A. Patrignani & R. Villé (eds.) Rromani youths: The pathways of juvenile justice. UNICRI publication series No 59. Rome, 1998.

Summary in English
Summary in Rromani

Table of Contents


Chapter 1
The project in the international framework


Methodology and data sources

The United Nations and the human rights perspective The European normative context

Structure of the study

Selected bibliographical references

Chapter 2
Juvenile justice and Rromani youths in Hungary: the case of Pest County

(Angela Kóczé & Piroska Versitz)


The functioning of the juvenile justice system in Hungary

The social service and Non-Governmental Organizations

The perspective of the Rromani community



Chapter 3
Juvenile justice and Rromani youths in Italy: the case of Florence

(Sandro Costarelli)


The juvenile justice system

Social services and NGOs in Florence

The perspective of the Rromani community in the city of Florence

Analysis and discussion of the issues


Chapter 4
La justice des mineurs et les jeunes rroms en France: le cas de la région parisienne

(Jacqueline Charlemagne)


Le fonctionnement de la justice des mineurs

La protection de la jeunesse: services sociaux et associations

Les jeunes et leurs familles face à l'intervention judiciaire

Analyses transversales



Chapter 5
Issues of concern, issues of hope

The complex realities

Juvenile justice: pathways riddled with obstacles

Positive developments

Annex: Selected contact points

Summary in English


In 1997 the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute (UNICRI) designed and implemented a comparative research study in the field of juvenile justice and Rromani [2] youths. The study was carried out in three European sites: Paris (France), Florence (Italy) and Pest County, the metropolitan area of Budapest (Hungary).

The main aim of the project was to provide information on, and discuss the interaction between minors from Rromani communities and the juvenile justice system in the three selected sites, in order to promote the protection of the rights of the child at risk of falling into contact with, or already in contact with the law. It also aimed at improving communication and co-operation between the Rromani community, the juvenile justice system, and social services and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), in the best interests of the child. The results of the study, composed of an introductory chapter dealing mainly with the existing international instruments, the three local reports and a conclusive chapter, were published in 1997 in UNICRI publication No. 59 "Rromani Youths: The Pathways of Juvenile Justice". [3]

It was decided to prepare this summary, for several reasons. The first reason was to facilitate the dissemination of the results of the study and, given the reduced size of the summary text, by making it available on Internet. The second reason was to produce a text that could be translated into the most commonly used Rromani language and therefore become accessible to Rromani persons. The third reason was to provide a different presentation of the key information from that of the publication, i.e. according to issues instead of countries in order to provide a more global and synthetic view of the situation.


Although Rromani communities have been studied from different perspectives - mainly social, cultural, linguistic and educational - there have been few researches on the interaction between the (juvenile) justice system and the minors belonging to Rromani communities. This is a very difficult issue to tackle, mainly due to the complexity and the sensitivity of the topic. The study required a very cautious approach so as to avoid labelling or side effects which might result in a biased presentation of the real situation, and hence a potential further risk of weakening the rights of Rromani children.

The methodology was chosen with a view to minimising risks of discrimination between one aspect and another and to avoid giving the impression of looking for "the guilty party", which was not the purpose of the study. The main idea of the project was to provide a balanced presentation of the experiences and perspectives of the different parties involved. This was considered particularly important for the Rromani people in that it would provide them with a rare opportunity to speak for themselves instead of having somebody else speak on their behalf. However, although the project attempted to give the floor also to Rromani people, it did not have the pretension of representing the perspectives of all the Rromani communities. The views, problems and perspectives presented in the reports by the Rromani, as well as by the other interviewed persons, are limited in time (the situation is in continuous flux and new problems emerge while others disappear) and in space (the information contained in the reports refers to Pest County, Florence and Paris, and not to Hungary, Italy and France). Particular stress was given to the juvenile justice system (both from the legislative and practical points of view) of the different countries in the context of the relevant international instruments related to the juvenile justice system and human rights.

Given the lack of quantitative data and the sensitivity and complexity of the issue, it was decided to opt for a more qualitative approach. This approach was also chosen because it would allow for a more in-depth analysis of the problems related to the interactions between Rromani children and the juvenile justice system in daily practices. A national consultant from each participating country was selected to be in charge of carrying out the research in his or her country's selected site [4]. Given the wide range of perspectives dealt with by the project, the selected national consultants have different backgrounds, i.e. they "represent" the social service sectors, the Rromani communities, and the juvenile justice system. The information was collected from three different sources: official reports; the available literature; and interviews with key persons using an unstructured focused questionnaire. Three groups of key informants were interviewed: juvenile justice personnel; social workers and NGO personnel; and members of the Rromani communities including juveniles, when appropriate and possible.


While the Rromani situation at the regional, national and local levels still needs to be improved, especially in terms of human rights, the international community is becoming increasingly aware of this and is making great efforts to improve the overall situation of Rromani communities. The role of the United Nations in the field of human rights, and that of the European Commission and the Council of Europe in the protection of minorities are essential for improving the Rromani situation, and they are very well assisted and seconded in their field activities by numerous non-governmental organisations. All the interventions made at the international, regional, national and local levels by the organisations and institutions aimed at improving the Rromani situation should therefore be seen as a global and joint effort.

The United Nations and the human rights perspective

Although the Charter of the United Nations (1945) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) are fifty years old, they are still of fundamental importance because they continue to provide a basis for all other international instruments. Among the various principles listed in the Declaration, those of equality and non-discrimination the cornerstone of the United Nations - are of particular importance for, and relevance to this study. They state, in articles 1 and 2 respectively, that:

"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights."

"Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status."

Later on, in 1965, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination was approved, which lists the steps that signatory Member States must take in their national context to eliminate racial discrimination. The concept of non-discrimination as a condition of human rights law is also reiterated in the following two covenants which deal with particular rights: the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966). These Covenants and Conventions are legally binding for the Member States that signed and ratified them, and oblige the States Parties to submit reports on the measures which they have adopted and the progress made in achieving the observance of the rights recognised in the instruments. [5]

More recently, the universality of human rights was reaffirmed in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, adopted by the United Nations World Conference on Human Rights (Vienna, June 1993) which also urged the universal ratification of human rights treaties. Other legally non-binding United Nations instruments include the Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice (1978) and the Declaration on the Elimination of all Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief (1981).

In theory, the above mentioned instruments and their related fundamental principles should suffice to assure a peaceful, multi-cultural co-existing human society. However, in recent years there has been an increase in ethnic contrasts, racism, xenophobia and other behaviour pointing to a decrease in, or complete lack of, tolerance and respect. Historical and anthropological studies testify to the unstable character of societies and cultures and to the importance of contacts between different cultures in the development and evolution of all societies. Notwithstanding the central role of cultural contacts throughout human history, however, difficulties still exist in accepting the different, i.e. "others". Even today minority groups are, in many contexts, exposed to risks of violence and discrimination.

Faced with this unfortunate situation, the United Nations and the international community in general have continued to promote respect of human rights and non-discrimination. In 1992, the General Assembly of the United Nations approved the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, which recognises that particular attention should be paid to respecting the rights of minorities since they are more at risk of discrimination. The Declaration singles out special situations and needs of minorities and the corresponding special safeguards, taking into consideration a variety of aspects such as education, language, the development of an individual identity, political representation, and religion.

As far as the Rromani populations are concerned, in 1992 the Commission on Human Rights adopted the resolution on Protection of Roma (gypsies), of which article 2:

"Invites States to adopt all appropriate measures in order to eliminate any form of discrimination against the Roma (gypsies)."

In 1996 the Commission on Human Rights adopted the resolution entitled Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, whereby it urges governments and the international community to promote and protect the rights of persons belonging to minorities as set out in the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities.

It is also important to underline that the International Romani Union - an umbrella organisation co-ordinating a large number of regional and national bodies in about thirty countries throughout the world - obtained the status of accredited NGO to the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) in 1979 and the consultative status to the United Nations in 1993.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child

One of the most important steps regarding the status of the child was the adoption in 1989 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). This was the result of years of efforts aimed at recognising the child not as an object but as a fully-fledged human being, with all the related rights. The CRC is a substantive global instrument not only because of the rights it guarantees, but also because of its world-wide coverage. On January 1998, 191 States had become party to the Convention, which is the first nearly universally ratified human rights treaty in history. To summarise the issues covered by the CRC would be restrictive, because all the 54 articles are of crucial importance. The set of rights covered by the CRC can however be presented by reference to three concepts, the so called "three P" [6]: provision of things and services such as name, nationality, health and education; protection against acts such as torture; and participation in decisions concerning their life. These three elements are the basis of the new status of the child as a human being.

Within the framework of the present study, article 2.1 of the CRC is essential in that it refers to the concept of non-discrimination.

"States Parties shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child's or his or her parent's or legal guardian's race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status."

With the aim of being a comprehensive instrument, the CRC could not but emphasise the issue of the child in contact with juvenile justice, and mentions, in its article 40.1, that:

"States Parties recognise the right of every child alleged as, accused of, or recognised as having infringed the penal law to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the child's sense of dignity and worth, which reinforces the child's respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of others and which takes into account the child's age and the desirability of promoting the child's reintegration and the child's assuming a constructive role in society."

The same article then lists a series of guarantees, promotes the establishment of specific laws, procedures, authorities and institutions, and asks for alternatives to institutional care.

Although one of the best qualities of the CRC is its universal and comprehensive character, it also has some limits especially in the field it covers. In other words, the CRC is a global instrument that needs to be supported by more specific ones. Hence the important role of such instruments as the United Nations standards and norms on juvenile justice.

United Nations standards and norms on juvenile justice

Juvenile justice is one of the priority issues of the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme. Three United Nations instruments, which were adopted by United Nations Congresses on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, deal more specifically with juvenile justice. Although these instruments are not legally binding (as is the CRC), they are however very important as guidelines for legislation and the administration of justice at the national level. They are:

They complement one another in the sense that they cover three different phases of the criminal justice process: the prevention of juvenile delinquency (The Riyadh Guidelines), the implementation of a progressive juvenile justice system (The Beijing Rules), and respect for the rights of juveniles in prisons, institutions or other closed premises (The JDL Rules). The main principles of the above instruments can be summarised as follow:

Although the child belonging to minorities is rarely mentioned in the international instruments because of the overriding non-discrimination principle, there is a consensus that special attention should be given to "children in need of special protection measures", such as those working or living on the streets, those deprived of a family environment, disabled children and children of minorities, immigrants and indigenous populations. The interest manifested by the United Nations in the implementation of existing standards and norms was reconfirmed at the 6th Session of the United Nations Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (1997). The Commission discussed the resolution on the Administration of Juvenile Justice, which contains the Draft Guidelines for Action on Children in the Criminal Justice System that was then adopted by the ECOSOC. This is a practically oriented instrument aimed at providing a framework to implement the CRC (with regard to children involved with the administration of juvenile justice) as well as the international standards and norms on juvenile justice.

At the regional level, common historical and cultural backgrounds have made it easier for regional organisations to deal with specific issues and for measures to be easily and directly implemented at the national and local levels. This is the case in Europe, where historically and culturally, single countries have always preceded the European governing bodies in expressing their great concern with Rromani issues.

The European normative context

Numerous instruments have been adopted by the two main European bodies - the European Commission and the Council of Europe - in the field of human rights and protection of minority rights.

The European Convention for Protection of Humans Right and Fundamental Freedoms (1950) is an instrument that provides States, groups, NGOs and individuals the possibility to report violations either as witnesses or as victims. Other important instruments are the European Social Charter (1961); the Declaration regarding Intolerance - A Threat to Democracy (1981) which condemns all ideologies denying equality of all human beings; the Declaration (and Plan of Action) on Combating Racism, Xenophobia, Anti-Semitism and Intolerance, adopted by the Heads of State and Government of the Member States of the Council of Europe at the Vienna Summit in October 1993; and the European Convention on the Exercise of Children's Rights (1996).

The European (Rromani) minority rights

The presence of numerous ethnic minorities in Europe, and the issue of the need to protect them from abuse and discrimination and to guarantee their rights, have forced the Council of Europe and other European bodies to give particular attention to minorities in general and to Rromani communities in particular. Several important documents have been adopted including:

In 1994, the Council of Europe adopted the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. It entered into force on the 1st February 1998 and is a primary legally binding multilateral instrument on the protection of minorities.

In 1992, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) established a special office of High Commissioner on National Minorities who has to report on the situation of Rromani communities in Europe. In 1994, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) created a "Contact Point for Roma and Sinti Issues". [7]

Although international instruments are of fundamental importance, they cannot by themselves guarantee respect of children's rights. Once these instruments have been created, it is essential that they be implemented and that the related agencies and institutions be established and provided with support.


Although the key issues that follow are general enough to be considered as potentially reflecting the real situation in many countries and locations, it should however be stressed once again that the information refers to three situations that are limited geographically and in time. It is also important to underline that, given the multiplicity of ethnically and historically different Rromani communities, any generalisations would go beyond reality and should therefore be avoided.

The socio-demographic conditions

It is difficult to provide an exact date for the first arrivals of Rromani communities in Europe, although it is believed that the first waves of migration of Rromani groups/communities into Europe date back to somewhere between the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Right from the beginning of Europe's contacts with these people, legends and rumours became mixed with facts and only at the end of the eighteenth century was it discovered, through linguistic studies, that Rromani originated from India and started to emigrate towards the west during the ninth century. [8]

In 1994 more than half a million Rromani were living in Hungary which has a population of approximately 10,000,000 inhabitants. They are Hungarian citizens. This community is not homogeneous but is composed of different sub-ethnic and linguistic groups. The youths represent the majority group according to age. Following the assimilation policy of the communist regime, new provisions have been introduced to guarantee the rights of the minorities. These include, in particular, the law on the Rights of Ethnic Minorities (1993) which contains several provisions relating to language, education, culture and representation, and the appointment of an Ombudsman to be in charge of defending minority rights. However, despite the new democracy, the socio-economic conditions of the Rromani community are still very poor. Manifestations of overt negative opinions about Rromani have become more frequent and economic liberalisation has, in general, worsened their condition. Rromani represent part of the most disadvantaged Hungarian population in terms of education, employment, housing conditions, and economic and social opportunities in general. Illiteracy is widespread and data relating to 1994 show that only 3% of Rromani pupils continued secondary education compared with 50% of non-Rromani. While the unemployment rate for the whole population was 11%, it reached 61.2% among Rromani. Moreover, acts and/or situations of discrimination and violence against them are widespread.

The first waves of migration to France are documented at around the fifteenth century, at least in the region of Paris. The Rromani community is multi stratified and heterogeneous. The first fifteenth century wave of migration was followed by various waves of different Rromani groups arriving in France, particularly after the Second World War following the demise of the communist regime in Eastern Europe and, even more so, in 1990s after the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. The typology of Rromani groups has changed with this last wave in that many of them obtained the status of refugees. The current Rromani population in France is estimated at around 240,000, half of which are nomad or semi-nomad, and half sedentary. Eighty thousand of them are less than 16 years old, and 90% of them have French nationality. Poor economic conditions, low educational levels, school dropout, and difficulties in finding jobs and proper housing are the most evident problems faced by these people, particularly those arriving with the last wave of migration.

In Italy, the first waves of migration date back to the fourteenth century. As in France, the characteristics and composition of the Rromani communities changed in Italy after the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. The majority of Rromani arriving with the new waves came from the former Yugoslavia. In 1994, the Rromani population was estimated at between 80,000 and 120,000 people, of which almost 50% were children. Of these, between 25,000 and 35,000 do not have Italian citizenship. In Florence, 80% of the non-Italian Rromani are clandestine, the remainder of them being refugees. The clandestine Rromani are not entitled to state services and therefore represent the group living in the worst socio-economic conditions. Only 30-35% of the Rromani school age population attend school, while adults are mainly illiterate and almost all of them are unemployed.

Although the situation is slightly different in each of the three sites, the fact remains that the socio-economic living conditions of Rromani are far from easy, one of the most important factors being their legal (in the case of refugees or citizens) or illegal status.

Rromani youth delinquency

It is important, when speaking about Rromani youth delinquency, to underline the lack of appropriate studies in this area. Although the problem of Rromani youth representing a group that is particularly at risk of becoming involved in criminal activities cannot be denied, it is too often based on prejudices that are strengthened by their "visibility" and difference. In many situations described in the three reports, most of the problems are not related to "the" Rromani culture but rather to the interaction between poverty, marginalisation and some cultural aspects. These result in Rromani children being at a higher risk of becoming involved in criminal activities, as well as being processed by the criminal justice system.

The local reports reveal that the majority of offences committed by Rromani youths are property-related crimes, petty crimes, pick pocketing and robberies. A significant percentage of the crimes committed by Rromani offenders in France, Hungary and Italy are for survival reasons, i.e. to support the family or community. An analysis of juvenile delinquency among Rromani should also take into account lack of resources and alternatives for the children as well as for their families. People often have an exaggerated perception of Rromani delinquency, and in particular of its dangerous element. This facilitates the transmission of the idea that Rromani - often meaning Rromani children - is synonymous with deviance and delinquency. What distinguishes Rromani youth delinquency from that of non-Rromani juveniles of the same age, is the repetition of the same offence by the same juveniles, as well as the greater involvement of Rromani girls. This latter point seems to be a consequence of the subordinated role that women and girls usually have in the Rromani community. They are strongly submissive to the power of the males in the family - fathers, husbands, brothers, male relatives - and it is very difficult for them to make their own decisions. Moreover, in the Rromani community the age of adulthood and consequently the age of responsibility when members of the community are expected to provide subsistence to their families, starts much sooner than the legal adult age of 18 years.

The crucial point of the juvenile justice system is the age of penal responsibility. Children below that age have no penal responsibility because they are considered incapable of understanding their actions. Consequently, they cannot be legally accused of committing a criminal offence. The age of penal responsibility is 14 in Hungary and Italy, and 13 in France, and juvenile justice is applied to youths aged between 14 and 18 in Hungary and Italy, and between 13 and 18 in France. Very often it is the adults who request the children - especially those who are under the age of penal responsibility - to commit offences. In fact, given their age, vulnerability and state of dependency, these children are particularly at risk of being used, not only by their own families and community but also by criminal organisations, to perpetrate offences. Rromani youth offenders should therefore be considered also as victims.

Although it appears that some specific ethnic/national groups are specialised in committing offences in France and Italy, Rromani groups are extremely heterogeneous, and it is impossible to generalise. In this respect, it should be underlined that those minors who come into contact with the law are not only a small proportion of the Rromani youth population, but that also at least in France and Italy - they often belong to specific communities from the last migratory wave that usually represent the most socio-economically disadvantaged Rromani groups.

The three reports also underline a recent trend among Rromani juveniles to become more actively involved in drug related crimes. In the Rromani camp in Florence, almost all males over 15 years old and some girls are addicted to heroin. Moreover, the use of very young children as drug dealers, some of them less than 5 years old, has recently been discovered in Florence. A similar phenomenon has appeared in France since the beginning of the 1990s: the greater involvement of young Rromani - particularly males - in drug offences both as consumers and dealers of heavy drugs, with many cases of deaths due to overdoses and AIDS.

In the light of this complex situation, the juvenile justice system is not always well prepared to deal with these cases.

The juvenile justice systems

It appears from the reports that the leading spirit of the international norms and standards, from the CRC to the specific United Nations instruments relating to children in conflict with the law, has been incorporated in national legislation. In all the national cases presented in this study, reference is made to the importance of new legislation and procedures adopted by the countries aimed at protecting the child and his or her psychological, educational and developmental needs and rights. Particular attention is given to: the role of juvenile justice as a means to assist the child in the resocialisation process; the importance of individualising interventions so as to better assist the child's (re)integration into society; the infliction of custodial sentences on juveniles only as a last resort so as to avoid labelling and its application for the shortest period possible; and the need for juveniles to be separated from adults during the period of imprisonment. Several differentiated measures aimed at avoiding youths' contact with the justice system are envisaged in the three countries: probation, foster homes, educational services and provision of psychological assistance. A distinct juvenile justice system already exists in France and Italy while in Hungary juvenile criminal cases are not adjudicated by separate courts, despite the fact that the Minister of Justice appoints juvenile judges to deal with these cases. In Hungary juveniles are not always separated from adults during detention and since juvenile offences are often committed in series and by groups, the criminal justice proceedings sometimes continue for several years.

However, from the point of view of the administration of juvenile justice, all the above-mentioned aspects appear to lose their positive potential when the juvenile justice system is dealing with Rromani minors. In fact, the problem appears related more to the implementation of the existing rules than to lack of appropriate legislation.

There is a tendency to institutionalise Rromani youths rather than to apply alternative special measures provided for by law. In the case of Rromani, more often than not the role of juvenile justice is a repressive or institutionalising one. As stated in the reports: "In front of this delinquency, the response of the police, like the one of the justice, seems unsuited and repressive". "...only two well known alternatives are left for Rromani children in conflict with the law: to be placed in detention or to be released (with no subsequent intervention by the social services)". The first set of "practical" problems that are strongly underlined particularly in France and Italy are those connected with identification, age control, residence, and contacts with the families. The juvenile justice system relies on the criterion of age, and the majority of the provisions should be individually tailored to take into consideration the personal characteristics of the child and his or her family and social environment. "Systematically, we have doubts on the identity as well as on the age. In front of the lack of guarantees on the identity of these juveniles, in front of the repetition of deviant behaviours, in front of their denial, and in front of the impossibility of contacting the family, a judicial reaction based on the repression is taking place."

A study carried out among the prison population in Hungary in 1989 shows that the crime rate was related to economic conditions and that crime was more widespread in poor areas inhabited by non-Rromani. In the report from Pest County, the tensions and conflicts between Rromani and the police represent one of the most serious problems. A new project has been recently launched, in order to increase contact and communication between Rromani and the police through training, the involvement of Rromani representatives as mediators, and the enrolment of more Rromani in the police departments. However, the problem cannot be resolved only through the criminal justice system. There is a serious lack of programmes and services addressed to juveniles in Hungary and those that do exist are underdeveloped. There are no specific programmes for Rromani children, and the few existing initiatives on juveniles are not advertised among the Rromani. The interviews with practitioners working in the correctional centres of Budapest underlined the need for appropriate programmes and services to deal with and assist Rromani children.

In Italy the juvenile justice personnel call for the need of a more organic response involving both the penal and the social services. The difficulty in applying juvenile justice legislation effectively is widely recognised. Great frustration arises from the impossibility to contact the family, to identify the child and to create some form of communication with them. The reaction to this has been that, since the 1990s, in Florence the local court has ordered the police to take fingerprints and photos of all Rromani children caught committing an offence, including those who claim to be minors, and has created a data bank. The need for more serious investigation into the families was also suggested, as is done in similar cases involving Italian children, as well as separation from their family and removal from their parents' authority if the child's development is at risk. The same complaints were made by the operators of the social services and NGOs who provide a link between the Rromani community and the institutions, apply special measures and help the juvenile justice system to assess the child's needs. Very often Rromani children disappear because they do not trust the social workers, which makes it almost impossible to carry out the investigation. The operators also underlined that Rromani children and their families do not understand the judicial system, on the one hand, and perceive the possibility of being sentenced as a kind of calculated risk rather than the result of a due action, on the other. For many of the families the only way to survive is to commit offences, and school is not an "income-raising" activity. The juvenile justice system appears ineffective from the preventive, educational and social perspectives. Rromani children experience first and foremost all the prejudices against Rromani, and the idea that they are Rromani whatever they do prevails. A great sense of frustration is strongly perceived by both the juvenile justice and social services operators.

The major problem of the identification of Rromani children is also underlined in France. In 1997, following an observation that a few young girls from the former Yugoslavia were committing most of the offences, the tribunal of Paris launched a special programme. They have started to centralise the information on these girls and a magistrate has been assigned to follow through the cases. This magistrate, who works in strict collaboration with the social services and the police, in responsible for proposing, initiating and imposing individualised interventions. The immediate goal is to obtain increasingly more reliable information on the girls in order to tailor appropriate interventions. The medium-term objective is to improve knowledge and communication in order to correct and improve both attitudes and behaviour. The first results (although at the time of the report the project had only been implemented for 3 months) pointed to some improvement in contacts with some of the girls as well as in their conditions. However, they also indicated some communication problems, such as lack of contact with the family and difficulties in involving the Rromani community. Organisational problems such as the operators' heavy workloads and lack of interest in these children on the part of the broader society were also mentioned. There are several services and programmes dealing with youth in general, and those services and associations working more specifically with Rromani youths play an essential intermediary role between the Rromani community and the institutions. With respect to the cases of Rromani juveniles in trouble with the law, they declare the enormous difficulties in coping with the situations. The social service operators underline, on the one side, the prejudices of the police, and on the other, the feeling of impunity among the Rromani communities as well as their over-protective attitudes towards the community members, their lack of response, and their refusal to accept responsibilities. The operators also report the existence of a sense of injustice and incomprehension within the Rromani community in addition to a tendency to hide serious problems, such as drug-related offences.

On the basis of the results of existing programmes as well as their personal experience, practitioners from both the juvenile justice system and the social services stress that it is possible to improve the situation, although it is very difficult to change the attitudes of both society at large and Rromani groups. It should however be highlighted that interagency co-operation and collaboration is increasingly used to better cope with often complex situations. Efforts are made especially in view of preparing police officers to intervene more appropriately. This is particularly important because the police officer often represents the child's first contact with the juvenile justice system, and the Rromani community usually considers police intervention as the main problem.

The Rromani Communities

As already stated above, it is impossible to consider Rromani communities as unique and homogeneous, and it is very dangerous to make generalisations. Different groups exist and the organisation, problems, and internal and external relationships of each group depend on their cultural values, the time they entered the country, their history, and so on. Some groups are more traditional than others and social change affects different communities in different ways. Some traditional jobs can no longer be carried out and are sometimes replaced by new ones. This has led to changes in some traditional relationships. Thus, for example, Rromani women have started to "review" their role in the community in the light of the new reality in which different Rromani communities find themselves.

In order to better understand how the Rromani feel about their interactions with the juvenile justice system, it is essential to underline some important characteristics which, although they cannot be applied without distinction to all Rromani, are to some extent shared by them. The most important one consists in the prevalence of the extended family and of the group over the individual. In the case of a child, this means that the whole extended family and/or group takes care of him/her, and not only the parents. This leads to a shared feeling of belonging to a community which in turn regulates the relationships both among the members and between the community and the external world, as well as a tendency to protect the community from the outside world (the gadge's world). However, those Rromani groups living in the most marginalised areas and conditions admit that there are problems in "controlling" their juveniles who, on the other hand, have strong identification conflicts.

In Hungary only a few groups still follow the traditional structure, and some still have their own traditional justice system - "Rromani Criss" which, in any case, is usually limited to specific areas of conflicts and problems. Generally speaking, there is widespread mistrust among the Rromani towards the official justice system in general and the tribunals in particular. The Rromani denounce lack of opportunities, lack of means to establish proper contacts with the judicial system, and their feeling of being less protected. They complain about racial discrimination in several fields including job opportunity and education, and highlight serious problems with the police.

Unfortunately, it was impossible to interview members of the Rromani community in Florence because the research was carried out during a difficult time. [9] Therefore, this part of the Italian report is based on previous work and on the interview of one Rromani only. The first problem mentioned by this person, which is experienced in particular by those Rromani arriving from former Yugoslavia during the last massive migration wave, is their status of illegal immigrants. This means that they do not have any rights and are therefore almost automatically forced to turn to survival activities such as begging, washing car windows, etc., and/or illegal activities. The behaviour of this small group of Rromani has however produced a strong negative image of all Rromani living in Florence, thus making it more difficult for all of them to be accepted and to find a job. It has also worsened the conditions of all those Rromani, including the Italian ones, who have been living in Florence for some time. The interviewed person also mentioned difficulties in "understanding" the judicial system, which up to now has only produced negative impacts on the juveniles and their future. The major point remains that some times these people have no other alternatives for survival.

In Paris, the interviewed persons described their problems in being accepted by the gadge and they had difficulties in speaking about deviance or problems related to deviance, since this is a sensitive issue that could increase intolerance towards them. Again, most of their problems seem to be linked with the police, with whom the Rromani describe their relationships as being quite difficult. They feel that the police do not trust them. They also denounce acts of racism with episodes of verbal and even physical violence. In addition, they find it difficult to understand how the judicial system functions and some Rromani complain about unfair treatment in the application of the law: the Rromani receive longer sentences, automatic detention, and Rromani parents find it more difficult to maintain contacts with detained relatives. Once again, the situation is not the same for all Rromani groups. Those families who have been living in Paris longer and have jobs seem to have fewer problems, and some of them have good contacts with the institutions, services and the police. In any case, the family is very influential in all the situations. Rromani communities complain about external interventions that do not take into consideration their culture and way of life. These are perceived as a risk for the unity, cohesion and maintenance of internal values. This does not mean, however, that the Rromani do not want access to education, health care or other social services, but that they do want to be involved in making decisions concerning themselves. As a consequence families are strong but at the same time alone and isolated even with respect to more serious problems such as drugs and delinquency. The more stable groups describe problems related to Rromani arriving with the new waves of immigration, with whom they do not share the same problems, as well as to the negative stereotype image of all Rromani being beggars, thieves and involved in drugs.


On the eve of the year 2000, a person who is born and brought up to be a Rromani is often subjected to prejudice, marginalisation and stigmatisation. In recent years, new waves of racism and violence against migrants and Rromani people have been reported all over Europe.

Every week, in France, Hungary and Italy - as well as in other European countries - for one reason or another Rromani are under the spotlights of the mass media. While most of the time their visibility is due to both violence committed against them and offences committed by them, this image is also linked with their poor living conditions. Schematically, the Rromani social condition can be described as follows: they live in marginalised residential areas, often without basic amenities; they experience gross difficulties in finding a job; they are exposed to conflicts between Rromani cultural values and those of the wider society; they are part of a poor and economically disadvantaged social group; they have reduced socio-economic opportunities; they have - at least in some countries and in some cases uncertain legal status (residence and citizenship) which often restricts their lawful employment and presence in the country, as well as entitlements to education, health care, social security, and so on.

When speaking about Rromani (as well as some other ethnic minority groups) the issue of the role of distinct cultural characteristics in the interaction and relationships with (and within) wider society is of great importance. These distinct cultural characteristics are sometimes used to legitimise behaviour considered deviant by the wider society. On the other hand, failure to accept cultural distinction impedes any form of communication or constructive relationships between different cultures. Without wanting to either legitimise or justify delinquency, it is of utmost importance that Rromani juvenile delinquency be placed within its specific cultural and economic context, as well as in the general cultural and institutional context of the wider society. Yet, this process of double contextualisation also includes understanding the type of delinquency attributed to and/or actually committed by Rromani youth.

Problems in establishing full communication or common grounds for understanding with the Rromani community are reported in many interviews with people working in the juvenile justice system and related social services. The fact that this is attributed to the impossibility to establish some communication between different cultures, increases the feeling of impotence and reduces the opportunities to create new forms of appropriate interventions utilising the existing rules and practices in the best interests of the children. Incomprehension, fear and lack of communication are evident on both sides and produce negative consequences, ranging from indifference to some forms of violence. Efforts to overcome these obstacles must be made by both the broader society and the minorities.

Rromani are generally quite proud of their culture. Therefore, for them to accept any interventions that are perceived as, or are intentionally directed towards modifying their culture would imply a rejection of their own cultural roots. As part of a society, Rromani and Rromani children - like any other citizens - have to accept and respect the social norms. At the same time, their rights (both as human beings and as members of minorities) should also be respected. The direct participation of Rromani in the initiatives addressed to them is the cornerstone to avoiding inappropriate and hence ineffective interventions, and a well designed and effective programme should satisfy at least two requirements: it should take into consideration all the involved persons, and should be based on an appropriate knowledge of the recipients of the programmes. This seems particularly true in the case of Rromani groups who have a very strong sense of the importance of preserving their culture.

To increase the presence and active participation of Rromani in all spheres of society is an important way to improve understanding and communication, and to prevent discrimination.

Many of the above mentioned problems could be at least partially solved by giving a more active role to education. This should not be limited to school education, and other forms of formal and informal education should emphasise the importance of accepting the "different", the "other". An education that is more clearly oriented towards a culture of acceptance and which openly discourages racism and xenophobia should be promoted. This educational process should be extended to all levels of the community through the use of the mass media and public campaigns to combat stereotypes and racist behaviour or attitudes. The values of a society based on the acceptance of the others should be constantly reaffirmed.

Furthermore, the fundamental importance of economic and social welfare efforts in preventing delinquency by improving living conditions and therefore reducing at risk situations should not be forgotten. Measures can be effective only if the Rromani people are given a chance to live respectably instead of committing crimes or living in a state of illegality.

Lack of co-ordination among the agencies involved seems to be another major problem in all three countries. Social and judicial measures must be part of a unique policy aimed at preventing crime, promoting social welfare within the Rromani communities, encouraging the integration of the Rromani communities, and safeguarding - to the extent possible - the cultural integrity of the Rromani community.

Notwithstanding the complexity of the issue, including connotations of "Rromani" producing an ambivalent feeling of romantic attraction (because of their music, dance, freedom and so on) but also of repulsion, as well as the fact that prejudices, stereotypes and discrimination against Rromani are still very strong and widespread, there are positive signs too. The situation of Rromani, and Rromani children, has improved in Europe, if not in terms of living conditions for all of them, at least in terms of rights. Much of this is due to the recognition of the international norms and standards in national legislation and efforts to implement them in practice. The CRC only dates back to 1989, and the international instruments related to the juvenile justice system are also very recent. Only a few decades ago the child was not considered a person with rights but the mere property of the family/parents/social group. Although differences exist at the international level, nevertheless, at least in some countries and parts of the world, the concept is now clear and respect for the child is no longer a matter of individual sensitivity but has become an integral part of people's knowledge and public policy. Problems still do exist however. Children of Rromani minorities frequently continue to live in conditions that are normally considered below the standards of the countries in which they live or are passing through. The rights of Rromani children are not sufficiently guaranteed or only partially so. This problem cannot be considered a marginal one: we are speaking of thousands of children who do not have the possibility to grow up in the best possible environment. It is becoming increasingly evident, however, that this situation is less tolerated today than it was in the past.The fact is that it takes some time and much political commitment before new social values and mechanisms related to the rights of human beings become accepted and internalised. Still, efforts should be made in the day to day life of all individuals and agencies to consider and respect Rromani youths first and foremost as youths.


[1] Associate Research Officers, United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute (UNICRI), Rome, Italy.

[2] The term "Rromani" generally refers throughout the text to all nomadic, semi-sedentary and sedentary population groups commonly called "Gypsies". This working term has been taken from Gheorghe N., Hancock J., Cortiade M., Advisory Rromani Council of the Project on Ethnic Relations, "Rrom{ani people}" or "Tigan"? (On the ethnic name of the Rromani people and the designation to be used in official international documents). Draft working document prepared for the International Seminar on Tolerance, organised by the Council of Europe, the Romanian Government and ODIHR-OSCE, Bucharest, May 23-26, 1995.

[3] The publication is in English with the exception of the report on Paris, which is in French.

[4] The local consultants were Ms. Angela Kòczè and Mrs. Piroska Versitz from Hungary, Mr. Sandro Costarelli from Italy, and Mrs. Jacqueline Charlemagne from France.

[5] France, Hungary and Italy are State Parties to all these instruments.

[6] For more information on these "three P" and on the Convention in general, see the Introduction by Nigel Cantwell of the leaflet on the CRC which was part of the folder on International Norms Related to Children's Rights prepared by Defence for Children International (1995).

[7] More detailed information on the international normative context, ways to present complaints, and selected international contact points are presented in the publication.

[8] For a comprehensive socio-cultural and socio-political approach to the Rromani in Europe, see: Jean-Pierre Liégeois (1987), Gypsies and Travellers, Council of Europe: Strasbourg.

[9] In fact, in the same period, the case of exploitation of very young children by their families as drug dealers exploded in the camp, leading to very strong reactions and making Rromani particular reluctant to provide any information.

Summary in Rromani


Ando 1997 o Instituto e Kethane Naciengo vas Interregionalo Maripe (Kriminalipe) thaj Rodipe e cacipasko (United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute) kerdas pala terne Rroma [2] jekh komparativikano rodipe pala krisipe e ternengo. I studia sas kerdi ando trin Europake thana: Paris (Franca), Florenca (Italia) thaj Pesta sar metropolako kotor e Budapestako (UngrikoThem).

Majbari res (cilo) e projektosko sas te del informacia, te phravel vakeripe pala e interakcia maskar verver Rromane grupe thaj sistemo e krisesko kana vakeras pala o terne manusa, ando trin alosarde thana, te kerelpe promocia vas o arakhipe e chavorrengo kana si o riziko te peravelpe kado cacipe, kana si phandado, vaj si po kontakto e thamesa (zakonesa). Sajekh,o projekto sas-les panda jekh res, te kerelpe sukareder komunikacia maskar o Roma, e krisesko sistemo vas o terne, socialno serviso, thaj na-themeske organizacie (NTO) vas o majbaro intereso e chavengo. O rezultato e studiako, savi sas la, o prindzardipasko kotor so sikavelas akanutne internacionalno instrumentia, o trin lokalo reportia thaj klidaripasko kotor, savo sas ikaldo 1997 ande UNICRI-akiri publikacia No. 59 "Rromane Chave: Droma vas o Krisipe e Ternengo". [3]

Bute sosibnastar (rezonendar) sas andi i decizia te kerelpe kado lil. O majangluno sas te buhlarelpe o rezultatia e studiakere, thaj te xarnarelpe kado lil vas o Internet. O dujto rezono sas te kerelpe jekh teksto, te paruvelpe pi majkethani Rromani chib - ajeka te pasakerelpe e Romenge gasav o materialo. O trito rezono sas te delpe jekh prezentacia savi si aver sar informacia e publikaciatar, po than o thema te len pe jakh, o misala save dena buter globalno thaj sintetikano dikhipe e situaciako.


E Rromen studirinde katar verver (save-na) perspektive - majbut katar socialno, kulturaki, lingvistikani thaj edukaciaki - o'the sas na but manusa so kerde rodipe pala e interakcia maskar (ternengo) krisipasko sistemo thaj verver Rroma. Kado si but phare sostar gasavi buti si kompleksivno thajbut hacerutni. I studia sas kerdi bare haceripa te na perel'pe pale ande stigmatizacia vaj pe avera dzungale hacerimata save saj te anen phago dikhipe e cace situaciako thaj dureder te dikhelpe, pe potencialno riziko sar phagenpe o hakaja e Rromane chavengo.

I metodologia sas alosardi e dikhipa te tiknarelpe o riziko e diskriminaciak maskar o jekh thaj aver aspektia thaj te naselpe katar o haceripe so varekon rodel "i bangi partia", kado na sas i buti e studiakiri. I majbari godi sas te sikavelpe balansirimi prezentacia i eksperiencaki thaj perspektivengi verver partienge save lele kotor pe gasavo projekto. Kado sas majvasno e Rromenge, sostar po than varekon aver te vakerel vas olenge o Rroma te vakeren korkore peske. Sajekh ando projekto o Rroma prezentirinde pere dikhipa korkore, katar i dujto rig na sas pretenzia e projektostar te sikavenpe sa e Rromenge perspektive. O dikhipe, o problemia thaj o perspektive so sikavde korkore o Rroma ando reportia, si limitirime vrjamasa (i sutuacia averchanel'pe, o prob lemia dzan thaj neve aven), thaj thanesa (o informacie vakerenas pala situacie ande thana: Pesta, Florenca, Paris, na ande: Ungriko-Them, Italia vaj Franca). Ulavdo than sas dendo ternenge krisipasko sistemeske (soduj katar legislativno thaj praktikano dikhipe) verver themende ando konteksto akanutne maskarthemenge instrumentenca save si phangle e ternenge krisipaske sistemesa thaj manusikane cacipasa.

Kodolestar so na sas but kvantitavno informacie thaj haceripe, o temato projektosko sas kompleksno, kadalestar alosardilo buter kvalitativno rodipe. Kado rodipe sas alosardo te kerelpe jekh xor analitika e problemengi save si ande interakcie maskar o Rromane chave thaj o krisipasko sistemo vas o terne ko sakodivesko dzivdipe (praktika). Pe jekh nacionalno kon sultando sas alosardino katar o thema so lele kotor te keren o rodipe ando lesko vaj lako alosardo than (foro, diz). [4] Sas dendino e projektestar buhle perspektive, o alosarde nacionalno konsultantia aven verver trujalipastar, von "reprezentinen" o socialo serviso, e Rromen, thaj terne krisipasko sistemo. O informacie sas kidime trine thanendar: oficialno reportendar; egzistirimi literaturatar; thaj kerdine intervjuendar e serutne manusenca savo sas len jekh bistrukturikano pucipasko lil. Trin serutne gru pe sas intervjuime: o manusa so keren buti ando ternengo krisipasko sistemo; o aver so keren buti ando socialo serviso; thaj o manusa so keren buti ando bi-themeske organizacie; Rroma thaj o Rromane terne kana mangelape sas thaj kana sas sajipe.

Jekh maskarthemutni (internacionalno) perspektiva

E Rromengi situacia ando regionalno, nacionalno (themesko) thaj lokalno nivelo - vi akana - mangelape te vazdelpe, specialno kana vakerelpe pala manusikane hakaja (cacipe), o thema thaj lenge manusa divestar po dive dzanen buter pala kado thaj keren te vazdelpe i situacia vas o Rromengo cacipe. E rola e Kethane Naciengi (KN) pi umal e manusikane cacipaski, Europaki Unia vi o Konsilo e Europakoro vas o arakhipe e minoritetengo si esencialno te vazden e Rromengi situacia, kadala institucie si but sukar asistirime e bucenca katar but na-themenge organizaciendar. Sa o intervencie so keren pe internacionalno, regionalno, nacionalno, thaj lokalno nivelo katar o organizacie thaj institucie si len jekh res, te vazden e Rromengi situacia, kodolestar kado musaj te dikhelpe sar jekh globalno thaj kethani buti.

Kethane Nacie thaj manusikane cacipaski perspektiva

Sajekh so i Harta Kethane Naciengi [Charter of the United Nations] (1945) thaj e Univerzalno Deklaracia e Manusikane Cacipaski [Universal Declaration of Human Rights] (1948) si purane pandzvardes bersa, von silen fundamentalno vasnipe kodolestar so von vi akana den i baza vas o internacionalne instrumentia. Maskar verver principia save si ande Deklaracia, kodola vas o jekhipe thaj na-diskriminacia - si sar o sasto vast e Kethane Naciengo - savo silen ulavdo vasnipe kadala studiake. Von phenen, ando artiklia 1 thaj 2 respektivikane (pacivasa), so:

"Sa o manusa si bijande mukle (slobodo) thaj savore si jekh ando pesko barikanipe thaj cacipe."

"Sakon saj te barjarel pesko cacipe (hakaj) thaj muklipe leparde kadala Deklaraciate, bi te ulavelpe: e rasatar, rangendar(kolorendar, farbendar), murs vaj dzuvli te ovel, chibatar, religiatar, politikane vaj aver gindipastar, nacionalno vaj socialne originatar, manginatar, leske/a bijandipastar vaj aver statusestar."

Palem, 1965 berseste, lelili(iklisti) e Internacionalno Konvencia vas i Eliminacia (Crdipe) Sa Diskriminaciake Formenge upral o Rase [International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination], te sikavelpe so o Thema save dende pesko vastesko hramipe(signatura, podpis) musaj te crden avri, te keren eliminacia i rasistikani diskriminacia ando lengo nacionalno konteksto. O koncepto e na-diskriminaciako sar kondicia e thamesko (zakonesko) vas o manusikano cacipe pal-pale si lipardo ando gasave sorte e thamengo (zakonengo) kote sikaven jekh ulavdo cacipe, o lav (i vorba, o vakeripe) si pala: Internacionalo Kovenancia vas Ekonomikano, Socialo, thaj KulturakoCacipe (Hakaj) [ International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights] (1966) thaj e Internacionalo Kovenancia vas o Civilno thaj Politikano Cacipe (Hakaj) [International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights] (1966). Kadala Kovenancie thaj Konve ncie legalno phandaven e Themen save dende pesko vastesko hramipe so ratifikerde kadala dokumentia thaj o Themeske Partie lele upral peste i obligacia te keren reportia pala i adaptacia thaj progreso savo von kerde te resen o cacikano dikhipe pala hakaja save si thodine ando kadala instrumentia. [5]

Na cirla, o univerzaliteto e manusikane cacipasko (hakajengo) sas reafirmirimo ande Vienaki Deklaracia thaj ande Akciako Programo, adaptirime katar Kethane Naciengi Lumaki Konferencia vas o Manusikano Cacipe (Viena, Juni 1993) save sidzarde i univerzalno ratifikacia e manusikane cacipaske kontraktengo. Aver Kethane Nacienge instrumentia so sidzarde i upre phenli ratifikacia si e: Deklaracia pala Rasa thaj Rasistikano Dikhipe [Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice] (1978) thaj i Deklaracia pala Eliminacia (Crdipe) e Intoleranciako thaj e Diskriminaciako Formengo bazirime pi Religia vaj pe Pacavipen [Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief] (1981).

Ande teoria, upre leparde instrumentia thaj lenge fundamentalno principia save si phandade jekh-jekhesa, pheren o mangipe vas jekh tehno (mirno), multikulturalno kethano manusikano amalipe. Akanutne bersende maskar o manusa kerenpe thaj barjarenpe etnikane kontrastia, o rasizmo, i ksenofobia thaj aver sikaven tikni - vaj na sas dosta - tolerancia thaj paciv. Historikane thaj antropologikane studie testirinde o bisiguripasko karaktero e amalipasko thaj e kulturengo, o'the dikhlarde o vasnipe e kontaktengo maskar verver kulture ando barjaripe thaj ande evolucia e amalipaski. Majserutni rola ande sasti manusikani historia sas kontaktia maskar o kulture, sajekh vi akana egzistirinel o pharipe te akceptirinelpe o ververipe (diferenca), kado kamel te phenel i ak ceptacia e "averen-gi". Adives minoritetenge grupe, ando but kontekstia, si thodine ando riziko e maripasko thaj e diskriminaciako.

Anglo muj kadala bibahtale situaciako o Kethane Nacie thaj o internacionalno amalipe, generalno, si te lundzaren, te barjaren i paciv (o respekto) vas o manusikano cacipe (hakaja) thaj na-diskriminacia. Ando 1992, o Generalno Besipe e Kethano Naciengo andas i Deklaracia Hakajengi vas o Manusa katar Nacionalno, Etnikane, Religiake thaj Lingvistikane Minoritetendar [Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities], savi specialno barjarel i paciv e hakajengo vas o minoritetia kana si von po riziko e diskriminaciako. E Deklaracia del avri specialno situacie thaj mangipe e minoritetengo ande relacia vas o specialno arakhipe, lel ande konsideracia verver aspektia sar so si i edukacia, chib, o barjaripe identitetosko, politikane reprezentaciako, thaj religiako.

Kana vakerelpe pala Rroma, ando 1992 i Komisia vas o Manusikano Cacipe adaptirindza i Rezolucia vas o Arakhipe e Rromengo [ Protection of Roma (gypsies)], savi ando 2-to artiklo phenel:

"Akharel o Thema te adaptirinen penge thama (zakona, dokumentia) te crden o diskriminaciake forme save si mamuj e Rromenge."

Ando 1996 i Komisia vas o Manusikano Cacipe adaptirindza i rezolucia po anav Hakaj e Manusengo katar Nacionalno, Etnikane, Religiake thaj Lingvistikane Minoritetendar [Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities], i rezolucia sidzarel o thema thaj internacionalno amalipe te kerel promocia thaj arakhipe e hakajengo vas o minoritetia sar so si hramimo ande Deklaracia palo Hakaja e Manusengo katar Nacionalne vaj Etnikane, Religiake thaj Lingvistikane Minoritetendar.

Sajekh si vasno te leparelpe so e Internacionalno Romani Uniake - organizacia savi kethane kerel buti bute regionalne thaj nacionalne institucienca ando trianda thema ande luma - 1979 sas dendo statuso sar: akreditirimi NTO (Na-Themeski Organizacia) ando ECOSOC (Ekonomikano thaj Socialno Konsilo), thaj 1993 berseste konsultativno statuso ando Kethane Nacie.

E Konvencia Pala Chavorikane Hakaja

Kana dikhelpe o statuso e chavorengo sar jekh majvasni buti sas e adaptacia e Konvenciaki vas o Chavorikane Hakaja (KCH) [Convention on the Rights of the Child, CRC] kerdi ando 1989 bers. Kado sas bute bersengo rezultato savo sas le res (cilo) te prindzarelpe o chavorro na sar objekto numaj sar jekh pherdo manus savore peske pherde hakajenca. E KCH si jekh substantivno globalno instrumento na kodolestar save hakaja thaj garancie si les, odolestar soske pere hakajenca thaj garancienca si prindzardi ande sasti luma. Ando Januaro 1998, 191 them avilo andre e Konvenciate, savo si angluno univerzalno akceptirimo manusikane cacipasko dokumento ande sasti historia. Nasti te phenelpe xarnes sava problematikasa kerel buti e KCH soske e informacia avela but bipherdi, sostar sa 54 paragrafia si but vasne. O hakaja save e KCH sikavel saj te prezentirinenpe ando trin konceptia save si prind zarde sar "trin P" [6]: provizia thaj serviso vas o nav, nacionaliteto, sastipe thaj edukacia; protekcia (arakhipe) mamuj e maribasko (e torturengo); thaj participacia ande decizia vas chavorrengo personalno dzivdipe. Kadala trin elementia si baza ando nevo statuso e chavorrengo sar aver manusengo.

Ando than e akanutne studiako, artiklo 2.1 e KCH si esencialno (vasno) kana vakerelpe pala koncepto e na-diskriminaciako.

"Phenel e Partienge te avel-len respekto thaj te sigurinen bidisikriminaciako o hakaja katar i Konvencia sakone chavorreske lengra jurisdikciasa, te den respekto vas e rasa, rang, chavorreske thaj chajake, lenge chibake, religiake, politikane vaj aver gindipaske, nacionalne, etnikane vaj socialne originake, manginake, fizikane invaliditetoske,bijanipaske vaj aver statusoske, savo perel e chavorreske, leska dake thaj dadeske vaj e tutoreske."

E KCH sar komprehenzivno instrumento zoraleder sikavel e chavorrengi problematika kodalestar si la kontakto e krisesa vas o terne, thaj kado leparel ando pesko artiklo 40.1, so:

"Phenel e Partienge te prindzaren o cacipe sakone chavorresko savo si thodino pe kris, vaj phagerdas o zakono e penalengo, te kerelpe e chavorreske te na phagen lesko barikanipe thaj molipe, so sastarel thaj del zor e chavorreske vas o respekto pala manusikane hakaja(cacipe) thaj fundamentalno muklipe e averengo; te dikhenpe e chavorreske bersa (phuripe) thaj te ovel e partiengo kamipe te promotirinelpe e chavorreski reintegracia thaj sajipe te avel leski konstruktivno rola ando amalipe."

Kado artiklo sajekh sikavel jekh seria e garanciengi, kerel i promocia e specifikane thamengi (zakonengi), procedurengi, themengi thaj instituciengi, pucel vas o alternative dzi o institucionalno arakhipe.

Jekh e majbare kvalitetendar so sila e KCH si lako univerzalno thaj komprehenzivno karaktero, sajekh si-la vi varesave limitia vi kadalestar pala soste voj korkori vakerel. Avere lavenca, e KCH si jekh globalno instrumento saveske kamelape te den vast katar aver specifikane instrumentendar. Phiravele vasno rola kodole instrumentengo sar so si o standardia thaj o norme e kriseske vas o terne ando Kethane Nacie.

Kethane Nacienge standardia thaj norme pala krisipe e ternengo

Krisipe e ternengo si jekh e majbare bucendar save lel angla peste o Programo vas e Maribaski Prevencia thaj vas o Kriminalno Kris ando Kethane Nacie. Trin Kethane Nacienge instrumentia, save si adaptirime katar Kethane Nacienge Kongresia vas i Prevencia e Maribaski thaj Tretmano e Bandzardengo, sikavel buter specifikanes pala krisipe e ternengo. Kadala instrumentia legalno na phandenpes jekh-jekhesa (sar so si e KCH), sajekh von si but vasne sar serutne linie vas i legalizacia thaj vas i administracia e kriseski pe nacionalno nivelo, von si:

Kadala instrumentia pheren jekh-jekhe, ucharen trin verver faze e procesesko so kerel o kriminalosko kris: e prevencia e delikvenciako so keren o terne (Rijadheske Serutne Linie), implementacia e progresivne krisesko sistemesko vas o terne (Pekingeske Regulacie), thaj respekto (paciv) e hakajengo ando phanglipe, institucie vaj aver phanglimata. (O JDL Regulacie). O serutne principia upre leparde instrumentengo saj te aven sar:

O chavo savo avel katar o minoriteto na butvar si lepardo ando internacionalno instrumentia sostar but dikhelpe pe na-diskriminaciake principia, o'the si konsenzuso so specialno dikhipe saj te kerel'pe e "chavorrenge so silen mangipe vas specialo arakhipe", sar so si o chave so keren buti vaj si bi kherengo, ando riga, kodola save naj familie, chave sar invalidia, chave e minoritetenge, imigrantenge thaj kodolenge so na dzanen katar aven. O intereso savo sas sikavdo katar o Kethane Nacie vas e implementacia akanutne standardengo thaj normengo, kerdili rekonfirmacia pe kado ande 6-to Besipe e Komisiako vas Maribaski Prevencia thaj Krisipe e Ternengo ando Kethane Nacie (1997). E Komisia diskutirindza i rezolucia pala i Administracia so kerelpe vas o Krisipe e Ternengo, savo sila o Lil anglokerdo Serutne Linienca vas i Akcia pala Chavorre ando Sistemo e Kriminalno Krisipasko [Draft Guidelines for Action on Children in the Criminal Justice System] savo sas adaptirimo katar o ECOSOC. Kado si jekh praktikano instrumento savo kerel i orientacia thaj si les cilo, res, te sikavel o than sar te kerelpe e implementacia KCH (Konvencia vas o Chavorrenge Hakaja), (te len sama-te dikhen-vi pala chavorre save si ande administracia e krisesko vas o terne) thaj e internacionalno standardengo thaj normengo pala krisipe e ternengo.

Ando regionalno nivelo, kethane historikane thaj kulturikane kondicie kerde te avel lokheder regionalne organizacienge te keren buti specifikane problemenca thaj e implementacia saj te avel direktno ando nacionalno thaj lokalno nivelo. Kadi si misal ande Europa, sostar historikanes thaj kulturikanes o individualno thema sarsakana sigeder sikade lengro intereso ande Romani problematika sar so keren o akanutne Europake institucie thaj o institucie e themeske.

Europako Normativno Konteksto

But instrumentia sas adaptirime katar o duj Europake institucie - e Europaki Komisia thaj Konsilo e Europako - vas o manusikano cacipe(hakaja) thaj arakhipe e minoritetengo cacipasko.

Europaki Konvencia vas o Arakhipe e Manusikane Cacipasko thaj Fundamentalno Mukhlipasko [European Convention for Protection of Humans Right and Fundamental Freedoms] (1950) si jekh instrumento savo del e Themenge, grupenge, Na Themeske Organizacienge thaj manusenge sajipe te keren reportia pala maripe vaj sar manusa so dikhle o maripe vaj vareso so sas, vaj sar manusa so sas marde. Aver vasno instrumentia si Europaki Socialno Harta [European Social Charter] (1961); Deklaracia pala Intolerancia - I Dar vas e Demokracia [Declaration regarding Intolerance - A Threat to Democracy] (1981) savi vakerel pala sa ideologie so peraven o manusikano jekhipe; i Deklaracia (thaj o Plan e Akciako) vas o Achavipe e Rasizmosko, Ksenofobiako, Anti-Semitizmosko thaj Intoleranciako [Declaration on Combating Racism, Xenophobia, Anti-Semitism and Intolerance], adaptirime katar o Serutne e Themenge save si ando Konsilo Europako thaj ande Vienako Samito (konferencia) ando Oktobro 1993; thaj i Europaki Konvencia vas o Keripe e Hakajengo vas o Chavorre [European Convention on the Exercise of Children's Rights] (1996).

Europake (Rromane) minoritetenge hakaja

But etnikane minoritetia besen ande Europa, thaj e problematika chivel-amen te kerelpe arakhipe katar o phageripe thaj diskriminacia, thaj te delpe garancia e hakajengi, kava sas ustavipe pe Konsilo Europako thaj pe aver Europake Institucie te den jekh ulavdo than kote saj te delpe godi pala minoritetia generalno, thaj specialno te dikhelpe so si e Rromenca. Varesave but vasno dokumentia sas adaptirime thaj von si:

Ando 1994, o Konsilo e Europako adaptirindza (kerdza) I Generalno Konvencia vas o Arakhipe e Nacionalne Minoritetengo. Kadava dokumento si pe zor katar o 1-to Februaro 1998 thaj si jekhto legalno kethano multilateralno instrumento pala o arakhipe e minoritetengo.

Ando 1992, e Organizacia vas o Arakhipe thaj Kooperacia ande Europa (OAKE) kerdas jekh specialno kancelaria e Uce Komisionareske vas o Nacionalno Minoritetia savo si te reportinel pala e Rromengi situacia ande Europa. Ande 1994, e OAKE-aki Kancelaria vas o Demokratikane Institucie thaj Manusikane Hakaja (manusikano cacipe) (KDIMH) kerdas jekh "Kontakt Than vas o Rroma thaj o Sinte". [7]

O internacionalno instrumentia silen fundamentalno vasnipe, von nasti korkore te garantinen o respekto vas o chavorrenge hakaja. Kana jekhvar si kerdine kadala instrumentia, si but vasno te keren peski buti ando dzivdipe thaj o agencie institucienca save si phandade kadalenca si organizirime palem, saj te den vast (azutinen, pomozinen, sigitinen) gasava bucake.

E Rromani situacia ando trin thana

I problematika savi sikavas si, generalno phendo, potencialno reflektinel pe caci situacia ande but thema thaj thana, panda jekhvar musaj te phenas, so e informacia amen so ka sikavas si pala trin situacie save si limitirime geografikane thaneste thaj vrjamate (vakteste, idejoste). Sajekh si vasno te phenelpe, so o Roma silen maskar peste verver etnikane, historikane diferencie, savi na generalizacia na avla caci thaj kodolestar kadi generalizacia musaj te mekhelpe ko agor.

O Socio-demografikane kondicie

Si but phare te arakhelpe egzaktno data kana o Roma resle ando Europa thaj pacalpe so o anglune Roma resle ande Europa ando 14-to thaj 15-to selbersutnipe. Kana e Europa lelas te kerel o jekhto kontakto e Romenca, o legende thaj paramisa sas hamime faktenca, numaj ando desuoftoto selbersutnipe sas araklo, katar o lingvistikane studie, so o Roma aven katar e India thaj i angluni emigracia Indiatar kerde ando enjato selbersutnipe. [8]

Ando 1994 bers, buter sar jekhpas miliono Roma besenas ando Ungriko Them, savo si les pase des milioni manusa. Savore on si Ungriko dizutne. O Rroma o'the naj homogenikani grupa thaj si la verver sub-etnikane thaj lingvistikane grupe. Kana dikhelpe o phuripe e Rromengo, o terne si majbari grupa maskar lende. Angleder, e asimilaciaki politika savi sas ando Ungriko komunistikano rezimo, akana silen neve dokumentia save si prindzardine te garantinen o hakaja e minoritetengo. Kado si o tham (zakono) po anav Hakaja vas o Etnikane Minoritetia (1993), savo si les varesave provizie vas e chib, edukacia, kultura thaj reprezentacia, thaj keripe jekhe Ombudsmanesko te kerel buti pala hakaja e minoritetenge. Nevi demokracia thajsocio-ekonomikane kondicie kerde e situacia e Romengi te ovel buter corrorikani. Ekonomikani liberalizacia andas o corroripe e Rromenge thaj vazdilo buter dzungaleder gindipe pala Roma, kodolestar akana si e Romengi situacia na lachi. Kana vakerelpe pala edukacia, buti, khera, specialno pala ekonomikano thaj socialno sajipe e Rromengo, o Rroma si kotor e majcorrore manusengo ando Ungro. Analfabetizmo maskar o Rroma si but baro thaj kana dikhenpe o data katar 1994 bers numaj 3% e Rromane chavendar so dzan ande skola lundzaren pesko sikhavipe ando maskarutne skole, na sar 50% e Ungrika chavendar so lundzaren pesko sikhavipe ando maskarutne skole. O bilanso sikavel so o bibucake manusa ando sasto Ungriko Them keren 11%, maskar o Rroma 61.2% si bibucake. Buter,e diskriminacia thaj maripe upral o Rroma si but prindzardo.

Anglune Rroma resle ande Franca ando 15-to selbersutnipe, ando Parizesko regiono. O Rroma maskar peste si ulavde ando but kaste thaj silen heterogenikano amalipe. Palo kala Rroma so resle, sas migracia e Rromengi dzi ande Franca, specialno pala Dujto Lumako Maripe, thaj pala peravipe e komunistikane rezimosko ande Disutni (Eastern, eng.) Europa, thaj 1990 bersende pala konflikto ande Jugoslavia resle but Rroma. Tipologia e Rromane grupengi si ave r sostar resle o Rroma aver thanendar ande Franca, thaj but lendar silen statuso e nasade manusengo. Akana ande Franca si pase 240.000, jekhpas (jekhkvas) lendar phiren thanestar po than, vaj varesave varekana phiren, thaj o dujto-jekhpas silen khera (kampi) thaj varekana phiren. E Francake Rromendar 80.000 si terneder 16 bersendar, thaj 90% e Rromendar silen Francako nacionaliteto. Corrore ekonomikane kondicie, bi edukaciako, e skolendar dzan avri, thaj pharipe te arakhen peske buti thaj khera save lenge kamelape, si majbare problemia save silen o Rroma, specialno kodola so aresen akanutne divende (migracienca).

Ande Italia, o Rroma resle ando 14-to selbersutnipe. Sar ande Franca, e karakteristika thaj i kompozicia e Rromengi si aver kodolestar soske vi ando kado than resle but aver Rroma, specialno kanatar ulo o konflikto ande Yugoslavia. Ando 1994 bers ande Italia sas maskar 80.000 thaj 120.000 Rroma savendar pase 50% sas chavorre. Kadalendar 25.000 dzi 35.000 Rroma naj Italiake lila. Ande Florencia, 80% na-Italiake Romendar resle pere familienca thaj lenge anglune sas denate manusa. Kadala Rroma na peren telal o Italiako zakono (tham), von dziven ando majcorrore socio-ekonomikane kondicie selendar (100) numaj 30 - 35% e Rromane chavorrendar dzan ande skola, o aver si analfabeti thaj bibucake.

I situacia si verver sotrine thanende, o fakto mothavel so o socio-ekonomikane thaj dzivdipaske kondicie e Rromenge si but phare, thaj jekh e majvasne faktorendar so kerel von te oven ando gasave kondicie si lengo legalno vaj ilegalno statuso.

Delikvencia e terne Rromengi

Si but vasno, kana vakeras pala delikvencia e terne Rromengi, te sikavas, so naj adekvatno studie vas gasavi problematika. Musaj te phenas, so o Rromane terne, si but "dikhle" averendar, dikhen pe lende avere jakhenca, kodolestar von si ando specialno riziko te aven ando kriminalno aktivipe. Kado si i godi katar o na-Rroma. O situacie save si sikade ando trin reportia, sikhlaren amen so o problemia naj phandade Rromane kulturasa, von si phandade e in terakciasa maskar o corroripe, marginalizacia thaj varesave kulturake aspektenca. Kadalestar o Rromane chave aven ando bareder riziko te keren kriminaliteto, thaj aven phandade ando kriminalno krisipasko sistemo.

O lokalne reportia sikaven, so o Rromane chave majbut dzan te coren ando khera, manusendar, vaj dzan te coren ando grupe. O baro procento kadale kriminalitetosko, o Roma ande Francia, Ungriko Them, Italia si kodolestar, soske naj len sostar te dziven, thaj te den vast pere familienge vaj e Rromenge. E analiza pala ternengi delikvencia maskar o Rroma musaj te dikhel thaj pe kada, so naj len katar te keren varesavo drom vas o sukar, po lacho dzivdipe. O manusa den pes godi, so e Rromani delikvencia si bari thaj specialno pe jakh pe lake dzungale elementende. Akava pherel e idea e manusengi, so o Rroma - akate si o lav pala o Rromane chave - si o sinonimo vas i delikvencia. So ulavel e Rromane ternengi delikvencia kodolatar na-Rromane delikvenciatar kerdi avere ternendar so silen jekh bersa, kodo si e recidiva savi keren vi o Rromane chave thaj but Rromane chaja si ande kada proceso sar o chave. Kada paluno argumento sikavelpe sar jekh konzekvencia kadalestar, so Rromane dzuvla silen o majpaluno than maskar o Rroma. Von si but ustade katar o mursa ande peske familie - dada, rroma, phrala, aver mursa ande familia - thaj lenge si but phare te keren peski decizia. Si prindzardo so maskar o Rroma o bers kana o chave vaj o chaja aven sar pherde (peke)manusa si angleder 18-to bersestar, thaj sigheder asistirenen pere familie.

O majvasno poento ando ternengo krisipasko sistemo si o bersa (o phuripe e chavengo) vas o penalo savo saj te delpe. Chavorrenge save si telal gasavo bers nasti te delpe penalo sostar von hacarenpe sar o manusa bipherde godzako te haloven pala i akcia so von kerde. Konsekvenciatar, von nasti legalno te krisinenpe pala lengi kriminalno buti. O bers kana saj te delpe penalo e chavorrenge si 14 ande Ungriko Them thaj Italia, 13 ande Francia, thaj o ternengo krisipe dikhel pe ternenge bersa save si maskar 14 thaj 18 ande Ungriko thaj Italia, thaj maskar 13 - 18 ande Francia. Butvar o manusa pherde bersenge pucen, vaj len e chavorren telal kadala bersa te keren kriminalno buti - soske von si telal o bersa kana saj te delpe varesavo penalo. Kana ochavorre sar fakto sikaven peske tikne bersa thaj phenen kaj si tikne, von si ando riziko pere familiendar, manusendar vi kriminalne organizaciendar, te keren gasavi (kriminalno) buti. Po agor vi Rromane ternenge save si ando gasavo drom mangelape te delp e jekh konsideracia sar savore aver manusenge save kerde varesavi dzungali buti.

Sikavelpes so varesave etnikane/nacionalne grupe si specializirime te keren kriminaliteto ande Francia thaj Italia, o Rromane grupe si ekstremno heterogikane, thaj nasti te kerelpe genaralizacia pala lende. Kadale dikhipastar saj te phenelpe so varesave tikne grupe save aven ando kontakto e thamesa (zakonesa) maskar lende naj tikni proporcia e procentoski savi perel pe Romane terne, thaj sajekh - ande Franca thaj Italia - butvar kadala Rromane chave katar gasave grupendar (Rromendar) so resle majpalune migracienca thaj von si katar o majcorrore socio-ekonomikane Rromane grupendar.

Trin reportia sajekh sikaven akanutno trendo maskar o terne Rroma save si aktivno ando drogako kriminaliteto. Ando Rromano kampo ande Florenca, saj te phenas so sa o mursa phureder 15 bersendar thaj varesave chaja si sikade te len heroin. Sigh akana arakhlilo so varekon lendar len e tikne chavorren, pandzebersenge te phiraven (bikinen) e droga. Gasavo f enomeno arakhlilo ande Francia 1990 berseste: o Rromane chave kerenas buti e drogasa - specialno mursa - phiravenas thaj lenas e droga korkore ando gasave doze, so varesave lendar mule vaj si len AIDS.

Gasavi kompleksno situacia sikavel so o ternengo krisipasko sistemo naj les sarsakana dzaniben sar te kerel buti kadala problematikasa.

E Ternenge krisipaske sistemia

Avel e reportendar so o internacionalno norme thaj standardia, katar e KCH dzi ando specifikane Kethane Nacienge instrumentia save vakeren vas o chavorre ando konflikto e zakonesa (thamesa) si inkorporime (thodine) ande nacionalno legislativa. Kadala nacionalne problemia sikade si ande kadi studia, mothavelpe o vasnipe e neva legislativake thaj procedurenge adaptirime katar o thema cilesa te keren arakhipe e chavorreske, leske psihologikane, edukaciake thaj bararipaske, mangipaske thaj hakajenge. Ulavdo than si dendo: e rolake savi si la o ternengo kris sar instrumento te asistirinel e chavorren ando resocializaciako proceso; vasnipe si kana kerelpe e intervencia pe individualno nivelo, kodolestar si sukareder te del pe vast e chavorreske ande leski (re)integracia ando amalipe; e solucia te phandelpe o chavorro ando phanglipe si te avel sar majpaluni buti, te na avel bari stigmatizacia pe chavorre;thaj mangipe si o terne te aven ulavde e phurederendar ando periodo e phanglimasko. Varesave buca, saj te leparas: o terne te na aven po kontakto e krisipaske sistemesa save si kerde ando kadala trin thema thaj von si: probacia, khera kaj saj o chavorre te besen, edukaciako serviso thaj provizia vas e psihologikani asistencia. Ande Francia thaj ande Italia si ulavdo ternengo krisipasko sistemo, ande Ungriko Them na, o'the o Ministro vas i Justicia thovel e krisatore vas o terne te kerel buti kadala problem atikasa. Ande Ungriko them o terne kana si ando phanglipe naj sarsakana ulavde phurederendar, sostar o kriminaliteto so o terne keren avel sar ando serie thaj ando grupe, o proceso e kriminalne krisesko astarel but bersa.

Kana dikhelpe katar o aspekto e administraciako vas o ternengo krisipe, sa kadala upre leparde aspektia saj te nasaven pesko pozitivno potencialo kana o ternengo krisipasko sistemo kerel buti e Rromenca. Ando fakto, o problemo sikavel so e legislativa si lachi, numa na arakhel peski pherdi implementacia ande praksa.

Othe si tendencia e institucionalizaciaki e Rromengi, sar te rodenpe aver, alternativne metodia save si ando zakono (tham). Te vakeras pala Rroma, majbut pes lel e metoda represaliengi thaj institucionalizaciengi. Phendo si ando reporto: "Angle kadi delikvencia e policiaki reakcia, sar jekh instrumento e krisipasko, sikavelpe sar bangi thaj represivno". "...numaj, duj but prindzarde alternative si e Rromane chavenge ando konflikto le thamesa: te thovenpe ando phanglipe vaj te mukhen len avri(bi intervenciako katar o socialno serviso)". O jekhto praktikano problemo savo zorales sikavelpe ande Franca thaj Italia si kodola kana pucenpe pala identifikacia, berseski kontrola, o than besipasko, thaj kontakto e familienca. E ternengo krisipasko sistemo majbari kriteria dikhel pe bersa, thaj majbut provizie saj individiualno te denpe thaj te dikhen o personalno karakteristike e chavorreske vaj e familiake thaj lenge socialno trujalipaske. "Sistematikane, amen na sam sigurno palo identitetothaj bersa e ternenge. Kana kanikastar najamende nisave garancie pala identiteto e ternengo, kana dikhas sajekh deviantno dzivdipe, kana sunas sar xoxaven, thaj kana nasti te avas po kontakto lenge familienca, e krisipaski reakcia avel represivno."

E studia kerdi maskar o phangle manusa ande Ungriko Them ando 1989 sikavel so o kriminaliteto sas kerdo katar o ekonomikane kondicie thaj sas buhlardo ando corrorikane thana kote besenas o na-Rroma. Ando reporto katar o Pestako regiono phenelpe, so o majvasno problemo si e tenzia thaj konflikto maskar o Rroma thaj e policia. Akana kerde jekh nevo projekto, te vazdel pe sukareder kontakto thaj komunikacia maskar o Rroma thaj e policia. O projekto kerel treningo thaj lel e Rromen sar mediatoria thaj del o sajipe vas o Rroma te keren buti ande policia. O problemo nasti te arakhel e solucia numaj ando kriminalno krisipasko sistemo. Othe naj but programia thaj servisia adresirime po terne manusa ande Ungriko Them, thaj kodola so si akana naj lache. Othe naj specifikaneprogramia vas o Rromane chave, varesave akanutne iniciative vas o terne naj prindzarde maskar o Rroma. O vakeripe e praktikane manusenca, so keren ande centro vas e korekcia zorales sikade so musaj te aven lache programia thaj servisia, te keren buti thajte den phiko e Rromane chavorrenge.

Ande Italia o personalo so kerel buti ando krisipe e ternengo mangen o penalno thaj socialno servisia te len than kethanes lenca. O pharipe savo sila e legislativa pala krisipe e ternengo si buhle prindzardi. O majbare frustracie aven kodolestar, soske naj sajipe te kontaktirinelpe i familia, te dikhelpe katar avel o chavorro, thaj te kerelpe lencar varesavi forma e komunikaciaki. E reakcia pala kado sas katar o 1990 bers, ande Florenca o lokalno kris phendas e policiakete keren fotografie sakone chavorreske (terneske) thaj te len lendar o angustesko printo, kodolendar so kerde kriminaliteto, vi kodelenge save phenen kaj si tikne (bipherde bersenge), po agor kadalestar kerdili jekh data banka (banka informaciengi). Sas mangipe vas jekh buter seriozno investigacia (rodipe) ando familie, thaj voj sas kerdi pe gasavo drom so sas akharde o Italiake chavorre te len kotor ande gasavi buti, thaj sikavdilo so o ulavdipe e chavengo katar lenge familie, katar o autoriteto - e chavorrenge dadendar barjol divestar po dive thaj o chave si akana ando riziko. O manusa so kerenas kadi investigacia thaj varesave NTO save sas sar kontakto maskar o Rroma thaj o institucie, mangle specialno azutipe (zutipe, pomozipe) katar e ternengo krisipask o sistemo te prindzarel e chavorresko mangipe pala pesko dzivdipe. Butvar o Rromane chave nasen e instituciendar sostar von na pacan e manuseske so kerel buti ando socialo serviso, kado kerdza te na agorinelpe e investigacia, o rodipe. O manusa so phiravenas kadi buti e investigaciaki phende, so o Rromane chave thaj lenge familie na haloven o krisipasko sistemo, thaj numaj dzanen o sajipe so saj te oven ando phanglipe sar jekh kalkulirimo riziko a na sar rezulatato varesave akciako. Bute familienge save keren krimanalno buca si jekh drom te achen dzivde, thaj vas lenge si e skola sar aktiviteto "savo na anel vareso". O krisipasko sistemo vas o terne sikavelpe biefektivno katar preventivno, edukativivno thaj socialno perspektiva. O Rromane chave dikhen pe pesko dzivdipe sar keren pe lende diskriminacia thaj aver dzungalimata so keren sa e Rromenge, thaj silen godi so vi sukaripe vi dzungalipe kana keren von si numaj thaj numaj si Rroma. Bare frustracie si vi ando kris vas o terne vi maskar o manusa so keren buti ando socialo serviso.

Vi ande Franca si baro problemo te kerelpe identifikacia e chavorrengi. Ando 1997, phiravenas jekh observacia kote varesave (Rromane) chaja katar Jugoslavia kerenas butivar kriminalno buca, o kris e Parizesko kerdas jekh specialo programo. Von lele te keren informacia katar jekh centralno than (te centralizirinen o informacie) pala kadala Rromane chaja thaj o magistrato e forosko lelas te phirel pala kadi buti. Zorales kerdza kethanes buti e socialno servisesa thaj policiasa pala p ropozicie, iniciacie thaj vas o jekhutne intervencie. Akanutno cilo, res, si te lel buter cacikane informacie pala chaja te kerelpe kethani intervencia. Vas e xarni vrjama o cilo sas te dzanelpe buter, te kerelpe sukareder komunikacia, te kerelpe varesavi korekcia e bucaki thaj e dromeski sar te kerelpe gasavi buti. O anglune rezultatia (o projekto sas ando anglune trin maseka dzi kerahas kado reporto) sikade so o kontaktia e chajenca ule sukareder thaj o kondicie e chajenge sas lacheder. Varesavo pharipe sas ande komunakacia e Rromenca, akana saj te leparas save sas o kontaktia e familienca: sas phare phare, sajekh vi avere Rromenca. Vi organizaciake problemia sas, sar misal saj te leparas e phari buti e operatorengi (manusengi so kerenas buti e Rromenca), na sas intereso katar o buxlo amalipe pala gasave (Rromane) chavore. Varesave servisia thaj programia generalno kerena buti e ternenca, kodola servisia thaj asociacie save buter specifikane keren buti e Rromane ternenca, khelen jekh vasno thaj esencialno rola maskar o Rroma thaj institucie. Kana dikhas o misala e Romane chavorengi save si ando problemo e thamesa (zakonesa), odothar saj te dikhelpe sar si but phare te marenpe gasave situacienca. O manusa (operatoria) katar o socialno serviso mothaven pala policiako dzungalo dikhipe, thaj katar aver rig, vakeren so o Rroma savo bangipe te keren - hacarenpe sar bibange manusa, thaj buter no so kamelape arakhen pere manusen, naj paciv lendar kana kamelape vareso te keren thaj na kamen te keren vareso kana pucen lendar. Sajekh o operatoria vakeren vi pala egzistencia e napacivale bucaki thaj e bihalovipasko e manusengo maskar o Rroma thaj o'the si tendencia te garavenpe but seriozne problemia, sar so si phiravipe e drogako.

Pe baza e rezultatengi, o programia save akana dzan, thaj pe lengi personalno eksperienca, o manusa katar o ternengo krisipasko sistemo thaj socilane servisendar vakeren so saj te lacharelpe i situacia, numaj, but si phare te averchanelpe e relacia maskar o amalipe (na-Rroma) thaj o Rroma. Pase kadava musaj te vazdelpe o vasnipe e maskar-agenciengi kooperacia thaj kolaboracia, thaj zoraleder te marelpe kadale kompleksno situacienca. Sa e zor delpe vas e preparacia e policajtengi te keren pacivali intervencia. Kada si but vasno kodolestar so o policajto si o jekhto kontakto vas o Rromano chavo e ternenge krisipaske sistemesa, thaj o Rroma phenen so majbaro problemo so silen si o problemo e policijasa.

E Rromenge komunite

Sar so angleder mothadam nasti te phenel'pe so o Romane komunite silen kethanipe thaj si homogenikane, but si phare te kerelpe generalizacia pala kado. Maskar o Rroma si verver grupe, lengi organizacia, problemia, andrune thaj avrune relacie si phangle e kulturasa, e vrjamasa (vakteha) kana resle ando them, lenga historiasa thaj avere kondicienca. Varesave grupe e Rromenge zoraleder adikeren e tradicia, thaj o socialno averchanipa afektirinen pe verver Rromane komunite verver dromenca. Varesave tradicionalne buca nasti dureder te kerenpe kodolestar po than e purane bucengo keren neve. Kado parudzas o tradicionalne relacie. Sajekh vi o Rromane dzuvla paruvde peski rola ande Rromane komunite vas o neve cacipa (hakaja).

Te hacaras sukareder sar o Rroma dikhen peski interakcia e ternenge krisipaske sistemesa, but si vasno te sikavenpe varesave linie (gindipe) save nasti te thovenpe upral sa o Rroma, numaj disave (varesave) lendar saj te arakhenpe maskar but Rroma. Majvasni karakteristika e Rromengi si so silen buter-generacienge familie thaj sarsakana jekh grupa si upral jekh manus. Kana dzal pala chavoro, na numaj leski daj thaj o dad arakhen-les, sasti familia thaj grupa les dikhen. Gasavo maskarhaceripe anel e Rromen jekh pase jekheste, thaj kado kerel e regulacia maskar o manusa ande Rromani komunita thaj maskar e Rromani komunita e na-Rromane amalipasa, sajekh kado anel e tendencia e Rromani komunitaki te arakhelpe katar avruno amalipe (Gadzikano amalipe). Kadala Rromane grupe so besen ando agor e agorutne thanengo pharipa vakeren so silen problemia te kontrolinen e ternen save silen bare identifikaciake konfliktia, sostar von (o terne) silen majteluni pozicia maskar o Rroma.

Ande Ungriko Them numaj varesave grupe e Rromenge adikeren e tradiciaki struktura, thaj vi akana varesave lendar silen lengo tradicionalno krisipasko sistemo - Rromani Kris - savi si limitirimi vas speecifikane konfliktia thaj problemia. Kana generalno vakera, o Rroma na pacan e justiciake sistemenge, specialno na pacan e (Gadzikane) kriseske. O Rroma vakeren vi pala kado so silen tikne sajipe, najlen sar te keren kontakto justiciake sistemesa thaj hacaren so von naj dosta arakhle katar o sistemo. Rroma mothaven pala rasistikani diskriminacia bute thanende vi ando thana kote delpe buti thaj ando skoli, thaj vazden seriozno glaso pala o problemia e policiasa.

Na sas ame n sajipe te vakeras e Rromenca katar e Florenca sostar o rodipe sas kerdo ande phari vrjama. [9] Kodolestar kado kotor e reportesko pala Italia si bazirimo pe buti so kerdam angleder thaj pe intervju so kerdam numaj jekhe Rromesa. O jekhto problemo so sas mothavdo kadale Rromestar sas pala lengo statuso, von si sar ilegalno imigrantia. Kadi eksperienca si e Rromengi so resle Jugoslaviatar majpalune bare migraciatar. Kado kamel te phenel so von najlen nisavo hakaj (cacipe, pravo) thaj kodololestar von autom atikane si thodine te keren so saj vas pesko dzivdipe, mangen, thoven o vurdona, thaj aver, vaj keren ilegalno aktivipe. Sostar kadala Rroma keren gasave buca peraven o imidzo avere Rromengi ande Florenca, sajekh kado anel baro pharipe e Rromenge te aven akceptirime thaj te arakhen varesavi buti. O kondicie ule dzungaleder vi avere Rromenge, vi kodolenge so akherenape sar Italiake Rroma, vaj kodolenge so besenas varesave vrjamate ande Florenca. E Rromesa kasa vakerdam, phendza so silen problemo te hacaren ejusticiako sistemo savo dzi akana kerdas negativno efekto po terne thaj pe lengo avutnipe. Sar majbaro poento achel so varekana e Rromen najlen aver alternativa vas o dzivdipe.

Ando Paris o Rroma save sas intervjuime vakerde pala problemo sar o Rroma naj a kceptirime katar o Gadze, thaj sas but phare te vakeren pal-o problemo e deviaciengo so keren o Rroma, sostar kado si haceripasko punkto savo saj te anel e intolerancia upral lende. Palpale majbare lenge problemia sas phandade e policiasa, sar vakerenas erelacia e policiasa si phari. Hacaren so e policia na pacal lenge. Vi pala rasizmo vakerenas, pala dive kana sas marde vi lavenca thaj vastenca. Phare hacaren o Rroma sar kerel buti o sistemo e justiciako thaj varekon e Rromendar, mothavenas sar o tham (zakono) na pacivasa (na fer) dikhel pe lende: o Rroma averendar buter besen ando phanglipe, automatikane phanen-len, thaj o Rromane daja - dada but phare keren kontaktia pere chavenca ando phanglipe. Na sa o Rroma so besen ando Pariso silen gasavo pharipe. O Rromane familie so besen but bersa ando Paris thaj silen buti, najlen but problemia, thaj varekon lendar silen sukar kontaktia e institucienca, servisenca thaj policiasa. Sajekh i familia sila baro than ando sa situacie so ovena. O Rroma vakeren pala avr une intervencie (Gadzendar), save na dikhen pala Rromani kultura vaj pala lengo dzivdipe. Kado hacaren sar riziko pala kethanipe, kethano adikeripe thaj riziko te adikerelpe andruno molipe. Kado na phenel so o Rroma na kamen te dzan pala edukacia, sastipasko arakhipe vaj aver socialno servisia, numaj von kamen te keren participacia kana varesavi decizia anel'pe pala lende. Sar konsekvenca kadaleski o familie si zorale numaj sajekh si korkore thaj izolirime vi kana si bareder seriozne problemia sar si so e droga thaj e delikvencia. Buter stabilno grupe vakeren pala kodo so von silen problemia e Rromenca save si imigrantia sostar len silen aver problemia, thaj sajekh silen pharipe e stereotipikane negativne imidzesa: sa o Rroma si cora, mangen love, vaj phiraven e droga.

Varesave finalno gindipe pala komleksno cacipe

Vi ande majpalune bersa anglo 2000 bersesko, o manus savo si bijando thaj barjardo sar Rrom, butvar si thodino averendar ando publikano phagerdo thaj dzungalo gindipe pala leste, si thodino ande margina thaj si stigmatizirimo. Ando akanutne bersa, neve balvala e rasizmoske thaj maripaske upral o migrantia thaj mamuj e Rromenge si prindzarde ande sasti Europa.

Sakone kurkoste, ande Franca, Ungro thaj Italia - thaj sajekh ande aver Europake thema - katar jekh vaj varesavo aver rezono o Rroma si telal i dudi e nevipengo so keren o mass medie. Butvar si sikade solduj rigendar, vaj si marde vaj kana von korkore phagen o tham (zakono), thaj kado imidzo si phandado lenge corrorikane dzivdipasa. Generalno,e Rromenge socialne kondicie saj te sikavenpe sar von besen ande marginalizirime thana, butvar bi nisavi infrastrukturasa, silen but bare problemia te arakhen buti, von si ando konflikto maskar o Rromanipe thaj Gadzikani kultura, von si kotor e manusengo save si corrore thaj save dziven ando phare ekonomikane kondicie, silen but tikne socio-ekonomikane sajipe, von silen - varesave themende - legalno statuso savo si nasigurno (naj len o lila e themeske) savo kerel pe lende restrikcie vas te arakhen legalno buti thaj legalno te achen ando them, kerel restrikcia vas e edukacia, sastipasko thaj socialno serviso thaj but aver.

Kana vakeras pala Rroma (thaj pala aver etnikane minoritetenge grupe) e rola verver kulturikane karakterengi, ande interakcia thaj phandadipe e buxle amalipasa astarel baro than. Kadala karakteristike varekana len pe vas i legalizacia dzivdipaski savo o buxleder amalipe prindzarel sar deviatno. Te o amalipe na akceptirinel o kulturako ververipe, othe naj komunikacia thaj naj nisavi konstruktivno relacia maskar o verver kulture. Bi kamle te keras legalizacia thaj krisipe e delikvenciako, but si vasno te dikhas e Rromane ternengi delikvencia katar specifikano kulturako thaj ekonomikano vi sajekh katar o generalno kulturako thaj institucionalnokonteksto e buxle amalipasko. O proceso dujekontekstengo sajekh siles o haceripe vas e sorta e delikvenciako savi keren o Rromane terne.

Problemo te kerelpe pherdi komunikacia thaj haceripe vas o Rroma si reportirime ando but intervjue e manusenca so keren buti ando ternengo krisipasko sistemo thaj ando socialno serviso. E faktesa sar atributo e na-sajipasko te kerelpe varesavi komunikacia maskar o verver kulture, barjarel o haceripe e bisajipasko thaj sajekh tiknarel o sajipe te kerenpe neve forme e cace intervencienge save saj te pheren o regulative thaj e praktika vas o majlacho intereso e chavorengo. Bihaceripe, dar thaj nakomunikacia si evedentno katar soduj riga thaj kodolestar keren negativno konsekvencie, save aven katar o indiferetno dzi varesave forme e maripaske. Sajipe kada te na avel buter musaj te kerenpe dujendar, buxle amalipastar thaj minoritetendar.

O Rroma si len barikanipe pala peski kultura. Kodolestar, vas lenge te akceptirinen varesavi intervencia savi si dikhli, vaj varekase si direkcia te kerel varesavi modifikacia lenge kulturaki, o Rroma dikhen pe kado sar varekon kon kamel te crdel e Rromen peska kulturatar. Sar jekh kotor e amalipasko o Rroma thaj Rromane chave - sar aver manusa - kamelape te akceptirinen thaj te den paciv e social ne normenge. Sajekh lenge hakaja (cacipe) (sar o manusa thaj dzene e minoritetenge) musaj te respektinenpe. Direktno participacia e Rromengi ando iniciative save si pala lende si sar jekh bar savo achavel bilache thaj naefektivno intervencie, thaj lacho, efektivno programo musaj te kerel satisfakcia vas o duj mangipe: musaj te kerelpe konsideracia savore manusenge save len kotor, thaj musaj te avelpe pi baza e dzandipaski kodolenge savenge kerenpe o programia. Kado si but vasno thaj cacipe si kana vakerelp e pala Rroma save silen but zoralo haceripe pala o adikeripe e Rromane kulturako.

Te barjarelpe e aktivno participacia e Rromengi ando savore sfere (kotora) e amalipasko si jekh vasno drom te vazdelpe o haceripe thaj e komunikacia thaj te kerelpe e prevencia e diskriminaciaki.

But upre leparde problemia saj sas kerdine te den buter aktivno rola e edukaciake. Kado na musaj te ovel limitirimo e skolake sikhlovipa, thaj aver formalno thaj naformalno edukaciake dromenca, musaj te sikavel o vasnipe e akceptaciako vas o "averipe" thaj o "avera". Edukacia savi sila suzi orientacia ki kultura e akceptaciaki thaj phravdes peravel o rasizmo thaj e ksenofobia, musaj te vazdelpe. Kado edukaciako proceso musaj te buxlarelpe maskar o sa komunite kethanes e mass medienca th aj publikane kampaniasa te achavelpe o stereotipi thaj rasistikano keripe. O molipe savo si bazirimo pe akceptacia e averengi musaj te ovel konstantno reafirmirimi.

Dureder, o fundamentalno vasnipe e ekonomikane thaj socialne barvalipasko save saj keren e prevencia delikvenciakiri, kana vazdenape e dzivdipaske kondicie thaj tiknakerenape rizikoske situacie, nasti te aven bisterde. Kado saj te avel efektivno numaj kana e Rromenge si dendi sajipe te dziven pacivasa po than te keren kriminaliteto vaj te dziven sar ilegalno manusa.

Sostar na sas koordinacia maskar o agencie sas jekh aver baro problemo ando sotrin thema. Socialno thaj justiciake buca musaj te aven kotor e khetane politikako savo sila res (cilo) te kerel prevencia e kriminalitetoski, te kerel promocia socialne barvalipaski maskar o Rroma, te den zor vas e integracia e Rromengi thaj te kerel lengo arakhipe - so majbuxle saj te avel - sajekh vi ando kulturako kethanipe.

Sostar si kompleksno o pucipe, vi kana dikhelpe e konotacia "Rroma", savi sikavel jekh xoxavno haceripe e romantikane atrakciaki (lengi muzika, khelipe, muklipe thaj aver), thaj vi kodolestar so na kamen e Rromen, katar o fakto so si upral lende dzungalo dikhipe, stereotipia thaj diskriminacia savi si buxles prindzardi, othe si vi pozitivno dikhipe.Situacia e Rromengi, thaj Rromane chavengi, si sukareder ande Europa bi dikhindoi ando save dzivdipaske kondicie besen, dikhindoi e Rromen pe terminologia e hakajengi (cacipaski). But kadalendar kana prindzardile o internacionaln o norme thaj standardia ando nacionalno legislativa thaj sajipe te keren len ando dzivdipe. E KCH si katar 1989 bers, thaj o internacionalno instrumentia save silen relacie e ternenge krisipaske sistemesa naj but purane. Numaj angle varesave des bersa o ch avorro na sas prindzardo sar manus save si les hakaja (cacipe), of sas sar i mangin e familiaki, dake, dadeski thaj socialne grupaki. Sajekh si diferencie ando internacionalo nivelo, ando varesave thema e lumake i koncepcia si akana suzi vas e chavorreske,na buter sar materia e individualno haceripaski, numaj akana si sar jekh integralno kotor e manusikane dzandipasko thaj phravde politikako. Sajekh o problemia egzistirinen. O Rromane chave besen ando gasave kondicie save si but telal e themenge standarden dar kote von besen vaj katar von phiren. O hakaja (cacipe) e Rromane chavengo naj buteder garantirime vaj kotor kotar i garancie naj othe. Kadale problemeske nasti te delpe jekh marginlno konsideracia: amen vakeras pala but mie (ezera, hiljada) have save naj len sajipe te barjarenpe ando sukar barvalipe. Sajekh si evidentno so kadi situacia naj kake tolerimen sar so sas. O fakto si kaj kamelape vrjama thaj but politikani buti angle neve socialno molipe vaj mehanizmi save si phandade e hakajenca (cacipenca) vas e manuseske, te avel akceptirimo thaj te avel ando centro amalipasko. O sajipe musaj te kerelpe divestar po dive ando sakonesko dzivdipe thaj o agencie musaj te den paciv, te den respekto, Rromane chavenge sar jekhto, thaj sar majpaluno sar sakone terne manuseske.

[*] Paruvdipe pe Rromani Chib kerda o Orhan Galjus.

[1] Kethane Rodipaske Oficiria, katar o Instituto e Kethane Naciengo vas Interregionalo Kriminalipe thaj Rodipe e Cacipasko (UNICRI), Rimo, Italia.

[2] O anav Rroma (pi Anglikani chib "Rromani") sikavel ando teksto sa nomadikane, phiravne, jekhpas-phiravne thaj besle manusenge grupe save si akharde "Gypsies". Kadi bucaki terminologia si leli katar o Gheorghe N., Hancock J., Cortiade M., Grupa e Rromane Konsiloski e Projektoskivas o Etnikane Relacie, "Rrom(a)" vaj "Tigan"? (Vas o etnikano anav e Rromengo thaj keripe te Ielpe ando oficialne dokumentia). Anglokerdo dokumento vas o Internacionalno Seminaro pala Tolerancia organizirimo katar o Konsilo e Europako, e Rumuniake Themestar thaj katar o ODIMC-OAKE, Bukuresti, Maj 23-26 1995.

[3] I publikacia si pi anglikani chib numaj o reporto pala o Parizo si pi Franciaki chib.

[4] O lokalno konsultantia sas i rani Angela Koncz thaj i rani Piroska Versitz katar Ungriko Them, raj Sandro Costarelli katar Italia, thaj rani Jacqueline Charlemagne katar i Franca.

[5] Franca, o Ungriko Them thaj Italia si o Partie Themenge vas sa kadale instrumentonge.

[6] Vas buxluder informacia pala kada "trin P" thaj generalno pala e Konvencia, dikh e Prindzardipe katar o Nigel Cantwell ando lil e CRC savo si kotor e lilesko pala Inernacionalno Norme vas o Chavorrenge Hakaja kerdine katar Arakhipe e Internacionalne Chavorrengo [Defence for Children International] (1995).

[7] Buter informacie pala internacionalno normativno konteksto, droma te sikavenpe o akusipe, thaj selektirime internacionalne kontaktne thana si prezentirime ande kadaja publikacia.

[8] Vas o komprehenzivno socio-kulturalno thaj socio-polikano dikhipe pala Rroma ande Europa, dikh: Jean-Pierre Li (1987), Rroma thaj o Phiravne [Gypsies and Travellers], Konsilo e Europako, Strasbourg.

[9] Ando fakto, sajekhte vakteste (vrjamate), kana vakerelpe pala sura so o familie len but terne chavorren te phiraven e droga thaj kadi buti sas kerdini ando kampura (kampi), o'the sas majzorali reakcia e Rromendar, von nakamenas te den nisavi informacia.