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

2019 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

9. Positive Action for the Roma Minority in Europe

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 expands on the importance of positive action for Roma. The use of this human rights instrument is indispensable in order to achieve full and effective equality for members belonging to this ethnic minority. Measures can pursue remedial, cultural, societal, pedagogical, and/or economic aims. Emphasis is put on the diverse range of positive action measures that are needed to advance Roma inclusion in Europe. It is argued that the proportionality principle allows the implementation of both soft and strong measures for Roma. Furthermore, this chapter considers why, despite the clear benefits of this human rights instrument in the promotion of substantive equality for Roma, it has failed to reach its full potential in the EU so far. The five main challenges are identified and analysed. It concerns the lack of awareness-raising activities about positive action and the need for such measures, the absence of genuine political will to tackle Roma issues, the lack of (reliable) disaggregated data on Roma, the lack of active participation of local Roma communities in positive action schemes, and the inadequate, short-term, and often top-down funding of positive action for Roma.

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 European Framework on Positive Action
Nächstes Kapitel Positive Action for Roma in Four Key Areas
Fußnoten
1
De Schutter (2007), p. 793. References to structural discrimination can be found throughout Part II of the book, including in Chap. 6 (Sects. 6.​1.​4, 6.​1.​5, 6.​2.​1, 6.​2.​3, 6.​3.​4, 6.​4.​1 and 6.​5.​3), Chap. 7 (Sect. 7.​2.​4), Chap. 8 (Sects. 8.​1.​1, 8.​1.​2 and 8.​2.​3).
 
2
This was previously mentioned in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​4.​1) on the remedial aim, Chap. 7 (Sect. 7.​2.​4) on the inclusion of a general obligation for States to adopt positive action since 2009 within the framework of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and Chap. 8 on the mandatory nature of positive action under circumstances according to the ECSR and the ACFC (Sect. 8.​1.​2), and on non-gender based positive action measures within the EU framework (Sect. 8.​2.​3).
 
3
The group-focus was presented as a descriptive element of positive action in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​2.​1). See Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2) for some reflections on the situation of Roma in Europe.
 
4
CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), paras. 19, 21, 22, 28, 29, 39 and 41. Chapter 7 reviewed the UN framework on positive action.
 
5
See, for example: ACFC, First Opinion on Ireland (22 May 2003), paras. 34 to 37. ACFC, First Opinion on the Czech Republic (6 April 2001), para. 29. ACFC, First Opinion on Hungary (22 September 2000), para. 19. See Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​1) on the CoE framework on positive action.
 
6
See, for example: ECSR, European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) v. France, Decision (19 October 2009), paras. 84 and 85. ECSR, ERRC v. Bulgaria, Decision (3 December 2008), paras. 49 and 50. See Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​1) on the CoE framework on positive action.
 
7
See, for example: ECRI, Third Report on Poland (17 December 2004), par. 119. ECRI, Third Report on Spain (24 June 2005), para. 107. Chapter 8 (Sect. 8.​1) focused on the CoE framework on positive action.
 
8
Chapter 10 on positive action for Roma in four key areas and Chap. 11 on inter-cultural mediation for Roma.
 
9
The limits of the formal approach to equality were explored in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​4). See also Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​7) for an analysis of socio-economic rights.
 
10
See Chap. 7 (Sect. 7.​3.​2) and Chap. 8 (Sects. 8.​1.​3 and 8.​2.​2) for a discussion on the proportionality principle at UN, CoE and EU level.
 
11
Strong and soft types of positive action were considered in Chap. 6 (Sects. 6.​2.​2–6.​2.​4).
 
12
This was discussed in Chap. 1 on the particular vulnerability of Roma (Sect. 1.​2.​1) and on intersectional discrimination (Sect. 1.​2.​3). See also Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​7) for an introduction to socio-economic rights, with a specific focus on the right to education, to housing, to work and to health.
 
13
Boccadoro (2009), p. 30.
 
14
Van Caeneghem (2013), p. 227.
 
15
Id.
 
16
See, for example: EctHR, Oršuš and Others v. Croatia, Judgment (16 March 2010, GC), para. 157. EctHR, D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic, Judgment (13 November 2007), paras. 181 and 207. EctHR, Chapman v. the United Kingdom, Judgment (18 January 2001, GC), paras. 95 and 96. EctHR, Beard v. the United Kingdom, Judgment (18 January 2001, GC), paras. 106 and 107. The case law of the EctHR on Roma was previously considered in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​7) on socio-economic rights and in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​1.​1) on the EctHR’s case law on positive action.
 
17
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 (NRIS) (5 April 2011), p. 4. For further discussion on this, see Sect. 9.2.2 on the lack of political will to adopt positive action for Roma.
 
18
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 4. Boccadoro (2009), p. 31.
 
19
Commission Communication, Joint Report on the application of Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (‘Racial Equality Directive’) and of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (‘Employment Equality Directive’) (17 January 2014), p. 13. Boccadoro (2009), p. 30; Kostadinova (2006), p. 1. This was explained in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​4) on the limits of the formal approach to equality. See also Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​3) where the two main topics of the book were introduced.
 
20
European Network of Equality Bodies (Equinet) (2010), pp. 6 and 7; Kostadinova (2006), p. 2.
 
21
Kostadinova (2006, p. 3) cites a Bulgarian case of 2005, where the prosecutor referred to the “psychology of this population (i.e. the Roma)” in order to explain why a person was not able to restrain himself in a case involving a tragic work accident that led to the death of a Roma man.
 
22
Hollo (2006), pp. 6 and 7; Kostadinova (2006), pp. 2 and 3. Compare this with the reasons why Roma often do not report discrimination, as cited in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​2.​3).
 
23
Kostadinova (2006), p. 2.
 
24
Id.
 
25
Ahmed (2011), pp. 183 and 184. Assimilation was discussed in Chap. 2 when introducing the notions social inclusion, diversity and pluralism (Sect. 2.​3.​3) and minority rights protection (Sect. 2.​4).
 
26
Equinet (2010), p. 7. Chapter 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​4) expanded on the distinction between formal and substantive equality.
 
27
Equinet (2010), pp. 21 and 23; Boccadoro (2009), p. 30; Kostadinova (2006), p. 3.
 
28
Hollo (2006), pp. 27 and 41.
 
29
Equinet (2010), p. 22; Hollo (2006), pp. 7 and 41.
 
30
CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), paras. 19, 21, 22, 28, 29, 39 and 41.
 
31
See, for example: ECSR, ERRC v. France, Decision (19 October 2009), paras. 84 and 85. ECSR, ERRC v. Bulgaria, Decision (3 December 2008), paras. 49 and 50.
 
32
See, for example: ACFC, First Opinion on Ireland (22 May 2003), paras. 34 to 37. ACFC, First Opinion on the Czech Republic (6 April 2001), para. 29. ACFC, First Opinion on Hungary (22 September 2000), para. 19.
 
33
Positive action for Roma in four key areas will be discussed in Chap. 10.
 
34
See Chap. 10 on positive action in four key areas.
 
35
Other successful policy conditions to promote Roma inclusion mentioned comprise multi-sector approach to social inclusion to overcome fragmentation, effective coordination of policy implementation between different levels—central, regional and local—of governments, sustainable long-term social inclusion policies that go beyond separate projects, combining targeting and mainstreaming to approach multi-dimensional Roma inclusion concerns, adequate participation of Roma in public affairs, and the collection of accurate data about Romani communities to develop, implement, assess and transfer effective evidence-based policies. Guy et al. (2010), pp. 4 and 5; Hollo (2006, p. 33) mentions mainstreaming of Roma needs in general policymaking and comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation in addition to positive action measures as parts of national action strategies for Roma.
 
36
See Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​4) for an overview of the five main justifications and aims of positive action.
 
37
The remedial aim of positive action was analysed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​4.​1).
 
38
See Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​4.​1) on the remedial aim, Chap. 7 (Sect. 7.​3.​1) on the pursuit of remedial and cultural goals at UN level, and Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​2) on the CJEU’s case law on gender-based positive action in employment.
 
39
Chapter 1 (Sects. 1.​2.​1 and 1.​2.​2) included reflections on the situation of Roma in Europe today and from a historical point of view.
 
40
See Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1) on the situation of Roma in Europe today.
 
41
ACFC, First Opinion on the Czech Republic (6 April 2001), para. 29; ACFC, First Opinion on Hungary (22 September 2000), para. 18; Commission Communication, Joint Report on the application of Racial Equality Directive and of Employment Equality Directive (17 January 2014), pp. 9 and 13; Equinet (2010), pp. 22 and 23; International Centre for Migration Policy Development (ICMPD) (2008), para. 8; Hollo (2006), pp. 7 and 10. Positive action for Roma in these four key areas will be considered in Chap. 10.
 
42
See, for example: ACFC, First Opinion on Ireland (22 May 2003), paras. 34 to 37; ACFC, First Opinion on the Czech Republic (6 April 2001), para. 29; ACFC, First Opinion on Hungary (22 September 2000), paras. 18 and 19; Commission Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and the Council of on the European Year of Equal Opportunities for All 2007 – Towards a Just Society (1 June 2005), pp. 4 and 5; Roma Education Fund (2009), p. 131; Hollo (2006), pp. 26–29, 40, 60 and 61; Kostadinova (2006), p. 3.
 
43
Hollo (2006), pp. 26–29, 40, 60 and 61. The key role of cultural identity in the promotion of Roma inclusion was emphasised in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​4).
 
44
Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (1 February 1995) (FCNM), art 5.2; Hollo (2006), p. 27; Recommendation 1557 of the Parliamentary Assembly on the Legal Situation of the Roma in Europe (25 April 2002), para. 9. For more on cultural identity, see Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​4). Assimilation was considered in Chap. 2 on the notions social inclusion, diversity and pluralism (Sect. 2.​3) and on minority rights protection (Sect. 2.​4).
 
45
The deracialisation argument was discussed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​4.​1).
 
46
Fredman (2002), pp. 10–16.
 
47
Sabbagh (2013), pp. 32 and 33.
 
48
Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 122 and 124.
 
49
Id. at p. 123.
 
50
See Chap. 11 (Sect. 11.​3) on the proactive and positive role of inter-cultural mediators in the facilitation of Roma inclusion.
 
51
Babouri (2014), p. 3; Koldinská (2011), pp. 253 and 254; Fredman (2009), p. 84; Hollo (2006), p. 10; Szyszczak (2006).
 
52
Intersectionality was defined and discussed in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​3).
 
53
Intersectional discrimination within the Roma context was introduced in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​3).
 
54
Babouri (2014), p. 3; Koldinská (2011), pp. 253 and 254; Fredman (2009), p. 84; European Network Against Racism (ENAR) (2008), p. 3; Hollo (2006), p. 10. For more on intersectional discrimination, see Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​3.​2) on the situation of Roma women and Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​1.​3) on the insufficient regard to the gender dimension in data collection efforts on Roma. The importance of adopting a gender approach to Roma mediation will be stressed in Chap. 11 (Sect. 11.​8).
 
55
ACFC, First Opinion on Hungary (22 September 2000), para. 19.
 
56
Chapter 6 (Sect. 6.​4.​2) focused on the cultural aim of positive action.
 
57
Roma Education Fund (2009), p. 131. Strict quotas were discussed among the strong types of positive action in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4.​2).
 
58
See Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​4.​2) on enhancing culture through the promotion of diversity.
 
59
Sudetic and Jovanovic (2013).
 
60
The ERRC published several reports on the political participation of Roma. See, for example: ERRC (2013); ERRC (2003), pp. 1–169. The European Roma Information Office (ERIO) also released several fact sheets on the issue. See, for instance: ERIO (2007, 2016). See also: Sudetic and Jovanovic (2013); ERIO (2010), p. 9; Guy et al. (2010), p. 5; Hollo (2006), p. 21. The importance of effective participation of minorities in public life was underlined in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​4.​4) on minority rights protection.
 
61
Hollo (2006), pp. 35 and 36.
 
62
See, for example: CESCR Committee, Concluding Observations on Hungary (16 January 2008), para. 34; CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), para. 41.
 
63
Sudetic and Jovanovic (2013).
 
64
For instance, Albania lowered the threshold while Germany and the Polish Lower Chamber completely remove it. In countries such as Croatia, Kosovo, and Romania one or more seats are reserved for Roma in Parliament. The ACFC welcomes such measures. See, for example: ACFC First Opinion on Croatia (6 April 2001), paras. 161 to 163; ACFC, First Opinion on Germany (1 March 2002), para. 63; ACFC, First Opinion on Poland (27 November 2003), para. 86; Hollo (2006), p. 36.
 
65
Hollo (2006), pp. 23 and 36.
 
66
Hollo (2006), p. 5. Diversity among Roma was addressed in Chap. 1 (Sects. 1.​1.​1 and 1.​1.​2).
 
67
Guy et al. (2010), p. 5. The specific situation and vulnerability of sub-groups was emphasised in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​3.​2) when discussing the situation of Roma women.
 
68
The societal aim of positive action was considered in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​4.​3).
 
69
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 3. While not specifically about Roma, see also: Council Directive 2000/43/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (29 June 2000) (RED), recital 9.
 
70
Roma Education Fund (2009), p. 131. See Sect. 9.1.2.2 on the cultural aim of positive action.
 
71
Chapter 6 (Sect. 6.​4.​4) focused on the pedagogical aim of positive action.
 
72
Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 102, 113, 114 and 123.
 
73
Id.
 
74
Roma sometimes hide their Roma identity to avoid discrimination and stigmatisation. Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 102, 113, 114 and 122.
 
75
Roma Education Fund (2009), p. 114. For more on this, see Chap. 11 on inter-cultural mediation for Roma.
 
76
Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 114 and 115. The potential side effects of positive action were addressed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​5).
 
77
The economic aim of positive action was discussed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​4.​5).
 
78
Roma Education Fund (2009), p. 131.
 
79
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), pp. 2–4; Commission Communication, Towards social and economic integration of the Roma in Europe (7 April 2010); European Network on Social Inclusion and Roma under the Structural Funds (2009). See also: RED, recital 9.
 
80
Ciaian et al. (2018).
 
81
Id. at p. 5.
 
82
The study focused on alternative Roma integration policies in education and employment in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and Romania. Ciaian et al. (2018).
 
83
For an overview of the diverse types of measures covered by the notion positive action, see Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​2).
 
84
This was stressed in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​1.1) when analysing the European Court of Human Rights’ case law on positive action. Chapter 6 considered soft measures (Sect. 6.​2.​3) and strong measures (Sect. 6.​2.​4).
 
85
This was underlined in Chap. 6 on the notion positive action (Sect. 6.​1), the broad spectrum of measures falling under the positive action umbrella (Sect. 6.​2.​2), and the different aims of positive action (Sect. 6.​4); in Chap. 7 (Sect. 7.​3.​2) on the case-by-case consideration of the proportionality requirement by UN bodies; in Chap. 8 when analysing the CJEU’s proportionality principle (Sect. 8.​2.​2.​5), and when discussing the opportunities that future case law on positive action on other discrimination grounds than gender creates (Sect. 8.​2.​4).
 
86
European Commission (2009), p. 23. Proportionality was identified as a normative element of positive action in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​2.​2). The opportunities created by the CJEU’s future case law on positive action based on other discrimination grounds than gender were considered in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​4).
 
87
For more on the proportionality principle, see Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​2.​2) on proportionality as a key element of positive action, Chap. 7 (Sect. 7.​4) on the role of proportionality in the UN framework on positive action, and Chap. 8 on the apparent acceptability of strong measures in certain contexts within the CoE framework (Sect. 8.​1.​4), and on impact of the unclear proportionality principle on positive action in the EU framework (Sect. 8.​2.​2.​5).
 
88
European Commission (2009), pp. 40 and 56; ICMPD (2008), paras. 12 to 14.
 
89
In the Netherlands, for instance, “(a) website and a web-based forum were set up to facilitate exchange of experience and has also served as a platform for the organisation of public events and campaigns to enhance the visibility of LGBT people in employment”. European Commission (2009), pp. 40 and 58.
 
90
Soft types of positive action were discussed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3).
 
91
For an over view of strong types of positive action, see Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​4).
 
92
This was explained in Chap. 7 (Sect. 7.​4.​2) on positive action in the UN framework.
 
93
CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), para. 41; Henrard (2007), p. 47.
 
94
CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), paras. 28 and 29.
 
95
See Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​1.​4) on the acceptability of strong positive action measures in certain contexts.
 
96
ACFC, Second Opinion on Croatia (1 October 2004), paras. 161 to 163.
 
97
The CJEU’s case law on positive action was analysed in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​2).
 
98
The opportunities that future case law on positive action on other discrimination grounds than gender creates, were discussed in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​4).
 
99
Kostadinova (2006), p. 5; Hollo (2006), pp. 29 and 63. This was mentioned previously in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​4).
 
100
Hollo (2006), pp. 29 and 63.
 
101
Proportionality at EU level was considered in Chap. 8 when analysing the CJEU’s case law on gender-based positive action (Sect. 8.​2.​2.​5) and discussing future case law on positive action based on other discrimination grounds (Sect. 8.​2.​4).
 
102
These include Bulgaria (the CoE estimates approximately 750,000 or 9.94% of the total population; the 2011 official census counted 325,343 or 4.9% of the total population), Slovakia (CoE estimates approximately 490,000 or 9.02% of the total population; the NRIS estimates approximately 440,000), Romania (CoE estimates approximately 1,850,0000 or 8.63% of the population; Romanian government estimates approximately 730,000 to 970,000) and Hungary (CoE estimates approximately 750,000 or 7.49% of the total population). European Commission (2014b, c, d, e).
 
103
For example, the Roma community in Belgium is estimated to stand at approximately 30,000 or 0.28% of the total population. European Commission (2014a).
 
104
See, for example: Caruso (2003), p. 332. The importance of cultural identity was considered in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​4). Minority rights protection was analysed in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​4).
 
105
Kostadinova (2006), p. 5. The importance of taking a bottom-up approach to positive action for Roma will be stressed in Chap. 10 (Sect. 10.​1).
 
106
See Chap. 10 (Sect. 10.​1) on the need to adopt a sectorial bottom-up approach to positive action in order to implement tailored and proportionate measures.
 
107
The CJEU’s lack of case law on non-gender based positive action schemes was mentioned in Chap. 8 (Sects. 8.​2.​3 and 8.​2.​4).
 
108
The analysis of the CJEU’s case law can be found in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​2).
 
109
Hollo (2006), p. 29. For an overview of different measures for Roma in four key areas of socio-economic life, see Chap. 10.
 
110
The optional nature of art. 5 RED was mentioned in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​3). This will be discussed further in Sect. 9.2.2 on the lack of political will to adopt positive action for Roma.
 
111
For the UN framework, see Chap. 7 on the context dependency of the optional or mandatory nature of positive action (Sect. 7.​2), the case-by-case consideration of the proportionality requirement (Sect. 7.​3.​2), and the prohibition of the maintenance of permanent, separate standards (Sect. 7.​4.​2). For the CoE framework, see Chap. 8 on the mandatory nature of positive action under certain circumstances according to the ECSR and the ACFC (Sect. 8.​1.​2), on proportionality as a limit to positive action in Europe (Sect. 8.​1.​3), and on the apparent acceptability of strong positive action measures in certain contexts (Sect. 8.​1.​4).
 
112
It concerns the following instruments: Revised European Social Charter (3 May 1996). FCNM. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (18 December 1979). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (16 December 1966). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (16 December 1966). International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (21 December 1965).
 
113
Hollo (2006), p. 42. This will be discussed further in Sect. 9.2.1 on lack of awareness as the first challenge to effective positive action for Roma.
 
114
This was previously mentioned in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​3.​2) when introducing positive action as one of the two main topics of this book. Section 9.1 explained that a diverse range of positive action measures are needed to advance Roma inclusion in Europe.
 
115
See Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​8.​1) on the importance of awareness-raising among Roma and non-Roma communities when collecting ethnic data on Roma.
 
116
Awareness-raising was stressed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​2) on positive action. It will be picked up again when concluding this book in Chap. 12 (Sect. 12.​2.​1).
 
117
This was explained in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​5.​2) on the potential impact of perceptions by (members of) non-targeted groups on positive action.
 
118
See, for example, for the various perceptions of positive action for Roma in education in Romania: Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 10 and 45–51.
 
119
The study cites Hungary and Slovakia. European Commission (2009), p. 41.
 
120
Hollo (2006, pp. 6 and 10) also identifies the unavailability of data to establish indirect discrimination, the absence of a duty to promote equality, challenges in accessing the legal system, and limited remit of specialised bodies as problematic. Equinet (2010), p. 25. Roma Education Fund (2009), p. 46.
 
121
Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 46–49 and 131. Stereotyping was discussed in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1), which reflected on the present-day situation of Roma in Europe.
 
122
Id. at pp. 49 and 51.
 
123
See, for example: ACFC, First Opinion on Azerbaijan (22 May 2003), para. 28; ACFC, First Opinion on Ukraine (1 March 2002), para. 27.
 
124
See, for example: ECRI, Third Report on Slovenia (30 June 2006), para. 34; ECRI, Third Report on the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYRM) (25 June 2004), paras. 147, 148 and 153; ECRI, Third Report on Spain (24 June 2005), para. 107; ECRI, Third Report on Poland (17 December 2004), para. 119.
 
125
Commission Staff Working Document, Accompanying the document report on the implementation of the EU framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (2 April 2014).
 
126
See Chap. 6 on the need for awareness-raising among and active participation of all relevant stakeholders in positive action schemes (Sect. 6.​3.​2) and on the importance to manage the perceptions of (members) of non-targeted groups (Sect. 6.​5.​2).
 
127
See, for example: ECRI, Third Report on Slovenia (30 June 2006), para. 34; ECRI, Third Report on the FYRM (25 June 2004), paras. 147, 148 and 153; ECRI, Third Report on Poland (17 December 2004), para. 119; ECRI, Third Report on Spain (24 June 2005), para. 107; Corsi et al. (2010), p. 137; Equinet (2010), p. 25; Roma Education Fund (2009), p. 132; European Commission (2009), p. 41; Hollo (2006), pp. 37, 41 and 42.
 
128
Hollo (2006), p. 24. The need for ethnically disaggregated data on Roma will be addressed in Sect. 9.2.3.1. This need was previously repeatedly stressed, including in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​3) when introducing the two topics of this book. For more on the link between ethnic data collection and positive action, see Chap. 4 (Sect. 4.​1.​4) and Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​4).
 
129
See, for example: ECRI, Third Report on the FYRM (25 June 2004), paras. 147, 148 and 153; ENAR and UKREN (2009), p. 6; Hollo (2006), p. 42; Cahn (2005). The potential side effects on beneficiaries of positive action and the perceptions of others were considered in Chap. 6 (Sects. 6.​5.​1 and 6.​5.​2).
 
130
ECRI, Third Report on the FYRM (25 June 2004), paras. 147, 148 and 153.
 
131
Hollo (2006), pp. 42 and 49.
 
132
Anti-Gypsyism was addressed in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1) on the particular vulnerability of Roma in Europe today.
 
133
Hollo (2006), p. 39.
 
134
ECRI, Third Report on Poland (17 December 2004), para. 119. European Commission (2009), pp. 42, 63 and 65. It was explained in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​5.​2) that negative perceptions by (members of) non-targeted groups may limit the effectiveness of positive action schemes. The role of the media in fuelling negative stereotypes of Roma was stressed in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1).
 
135
ECRI, Third Report on Poland (17 December 2004), para. 119.
 
136
CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), para. 37.
 
137
Some of the trainers are of Roma origin. Such training also takes place on an ad hoc basis. Equinet (2014), p. 41.
 
138
Fundación Secretariado Gitano (2011), pp. 98 and 99.
 
139
ERIO (2010), p. 4. Sections 9.1.1 and 9.1.2 expanded on the benefits and possible aims of positive action for Roma.
 
140
Hollo (2006), p. 49.
 
141
CERD Committee, General Recommendation No. 27: Discrimination against Roma (16 August 2000), para. 44. Securing minority rights through effective participation in public life was discussed in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​4.​4) when introducing minority rights protection.
 
142
ERIO (2010), p. 4.
 
143
Guy et al. (2010), p. 5; ICMPD (2008), para. 41.
 
144
Guy et al. (2010), p. 50.
 
145
See Sect. 9.1.1 on the benefits and Sect. 9.1.2 on the aims of positive action for Roma.
 
146
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. 7 and 14. The particular vulnerability of Roma in Europe was reviewed in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1). Socio-economic rights were discussed in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​7).
 
147
Commission Communication, National Roma Integration Strategies: a first step in the implementation of the EU Framework (21 May 2012), p. 16.
 
148
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 4. This will be discussed further on in this section.
 
149
See Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​8.​3) on the need for genuine political will when collecting ethnic data on Roma.
 
150
For this reason, the author identifies genuine political will as a key element of this human rights tool and instrument. This will be discussed further in Chap. 12 (Sect. 12.​2.​3).
 
151
RED, art. 5. See Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​3) on the permissibility of non-gender based positive action since 2000.
 
152
Dediu (2007), pp. 124–125. See Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​3) where political will was identified as a prerequisite for effective positive action. See also Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​4) on the impact of the optional nature of positive action in the EU framework.
 
153
Kostadinova (2006), p. 2.
 
154
Following Member States reportedly have positive action in place for Roma: Bulgaria (education, healthcare, housing and employment), the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (Republic of North Macedonia since February 2019; employment and goods and services for Roma; education, employment and health for Travellers), Ireland, Lithuania (integration), Romania (attendance and access to higher education), Slovenia (education and political representation) and Spain (development plan). Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 4; European Commission (2009), p. 40; European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2007), pp. 67, 68 and 156; European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (2006), p. 60; This was briefly mentioned in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​3.​2) when introducing positive action as one of the main topics of this book.
 
155
ECRI, Fifth Report on Bulgaria (19 June 2014), para. 78.
 
156
ECRI, Third Report on Slovenia (30 June 2006), para. 34. This example once again confirms the importance of awareness-raising on positive action, which was stressed in Sect. 9.2.1.
 
157
European Commission (2009), p. 43.
 
158
See, similarly, for the problems encountered with the Roma policies adopted by countries such as Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia during the access programme to the European Union: Kostadinova (2006), pp. 6 and 7.
 
159
The twelve participating States included Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (renamed Republic of North Macedonia in February 2019), Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Spain.
 
160
Hollo (2006), p. 18. See Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​1.​1) on international and European calls for data on Roma.
 
161
Kostadinova (2006), p. 6.
 
162
Nicolae (2005), p. 4. As explained in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​1.​2), the Decade of Roma Inclusion also failed to deliver in terms of addressing data gaps on Roma.
 
163
According to Jovanovic (2015), this was a result of accession of Eastern European countries to the EU, which took away their motivation to demonstrate they fulfilled the EU accession criteria on human rights and minority rights as well as the financial crisis that put strains on the interest of politicians to spent large amounts of money on the deeply marginalised and stigmatised Roma out of fear for political backlash.
 
164
See Chap. 10 on positive action for Roma in four key areas for some of the good practices within the framework of the NRIS. Commission Communication, Report on the evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 (4 December 2018); Commission Staff Working Document, Evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 (4 December 2018).
 
165
ENAR (2013), p. 6. As seen in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​1.​2), progress reports on the EU Framework for NRIS also cite the absence of data, including benchmark data and specific targets, as a challenge.
 
166
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 4. This was briefly mentioned already in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​3.​2) when introducing the topic positive action.
 
167
Terenzani-Stanková (2013).
 
168
Id.
 
169
It was explained in Sect. 9.2.1 that lack of awareness about positive action prevents this human rights instrument from reaching its full potential in the context of Roma inclusion. Anti-Gypsyism and the role of the media was discussed in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​1) on the present-day situation of Roma in Europe.
 
170
See, for example: ECRI, Fifth Report on the Czech Republic (16 June 2015), para. 79; ECRI, Fifth Report on Slovakia (19 June 2014), paras. 44, 46 and 47; Hollo (2006), pp. 25 and 43.
 
171
The Council of the EU recommends, among others, the accompanying of policies and measures to combat segregation by appropriate training and information programmes, awareness-raising on the diverse nature of societies, the problems Roma face and the benefits of Roma integration, and active involvement of all actors including the Roma communities themselves to combat discrimination. See: Council Recommendation on effective Roma integration measures in the Member States (9 December 2013), arts. 2.2, 2.4 and 2.5; Commission Communication, Report on the implementation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (2 April 2014), pp. 3 and 13.
 
172
Commission Communication, Report on the implementation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (2 April 2014), p. 13.
 
173
Kostadinova (2006), p. 1.
 
174
See Chap. 8 (Sects. 8.​2.​3 and 8.​2.​4) on positive action on other discrimination grounds than gender within the EU framework.
 
175
De Schutter (2010), p. 27; De Schutter (2008), pp. 238 and 239.
 
176
Kostadinova (2006), p. 3.
 
177
Commission Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and the Council of on the European Year of Equal Opportunities for All 2007 – Towards a Just Society (1 June 2005), pp. 4 and 5.
 
178
For a discussion of positive action in the RED, see Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​3).
 
179
Kostadinova (2006), p. 8. Art. 5 RED currently reads: “With a view to ensuring full equality in practice, the principle of equal treatment shall not prevent any Member State from maintaining or adopting specific measures to prevent or compensate for disadvantages linked to racial or ethnic origin.” For more on this, see Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​3).
 
180
CFEU, art. 23. This was explained in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​1) when reviewing the main EU instruments dealing with gender equality.
 
181
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (7 December 2000) (CFEU). In addition to sex, the discrimination grounds covered are race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age and sexual orientation. Discrimination based on nationality is also prohibited. See CFEU, art. 21. The notions race and ethnicity, racial and ethnic origin and proxies for ethnicity were discussed throughout the book, including in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​2), Chap. 3 (Sect. 3.​2), Chap. 4 (Sects. 4.​4 and 4.​5.​4), and Chap. 5 (Sects. 5.​3 and 5.​4.​2).
 
182
Ramos Martín (2013), pp. 20 and 29.
 
183
Art. 19.1 TFEU stipulates that “the Council, acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure and after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, may take appropriate action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation”. Treaty establishing the European Community (Nice Consolidated version) (21 February 2001), former art. 13.1. Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (Consolidated version). RED, art. 3. Kostadinova (2006), pp. 2 and 3. This article was analysed in Chap. 8 (Sects. 8.​2.​1 and 8.​2.​3) on the EU framework on positive action. It will be explored further in Chap. 10 on positive action for Roma in four key areas. As explained in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​3.​4) when delineating positive action from equality mainstreaming, some Member States have imposed such a positive duty to promote equality on their public authorities, even though the RED currently does not mention this.
 
184
Kostadinova (2006), pp. 1, 2, 5 and 8. The international framework on positive action was analysed in Chap. 7. For an introduction on minority rights protection, including on special measures to achieve full and effective equality for minorities, see Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​4.​2).
 
185
Directive 2002/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 76/207/EEC on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions (23 September 2002), art. 1. This instrument was briefly discussed in Chap. 8 (Sect. 8.​2.​1) when reviewing the main EU instruments dealing with gender equality in employment.
 
186
This requires monitoring of the situation of Roma and impact assessments of relevant legislation and policies. Kostadinova (2006), pp. 3 and 4. The notion equality mainstreaming and how it differs from positive action was addressed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​3.​4).
 
187
Chopin et al. (2013), p. 19.
 
188
Hollo (2006), pp. 6 and 7.
 
189
ECRI states that such an obligation should ideally also be imposed on the private sector. ECRI, General Policy Recommendation No. 7: National legislation to combat racism and racial discrimination (13 December 2002), paras. 8 and 9 and Explanatory Memorandum para. 27. For more on equality impact assessments, see Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​3.​5).
 
190
Hollo (2006), pp. 47 and 48.
 
191
Hollo (2006), p. 31. The absence of reliable disaggregated data on Roma will be addressed in Sect. 9.2.3 and lack of consultation and participation of Roma in Sect. 9.2.4.
 
192
The European Commission identifies both approaches as strong policy tools to actively promote equal opportunities in the EU. Commission Communication, Non-discrimination and equal opportunities: A renewed commitment (2 July 2008), pp. 6 and 8. See also: Council Conclusions on an EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 (19 May 2011), para. 20; Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), pp. 3 and 4; Guy et al. (2010), p. 10; Sobotka (2007), p. 108.
 
193
Guy et al. (2010), pp. 4 and 20; Hollo (2006), pp. 33 and 44; Kostadinova (2006), pp. 3 and 8. The added value of combining mainstream and targeted approaches was previously highlighted in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​3.​4) on equality mainstreaming and how it differs from positive action.
 
194
ENAR (2008), pp. 3 and 4.
 
195
European Commission (2009), pp. 30, 31 and 40.
 
196
The distinction between anonymous, personal and sensitive data was explained in Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.​6.​2). See also Chap. 3 (Sects. 3.​3–3.​5) on the general and special data protection rules at CoE and EU level.
 
197
This was discussed in Chap. 4 (Sect. 4.​3) on the four complementary data sources of ethnic data collection and in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​2) on the multifarious data sources on Roma.
 
198
See, for example: ACFC, First Opinion on Ireland (22 May 2003), para. 36; ACFC, First Opinion on Sweden (20 February 2003), para. 9; ACFC, First Opinion on Germany (1 March 2002), para. 23; Kostadinova (2006), p. 5.
 
199
See, for example: CESCR Committee, Concluding Observations on Ukraine (13 June 2014), para. 8. CESCR Committee, Concluding Observations on Hungary (16 January 2008), para. 34.
 
200
See, for example: ACFC, First Opinion on Ireland (22 May 2003), para. 36. ACFC, First Opinion on Germany (1 March 2002), par. 24.
 
201
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 13.
 
202
Hollo (2006), p. 35; Kostadinova (2006), pp. 4 and 8. The link between ethnic data and positive action was previously highlighted in Chap. 4 (Sect. 4.​1.​4) on the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policies as one of the five main benefits of ethnic data collection, and in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​4) on ethnically disaggregated data as a prerequisite of positive action.
 
203
European Commission (2009), pp. 40 and 41; Hollo (2006), p. 10. The lack of ethnic data on Roma in Europe was stressed in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​3) when introducing ethnic data collection as one of the two main topics of the book, Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​1) on the large data gaps on Roma communities in Europe, and Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​4) on the need for ethnically disaggregated data to implement certain types of positive action.
 
204
See, for example: ACFC, First Opinion on the Czech Republic (6 April 2001), para. 28; ACFC, First Opinion on Slovakia (22 September 2000), para. 21; The limitations of official data on Roma were addressed in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​2.​1).
 
205
Id.
 
206
The importance of adopting a gender approach to tackle intersectional discrimination faced by Roma women was underlined in Sect. 9.1.2.1. Intersectional discrimination was also mentioned in Chap. 1 (Sect. 1.​2.​3.​2) on the situation of Roma women, and Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​1.​4) when explaining that greater attention should be given to the gender dimension when collecting data on Roma communities.
 
207
The second priority of the action plan concerns the demonstration of innovative models for inclusive policies for the most vulnerable. Thematic Action Plan of the Committee of Ministers for the Inclusion of Roma and Travellers (2016–2019) (2 March 2016). While not specifically about the Roma, see, for example: ACFC, Second Opinion on Denmark (9 December 2004), para. 62; ACFC, First Opinion on Germany (1 March 2002), para. 23.
 
208
Hollo (2006), p. 35. The link between ethnic data and positive action was explored in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​4).
 
209
The maintenance of a more structured data base on beneficiaries should respect the applicable personal data protection rules. Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 52–54, 63, 135 and 136.
 
210
Moreover, census data are not reliable. The study states that “(t)here are two other possible explanations for the rise in numbers: (a) simply a result of more Roma who were already enrolled now enrolling using the quota system; and (b) the result of a dramatic rise in the number of Roma graduating from primary education. While there is no conclusive empirical evidence, we believe is extremely unlikely that either explanation is true or of more significance than that the affirmative action programme contributed to the rise in numbers”. Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 131 and 132.
 
211
Other reasons are the failure of projects to tackle discrimination and foster systemic change, poor co-ordination and low levels of involvement of Roma communities. Hollo (2006), p. 4.
 
212
Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 135 and 136. Hollo (2006), p. 35.
 
213
Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 132 and 133.
 
214
Id.
 
215
The temporary nature of positive action was discussed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​1.​2.​3) when analysing the notion positive action and in Chap. 7 (Sect. 7.​3.​3) on the UN framework on positive action.
 
216
ENAR (2007), p. 9.
 
217
ACFC, First Opinion on Ireland (22 May 2003), para. 37. The use of soft targets was mentioned as a soft type of positive action, more specifically as a facially biased diversity policy, in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​2.​3.​4).
 
218
Hollo (2006, p. 35) talks about the adequate monitoring and evaluation of National Action Strategies for Roma, but this applies in extension to positive action.
 
219
The diversity within these communities in terms of gender and age and so on must be taken into consideration. This will be discussed further in Sect. 9.2.4 on the need for consultation and participation of local communities in positive action schemes. Hollo (2006), p. 35.
 
220
It was explained in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​4.​2) that the data needs depend on the type of positive action to be implemented.
 
221
Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 58 and 85. For more on Roma reluctance to self-identify, see Chap. 5 (Sects. 5.​1.​3 and 5.​3.​2) on challenges to collecting ethnic data on Roma in Europe.
 
222
Roma Education Fund (2009), p. 57. Inter-cultural mediation will be defined and discussed in Chap. 11.
 
223
Abuse occurred, for instance, with regard to a Roma quota system put in place in Macedonian universities. Kostadinova (2006), pp. 3 and 4. Over-reporting of ethnicity to access benefits flowing from positive action was addressed generally in Chap. 4 (Sect. 4.​5.​2.​2) and specifically in relation to Roma in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​4.​4).
 
224
Kostadinova (2006), p. 4. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was officially renamed the Republic of North Macedonia in February 2019.
 
225
See Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​4.​4) for a consideration of other members of the group as the fourth ethnical identification approach for Roma. See also: Kostadinova (2006), p. 4.
 
226
Eligibility is limited based on citizenship. For more information, see the webpage of the scholarship on the website of the Central European University: https://​www.​ceu.​edu/​admissions/​funding-fees/​ref (Accessed 12 May 2019). This scholarship was discussed in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​4.​4) when reviewing identification by other Roma as one of the identification approaches that can be used in the Roma context.
 
227
The Roma candidates do not have to be a candidate of such an organisation. Roma Education Fund (2009), pp. 32 and 56.
 
228
Roma Education Fund (2009), p. 53.
 
229
Hollo (2006), p. 34.
 
230
For more on proportionality, see Chap. 6 on proportionality as a key element of positive action (Sect. 6.​1.​2.​2), and the distinction between soft and strong types of positive action measures (Sects. 6.​2.​2–6.​2.​4); Chap. 7 on case-by-case consideration of the proportionality principle by UN bodies (Sect. 7.​3.​2) and the impact of the goals pursues and the needs in a specific context to determine the intensity of the positive action measures (Sect. 7.​4.​2); Chap. 8 on proportionality as a limit to positive action in Europe (Sect. 8.​1.​3), the acceptability of strong positive action measures in certain contexts (Sect. 8.​1.​4), the role of proportionality in the CJEU case law on gender-based positive action in employment (Sect. 8.​2.​2.​5), and opportunities created by the proportionality principle for future case law on positive action based on other discrimination grounds (Sect. 8.​2.​4); and Chap. 10 on a sectorial bottom-up approach for tailored and proportionate positive action measures (Sect. 10.​1).
 
231
The importance of active participation of Roma, non-Roma and local authorities in ethnic data collection on Roma was stressed in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​8.​2). See also Chap. 3 (Sect. 3.​7.​5) on the importance of active participation when processing sensitive data.
 
232
Equinet (2010), p. 7; Hollo (2006), pp. 5, 34 and 35. The importance of active participation in the framework of positive action was previously stressed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​2). It will be discussed further in Chap. 10 (Sect. 10.​1), in Chap. 11 (Sects. 11.​5 and 11.​8), and in Chap. 12 (Sect. 12.​2.​2).
 
233
Kostadinova (2006), pp. 3 and 4. The risk of over- and under-inclusiveness of positive action was addressed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​5.​1.​3).
 
234
Hollo (2006, pp. 13, 21, 22 and 35) talks more broadly about Roma policymaking, which also covers the adoption of positive action measures.
 
235
Kostadinova (2006), pp. 4 and 8.
 
236
The argument in favour of a sectorial bottom-up approach to positive action can be found in Chap. 10 (Sect. 10.​1). See also Chap. 11 on inter-cultural mediation for Roma.
 
237
Hollo (2006), p. 5.
 
238
Kóczé (2014), p. 1.
 
239
Other publications confirm that Romani NGOs can play a significant role in the promotion and in the management of positive action for Roma. See, for example: Guy et al. (2010), p. 5. ICMPD (2008), para. 41.
 
240
D’Agostino (2014), p. 2.
 
241
Id. at p. 3.
 
242
Id.
 
243
Currently, they face strong incentives to focus on the national and international level rather than on the local level. Community-based organisations and civil society organizations are non-state, non-business actors implementing Roma-targeted interventions at the local level. NGOs are too, but they are often donors and therefore not considered as part of the civil society community according to Kóczé (2014, p. 6).
 
244
Sobotka and Vermeersch (2012), pp. 819 and 820.
 
245
Kostadinova (2006), p. 3. Such controversy was discussed in Sect. 9.2.1 on lack of awareness about positive action and its relevance for Roma as one of the factors limiting positive action for this ethnic minority from reaching its full potential. On a more general level, perceptions by (members of) non-targeted groups were addressed in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​5.​2).
 
246
Hollo (2006), p. 8. This was underlined in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​3) on the need for funding of positive action.
 
247
See, for example: ECRI, Fifth Report on Bulgaria (19 June 2014), paras. 78 and 79. ECRI, Third Report on Poland (17 December 2004), para. 119.
 
248
European Commission (2009), p. 41.
 
249
Equinet (2010), p. 22.
 
250
The report mentions cuts of 85 per cent. Pavee Point Traveller and Roma Centre (2013), pp. 1, 2, 7, 25, 38 and 41.
 
251
D’Agostino (2014), p. 3.
 
252
Jovanovic (2014).
 
253
Id.
 
254
D’Agostino (2014), p. 3. For more on this, see Sect. 9.1.2 on the multiple aims positive action for Roma can pursue and Sect. 9.2.4 on the need to consult with and include local communities in positive action schemes.
 
255
ENAR (2007), p. 18. This was briefly mentioned in Chap. 6 (Sect. 6.​3.​3) when depicting funding as a prerequisite of positive action.
 
256
Sobotka and Vermeersch (2012), pp. 805 and 806; European Commission (2010a). It was mentioned in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​1.​2) that Eurostat does not appear to engage in ethnic data collection in relation to the European Structural Funds.
 
257
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), p. 9; European Commission (2010b).
 
258
Commission Communication, An EU Framework for NRIS (5 April 2011), pp. 8 and 9.
 
259
Hollo (2006), p. 42. The lack of political will to use positive action for Roma was cited in Sect. 9.2.2.1 as one of the challenges limiting the use of this human rights instrument.
 
260
Jovanovic (2015) argues that initiatives such as the Decade of Roma Inclusion, the EU Framework for NRIS and EU funds “can help only if they expand participation in shaping domestic political power and public budgets beyond the narrow elites”.
 
261
D’Agostino (2014), p. 3; Kóczé (2014), pp. 5 and 6.
 
262
D’Agostino (2014), p. 3; Kóczé (2014), p. 5.
 
263
D’Agostino (2014), p. 3; Kóczé (2014), pp. 1 and 5.
 
264
D’Agostino (2014), pp. 1 and 4; Kóczé (2014), p. 5. See, for example: Hurrle et al. (2012), pp. 10, 11 and 97–99.
 
265
Kóczé (2014), pp. 5 and 6.
 
266
D’Agostino (2014), p. 4; Kóczé (2014), p. 5.
 
267
D’Agostino (2014), pp. 3 and 4; Kóczé (2014). The need for consultation with and participation of local communities was emphasised in Sect. 9.2.4.
 
268
This opinion was expressed previously in Chap. 5 (Sect. 5.​8.​2) on the need for active participation of Roma in ethnic data collection practices.
 
269
See Chap. 10 on positive action for Roma in four key areas and Chap. 11 on inter-cultural mediation to enhance Roma inclusion.
 
Literatur
Ahmed T (2011) The impact of EU law on minority rights. Hart Publishing, Oxford
Boccadoro N (2009) Housing rights and racial discrimination. Eur Anti-Discrimination Law Rev 9:21–32
Caruso D (2003) Limits of the classic method: positive action in the European Union after the new equality directives. Harv Int Law J 44:331–386
Ciaian P, Ivanov A, Kancs d’A (2018) Long-run economic, budgetary and fiscal effects of Roma integration policies. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
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
D’Agostino S (2014) The missing piece: empowerment of Roma grassroots organisations in EU Roma integration policies. Available via Institute for European Studies. https://​www.​ies.​be/​node/​2723. Accessed 24 Jan 2019
Dediu M (2007) The European Union: a promoter of Roma diplomacy. In: Nicolae V, Slavik H (eds) Roma diplomacy. International Debate Education Association, New York, pp 113–130
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 Schutter O (2008) The framework convention on the protection of national minorities and the law of the European Union. In: Verstichel A et al (eds) The framework convention for the protection of national minorities: a useful pan-European instrument? Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 231–272
De Schutter O (2010) Recognition of the rights of minorities and the EU’s equal opportunities agenda. Eur Anti-Discrimination Law Rev 11:23–34
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 Roma Rights Centre (2003) Political rights of Roma. Eur Roma Rights Q 4:1–169
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2007) Report on racism and xenophobia in the member states of the EU. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
Fredman S (2002) The future of equality in Britain. Equal opportunities Commission working paper 5: 1–48
Fredman S (2009) Positive rights and positive duties: addressing intersectionality. In: Schiek D, Chege V (eds) European Union non-discrimination law: comparative perspectives on multidimensional equality law. Routledge, London, pp 73–89
Fundación Secretariado Gitano (2011) FSG 2011 annual report: discrimination and the Roma community. Fundación Secretariado Gitano, Madrid
Guy W, Liebich A, Marushiakova E (2010) Improving the tools for the social inclusion and non-discrimination of Roma in the EU – Report. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
Henrard K (2007) Equal rights versus special rights? - minority protection and the prohibition of discrimination. European Commission, Brussels
Hurrle J, Ivanov A, Grill J, Kling J, Škobla D (2012) Uncertain impact: have the Roma in Slovakia benefitted from the European Social Fund? Findings from an analysis of ESF employment and social inclusion projects in the 2007–2013 programming period. UNDP, Bratislava
Koldinská K (2011) EU non-discrimination law and policies in reaction to intersectional discrimination against Roma women in Central and Eastern Europe. In: Schiek D, Lawson A (eds) European Union non-discrimination law and intersectionality. Routledge, London, pp 241–258
Pavee Point Traveller and Roma Centre (2013) Travelling with austerity: impacts of cuts on travellers, traveller projects and services. Pavee Point, Dublin
Sabbagh D (2013) The paradox of decategorization: deinstitutionalizing race through race-based affirmative action in the United States. In: Möschel M, Hermanin C, Grigolo M (eds) Fighting discrimination in Europe – the case for a race-conscious approach. Routledge, London, pp 30–46
Sobotka E (2007) Opportunities and limitations for international organizations in addressing the situation of Roma and travellers in Europe. In: Nicolae V, Slavik H (eds) Roma diplomacy. International Debate Education Association, New York, pp 103–111
Sobotka E, Vermeersch P (2012) Governing human rights and Roma inclusion: can the EU be a catalyst for local social change? Hum Rights Q 34(4):800–822CrossRef
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 the Roma Minority in Europe
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_9