FRA: Racism, discrimination, intolerance and extremism: learning from experiences in Greece and Hungary

8/13/2019 FRA: Racism, discrimination, intolerance and extremism: learning from experiences in Greece and Hungary

1/62


2/62

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http ://europa.eu).

FRA European Union Agency for Fundamental RightsSchwarzenbergplatz 11 1040 Vienna Austria

Tel.: +- Fax: +-Email: [email protected] fra.europa.eu

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2013

ISBN 978-92-9239-418-9doi:10.2811/64418

European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2013Reproduction is authorised, except for commercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Luxembourg

P-(PCF)

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answersto your questions about the European Union.

Freephone number (*):00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.


3/62

Racism, discrimination,

intolerance and extremism:learning from experiences in

Greece and Hungary

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS


4/62


5/62

INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................................................

CASE STUDY : RESPONDING TO RACISM, XENOPHOBIA AND RELATED INTOLERANCE IN GREECE ................................

Anti-migrant prejudice, discrimination and hate crime .................................................................................................. 10Barriers to the effective implementation of responses ................................................................................................. 18The case of Golden Dawn....................................................................................................................................................23

CASE STUDY: RESPONDING TO RACISM, XENOPHOBIA AND RELATED INTOLERANCE IN HUNGARY.........................

Anti-Roma prejudice, discrimination and hate crime .....................................................................................................26Antisemitism and other forms of prejudice .....................................................................................................................32Barriers to the effective implementation of responses ................................................................................................. 35The case of Jobbik ................................................................................................................................................................39

CONCLUSIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE EU AND MEMBER STATES .....................................................................

National strategies to fight racist and related crime ......................................................................................................44Tackling racist and related crime .......................................................................................................................................44Increasing trust in the police ..............................................................................................................................................45Countering extremism .........................................................................................................................................................46Multi-agency partnerships ..................................................................................................................................................47Raising awareness of diversity ..........................................................................................................................................48

FRA REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................................................

ANNEX : FRA MEETINGS WITH PUBLIC AUTHORITIES, STATUTORY HUMAN RIGHTS BODIES AND CIVILSOCIETYORGANISATIONS .....................................................................................................................................................

ANNEX : EU FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES .............................................................................................................................

Asylum and Migration Fund ................................................................................................................................................53Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Funding Programme 20072013 ........................................................................53Rights and Citizenship Programme 20142020 DG Justice ..........................................................................................54Internal Security Fund instrument for financial support for police cooperation, preventing

and combating crime, and crisis management ................................................................................................................54Justice rogramme ...............................................................................................................................................................55Progress 20142020 Objectives: ........................................................................................................................................56EIDHR European Instrument for Promoting Democracy & Human Rights ................................................................56

Contents


6/62


7/62

IntroductionThe objective of the European Union Agency forFundamental Rights (FRA) is to provide the EuropeanUnion (EU) and its Member States with assistanceand expertise on fundamental rights issues whenimplementing EU law. To achieve this objective, CouncilRegulation (EC) No. 168/2007 (Founding Regulation)requires the agency to formulate and publish conclu-

sions and opinions on specific thematic topics [] eitheron its own initiative or at the request of the EuropeanParliament, the Council or the Commission. Theregulation also states that the agency should producethematic reports on topics of particular importance tothe Unions policies.

FRA collects objective, reliable and comparable data

and information across all or some EUMember States.Not all issues are relevant to all EUMember States inthe same way. Specific topics may warrant analysisof the situation in specific Member States, as was thecase when the agency published thematic situationreports on a single country in close cooperation withthe authorities of the Member States concerned. Todate, FRA has published two thematic situation reportsfocusing on specific Member States: Coping with a fun-

damental rights emergency: The situation of personscrossing the Greek land border in an irregular mannerand Violent attacks against Roma in the Ponticelli districtof Naplesin Italy. In several of its research projects, theagency covers a selected number of Member States, forexample, the project on experiences of discrimination,social marginalisation and violence among Muslim andnon-Muslim youth covered three Member States, theproject on access to justice in cases of discrimination

eight Member States and the project on perceptionsand experiences of antisemitism nine Member States.

Thematic situation reports provide a better understand-ing of drivers and barriers to the effective implementa-

law by the institutions and by Member States in theirrespective competence.

In the conclusions of its Justice and Home AffairsCouncil meeting on combating hate crime on 5 and6 December 2013, the Council of the EU welcomedthe important role of FRA in providing expert and

independent analysis relating to fundamental rightswithin the remit of its mandate. The conclusions calledattention to recent FRA reports, which document theextent and impact of hate crimes in Europe and whichrecommend action to render hate crimes more visibleand acknowledge victims rights at three levels: leg-islation, policy and practice. In particular, the Councilinvited FRA, the European Police College (Cepol), the

European Police Office(Europol) and Eurojust, the EUagency that deals with judicial cooperation in criminal

matters, to continue their efforts to counter hate crime.The Council suggested that they pool their expertise,taking into account their respective mandates. FRAshould continue to assess in an objective, reliable andcomparable manner the extent of racism, xenophobia,antisemitism and other forms of hate crime throughEU-wide surveys. The agency should also work together

with EUMember States to facilitate exchange of goodpractices and assist them at their request in their effortto develop effective methods to encourage reportingand ensure proper recording of hate crimes.

In its conclusions on the evaluation of FRA of the sameCouncil meeting, the Council invited EUMember Statesto make full use of FRAs expertise, within the limits ofits mandate.

The fight against racism, xenophobia and related intol-erance is a permanent feature of FRAs Multi-annualFramework, which sets out the agencys areas of work.The current framework, covering the period 20132017,


8/62

Racism, discrimination, intolerance and extremism: learning from experiences in Greece and Hungary

on sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic

features, language, religion or belief, political or anyother opinion, membership of a national minority,property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation.

The most relevant EU legislation in this regardare Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of28November 2008 on combating certain forms andexpressions of racism and xenophobia by means ofcriminal law and Council Directive 2000/43/EC of

29June 2000 implementing the principle of equaltreatment between persons irrespective of racial orethnic origin. EUMember States are also committedto respecting and protecting the values enshrined inArticle2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU): TheUnion is founded on the values of respect for humandignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of lawand respect for human rights, including the rights ofpersons belonging to minorities. These values arecommon to the Member States in a society in whichpluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, soli-darity and equality between women and men prevail.

In its Annual reports, FRA analyses the situation con-cerning discrimination, racism and related intolerancein all EUMember States. The Annual report publishedin June2013 states that crimes motivated by racism,

xenophobia and related intolerances, the mainstream-ing of elements of extremist ideology in political andpublic discourse and ethnic discrimination in healthcare,education, employment and housing persist throughoutthe European Union (EU).Against this backdrop, FRAnoted growing alarm at the national, EU and interna-tional levels at ongoing manifestations of discrimina-tion, racism and related intolerance in two EUMember

States, namely Greece and Hungary,combined with the

phenomenon unique in theEU of the representation innational parliaments of parties with extremist rhetoric,with Golden Dawn () in Greece mainlytargeting irregular migrants and the Movement for aBetter Hungary (Jobbik Magyarorszgrt Mozgalom)in Hungary mainly targeting Roma and Jews. GoldenDawn organises its members into paramilitary groupsand directly engages in violent criminal activities, whileJobbik openly supports similar activities by paramilitary

organisations or groups. In both EUMember States, anddespite their efforts to stop such activities, evidencefrom recent polls shows that the popularity of theseparties remains relatively high, in particular amongyounger age groups.

FRA therefore took the initiative to develop the presentthematic situation report to examine closely the effec-tiveness of responses by public authorities, statutory

9 Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights(2013), Report by the Council of Europe Commissioner forHuman Rights following his visit to Greece, 28January to1February2013, CommDH(2013), 16April2013, availableat:https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=2053611 ;OHCHR (2012), UN Special Rapporteur on the humanrights of migrants concludes the fourth and last countryvisit in his regional study on the human rights ofmigrants at the borders of the European Union: Greece,

News Item, 3December2012, available at: www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=12858&LangID=E; The Greek Ombudsman(2013), The phenomenon of racist violence in Greeceand responses to it, Special report, September2013,available at: www.synigoros.gr/resources/docs/eidikiekthesiratsistikivia.pdf; Human Rights Watch(2013), Unwelcome Guests Greek Police Abuses ofMigrants in Athens, available at: www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/greece0613_ForUpload.pdfr;European Parliament (2013), Parliamentary questions:racist statements made by Greek MPs in the HellenicParliament, available at: www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+WQ+E-2013-009567+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN ; Human Rights Committee(2010), Consideration of reports submitted by States partiesunder Article40 of the Covenant, Concluding observationsof the Human Rights Committee Hungary, CCPR/C/HUN/CO/5 available at: http://tbinternet ohchr org/ layouts/


9/62

Introduction

human rights bodies and civil society organisations to

counter racism, discrimination, intolerance and extrem-ism. This includes identifying barriers that may preventthe effective implementation of actions taken andwhat could be done to remove such barriers, as well asdrivers that may not be fully used.

The research shows that the situation in the two EUMember States presents some commonalities. Publicauthorities in both countries are, for example, reluc-

tant to acknowledge the gravity and social impact ofthese phenomena. Both countries must contend withthe influence on public opinion of parties with links toparamilitary activities and extremist rhetoric. It alsoshows that important differences exist, for examplein the level of formal legal protection afforded againstdiscrimination and hate crime, or in the efforts made toinclude migrants and minorities in society. These differ-ences highlight the need to adopt in the report a casestudy approach to ensure that the specificity of thenational context is taken into consideration. The report

is, therefore, structured in two sections that examine

the situation in each Member State and a final sectionthat presents common conclusions and considerationsrelevant to the wider context of the EU and its MemberStates.

The analysis presented in this report mainly drawsfrom fact-finding meetings senior FRA staff held inboth EU Member States with government officials,prosecutors, law enforcement agencies, members of

parliament, statutory human rights bodies and civilsociety organisations during the second half of2013(see Annex). These meetings were achieved withthe support of the agencys national liaison officersfor Greece and Hungary. The FRA would like to thankthe governments of Greece and Hungary, as well asall other organisations with which it met for their fullsupport in conducting these meetings. The analysisalso draws on secondary data collected through deskresearch or provided by FRAs interlocutors during orafter meetings.


10/62


11/62

Case study 1:Responding to racism, xenophobiaand related intolerance in Greece

Members of the Hellenic Parliament, government rep-resentatives and public officials with whom FRA metsay that in the past few years Greece has witnesseda steep increase in phenomena of racist violence,discrimination and intolerance, as well as extremism.They attribute the increase in these phenomena to acombination of two interlinked factors: the social andpolitical impact of the acute economic crisis, particu-larly the dramatic increase in youth unemployment;and, the very large number of third-country nationals,particularly asylum seekers and irregular migrants,many living in conditions of severe deprivation in theAthens city centre.

During the meetings with all interlocutors in Greece,it became apparent that the existing legal apparatusdoes not offer sufficient protection against racism,xenophobia and related intolerance. Recently, however,efforts to introduce new legislation to address issues ofmigration and racism have intensified.

Several FRA interlocutors consider that the signifi-

cant public sector reductions in human and financialresources, resulting from the financial and public

10 According to Eurostat, in June2013 Greeces totalunemployment rate stood at 27.3% (1574 years of age)and youth unemployment at 58 2 % (under 25 years of

administration reforms of the first and second EconomicAdjustment Programmes,have considerably stretchedthe capacity of public authorities to address these phe-nomena effectively.

These interlocutors also suggest that the increase inthe number of irregular migrants and asylum seekerspresent in Greece can largely be attributed to what theyconsider an unequal distribution among EU MemberStates of the burden of receiving third-country nation-als, who seek asylum or better employment opportu-nities in the EU. They also suggest that this burdenprovides one explanation for the growing influence

of the extremist party Golden Dawn

and its electoralgains in2012, as well as for the threats and assaultsperpetuated on migrants by extremist groups.

Representatives of statutory human rights bodies andcivil society organisations with whom FRA met alsospoke of a steep increase in racist violence, discrimi-nation, intolerance and extremism in Greek society.However, without diminishing the importance of the

influence of the economic crisis, they also claim that theineffective responses of public authorities over a con-siderable period of time are a key contributing factor.They argue that the lack of effective public authoritiesanswers could be attributed to a combination of limited


12/62


In addition, they underlined that while the intensity and

frequency of racist violence and intolerance has grownin recent years, there is ample evidence that thesephenomena have been present for a long time. Reportsof national statutory human rights bodies, such as theGreek National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR),international bodies, such as the Council of EuropesEuropean Commission against Racism and Intolerance(ECRI), international civil society organisations, such asHuman Rights Watch, as well as FRA have repeatedly

and consistently underscored the persistence of phe-nomena of racism and intolerance in the country, andthe lack of effective measures to tackle them.

In 2001, NCHR highlighted, for example, that par-ticularly violent, unheard of for modern Greek society,actions by Greek citizens but also public (police) offi-cials, in the years 19992001, mainly against foreignmigrants legally residing in Greece, but also againstmembers of the Roma community, make it clear thatthe state must immediately introduce and implementnew, comprehensive legislation for the protectionfrom and the eradication of racial discriminationin Greece. In 2003, ECRI noted that many of theproblems encountered by groups exposed to racismand intolerance stem directly from the majority popula-tions attitude towards them. When national authorities

contemplate taking measures conducive to ethnic orreligious tolerance, the majoritys reaction is often sovehement that authorities prefer to desist or evenbacktrack. Despite the efforts of Greek authorities toalert the public to the dangers of racism, media, politi-cians, civil servants, religious leaders, including thoseof the dominant religion, and the general public still toooften make racist remarks about immigrants, refugeesand asylum seekers including, Roma, Jews and anyone

not of Greek origin or not professing the dominantreligion in Greece.

Against this backdrop, the prevailing assumption thatphenomena of racist violence, discrimination and

are not necessarily caused by it. Acknowledging these

wider issues would be an essential step in developingtargeted and effective responses.

The gravity of the situation concerning racist incidents iswell substantiated through data collected by the RacistViolence Recording Network,which NCHR, the UnitedNations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)Office in Greece and other civil society organisationsdeveloped in 2011. The network reports that victims

increasingly identified perpetrators as persons wearingthe distinct black t-shirts with Golden Dawn insignia.According to the networks 2012 Annual report, in91cases victims of racially motivated attacks describedperpetrators as being organised in groups often withlarge dogs and dressed in black; at times, they wearmilitary fatigue pants and full-face helmets or covertheir faces patrolling specific areas, attacking mostlyvisible minority ethnic groups on the street, in squaresor public transport stops. In eightcases, victims identi-fied persons linked to Golden Dawn, known to thembecause they were seen to be active in public eventsorganised by the party in their area or because they areknown as members of the partys local branches.

During meetings with FRA, NCHR, the Ombudspersonand civil society organisations suggested that inci-

dents involving verbal abuse are also becoming morefrequent in public places. This is also illustrated in thewarning that the US Department of State issued inNovember2012 to US visitors on the rise in unpro-voked harassment and violent attacks against personswho, because of their complexion, are perceived to beforeign migrants. US citizens most at risk are those ofAfrican, Asian, Hispanic, or Middle Eastern descent. []The US Embassy has confirmed reports of US African-

American citizens detained by police authorities con-ducting sweeps for illegal immigrants in Athens.

Anti-migrant prejudice,di i i ti d h t i


13/62

Case study 1

punishing acts or activities aiming at racial discrimi-

nation.

Such acts and activities can be prosecuted exofficiosince2005 (Article71.4 of Law N.3386/2005).The law provides that anyone who publicly, orallyor in writing or through pictures or any other meansintentionally incites people to perform acts or carry outactivities that may result in discrimination, hatred orviolence against other persons or groups of persons onthe sole ground of the latters racial or ethnic origin orreligionis punishable by a maximum imprisonment of

two years and/or pecuniary penalty or both. The penal-ties also apply in cases where someone establishesor participates in organisations that aim at organisingpropaganda or activities of any form whatsoever,leading to racial discrimination. The law prohibits thepublic expression orally, in writing or through picturesor any other means of offensive ideas against anyindividual or group on the grounds of the latters racialor ethnic origin or religion. The penalty in this case ismaximum imprisonment of one year and/or fine.

The notion of bias motivations based on ethnic, racial,religious or sexual orientation as aggravating circum-stance was added in2008 though Article23 of LawN. 3719/2008 amending Article 79 of the CriminalCode. The article was further amended in2013 throughArticle66 of Law N.4139/2013adding genetic char-

acteristics and gender identity as bias motivationsand providing that sentences imposed may not besuspended.

ECRI highlighted in 2009 that the Greek authoritieshad acknowledged themselves that Law 927/1979continues to be rarely applied although informa-tion indicates cases ofincitement to racial hatred inGreece.Another critique of Law N.927/1979 is that

it is only applicable if race, ethnic origin or religion is

22 Law N.927/1979139 1979 , availableat: http://www et gr/idocs-nph/search/

the sole ground motivating an action. For example,

the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal in cassationin 2010 concerning the publication of an antisemiticbook, since the defendant was found not to revileJews solely because of their racial and ethnic origin,but mainly because of their aspirations to world power,the methods they use to achieve these aims, and theirconspiratorial activities. More recently, however,on 20 November 2013, the first instance MagistrateCourt of Athens accepted racism as bias motivation

in sentencing two alleged Golden Dawn members to41months imprisonment for torching a shop belongingto a migrant.

All those who participated in meetings with FRAduring June2013 shared the view that existing legisla-tion has never been applied effectively. ProsecutorsFRA met, for example, argued that it is very difficultto investigate bias motivation in order to use it as anaggravating circumstance in the assessment of penal-ties, therefore relevant legal provisions cannot beapplied in practice. The Supreme Court Vice-Prosecutorpointed out that while the racist motive may beobvious in many cases, judges do not always considerit. This can be because police investigation protocolsdo not provide them with sufficient evidence in thatrespect, or because insufficient attention is paid to such

evidence in court proceedings.

The 2013 report of the Council of Europe Commissionerfor Human Rights echoed this view: The Commissionerwas informed [] that legislative amendments aimedat creating a special criminal offence of acts of racistviolence has been under consideration by competentauthorities. Legal practitioners have indicated that sucha provision would facilitate the prosecution of racist

violence and the inclusion of racist motivation in theearly stages of criminal proceedings, including theindictment, instead of in the last phase of assessmentof the criminal penalty by the court.


14/62


in their own right; and if racist motivation was explicitly

mentioned as an aggravating circumstance for specificcrimes in the Criminal Code. NHRC representatives andthose of the Racist Violence Recording Network alsostressed the need for a distinct offence for crimes witha racist motive.

Representatives of the Police Directorate of InternalAffairs noted during their meeting with FRA that it isdifficult to identify a racist motive during investigations

and that specialised training on intelligence gather-ing and investigation would be useful. One means toimprove the investigation of bias motivation wouldbe the effective implementation of Police Circular(7100/4/3) of 25 May 2006. This circular requiresthat the police investigate the motivation of criminaloffences; collect relevant information; and record/report incidents perpetrated on grounds of nationalor ethnic origin, colour, religion, disability, sexualorientation and gender identity when confessed byperpetrator(s) or reported by victim(s) or witness(s)and when there are indications that perpetrator(s) and/or victim(s) belong to different racial, ethnic, religiousor social groups. In addition, racist motivation mustbe investigated in complaints against the police bypersons belonging to vulnerable ethnic, religious andsocial groups or by foreigners.

A position paper published by the Hellenic Leaguefor Human Rights on 3October2013 argues that theracist motive must be investigated at the beginningof the criminal prosecution, during the pre-trial phase.It notes, in particular, that [] a crime motivatedby racial hatred should either (a)be considered as acrime with distinct offences, or (b)be combined withlonger sentences for some specific types of crime (e.g.

crimes against life, physical integrity, personal freedom,property), or finally (c)constitute a general aggravat-ing circumstance, defining a fixed sentencing period.This cannot be separated from the responsibility ofthe Ministry of Justices political leadership to finally

groups, including migrants, Roma, persons with dis-

abilities and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender(LGBT) persons. Reportedly, the guide was developedin cooperation with civil society organisations and theOmbudsperson, but it was neither published nor dis-tributed.Police officers with whom FRA met were notaware of the Circular or the Guide nor did they considerthat they were adequately trained to investigate biasmotivation effectively. The National Human RightsAction Plan, which was published at the beginning of

December2013, states, however, that the Guide hasrecently been distributed to all police officers. TheAction Plan also makes specific reference to the needto update the relevant Police Circular (7100/4/3) by thebeginning of2014.

Concerns on the effectiveness of anti-racist legislationled to the introduction of a draft law on combatingmanifestations of racism and xenophobia by the coali-tion government in2011, thereby transposing CouncilFramework Decision 2008/913/JHA on combatingcertain forms and expressions of racism and xenopho-bia by means of criminal law (Framework Decision onRacism and Xenophobia). The explanatory memoran-dum, attached to the 2011draft law, noted that LawN. 927/1979 had rarely been used and could not beconsidered a sufficiently robust instrument to confront

the challenge of Greeces transition to a multiculturalsociety.Parliament debated the draft law intensely,and a major partner in the coalition government electedin2012 opposed it.

Two other draft laws seeking to transpose theFramework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia weretabled in May 2013 by parties participating in thecoalition government, which led to intense political

controversy. The two socialist parties, the PanhellenicSocialist Movement (PASOK) and the Democratic Left(DIMAR), proposed an entirely new draft law, whichincludes a provision on the protection from deporta-tion of third-country nationals, who are victims and


15/62

Case study 1

The third coalition party, New Democracy, proposed

a different draft law amending Law N.927/1979; theproposed amendment did not comprise the provisionson the protection of victims or material witnesses.InJune2013, the main opposition party, the Coalition ofthe Radical Left (Syriza), proposed yet another draft law,which provides for a distinct criminal offence with racistbias motivation, adds bias motivation as an aggravatingcircumstance in the Criminal Code and provides for theprotection and support of victims irrespective of their

residence status.

The status of these draft laws remains, as at the begin-ning of December 2013, unclear, since the coalitiongovernment (New Democracy and PASOK) tabled on20 November 2013 a new draft law on combatingmanifestations of racism and xenophobia to transposethe Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia.This new draft law amends the aforementioned LawN. 927/1979. It also merges the previous legislativeproposals of the coalition government parties, NewDemocracy and PASOK, providing for increased sanc-tions and penalties for those who publicly encourageor cause hate or violence against individuals or a groupof individuals on the basis of their race, skin colour,religion, genetic origin, ethnic or national origin anddisability, posing a danger for public order or a threat

to life, freedom or physical integrity of these persons.The draft law also punishes public denial or appraisalof crimes of genocides, war crimes, crimes againsthumanity, the Holocaust and Nazi crimes when thisbehaviour is against a group of people defined on thebasis of their race, skin colour, religion, genetic origin,ethnic or national origin and disability, and when thebehaviour incites hatred or violence, or has a threaten-ing, offending character against such group or a member

of it. The addition of disability as a bias motivation goesbeyond the requirements of the Framework Decisionon Racism and Xenophobia and can be considered asa positive measure. This draft law does not includesexual orientation and gender identity as bias motiva-

the scope of Law N.3719/2008 providing for a pact

of common life. The court found Greece in violation ofArticle14 in conjunction with Article8 of the EuropeanConvention on Human Rights (ECHR). After the govern-ment signalled its intention to amend the draft anti-rac-ist law, the Greek-Orthodox bishop of Piraeus criticisedthe move in a widely published statement, threateningto excommunicate those members of parliament whovoted for the amendment.By 15December2013, itwas unclear if this amendment would be tabled.

Enhanced penalties are foreseen in cases where theperpetrator is a public official during the execution ofhis or her duties. This draft law does not, however,foresee deprivation of political voting and electionrights. It also does not include any new provisionregarding the enhancement of bias motivation as anaggravating circumstance or the integration in theCriminal Code of the criminal offence with racist biasmotivation as a distinct offence. Protection for victimsor witnesses is included in another draft law codifyinglegislation on migration and integration, which providesfor protection from deportation and residence permitson humanitarian grounds for third-country nationalswho are victims or witnesses of severe crimes or hatespeech, or crimes with bias motivation.The new draftlaw also provides for criminal responsibility of legal

entities, but it does not include public entities. It des-ignates the National Council for Radio and Television asa competent body for imposing sanctions and penaltiesfor offences committed through a radio or televisionprogramme. With regard to cyber hate, the new draftlaw criminalises dissemination of racist and xenophobicmaterial through computer systems, if the systemsused or the perpetrators are located in Greece. On3December2013, the draft law passed the first stage

of parliamentary scrutiny. Human Rights Watch arguedthat the law should include measures to combat racistand xenophobic violence, and encourage reporting ofviolent hate crimes, also by waiving the fee of 100that is generally required to file a complaint.


16/62


68anti-racist units, staffed by 197police officers.A

two-day training course was provided in February2013on the prevention and prosecution of crimes perpetratedon grounds of racial or ethnic origin.The PresidentialDecree foresees cooperation with non-governmentalorganisations (NGOs) and international organisationsand includes reference to victim support services. On10January 2013, a countrywide hotline (11414) wasestablished together with an online form for reportingracist crime.By September2013, 214complaints were

registered through the hotline, according to informationprovided by the Ombudsperson.

During the meeting with FRA, representatives of theRacist Violence Recording Network, who participatedin the training of police officers for these specialisedunits, raised concerns as to their effectiveness in termsof staff selection or adequacy of operational training.Another problem the Racist Violence Recording Networkrepresentatives identified was the lack of provisions inthe current legal framework for the protection fromarrest and detention of hate crime victims or materialwitnesses, if they are in the country illegally.

Police trade unionists have also raised concerns abouthuman and financial resources to operate the anti-rac-ist units.The operation of the 24-hour 11414 hotline

requires special operational training. Sharing of goodpractice with other EU police forces that have similarpractices could be useful. During meetings with theresponsible police officers, FRA was informed that suchtraining has not been provided nor has there been anyexchange of experience and good practice with otherpolice forces. In regard to the need for anonymity andconfidentiality, police respondents were unsure as tohow the hotline operators should react to anonymous

complaints in the current framework of police opera-tional guidelines. The online complaint form, neverthe-less, allows for anonymous reporting.

On 24July 2013, the government presented a draft

law

on restructuring the police. This draft law makesno reference to the newly established departments anddoes not include them explicitly in the organograms ofthe regional directorates. The only reference to racismis found in the draft laws Article6 paragraph3, whichstates that under the Security Branch, the Directorateof State Security is competent on issues of statesecurity and especially on those concerning the protec-tion of the state and the democratic system, such as

weapons and explosives control, racism and terrorism,the protection of Greek and foreign dignitaries. ThePolice Internal Affairs Directorate also issued a SpecialReport in October 2013 that proposed a substantialpolice services reform. The reform was designed tocombat abusive behaviour and corruption, reinforce therespect and protection of human rights and aid in thedevelopment of a professional ethos with emphasison addressing racist behaviour effectively. The reportsproposals also highlight that disciplinary measuresmust be implemented immediately and fully, especiallyin the most extreme cases involving excessive andunjustified use of force. The proposals underline that itis essential to seek responsibility for any lack of internalcontrol measures in the hierarchy.

FRA was informed that the Police Academy introduced

during the academic year 20122013 a course onracism and xenophobia, although in the spring of 2013educational and training initiatives on the relevantsection of the police websitefocused on combatingtrafficking (20April2013); the treatment of vulnerablepersons in returns procedures (23April2013); or thescreening of illegal immigrants (13April2013). FRA wasalso informed that, since March2013, six three-hoursessions on racism and xenophobia were introduced in

the training provided by the National School for Judges.

Nevertheless, the paucity of targeted, operationalawareness raising and training was also underlinedby the Police officers trade union, which informed


17/62

Case study 1

challenging conditions, including severe pay cuts, while

the intensity of their work is increasing due to the socialimpact of the economic crisis.

As early as 2004 the police officers trade union hadalready participated in an EU-funded project, alsoinvolving Dutch and Swedish police, that surveyedaround 300 police officers on diversity issues. Thefindings indicated little interest in diversity issues, inparticular among senior ranks, and lack of awareness

of its positive aspects. Based on the outcome of thisproject, the trade union proposed recruiting policeofficers with an ethnic minority background to betterreflect ethnic diversity in society.

The Racial Equality Directive and the EmploymentEquality Directive were transposed into Greek legisla-tion through Law N. 3304/2005 which prohibitsdiscriminatory treatment on the grounds of ethnic orracial origin or religious or other beliefs, disability, ageor sexual orientation, during transactions regardingprovision of goods or services to the public. For suchoffences, the law foresees imprisonment of betweensix months and three years and a fine of between1,000 and 6,000. Following the provision of Article3paragraph 2 of the Racial Equality Directive, it doesnot cover difference of treatment based on nationality

and is without prejudice to provisions and conditionsrelating to the entry into and residence of third-countrynationals and stateless persons on the territory ofMember States, and to any treatment which arisesfrom the legal status of the third-country nationals andstateless persons concerned.

The task for the promotion of equal treatment wasassigned to three institutions: The Ombudsperson,

tasked with the promotion of equal treatment in regardto public authorities; the Committee for Equal Treatmentsupervised by the Ministry of Justice, Transparency andHuman Rights, tasked with the promotion of equaltreatment in regard to individuals and private entities;

February 2010 NCHR proposed merging the three

equality bodies into one, namely the Ombudsperson.The Greek Economic and Social Committee expressedits opinion in a 2011 report,which largely reflectedthis view and noted that whereas the Ombudsperson ingeneral fulfils its tasks, neither of the other two bodiesfunction effectively. The Committee for Equal Treatment,which is the competent authority on all discrimina-tion areas by private entities except in employment,received very few complaints and its work has been

minimal because there is confusion about its role anda lack of awareness of its existence and effectiveness.The Economic and Social Committee refrained fromreporting about the Committee for Equal Treatment inits latest annual report published in July2012, becausethe Labour Inspectorate never issued a report on equaltreatment in employment, as it has no relevant dataor complaints. The Economic and Social Committeeconcluded that the Labour Inspectorate cannot effec-tively perform its tasks in regard to awareness raising,recording incidents and tackling widespread phenom-ena of unequal treatment in employment.

The Ombudsperson informed FRA that the investigationof complaints by third-country nationals or non-GreekEU citizens concerning discrimination on grounds ofracial or ethnic origin is hampered, because the ground

of nationality is not included. This limitation of thecurrent legislation has also been highlighted in annualreports by the Ombudsperson.

The Special Secretary of the Labour Inspectorate toldFRA that the institution would require resources, opera-tional training and field methodology, as well as legaland practical tools to accomplish its role as an equalitybody. Cases of discrimination concerning workers who

are irregular migrants cannot now be reported by them,for example, as the complainant would face detentionand deportation, except in cases of trafficking victims.A relevant case is that of agricultural migrant workers inManoladawho were shot at and injured in April2013


18/62


and ensuring that they remain in the country legally to

testify as witnesses.

FRA identified a number of initiatives combating dis-crimination and promoting diversity, some of which areincluded in a report by the National Centre for SocialResearch, which noted the absence of a comprehensiveanti-discrimination and equal opportunities strategy:The main policy developments have been confined tolegislative amendments mostly on immigration and

EU funded interventions, such as the National Strategyfor Equal Opportunities, implemented in the frameworkof 2007: European Year of Equal Opportunities for alland the National Strategy Report on Social Inclusion20082010.

The National Strategy for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals, issued in April 2013, addressesissues related to equal treatment and combating dis-crimination on racial or ethnic grounds. The strategyrefers to measures targeting the majority populationonly in the context of intercultural dialogue, althoughthe Common Basic Principles for Immigrant Integrationin the EU clearly refer to a mutual accommodationprinciple by immigrants and residents of EU coun-tries. The strategy notes that the participation ofmigrants in social life is only possible when they are

sufficiently aware of the way of life, the customs andthe values of the host society, when they have directlyor indirectly accepted the dominant national andEuropean ideology. There is no reference, however,to concrete measures to improve mutual understand-ing or mechanisms of consultation involving migrants,public authorities, as well as the host society. Similarly,a new draft law regulating migration issues providesfor a national level inter-ministerial migration policy

committee, but it does not refer to the participation ofmigrant communities, local integration councils, statu-tory human rights or equality bodies or civil societystakeholders. It is unclear whether the operation ofLocal Migrant Integration Councils, which can help

build social cohesion, will be reviewed. According to

research,

only about 15 of the countrys municipali-ties have established or are about to establish suchcouncils, foreseen in Law N.3852/2010, either dueto lack of resources or lack of interest. Among theactions supported by the European Integration Fundis contribution to the two-way process underlyingintegration policies by developing platforms forconsultation of third-country nationals, exchange ofinformation between stakeholders and intercultural,

inter-faith and religious dialogue platforms betweencommunities and/or between communities andpolicy and decision-making authorities.

The Strategy will be implemented through actions co-funded by the European Integration Fund,which hasallocated steadily more funds:1,527,626.75 in2007;2,063,575.78 in 2008; 2,653,009.62 in 2009;2,946,352.32 in 2010; 3,280,005.77 in 2011;4,115,432.00 in2012; and 4,178,416.00 in2013. Theoverview table of actions for 2012 provides someinformation on initiatives to be funded (with nationalcontribution at 25%). It is, however, unclear whatpart, if any, of the resources are specifically allocatedto tackling racism, as part of the integration process.It would be useful to publish the output, outcome andimpact of such EU-funded actions for previous years

in order to assess its effectiveness and, on this basis,develop future proposals.

Regarding migrant youth, Law N. 3838/2010 provi-sions which allowed children of third-country nationalswho were born and completed their primary educa-tion in Greece to acquire citizenship status are notincluded in the draft law on the Ratification of theMigration and Social Integration Code. In early 2013,

the supreme administrative court, Hellenic Council of

58 Greece, National Centre for Social Research(2012), MigrantIntegration: views, policies and practices, p.53, available at:http://www.ekke.gr/open_books/EntaxiMetanaston.pdf.

59 Council of the European Union (2007) Council


19/62

Case study 1

State, declared these provisions unconstitutional, as

they did not take sufficient account of the requirementfor a genuine bond to the Greek state and society thatconstitute a timeless unity of a particular communitywith a common culture, relatively consistent moralsand customs, common language with a long tradition,elements that are transmitted through generationsthrough smaller social units (family) and organisedstate units (education).

Promoting diversity and combating racism amongchildren and youth through education is of criticalimportance, as what children learn and experience inschools can affect their families and communities. TheMinistry of Education acknowledged during its meetingwith FRA that diversity and anti-racism are importantissues that still need to be tackled.

There is evidence of several educational programmes,

mostly relying on teachers initiatives, which tackleracism and discrimination and promoting diversity.A 2011 survey of 294 teachers showed that almostall (92%) wanted to participate in educational pro-grammes related to diversity, but only about half ofthem (54 %) actually knew where to find relevantmaterial.In regard to major educational programmes,FRA could not find information regarding their imple-

mentation, such as on the Ministry of EducationsAction Plan, which was developed in2012 to promotediversity, prevent and combat racism, discriminationand violence in schools and includes relevant guidesand educational material for students and teachers.The action plan was co-funded by the European SocialFund.

An initiative announced in 2013 by the Ministry of

Education concerns the establishment of a MonitoringCentre on Violence in Schools, including racist violence.FRA was informed that the Ministry of Educationestablished an antibullying network in early 2013and launched a school-based survey co-funded by the

participated in the first round of this survey through an

online questionnaire.

On 4 November 2013, the Ministry of Education, inresponse to a parliamentary question, announcedadditional measures, specifically the appointment ofa primary or secondary school teacher as coordinatorof activities in the regional Directorates of EducationMinistry, the assignment of one or two teachers in eachschool as mediators and the creation in the Ministry

of a task force to promote anti-racist messages onthe internet, in the media and at the meeting placesof students and adolescents. No information is yetavailable, however, on the practical implementation ofthese measures, which will require significant effortsespecially in regard to teacher capacity building andtraining. In addition, a new political education coursewas introduced during the current school year to con-tribute to democratic citizen education. The three-hour

a week course, which will be compulsory for secondaryeducation students aged15 and16, blends three pre-existing courses in economics, sociology, and politicsand law. The courses will be taught based on existingtextbooks that were drafted much earlier and do notreflect current needs. As an illustration, the textbookfor the course on politics and law has no reference toissues of social inclusion in regard to minority groups,

such as Roma or migrants and no reference to racism.The sociology course textbook makes little and mostlyacademic reference to racism and omits any referenceto minorities in the chapter on the composition ofGreek society.

Intercultural and interreligious dialogue can be impor-tant in promoting diversity and the National Strategyfor the Integration of Third-Country Nationals includes

such measures. Nevertheless, Athens has no mosqueto serve the needs of a large community of Muslims,whether they are Greek citizens or not. In2006, theconstruction and administration of a mosque wasdetailed in Law N. 3512/2006, and in 2011 techni-


20/62


minaret had been accepted.The Minister said that he

felt proud that the mosque would be built during histenure.

Media can play a key role in promoting diversity andcombating racism and intolerance. They also have amoral and legal obligation to report objectively andwithout prejudice. The Code of Conduct of the AthensJournalists Association contains provisions (Articles 1and 2), which require journalists to impart information

without any prejudice related to their own political,social, religious, racial or cultural views or beliefs andto make no distinction on grounds of national origin,sex, race, religion, political beliefs, economic and socialstatus.

Article 4 of Presidential Decree 77/2003 regulatingradio and television news and political broadcastsprohibits the presentation of individuals in a way

that, under specific conditions, could encourage theirridicule, social isolation or discrimination on grounds ofracial or ethnic origin, nationality, religion and language,among others. It also prohibits broadcasting racist andxenophobic and intolerant views, in particular concern-ing ethnic or religious minorities and other vulnerablepopulation groups.

Representatives of civil society organisations, as wellas some public officials, suggested to FRA that printand audio-visual media often do not follow these rules,which contributes to fostering a climate of intolerance,especially towards irregular migrants and asylumseekers. Members of the Management Board of theNational Council for Radio and Television told FRA,for instance, that on occasion extremist views havebeen openly promoted by small private TV stations and

in some cases xenophobic statements were aired bymajor television channels, but that the Council appliedfinancial penalties only in a very small number ofcases.

that they have actually been established, these com-

mittees have been inactive, not having imposed anysanctions as provided for by the relevant law.

Article6 of the Audio-visual Media Services Directivedoes indeed stipulate that EU Member States shallensure by appropriate means that audio-visual mediaservices provided by media service providers undertheir jurisdiction do not contain any incitement tohatred based on race, sex, religion or nationality.

Presidential Decree109/2010transposing the Audio-visual Media Services Directive provides under Article7that audio-visual service providers must ensure thatprogrammes do not cause hate due to race, sex,religion, beliefs, nationality, disability, age and sexualorientation, and they must also not take advantageof peoples superstitions and prejudices. The NationalCouncil for Radio and Television is empowered through

Article 4.2 to temporarily suspend broadcasting oftelevision programmes under certain conditions thatinclude notification of the European Commission iftheir content encourages hate on grounds of race,sex, religion, beliefs, nationality, disability, age andsexual orientation.Such a penalty has not, however,been applied to date and the National Council did notprovide FRA with information concerning any relevant

complaints received.

Barriers to the effectiveimplementation of responses

FRA Annual reports have noted that Greece has verylimited data on either racist violence or discrimina-tion on grounds of race or ethnic origin. In regard to

discrimination, only one of the three Equality Bodies,the Ombudsperson, collects complaints data. As currentlegislation does not include the ground of nationalityand given that the competence of the Ombudsperson islimited to public authorities, only one or two complaints


21/62

Case study 1

that 16 racist incidents were recorded in the first

fourmonths of2013.

Police officials informed FRA that a mechanism hasbeen established under the Ministry of Justice to recordracist incidents, with a database under developmentto compile data to be provided by the police twice ayear (Police Circular 7100/11/21 of 21 August 2012).However, details regarding the implementation of thismeasure were not available. FRA was informed that

in2012 the police recorded officially 84incidents withpossible racist motive and 41such incidents betweenJanuary and the end of June2013.

In2011, NCHR, the United Nations High Commissionerfor Refugees Office in Greece and other civil societyorganisations established, as noted above, the RacistViolence Recording Network to collect data onincidents of racist violence. This network recorded

154 racist crime incidents in2012and 104 incidentsin the first eightmonths of2013. Although the dataare not officially sanctioned by the competent publicauthorities, the legal status of NCHR is that of a publicadvisory body under the Prime Ministers Office.Thisinitiative merits the attention and support of stateauthorities, because, apart from collecting valuabledata, it would be a first step towards the developmentof a multi-agency approach to tackling hate crime andextremism.

In September2013, the Ombudsperson issued a reporton the phenomenon of racist violence. It recorded281such incidents in the period between January2012and April2013. These incidents include those recordedby the Racist Violence Recording Network. On12September2013, the Ministry of Justice announced in

response to a parliamentary request for data concern-ing the prosecution of racist crimes that 16 ProsecutionOffices had not dealt with any related offences. TheProsecution Office of Athens initiated two prosecutionsin regard to racist hate speech, two prosecutions for

these cases are in different stages of the investigation

process, as described in the Ministrys response.

Tackling racist violence, discrimination and intoleranceeffectively requires both preventative and punitiveaction engaging law enforcement and other publicauthorities at all levels. It also requires meaningfulengagement with local minority and majority commu-nities because racist behaviour and attitudes occur ina community context. This is particularly important in

the acute economic crisis context, which affects bothminority and majority members of local communitiesand can trigger tensions and conflicts.

The 1997 United Kingdoms Home Office report on racialharassment and violence showed that perpetratorsshare a key feature, namely a negative attitude towardsethnic minorities that is shared by the communityto which they belong and which serves to legitimise

their actions: In turn, the wider community not onlyspawns such perpetrators, but fails to condemn themand actively reinforces their behaviour. The reciprocalrelationship suggests that the views of the perpetra-tor community also need to be addressed in efforts toreduce racial harassment.

In light of this, FRA found no evidence of systematicefforts to tackle racism, discrimination and intolerancethrough a multi-agency approach involving cooperationand coordination of law enforcement, local authorities,schools, health providers and public administration. FRAalso found no evidence of local community involve-ment in the design, development or implementation ofrelevant policies. There is a legal framework in place,for example, for the establishment and operation oflocal crime prevention councilsbased on Article16

of Law N.2713/1999. Out of a total of 325municipali-ties, 82 have put such councils into place, but there isno information on their operation and impact.Policeand Justice Ministry officials, as well as civil societyrepresentatives, said in the meetings with FRA that in


22/62


23/62

Case study 1

the European Union that, I regret the sweep opera-

tions in the context of operation Xenios Zeus, whichhave led to widespread detention of migrants in differ-ent parts of the country, many of whom have lived andworked in Greece foryears.

In addition, in June2013, a Human Rights Watch reportnoting that the right to liberty and security of the personis a principle of international human rights law arguedthat the widespread detention of foreigners for hours

for the purpose of verifying their legal status amountsto arbitrary deprivation of liberty. The report recallsthat in January2013, following its visit to Greece theUnited Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detentionwarned that any detention on discriminatory groundsconstitutes arbitrary detention and furthermore, thatdetention without any legal basis also renders thedetention arbitrary.

While immigration checks need to be conducted, theefficiency and effectiveness of the way operationXenios Zeus is carried out is questionable: betweenAugust2012 and June 2013 a total of 123,567 third-country nationals were apprehended, but only6,910persons, or 5.6%, were actually found to residein the country illegally (see Table1).

In its special report on racist violence, the Ombudspersonnoted that these apprehensions are abusive as thoseapprehended produced valid residency documents inmany cases. The report considered the operation tobe inefficient and problematic from a constitutionalpoint of view, since the deprivation of personal libertyof those apprehended is not necessary. It notes thatthe operation also undermines other police initiatives

addressing racist violence by indirectly nurturing

negative stereotypes.

Despite this criticism, the police resumed opera-tion Xenios Zeus in Athens on 29 September 2013;150 officers apprehended 334 persons resulting in41arrests. Although the stated aim of this operationwas to combat and prevent criminality, only two ofthese arrests concerned criminal offences: one forpossession of illegal narcotic substances and one for

possession of forged documents. Of the others, fourwere arrested for pending deportation orders and35for illegal entry into the country.

Those arrested for irregular entry face detainmentand expulsion. They are mostly detained in new pre-departure detention centres, which were establishedin unused military installations throughout the country.These installations generally provide for better condi-

tions than the detention centres visited by FRA in theEvros border region in2011. The establishment of thesenew centres met with strong local protest by munici-palities, influenced in some cases by activities of theGolden Dawn party. In the spring and summer of2013,riots broke out at these new detention centres, becauseliving conditions had deteriorated due to funding andother problems. This underscores the need for bettercoordination between administrative levels, an aspectreported as highly problematic in the FRA 2011 reporton the situation of persons crossing the Greek landborder in an irregular manner. The report noted in par-ticular the problem of inertia among key local authori-ties, who when interviewed at the time by FRA werenot aware of the relevant legislation, which assignedthem specific responsibilities in regard to detention

Table 1: Apprehensions and arrests under operation Xenios Zeus

Operation Xenios Zeus 1st Phase 2nd Phase TOTAL

Date 4 8 2011 13 2 2013 14 2 2013 18 6 2013 4 8 2011 18 6 2013


24/62


centres. In this regard, the2011 FRA report, which had

been discussed at the time with the Greek authorities,specifically noted a need to involve proactively localauthorities concerning the establishment of receptionor detention facilities for third-country nationals.

Despite the establishment of the new centres, a largenumber of third-country nationals is still detainedin police cells. According to police data, 2,702 third-country nationals were detained in police station

cells in July 2013. During its missions, FRA met withdetainees who had been held in cells of the centralPolice station of Omonia for many months, somemore than six months. The detainees, as well as thepolice officers, said that lengthy multi-month detentioncreated problems, especially as there is limited space inthese cells, which are designed for temporary deten-tion pending judicial proceedings.

In January 2013, the First Instance Criminal Court ofIgoumenitsa acquitted 15migrants who had escapedfrom detention at the local police station becausethe deplorable detention conditions put their healthin extreme danger. The court found the detentionconditions in violation of Article 3 of the EuropeanConvention on Human Rights, and that both the con-ditions and the duration of detention while awaitingexpulsion but without any criminal charges, were inviolation of Articles3, 8 and 13 of the convention. Thecourt considered that the conditions constituted a stateof necessity and they should therefore not be heldliable for the crime of escape.

An essential precondition for the effectiveness of policeresponses to racist violence is that victims and wit-nesses report incidents to the police. This they will do,

if they have trust in law enforcement agencies and thecriminal justice system. Therefore, any allegations ofpolice misconduct against members of minority ethnicgroups, who are the most likely target of racist crime,should be investigated independently and thoroughly.

enforcement officials.This chimes with observations

in the FRA situation report on Coping with a fundamen-tal rights emergency The situation of persons crossingthe Greek land border in an irregular manner, whichdocumented inhumane conditions in detention centresoperated by the police. In 2009, ECRI reiterated itscall on the Greek government to carry out effectiveinvestigations into alleged cases of racial discrimina-tion or racially-motivated misconduct by the police andensure as necessary that the perpetrators of these acts

are adequately punished.

In July2012, Amnesty International noted that whileGreek authorities acknowledge human rights abusesby law enforcement officials, they categorise them asisolated incidents, thereby failing to acknowledge theextent and depth of this systemic problem. Over thepast 10years, the ECtHR has found Greece in violationof Article2 on the right to life or Article3 on the prohi-

bition of torture or other ill-treatment of the EuropeanConvention on Human Rights in 11 cases concerninghuman rights violations by law enforcement officials.

In April2013, the Council of Europe Commissioner forHuman Rights urged Greek authorities to eliminate theinstitutional culture of impunity and establish an inde-pendent and well-functioning complaints mechanismcovering all law enforcement officials. In this regard, itshould be noted that the Office for Addressing Incidentsof Arbitrariness established by Law N.3938/2011 andPresidential Decree78/2011 can only carry out investi-gations upon a request by the Ministry of PublicOrder.

In 2013, the Ombudsperson received 17 complaintsconcerning inappropriate police officer behaviour withalleged racist motivation, the bulk of these complaints

from persons of Asian and African descent. The policeinvestigated nine of these complaints. Sixwere dis-missed as groundless, one was pending at the time ofwriting, and in one case the police established offen-sive behaviour and refusal of service but without racist


25/62

Case study 1

The Code of Police Ethics, under Article 2, requires

police officers to respect the life and personal securityof every individual; not to cause or tolerate acts oftorture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punish-ment and to report, as appropriate every violation ofhuman rights. It further requires them under Article5to develop relations of mutual trust and cooperationwith citizens and to avoid prejudice on grounds ofcolour, gender, ethnic origin, ideology or religion, sexualorientation, age, disability, family situation, economic

and social status or any other specific individualcharacteristic. In this light, thorough, independ-ent investigations of any allegations of police abusewould contribute to building up trust and improvingcooperation with law enforcement. These actions couldbe usefully supplemented with a broader independentassessment of issues concerning police institutionalcultures.

The case of Golden Dawn

The growing number of incidents of racist violenceattributed to members or sympathisers of GoldenDawn was reported on several occasions by interna-tional organisations, national statutory human rightsbodies and civil society organisations. The party wasfounded in1985 and developed its activities during the1990s focusing mainly on the issue of the name of theFormer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and migration.Until2010, it received between 0.07% and 0.47% ofthe vote in national or European elections. Its first elec-toral success was in2010 when it managed to secureone seat on the Athens municipal council with 5.29 %of the vote.

In the national elections of 6May and 17June2012,however, Golden Dawn received 6.97% and 6.92% ofthe vote, respectively, securing 18seats in the HellenicParliament. This was a spectacular increase from the0.29% the party received in the previous 2009 elec-

manifesto identifies peoples biological and spiritual

heritage as the main constituting element of the state,which will replace social stratification based on incomewith organically collaborating groups of people withdifferent abilities and production skills based on meri-tocracy. The party also supports both irredentism andexpansionism. Members of the party leadership havedenied the existence of the Holocaust and openly sup-ported the legacy of National Socialism (Nazism) andAdolf Hitler. The partys symbol bears a striking resem-

blance to the swastika and its leader has on severaloccasions publicly used the Nazi salute (Hitlergru).The party retains close contacts with the Germanneo-Nazi organisation, Free South Network (Freie NetzSd); its leadership visited the Hellenic Parliamenton 1February2013 in response to an invitation fromGolden Dawn parliamentarians.

Since 2009, the media and civil society organisa-

tions have reported on a series of attacks by GoldenDawn members on Greeks and migrants. In2012 andin2013, Members of Parliament representing GoldenDawn participated in attacks against migrants, forexample, by destroying their open markets stall andverbally or physically abusing members of the publicwho objected. Such incidents were shown on majortelevision channels and issues of impunity were raised,as the police did not intervene during these incidents.Golden Dawn also staged events such as the distribu-tion of food and medicine, the provision of free medicalexaminations or blood donations open only to thosewho could prove they were Greek citizens throughtheir identification papers. In parallel, members of theparty were reported to be visiting schools to distrib-ute leaflets with racist content intimidating migrantschoolchildren and teachers who opposed these visits.

FRA has no evidence of formal investigation into theseallegations, although Golden Dawn activities in schoolsreportedly date back to2006.

In December 2012, Golden Dawn parliamentarians


26/62


organisation. Reportedly, the case file contains thou-

sands of pages of testimony and evidence on criminalactivities of Golden Dawn members. The parliamentmeanwhile waived the parliamentary immunity ofGolden Dawn members charged with criminaloffences. By overwhelming majority, it approved on2December2013 changes in the rules of parliamentaryprocedure to allow the suspension of state or any otherfunding to any political party under investigation forcriminal activities.

At the same time, the police launched its own inten-sive internal investigation resulting in the arrests ofpolice officers, including senior officials, on veryserious charges, reportedly related to Golden Dawn.On 30October2013, the Internal Affairs Directorate ofthe police presented an outline of a special report on aWide investigation for the active engagement of policein illegal activity of Golden Dawn and possible partici-

pation in committing criminal acts, racist violence andcorruption. The report notes that, following investiga-tions into the activities of 319police officers, two coastguard officers, 12citizens and 104police precincts, aswell as one Golden Dawn office, 15police officers werearrested, 10of whom were directly or indirectly linkedto Golden Dawn activities, and arms and ammunitionwere confiscated. In parallel, the directorate recorded142 allegations of extreme police behaviour conclud-ing that there are neither coherent groups of policeofficers in service with a common criminal intentnor any invisible group within the Greek police, whichon the whole is described as a pillar of the demo-cratic order. However, the investigation revealed acoordinated inaction of specific police officers whoparticipated in criminal activities in dereliction oftheir duty and abuse of their power. The investigation

further uncovered problems of inadequate oversightand hierarchical control, bureaucratic attitudes andmoral cynicism. This special report concludes by rec-ommending a substantial reform of the police, with anemphasis on combating abusive behaviour and corrup-

special management training for middle ranking police

officers.

The need for drastic and effective measures to tacklethe racist and extremist violence that has plaguedGreek society for far too long was underscored byanother event: the murder of two young supportersof Golden Dawn, reportedly by an extremist left-wing group, outside the partys offices in Athens on1 November 2013. While legal measures and police

action taken to tackle extremism are essential, theexperiences of other Member States, particularly thosewhich are also mobilising the efforts of civil society andlocal communities, could also be usefully considered.

The European Commission welcomed the govern-ments efforts, confirming its confidence in the Greekjustice system. Despite the extraordinary efforts andmeasures taken, however, Golden Dawn remains the

third largest party in polls conducted in October andNovember2013. The latest poll conducted between28and 30November shows that Golden Dawn has actuallygained ground, based on voting intention, reaching8.4 % from 7.8% in October2013 (undecided voters at17.9%). This points both to the need to recognise theextent and gravity of these issuesand on the need totake measures tackling extremism and racism locally,where public opinion is formed through the daily inter-action of minority and majority communities.

105 See: Special Report (2013), Wide investigation for the activeengagement of police in illegal activity of Golden Dawn and

possible par ticipation in committing crimina l acts, racistviolence and corruption, October2013,available at: http://www.astynomia.gr/images/stories/2013/prokirikseis13/parousiasi.pdf.

106 As an illustration, in Germany, see relevant actions of theFederal Ministry for Labour in the context of project Xenosconcerning the disengagement of young people fromextremist groups, available at: http://www.esf.de/portal/generator/6664/xenos__ausstieg__zum__einstieg__inhalt.html; and the work of the Network for Democracyand Courage available at: http://www netzwerk-courage


27/62

Case study2:Responding to racism, xenophobiaand related intolerance in Hungary

During the meetings FRA held with government andpublic officials, statutory human rights bodies and civilsociety organisations in Hungary, it became apparentthat while the legal apparatus offers a good level offormal protection in principle against racism, xeno-

phobia and related intolerance, there is evidence tosuggest that this apparatus and the policies that derivefrom it are nevertheless not implemented effectively.Secondary data and information analysed by FRA alsopoint to a number of barriers concerning the implemen-tation of relevant legal and policy provisions.

Despite evidence to the contrary, many public officialswith whom FRA met maintained that discrimination,racism, intolerance and extremism are not a particularproblem in Hungary. Limited awareness, as well as alack of acknowledgement of the extent of these phe-nomena and their negative impact on social cohesioncan be a barrier to fighting these phenomena. It couldalso hamper Hungarys efforts to promote the socialintegration of minority ethnic groups such asRoma.

The effective implementation of measures to combatdiscrimination, racism, xenophobia and related intol-erance and promote social integration requires clearawareness of these issues at all levels of governance,as well as strong political will. The sections below

measures to tackle discrimination, racism, intoleranceand extremism.

Cases of discrimination, racist violence and intolerancein Hungary have already been reported in the past by

international bodies such as the Council of EuropesEuropean Commission against Racism and Intolerance.In 1997, the first ECRI report on Hungary noted that,as in other countries, the Roma population faced par-ticular problems and disadvantages, exacerbated bywidespread discrimination, and urged the authorities tomake a particular effort to develop targeted policies.It also noted some problems with antisemitism andproposed targeted policies.In2000, the second ECRIreport noted growing acknowledgement of problemsof racism and discrimination particularly towards Roma.However, it expressed concern in regard to the inci-dence of discrimination towards Roma in all fields oflife, including the administration of justice, as well aspolice ill-treatment. Given new patterns of migration,the report also called for greater consideration of thesituation of non-citizens. The report also warned that,

although membership of neo-Nazi and extreme-rightwing parties is at present relatively limited, care needsto be exercised to counter expressions of intolerance orantisemitism in political discourse and public debate.In2004, the third ECRI report considered progress in


28/62


successfully filter down to local level. In 2009, thefourth ECRI report welcomed positive developments,particularly concerning Roma inclusion, but also notedan alarmingly sharp rise in racism in public discourse.In 2012, the Special Rapporteur on contemporaryforms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia andrelated intolerance acknowledged the important stepstaken in the fight against racism, racial discrimination,xenophobia and related intolerance, but also stated inthe conclusions that racial discrimination, racism and

negative stereotypes against the Roma minority withinState institutions, including the police and the judiciary,is a reality that Hungary should not deny, and calledfor regular and mandatory human rights training forState agents, including the police and the judiciary. Italso appealed for efforts to improve relations betweenthe police and Roma, in order to restore confidence andincrease reporting of racist acts to the authorities. TheSpecial Rapporteur also noted a lack of adequate imple-

mentation of the broad range of initiatives developedand that the insufficiency of funding to ensure theireffective implementation remains a major challenge.

Despite measures taken by the authorities, intol-erance, as a key element of extremist ideology,continued to manifests itself in the public sphere.On 26 November 2012, for example, a Member ofParliament for the Jobbik party, called for the drawingup of a list of Jews who, in his view, represented asecurity risk in Hungary: I think now is the time toassess [] how many people of Jewish origin there arehere, and especially in the Hungarian Parliament andthe Hungarian government, who represent a certainnational security risk for Hungary.The Speaker of theParliament then called for tightening of House rules toallow such behaviour to be censured. On 5January2013,

a prominent conservative commentator respondedin a column in the Magyar Hrlapdaily newspaper tothe New Years Eve stabbing of two Hungarian youthsallegedly by Roma perpetrators, saying: A significantpart of the Roma are unfit for coexistence. They are not

communication. Inarticulate sounds pour out of theirbestial skulls These animals should not be allowed toexist.On 14March2013, another journalist, knownfor his antisemitic and anti-Roma views, was awardedthe Tncsics prize for journalism for his work on thecollapse of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. A numberof previous holders of the Tncsics prize returned theirawards in protest. Upon the request of the Ministerfor Human Resources, the 2013 prize winner in turn,returned his award on 21March2013. The minister was

of the opinion that his antisemitic and anti-Roma viewswere contrary to those of the Hungarian state.

Anti-Roma prejudice,discrimination and hate crime

Act No.CLXXIX of2011 on the rights of nationalities,which entered into force on 1January 2012, recog-

nises the Bulgarian, Greek, Croatian, Polish, German,Armenian, Roma, Romania, Ruthenian, Serbian, Slovak,Slovene and Ukrainian nationalities, which are definedas ethnic groups resident in Hungary for at leastonecentury.

According to Hungarys National Social Inclusion Strategy Extreme Poverty, Child Poverty, the Roma(20112020)published in December2011, out of 750,000HungarianRoma, the majority (500,000600,000) live in disad-vantaged regions and in conditions of extreme poverty.In this context, Hungary aims to [] pay particularattention to the ethnic group of the Roma as experi-ences show that they are the poorest of the poorand have been least reached by the various inclusionprogrammes. The Strategy notes that efforts are alsomade to [] keep track of, if necessary, via special,

anti-discrimination programmes, the development ofthe situation of the Roma and concludes that []we need effective measures to combat discriminationand prejudice against the Roma.FRA was informedduring its meeting with the State Secretary for Social


29/62

Case study2

The anti-discrimination legal framework (EqualTreatment Act) has been in force since January2004.Article 8 lists 20 protected grounds that apply toindividuals or groups, including racial origin; colour;nationality; affiliation with a nationality (in the sense ofAct No.CLXXIX of 2011 on the rights of nationalities, seebelow); religious or ideological conviction; political orother opinion; sexual orientation; and sexual identity.

Other provisions of the Act concern protection from

harassment and unlawful segregation: Harassmentis a conduct violating human dignity related to therelevant persons characteristic defined in Article 8with the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating,hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environ-ment around a particular person. Unlawful segregationis a conduct that separates individuals or groups of indi-viduals from others on the basis of their characteristicsas defined in Article8 without a reasonable explanation

resulting from objective consideration.

Act No. CLXXIX of 2011 on the rights of nationalitiesregulates their participation in public life, with Article9under Chapter2 stating: Hungary forbids all policiesand practices which a) are aimed at or result in theassimilation of nationalities into the majority nationor the exclusion and segregation of nationalities fromthe majority nation [] c) persecute or intimidate anationality or individuals belonging to a nationality dueto their affiliation, make their living conditions morecumbersome or prevent them from the exercise oftheir rights.

Despite these legal provisions, anti-Roma prejudice isstill very much in evidence, as noted in Hungarys 2011National Social Inclusion Strategy: [] Right through

to todays day and age, the social exclusion of Roma

has resulted in the perpetualization of mutual distrust,aggression and prejudice and a declining feeling ofsecurity.

FRAs Annual Report on the situation of fundamentalrights in the EU, as well as other reports by nationaland international organisations, consistently showthat Roma in Hungary suffer unequal treatment,discrimination, segregation, and harassment. Manyalso become victims of hate speech or hate crime.

Statistics published by the national equality body, theEqual Treatment Authority, also show that Roma fileapproximately 10% of all the discrimination complaintsit receives (see Table2).

The prejudiced attitudes identified in Hungary are felt atthe level of society at large and often translate into anuneasy cohabitation between the Hungarian populationas a whole and Roma, the largest ethnic minority group

in Hungary, in particular. A 2011 survey of attitudestowards Roma in Hungary found, for example, that60% of a representative general population sampleshared the view that the inclination to criminality is inthe blood of Gypsies. Another 42% agreeing that itis only right that there are still pubs, clubs and discoswhere Gypsies are not let in.

The national strategy recognises the problem, whichis a very important step towards addressing the issueof Roma inclusion, but civil society organisations havecriticised the fact that it pays little attention to Romadiscrimination and anti-Gypsyism. These organisationsargue that the strategy does not contain concrete anti-prejudice or anti-discrimination measures or tools,nor does it describe any concrete action, measure,tool, accountable person/body in charge, or dedicated

Table 2: Complaints from Roma persons received by the Equal Treatment Authority, 20082012

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012


30/62


funding to enforce the fight against racially or ethni-cally motivated crimes.

Media reporting, according to the Hungarian Associationof Journalists, has not countered such prejudice, oftenpresenting Roma as criminals or in a similarly negativelight. This view is confirmed by a content analysis ofprint and broadcast media conducted by the Centrefor Policy Studies, covering the

Documents

FRA: Racism, discrimination, intolerance and extremism: learning from experiences in Greece and Hungary