Anti-GYPSYISM IN BULGARIA MAY 2012 Report from the Field visit of the European Roma and Travellers Forum

2

www.ertf.org

ERTF SECRETARIAT c/o Council of Europe

Agora Building 1, quai Jacoutot

67075 Strasbourg Tel.: + 33 3 90 21 53 50 Fax: + 33 3 90 21 56 58

e-mail: info@ertf.org

Disclaimer: This report was commissioned by the European Roma and Travellers Forum. The opinions and

conclusions of this report do not necessarily express the position of ERTF.

http://www.ertf.org/mailto:info@ertf.org

EUROPEAN ROMA AND TRAVELLERS FORUM The ERTF is an autonomous body, independent of governments and inter-governmental organisations. It has the status of a non-governmental organisation. It has, however, a legal partnership agreement with the Council of Europe, which, amongst other things, provides for the establishment of relations with the various bodies of the Council of Europe. As appropriate, this relationship can take the form of a hearing, participation at meetings, providing expert advice, and so on. Representing more than 1000 national NGOs across Europe and beyond, ERTF is an international umbrella organisation, which enables the voice of its members to be heard at national and international level. The ERTF and its members are committed to the achievement of equal rights and equal opportunities and respect for the fundamental Human Rights of Roma in Europe, including political participation. It also takes an active part in the fight against discrimination and for the full realisation of human rights.

THE ERTF’S OBJECTIVES ARE:

To establish a fair and democratic representation of Roma in Europe;

To achieve a fair and equal participation of Roma at all levels of policy making at national and international level;

To achieve an improvement of the living conditions of Roma and related groups;

To achieve the social integration of Roma on the basis of full equality and mutual respect;

To fight against anti-Gypsyism in all its forms;

To make governments and international organisations more aware of their responsibilities towards Roma as their citizens and more responsive towards their needs;

To become recognised as the key political partner and interlocutor by national governments and international organisations on any issues affecting Roma;

To achieve official recognition of the Roma as a European people and of Romanes as a European language;

To develop a Charter on the Rights of the Roma as ordinary citizens.

To achieve official recognition of the Romani Pharaimos (Holocaust).

4

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

Table of Contents

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................... 5

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... 7

ERTF RECOMMENDATIONS to the BULGARIAN GOVERNMENT............................... 9

OVERVIEW ON THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF ROMA AND THE RISE OF ANTI-GYPSYISM IN BULGARIA ................................................................................................. 12 A NEW WAVE OF ANTI-GYPSYISM: THE CASE OF KATUNIZA ......................................................... 14

REACTIONS TO THE KATUNIZA ANTI-ROMA DEMONSTRATIONS AND VIOLENCE ............... 17 ERTF HEARING IN SOFIA ON 10 NOVEMBER 2011 ............................................................ 19

ERTF FINDINGS ON THE GENERAL SITUATION OF ROMA IN BULGARIA ............................ 20

EDUCATION EMPLOYMENT HEALTH CARE HOUSING CHILD PROTECTION

CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................... 27

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

5

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was commissioned by the European Roma and Travellers Forum (hereinafter ERTF). The report was prepared by Isabela Mihalache1. The final editing was done by Robert Rustem, the head of the ERTF Secretariat. The ERTF Secretariat authorised the publication of the report.

This report would have not been possible without the valuable testimonies of Romani and non-Romani NGOs, Romani persons, international NGOs, Embassies and local authorities present at the ERTF Public Hearing on Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria on 10 November 2011 in the aftermath of the Katuniza events. ERTF would like to express particular thanks to the Romani people from the Fakulteta and Hristo Botev Romani settlements, who accompanied the ERTF international team in its visit and shared their problems and concerns for the preparation of this report. ERTF would also like to thank Romani activists who shared with ERTF their monitoring reports about the events in Katuniza in the fall of 2011.

1Isabela Mihalache is a Roma human rights advocate with ten years of experience at international level. Currently she is a Consultant with UN Women.

6

INTRODUCTION

In September 2011, the death of an ethnic Bulgarian in a traffic accident involving a Roma person triggered strong anti-Roma feelings manifested through a series of anti-Roma protests and attacks in several cities in Bulgaria. The right-wing extremist groups capitalised on the situation and the lack of adequate response by state authorities, engaging thereof in more racist rhetoric and violence against Roma and other minorities. On 10 November 2011, the European Roma and Travellers Forum conducted a field visit in Bulgaria to inquire on the state of affairs of Roma as a result of the violent incidents as of September 2011 and beyond. ERTF organised a public hearing in Sofia with civil society, international organisations, embassies and local authorities and conducted visits in the Romani settlements of Fakulteta and Hristo Botev at the outskirts of Sofia. This report is based on testimonies from approximately 50 Romani activists and community members in Bulgaria, as well as on secondary research and reports on the situation of Roma in Bulgaria. ERTF has a long standing commitment in engaging with issues of security of Roma in the Council of Europe Member States. To attempt to find an end to this vicious circle and to seek common action against Europe's anti-Gypsyism attitude, since 2009 the ERTF has organised several High Level Conferences and Public Hearings on the Security Situation of Roma in Europe.

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

7

As European states are the key actors in fighting anti-Roma violence and promoting the human rights, solidarity and inclusion of the Roma, participants in the ERTF gatherings included high level officials, national delegations, policy-makers, experts and representatives from the international Romani community. The aim of these meetings has been to hold in-depth discussions with the main stakeholders in order to determine how to ensure security of the Roma and question why European states have not guaranteed their human rights protection to date, whilst also exploring possible action to overcome the recent anti-Roma sentiments that have occurred in several European member states. Discussions have focused on Roma mobility in Europe, worldwide experiences of racism and discussions about the impact of existing policies designed for the inclusion and integration of the Roma in Europe. The ERTF remains concerned that successive governments have consistently failed to address the human rights situation of the Roma and that the current administrations have failed to respond to the challenge of the Decade of Roma Inclusion, which aimed to introduce measures to ensure that all Roma are guaranteed their rights including access to education, work, health care and adequate housing. Where action has been taken, it has not been taken by governments as such, but rather by domestic and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs), including Romani NGOs, and with international funding.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides a brief overview of the human rights situation of Roma in Bulgaria in the framework of the most recent anti-Roma manifestations in Bulgaria in the fall of 2011 but not limited to them. The report also describes in short the overall situation of Roma

and their access to education, health, employment and housing. It provides as well a glance on the situation of Romani children in state care.

Thus, the report aims to raise the awareness of state authorities and international organisations over the intricate and complex forms and facets of anti-Gypsyism manifested in Bulgaria by state and non-state actors.

Based on its findings, the report claims that anti-Gypsyism exhibits itself not only through direct acts of violence but also through more silent forms of indifference, inaction, exclusion and discrimination against Roma in their everyday lives and at all levels of their interaction with state and non-state parties.

Notwithstanding, racially motivated crimes against Roma by state and non-state actors occur frequently in Bulgaria. Despite being constantly challenged in national and international courts by human rights NGOs, the racist nature of crimes is still not adequately addressed by the Bulgarian criminal law and justice system.

The failure of the Bulgarian state authorities to intervene promptly in the September 2011 events and stop the racist protests, incitement to hatred, violent attacks and destruction of properties of Roma led to a major law and order crisis throughout numerous Bulgarian cities and villages. Radical groups such as the Ataka further capitalized the vacuum in social order and rule of law, calling for the reinstatement of death penalty as a solution to “Romani criminality”.

The Roma NGOs, in their opinion, found little availability on the part of government and local authorities to dialogue and find solutions to the crisis. On the contrary, NGOs have been subjected to intimidation and checks by the police, while being accused of crimes by local authorities. Their efforts to protect the Roma had very little effect on the ground where

8

Romani communities felt forced to self-organise and defend themselves alone, in the absence of well-organised and sustained law enforcement interventions and patrols.

NGO testimonies and available reports were not able to indicate a fair number of attacks against Roma at national level, due in part to the under-reporting by Roma and disclosure of data by the police and local authorities. However, this report attempts to provide some estimates of the number of Romani victims subject to violence between 23 September and 7 November 2011, based on the NGOs reports available by the drafting of this report.

ERTF findings of its visit in Bulgaria confirmed the persistent exclusion and discrimination of Roma in accessing education, employment, and health services. Discrimination in housing rights is still a major problem. In the area of children’s rights, the over-representation of Romani children in state care constitutes a major concern of human rights NGOs in Bulgaria. According to testimonies, a further increase of segregation in education is registered in Bulgaria despite the consistent NGO and government initiatives to desegregate. Some testimonies argue that this new increase in segregation may be the result of the failure of the government to implement a comprehensive and sustained national desegregation policy. Thus, a great number of Romani children continue to receive education in de facto segregated environments and special schools for children with mental disabilities based on erroneous diagnosis.

ERTF findings in the area of employment in the Fakulteta and Hristo Botev Roma settlements reaffirm the national estimates of 56 to 80 percent. In Fakulteta, Roma leaders estimate 40 percent unemployment, while in Hristo Botev, 60 percent to 70 percent Roma unemployment. Thus Roma remain largely

excluded from the job market both because of their lack of qualifications and because of discrimination, particularly when it comes to recruitment.

Despite some progress through Roma health mediation, discrimination remains a barrier in the access to health care and social assistance for most Roma in Bulgaria. Racial discrimination against Roma in the provision of health care occurs at many levels within the health care system and ranges from overt denial of medical services to more complex forms of discrimination resulting in the provision of inferior medical services.

Many Roma continue to live in substandard housing and lacking legal registration for their places of residences, in de facto segregated housing with no access to water, electricity, gas and heating. The over-representation of Romani children in state-care supports the efforts of national and international NGOs fighting for children’s rights to treat Romani children as a specific priority.

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

9

ERTF RECOMMENDATIONS to the BULGARIAN GOVERNMENT

GENERAL

The Bulgarian Government should: 1. Ensure that the Framework for Integration

of Roma into Bulgarian Society (2010–2020) includes clear indicators, targets and budgets to achieve impact in all its priorities; ensure the respect of human rights standards and promote active citizenship.

2. Annually collect comparable data disaggregated by ethnicity, gender, disability and other relevant factors, in the areas of child protection, education, housing, employment and health care, with appropriate measures to protect the personal data of children and families.

3. Effectively consult Roma on the improvement of their lives, by providing participatory mechanisms.

SPECIFIC

HATE CRIME, VIOLENCE AND HATE SPEECH In the area of hate crime, violence and hate speech, the Bulgarian government should take the following measures: 1. Ratify, as soon as possible, Protocol No.12

to the European Convention on Human Rights in the fight for combating racial discrimination at national level.

2. Amend the Criminal Code to include racist motivation for any ordinary offence as an aggravating circumstance; ensure that racist offences are duly punished; give priority to the criminal prosecution of racist and xenophobic offences and compile accurate statistical data in this field.

3. Strengthen training in racial discrimination issues and, in particular, in the provisions of the Protection against Discrimination Act offered to judges; similar training should be provided to prosecutors and lawyers.

4. Take immediate measures to reduce ethnic tensions and end anti-Roma sentiments.

5. Take measures against politicians who make racist and/or xenophobic speeches and remarks. Organize campaigns to make the general public aware of the seriousness of racist crimes; they should encourage victims to file complaints.

6. Guarantee the safety of its citizens and the rule of law.

7. Ensure that events involving persons belonging to a minority do not escalate into the collective criminalization of that minority group and propagate into further violence.

8. When violent attacks occur, guarantee the presence of the law enforcement, a proper, efficient and timely investigation into the violent attacks to identify and punish all perpetrators of violence and incitement to hatred; ensure that investigation takes consideration of racial motivation.

10

EDUCATION In the area of education, the Bulgarian government should take the following measures: 1. Inclusion of all Romani children of school

age in the educational system. 2. Develop and implement concrete plans to

eliminate segregation in education. 3. Improve the quality of education in

schools that teach exclusively Romani children and where desegregation is not possible.

4. Develop and implement measures to prevent children from dropping out and to reintegrate those who have already dropped out.

5. Introduce training methods for teachers working with children from minorities as a priority in teacher’s qualification plans.

6. Establish effective mechanisms to monitor and prevent racism inside Bulgarian schools and promote programmes aimed at interethnic tolerance and co-operation.

7. Involve Roma parents in the educational process and encourage their active participation in school life.

8. Prevent the enrolment of healthy Romani children into special education.

9. Re-test Romani pupils from schools for mentally disabled against misdiagnosis and create the conditions for their integration into mainstream schools.

EMPLOYMENT In the area of employment, the Bulgarian government should take the following measures: 1. Implement positive action programmes to

support Roma to access employment and in line with the targets established in the Europe 2020 Strategy (75 percent employment) and relevant national policies.

2. Provide additional measures to facilitate access of Roma to the labour market by developing training programs, qualification and requalification courses.

3. Encourage further training for employers and managers to manage cultural diversity and hire Roma.

4. Provide mechanisms for effective protection against discrimination of Roma in the labour market and workplace.

5. Conduct information campaigns and build partnerships at national, regional, and local level to promote labour insertion of Roma.

HEALTH CARE In the area of health care, the Bulgarian government should take the following measures: 1. Increase the number of Roma with health

insurance, with the objective to achieve universal coverage of Roma in the health insurance system.

2. Provide health education and conduct public information campaigns in order to inform Roma about their rights and obligations; increase their health awareness about diseases and risk factors, including those related to early marriages and births and enhance their access to health services.

3. Provide training to health care personnel about (multi)cultural adequacy to improve their attitudes and abilities in working with minority communities such as the Roma.

4. Reduce infant mortality, maternal mortality, and early births through ensuring coverage and monitoring of pregnant women and maternity consultations.

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

11

HOUSING In the area of employment, the Bulgarian government should take the following measures: 1. Implement a moratorium on all mass

evictions until the proper legal framework is in place to ensure that unlawful or arbitrary evictions do not occur and that any evictions are in compliance with international human rights law, including as informed by General Comments No. 4 and 7 of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Guidelines on Development-based Evictions and Displacements, prepared by the UN Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing.

2. Ensure compliance with international human rights law on housing; ensure that all residents enjoy security of tenure that guarantees legal protection against forced eviction, harassment and other threats.

3. Implement the 2006 decision by the European Committee of Social Rights regarding evictions of Roma as well as to offer adequate housing to Roma families currently living in unsuitable conditions.

4. Fully enforce the Protection against Discrimination Act, including in the context of Romani housing.

5. Ratify the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

6. Legalise Romani settlements in order to provide security of tenure and property rights for accessing basic rights.

7. Provide the necessary infrastructure in remote and disconnected Romani neighbourhoods.

8. Improve the quality of existing houses in compact Roma neighbourhoods in order to meet legal requirements.

9. Revise the concept of social housing in order to prevent the creation of new Roma segregated neighbourhoods or apartment buildings.

10. Monitor against discrimination in the allocation of social housing, including against the eligibility criteria.

CHILD PROTECTION In the area of child protection, the Bulgarian government should take the following measures: 1. Amend domestic legal standards to

provide full and adequate protection to Romani children and families at risk of separation.

2. Ensure that child removal on the basis of poverty or material concerns is prohibited.

3. Revise national child protection policy to include Romani children and families at particular risk of endangerment.

4. Provide free legal aid to families at risk of child removal, especially Romani 
families endangered by discrimination and social exclusion.

5. Develop a set of objective criteria and methodological guidance to define and assess child endangerment when making decisions regarding the removal of children from their families.

12

OVERVIEW ON THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF ROMA AND THE RISE OF ANTI-GYPSYISM IN BULGARIA Anti-Gypsyism seems to be on the increase in Bulgaria in its various forms. Although the Bulgarian government does not provide statistics on the incidence of hate crime and its trends, racially motivated hate crimes against Roma by both police and private individuals have always been a serious concern in Bulgaria. Equally, hate speech by radical groups and political figures operates unhampered in Bulgaria. Still, unofficial data indicate that the number of private racist attacks increased over the past several years.2 Some media sources have reported that the biggest number of cases of racist violence was last registered in 2007.3 The 2008 Country Report on Human Rights4 found that in August 2007 a group of four teenagers beat to death Asparuh Atanasov, a 17-year-old Roma, reportedly because they were angry that he was in the centre of the town. The 2007 series of assaults in Samokov resulted in serious injuries and deaths.5

2Bulgarian Helsinki Committee and the European Roma Rights Centre, Written Comments Concerning Bulgaria for Consideration by the UN CERD at its 74th session, December 2008, available at: http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/media/03/A3/m000003A3.pdf 3Николета Попкостадинова, „Толерантност към дискриминацията. През 2007 г. са регистрирани най-много расистки мотивирани случаи на насилие” (Nikoleta Popkostadinova, 'Tolerance to Discrimination’. 2007 Marks Highest Number of Racially Motivated Acts of Violence', Capital weekly, 50 (2007), also available for paid view at: http://www.capital.bg/show.php?storyid=407656, accessed 18 July 2008. 4US Department of State, 2008 Human Rights Report available at: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/eur/119072.htm 5Bulgarian Helsinki Committee and the European Roma Rights Centre, Written Comments Concerning Bulgaria for Consideration by the UN CERD at its 74th session, December 2008, based on information provided to the BHC by Ahmed Husein, Deputy-Chairperson of the Parliamentary Commission of Human Rights, MP from the Movement of Rights and Freedoms, Sofia, 21 November 2008.

http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/media/03/A3/m000003A3.pdfhttp://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/eur/119072.htm

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

13

In cases of racist violence the police reportedly fail to take any measures.6 On several occasions, it has used discriminatory violence and ill treatment against members of Roma community. In such cases, as well as in cases of racist police brutality, if prosecuted at all, the perpetrators have been charged for ordinary crimes with no racial motive.7

The Bulgarian Penal Code does not contain a provision which qualifies racist motivation as an aggravating circumstance of all types of offences. In its third and fourth reports on Bulgaria8, ECRI recommended to the authorities that they insert a provision in the Criminal Code expressly stating that racist motivation for any ordinary offence constituted an aggravating circumstance, inviting them to give priority to the criminal prosecution of racist and xenophobic offences and compile accurate statistical data in this field.9

The Human Rights Council later made the same recommendation at its 9th Session of the Universal Periodic Review in November 2010.10 Under both reviews, Bulgaria indicated that the provisions of the General Part of the Penal Code expressly state that in determining the penal sanction, the court takes into consideration, inter alia, the motives for the commission of the act (Article 54, para1), including possible racist motives.

If it is established by the Court that the motivation for the commission of a particular offence is a racist one, this in all cases is

6Testimony of Roma representative, ERTF Hearing, November 2011, Sofia, Bulgaria. 7Bulgarian Helsinki Committee and the European Roma Rights Centre, UN CERD report, December 2008. 8ECRI Report on Bulgaria (fourth monitoring cycle), adopted on 20 June 2008, published on 24 February 2009. The full version of the report is available at: http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ecri/country-by-country/bulgaria/BGR-CbC-IV-2009-002-ENG.pdf

9ECRI fourth report on Bulgaria, p. 14. 10UPR Council Recommendation on Bulgaria in its 9th session, November 2010, available at: http://upr-epu.com/ENG/country.php?id=193

considered as an aggravating circumstance. In the 4th ECRI report, authorities stated that “they do not receive complaints of racist acts” and “that there was no lack of awareness of issues connected with racist offences among the judiciary”.11 This systemic omission of the Bulgarian criminal justice however reached the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on several occasions.

In 2007, the ECtHR condemned Bulgaria in the case of Angelova and Iliev v. Bulgaria12 under Article 14 in conjunction with Article 2 of the Convention for its failure to address the racist nature of a murder of a Romani man by a group of assailants. A number of other cases of racially motivated crimes against Roma are pending before the ECtHR.

Public speech that incites to hatred and discrimination by radical groups and political figures remains greatly unchallenged. Some ultra-nationalists groups such as the political party Ataka and have their own print media or benefit from TV programs offered exclusively for their use. Hate speech continues to be widespread in some media as well as in Internet. During 2005 parliamentary elections the newly formed political party Ataka entered the Parliament with 8.2 percent of the votes and with the slogan "Bulgaria for Bulgarians!" The election campaign of Ataka was based almost exclusively on incitement of anti-Romani and anti-Turkish hatred. Notwithstanding, in its 2008 report to the UN CERD, the government rejected the existence or organized dissemination of racist propaganda: "There are no organized movements or organizations in the Republic of Bulgaria disseminating and spreading racist,

11ECRI fourth report on Bulgaria, p.15. 12ECHR, Angelova and Iliev v. Bulgaria, Appl. no.55523/00, Judgment from 26 July 2007, para. 115.

http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ecri/country-by-country/bulgaria/BGR-CbC-IV-2009-002-ENG.pdfhttp://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/ecri/country-by-country/bulgaria/BGR-CbC-IV-2009-002-ENG.pdfhttp://upr-epu.com/ENG/country.php?id=193http://upr-epu.com/ENG/country.php?id=193

14

anti-Semitic, xenophobic and other discriminatory ideas."13

In May 2011, the Sofia Court of Appeal upheld a judgment against the leader of the Ataka Party, Volen Siderov, for discriminatory statements pronounced against ethnic Turks, Roma, Jews and other groups. Six out of eight cases brought in a complaint against Siderov remain under review by the Sofia Regional court. The complaint originated from a coalition of 60 NGOs who accused Siderov of harassing and discriminating against persons from ethnic, religious and sexual minorities. Regarding the two cases, which were decided upon, both from 2006, in one case the court found that Siderov had incited discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, whilst, in the other the court found that his statements did not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. Following an appeal, the Sofia Court of Appeal upheld the ethnic discrimination judgment in May.

During his visit to Brussels in September 2010, the Bulgarian Interior Minister, Tsvetan Tsvetanov, stated in an interview with the daily “24 chasa” that a "very thorough analysis" of the Roma problem was needed because "this environment is an incubator for generating crime".14

13Para. 196 of the Bulgaria government report for consideration by the UN CERD at its 74th session, 2008. 14Interview available at: http://www.24chasa.bg/Article.asp?ArticleId=622490

A NEW WAVE OF ANTI-GYPSYISM: THE CASE OF KATUNIZA

A new wave of anti-Gypsyism escalated in Bulgaria after September 2011. This was prompted by the death of Angel Petrov, a 19 year-old ethnic Bulgarian, on 23 September in Katuniza village, near Plovdiv, which was caused by a Roma person linked to a controversial Roma leader, Kiril Rashkov, the “Kiro Tsar”. Following this incident, 500 people organised a protest in front of Kiril Rashkov’s properties, making threats and destroying in the end three of them. The unrest in Katuniza spread across Bulgaria over the next few days, resulting in the destruction of other properties, attacks against Roma, the police and even the media. The protests, reportedly called for by far right politicians, involved many children under the age of 18 and included racist chants against the Roma. The protesters carried racist slogans such as “Let’s turn Gypsies into soap”, “Turks should be slaughtered”, “Death to the Gypsies” and “Gypsies, die!” Fan clubs, rocker clubs, nationalist political parties and many young secondary students joined the protests, which were being organised through Facebook and other social media.

On 26 September 2011, the Bulgarian authorities decided to establish a crisis headquarters in Plovdiv to prevent ethnic tensions and new violent incidents between ethnic Bulgarians and Roma occurring. The Mayor announced that these headquarters would fulfil a coordination role between the different institutions, involving concrete measures to prohibit protests and riots in the Roma districts of Stolipinovo and “Adzhissan Mahala”.

http://www.24chasa.bg/Article.asp?ArticleId=622490

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

15

On September 27, the Acting Mayor of Varna banned protests. About 400 people gathered in the city and police moved in to prevent the demonstration. A reported 50 people were arrested. On 28 September, Kiril Raskov was arrested and charged with making death threats as well as tax evasion. The nationalistic RZS Party (Order, Law and Justice) offered to provide legal assistance to all those arrested in the protests. Some of the arrested hooligans have already been convicted.

On 29 September, the protests started to die down, becoming more peaceful, mainly as Facebook had deleted the protest groups. The protests were evolving into political slogans meant to bring the government down, blaming the police and the Prosecutor’s Office for their lack of action over the past 20 years. As such, after a week of unrest prompted by the killing of the 19 year-old in Katuniza, hundreds of protesters rallied around by the far-right RZS Order, Law and Justice Party called for Parliament to be suspended. Bulgarian riot police were deployed on Sunday 2 October to disperse protesters.

All in all, an estimated 2,200 people turned out for the protests, the largest crowds of up to 600 each being in Sofia and Plovdiv. Media and NGOs reported that more than 30,000 people registered on the Facebook “Wall” entitled “Let’s kill Tsar Kiro, an eye for an eye”. People shared their bad experiences with Roma, expressing their desire for the Roma to be expelled from the country. Another Facebook group named “Protecting the Bulgarians in

Katunitsa” collected 56,000 followers. As a result, the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee asked the police to investigate the Facebook groups inciting hatred and violence against Roma.

Between September 23 and November 7, according to testimonies from both Roma and NGOs, Roma had been victims of violence in Burgas, Blagoevgrad, Dupnitsa, Kustendil, Lom, Peshtera, Razgrad, Ruse, Sofia and Varna.

The victims of the violence were ordinary Roma without any links to Rashkov. Some were students who attended ethnically-mixed schools outside of the Roma ghettos; many of them were attacked at work, on their way home, on public transport or in public places. In fear of the growing number of reported attacks and a lack of organised security patrols, many Roma parents from Burgas, Montana, Sliven, Plovdiv and so on stopped sending their children to school or to work. In many neighbourhoods, Roma started to organise themselves into defence groups.

16

The table below lists some of the attacks reported in the media or monitored by Roma NGOs in Bulgaria.15 Please be aware however that many cases of violence against Roma remained unreported.

Date Locality No. of victims Description

23.09.11 – 6.10.11 Blagoevgrad 2 Roma men Beaten while they were at work

23.09.11 – 6.10.11 Kustendil No victims reported A Molotov cocktail was thrown in two Romani houses

23.09.11 – 6.10.11 Vratsa No victims reported A Roma neighbourhood was invaded by far-right groups and hooligans

23.09.11 – 6.10.11 Sofia 1 Roma woman Attacked with rocks on her way to the market

23.09.11 – 6.10.11 Dupnitsa 1 elderly Roma woman Was insulted and expelled from the market because she asked her grandchild in Romanes what the price of tomatoes was

23.09.11 – 6.10.11 Ruse and Razgrad

Exact number unknown A gang of motorists drove around Roma villages stopping Roma and asking them for their ID cards

23.09.11 – 6.10.11 Peshtera 1 Roma child Missed his surgery in Pazardjik because his parents were afraid to travel to the hospital

19.10.11 Lom 2 Roma women and 2 Roma men

Attacked by a group of 4 young Bulgarians with brass knuckle rings in the no. 72 bus shouting “Dirty Gypsies”.

28.10.11 Lom 39 year old Petar Petrov, candidate for municipal councillor at the Local Elections

Attacked with baseball bats by 6 ethnic Bulgarians

16

1.11.11 Cherven Briag 1 family from Zlatko Zlatkov. A women was hospitalised, a 56 year-old victim was put into a coma, two men had less serious injuries. Three men were arrested. No racial motive found.

Attacked at their home by about 20 Roma people with baseball bats, spades and knives.

1.11.11 Sofia 2 Roma Attacked by a Neo-Nazi group on the no. 79 bus line.

7.11.11 Sofia 32 year-old Trayan Stefanov

Attacked with a big knife by an ethnic Bulgarian in the Kniazhevo neighbourhood. He was stabbed repeatedly in his left hand and left leg. He was hospitalised and has undergone surgery. Police investigation was initiated.

7.11.11 Sofia 1 Roma man Severely beaten by five or six masked attackers in the Liulin neighbourhood. The victim was hospitalised.

15Information put together by the Integro Association, Bulgaria and the Civil Society in Action Association. 16BLITZ information agency at: http://www.blitz.bg/news/article/121766; bTV channel at: http://www.btv.bg/news/bulgaria/zakonired/story/180254857-Boy_s_izboren_privkus_v_romskata_mahala_v_Cherven_bryag.html & DnesDir. Bulgarian agency at http://dnes.dir.bg/news/boy-cherven-brjag-izbori-2011-romska-mahala-9826997

http://www.blitz.bg/news/article/121766http://www.btv.bg/news/bulgaria/zakonired/story/180254857-Boy_s_izboren_privkus_v_romskata_mahala_v_Cherven_bryag.htmlhttp://dnes.dir.bg/news/boy-cherven-brjag-izbori-2011-romska-mahala-9826997

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

17

REACTIONS TO THE KATUNIZA ANTI-ROMA DEMONSTRATIONS AND VIOLENCE

Media reports showed that the Bulgarian authorities ordered a strong police presence to protect Roma neighbourhoods in the initial stages following the death of Angel Petrov. Local authorities claimed that they contacted community leaders to appeal for calm and encouraged parents to speak to their children to explain to them not to get involved themselves.

The Bulgarian Helsinki Committee criticised the Bulgarian security forces for being conspicuously inactive during the Katuniza riots while a “flood of serious crimes unfolded before their eyes”, which led to “racist abuse” and “social tensions” in many parts of the country.

The far-right Ataka Party17 was one of the first to react to the Katuniza events, discussing Roma criminality in Parliament and public media debates. Ahead of the presidential elections on 23 October, the party leader, Volen Siderov, tried to capitalise on the tensions, calling for the death penalty to be reinstated as a response to “Roma criminality” and for Roma "ghettos" to be dismantled.

17In the European elections in 2007, Ataka received 14 percent of the votes cast, and 9.4 percent in the parliamentary elections in 2009. In parliament, it supports the conservative minority government of Boyko Borisov.

Ataka requested the resignation of the Regional Police Director for failing to cope with the situation and protecting the family threatened by Kiril Rashnov on the day prior the killing. During the ordeal, Ataka organised numerous anti-Roma demonstrations. On Facebook the Party used slogans such as “Death to Tsar Kiro!” and “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth!” Ataka supporters also instigated violent disorder at the Banya Bashi Mosque in downtown Sofia in which several people were injured. Siderov handed over a petition to the Head of State, Georgi Parvanov, blaming the pogroms on the Roma themselves.

President Parvanov called for "an end to the language of hatred" against Roma. Together with the Prime Minister, Boiko Borissov, the President also appealed for the Katuniza incident to be seen not as an ethnic clash, calling for calm, with a warning that the State will act firmly against racism and incitement to violence. The Prime Minister later admitted that the police reaction had been inadequate.

The Turkish party, DPS, warned that the ethnic conflicts were spreading around the country and the Government was unable to deal with the unrest. In response, the ruling party, GERB, claimed that the situation was under control, while protests were already under preparation.

18

The nationalistic Macedonian Revolutionary Party, VMRO, requested that the elections be called off until the Roma issue was resolved. VMRO followers are popular for using an anti-Roma election campaign, fighting to combat Roma criminality. Moreover they are arguing that the Roma “problem” is the demographic increase of Roma.

The Interior Ministry justified the police inaction or failure to investigate the arsonists as a way to avoid a further escalation of violence and clashes with police.

At the opening plenary session of the Human Dimension Implementation Meeting in Warsaw on 26 September, when speaking about the events in Bulgaria, the ODIHR Director, Ambassador Janez Lenarčič, commended the “determined and swift action by the Bulgarian authorities to defuse tensions and protect Roma communities from violence”.18

On 28 September, a spokesperson for the European Commission condemned the anti-Roma rallies in Bulgaria, expressing its concern and stating that the EC were monitoring the situation.19

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe referred to the recent violence against Europe's Roma population as deeply disturbing. OSCE National Minorities Chief, Knut Vollebaek, stated that violence and terror by extremists threaten the overall stability and credibility of a democratic Europe based on the rule of law. Vollebaek said that the anti-Roma violence appears to be the work of extreme nationalists who are exploiting the insecurity caused by the economic crisis. He believed that their simplistic messages appeal to those looking for scapegoats for their problems. Vollebaek called on European

18More information is available at: http://www.osce.org/odihr/83229

19 More information is available at: http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=132501

authorities to denounce hatred and ensure basic rights for all citizens, especially minorities.20

On 3 October 2011, the Council of Europe’s Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights expressed its grave concern regarding the resurgence of racist hatred and threats against Roma in Bulgaria. The Committee called on the Bulgarian authorities to do their utmost to protect Roma from attacks, urging them to condemn and prosecute acts of anti-Gypsyism, whilst firmly reacting to hate speech by public officials.21

On 4 October 2011, in reaction to the anti-Roma events, the Council of Europe’s Secretary General, Thorbjørn Jagland, warned against the danger of stigmatising an entire community for individual crimes and emphasised the responsibility of politicians and the media in avoiding any generalisation and stigmatisation of the Roma population as a whole: “Populist exploitation of anti-Gypsyism is incompatible with the democratic values which the Council of Europe upholds. Justice must be done in the courts, not in the streets”, he stated.22

20 More information is available at: http://sofiaecho.com/2011/10/11/1173862_osce-recent-violence-against-roma-deeply-disturbing

21 More information is available at:

http://assembly.coe.int/Mainf.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedTex

t/ta10/ERES1740.htm 22For more information, visit: https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1843325&Site=DC&BackColorInternet=F5CA75&BackColorIntranet=F5CA75&BackColorLogged=A9BACE

http://www.osce.org/odihr/83229http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=132501http://sofiaecho.com/2011/10/11/1173862_osce-recent-violence-against-roma-deeply-disturbinghttp://sofiaecho.com/2011/10/11/1173862_osce-recent-violence-against-roma-deeply-disturbinghttp://assembly.coe.int/Mainf.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta10/ERES1740.htmhttp://assembly.coe.int/Mainf.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta10/ERES1740.htmhttps://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1843325&Site=DC&BackColorInternet=F5CA75&BackColorIntranet=F5CA75&BackColorLogged=A9BACEhttps://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1843325&Site=DC&BackColorInternet=F5CA75&BackColorIntranet=F5CA75&BackColorLogged=A9BACEhttps://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1843325&Site=DC&BackColorInternet=F5CA75&BackColorIntranet=F5CA75&BackColorLogged=A9BACE

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

19

ERTF HEARING IN SOFIA ON 10 NOVEMBER 2011

On 10 November 2011, the European Roma and Travellers Forum organised a public hearing in Sofia with civil society, international organisations, embassies and local authorities to inquire on the latest violent incidents involving both Roma and ethnic Bulgarians. Testimonies of Roma at the hearing pointed to the inadequate responses from Bulgarian politicians which encouraged subsequent attacks and violence against Roma after the 23 September incident and the criminalisation of an entire community. Roma activists stated that “the State was in the position to prevent the attacks”, but “they were very slow and hesitant”.

According to Roma NGOs, there has not been any dialogue between the Bulgarian Government and Roma civil society regarding the events surrounding the Katuniza case. They claimed that there has been neither the availability nor the desire on the side of the Government or local authorities to communicate with them and to find joint solutions to the crisis. On the contrary, NGOs reported that they have been subject of intimidation and checks by the police, whilst standing accused of committing crimes by local authorities. They spoke about the terror that overtook Romani communities, which found themselves alone and powerless in the face of the mob’s hatred and organised attacks.

NGO representatives expressed their opinions about the state of affairs in Bulgaria. Some of them concluded that the main reasons for anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria are the “asymmetric relations between the Government and its

20

citizens at all levels”: “little information and consultation of Roma in the decision-making process”; “anti-Gypsyism seen as the main consequence of Roma exclusion from all the related processes”; “the is only a formality”.

The representative of the Commission for Protection against Discrimination (CPD) stated that there is a tendency to see a decrease in the number of complaints filed by Roma due to lack of confidence in the judiciary. More specifically, the CPD has alleged that many of the cases ruled by CPD as being discriminatory have been rejected, this leading the Roma to refrain from filing further complaints. The complaints of discrimination against Roma that the CPD has received relate mainly to cases of discrimination when applying for a job and when accessing education and health care services. According to the CPD, a number of complaints have been filed in relation to the Katuniza events, which the CPD has already referred to the prosecutor’s office. An additional element stressed by the CPD was that in all the complaints filed by the Roma before the CPD, which were later referred to court, no financial compensation has been requested.

ERTF FINDINGS ON THE GENERAL SITUATION OF ROMA IN BULGARIA

The ERTF hearing in Bulgaria and the visits to the Romani neighbourhoods in Fakulteta and Hristo Botev settlements revealed that anti-Gypsyism has many intricate and complex facets. As elsewhere in Europe, anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria is manifested through the exclusion of Roma in all areas and at all levels. At the end of 2011, it culminated in clear expressions of hatred, such as hate speech, racist violence and hate crime.

While there are no official disaggregated statistics on ethnicity and gender which would provide clear evidence of the specific situation

of Roma with regard to the access to, and quality of, education, health and reproductive care, employment, housing and social services, in reality the Roma remain one of the most deprived and discriminated population groups is Bulgaria.

The 2011 census showed that the Roma continue to be the second largest minority in Bulgaria after the Turks, numbering 325,343 out of a total of 7,364,570, a relative share of 4.9 percent. Unofficial data however estimates the size of the Roma population to be as high as 10 percent, while “life expectancy rates are estimated to be over 10 years less than the average”23. Testimonies of Roma at the ERTF hearing stated that the Roma in Stolipinovo, the biggest Roma neighbourhood in Bulgaria, do not declare themselves to be Roma and that indeed, in Bulgaria, most Roma declare themselves to be Turkish.

After her visit to Bulgaria in July 2011, the UN Independent Expert on Minorities declared that “in key areas like housing, employment, education and health care, the evidence demonstrates that Roma remain in desperate circumstances, at the very bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. Roma people experience discrimination in all walks of life that leaves them totally marginalized and in persistent poverty… The level of racial prejudice against Roma in Bulgaria was evident.”24

From a wider policy perspective, Bulgaria, along with the rest of the EU Member States, submitted a revised National Roma Integration Strategy by the end of 2011 in the context of the EU Framework for national Roma

23U.N. Independent Expert on minority issues’ statement, Monday, 18 July 2011. The full statement is available at: http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=11222&LangID=E 24 U.N. Independent Expert on minority issues’ statement, Monday, 18 July 2011

http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=11222&LangID=Ehttp://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=11222&LangID=E

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

21

integration strategies25 (the EU Framework), a concerted European Union effort to improve the situation of the Roma communities in four key areas: education, employment, healthcare and housing. In their strategies, Member States were asked to specify how they would contribute to achieving the overall EU level goals for Roma integration. The Commission assessed the national strategies at the beginning of 2012 and reported back to the Council and the European Parliament in spring 2012. The Framework for Integration of Roma into Bulgarian Society (2010–2020) takes on the strategic areas and guidelines set by a previous framework from 1999, while reflecting on the strategic priorities outlined by the EU Framework and the 2011 Council Conclusions.26 The Framework for Integration of Roma into Bulgarian Society (2010–2020) is consistent with Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)5 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on policies for Roma and/or Travellers in Europe and corresponds with both the Governmental Programme for European Development of Bulgaria 2009–2013 and the National Action Plan for the Decade of Roma Inclusion 2005–2015.27 The Bulgarian Framework undertakes to implement the 10 Common Basic Principles on Roma Inclusion adopted by the EU Council on June 8, 2009.28

25

COM(2011) 173, available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/discrimination/docs/com_2011_173_en.pdf 26Council conclusions on an EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020, Brussels, 19 May 2011 available at: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/lsa/122100.pdf 27Open Society Foundations, Beyond Rhetoric: Roma Integration Roadmap for 2020, Hungary, June 2011. 28More information about the 10 Common Basic Principles on Roma Inclusion are available at: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/youth/Source/Resources/Documents/2011_10_Common_Basic_Principles_Roma_Inclusion.pdf

EDUCATION Despite the impressive number of Romani NGOs working in the area of education and specifically on desegregation in education, Romani children continue to receive education in de facto segregated environments. Romani NGOs attending the ERTF hearing reported that segregation increased as a result of funding allocated to fighting segregation, as schools showed an interest just in receiving money rather than in tackling segregation and delivering quality educational services. NGOs also spoke about the lack of sustainability of the 18 educational mediators trained with no perspective for employment.29 During the visit to the Fakulteta settlement located in the outskirts Sofia, the ERTF was informed that, out of 200 Roma children born per year, 100 children attend the segregated school, 50 learn in desegregated schools and 50 do not go to school since they are not registered with the police, lack personal documents or their parents are migrating.30 Fakulteta has between 30,000-40,000 inhabitants, mostly Roma.31 In contrast, in Hristo Botev, the ERTF found that Romani children learn in a mixed environment and the drop-out rate is low, according to testimonies by local inhabitants. In an earlier visit to Bulgaria in 2011, the UN Independent Expert on Minorities found that “while Bulgaria was among the first European countries to acknowledge the need for desegregation of Roma children in education, 50 percent to 70 percent of Roma children are in substandard, de facto segregated schools in Roma neighbourhoods that lack municipal transportation.”32

29Testimony at the ERTF hearing on November 10, 2011, Sofia, Bulgaria 30Romani Baxt statement, ERTF visit to Bulgaria, November 2011 31NGO reports and testimonies 32U.N. Independent Expert on Minority Issues statement, Monday 18 July 2011.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/lsa/122100.pdfhttp://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/lsa/122100.pdfhttp://www.coe.int/t/dg4/youth/Source/Resources/Documents/2011_10_Common_Basic_Principles_Roma_Inclusion.pdfhttp://www.coe.int/t/dg4/youth/Source/Resources/Documents/2011_10_Common_Basic_Principles_Roma_Inclusion.pdf

22

Thus, there are at least 65 schools in Roma neighbourhoods, exclusively attended by Roma children. Approximately 30 percent of Roma children attend completely segregated schools, while 10 percent do not attend school at all. The numbers of Roma children dropping out are estimated at between 22,000 and 66,000 and represent 32 percent, followed by Bulgarians with 8 percent and Turks, 6 percent.33 According to a 2008 report by the Open Society Foundations, in Bulgaria only 46.2 percent of Roma children complete primary education and only 7.2 percent finish secondary school, while the EU average for primary education completion is 90 percent. In segregated schools, Romani pupils underperform compared to other children, have high dropout rates and high levels of illiteracy. Various reports suggest that Roma children without any disability continue to be placed in special schools for the mentally disabled because schools provide free meals. Another excuse is that the Roma children do not speak Bulgarian language well. Since 2007, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has condemned discrimination against Romani children in access to education in three different cases (D.H. and Others v The Czech Republic, Sampanis and Others v Greece and Oršuš and Others v Croatia). The three cases demonstrate that discrimination against Romani children in education is a widespread phenomenon in Europe which occurs in different ways but has the same outcome: Romani children are deprived of their fundamental right to education on an equal footing with other children.34

33Open Society Foundation, Beyond Rhetoric: Roma Integration Roadmap for 2020, Hungary, June 2011. 34In its first judgment, D.H. and Others v The Czech Republic from November 2007, the ECtHR ruled that segregating Romani students in special schools is a form of unlawful discrimination that violates their right to education. At the same time the ECtHR noted that the Czech Republic is not alone in this practice

Bulgaria’s Constitution, the National Education Act, and the Protection against Discrimination Act make discrimination in education unlawful, however no court has ordered the Government to comply with its obligation to desegregate schools. The most notable effort by the Bulgarian Government to address segregation was in 2008 when it co-funded four school projects for school desegregation within the framework of the Operational Human Resource Development. Nonetheless, NGOs seem to be dissatisfied with the way the Government is approaching the issue of the desegregation of Romani schools. They have declared that segregation has increased due to incentives provided to schools per capita child.35 Recently the Ministry of Education has established the Center for Educational Integration of Children and Students of Ethnic Minorities which has helped restore some segregated Roma neighbourhood schools36.

and that discriminatory barriers to education for Romani children are present in a number of European countries. The ECtHR made it clear that this kind of practice cannot be tolerated anymore in Europe. Less than one year after this groundbreaking judgment, in June 2008 the ECtHR reiterated the principles established in this case in the Sampanis and Others v Greece judgment. The ECtHR unanimously found a violation against Greece for effectively denying and obstructing education to Romani children. In the Sampanis judgment, the ECtHR pointed out that integration in schools is a fundamental element for integration into society as a whole. The ECtHR Grand Chamber judgment of March 2010 held that the segregation of Romani children into separate classes ostensibly based on language is unlawful discrimination, in violation of the ECtHR. More information is available on the website of ERRC, which litigated many of the Roma segregation cases to the ECtHR: http://www.errc.org/strategic-litigation-european-court-of-human-rights 35NGO statements at the ERTF hearing, November 2011 36U.N. Independent Expert on Minority Issues’ statement, 18 July 2011

http://www.parliament.bg/en/consthttp://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UNTC/UNPAN016454.pdfhttp://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UNTC/UNPAN016454.pdfhttp://www.blogger.com/www.regione.taa.it/biblioteca/minoranze/bulgaria2.pdfhttp://www.blogger.com/www.regione.taa.it/biblioteca/minoranze/bulgaria2.pdfhttp://www.minedu.government.bg/news-home/http://www.errc.org/strategic-litigation-european-court-of-human-rightshttp://www.errc.org/strategic-litigation-european-court-of-human-rights

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

23

EMPLOYMENT

The ERTF visit to Roma neighbourhoods in Bulgaria confirmed the increased level of Roma unemployment in Bulgaria. In Fakulteta, Roma leaders estimate that there is 40 percent unemployment, while in Hristo Botev, 60-70 percent of Roma are unemployed. According to a 2009 report, unemployment among the Bulgarian Roma lies between 56 and 80 percent.37 Studies carried out by NGOs suggest that the unemployment rate among Roma in Bulgaria lies between 65 percent and 80 percent, with the situation of women and young people giving rise to particular concern. Thus the Roma remain largely excluded from the job market, due to both their lack of qualifications and discrimination, particularly when it comes to recruitment. The FRA 2009 EUMIDIS report indicates that 32 percent of the Romani respondents to its statistical survey in Bulgaria reported discrimination in access to the labour market.38

While the Protection against Discrimination Act (PAD) contains several provisions prohibiting discrimination on grounds of race, national or ethnic origin, religion and nationality in respect of recruitment, it seems that the authorities have done little to raise awareness of the PDA among employers and that more could be done in this regard as concerns Roma in particular. In a 2006 case, the Sofia city court found a company liable when one of its employees advised Angel Assenov not to apply for a position, since he was Roma and would not be hired.39

37Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Bulgaria: Situation of Roma, including treatment by society and government authorities, 6 October 2009, BGR103246.E, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4b20f040c.html [accessed 9 January 2012] 38European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, Data in Focus Report: The Roma, 2009, available at: http://fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/attachments/EU-MIDIS_ROMA_EN.pdf, 5 39US Department of State, 2008 Human Rights Report, available at: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/eur/119072.htm

HEALTH CARE Despite some progress through Roma health mediation, discrimination remains a barrier in the access to health care and social assistance for most Roma in Bulgaria. Racial discrimination against Roma in the provision of health care occurs at many levels within the health care system and ranges from overt denial of medical services to more complex forms of discrimination resulting in the provision of inferior medical services. Discriminatory practices include egregious forms of negligent and/or inappropriate medical treatment leading to the death of the patient or to damaging effects on the patient’s health; denial of medical services and segregation of Roma in hospital facilities.40 In 2009, the European Committee of Social Rights found Bulgaria to be in violation of the European Social Charter on two occasions by failing to ensure that Roma have adequate access to the health care system and to social assistance, prompting the Government to amend the law on social assistance.41

On 2 June 2011, the Sofia city court found that the Sveta Sofia maternity clinic refused medical treatment for a Romani woman because of her ethnicity. The court awarded the plaintiff 50 Leva (approximately $38) in damages.42

Many Roma in Bulgaria do not have health insurance due to unemployment, low income, and ineligibility for state-provided health insurance. Lack of health insurance for poor

40Bulgarian Helsinki Committee and the European Roma Rights Centre, Written Comments Concerning Bulgaria for Consideration by the UN CERD at its 74th session, December 2008, available at: http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/media/03/A3/m000003A3.pdf

41European Roma Rights Centre, News: European Committee finds Bulgaria in violation of right to social assistance, 6 August 2009, available at: http://www.errc.org/en-search-results.php?mcountry=33&mtheme=1&marea=1&mkeyword=ECSR

42US Department of State, 2008 Human Rights Report

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/eur/119072.htmhttp://www.errc.org/cms/upload/media/03/A3/m000003A3.pdfhttp://www.errc.org/en-search-results.php?mcountry=33&mtheme=1&marea=1&mkeyword=ECSRhttp://www.errc.org/en-search-results.php?mcountry=33&mtheme=1&marea=1&mkeyword=ECSRhttp://www.errc.org/en-search-results.php?mcountry=33&mtheme=1&marea=1&mkeyword=ECSR

24

people means lack of access to a range of health services. The health status of Roma is drastically inferior compared to the non-Roma. Both exclusion from the labour market and discrimination in housing directly affect the access of Roma to health care services, as well as increasing the health risks for Roma. NGO reports indicate some progress with regard to the work of the Roma health mediators. Information indicates that since 2001, 106 Roma health mediators have been employed. The Bulgarian professional association of mediators reported that, in 2010, Bulgarian mediators assisted in the emergency vaccination of 188,703 children following a measles outbreak in a Roma community.43 Testimonies from the Roma health mediators at the ERTF hearing describe their experience as a challenging one over obtaining professional status and recognition. Persistent challenges regard the insufficient number of Roma health mediators in the Roma communities, the modest monthly wage and the confused expectations about the role of health mediators, which often go beyond health care prevention. One health mediator stated that “they are supposed to provide us with stationary, offices, Internet connection. However there is no Internet or any other necessary requisites to carry out our activities in a decent way. We do not even have paper or other stationary and this is the responsibility of the municipality. The only thing that they have provided us with was books, because those have remained within the framework of donations, but not pens, so we had to buy them from our own pocket.”44 Another testimony about the health mediators referred to some restrictions they are faced with in their work: “Well in some places these mediators do not have the right to speak about the problems that are existing, and they just have to agree with some things directed by the

43Open Society Foundations, Beyond Rhetoric: Roma Integration Roadmap for 2010, June 2011. 44Roma health mediator testimony at the ERTH Hearing in Sofia,

local authorities or the governments. It is very sad because the Council of Europe supports this mediators’ programme. The other problem that was already mentioned here is the long-term employment of the mediators. There have been a number of demands to employ these mediators in the schools.“45 Above all, a constant question mark, which was raised at the ERTF hearing, remains that, despite the value of having Roma health mediators, their existence challenges considerably Bulgaria’s responsibility to ensure the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, which only the public health care system is entitled to provide. The parallel institution of the health mediator is a constant reminder that the health care system does not work efficiently. While the Roma health mediator has gauged significant success in many Roma communities across Europe, its function should seek temporary remedies. Nonetheless, investing in people is a valuable human rights principle and a human rights approach to health: more steps should be taken in the professional development of the Roma health mediators, while development of health care professional should take account of relevant cultural differences that Romani communities bring. HOUSING Many Roma continue to live in substandard housing and, lacking legal registration for their places of residences, in de facto segregated housing with no access to water, electricity, gas and heating. Housing rights violations against the Romani citizens of Bulgaria have increased in Romani communities in Bulgaria largely due to the lack of enforcement of existing legislation. While the Protection against Discrimination Act has

45 Roma representative’s testimony at the ERTF Hearing, Sofia, 10 November 2011

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

25

been in place since 1 January 2004, it is not adequately enforced in the context of discriminatory practices by state and municipal authorities or by federal ministries and agencies. Forced evictions violate international human rights obligations of the Republic of Bulgaria, including, in particular, its obligations under Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Articles 2 and 5(e)(iii) of the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination; and Articles 17 and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Under international human rights law binding upon the Republic of Bulgaria, evictions can only be justified in highly exceptional circumstances and after all feasible alternatives to eviction have been explored in meaningful consultation with the persons affected. In any event, evictions should not be undertaken in a discriminatory manner or if they render those evicted homeless.46 Despite the 2006 decision by the European Committee of Social Rights which issued a decision on the violation of Article 16 of the Revised European Social Charter47 (right of the family to social, legal and economic protection), evictions against Roma have continued to be carried out and the threat of evictions remains increasingly imminent and real. In September 2009, almost 50 Romani homes were demolished and the families were forcibly evicted in the town of Burgas. As a consequence, almost 200 people were left without accommodation while no alternative housing was provided.48 In his visit to Bulgaria in 2010, the Commissioner on Human Rights witnessed that access to adequate housing

46Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comments No. 4 and 7 47European Roma Rights Centre v Bulgaria, Complaint No. 31/2005, Decision on the merits, 18 October 2006 48European Roma Rights Centre, Letter to the Ministry of Interior in Bulgaria, available at: http://www.errc.org/article/errc-urges-bulgarian-authorities-to-act-against-forced-evictions/3054/0

remains problematic for Roma who live in sub-standard conditions.49 In Sofia, for example, at least 70 percent live in dwellings not considered eligible for infrastructure services. They have no running water, sewage, paved streets, waste collection or street lights.50 More needs to be done towards legalising Roma settlements, connecting Roma settlements to adequate infrastructure and basic facilities, providing social housing for those in need and refraining from forced evictions. Comprehensive housing solutions can be envisaged in the under the 2010 EC Regulation 1080/2006 of the European Regional Development Fund; thus desegregation of settlements and adequate national housing programmes and projects are possible. CHILD PROTECTION At the ERTF hearing, the UNICEF reaffirmed the need for the rights of Romani children to be dealt with as a priority since“…at the moment they are not defined as a priority in the activities of various organisations and institutions; they are either part of the rights of all children or part of integration policies, but in relation to Roma children, there is a specificity which has to be taken into account with respect to specific measures and services to be implemented and provided.”51 New data shows an increase in the over-representation of the Roma children in state care. According to official data, as of 31 December 2009, 1,705 out of 3,440 (49.6

49Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Report on his visit to Bulgaria, 9 February, 2010. The report is available at: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1608817&Site=CommDH&BackColorInternet=FEC65B&BackColorIntranet=FEC65B&BackColorLogged=FFC679 50U.N. Independent Expert on Minority Issues’ statement, Monday, 18 July 2011. 51UNICEF’s testimony at the ERTF Hearing, Sofia, 10 November 2011

http://www.errc.org/article/errc-urges-bulgarian-authorities-to-act-against-forced-evictions/3054/0http://www.errc.org/article/errc-urges-bulgarian-authorities-to-act-against-forced-evictions/3054/0https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1608817&Site=CommDH&BackColorInternet=FEC65B&BackColorIntranet=FEC65B&BackColorLogged=FFC679https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1608817&Site=CommDH&BackColorInternet=FEC65B&BackColorIntranet=FEC65B&BackColorLogged=FFC679https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1608817&Site=CommDH&BackColorInternet=FEC65B&BackColorIntranet=FEC65B&BackColorLogged=FFC679

26

percent) children in Homes for Children Deprived of Parental Care were Romani; 1,190 out of 2,334 (51 percent) children in Homes for Medical-Social Care of Children aged 0 to 3 were Romani; and 314 out of 956 (32.8 percent) children in Homes for Children with Intellectual Disabilities were Romani. According to ERRC’s 2011 report, in the 15 children’s homes visited during the course of the study, 510 of the 809 (63.0 percent) children resident in the homes were Romani.52 ERRC research53 across Bulgaria revealed numerous factors contributing to the over-representation of Romani children in institutional care, which can broadly be broken down into two main categories: those related to the situation of the family (including poverty and material conditions, school absenteeism, single parenthood, unwanted pregnancies and migration) and those related to the child protection system itself (mainly discrimination by child protection actors). Bulgaria needs to amend its domestic legal standards to provide full and adequate protection to Romani children and families at risk of separation, including ensuring that child removal on the basis of poverty or material concerns is prohibited. A 2010 survey of 595 households in residential areas of Bulgaria with predominantly Romani populations including 2,746 individuals from all regions and groups of Roma in the country found that, while the average age of marriage or matrimonial cohabitation among all Roma was 18 years, 50 percent of 16 year-old Roma with only a primary education background or less were already living with a permanent partner. It is likely that some of these began co-habitating with their partner before the age

52European Roma Rights Centre, Life Sentence. Romani Children in Institutional Care, Hungary, June 2011, available at: http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/life-sentence-20-june-2011.pdf 53ERRC, Life Sentence. Romani Children in Institutional Care, June 2011

of 16, the age at which it is legal to enter marriage with parental consent.54 Economic status was also found to be a major determining factor contributing to child marriages, with the age of the first cohabitation or marriage being proportional to a household’s average monthly income and average living area per household.55 The 2010 ERRC report on trafficking56 found that forced child marriages can result in the trafficking of the young bride and increase both her and her children’s vulnerability to trafficking. During research carried out by the ERRC in Romani communities in Bulgaria, respondents from the regions of Pazardzhik and Sliven reported that the most common reason for the trafficking of young Romani women is that they marry too early (often at the age of 14) after the husband “steals the girl.” It was reported that, after one or two years of marriage, girls married under such circumstances may manage to escape but are then very vulnerable to trafficking.57

54Project Preventing Forced Marriages, (29 June 2010), available at: http://www.romanibori.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76%3Astudy-marital-attitudes-among-roma-in-bulgariaq&catid=1%3Alatest-news&Itemid=50&lang=en 55Project Preventing Forced Marriages, (29 June 2010) 56European Roma Rights Centre and People in Need, Breaking the Silence: Trafficking in Romani Communities, Hungary, March 2011, available at: http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/breaking-the-silence-19-march-2011.pdf 57European Roma Rights Centre and People in Need, Breaking the Silence: Trafficking in Romani Communities, Hungary, March 2011.

http://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/life-sentence-20-june-2011.pdfhttp://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/life-sentence-20-june-2011.pdfhttp://www.romanibori.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76%3Astudy-marital-attitudes-among-roma-in-bulgariaq&catid=1%3Alatest-news&Itemid=50&lang=enhttp://www.romanibori.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76%3Astudy-marital-attitudes-among-roma-in-bulgariaq&catid=1%3Alatest-news&Itemid=50&lang=enhttp://www.romanibori.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76%3Astudy-marital-attitudes-among-roma-in-bulgariaq&catid=1%3Alatest-news&Itemid=50&lang=enhttp://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/breaking-the-silence-19-march-2011.pdfhttp://www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/breaking-the-silence-19-march-2011.pdf

Anti-Gypsyism in Bulgaria

27

CONCLUSIONS Roma in Bulgaria suffer from chronic exclusion and discrimination compounded by an unstable and contaminated socio-political climate at national level. The Bulgarian State has been constantly failing to protect and integrate Roma, despite well-defined legal obligations and assumed political commitments. Roma in Bulgaria continue to live in isolation and deprivation, while being often victims of blatant hate speech, racist attacks and hate crimes by both state and non-state actors. The failure of the Bulgarian state authorities to intervene promptly into the clashes formed between Roma and non-Roma surrounding the Katuniza events after September 2011 created a law and order crisis throughout Bulgaria which encouraged incitement to hatred and violent attacks against Roma. The inconsistent intervention of state authorities aggravated by the ultra-nationalistic anti-Roma rhetoric maintained a climate of fear and insecurity amongst Roma in Bulgaria. Threatened with attacks by radical groups hundreds of Roma stopped going to work, while many started to self-organize themselves in defence groups. The ERTF’s findings confirm the persistent exclusion and discrimination of Roma in their access to education, employment, health services and housing. Children’s rights and child protection is a priority of the work of many NGOs in Bulgaria. The report shows that, despite the impressive number of NGO initiatives to desegregate

28

Roma-only schools, Bulgaria has not yet implemented a national policy to desegregate Romani schools in Bulgaria. In addition, desegregation in education encounters new institutional challenges manifested in various project initiatives, which leads to further segregation.

ERTF findings in the area of employment indicate that Roma remain largely excluded from the job market both because of their lack of qualifications and because of discrimination, particularly when it comes to recruitment.

Despite the progress registered by Roma health mediators in access to health care, discrimination against Roma in the access to health care and social assistance for most Roma in Bulgaria remains a barrier. Racial discrimination against Roma in the provision of health care occurs at many levels within the health care system and ranges from overt denial of medical services to more complex forms of discrimination resulting in the provision of inferior medical services. In the area of housing and housing rights, many Roma continue to live in unacceptable housing and lack security of tenure, living in de facto segregated housing with no access to water, electricity, gas and heating. Romani children in Bulgaria are over-represented in state-care institutions and lack the full and adequate protection by the state when at risk of separation, including removal on the basis of poverty or material concerns. Overall, the Government’s inconsistent approach to Roma integration and the application of the law by local authorities and the judiciary have deprived Roma in Bulgaria from enjoying their rights and from contributing both to their wellbeing and to their country’s growth. Investment in Romani communities is critical, however, if any substantial change is to be

achieved, investment in Romani communities needs to take place in a more regulatory, participatory and inclusive manner. Integration programmes should include both Romani and non-Romani communities. Roma should be enabled to become active citizens while a more positive and objective image of Roma has to be promoted by the Government and the media. To this end, it is critical that the Roma are supported in their exercise to gain political representation and decision-making power at local and national level. Policies and programmes on Roma such as those deriving from the Framework for Integration of Roma into Bulgarian Society for 2010–2020 should include well-defined indicators, targets and budgets to achieve impact in all its priorities and should ensure the respect of human rights standards.