Beyond the Missing Link: National Institutions for Roma Inclusion (NIRIs) as an Opportunity Structure for Addressing the Contemporary Roma Issue in Central and East European EU-Countries

(1)

University of Groningen

Faculty of Arts - Department of History - Master Central and East European Studies

Beyond the Missing Link: National Institutions for Roma Inclusion (NIRIs) as

an Opportunity Structure for Addressing the Contemporary Roma Issue in

Central and East European EU-Countries

Case study:

The value of the Plenipotentiary Office of the Government of the Slovak

Republic for Roma Communities within the Slovak Roma governance structure

from 1995 to 2017

15 March 2019 Student

Mirjam Gietema

S1877976

Contact details Telephone number: +31620645647 Email address: mirjamgietema@gmail.com Address: Kolfstraat 38, 9717 GS Groningen, Netherlands

Supervisor

(2)

1

I, Mirjam Gietema, hereby declare that this thesis, “Beyond the Missing Link: National Institutions for Roma Inclusion (NIRIs) as an Opportunity Structure for Addressing the Contemporary Roma Issue in Central and East European Countries - Case study: The value of the Plenipotentiary Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic for Roma Communities within the Slovak Roma governance structure from 1995 to 2017,” is my own work and by my own effort that it has not been accepted anywhere else for the award of any other degree or diploma. Where sources of information have been used, they have been acknowledged.

(3)

2

Abstract

This research concerns the national level of the EU-led Roma governance structure and examines the value of National Institutions for Roma Inclusion (NIRIs, a term coined by the researcher) in Central and Eastern European EU-countries to coordinate the efforts of the national government, Non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and municipalities aimed at fostering the process of Roma inclusion on a national level. Existing Roma-related literature does not seem to focus on the historical relevance of these particular institutions. However, considering the main theories linked to National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), which emphasise the strategic position of such national institutions to coordinate national efforts, this study takes a tentative step towards exploring the historical value of these specific Roma institutions in this regard. A qualitative research method is used to study the Plenipotentiary Office of the Slovak Republic for Roma communities, the case study selected for this research. The analysis proceeds in the following five steps: national context (1); the historical development of this Roma-focused institution (2); the decisive characteristics that affect the functioning of the institution (3); the institution’s position in the national Roma governance triangle (4); and an assessment of the effectiveness in terms of independence and accountability (5). One-to-one interviews with four (former) plenipotentiaries, four NGO representatives, two Roma experts and one employee have been used to acquire in-depth insights with regard to each of these five steps. The main finding of this study is that the Plenipotentiary Office of the Slovak Republic for Roma communities is more valuable than has previously been recognised by literature, which has primarily focused on the governance aspect of the Roma issue. Moreover, these discoveries suggest that an independent and accountable institution may negatively affect the overall process of Roma inclusion. This study also highlights the need to replicate this analysis by applying it to other NIRIs in the region and explore their impact on the governance triangle at the local level.

Key words: Roma Issue, Roma governmentality, National Institutes for Roma Inclusion (NIRI), Slovakia, Plenipotentiary Office of the Slovak Republic for Roma communities.

(4)

3

Abstract (in Slovak)

Výskum sa venuje národnej úrovni európskej štruktúry riadenia rómskych komunít a skúma význam Národných Inštitúcií pre Rómsku Inklúziu (NIRI, pojem vytvorený výskumníčkou) v stredo- a východoeurópskych krajinách Európskej Únie v koordinácii snáh vlády, mimovládnych organizácií (MVO) a samospráv zameraných na podporu celonárodného procesu rómskej inklúzie. Existujúca literatúra, týkajúca sa rómskej populácie, sa nesústredí na historický význam a dôležitosť menovaných inštitúcií. Berúc do úvahy základné teórie spojené s Národnými Inštitúciami pre Ľudské Práva (NIĽP), ktoré zdôrazňujú strategický význam a rolu týchto národných inštitúcií v koordinácii celonárodných aktivít, tento výskum podniká experimentálne kroky smerujúce k preskúmaniu historickej hodnoty týchto špecifických rómskych inštitúcií v tomto ohľade. Kvalitatívnym výskumom sme skúmali Úrad splnomocnenca vlády Slovenskej republiky pre rómske komunity, prípadovú štúdiu zvolenú pre tento výskum. Analýza pokrýva nasledovné body: národný kontext (1), historický vývoj inštitúcie zameranej na Rómov (2), rozhodujúce charakteristiky ovplyvňujúce fungovanie inštitúcie (3), pozíciu Úradu v trojuholníku národných inštitúcií spravujúcich rómske komunity (4) a vyhodnotenie efektivity v kontexte nezávislosti a zodpovednosti (5). Uskutočnili sme individuálne rozhovory so štyrmi predošlými splnomocnencami, štyrmi zástupcami MVO, dvoma expertmi na rómske témy a jedným zamestnancom Úradu s cieľom získať komplexné poznatky ku každému zo spomínaných bodov. Hlavné zistenie tohto výskumu je, že Úrad splnomocnenca vlády SR pre rómske komunity je oveľa dôležitejší a významnejší, než to predošlá literatúra, venujúca sa aspektu spravovania rómskych komunít, priznávala. Zistenia tohto výskumu taktiež naznačujú, že silne nezávislá a kontrolovateľná inštitúcia môže *negatívne* ovplyvniť celkový proces rómskej inklúzie. Výskum taktiež podčiarkuje potrebu replikovať analýzu na ostatných NIRI v regióne a skúmať ich vplyv na trojuholník spravujúcich inštitúcií na lokálnej úrovni.

Kľúčové slová: rómske témy, rómska governmentalita, Národné Inštitúcie pre Rómsku Inklúziu (NIRI), Slovensko, Úrad splnomocnenca vlády SR pre rómske komunity.

(5)

4

Acknowledgements

Over the last two years, interviewees and various other individuals I encountered always seemed to be surprised why I, a Dutch student from the Netherlands, went to Slovakia to investigate the Plenipotentiary Office of the Slovak Republic for Roma communities. Although I initially wanted to explore national governance structures aimed at addressing the situation of the Roma population in Central and Eastern Europe, the fascination for the region started during my bachelorstudies of International Relations and International Organisation at the University of Groningen. The interest in minority politics and the Roma topic in particular was sparked during my Erasmus+ exchange at the Comenius University in Bratislava (spring semester 2015). Initially, I wanted to learn more about nationalism, minority politics and post-communist society and politics in general. However, after the following statement expressed by one of my Slovak peer students I was deeply moved by the Roma issue:

“The Roma are not normal people. They are different, they have different blood. It is even proven by academic research. They took some Roma babies to France to see if a French upbringing would educate them...”

I am not exactly sure how she finished her argument, but I still remember that I was shocked and speechless. In different ways, this moment has affected decisions made ever since I returned to the Netherlands. I signed up for the master programme History Today at the University of Groningen and followed the specialisation track ‘Central and East European Studies’ to learn more about historical processes that shaped today’s Central and Eastern European societies and politics. Besides my studies, I was part of a youth NGO and organised different youth exchanges and training in the region about social inclusion and multiculturalism to discuss the position of minorities. Meanwhile, and particularly due to my work as a project manager at the International Cooperation Agency of the Association of Netherlands Municipalities (VNG International), I became increasingly aware of the crucial role that local governments can play in addressing the daily challenges faced by the Roma. With this master dissertation I am obtaining my master’s degree. But equally as important, I got a better understanding of the complexities of the Roma issue.

I would like to thank the following people for the help and support during the master thesis process. Firstly, all the interviewees for taking the time to answer all of my questions. Their knowledge, experiences and opinions have been extremely useful for answering the main question of this research. Secondly, Dr. Prof. Alexander Mušinka (University of Prešov) and Dr. Andrej Findor (Comenius University Bratislava). During the three Skype calls we had, Mušinka provided support and commented on the focus of this research. During my stay in Bratislava, I also discussed my research with Findor. His academic network helped me with selecting and contacting relevant interviewees. Thirdly, I want to thank my supervisor Dr. Sipke de Hoop for the feedback in the set-up of this study. Fourthly, a special thanks for my Slovak friends that helped me with translating relevant Slovak documents, interpreting one of the interviews and clarifying the recorded interviews where necessary. Finally, I would like to thank my friends and family for the invaluable support and encouraging words during the writing-up process.

(6)

5

D. List of interviewees... 108 E. List of themes, categories and codes ... 111 F. Statute of the Plenipotentiary Office of the Slovak Government for Roma communities ... 114 G. Statute of the Advisory body to the Office of the Plenipotentiary of the Slovak Republic for Roma communities for the field of NGOs ... 119

(8)

7

List of Abbreviations

CEE Central and Eastern European

CVEK Centre for the Research of Ethnicity and Culture ESF European Social Fund

EU European Union

IDC Interdepartmental commission

INGO(s) International non-governmental organisation(s) NGO(s) Non-governmental organisation(s)

NHRI(s) National human rights institution(s) NIRI(s) National institution(s) for Roma Inclusion NRCP National roma contact point

NRIS National Roma Integration Strategy

OSCE Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe OSF Open Society Foundation

SNS Slovak National Party

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

(9)

8

List of Figures and Tables

List of figures

Figure 1 The Roma governmentality page 32

Figure 2 The main actors and most significant institutional and page 60 international changes summarised in a timeline

Figure 3 The positioning of the Office within the government structure page 64 since its establishment in 1995

Figure 4 Organisational structure of the Office page 65 Figure 5 Geographical dispersion of the Roma population and the page 70

Office

Figure 6 The positioning of the main stakeholders within the Slovak page 77 Roma governance triangle

List of tables

Table 1 Summary of the different types of independence and page 40 accountability

Table 2 The five-step analysis that supports this research’s quest page 42 towards the value of Plenipotentiary Office in Slovakia

Table 3 Overview of the regional and project offices, including the page 69 year of establishment

Table 4 Main findings with regard to the assessment of the Office page 77 in terms of independence and accountability

Table 5 The eleven stages applied to analyse the collected qualitative page 104 data

(10)

9

“Reams of words have been written about the Roma. The abject poverty, the discrimination, the pity, the racism, the hatred - it’s a problem that could either be taken as extremely complicated to solve, or, very straightforward. If I were to offer my own opinion, it’s simple - it’s not right for humans to live

in these conditions, anywhere.”1

1

Nate Robert, “The Largest Gypsy Ghetto in Europe - Stolipinovo, Bulgaria,” Yomatic (website), 29 March 2016, accessed 12 April 2018, https://yomadic.com/stolipinovo-gypsy-ghetto/.

(11)

10

Introduction

Each national government in Central and Eastern Europe which hosts a large Roma population created a national institution in order to coordinate its efforts to promote and protect the situation of the Roma living in their territories.2 These institutions are a direct result of the Copenhagen criteria introduced by the European Union (EU) in 1993, which required countries aspiring to join the EU to have “stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities.”3 During the accession negotiations that started in 1997, the candidate countries Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, and Romania (from now on these countries are grouped together and referred to as Central and East European EU countries, abbreviated as CEE-EU countries) were explicitly asked to establish a specific national institution to foster the process of Roma inclusion, which is the main strategy applied in Europe to address a human rights issue.4 This is an important topic of discussion among numerous non-governmental organisations (NGOs), international governmental organisations (IGOs) and scholars from different fields of study since the 1990s.5

This study focuses on these national institutions created in the 1990s in the CEE-EU countries. Thus far, their creation has neither been considered as an event of historical relevance nor has its existence been much discussed in existing literature concerned with the “largest and most disadvantaged minority of Europe.”6 Therefore, the researcher coins the term ‘National institution for Roma Inclusion’ (NIRI). All the Roma focused institutions created in the 1990s by national governments in the Central and East European (CEE) region qualify as a NIRI. The negligible role of these NIRIs can be well-understood considering the dominant discourse of the literature produced in the 1990s. In this period, literature started to discuss the deteriorating situation of the Roma under the common denominator ‘Roma issue’. Two strands of literature have been identified.7 Within the first strand of literature, scholars perceive the Roma issue as a matter of human rights. Various scholars describe how numerous NGOs raised the alarm, outraged not only by the inhuman living conditions and exclusion faced by them, but also by the blatant ignorance of policy makers in the

2

This research applies the term ‘Roma’ to describe the minority that is also referred to as ‘Romani’ or ‘Gypsies’. Herewith it follows the terminology applied in most of the Roma-related literature.

3

Tim Haughton, “When Does the EU Make a Difference? Conditionality and the Accession Process in Central and Eastern Europe,” Political Studies Review (2007), 235; Aidan McGarry and Timofey Agarin, “Unpacking the Roma Participation Puzzle: Presence, Voice and Influence,” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 40, no. 12 (2014): 1980; European Council, Presidency Conclusions Copenhagen European Council 21-22 June 1993, accessed 14 January 2018,

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/enlargement/ec/pdf/cop_en.pdf. 4

Aidan McGarry, “The Dilemma of the European Union’s Roma policy,” Critical Social Policy 32 (2012): 129. 5

Examples of such NGOs are Human Rights Watch, European Roma Rights Centre, Open Society Foundation and the European Centre of Minority Issues. The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), Council of Europe and EU constitute the main IGOs concerned with the human rights situation of the Roma. Eva Sobotka, “Influence of Civil Society Actors on Formulation of Roma Issues within the EU Framework,” International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 18 (2011): 241-243.

6

Thomas Acton and Gary Mundy, Romani culture and Gypsy identity, 38; James Goldston, “Roma Rights, Roma Wrongs,” Foreign Affairs 81 (2002): 146; András Bíró, Nicolae Gheorghe, Martin Kovats and Will Guy, From Victimhood to Citizenship: The Path of Roma Integration (Budapest: Central European University Press, 2013), 13; Zoltan Barany, “Living on the edge: The East European Roma in Postcommunist Politics and Societies,” Slavic Review 53, no. 2 (Summer, 1994): 322.

7

Both strands of literature are well-captured by the following academic accounts: Zoltan Barany, The East European Gypsies; Will Guy, Between Past and Future: The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe (Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press, 2001); Huub van Baar, The European Roma: Minority representation, memory, and the limits of transnational governmentality (Amsterdam: F&N Eigen Beheer, 2011).

(12)

11

CEE-EU countries.8 Accounts related to the latter consider the Roma as a policy object and focus on the international government efforts of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), Council of Europe and EU aimed at addressing the Roma issue in these respective countries. The EU is generally regarded as the most important catalyst for changes in individual government policies towards the Roma and the building of a specific transnational institutional governance apparatus for the Roma.9 Scholars mainly focus on the European level of the emerging Roma government framework. Herein, the IGOs (OSCE, Council of Europe and EU), NGOs and CEE-EU candidate states are considered as the main actors.10

Nevertheless, this study claims that, two decades after their creation, NIRIs can now be considered as relevant players. Their significance derives from the new Roma discourse focused on the new challenge: a situation in which international efforts appears to have contributed to a deteriorating situation of the Roma.11 This so-called ‘contemporary Roma issue’ is discussed in literature that appeared from 2002 onwards. In this new situation, there is an institutional framework in place but the situation of the Roma seems to have deteriorated.12 Herein, literature not only describes the increased efforts of the EU but also points to the responsibilities of the governments of the CEE-EU countries. Literature generally agrees that the political commitments are not translated into deeds.13 In order to activate these governments, literature published after 2011 suggests or aims to scrutinise possible constructions and strategies that could be undertaken at the European level to improve effective implementation on the ground.14 In this respect, the EU has a crucial role to play. A concrete example in this regard is the EU initiative to install a ‘National Roma Contact Point’ (NRCP). These contact points have been generally considered a mechanism that increased the EU’s monitoring power on national efforts in CEE-EU countries. The Open Society Foundation (OSF) elaborately assessed the European dimension of the Roma governance framework. However, rather than focussing on the European level of governance and ways to optimise the effectiveness of the EU-led governance structure, various scholars are calling for research on national governance structures.15 In this way, the deficiencies at the national level could be better understood.

8

Eva Sobotka, “Influence of Civil Society Actors on Formulation of Roma Issues within the EU Framework,” 242. 9

Marcel Dediu, “The European Union: A Promoter of Roma Diplomacy,” in Roma Diplomacy, by Valeriu Nicolae and Hannah Slavik, (New York: Idebate Press, 2004), 121; Asmet Elezovski, Roma integration in the European Union, in Roma Diplomacy, 131 and 136; James A. Goldston, “Roma Rights, Roma Wrongs,” Foreign Affairs 81, no. 2 (March-April 2002): 149

10

Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, “The Influence of EU Accession on Minorities’ Status in East Central Europe,” Romanian Journal of Political Science (2007): 59; Peter Vermeersch, “How does the EU matter for the Roma? Transnational Roma activism and EU social policy formation,” Problems of Post-Communism (2017): 226; Timofey Agarin and Malte Brosig, Minority Integration in Central Eastern Europe: Between Ethnic Diversity and Equality (New York: Rodopi B.V., 2009), 8.

11

Yaron Matras, Romani Worlds: Academia, Policy, and Modern Media: A selection of articles, reports, and discussions documenting the achievements of the European Academic Network on Romani Studies, edited by Eben Friedman (Cluj-Napoca: Editura Institutului pentru Studierea Problemelor Minoritatilor Nationale, 2015), 40; Andria D. Timmer, “Constructing the “Needy Subject”: NGO Discourses of Roma Need,” Political and Legal Anthropology Review 33, no. 2 (2010): 265; Aidan McGarry, Romaphobia: The Last Acceptable Form of Racism ( London: Zed Books Ltd, 2017), 47. 12

Timofey Agarin and Malte Brosig, Minority Integration in Central Eastern Europe, 31. 13

Dediu, “The European Union: A Promoter of Roma Diplomacy,” 126; Aidan McGarry, Who Speaks for Roma? Political Representation of a Transnational Minority Community (New York and London: Continuum, 2010), 37.

14

Open Society Foundation, Revisiting the EU Roma Framework: Assessing the European Dimension for the Post-2020 (Open Society European Policy Institute, 2017), accessed September 2018,

https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/revisiting-eu-roma-framework-20170607.pdf

15

Huub van Baar, The European Roma, 165; Eva Sobotka, “Opportunities and Limitations,” 104; Jeffrey Checkel, “Norms, Institutions, and National Identity in Contemporary Europe,” International Studies Quarterly 43, no. 1 (1999): 85 and 96.

(13)

12

Considering that national governments should translate the international efforts and strategies into national legislation and practice, the CEE-EU countries are somehow perceived as the missing link. This research maintains that NIRIs can possibly function as an opportunity structure beyond these missing links. This point is justified by a closer look at the original ideas of the EU behind the creation of these institutions. After the creation, the EU repeatedly emphasised the need and task of these national institutions. In 2004, for instance, the EU argued that “governments should consider seriously the establishment of governmental Roma agencies charged with ensuring the effective implementation of social inclusion policies targeting Roma.”16 This shows that the EU perceived NIRIs as important actors once the CEE-EU countries joined the EU.

Studies on national human rights institutions (NHRIs) support the ideals of the EU. Crucially, these insights underline the theoretical foundation of NIRIs as well. In contrast to national institutions focused on the Roma, the more general NHRIs are extensively studied. The main contributors emphasise the strength of these institutions by referring to their particular role and position, which is well described by the United Nations: *as+ “a central element of a strong national human rights system.”17 The strong position is also acknowledged by scholars. According to Anne Smith and Julie Mertus, NHRIs are positioned between the government and NGOs. They cooperate with and contribute to the efforts of both institutions.18 From literature it can also be observed that these institutions are not only an actor but also structures of social and political spaces in a larger domestic human rights system.19 Therefore, literature researched how NHRIs are related not only to already existing NGOs but also to municipalities and other state agencies.20 Even though their performance is affected by the national (political) context, they can play a crucial role if they develop effective work relationships with NGOs, national government and municipalities.21 Based on these findings, this research suggests that NIRIs could advance the existing EU-led Roma governance framework.

Insights stemming from studies of NHRIs do not only show that the NIRIs can play a crucial role in theory, but also offer a theoretical framework that could be applied to assess the value of these Roma-focused institutions. The latter allows the researcher to take a tentative step towards exploring the historical value of NIRIs. Two decades ago, these institutions have been created and

16

European Commission - Directorate-General for Employment and Social Affairs, The situation of the Roma in an Enlarged European Union (2004), accessed 12 December 2017,

http://www.google.nl/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwi15OvBgLDYAhWLLFAKHahwC_QQFgg zMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fec.europa.eu%2Fsocial%2FBlobServlet%3FdocId%3D99%26langId%3Den&usg=AOvVaw17f9M-zCSQjzUiuOwy8zcV, 51.

17

UNDP and Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), UNDP-OHCHR Toolkit for collaboration with National Human Rights Institutions, December 2010, accessed 15 March 2018,

http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/Democratic%20Governance/IP/UNDP-UHCHR-Toolkit-LR.pdf, 2. 18

Anne Smith, “The Unique Position of National Human Rights Institutions: A Mixed Blessing?,” 910; Julie Mertus, “Evaluating National Human Rights Institutes,” in Human Rights, State Compliance, and Social Change: Assessing National Human Rights Institutions, by Ryan Goodman and Thomas Pegram (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 74.

19

Steven Jensen, “Twenty-five years later, how much do national human rights institutions matter?,” Open Global Rights. 12 June 2018, accessed 13 August 2018: https://www.openglobalrights.org/twenty-five-years-later-how-much-do-national-human-rights-institutions-matter/

20

Sonia Cardenas, “National Human Rights Institutions and State Compliance,” in Human Rights, State Compliance, and Social Change: Assessing National Human Rights Institutions, 30.

21

This conclusion comprises the following accounts: UNDP and Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), UNDP-OHCHR Toolkit for collaboration with National Human Rights Institutions, December 2010, assessed 15 March 2018,

http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/Democratic%20Governance/IP/UNDP-UHCHR-Toolkit-LR.pdf; Anne Smith, “The Unique Position of National Human Rights Institutions: A Mixed Blessing?,” 909; Jan Wouters and Katrien Meuwissen, National Human Rights Institutions in Europe, 226; Julie Mertus, “Evaluating National Human Rights Institutes,” 84.

(14)

13

assigned to coordinate implementation efforts of the national government, NGOs and municipalities. In the absence of any comprehensive research into these institutions, it is important to thoroughly study these Roma-focused institutions.

In order to find a detailed explanation on this relatively unknown phenomenon a qualitative research method is applied.22 Considering the unique character of each institution in place, a single-case study is chosen as the most suitable research design for this dissertation. The Office of the Plenipotentiary of the Slovak Republic for Roma Communities (Slovak: Úrad splnomocnenca vlády SR pre rómske komunity, from now on referred to as the Office) has been selected for the following reasons: Firstly, this institution clearly qualifies as a NIRI. The Office has been established by the Slovak in 1995 and its development has been largely affected by the EU.23 Moreover, this government institution is officially responsible for coordinating role within the Slovak governance triangle.24 Secondly, Slovakia is an interesting case. The Roma issue in Slovakia is considered as one of the most pertinent and pressing.25 In percentages, Slovakia hosts the largest Roma population in the region (eight percent).26 Beata Balogová goes even further by suggesting that “the unsolved problems of Slovakia’s Roma communities are a ticking time-bomb, the explosion of which will affect the whole society. Meanwhile, groups of frustrated citizens are calling more frequently for the application of repressive solutions.”27 In the period 1995 to 2017, various reports have been published in which the Office is mentioned. However, they have not been the focal point of the reports but only mentioned briefly. Therefore, the research aims to explore the value of NIRIs by posing the following research question:

What was the value of the Plenipotentiary Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic for Roma communities within the Slovak Roma governance structure from 1995 to 2017?

Informed by theoretical insights from the literature on NHRIs, a structured framework consisting of five steps is designed to find an adequate answer to the main research question. The first step entails the national context and aims to answer the sub questions: How did the Roma issue evolve in the Slovak national context? With this question, the researcher aims to outline the main characteristics and developments of the Slovak Roma issue after 1993 and pictures the working field in which the Office operates. The answer to this question allows the researcher to analyse the development and functioning of the Office in a national perspective.

The second step concentrates on the main historical development of the Office in the period 1995-2017. The partial question posed in this regard is: What are the major actors and factors that

22

See Appendix A for an elaborate discussion on the ontological, epistemological and methodological considerations.

23

Michal Vašečka, Martina Jurásková, Elena Kriglerová, et all., Evaluation of the Activities of the Office of the Plenipotentiary of the Government for Roma Communities (Bratislava: Institute for Public Affairs, 2002), 16.

24

Government of the Slovak Republic, Strategy of the Slovak Republic for Integration of Roma up to 2020 (Slovak: Stratégia Slovenskej republiky pre integráciu Rómov do roku 2020), adopted by resolution no. 1/2012 on 11 January 2012, accessed 24 November 2017, https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/roma_slovakia_strategy_en.pdf: 24

25

Zoltan Barany, “Living on the edge,” 337. 26

UNDP, Atlas of Roma Communities 2013 (Slovak: Atlas rómskych komunít na Slovensku 2013), accessed 14 October 2017,

http://www.unipo.sk/public/media/18210/Atlas_romkom_web.pdf. Conclusions are based on the findings of a thorough questionnaire executed by a scientific team that visited 1070 municipalities. This study is generally perceived as the most extensive research of the Slovak Roma community and was led by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in cooperation with the Department of Roma Studies of the University of Prešov, the Plenipotentiary Office of the Slovak Republic for Roma communities and the Slovak Association of Towns and Municipalities (ZMOS).

27

Beata Balogová, “Anti-Roma Protests Draw Thousands,” The Slovak Spectator, October 4, 2012, accessed 13 October 2017, https://spectator.sme.sk/c/20044803/anti-roma-protests-draw-thousands.html.

(15)

14

impacted the evolution and development of the Office? Based on the historical analysis, the researcher aims to identify the main actors and factors that shaped the Office.

The third step entails a discussion surrounding the sub question: What were the main features that determined the way the Office functioned? This section perceives the Office as an actor and based on the historical timeline, interviews and official documents, the researcher aims to identify the main features that have affected the functioning of the Office. This step is considered important as it explains the capacities and potential of the Office as an actor.

The fourth step poses the sub question: What was the position of the Office in the Slovak governance triangle? In order to answer this question, the researcher assumes that the government, NGOs and municipalities constitute the main actors in the governance structure. Based on this assumption, and in order to determine the position of the Office within this triangle, the researcher studies the mutual perceptions, experiences and visions between the Office and these three actors.

The fifth step analyses the performance of the Office and aims to find an answer on the partial question: How effective was the Office as an actor and coordinator within the Slovak Roma government structure? In order to determine the effectiveness, the researcher will apply the concepts of independence and accountability. Independence implies a situation in which the NHRIs act free from government and NGO interference. Accountability refers to the situation of being accountable for its conduct or performance, and serves as an instrument and goal to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of governance.28

As the main research question and sub questions require in-depth insights into the context, development and functioning of the Office, eleven one-to-one interviews were conducted. Targeted interviewees were four persons that fulfilled the plenipotentiary position, five representatives of respected NGOs who have been working in the field and with the Office for at least fifteen years, two experts, and one employee of the Office.29 Most of the interviews were conducted in Bratislava, during a fieldwork trip in the period between 25 October and 10 November 2017. Interviews prior and after this period were conducted via Skype. The interviews followed a semi-structured format.30 In addition to the interviews, a questionnaire has been filled out by the Association of Towns and Communities of Slovakia (Slovak: Združenia miest a obcí Slovenska, ZMOS). By presenting the main findings stemming from the analysis of the collected data, this research aims to enrich knowledge about this institution from different angles. Research into the sub questions will lead to an answer to the main question.31

Various primary and secondary sources have been used to validate and complement the interview results, including official government documents, reports published by international and Slovak NGOs and researchers, and newspaper articles. Examples of valuable primary sources are the ‘Strategy of the Slovak Republic for Integration of Roma up to 2020’, the ‘Statute of the

28

Jan Wouters and Katrien Meuwissen, National Human Rights Institutions in Europe, 249; Mark Bovens, “Analysing and Assessing Public Accountability. A Conceptual Framework,” European Governance Papers (EUROGOV), no. C-06-01 (January 2006), accessed 15 March 2018, https://www.ihs.ac.at/publications/lib/ep7.pdf, 8-9.

29

The background of each person that took part in the interview and their professional relationship with the Office, are summarized in the so-called ‘list of interviewees’, which can be found in Appendix D.

30

The interview guide used can be found in Appendix C. 31

(16)

15

Plenipotentiary Office’ and the ‘Statute of the Office’s relations with the NGO sector’.32 Reports, news articles and websites are considered as the main secondary sources. The ‘Evaluation of the Activities of the Office of the Plenipotentiary of the Government for Roma Communities’, an elaborate report that assessed the creation and development of the Office in the period 1995-2002 is regarded as a valuable source. Furthermore, academic reports and articles produced by Slovak experts, the Centre for the Research of Ethnicity and Culture (CVEK) and the Open Society Foundation (OSF) are used. News articles and websites have been consulted to find more background information on the terms and personalities of the different Plenipotentiaries that served the Office. The main findings of this study suggest that the Slovak NIRI has developed itself as an actor that links municipalities, NGOs and the national government. Although the institution is clearly part of the national government structure, its structure and working methods allow the Plenipotentiary to interact with each of them on a regular basis. Moreover, the findings suggest that an independent and accountable institution may negatively affect the overall process of Roma inclusion.

The study is organised as follows: The first chapter reviews relevant literature and clarifies the niche that this study aims to fill. The second chapter presents the findings of the case study. Finally, the conclusion offers the main findings about the value of the Office, links these to the dominant Roma discourse focused on the European level of Roma governance, and, based on the limitations of this study, gives suggestions for further research.

32

The ‘Statute of the Plenipotentiary Office’ and the ‘Statute of the Office’s relations with the NGO sector’ have been translated for the purpose of this research. The English versions can be found in Appendix F and Appendix G.

(17)

16

1. Literature review

This chapter discusses literature relevant to this research and clarifies the gaps in current knowledge being addressed in this study. The first section introduces the Roma population and discusses the developments within the main Roma discourse. This section also elaborates upon the importance of exploring governance structures towards the Roma at the national level. The second section unravels the pertinent national governance structures and underlines the need to further examine the potential of the so-called national institutions for Roma inclusion (NIRIs). The third section engages with studies on national human rights institutions (NHRIs) to explore its theoretical potential. Insights stemming from these studies confirm the possibly crucial role of the NIRIs to move the Roma issue forward, which have so far never been subject to comprehensive studies. The fourth and final section addresses this gap in research and elaborates on the objectives of this study by presenting the research question and operationalising this research’ quest into the value of NIRIs in practice.

1.1 The ‘Roma issue’ in Central and East European EU countries

The Roma, also called Romani or Gypsies, left their ancestral homeland in the Punjab region of India and reached the European continent approximately thousand years ago. Currently, they are a dispersed population that mainly live in Europe.33_{They speak more than sixty dialects of their original} Romani language and their numerous communities know many different models of settlement, culture, legal status, and periods of migration.34 Today, their census population size has been estimated to be within the range of eleven and fifteen million, of which the largest population is residing in Central and Eastern Europe.35 Despite their heterogeneous character, literature applies the generalist term ‘Roma minority’ to discuss Europe’s “largest, most marginalized, discriminated against and misunderstood minority.”36

It has been firmly established that the Roma have been discriminated against since their arrival in Europe. Scholars agree that the discrimination is the result of the historical relation between the Roma and their host countries. Due to their unique culture and distinct physical features, societies have viewed them as an unwanted and troublesome ‘other’. Majorities typically associate the Roma with poverty, criminality, a high fertility rate and behaviour that are perceived as inappropriate and antisocial.37 These negative perceptions combined with unsupportive policies have largely contributed to the disadvantaged position of the Roma. Rulers and governments have never perceived them as belonging to their societies and have rather viewed them as uncivilised,

33

Donald Kenrick and Puxon Grattan, The Destiny of Europe’s Gypsies (New York: Basic Books, 1972); I. Mendizabal, “Reconstructing the Population History of European Romani from Genome-wide Data,” Current Biology 22 (2012): 2345. 34

For an elaborate account on the Roma culture, see Thomas Acton and Gary Mundy, Romani culture and Gypsy identity (Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press, 1997).

35

Council of Europe (website), Strategy and Statistics: Roma and travellers, accessed 18 March 2018,

https://web.archive.org/web/20070622154153/http://www.coe.int/t/dg3/romatravellers/documentation/strategies/statis tiques_en.asp.

36

Jaromir Cekota and Claudia Trentini, “The Educational Achievement and Employment of Young Roma in Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania: Increasing Gaps and Policy Challenges,” Europe-Asia Studies 67 (2015): 540.

37

Thomas Acton and Gary Mundy, Romani culture and Gypsy identity, 38; James Goldston, “Roma Rights, Roma Wrongs,” 146; András Bíró, Nicolae Gheorghe, Martin Kovats and Will Guy, From Victimhood to Citizenship: The Path of Roma Integration,13; Zoltan Barany, “Living on the edge,” 322.

(18)

17

dangerous, and deviant subjects, construed as a threat to political stability. As a result, the Roma have always lived at the bottom of political, social, economic, and cultural structures.38

Only in the 1990s did the inferior position of the Roma suddenly start to garner serious and sustained attention and policy prescriptions. Since then, the situation of the Roma has been increasingly framed under the denominator ‘Roma issue’.39 Although the situation of the Roma in Western European countries such as France, Spain, and Portugal, when it concerns discrimination, is not worse than those residing in Central and East European countries, it was the Roma population in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia that turned the relatively unknown population into a popular topic for various internationally renowned NGOs. They became a concern for a number of IGOs and a research object for scholars from various disciplines.40 These five countries are frequently grouped together for four reasons. Firstly, they are situated in the same region. Secondly, these countries host the largest Roma populations. Thirdly, they share a communist past, lasting until 1990. There is a consensus among scholars that the Roma have been exposed to extraordinarily repressive policies of assimilation in these former communist states.41 Finally, they joined the EU during the same wave of accession.42 Altogether, this group of countries has influenced the emergence and development of the Roma discourse most significantly.

This study finds that the Roma discourse centred on these CEE-EU countries starts in the 1990s and can be grouped in three phases. The first two phases have been identified by scholars.43 The first phase constitutes the start and further developments of the ‘traditional’ approaches towards the Roma issue and is reflected in the literature published starting from the 1990s and in the period of EU pre-accession. The second phase covers accounts written at the beginning of the 2000s and 2011 and concerns the contemporary Roma issue. The third phase is introduced by this research and follows from the observation that literature published after 2011 starts to emphasise the need for a new research agenda aimed at tackling current challenges. The main characteristics related to each of these three phases will be discussed below.

1.1.1 Phase 1: Traditional approaches to the Roma issue

The first phase concerns research done since the 1990s onwards. Herein, two different but related strands of literature can be identified. The first strand perceives the situation of the Roma as a human rights issue, the main issues being the inhuman living conditions of the Roma and their position in their host societies. The second strand of literature describes the Roma issue as a problem

38

Zoltan Barany, The East European Gypsies: Regime Change, Marginality, and Ethnopolitics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 63.

39

Some scholars use the term ‘Roma problem’. This, however, has a negative connotation and suggests that it is the Roma that cause the problems. ‘Roma issue’ instead refers to the societal character of the issue.

40

This is explicitly claimed by Zoltan Barany, Robert Gould, Silva Rodrigues Maeso, and Jaromir Cekota and Claudia Trentini. Zoltan Barany, “Living on the edge,” 338-340; Robert Gould, “Roma rights and Roma expulsion in France: Official discourse and EU responses,” Critical Social Policy 35, No. 1 (2014): 27; Silva Rodrigues Maeso, “Civilising the Roma? The

depoliticalisation of (anti-)racism within the politics of integration,” Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power 22: 62; Jaromir Cekota and Claudia Trentini, “The Educational Achievement and Employment of Young Roma,” 540.

41

Konrad J. Huber, “The Roma: Group Identity, Political Activism, and Policy Response in Post-1989 Europe,” Helsinki Monitor: Quarterly on Security and Cooperation in Europe 4, no. 3 (1993): 45

42

Aidan McGarry, “The Dilemma of the European Union’s Roma policy,” 129. 43

The traditional approach is well-captured by the following academic accounts: Zoltan Barany, The East European Gypsies; Will Guy, Between Past and Future: The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe (Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press, 2001); Huub van Baar, The European Roma: Minority representation, memory, and the limits of transnational

(19)

18

of governance and focused on international efforts aimed at addressing challenges faced by the Roma. The central themes that have been discussed within these two strands are presented below.

The human rights approach

Generally, literature that perceives the Roma issue as matter of human rights extensively describes how this relatively unknown minority was quickly turned into an issue of human rights and transformed into a European minority that became increasingly discussed in a European context. The increased attention is primarily attributed to the fall of communism. Scholars thoroughly studied the consequences of the communist approach and describe the socio-political and economic situation of the Roma before and after 1989. The communist system is characterized by strong assimilation.44 Barany’s study identified significant variations in the East European communist states’ approaches to the Roma, but argued that the objective was the same: “transform them into ‘useful’ members of those societies.”45 Moreover, Roma were no longer framed as an ethnic group but viewed as a (low) social class.46 In this new discourse, state policies towards them were determined by the structural demand of host economies in which they lived and depended on the extent to which their labour power was required.47 Some authors suggest that the Roma were better off under communism. Jaromir Cekota and Claudia Trentini, for example, pointed towards the positive elements of the communist policies that aimed to assimilate the Roma by offering mandatory schooling, access to residential housing and steady employment.48 Similarly, they argued that assimilation policies improved the Roma’s socioeconomic status. Due to (forced) deportation to villages and cities, they lived closer to their host societies and were more able to participate in the communist economy.49 Moreover, most Roma were employed, which allowed them to support their families. However, Jean-Pierre Liégeois, a sociologist who has studied the Roma since the 1980, maintained that the technocratic and controlling element of the regime and intention to assimilate rather than to integrate the Roma prevailed.50 Based on the beliefs of Karl Marx, which considered the Roma a social problem requiring rehabilitation and participation, “regimes stripped off their ethnicity and executed dubious state interventions.”51

After the fall of communist regimes, scholars expected the situation to improve. Barany explains that, of all types of regimes, democracies tend to be the most favourable for minorities. He points out that by their very nature, democracies are more concerned with human rights and minority rights.52 The opening of the border and democratic system has been perceived as the perfect recipe to develop the Roma. The drastically increasing number of NGOs in the region further contributed to

44

Eva Sobotka, “Opportunities and Limitations for International Organisations in Addressing the Situation of Roma and Travellers in Europe,” in Roma Diplomacy, 107.

45

Zoltan Barany, “Living on the edge,” 327. 46

Will Guy, Between Past and Future: The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe, 8; Huub van Baar, The European Roma: Minority representation, memory, and the limits of transnational governmentality, 216.

47

Nicolae Gheorghe and Andrzej Mirga, “The Roma in the Twenty-First Century: A Policy Paper,” Eurozine (website), accessed 20 November 2017, https://www.eurozine.com/the-roma-in-the-twenty-first-century-a-policy-paper/?pdf, 3. 48

Jaromir Cekota and Claudia Trentini, “The Educational Achievement and Employment of Young Roma,” 541. 49

Ibid. 50

Jean-Pierre Liégeois, Roma, Gypsies, Travellers (Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing and Documentation Service, 1994): 143-144. Dena Ringold, Mitchell Orenstein and Erika Wilkens, Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle (World Bank, 2000), 5; Andrey Ivanov, Avoiding the Dependency Trap (UNDP, 2002), 19- 21.

51

Jean-Pierre Liégeois and Nicolae Gheorghe, Roma/Gypsies: A European Minority, an Minority Rights Group International Report (1995), accessed 10 May 2018, http://minorityrights.org/wp-content/uploads/old-site-downloads/download-127-RomaGypsies-A-European-Minority.pdf, 13; Věra Sokolová, Cultural Politics of Ethnicity: Discourses on Roma in Communist Czechoslovakia, (IbIbid-Verlag, Stuttgart: 2008), 82 and 94.

52

(20)

19

these expectations.53 Nevertheless, these expectations soon turned into feelings of disappointment. Literature generally notes that the positive aspects of the regime change have had a smaller effect on the Roma than on the other people.54 According to Timofey Agarin and Malte Brosig, this is due to the ceasing of certainty, security, housing, full employment and welfare. These aspects were provided for by the communist regimes. They explained that the Roma mainly worked in the heavy industry and lost their livelihoods when the communist regimes collapsed.55 The widespread loss of legal employment, Agarin and Brosig continue, “left the Roma impoverished and created a situation in which they relied on insecure short-term payments generated in the black economy or they remained inactive in their settlements.”56 Will Guy shows that this had social consequences as well, “the high unemployment rates among Roma confirmed Roma stereotypes hold by the societies: work-shy, scrounging thieves and inadaptable.”57 The new governments’ nationalist rhetoric is referred to as yet another factor that amplified the situation. Numerous discriminatory statements from high officials have been quoted to underline that they paid inadequate attention to their so-called ‘gypsy problem’.58_{In the absence of a mother state, no external actor was sufficiently strong} or concerned enough to compel host governments to offer protection and empower Roma communities. Contrarily to the initial expectation to further develop the social, economic and political position of the Roma, scholars started to identify them as the ‘greatest losers’ and ‘orphans’ of the transition.59

The first observations of the deteriorating situation of the Roma people living in the former communist states in Central and Eastern Europe appeared right after the fall of the Iron Curtain.60 Numerous NGOs raised the alarm, outraged not only by the inhuman living conditions and exclusion faced by them, but also by the blatant ignorance of policy makers in the CEE-EU countries.61 Peter Vermeersch and Sobotka elaborately describe how the number of human rights activists and NGOs exclusively concentrated on the plight of the Roma increased and contributed to an active transnational advocacy network.62 Concerning their working method, Eva Sobotka notes that international NGOs cooperated with domestic NGOs and applied mechanisms of international law to report on human rights abuses of Roma in the CEE-EU countries. Herein, NGOs focussed on the national context and applied a strategy of ‘blaming and shaming’ the respective governments.63 Gradually, as described by all accounts covering the developments in the 1990s, the situation of the Roma people entered the political agenda of the Council of Europe, OSCE and EU. According to

53

These were supported by philanthropic organisations such as OSF and by EU funds aimed at supporting the development of the NGO sector in this region.

54

Zoltan Barany, The East European Gypsies, 43. 55

Timofey Agarin and Malte Brosig, Minority Integration in Central Eastern Europe, 286. 56

Ibid. 57

The Roma’s supposed inadaptability under both communism and post-communism has reinforced the idea that they are not able to adapt at all, no matter which political system dominates. Will Guy, Between Past and Future: The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe, 22-23; Huub van Baar, The European Roma, 198.

58

James A. Goldston, “Roma Rights, Roma Wrongs,” 155-156. 59

Huub van Baar, The European Roma, 155; Zoltan Barany, The East European Gypsies, 328; András Bíró, “The Price of Roma Integration,” 24.

60

These efforts were related to a globally changing discourse of human rights that gained greater acceptance in the 1990s. The way governments treated their own citizens was no longer considered an internal affair and became a matter of international politics.

61

Eva Sobotka, “Influence of Civil Society Actors on Formulation of Roma Issues within the EU Framework,” 242. 62

Peter Vermeersch, The Romani Movement: Minority Politics and Ethnic Mobilization, (New York: Berghahn Books, 2006), 16.

63

(21)

20

Melanie Ram, the transnational NGOs played an important role in getting the Roma on the concerned political agendas. Similarly, Sobotka observes that NGOs not only promoted the situation of the Roma as a subject of concern to push policy makers in these respective countries, but also “systematically campaigned for an EU-wide political and human rights focused policy response.”64 It should be noted however that the involvement of these IGOs (Council of Europe, OSCE and EU) was not only justified in terms of human rights. For instance, Agarin and Brosig argue that it was the Western European countries’ concern of potential ethnic violence and war in the Balkan region, which led these IGOs to discover the issue of minority rights. Following the breakdown of the Communist block and the war in former Yugoslavia, minority promotion and protection became a means of maintaining security and stability in the region, the EU and the European continent.65 The fear of migration, caused by opening international borders, was another reason for increased attention paid to the Roma.66 Regardless of their motivation, the involvement of these three international organisations (IGOs) brought about a crucial change to the Roma discourse. Most significantly, they started to frame the Roma people as a ‘European minority’.67_{As a result, the} situation of the Roma was increasingly discussed in an international context. Within the new literature, Roma were framed as ethnic or cultural objects rather than social deviant group of peoples.68 This becomes particularly clear from the voluminous reports on the Roma in Europe published by the United Nations and the World Bank, underlining that the situation is tough and persistent.69

The governance approach

The fact that the human rights situation gained political attention triggered a new discussion. Next to the literature focussing on the challenging living conditions of the Roma, the term ‘Roma issue’ was increasingly applied when discussing the efforts aimed at improving the situation of the Roma. Literature from this strand is based on the notion that CEE governments are primarily responsible for taking care of the Roma within their territories. National politics is considered crucial in creating institutions, adopting policies, and allocating resources aimed at improving the specific needs of the Roma.70 However, rather than focussing on the government aspects at the national level, the literature seemed to exclusively focus on the efforts at the international (European) level, and the efforts of the Council of Europe, OSCE, and EU in particular. These IGOs were increasingly perceived as actors to politically represent the Roma and facilitate change with regard to the problems faced by them in these countries. Scholars argue that their new European status necessitated addressing the

64

Eva Sobotka, “Influence of Civil Society Actors on Formulation of Roma Issues within the EU Framework,” 236; Melanie H. Ram, “Interests, Norms and Advocacy: Explaining the Emergence of the Roma onto the EU's Agenda,” Ethnopolitics 9, issue 2 (2010): 200.

65

Timofey Agarin and Malte Brosig, Minority Integration in Central Eastern Europe, 8 and 27; Gabriel Toggenburg, Minority Protection and the Enlarged European Union: The Way Forward, (Budapest: Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, a programme of the Open Society Institute, 2004), 7.

66

F.W. Carer, R.A. French and J. Salt, “International migration between East and West in Europe,” Ethnic and Racial Studies 16, no. 3 (1993): 469; Zoltan Barany, “Living on the edge,” 338; Jean-Pierre Liégeouis and Nicolae Gheorghe, Roma/Gypsies: A European Minority, 16-17.

67

Huub van Baar, The European Roma, 155; Zoltan Barany, The East European Gypsies, 388. 68

Huub van Baar, The European Roma, 227. 69

Dena Ringold, Mitchell Orenstein and Erika Wilkens, Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle,” 5; Andrey Ivanov, Avoiding the Dependency Trap, 19- 21.

70

Timofey Agarin and Malte Brosig, Minority Integration in Central Eastern Europe, 34, 105 and 179; Thomas Acton and Gary Mundy, Romani culture and Gypsy identity, 4-5 and 85; András Bíró, Nicolae Gheorghe, Martin Kovats and Will Guy, From Victimhood to Citizenship: The Path of Roma Integration, 101 and 120; Marcel Dediu, “The European Union: A Promoter of Roma Diplomacy,” 126.

(22)

21

issue at a European level and in a European context.71 Jean-Pierre Liégeois was one of the first scholars who explicitly acknowledged international institutions to play a particular role in remedying the situation of the Roma. He maintains that these institutions should play an active role in coordination, dialogue, practical assistance, information, initiative and, while being independent, encourage EU member states to take positive measures toward the Roma minorities in their territories.72

As a result, institutional developments triggered by these IGOs were closely followed and reported on by scholars using the term ‘europeanisation’.73 The dominant approach describes Europeanisation as “how national political structures, political actors, policy processes and policies are increasingly oriented, or are being directed, in a European direction.”74 The efforts of the IGOs related to the development of a legal human rights system and the establishment of specialised bodies to deal with the Roma resulted in an important change to Roma policy discourse and the set-up of the European Roma governance framework.75 Whereas Liégeouis remained cautious when it comes to establishing specialised institutions, Agarin and Brosig, and McGarry argue that Roma-focused institutionalisation is paramount to the successful integration of the Roma minority into mainstream society.76

The efforts of the EU have proved crucial for the Roma governance debate. The EU is generally regarded as the most important catalyst for changes in individual government policies towards the Roma.77 With the introduction of the Copenhagen criteria in 1993, the European Commission identified “respect for and protection of minorities” among the political requirements for accession.78_{Various researchers discussed the impact of this powerful instrument. Neill Nugent, for} instance, found the EU to be a power that largely affected the national political structures.79 Similarly, Ian Bache identified a “redirection of policies and practices and preferences in the domestic area toward those advanced by dominant EU level actors and institutions.”80 The adoption of the ‘Agenda 2000’ by the European Commission in 1997, a document that has been described as an

71

In 1998, the Czech Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Martin Palous, clearly framed the Czech ‘Roma problem’ as a matter that had to be solved in a European context. Vermeersch, The Romani Movement: Minority Politics and Ethnic Mobilization, 176-177; Huub van Baar, The European Roma , 158-160.

72

Jean-Pierre Liégeois, Roma, Gypsies, Travellers (Strasbourg, Council of Europe Publishing and Documentation Service: 1994): 307-309.

73

Kristin Henrard, “The building blocks for an Emerging Regime for the Protection of a Controversial Case of Cultural Diversity: The Roma,” International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 10 (2004): 192. Jean-Pierre Liégeois and Nicolae Gheorghe, Roma/Gypsies: A European Minority, 22-25.

74

Neill Nugent, The Government and Politics of the European Union (Durham: Duke University Press, 2003), 442; Ian Bache, “Europeanisation: A Governance Approach,” paper presented at the EUSA 8th International Biennial Conference, Nashville, 27-29 March 2003: 2.

75

Kristin Henrard, “The building blocks for an Emerging Regime for the Protection of a Controversial Case of Cultural Diversity: The Roma,” 198-201.

76

Jean-Pierre Liégeois, Roma, Gypsies, Travellers, 309; Timofey Agarin and Malte Brosig, Minority Integration in Central Eastern Europe, 134; Aidan McGarry, Who Speaks for Roma? Political Representation of a Transnational Minority

Community, 37; Aidan McGarry, “The Dilemma of the European Union’s Roma Policy,” 128; Istvan Pogany, “Accomodating an Emergent National Identity: The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe,” International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 6 (1999): 163.

77

Marcel Dediu, “The European Union: A Promoter of Roma Diplomacy,” 121; Asmet Elezovski, “Roma integration in the European Union,” 131 and 136; James A. Goldston, “Roma Rights, Roma Wrongs,” Foreign Affairs 81, no. 2 (March-April 2002): 149; Peter Vermeersch, “Ethnic mobilisation and the political conditionality of European Union accession: the case of the Roma in Slovakia,” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 28 (2002): 85-88.

78

Tim Haughton, “When Does the EU Make a Difference? Conditionality and the Accession Process in Central and Eastern Europe,” 235; Aidan McGarry and Timofey Agarin, “Unpacking the Roma Participation Puzzle: Presence, Voice and Influence,” 1980; European Council, Presidency Conclusions Copenhagen European Council 21-22 June 1993. 79

Neill Nugent, The Government and Politics of the European Union (Durham: Duke University Press 2003), 442. 80

(23)

22

elaborate enlargement strategy including opinions for each country to improve their national policies in line with the Copenhagen criteria, is frequently referred to as well.81 For example, Dediu noted that this document actively steered and supported the CEE-EU states.82 More specifically, as stated by Tim Haughton, the EU was empowered by the adoption of the ‘Agenda 2000’. He furthermore noted that “the need to ensure their country meets the Copenhagen criteria provided a clear ‘external incentive’ for change in aspirant member states.”83 As such, the developments regarding the European governance framework toward addressing the situation of the Roma have been increasingly described in terms of ‘EU-isation’. This term is defined by Helen Wallace as “change driven by the demands of EU membership.”84

Next to the EU’s influence on the institutional arrangements and policies in CEE-EU states, literature also points towards the changing dynamics between the EU and international NGOs concerned with the Roma. Throughout the 1990s, literature observed that the efforts of the transnational Roma movement and the EU governance framework intertwined and started to function as a network.85 This tendency seemed to be two-fold. On the one hand, international NGOs approached and followed the direction taken by the EU. This has been explained by Sobotka, Vermeersch and Ram. They argue that NGOs perceived the EU as the main opportunity structure for addressing the realities faced by Roma and their status within society. In their researches they concluded that NGOs increasingly followed the EU strategy by developing or adapting missions and project proposals in line with the priorities of the EU.86 Similar tendencies are noted by the more comprehensive studies executed by Barany, Van Baar and, Agarin and Brosig.87 On the other hand, and simultaneously, the EU integrated the NGOs in its governance framework. This has been well-explained by Dediu, whom argues that the EU actively involved NGOs by organising capacity-building projects and awarding grants to NGOs working with Roma communities.88 Kohler-Koch and Ritta Berger identify two reasons that supported this turn. Firstly, the strengthening of Roma civil society aimed towards further professionalise national Roma advocacy groups and NGOs, and to increase their capacity to monitor the implementation of governmental policies. Secondly, including NGOs advanced the EU’s new governance approach: “they would not just participate in designing and implementing development strategies and mobilising endogenous economic and social resources, but also activate civil society and boost grass root democracy.”89 In this sense, during the period of EU-accession the EU stood up for the Roma and laid down the foundation of a European institutional and legislative governance

81

Zoltan Barany, The East European Gypsies, 270; Timofey Agarin and Malte Brosig, Minority Integration in Central Eastern Europe, 29; Marcel Dediu, “The European Union: A Promoter of Roma Diplomacy,” 121.

82

Marcel Dediu, “The European Union: A Promoter of Roma Diplomacy,” 121. 83

Tim Haughton, “When Does the EU Make a Difference? Conditionality and the Accession Process in Central and Eastern Europe,” 237.

84

Helen Wallace, “The Domestication of Europe and the Limits to Globalisation,” unpublished paper presented to IPSA Congress, Quebec, August 2000.

85

Melanie H. Ram, “Interests, Norms and Advocacy: Explaining the Emergence of the Roma onto the EU's Agenda,” Ethnopolitics 9, issue 2 (2010): 197-217.

86 Ibid. 87

Zoltan Barany, The East European Gypsies, 267. Huub van Baar, The European Roma, 227; Timofey Agarin and Malte Brosig, Minority Integration in Central Eastern Europe, 31.

88

Marcel Dediu, “The European Union: A Promoter of Roma Diplomacy,” 120-121; Eva Sobotka, “Influence of Civil Society Actors on Formulation of Roma Issues within the EU Framework,” 241-242.

89

B. Kohler-Kochand B. Rittberger, “The Governance Turn in EU Studies,” Journal of Common Market Studies 44, no. 1 (2006): 29.

Beyond the Missing Link: National Institutions for Roma Inclusion (NIRIs) as an Opportunity Structure for Addressing the Contemporary Roma Issue in Central and East European EU-Countries