What results has Romani policy given so far?
This analysis was created by a combination of different methods. The first part of the analysis was made using the method of content analysis, which used the reports of international organizations on Romani policies implemented in the territory of the Republic of Serbia in the period from 2005 to the present. In this way, we tried to frame the topic by offering official conclusions derived from the long-standing practice of monitoring and reporting on Romani policies and policies towards the Romani community. The second part of the analysis consists of the data obtained from the questionnaire. The questionnaire uses a combination of open-ended and closed-ended questions, and is aimed at the Romani community but also the general public. The general goal of the questionnaire is to examine public opinion on the topic of Romani policies and the perception of the effects of Romani policies on the Romani community. The questionnaire is aimed at the general public, taking into account geography, gender, national identity, as well as the level of education. The specific objectives of the questionnaire are to obtain data on: the effects of Romani policy in specially defined priority areas; the political will to solve the problems of the Romani community; the perception of the voters about the attitudes of political parties towards the Romani community; shortcomings of the Romani political movement as well as proposals to improve it. With the help of this analysis, we will try to draw conclusions and give answers to the key question for this topic, and that is what results the Romani policy has given so far.
Two “Decades” of Roma
Mass political changes in Europe from the end of the 1980s to the 2000s also influenced the Romani political movement, which produced as many as 7 political parties in Serbia at that time. In the new millennium, this trend continued, and another 12 Romani political parties were founded, which caused the fragmentation of the Romani voters. Shortly after the democratic changes, in 2002 the Romani community gained the status of a national minority in the Republic of Serbia, and the civil sector developed rapidly under the auspices of the EU and international organizations. Various strategies, recommendations and plans of the EU and public funds have been adopted, aimed at improving the position of Romani men and women.
Documents
Political participation and representation of Roma shows up in the recommendations of the Government and transnational organizations - the European Union (EU), the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of Europe (CoE), but in practice it remains largely unfulfilled. The 2002 Council of Europe General Statement on Romani Political Participation and Representation in Recommendation 1557 recommended that member states include Roma in all levels of the decision-making process concerning their improvement of their position and conditions, namely to improve political conditions for the Romani community.
Given the difficult situation of Roma who are mostly settled in Central and Southeast Europe at the initiative of the World Bank, the Open Society Fund and the European Commission, the period from 2005 to 2015 was declared the Decade of Roma. The Decade of Roma is a development program aimed at contributing to the faster improvement of the socio-economic status of the Romani population and the reduction of its poverty. The signatories of this agreement were the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovenia, Montenegro and Macedonia, as well as Serbia, which was the presiding country of the Decade of Roma in 2008, when, based on the Law on Government, Serbia brought the Strategy for improving the position of Roma in the Republic of Serbia. After the mentioned strategy, in March 2016, the Strategy for Social Inclusion of Roma Men and Women for the Period from 2016-2025 was adopted, and which was revised in February this year, with a validity of 2022-2030. The goal of all these strategic documents is to lay the foundations for improving the position of Roma in the Republic of Serbia and reducing the gap between the Romani population and the rest of the population and to create a basis for identifying and implementing affirmative action measures, primarily in education, health, employment and housing.
Monitoring and results
Since March 2002, the European Commission has been regularly reporting to the Council and Parliament on the progress of the countries of the Western Balkans region, the European Council granted Serbia candidate status in 2012, and accession negotiations were launched in January 2014. The analytical review of the acquis (screening process) was completed in March 2015. The Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) between Serbia and the EU entered started in September 2013. As the status of the Romani community is one of the unresolved issues hindering the Republic of Serbia's accession to the EU, European Commission reports since 2005 show symbolic progress in education and health, namely Serbia is one of the leaders in the region where Romani children are covered by education, scholarships were provided to high school and university students at the national and provincial levels, but there are still large dropout rates of Romani children from education, especially girls. Progress has been made in obtaining personal documents, but still insufficient. The Implementation Council of the first decade rarely met. Displacement of substandard Romani settlements was often carried out in an inappropriate manner, leading to violations of basic human rights. According to the 2015 report, the report preceding the adoption of the new strategy and the conclusions of the third Roma seminar, held in June 2015, it was concluded that good progress has been made in terms of citizens' records, while in all other areas progress has been slow and unequal. The 2018 report states that a body has been established to monitor the implementation of the strategy, but it has also rarely met. It is pointed out that informal employment is still high and Roma are still under-represented in public administration. Regarding the legalization of Romani settlements, more precisely the housing conditions, there is absolutely no progress, because the adoption of the National Housing Strategy in accordance with the Housing Law from 2016 has been pending for 5 years. According to the assessments of the success of the implementation of the program made by the representatives of the World Bank, despite some progress in the field of education, Serbia lags behind in the realization of the Decade of Roma behind other countries in the region. According to the same assessments, Serbia shows a lack of will to solve the problems of Roma in a sustainable way. Despite countless promises, the issues of Roma have not yet become an integral part of official state policy. As for the first decade of Roma, it is indisputable that it did not yield certain results, which was opposed by "official" Romani representatives in the Secretariat for Romani National Strategy at the Ministry of Human and Minority Rights, as well as leaders within the Decade of Roma League office. The fact is that there is no precise public report on the progress made in the Roma decade. If we consider the involvement of Roma at the level of rhetoric of the Government and Roma civil society, the general impression is that Roma are talked about only in terms of projects and sporadic measures, but not in terms of programs and integrated policies.
As for the existing political spectrum, it is reactive and situational, without a clear ideological division. In such a political environment, minority parties are victims of "big" parties and their electoral mathematics, which is often seen in laws governing the political and electoral rights of minorities, on the other hand, the political position of Roma men and women in Serbia is conditioned by unfinished institutionalization of the political community of Roma men and women in Serbia. In the 2007 parliamentary elections, we had two Romani lists, each of which managed to win the right to one seat in the Assembly[1], while the following year in the 2008 parliamentary elections, three Romani parties / lists participated and none had managed to secure a place in the then convocation of the Parliament of the Republic of Serbia[2]. After that, in all subsequent elections that followed until today, we did not have the participation of Romani parties / lists, so it is evident that the Romani leadership is experiencing a greater crisis than ever in the history of political emancipation of the Romani community. It is passive, without the possibility and influence of important decisions that affect the Roma. The National Council of the Roma National Minority, as the highest representative body of the Romani national minority in the Republic of Serbia, does not instill trust and support in the community and does absolutely nothing that would aim for substantial change for Roma. Also, about 1,000 Roma NGOs are registered, which are unstable and have limited influence, mainly due to their inability to reconcile with their moral and political foundations, while responding adequately to the new political context.
Regarding the crime of corruption during the elections, it can be said that "vote buying" has become a general phenomenon in the Republic of Serbia, where the Romani community is most often targeted by political parties due to the difficult economic situation of the Romani community, a crime that only leads to the expression of hatred and intolerance of the majority and other peoples towards Roma men and women, for which the majority people blame the Roma for such rigged election victories, and the essence is that the whole system is to blame for this, thus abusing the social situation of the poorest (the most vulnerable) part of the population, with no response from authorities, although that is a criminal offence. This, in turn, leads to the manifestation of hatred and intolerance of the majority population towards Roma men and women, and the blame for rigged elections is being put on the Roma. The gist of it is that the entire system is at fault, as it uses the poorest and the most vulnerable, by means blackmail and threat.
Questionnaire analysis
190 respondents answered the questionnaire. Most respondents come from the largest cities in Serbia; Belgrade, Nis, Novi Sad, Kragujevac, Krusevac, Leskovac, Vranje, etc. Regarding the age structure, 21.8% of respondents are in the category of 18 to 30 years old, 71.8% of respondents in the category of 31 to 65, 3.7% of respondents over 65 years old and 3.1% of respondents without answers. Gender structure, unfortunately, does not reflect the true state of our society; 63.3% of respondents were male, and only 36.2 were female, while 0.5% of respondents chose the option "Other". The educational structure of the respondents looks like this: 5.3% did not finish primary school, 20.2% with primary school, 42% with secondary school and 32.4% with higher education. Of the total number of respondents, 83.6% are Roma and 16.4% are not.
In the first question, we made several claims, and it was up to the respondents to agree or disagree with our claim. We also offered the answer "I don't know". When forming the statements, we considered the balance between positive and negative statements so that the questionnaire itself was neutral.
The first statement is: "Romani policy does not yield results for the Roma community." 111 respondents agreed with this statement, 48 did not agree, and “I do not know” answer was given by 26 respondents. From this we can conclude that the perception of the community is that the Romani policy has not yielded results for the Romani community.
The second statement reads: "Romani policies have improved the position of the community in the last two decades." 70 respondents agreed with this statement, 72 did not agree, and 37 respondents did not give an answer. Opinions are divided on this issue. We interpret these results as the result of the uneven impact of Romani policies on various members of the Romani community. In this study, no significant differences in responses were observed in respondents with higher and lower levels of education, as well as in younger and older respondents.
The third statement reads: "Romani policies have led to improvements in education." As many as 116 respondents agreed with this statement, 44 did not agree, and 23 respondents did not give an answer. Such a significant difference in responses is not surprising; in efforts to improve the position of the Romani community, the field of education was most often rated as one of the most successful.
The fourth statement reads: "Romani policies have led to improvements in employment." 60 respondents agreed with this statement, 90 did not agree, and 32 respondents did not give an answer. Here we can conclude that employment policies have yielded poor results according to the perception of the Romani community, which is in line with many reports on this topic.
The fifth statement reads: "Romani policies have led to improvements in the field of housing." 39 agreed with this statement, 101 did not agree, and 44 respondents did not answer. In the area of housing and infrastructure, there has been the least progress in the last 20 years. Substandard Roma settlements are still undeveloped, without electricity, drinking water and sewage connections. In recent years, civil society has launched an initiative to legalize sustainable Romani settlements, but there are still no concrete results.
The sixth statement reads: "Roma policies have led to improvements in the field of health." 54 agreed with this statement, 86 did not agree, and 40 respondents did not answer. Although the introduction of health mediators is one of the most successful projects in an effort to improve the position of the Roma community, access to health care and discrimination are reflected in the responses we have received here.
The seventh statement reads: "Roma leaders have lost contact with the community." 101 agreed with this statement, 26 did not agree, and 53 respondents did not answer. Apart from the fact that the Romani community largely agrees on this issue, a large number of answers “I do not know” also speak in its favor. The very fact that the respondents “do not know” tells us that the community is not in contact with those who represent it sufficiently.
The eighth statement reads: "Political parties are interested in the Romani community only at the time of the elections." As many as 147 agreed with this statement, 20 disagreed, and 18 respondents did not have an answer. This is the statement with which the majority of respondents agreed, which clearly tells us about the treatment that the Romani community receives from political parties. The narrative that accompanies this claim is so pervasive, which our questionnaire confirms, that it can be freely taken as proof of this phenomenon. The Romani community is perceived by political parties as cheap votes, and pre-election promises, as a rule, remain just that; promises.
The ninth, and last statement, reads: "There is no political will in Serbia to solve the problem of the Romani community." 126 agreed with this statement, 24 disagreed, and 32 respondents gave no answer. From these answers we can clearly conclude that the perception of the Romani community is that there is no political will in Serbia to improve the position of the Romani community.
In the continuation of the research, the respondents were asked how they choose which party to give their vote to. In this question, we gave four offered answers, with the possibility to write the answer if the offered answers are not in accordance with the answer of the respondents. The answers we offered were: a) According to the pre-election promises; b) According to personal beliefs; c) According to the political program offered by the party; d) According to promises of personal services if a party wins power; e) Other.
From the chart above, we can see that the majority of respondents (56.1%) state that the choice comes from personal beliefs. The next answer with 19.6% is according to the political program offered by the party. From these two answers we can conclude that the Roma community seeks interaction with political parties and that the Roma community wants to make informed choices. The answer to the question of whether this is really happening would be the subject of another research.
The next most common answer with 14.7% is "other". Here we got answers such as: I do not vote; I boycott all elections; they are all thieves; I would vote for a Romani party. From this we conclude that there is a part of the community that is dissatisfied with the current political situation in Serbia, and what is especially meaningful, the Romani community is looking for a Romani party to vote for.
The devastating result is that as many as 50.8% of respondents answered YES to the question "Did someone offer you money, and in return asked you to vote for a certain party". This confirms the claim that political parties target the Romani community as easy-to-buy votes, taking advantage of its poor socio-economic position.
Through this research, we wanted to find out what is needed for Romani political parties to be better, so the next question is just that. In the question, we left the respondents the freedom to write their answer, so that the answers would be as complete as possible. In order to analyze this data, we divided the answers into several categories. These categories are: a) Young, educated and non-corrupt Roma men and women (25.1%); b) Unification of the community (20.7%); c) Stopping corruption (17.2%); d) Independence from majority political parties (7.9%); e) Work with the Romani community (9.4%); f) Roma men and women in decision-making positions (8.3%); d) Other * (11.4%). A total of 172 respondents answered this question, as in the following chart:
*In the category “other”, we grouped answer with no statistical significance
The answers in category b of the previous question add to the validity of the next question which reads: "What is the biggest problem why the Romani community is not organized?" In this question it was possible to mark several answers.
Distrust of the Romani community in Romani political leaders was chosen by 88 (46.3%) respondents, and in direct connection with that, 86 (45.3%) respondents chose the answer "Disorganization of Romani parties". These two responses lead us to the following conclusions: the Romani community is aware of the importance of political participation in achieving equality in a society; the Romani community is aware of the role of legitimate leadership in a human rights movement; and the Romani community has a clear idea of the direction in which changes should take place within the Romani movement in Serbia. The answer "Lack of ideology that clearly shows the direction of Romani policy" was given by 75 (39.5%) respondents. This validates the results of the previous sections of this questionnaire, where respondents state that Romani leaders have lost contact with the community. If a clear ideology exists, the message does not reach the community. From all this we conclude that there are problems in the Romani movement itself that the community clearly identifies.
Regarding external influences on the Romani movement, the answers "Influence of majority parties on Romani parties" and "Systemic corruption" were chosen by 69 (36.3%) and 75 (39.5%) respondent respectively. The perception of the community is very clear here as well; it is also necessary to change the system within which the Romani movement lives, in order to change the situation for the better.
The answer "Other" was chosen by 19 (10%) respondents. As these answers mostly fall into one of the above categories (Poor communication with ordinary people; we are not united, everyone works for themselves; there is no agreement), we will not analyze them separately here.
The last question in the questionnaire was "What needs to happen for Romani policy to give better results for the Romani community?". There were no offered answers in this question, but we asked the respondents to write their answers themselves. In order to analyze the answers, we created several categories in relation to the answers received: a) Eradication of corruption; b) Emergence of young and educated leaders; c) Unification of the Romani community; d) Greater political participation of the Romani community; e) Implementation of strategic documents; f) Other.
The statistically most significant answers fall into categories b and c; the emergence of young and educated leaders with 17.9% and the unification of the Romani community with a staggering 35.7%. The second category includes answers that are statistically negligible, as well as answers like "I don't know" or "miracle". Other categories are arranged according to the chart
Conclusion
Roma are mostly excluded from the process of equal participation in public issues, since the 1990s different strategies and recommendations have been adopted, which approach the issues of Roma men and women with minor differences. What they all have in common is that they do not offer concrete solutions to the problems of Roma, and if those solutions are offered, the authors complain that no funds are provided for the implementation of these solutions. At the local and the state level, nothing was done to increase the number of Roma who would be involved in the functioning of these institutions.
The situation of Roma can be described as socially marginal in the presence of systemic racism, which is significantly tolerated by the competent institutions and which is approached as a "common" phenomenon. The reasons for this should be sought within the Romani national minority as well, but primarily in inaccessible institutions, which are based on laws and strategies forced upon them by the international community, whose inappropriate implementation does not lead to the required level of positive change. This results in the inability to meet both existential needs (housing, health care, material security and employment) and inclusive needs (education, information and social activism). In this way, various frustrations develop to which members of the Romani community react: by withdrawing, conforming, by "innovative rebellions" through engagement in civil society.
The ever-changing context presents new challenges to which Romani leadership cannot respond. There are no inclusive and effective leadership models for more than 500,000 Roma in Serbia. National and local public institutions do not represent Romani interests. A significant number of Roma who vote are affected by fear and violence and manipulation as a result of electoral fraud. Consequently, the Roma are the most unrepresented national minority, absent from local and national decision-making processes, and decisions that affect them are made illegitimately. Serbia has not made significant progress for the Roma, except for limited progress in scope and influence. Macro trends have reduced interest and priorities for Roma, with many political parties limiting democracy, and rejecting equality and social cohesion. In this climate, anti-Roma policies are accompanied by a political agenda that refuses to support the Romani community. Despite some attempts at inter-ministerial coordination, the NRIS still lacks visible results, substantial policy initiatives and the efficient use of public and EU funds.
Also, as we stated, in February 2022 a revised Strategy for Social Inclusion of Roma Men and Women for the period 2022-2030 was adopted, which was adopted without consensus, many NGOs did not participate in its adoption, and since the day of adoption it is not available on any of the websites of the competent institutions, which speaks in favor of the presented and catastrophic situation in which the Romani community is currently. “Nothing about Roma without Roma”!
From the questionnaire we can further conclude that the Romani community believes that the current Romani policies do not work and that they are influenced by many internal and external factors; systemic corruption, the influence of majority parties, lack of political will to solve the problem of the Romani community, disloyal leadership within the Romani community, lack of young people on the Romani political scene, etc. We can also conclude that the opinion of the Romani community is that the state is not doing enough and that policies towards the Romani community, although they have yielded some results, have not done enough in the last two decades. As the topics covered in this analysis are of great importance for the Romani community and the Romani political movement, we believe that additional research in these areas is necessary in order to plan future actions in the best possible way.
[1] http://arhiva.rik.parlament.gov.rs/doc/arhiva/poslanici/2007/2.%20izvestaj%20o%20rezultatima%20np.pdf
[2] http://arhiva.rik.parlament.gov.rs/latinica/arhiva-izbori-za-narodne-poslanike-2008.php