrument to achieve effective equality for Roma. See also Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​4) on the limits of the traditional approach to equality. In Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​1.​2.​1), it was mentioned that the ECSR requires the adoption of positive action under certain circumstances.
 
77
ERRC (2007a).
 
78
The ECSR found a violation of the right of the family to social, legal and economic protection in art. 16 Revised European Social Charter (3 May 1996) in conjunction with the non-discrimination principle in art. E. The ECSR came to the same conclusion regarding housing conditions of Roma in other States such as Greece and Italy. See: ERRC v. Bulgaria, Decision (18 October 2006).
 
79
Council of Europe Strasbourg Declaration on Roma (20 October 2010).
 
80
For an overview of the four different soft types of positive action, see Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3).
 
81
Facially biased diversity policies were identified as the fourth kind of soft positive action in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3.​4).
 
82
ACFC, First Opinion on Ireland (22 May 2003), para. 52. This could qualify as a facially biased diversity policy, which was cited as a soft measure not providing preferential treatment in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3.​4).
 
83
ACFC, First Opinion on Ireland (22 May 2003), para. 53. Short-term funding was identified as a challenge to effective positive action for Roma in Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​2.​5).
 
84
The Flemish government covers up to 90 per cent of the total cost of caravan sites for Travellers. In the French-speaking Community it concerns up to 60 per cent of the total cost. See: Van Caeneghem (2013), pp. 244 and 245.
 
85
Absence of political will and inadequate and short-term funding were identified in Chap. 9 (Sects. 9.​2.​2 and 9.​2.​5 respectively) as two of the five main challenges that limit positive action for Roma.
 
86
Kostadinova (2006), p. 4. This qualifies as individual outreach, because the subsidies are attributed directly to members of the Roma community in order to promote their opportunities to live in mixed areas. See Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​1) on strong types of positive action. The temporary nature of measures was identified as a normative element of positive action in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​2.​3).
 
87
In particular, see: Hollo (2006), pp. 27 and 29. See Chap. 1 on issues Roma face in the area of housing today (Sect. 1.​2.​1) and on the importance of respecting Roma identity (Sect. 1.​2.​4). See also the discussion on several concepts in Chap. 2, in particular so on the notions assimilation and pluralism (Sect. 2.​3.​3) and on the right to identity and the prohibition of assimilation as interrelated building blocks of minority rights protection (Sects. 2.​3 and 2.​4).
 
88
Hollo (2006), p. 27.
 
89
The importance of adopting a bottom-up approach to positive action for Roma was emphasised in Sect. 10.1. See also Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​2) on the need for active participation of all relevant stakeholders in positive action, and Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​2.​4) on the lack of consultation and participation of local communities as one of the challenges that limit positive action for Roma.
 
90
Commission Communication, Report on the evaluation of the EU Framework for NRIS (4 December 2018), p. 4. Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 6. FRA (2016), pp. 17–22. World Bank (2010), pp. 13 and 16. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) (2009), pp. 157, 158 and 160–163. ENAR (2007), p. 9. Employment issues were mentioned in Chap. 1 on a general level (Sect. 1.​2.​1) and specifically in relation to Roma women (Sect. 1.​2.​3.​2). The right to work was briefly introduced in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​7.​4).
 
91
ACFC, First Opinion on Ireland (22 May 2003), para. 35.
 
92
ACFC, First Opinion on Serbia and Montenegro (27 November 2003), para. 38. Funding challenges in relation to positive action for Roma were addressed in Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​2.​5).
 
93
CESCR Committee, Concluding Observations on Hungary (16 January 2008), para. 34. CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), paras. 28 and 29. This corresponds to the remedial and the cultural aim of positive action, as discussed in Chap. 6 (Sects. 6.​4.​1 and 6.​4.​2 respectively). See also Chap. 9 (Sects. 9.​1.​2.​1 and 9.​1.​2.​2) on the multifarious aims positive action for Roma can pursue.
 
94
CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), paras. 28 and 29. The need for a diverse range of positive action measures to advance Roma inclusion was highlighted in Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​1).
 
95
The different kinds of soft positive action were analysed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3).
 
96
Resolution 1740 of the Parliamentary Assembly on the situation of Roma in Europe and relevant activities of the Council of Europe (22 June 2010), art. 18.3.
 
97
Hollo (2006), pp. 37 and 53. Group outreach was identified as a soft measure not providing preferential treatment in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3.​3).
 
98
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 6.
 
99
The redefinition of merit was discussed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​3).
 
100
Council of Europe Strasbourg Declaration on Roma (20 October 2010), para. 34.
 
101
See Chap. 11 on inter-cultural mediation to enhance Roma inclusion.
 
102
CESCR Committee, Concluding Observations on Hungary (16 January 2008), para. 34. CESCR Committee, Concluding Observations on Ukraine (4 January 2008), para. 37. CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), paras. 28 and 29.
 
103
Kostadinova (2006), p. 4.
 
104
Resolution 1740 of the Parliamentary Assembly on the situation of Roma in Europe and relevant activities of the Council of Europe (22 June 2010), art. 18.4.
 
105
Bell (2007), p. 6. Hollo (2006), p. 53. This is a strong type of positive action providing preferential treatment, as explained in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4). For more information on the FRA Roma Internship programme, see: https://​fra.​europa.​eu/​en/​about-fra/​recruitment/​roma-traineeship (Accessed 28 January 2019).
 
106
European Commission (2009), p. 58.
 
107
Id.
 
108
The strong measures involving preferential treatment were analysed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4).
 
109
Council of Europe Strasbourg Declaration on Roma (20 October 2010), para. 34.
 
110
Group outreach was mentioned among the soft types of positive action in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3.​3).
 
111
ENAR (2008), pp. 3 and 4.
 
112
For an overview of the different types of positive action, see Chap. 6 (Sects. 6.​2.​2–6.​2.​4).
 
113
CESCR Committee, Concluding Observations on Ukraine (4 January 2008), par. 37. CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), paras. 28 and 29.
 
114
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 6.
 
115
The report mentions Croatia, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Romania. Equinet (2014), pp. 6 and 36.
 
116
De Vos (2007), p. 42.
 
117
ACFC, First Opinion on Ireland (22 May 2003), paras. 36, 37 and 94.
 
118
Henrard (2013), pp. 54 and 55.
 
119
ENAR (2007), p. 9.
 
120
Hollo (2006), p. 53. This was referred to as preferential treatment by applying a tiebreak in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​2) when presenting the three types of strong positive action measures that involve preferential treatment. Provided there is savings clause guaranteeing objective assessment of individual characteristics, such a strong measure is permitted by the CJEU in its case law on gender-based positive action. For an overview of the CJEU’s case law on positive action, see Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​2).
 
121
See Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​2) on strong types of positive action that involve preferential treatment.
 
122
Hollo (2006), p. 53.
 
123
Hollo (2006), p. 37. Kostadinova (2006), p. 4. This corresponds to the cultural aim of positive action, which was discussed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​4.​2). See also Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​1.​2.​2) on the multifarious aims positive action for Roma can pursue.
 
124
ACFC, First Opinion on Ireland (22 May 2003), para. 38.
 
125
Id.
 
126
See Sect. 10.2 on examples of positive action for Roma in education. The interlinkedness between issues faced in different socio-economic areas was also briefly mentioned in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1).
 
127
See Sect. 10.4 on positive action for Roma in employment.
 
128
FRA (2016), pp. 29 and 30. Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 7. FRA (2009), pp. 160–163. ENAR (2007), p. 9. Problems Roma face in the area of health were briefly mentioned in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1). See also Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​7.​5) on the right to health.
 
129
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), pp. 6 and 7.
 
130
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 7. Fundación Secretariado Gitano (2009), p. 73. Parry et al. (2004), pp. 51 and 71.
 
131
Hollo (2006), pp. 3 and 27.
 
132
ENAR (2007), p. 9. Forced sterilisation of Roma women was briefly mentioned in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​3.​2) on intersectional discrimination, and in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​7.​5) on the right to health.
 
133
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 7. The importance of active participation of Roma in positive action schemes on this ethnic minority was cited in Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​2.​4) when addressing the challenges that limit positive action for Roma from reaching its full potential.
 
134
Council of Europe Strasbourg Declaration on Roma (20 October 2010), para. 35. Chapter 11 zooms in on inter-cultural mediation.
 
135
See Chap. 11 on inter-cultural mediation to enhance Roma inclusion. For an introduction to the redefinition of merit as a strong type of positive action, see Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​3).
 
136
The distinction between soft and strong types of positive action was explained in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​2). Group outreach was discussed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3.​3) on soft measures that do not provide preferential treatment.
 
137
ENAR and Anti-Racism Diversity Group (2008). Lack of awareness about this human rights instrument was highlighted in Chap. 6 when expanding on the different types of measures covered by the notion positive action (Sect. 6.​2.​2) and when stressing the need for awareness-raising (Sect. 6.​3.​2).
 
138
Resolution 1740 of the Parliamentary Assembly on the situation of Roma in Europe and relevant activities of the Council of Europe (22 June 2010), art. 119.2.
 
139
European Commission (2009), p. 58.
 
140
European Commission (2009), p. 58. See Chap. 9 (Sect. 9.​2.​4) on the importance of consulting with and actively including local communities in positive action schemes.
 
141
Id.
 
142
EctHR, Oršuš and Others v. Croatia, Judgment (16 March 2010, GC).
 
143
See Chap. 11 on inter-cultural mediation to enhance Roma inclusion.
 
Literatur
Bell M (2007) Positive action – introducing the concept. In: European Commission (ed) Putting equality into practice: what role for positive action? Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, pp 5–6
Cahn C (2004) Void at the Centre: (the lack of) European Union guidance on ethnic data. Roma Rights 2:30–37
Corsi M, Crepaldi C, Samek Lodovici M, Boccagni P, Vasilescu C (2010) Ethnic minority and Roma women in Europe: a case for gender equality? Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
De Schutter O (2007) Positive action. In: Schiek D, Waddington L, Bell M (eds) Cases, materials and text on national, supranational and international non-discrimination law. Hart Publishing, Oxford, pp 757–869
De Vos M (2007) Beyond formal equality - positive action under directives 2000/43/EC and 2000/78/EC. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
European Commission (2009) International perspectives on positive action measures - a comparative analysis in the European Union, Canada, the United States and South Africa. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
European Network Against Racism (2007) Understanding positive action: from theory to practice. Available via European Network Against Racism. cms.horus.be/files/99935/MediaArchive/pdf/Seminar%20Report_EN_final.pdf. Accessed 23 Jan 2019
European Roma Rights Centre (2007b) The impact of legislation and policies on school segregation of Romani children: a study of anti-discrimination law and government measures to eliminate segregation in education in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia. European Roma Rights Centre, Budapest
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2009) EU-MIDIS European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey - main results report. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2016) Second European Union minorities and discrimination survey: Roma – selected findings. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2018) Transition from education to employment of young Roma in nine EU Member States. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
Farkas L (2007) Segregation of Roma children in education – addressing structural discrimination through the race equality directive. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
Farkas L (2014) Report on discrimination of Roma children in education. European Commission, Brussels
Henrard K (2013) Minorities, identity, socio-economic participation and integration: about interrelations and synergies. In: Henrard K (ed) The interrelation between the right to identity of minorities and their socio-economic participation. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, pp 21–72CrossRef
Terenzani-Stanková M (2013) Affirmative action law could help Roma. Available via The Slovak Spectator. spectator.sme.sk/articles/view/49252/2/affirmative_action_law_could_help_roma.html. Accessed 23 Jan 2019
Van Caeneghem J (2013) Positive action for Roma in Belgium. In: Goodwin M, De Hert P (eds) European Roma integration efforts – a snapshot. Brussels University Press, Brussels, pp 227–249
Metadaten
Titel
Positive Action for Roma in Four Key Areas
verfasst von
Jozefien Van Caeneghem
Copyright-Jahr
2019
Buch
Legal Aspects of Ethnic Data Collection and Positive Action

Print ISBN: 978-3-030-23667-0

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-23668-7

Copyright-Jahr: 2019

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23668-7_10