Selected Issues

 

BIBLIOGRAPHIC UPDATE

Since the research for this report was completed, the following sources have become

available to the Documentation, Information and Research Branch. Please consult an IRB

Regional Documentation Centre for information on obtaining these documents.

Adevarul [Bucharest, in Romanian]. 26-27 March 1994. "Official Defends Government

on Minority Rights." (FBIS-EEU-94-063 1 Apr. 1994, p. 22)

Amnesty International. March 1994. Romania: Criminal Law Reform on the Wrong

Track. (AI Index: EUR 39/01/94). London: Amnesty International.

BBC Summary of World Broadcasts. 26 April 1994. "Israeli Foreign Minister Interviewed on

Middle East, Jewish-Romanian Relations." (NEXIS)

_____. 14 April 1994. "HDUR Appeals Against Detention of Three Pardoned Ethnic

Hungarians." (NEXIS)

_____. 4 April 1994. "Three Ethnic Hungarians Remain in Prison Despite Presidential

Amnesty." (NEXIS)

_____. 28 March 1994. "Government Dismisses Opposition Mayor of Bucharest District, 14

Others." (NEXIS)

Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1993. 1994. US Department of State.

Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.

Kossuth Radio [Budapest, in Hungarian]. 27 February 1994. "Tokes Warns about Treatment

of Minority." (FBIS-EEU-94-039 28 Feb. 1994, p. 19)

Libération [Paris]. 30 March 1994. "Roumanie: Nouvelle vague de changements au sein

des renseignements."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 21-25 March 1994. RFE/RL News Briefs.

Vol. 3, No. 13, p. 15.

_____. 14-18 March 1994. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 3, No. 12, p. 20.

_____. 7-11 March. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 3, No. 11, p. 10.

_____. 28 February-4 March 1994. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 3, No. 10, p. 10.

_____. 21-25 February 1994. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 3, No. 10, pp. 13-15, 18-19.

Radio Romania Network [Bucharest, in Romanian]. 28-31 March 1994. Various reports under

heading "Council of Europe Human Rights Officials Visit." (FBIS-EEU-94-062 31 Mar. 1994,

pp. 12-15)

_____. 31 March 1994. "Timofte, Roman View Intelligence Unit's Work." (FBIS-EEU-94-063

1 Apr. 1994, p. 23)

_____. 25 March 1994. "Decree Lists 24 Persons Pardoned." (FBIS-EEU-94-059 28 Mar.

1994, p. 24)

_____. 25 March 1994. "Iliescu Pardons Communists, Ethnic Hungarians."

(FBIS-EEU-94-059 28 Mar. 1994, p. 24)

_____. 8 March 1994. "New Defense, Interior Ministers Installed." (FBIS-EEU-94-046 9 Mar.

1994, p. 24)

_____. 7 March 1994. "Mohora: PSM 'Not Involved' in Reshuffle." (FBIS-EEU-94-045

8 Mar. 1994, p. 35-6)

Romania Libera [Bucharest, in Romanian]. 18 March 1994. "History of Secret Police

Unit, Leaders Viewed." (FBIS-EEU-94-057 24 Mar. 1994, p. 29)

_____. 17 March 1994. "Interior Ministry Surveillance Activity Viewed." (FBIS-EEU-94-057

24 Mar. 1994, p. 28)

GLOSSARY

APADO Association for the Defense of Human Rights

APADOR              Romanian Helsinki Committee

DC          Democratic Convention

FSDN     Democratic National Salvation Front

FSN        National Salvation Front

IRU         International Romani Union

PD-FSN  Democratic Party-National Salvation Front

PRM       Romania Mare (Greater Romania) Party

PSM       Party of Socialist Labour

PUNR     Party of Romanian National Unity

SDPR      Party of Social Democracy

SRI          Romanian Intelligence Service

UDMR   Hungarian Democratic Alliance of Romania

VR           Vatra Romaneasca

1.  INTRODUCTION

Throughout 1992 and 1993, the generally positive human rights trend noted by the United Nations Special Rapporteur in his January 1992 report continued in Romania. At the 49th session of the UN Commission on Human Rights, his mandate was terminated and Romania was transferred to "advisory services" status (Amnesty International Nov. 1992, 20; ibid. Nov. 1993, 14, 16; United Nations 3 Jan. 1992). Improvements in the human rights situation in Romania have also been noted recently in reports by the United Nations Human Rights Committee and committees of the Council of Europe as well as in recommendations made by the International Human Rights Law Group to the Clinton administration concerning future changes to Romania's trade status with the United States (RFE/RL 24 Sept. 1993, 41; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 16; United Nations International Covenant 5 Nov. 1993, 2; Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 9).

While noting improvements, however, the above-mentioned organizations point out continuing problems with respect to a number of issues including the judiciary, the conduct of police, control of the Romanian Intelligence Service (SRI) and the treatment of minorities (Amnesty International Nov. 1993, 14, 16; RFE/RL 24 Sept. 1993, 41; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 16; Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 9-10; United Nations International Covenant 5 Nov. 1993, 2-3). This paper will update a June 1992 Immigration and Regugee Board Documentation Centre Question and Answer Series Paper on Romania and provide information on the above-mentioned issues.

1.1         Recent Domestic and International Developments

The run up to national presidential and parliamentary elections in the fall of 1992 saw a core group of National Salvation Front (FSN) members split away from the party to form a new ruling party, the Democratic National Salvation Front (FSDN). Petre Roman stayed as the leader of the FSN while the FSDN remained loyal to President Ion Iliescu, subsequently re-nominating him as its presidential candidate (Human Rights Law Journal 1993, 137; RFE/RL 10 July 1992, 78).

Although the FSDN finished first in the parliamentary elections, its 28 per cent showing in the polls put it well short of a majority. The opposition Democratic Convention received 20 per cent of the vote followed by the FSN with 10 per cent. The Hungarian Democratic Alliance of Romania (UDMR) received 7.5 per cent while three right- and left-wing nationalist parties held the balance of power with 15 per cent of the vote (Helsinki Commission Nov. 1992, 1, 21). With the support of the latter three, Nicolae Vacaroiu formed a government of FSDN members and independents (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 1; RFE/RL 27 Nov. 1992, 11, 14, 16). With the exception of some administrative deficiencies, international observers generally considered the elections to be free and fair (Helsinki Commission Nov. 1992, 2; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 2; Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 2).

Romanian Parliament (after September 1992 elections)

Chamber of Deputies Senate

FSDN 117 49

DC 82 34

FSN 43 18

PUNR 30 14

UDMR 27 12

PRM 16 6

PSM 13 5

Other 13 5

Total 341 143

(RFE/RL 30 Oct. 1992, 2)

In May 1993, the FSN merged with the Democratic Party into the PD-FSN (RFE/RL 2 July 1993, 22). The move was followed by an FSDN national conference in mid-July which saw that party change its name to the Party of Social Democracy of Romania (SDPR) and elect former foreign minister Adrian Nastase as its president (RFE/RL 27 Aug. 1993, 15).

In October, Romania achieved two top-priority foreign policy objectives (RFE/RL 7 Jan. 1994, 125). On 7 October, it was formally admitted into the Council of Europe, and two weeks later, the US Senate voted to approve a trade agreement that restored Romania to most-favoured nation (MFN) status. While both events were linked to recent progress in democratization, membership in the Council of Europe was made conditional to the biannual review of the country's human rights record and improvements in areas such as minority rights (Congressional Record 4 Nov. 1993; Radio Romania Network 22 Oct. 1993; The New York Times 30 Nov. 1993; RFE/RL 24 Sept. 1993, 40, 43-4; Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 7). To a certain extent, the granting of MFN status was seen within a strategic context. As the Washington-based Helsinki Commission stated in 1992:

Stigmatizing the country as a whole [and] closing the gate between Romania and the West will only stoke the fires of the extremists and aggressive nationalists whose programs the West has rejected (Helsinki Commission Nov. 1992, 24).

In February 1994, the government signed an official coalition agreement with its right- and left-wing nationalist allies in parliament, which would bring members of those parties, including the nationalist Party of Romanian National Unity and the Romania Mare Party, into the cabinet by 1 March. The other parties in the coalition agreement are the Party of Socialist Labour and the Democratic Agrarian Party (The Reuters European Business Report 2 Feb. 1994; BBC Summary 4 Feb. 1994).

2.    THE LEGAL SYSTEM

In early 1994, the Romanian Criminal Code was in the process of being amended. By February 1994, the Senate had passed the amendments and referred the bill to the Chamber of Deputies for consideration. The Romanian Helsinki Committee (APADOR) is particularly critical of the wording of Articles 166, 200, 205-6, 236 and 239 as passed by the Senate. They cover offences such as "transmission of false news, same sex relations, libel, insult, defamation of the country or nation and outrage" (APADOR 10 Feb. 1994; CEELI 10 Feb. 1994). By late November 1993, the Senate had approved a new law on "state secrets"; however, a mid-December report indicates that the law had still to be passed by the Chamber of Deputies (The New York Times 13 Dec. 1993; ibid. 30 Nov. 1993). At that time, the wording of the draft law made publishing secret government information, which was defined to include "scientific, technological or economic activities," a criminal offence (ibid.).

2.1                Structure of the Judiciary and Procuracy

The functions of the judiciary in Romania are defined by the constitution and the Law on the Reorganization of the Judiciary (Law No. 92/1992), which came into full force in July 1993. It removes the more disreputable aspects of the communist legal system but maintains the traditional power of the procuracy (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 4; Human Rights Law Journal 1993, 138).

In Romania, the magistrature is composed of all judges and prosecutors (the procuracy). As per the continental system of justice, prosecutors can act as trial lawyers or "sitting prosecutors" who oversee criminal investigations, approve search and arrest warrants, and assemble evidence (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 4, 6).

While the Ministry of Justice has jurisdiction over the entire magistrature, effective control of the procuracy rests with the "Public Ministry," headed by the prosecutor general (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 2-3; Human Rights Law Journal 1993, 138; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 4). The procuracy plays a role in assessing the performance of judges through the Superior Council of the Magistrature; however, a special commission composed only of prosecutors oversees the performance of the procuracy. Only prosecutors can launch a habeas corpus-type procedure. The procuracy also has exclusive responsibility for monitoring preventive detention and prison facilities, and can issue an initial 30-day period of preventive detention without the concurrence of a court (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 5; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 3).

Provisions of Law No. 92 have been criticized with respect to judicial independence (Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 4; United Nations International Covenant 5 Nov. 1993, 3, 4). For instance, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has recently stated that "powers of the Ministry of Justice over judicial decisions and the power to remove judges creates a situation which greatly undermines the independence of the judiciary" (ibid.). The Minister of Justice apparently went beyond these powers when he summarily dismissed the president of the Bucharest Municipal Court in mid-July 1993 without convening the Superior Council of the Magistrature (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 7).

As of September 1993, the vast majority of active judges had been appointed under the Ceausescu regime, a situation that Amnesty International believed was incompatible with the functioning of an independent judiciary (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 3). Judicial independence in Mure- (Maros) [Counties and municipalities in Romania often have a Romanian and a Hungarian name. Where possible, this report will provide the Hungarian name of a locality in parentheses when first cited. Thereafter, only the Romanian name will be used. This does not, however, imply a standpoint on the part of the DIRB with respect to political questions associated with the use of Romanian or Hungarian names.] county has been questioned as a result of the affiliation of judges on the county court and the Tîrgu Mure- (Marosv s rhely) municipal court with the nationalist Vatra Romaneasca organization (HHRF 9 Feb. 1994; APADO 15 July 1992, 7; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 17-18). Decisions of those courts, which banned the candidacies of ethnic Hungarian candidates in the May 1990 national and February 1992 local elections, were widely seen as politically motivated. Helsinki Watch has raised concerns about the objectivity of judges who convicted ethnic Hungarians and Roma after ethnic violence in Tîrgu Mure- in March 1990 (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 17-18, 70-2; APADO 15 July 1992, 4-7; United Nations 5 Feb. 1993, 35).

2.2         The Issue of Fair Trial

The Romanian Code of Criminal Procedure provides that detainees must be informed of their right to counsel. If they cannot afford to hire a lawyer, the state must provide one once the investigation stage is completed and charges are brought (Country Reports 1992 1993, 878; APADOR 10 Feb. 1994). Detainees are generally unaware of their legal rights (Weber 7 Feb. 1994). Reports indicate that in 1992, police systematically failed to inform detainees of their right to counsel (LCHR July 1993, 316; Helsinki Watch Jan. 1993, 15; Weber 7 Feb. 1994). Consequently, those held in pre-trial detention often waited for months before obtaining state-appointed legal representation. Once a lawyer arrives, all counsel-client conversations must be conducted in the presence of one or more police officials (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 2-3, 15-16; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 7). APADOR indicates that this situation improved somewhat in 1993 but that detainees are less likely to be informed of their right to counsel in smaller municipalities (10 Feb. 1994).

Since January 1990, at least three cases have been documented involving the imprisonment of individuals based on confessions obtained as a result of police ill-treatment or torture (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 12; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 3, 9-11). According to Renata Weber, a representative of the Romanian Helsinki Committee currently studying at Columbia University's Human Rights Centre, the prevalence of this practice depends on the judges involved. Some judges "of the Ceausescu-era mentality" will convict solely on the basis of such confessions while others will demand additional evidence. Human rights observers in Bucharest do not have information on how often such confessions form the basis for convictions in Romania (Weber 7 Feb. 1994; APADOR 10 Feb. 1994; CEELI 10 Feb. 1994).

Laws No. 60/1991 (25 September 1991) and No. 61/1991 (27 September 1991) deal with offences related to public assembly and public order respectively and provide for penalties in the form of a fine or up to six-months imprisonment based on summary judicial procedures (Monitorul Oficial 25 Sept. 1991, 1-4; ibid. 27 Sept. 1991, 1-4). Law No. 61 has incorporated elements of Decree 153, a widely criticized Ceausescu-era legal instrument (Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 18; Weber 7 Feb. 1994). According to reports, neither law allows for an effective appeal procedure. For instance, Article 14 of Law No. 61 provides for a "re-examination" before the same court that handed down the first decision (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 8; Helsinki Watch 8 Feb 1994; Monitorul Oficial 27 Sept. 1991, 3).

Amnesty International has documented the application of these laws with respect to two cases. In September 1992, a man was convicted under Law No. 60 for participating in a non-violent protest in Gala-i, although he insisted that he was only present in the vicinity of the protest. In November 1992, his fine was converted into a prison sentence of 333 days. In late June 1993, a man in Dorohoi (Ia-i county) was sentenced to three-months imprisonment under Law No. 61 for "allegedly threatening his wife and mother-in-law with a knife during a quarrel" (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 8). His case was re-examined the next day in the same court, this time in the presence of a prosecutor and defence lawyer, his appeal was rejected and he was imprisoned immediately. He died four days later under suspicious circumstances (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 8, 14; Human Rights Watch Dec. 1993, 230). Other human rights observers indicate that Law No. 61 was used frequently throughout Romania in 1993, but they state that statistics on how often convictions have resulted in imprisonment are not likely to be available (Weber 7 Feb. 1994; APADOR 10 Feb. 1994).

According to Country Reports, "[t]here were no known political prisoners in Romania in 1992" (1993, 878). As of September 1993, there were, however, at least 20 individuals serving long prison sentences who had been convicted on the basis of trials that international organizations felt raised serious concerns about due process. All but one had been convicted since the fall of Ceausescu in 1990 (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 12-17; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 11-12, 14; Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 17, 19).

3. ARREST AND PRE-TRIAL DETENTION

In January 1993, Helsinki Watch published an extensive report on pre-trial detention in Romania. It indicated that conditions of detention, with respect to ventilation, overcrowding, access to fresh air, exercise, sanitation and medical care contravened the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. To a certain extent, this was the result of economic shortages. On the other hand, the report pointed out a number of areas, such as access to fresh air, exercise and basic medical care, where substantial improvements could have been made with little or no money (Helsinki Watch Jan. 1993, 3, 5-10).

In Romania, lockups at police stations are used to hold individuals who have been charged and are awaiting trial. In July 1992, a "specialist consultant" with the Department of Investigation of the Romanian Police estimated that about 25 per cent of those awaiting trial were being held in detention (Helsinki Watch Jan. 1993, 4).

3.1      Conduct of Police

There have been reports of the physical abuse of detainees by police at the time of their arrest and during interrogation (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 3; United Nations International Covenant 5 Nov. 1993, 2; Human Rights Watch Dec. 1993, 230; Weber 7 Feb. 1994). In July 1992, Helsinki Watch visited eight police lockups in Bucharest and the main cities of five other counties where it conducted private interviews with 86 detainees. All of the interviewees complained of ill-treatment by police prior to being placed in a lockup (Helsinki Watch Jan. 1993, 2, 11-12).

In most cases, police ill-treat detainees in order to force confessions (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 3, 7, 10-11; Helsinki Watch Jan. 1993, 11-12; Weber 7 Feb. 1994). Amnesty International has recently documented five cases (three in Gala-i county, one in Bucharest and one in Ia-i) of severe ill-treatment by police during arrest or in pre-trial detention which took place between March 1992 and June 1993 (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 7-11). It also has described a June 1992 incident in Bucharest involving a police officer and soldier in which a student was ill-treated and accidentally wounded in the head, as well as the case of a man who died under suspicious circumstances after being imprisoned in Dorohoi (ibid., 8-9; United Nations 5 Feb. 1993, 33).

Once detainees arrive at police lockups, the frequency and severity of abuse reportedly diminishes markedly. Still, detainees reported at least some beatings in most of the eight lockups inspected by Helsinki Watch in July 1992. Those in Bucharest Lockup 16 stated that there were daily beatings on the palms of the hand for spending too much time in a washroom or falling asleep during the day (Helsinki Watch Jan. 1993, 12-13).

3.2          Investigation and Prosecution of Police Abuses

In Romania, the Interior Ministry, which controls the police, is considered to be a military formation. For this reason, only the Military Prosecutor's Office is empowered to register, investigate and bring to trial complaints of torture and ill-treatment by the police (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 8; Helsinki Watch Jan. 1993, 12; Human Rights Law Journal 1993, 138; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 14). Police officers convicted of such physical abuse face a maximum penalty of seven-years imprisonment; however, according to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, "the number of charges and convictions are extremely few compared with the number of complaints received or abuses reported" and "penalties prescribed by law are not commensurate with the gravity of the crimes committed" (United Nations International Covenant 5 Nov. 1993, 2). The Committee also states that this has "contributed to an atmosphere of impunity," a view shared by Renata Weber (United Nations International Covenant 5 Nov. 1993, 2-4; Weber 7 Feb. 1994; Helsinki Watch Jan. 1993, 12; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 8).

A number of reports are critical of the continuing military supervision of the police and recommend that law enforcement, including investigation of police abuses, be turned over to civilian control (United Nations International Covenant 5 Nov. 1993, 3; LCHR July 1993, 315; Human Rights Law Journal 1993, 138). The International Human Rights Law Group suggests that without such control, "there is little hope of achieving full protection of human rights" in Romania (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 8). In 1993, a Council of Europe report cited the "apparent reluctance" of military prosecutors to properly investigate complaints against police officers (ibid., 8).

A number of reports either state outright, or provide information that suggests, that the current system for investigating police abuses is ineffectual. Investigations have either not taken place or police officers have been cleared of wrong-doing despite considerable evidence of physical abuse (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 7, 9, 11, 14; Human Rights Watch Dec. 1993, 230; SIRDO 16 Feb. 1993, 1; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 8-9; United Nations 5 Feb. 1993, 33). One human rights group has recently reported that it has not heard of a single case where a police officer accused of ill-treatment has been convicted (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 8).

Investigating authorities have been similarly negligent with respect to the numerous police abuses committed before December 1989 (Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 16). In February 1993, a Romanian human rights group pointed to considerable evidence that a number of police officers serving in Suceava county had tortured or ill-treated detainees and prisoners before the 1989 revolution. In September 1993, Amnesty International indicated that it was not aware of any investigations into those allegations (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 13; SIRDO 16 Feb. 1993, 1).

4.    THE ROMANIAN INTELLIGENCE SERVICE (SRI)

From its inception in March 1990, the SRI has been tainted by links to its predecessor, the Securitate. [For information on this issue up to mid-1992, see Immigration and Refugee Board Documentation Centre, June 1992, Romania: Security Forces and the Romanian Intelligence Service, Ottawa, pp. 12-15.] One of the main reasons for this has been that the SRI took several thousand members of the Securitate into its ranks, although the precise figure remains unclear. In September 1993, the agency's director, Virgil Magureanu, put the number at about 6,000 (The New York Times 13 June 1993; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 9; The New York Times 30 Nov. 1993; The Guardian 7 Jan. 1994). The law on the SRI, which came into effect in February 1992, prohibits the hiring of most members of the former Securitate, although it remains unclear whether those currently working for the SRI are in contravention of the law (Country Reports 1992 1993, 878). The wording of the SRI law, as well as that of the Law on National Security of July 1991, has been criticized for enabling the agency to conduct otherwise illegal activities under the broad rubric of "national security" (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 9-10; LCHR July 1993, 314; Country Reports 1992 1993, 878).

There have been continuing reports of illegal surveillance activities being carried out in Romania since 1992, but the reports are inconclusive on whether the SRI is responsible for such activities (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 9; LCHR July 1993, 314; Country Reports 1992 1993, 878). In January 1993, three opposition parties represented in parliament alleged that their offices had been bugged and accused the SRI of being responsible (Recosh 17 Jan. 1994; RFE/RL 18-22 Jan. 1993, 19). In July 1993, a Romanian newspaper reported that the Hunedora detachment of the SRI was being investigated for illegal surveillance (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 9).

Concerns have recently been raised that former Securitate officers are illegally tapping telephones and opening mail on a freelance basis (LCHR July 1993, 314; IHRLG 27 Jan. 1994). A Romanian journalist specializing in intelligence matters recently stated that the 20 per cent of personnel of the Securitate who were not hired by the SRI "have infiltrated the Party, the opposition, private firms and exporters" (The Guardian 7 Jan. 1994).

4.1              Civilian Control of the SRI

The February 1992 law on the SRI establishes a special joint parliamentary commission to scrutinize the activities of the SRI. It also provides for parliamentary oversight of the agency's budget and sets out a confirmation process for its director (Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 3). According to a number of reports, these safeguards have not been functioning adequately in practice (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 9-10; Human Rights Law Journal 1993, 138; Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 3; Country Reports 1992 1993, 878).

The special parliamentary oversight commission was not established until June 1993. It consists of nine members: five from parties supporting the government and four from opposition parties. Vasile Vacaru of the ruling FSDN was appointed the chairman of the commission (Radio Romania Network 24 June 1993; Evenimentul Zilei 24 June 1993). It was several months later, in October 1993, that Magureanu was finally confirmed by parliament in his position as director (Radio Romania Network 12 Oct. 1993; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 10; RFE/RL 4-8 Oct. 1993, 19).

In June 1993, the government created the "Special Telecommunications Service," and reportedly provided it with electronic surveillance equipment. The move was immediately criticized by the Romanian Helsinki Committee as an attempt to further remove potentially illegal activities from the scrutiny of parliamentary control (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 10). In late August, the head of the parliamentary commission stated that the SRI had tapped telephones "a few hundred" times but always within the bounds of the law (Romania Libera 31 Aug. 1993). A long overdue report by the SRI on its activities, presented to parliament in September, was criticized for being too general and providing substantial information only on what the agency perceived as continuing threats from foreign intelligence services operating in Romania (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 10-11; Romania Libera 15 Sept. 1993).

Parliament can exercise a measure of control over the SRI through the budgetary approval process; however, reports indicate that it has thus far effectively failed to do so (Country Reports 1992 1993, 878; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 9-10; Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 3; IHRLG 27 Jan. 1994). In April 1993, former prime minister Roman confirmed in parliament that the SRI owned a farm. The statement raised concerns that, with an independent source of income, the agency's accountability to parliament had been reduced further (Adevarul 8 Apr. 1993).

5.                TREATMENT OF MINORITIES

The Romanian constitution, approved in 1991, contains a number of provisions related to minority rights. Article 6 states that Romanian citizens have the right to the "preservation, development and expression of their ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity," while Article 32 grants minority communities the right to be educated in their native language, "pursuant to regulations." With respect to legal rights, Article 127 stipulates that all trials are to be conducted in Romanian with the use of a translator if necessary (United Nations 5 Feb. 1993, 31; Human Rights Law Journal 1993, 139). In April 1993, the government established the Council for National Minorities, although there was a suspicion that the move was timed more to influence the Council of Europe in its decision about Romania's membership than as a way to bring about a substantive improvement in ethnic relations (RFE/RL 11 June 1993, 35-37; RFE/RL 24 Sept. 1993, 42).

The government has yet to fulfil a number of legislative commitments in the area of minority rights. In the January 1990 Declaration on the Rights of National Minorities, it promised to create a Ministry of Nationalities and adopt a national minorities law, neither of which had been realized as of September 1993 (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 99; Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 7). In that month, the ethnic Hungarian representatives withdrew from the Council for National Minorities due to what they believed was the government's lack of "political will" to implement Council recommendations (RFE/RL 30 Aug.-3 Sept. 1993, 19). The immediate issue provoking the withdrawal was slow progress on the draft law on bilingual street signs, proposed by the Council in August (ibid. 23-27 Aug. 1993b, 17; ibid. 7 Jan. 1994, 126; HHRF 9 Feb. 1994). The legislation subsequently stalled under concerted attacks by the government's nationalist parliamentary allies (RFE/RL 23-27 Aug. 1993b, 17; ibid. 7 Jan. 1994, 126; Rompres 24 Aug. 1993; RFE/RL 24 Sept. 1993, 22). According to the president of the Hungarian Human Rights Foundation, the Council has been relatively ineffectual since the departure of the Hungarian members. With the withdrawal of the Roma representatives after ethnic violence in H-d-reni in late September, Romania's two largest minorities were boycotting the Council (ibid. 7 Jan. 1994, 126; HHRF 9 Feb. 1994).

Upon Romania's admission to the Council of Europe, the latter recommended that the government adopt a law on national minorities as well as sign the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (RFE/RL 5 Nov. 1993, 23; ibid., 24 Sept. 1993, 43; Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 7). At the time of admission, however, representatives of parties supporting and opposing the government either criticized the recommendations or expressed the view that they were not obligatory (BBC Summary 4 Oct. 1993; RFE/RL 24 Sept. 1993, 44).

5.1     The Situation of Roma

The January 1992 census puts the Roma population in Romania at about 425,000, a figure generally thought to be far too low. Roma organizations indicate that the real number is about two million (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 2; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 6; IRU 20-23 Apr. 1993, 6; Braham Mar. 1993, 14). Reports since 1991 agree that Roma face what amounts to systematic discrimination in Romanian society (United Nations International Covenant 5 Nov. 1993, 2; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 12-13; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 2; LCHR July 1993, 319; Braham Mar. 1993, 15, 17; Country Reports 1992 1993, 881-82; United Nations 5 Feb. 1993, 29). In reference to their origins in South Asia, a 1993 report describes the Roma as "Europe's untouchables" (Braham Mar. 1993, iii). Discrimination against the Roma is reflected in a variety of negative economic and social indicators in areas such as employment, income and education (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 2; Braham Mar. 1993, 15-16; IRU 20-23 Apr. 1993, 6; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1991, 93).

Since December 1989, there have been a number of "vigilante-style" attacks on Roma communities throughout Romania (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 13; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1991, 37-67). Out of the approximately 26 attacks, the majority took place before 1992, with four major incidents in that year and two in 1993 (IRU 20-23 Apr. 1993, 5; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1991, 37; LCHR July 1993, 319; FRR 4 Feb. 1994). While the number of attacks has diminished considerably since 1991, one of the most recent incidents, which took place in September 1993, has been the most violent, prompting the Paris-based International Federation of Human Rights to comment that, "In these circumstances it is not inappropriate to speak of veritable pogroms" (Reuters 1 Oct. 1993; RFE/RL 7 Jan. 1994, 126). On 20 September 1993, hundreds of Romanians and ethnic Hungarians rampaged through the village of H-d-reni (Mure- county) in revenge for the stabbing death of a Romanian. Three Roma were killed, 17 houses burned to the ground and about 170 Roma displaced in the attack (Amnesty International 11 Nov. 1993; ibid. 4 Oct. 1993; Congressional Record 4 Nov. 1993). On 5 October, local residents held a meeting to obtain signatures on a letter to President Iliescu demanding the Roma of the village "go back to where they came from" (APADOR 5-7 Oct. 1993, 3). On 2 November, a 25-member committee of villagers met and decided that 21 Roma families would have to leave within four days. Representatives from the local government and the county prefect's office were present at this meeting. On 8 November, a county official reportedly arrived in the village to arrange for the expulsion of the 21 families (Amnesty International 11 Nov. 1993). According to one observer, by February 1994, none of the Roma families had returned permanently to the village amidst threats and intimidation at the local level which had not been countered by the local, county or national government (Helsinki Watch 9 Feb. 1994; APADOR 10 Feb. 1994; ibid. 5-7 Oct. 1993, 3; Amnesty International 11 Nov. 1993).

Tensions between Roma and ethnic Romanians remain high as evidenced by three incidents in January 1994 where serious violence was averted. In one incident, in the municipality of Roata, police prevented villagers from carrying out their threat to kill several Roma and destroy their houses after a Roma killed a Romanian (FRR 4 Feb. 1994; APADOR 10 Feb. 1994).

Assistance from the national government, in the form of rebuilding houses and compensating damage, reportedly has been slow to arrive (United Nations 5 Feb. 1993, 34; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 13). There are reports of reconstruction of homes taking place in three of the villages in which vigilante violence against Roma occurred. The sources of financial assistance have been foreign NGOs, local governments and individuals (United Nations 5 Feb. 1993, 34; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 13; IRU 20-23 Apr. 1993, 5).

5.2      The Situation of Ethnic Hungarians

According to the 1992 census, there are about 1.6 million ethnic Hungarians in Romania representing 7.1 per cent of the population. Representatives of ethnic Hungarians claim that the true number is significantly higher. Most ethnic Hungarians live in the northwestern region of the country known as Transylvania. Hungarians form majorities in two counties, [Romania's administrative structure, similar to that of France, consists of administrative units variously referred to as counties, districts or departments.] Covasna (Kov zsna) and Harghita (Hargita) and represent about 50 per cent of the population in Mure- and Satu Mare (Szatm r). In addition, the city of Cluj (Kolozsv r) has a Hungarian minority of about 20 per cent (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 6-7, 57; Human Rights Watch Dec. 1993, 7; RFE/RL 26 Feb. 1993, 27; Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 7)).

In September 1993, Helsinki Watch published an extensive report on ethnic Hungarians in Romania. It provides detailed information on minority rights problems faced by ethnic Hungarians. The majority of those issues relate to language rights such as education in Hungarian (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 19-37). At the same time, a Council of Europe document stated:

Not all of the claims of the Hungarians and of other minorities are justified, but one can understand that they are concerned about some recent developments such as the loss of a university and high schools that once used to be purely Hungarian (Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 7).

As of September 1993, a new law on education remained in draft form despite having been submitted to parliament in June 1991. Political representatives of ethnic Hungarians were at that time unhappy with certain provisions of the draft law. For instance, it stipulates that history, geography and civic education can only be taught in Romanian, provisions that exist in the legislation on education currently in force (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 26-7, 35-7). Another issue of concern for ethnic Hungarians is what they see as a serious shortage of Hungarian-language teachers. In 1993, the government authorized the admission of 300 additional Hungarian-language students into Babe--Bolyai University in Cluj. This could improve the situation since graduates of Romanian universities can be licensed as teachers (ibid., 25-6, 31; HHRF 9 Feb. 1994).

Other issues related to the rights of ethnic Hungarians are covered elsewhere in this report. Notably, a number of problems experienced by ethnic Hungarians are most acute at the local level, particularly in the city of Cluj and as such will be covered in subsection 5.5 on local government.

5.3          Ethnic Violence and the Police

During many of the incidents of ethnic violence since 1989, police have been slow to intervene or have stood by as attacks occurred (Amnesty International 4 Oct. 1993; IRU 20-23 Apr. 1993, 5; United Nations 5 Feb. 1993, 34; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 14-15; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1991, 39-68 passim; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 13). The International Romani Union (IRU) noted an improvement in this regard beginning in mid-1992 (IRU 20-23 Apr. 1993, 5). The response by police to the two incidents involving Roma in 1993 was mixed. In May 1993, police intervened in Carpini- (Timi-oara county) to prevent violence from escalating (FRR 4 Feb. 1994). In H-d-reni, however, reports indicate that two police officers were present while two Roma men were lynched and that about 50 police had been dispatched to the village soon after the violence began. In an October 1993 report, the Romanian Helsinki Committee comments that it is "utterly impossible to understand" why the reinforced contingent of police could not prevent the destruction of 12 Roma houses (APADOR 5-7 Oct. 1993; Amnesty International 11 Nov. 1993). The limited information available on three less serious incidents in January 1994 also provides a mixed picture. Police managed to diffuse tensions in Roata and a locality in Ia-i county but were reportedly inciting villagers to violence in a village in Bac-u county (FRR 4 Feb. 1994; APADOR 10 Feb. 1994).

Reports indicate that in some cases police have taken part directly in violence against minorities (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 2; Braham Mar. 1993, 17; United Nations 5 Feb. 1993, 34). For instance, Amnesty International recently indicated that it continues to receive reports that Roma have been "subjected to torture and ill-treatment by police officers . . . apparently because of their ethnic background" (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 2). In April 1993, the IRU noted an increase in direct attacks by the police on Roma (IRU 20-23 Apr. 1993, 5). A documented example occurred in early July 1992. Two days after a brawl between a Roma and a military policeman in the Bucharest suburb of Pia-a Rahova, fellow members of the policeman's unit indiscriminately attacked Roma at the local market, injuring 13. Local police reportedly stood by during the attack (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 4-5).

5.3.1        Investigation and Prosecution of Incidents

Investigations and prosecutions of those responsible for vigilante-style violence against Roma and other ethnic minorities have proceeded slowly if at all (Helsinki Watch 9 Feb. 1994). Three reports since August 1993, including one by the human rights section of the Romanian Supreme Court, indicate that there have been no convictions of those responsible for attacks against Roma (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 13; Human Rights Watch Dec. 1993, 229; The New York Times 27 Oct. 1993). There have been few prosecutions of non-Roma involved in such violence (ibid.; United Nations 5 Feb. 1993, 34). Legal proceedings against individuals who took part in attacks on Roma in two villages, Mihail Kogalniceanu and Valeni Lapusului, were continuing in August 1993 (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 13-14; IRU 20-23 Apr. 1993, 5; Braham Mar. 1993, 22).

With respect to the violence in H-d-reni, by late October, the prosecutor in charge of the case stated that six or seven of the people who took part in the attack on Roma had been identified. He claimed, however, that since the whole village had taken part, it would not be just to charge only those few (The New York Times 27 Oct. 1993; APADOR 10 Feb. 1994). According to a representative of Helsinki Watch, this assertion has been used in the past by prosecuting authorities as a justification for inaction. In other instances, the Roma affected by the violence have dropped charges against their attackers in exchange for assistance in rebuilding damaged or destroyed property (Helsinki Watch 9 Feb. 1994). [In early February 1994, Helsinki Watch was in the process of preparing a report on the situation of Roma in Romania which will examine issues such as the investigation and prosecution of individuals and police involvement in violence against Roma.]

There have been few investigations into the role played by police during the above-mentioned incidents of ethnic violence (IRU 20-23 Apr. 1993, 5; Human Rights Watch Dec. 1993, 229; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 5; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 18). In December 1993, Helsinki Watch had "no information that any local officials or police officers had been prosecuted or disciplined" in relation to incidents documented by the organization in September 1991 (Human Rights Watch Dec. 1993, 229). As of September 1993, the military prosecutor was reportedly still investigating the July 1992 Pia-a Rahova incident (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 5; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 14). In the same month, Helsinki Watch indicated that an investigation into the conduct of police during ethnic violence in Tîrgu Mure- in March 1990 had still not taken place (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 18). After the violence in H-d-reni, the Mure- county police chief was dismissed and two police officers were disciplined for their "unprofessional" conduct during the incident (Human Rights Watch Dec. 1993, 229-30; APADOR 5-7 Oct. 1993, 5).

5.4                Ethnically-based Political Parties and Organizations

As a result of the September 1992 parliamentary elections, the government of Nicolae Vicaroiu is dependent on the support of three right- and left-wing nationalist parties to form a slim majority in both houses of parliament (Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 1; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 88; RFE/RL 24 Sept. 1993, 22; RFE/RL 30 Oct. 1992, 2). Although the government is composed of members of the SDPR (formerly FSDN) and independents, the minister of education, Liviu Maior, is reportedly a member of the nationalistic Vatra Rom-neasc- (VR) organization, while the deputy minister of culture, Mihai Ungheanu, is closely associated with the leader of the Romania Mare Party and reportedly belonged to a group of extreme nationalist supporters of the Ceausescu regime (RFE/RL 26 Feb. 1993, 30; ibid. 24 Sept. 1993, 18, 20-1).

The VR is a strongly nationalistic ethnic Romanian organization established in early 1990 and based in Tîrgu Mure-. Its membership increased sharply after the ethnic violence in that city in March 1990. Its founding members reportedly include 25 Romanian army officers and former members of the Securitate as well as 30 judges (APADO 15 July 1992, 2; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 86-7).

The Party of Romanian National Unity (PUNR) is the political wing of the VR (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 87). It is led by the controversial mayor of Cluj, Gheorghe Funar, who ran in the 1992 elections as a presidential candidate, finishing third with 10.9 per cent of the vote. During the campaign, Funar called the Hungarian minority subversive, expressed the opinion that ethnic Hungarians and Jews played a sinister role during the December 1989 revolution and threatened to jail the ethnic Hungarian bishop Laszlo Toke- if elected president (Helsinki Commission Nov. 1992, 1, 9, 15, 19; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 2). He has since called for the banning of the main ethnic Hungarian political party and the imprisonment of its leaders (RFE/RL 26 Feb. 1993, 27). In September 1993, one report mentioned a potential split within the party between Funar and some moderate members (ibid. 24 Sept. 1993, 22).

The Romania Mare (Greater Romania) Party (PRM) is led by Senator Corneliu Vadim Tudor, who has referred to Ceausescu as a "patriot" (RFE/RL 23-27 Aug. 1993a, 10; ibid. 8-12 Mar. 1993, 11). In November 1992, the PRM was reportedly labelled as anti-Semitic by Romania's chief rabbi, Moses Rosen (Rompres 20 Nov. 1992). In August 1993, the party accused government secretary-general Viorel Hrebenciuc of "high treason" over his support for bilingual signs in certain municipalities (RFE/RL 20-24 Sept. 1993, 12; ibid. 23-27 Aug. 1993a, 10). Mircea Musrat, a leading member of the party and the historical ideologue of the former Romanian Communist Party (RCP), strongly criticized recommendations made by the Council of Europe in association with Romania's admission to that organization (RFE/RL 24 Sept. 1993, 21, 44).

The Party of Socialist Labour (PSM), the successor to the RCP, is "a far left party with strong nationalist sentiments" (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 87). Its leader is Adrian Paunescu, a former "court poet" under Ceausescu. Paunescu is also a member of the senate, where the PSM and PRM have formed a coalition known as the Partida Nationala (National Bloc) (Helsinki Commission Nov. 1992, 20; RFE/RL 24 Sept. 1993, 21, 44).

The Hungarian Democratic Alliance of Romania (UDMR) was founded just after the December 1989 revolution and led until January 1993 by Géza Domokos. It is organized into local branches and by May 1991 claimed about 530,000 dues-paying members. It currently has 39 seats in parliament (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 91). In October 1992, the UDMR issued its "Cluj Declaration," calling for "communitarian autonomy" based on ethnic lines. The declaration was severely criticized by a broad political spectrum, including the opposition Democratic Convention. It also raised fears that the UDMR was becoming radicalized. Its January 1993 congress elected a known moderate, Bela Marko, as the new leader, but one analysis states that this did not represent a final defeat of the militant wing of the party (RFE/RL 26 Feb. 1993, 31-2, 36, 39).

5.5                Local Government

In some areas of Romania, local government has been an issue with respect to minorities. Since the February 1992 election of Funar as mayor, the city of Cluj has become "the most turbulent political battleground on the nationality issue" (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 12). PUNR mayors also control the county-capital of Baia Mare (Nagyb nya) and the town of Buz-u (Boza) (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 57).

Funar has implemented a number of decrees aimed at restricting the language and cultural rights of ethnic Hungarians in the city. All conferences in the city must have the approval of city hall, a measure that violates national law (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 63, 65; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 12; RFE/RL 26 Feb. 1993, 27). The mayor has also prohibited the display of signs or other advertising, such as posters, in languages other than Romanian (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 12; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 1-2; RFE/RL 26 Feb. 1993, 29; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 41-2, 66-7). In June 1992, Funar was behind the dismissal of the principal of Brassai S muel Lyceum, who is also an ethnic Hungarian city councillor in Cluj. One of the reasons for his dismissal was reportedly that he had conducted a meeting in Hungarian (ibid., 34; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 1-2).

Beginning in November 1992, Funar promulgated additional measures. The city government instructed local television and radio stations to use only Romanian place names in their programming and renamed streets in the city after important, sometimes highly controversial, Romanian historical figures. Ethnic Hungarians were infuriated when he ordered that a plaque with an overtly nationalistic statement be placed on a historic statue of M ty s Corvinus, a Hungarian king considered by Transylvanian Hungarians to be a symbolic bridge between them and Romanians in the region (RFE/RL 26 Feb. 1993, 28-9, 31; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 39-41, 76-7).

Tensions between ethnic Hungarians and Romanians have also focused on the issue of county prefects, who are appointed by the prime minister to ensure that the activities of municipal governments are within the bounds of national law. Prefects have the power to restrain or dismiss officials, including mayors, who are acting contrary to the law, and municipal governments must consult with prefects before passing regulations that relate to national law (RFE/RL 26 Feb. 1993, 33; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 58; United Nations 5 Feb. 1993, 23).

The mayor of Cluj has generally ignored the county prefect, issuing decrees that violate national law (RFE/RL 8-12 Feb. 1993, 15; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 45, 66; RFE/RL 26 Feb. 1993, 27). In December 1992, a Romanian human rights group asked the prime minister to dismiss Funar for his actions thus far (ibid., 30). The government's reluctance to take action on the request has been linked to the importance of PUNR's support in parliament. The same month, the prefect for Cluj county was re-appointed despite his passivity in dealing with Funar (ibid., 33; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 12).

In March 1993, the national government dismissed the joint Hungarian/Romanian prefects in Covasna and Harghita counties, replacing them with one Romanian prefect for each county (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 58-60; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 2). As a result, there are no ethnic Hungarian prefects and the move was therefore "seen by many as discrimination against the Hungarian minority and an effort to exert some political control over the counties where Hungarians comprise a majority" (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 59-60). Compounding the situation, the new prefect for Covasna, Adrian Vlad Casuneanu, is reportedly associated with Vatra Rom-neasc- (RFE/RL 26 Feb. 1993, 32).

5.6                Minority Rights and the Media

The Hungarian-language print media has expanded considerably in post-communist Romania (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 46-7). At the same time, Hungarian-language television programming has been restricted in terms of air time and content, and has been moved to a channel which does not reach regions with relatively large ethnic Hungarian populations (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 11; Helsinki Watch Nov. 1993, 14, 16; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 47-50).

Ethnic Hungarian representatives denounced the May 1992 Audio-Visual Law which set up a national regulatory council without adequate representation of ethnic minorities. In January 1993, the council revoked the licence of an Oradea radio station, allegedly because it had been too sympathetic to minority concerns. The May 1992 law also prohibits separatist statements or those that promote racial or religious "hatred," and some ethnic Hungarians are concerned that this provision will be used to ban programmes that deal with issues of cultural or political autonomy (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 51-2; Helsinki Watch Nov. 1993, 16, 52-3; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 11).

Enhanced media freedom has also resulted in a proliferation of publications that are "virulently anti-Hungarian and anti-Semitic in tone" (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 85). While many have a relatively small circulation, they include Romania Mare, one of the country's highest circulation newspapers (Uncaptive Minds Summer 1993, 91, 93; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 85). Founded in mid-1990, it is edited by the leader of the PRM (RFE/RL 24 Sept. 1993, 21; Uncaptive Minds Summer 1993, 93-4). Helsinki Watch describes Romania Mare as "one of the most notorious of the extremist journals," while Liviu Man, the editor of an independent Romanian weekly, has noted the "ferociousness of its anti-minority stance" (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 85; Uncaptive Minds Summer 1993, 93; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 14).

Other newspapers and magazines reported to be nationalistic, anti-minority and/or anti-Semitic in tone are Europa, Phoenix, Cuvintul Liber, Totusi iubirea and Vremea (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 14; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 88; APADO 15 July 1992, 10). Europa was founded in 1990 and is published by a company which is said to be owned by ex-Securitate officers. It is described as "more anti-Semitic than anti-Hungarian." For instance, it has called for the deportation of Romania's chief rabbi and blames "Jewish KGB" agents for repression in Romania from 1948 to 1965 (Uncaptive Minds Summer 1993, 94).

In 1992, representatives of the Jewish community in Romania filed complaints against Romania Mare and Europa. An investigation by the attorney general subsequently found that the specific articles mentioned in the complaints were "polemical in character" but did not attack "the Jewish community as a whole" (Council of Europe 20 Sept. 1993, 15). In April 1993, an investigation of three editors of Europa on charges of "nationalistic and chauvinistic propaganda" was continuing (ibid.). In November 1993, Romania's chief rabbi indicated that the Federation of Jewish Communities in Romania would be filing requests for investigations against a number of extremist publications (RFE/RL 8-12 Nov. 1993, 19).

Representatives of the Hungarian and Roma minorities have been critical of how their constituents are portrayed in media reports. The Lawyers' Committee for Human Rights indicates that "discrimination against Roma is probably aggravated by defamatory campaigns in the mass media" (LCHR July 1993, 319), while the United Nations Human Rights Committee recommended in November 1993 that the government do more to "counter negative attitudes in the media which are likely to reinforce racist attitudes among the public, particularly in relation to the Roma" (United Nations International Covenant 5 Nov. 1993, 3; Helsinki Watch Sept. 1991, 86-8). Some Romanian print media regularly accuse ethnic Hungarians of preparing for armed conflict (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 86).

Romania's main television station, state-controlled RTV, has been accused of inflaming ethnic tensions. Since January 1993, the director of RTV has been Paul Everac, a controversial figure known for his verbal attacks on minorities and Jews (Helsinki Watch Sept. 1993, 15, 54; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 11-12).

5.7           Treatment of Homosexuals

Consensual sexual relations between adults of the same sex is a criminal offence in Romania under Article 200 of the Criminal Code. Sentences for convictions range from one to five years. Despite strong international criticism of Article 200, the Romanian Senate recommended, in October 1993, that the maximum penalty for convictions be increased (Docket Nov. 1993, 6; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 15; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 5).

A number of people have been imprisoned under Article 200. As of December 1993, about 60 people were serving such prison sentences (Reuters 21 Dec. 1993; Docket Nov. 1993, 6; Amnesty International Sept. 1993, 9-11). However, gay rights activists viewed a June 1993 court decision in Timi-oara that handed down suspended sentences to a gay couple as a significant victory (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 16; Docket Nov. 1993, 6). The following month, a court in -ibiu suspended proceedings in an Article 200 case and asked the Constitutional Court to rule on whether the law violates the constitution because it is contrary to international human rights agreements to which Romania is party. As of November 1993, no date had been set for a hearing (IHRLG Aug. 1993, 16; Docket Nov. 1993, 6).

Article 200 is in the process of being amended, along with other provisions of the Criminal Code. As of February 1994, the wording of Article 200 as approved by the Senate reportedly provided for one to four years imprisonment for "same sex relations, if resulting in a public scandal" (APADOR 10 Feb. 1993). At that time, observers indicated that the draft did not include a clearer definition of what constitutes a "public scandal" (ibid.; CEELI 10 Feb. 1994).

6.   FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS

From 1990 until May 1993, about 225,000 persons left Romania to apply for asylum in Germany. According to one report, by the end of 1992, 30,000 had their applications for refugee status rejected by German authorities (BBC Summary 27 May 1993; Country Reports 1992 1993, 880).

Germany and Romania signed an agreement on 24 September 1992 under which the citizens of one country who are illegally in the other country are to be returned to their country of origin. The agreement came into force, and, according to an April 1993 study by the International Romani Union (IRU), by the end of March 1993, about 6,500 Romanian citizens had been returned (IRU 20-23 Apr. 1993, 1; Bundesgesetzblatt 13 Mar. 1993, 221).

While reports have referred to the accord as a "Gypsy agreement," the percentage of returnees who are of Roma origin is the subject of disagreement. There are estimates as high as 70 per cent; however, the IRU study, which involved monitoring returnees at Bucharest airport, put the number at 15 per cent (LCHR July 1993, 319; IRU 20-23 Apr. 1993, 1-2; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 14-5).

Available reports do not provide information on the treatment of returnees by the Romanian authorities. The accord does not deal with assistance programmes for them, however, under a separate "return support and reintegration programme," the German government had, by May 1993, earmarked DM 30 million to set up three vocational training centres for Romanian citizens being returned from Germany (LCHR July 1993, 319; BBC Summary 27 May 1993; IHRLG Aug. 1993, 15).

The German-Romanian agreement specifically states that the obligations of both countries under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its associated 1967 Protocol remain unaffected (Bundesgesetzblatt 13 Mar. 1993, 221). Nevertheless, of the 18 returnees interviewed by IRU whose stories were included in its April 1993 report, six indicated that they had been effectively denied the right to apply for asylum, were briefly detained and then returned to Romania. German police reportedly contravened the agreement in other ways as well, for instance, by telling returnees that money being confiscated was to pay for their return airfare. The agreement specifically states that the costs of return are to be borne by the deporting country (IRU 20-23 April 1993, Annex II; Bundesgesetzblatt 13 Mar. 1993, 221).

Developments along the political front, particularly with respect to the February 1994 coalition agreement between the ruling SDPR and its parliamentary allies, are likely to have an impact on human rights in the coming year. According a representative of Helsinki Watch, the agreement "bodes badly for the future, especially with respect to minority rights" (Helsinki Watch 14 Feb. 1994). In mid-February, APADOR had what it termed "reliable information" that the United States was exerting diplomatic pressure on the government not to go through with the coalition, scheduled to be formed by 1 March (APADOR 14 Feb. 1994).

REFERENCES

Adevarul [Bucharest, in Romanian]. 8 April 1993. "Parliament Discusses SRI Budget." (FBIS-EEU-93-071 15 Apr. 1993, p. 31)

Amnesty International. 11 November 1993. Urgent Action. (AI Index: EUR 39/14/93). "The Roma Community of H-d-reni."

Amnesty International. November 1993. Amnesty International's Concerns at the 50th Session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. (AI Index: IOR 41/38/93). London: Amnesty International.

Amnesty International. 4 October 1993. "Romania: Police Fail to Protect Three Roma from Public Lynching." (AI Index: EUR 39/WU 01/93).

Amnesty International. September 1993. Romania: Update to Amnesty International's Concerns (AI Index: EUR 39/13/93). London: Amnesty International.

Amnesty International. November 1992. Amnesty International's Concerns at the 49th session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. (AI Index: IOR 41/10/92). London: Amnesty International.

APADOR (Romanian Helsinki Committee), Bucharest. 14 February 1994. Telephone interview with representative.

APADOR (Romanian Helsinki Committee), Bucharest. 10 February 1994. Information faxed to DIRB in response to questions submitted.

APADOR (Romanian Helsinki Committee), Bucharest. 5-7 October 1993. "Report on the APADOR-CH Fact-finding Mission to H-d-reni and Tîrgu Mure-."

Association for the Defense of Human Rights (APADO), Bra-ov. 15 July 1992. "Judicial and Police Electoral Abuses in Mures County, Romania."

BBC Summary of World Broadcasts. 4 February 1994. "Ruling SDPR Signs Coalition Accord with Romanian National Unity Party." (NEXIS)

BBC Summary of World Broadcasts. 4 October 1993. "Hungarian Radio: Government Parties Dismiss Minority Clauses as Not Obligatory." (NEXIS)

BBC Summary of World Broadcasts. 27 May 1993. "Germany Opens Training Centre in Romania for Returning Refugees." (NEXIS)

Braham, Mark. March 1993. The Untouchables: A Survey of the Roma People of Central and Eastern Europe. Geneva: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Bundesgesetzblatt [Bonn]. 13 March 1993. No. 8. "Bekanntmachung der Vereinbarung und des Protokolls zur Durchführung der Vereinbarung zwischen dem Bundesminister des Innern der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und dem Innenministerium von Rumänien über die Rückübernahme von deutschen und rumänischen Staatsangehörigen." (Unofficial translation)

Central and East Europe Law Initiative (CEELI), Bucharest. 10 February 1994. Telephone interview with representative.

Congressional Record [Washington]. 4 November 1993. "Combating Ethnic Intolerance in Romania."

Council of Europe. 20 September 1993. (ADOC6918) "Opinion on the Application by Romania for Membership in the Council of Europe."

Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1992. 1993. US Department of State. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.

Docket [Washington]. November 1993. Vol. 8, No. 2. Edwin Recosh. "Romania: Gay Rights Out of the Closet."

Evenimentul Zilei [Bucharest, in Romanian]. 24 June 1993. "Members of Control Commission over SRI Listed." (FBIS-EEU-93-125 1 July 1993, p. 25)

Federation of Romanies of Romania (FRR), Bucharest. 4 February 1994. Telephone interview with representative.

The Guardian [Manchester]. 7 January 1994. Henriette Shroder. "Ghost Busted." (NEXIS)

Helsinki Commission (US Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe). November 1992. Presidential and Parliamentary Elections in Romania. Washington: Helsinki Commission.

Helsinki Commission (US Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe). 19 March 1992. Local Elections in Romania. Washington: Helsinki Commission.

Helsinki Watch, New York. 14 February 1994. Telephone interview with representative.

Helsinki Watch, New York. 9 February 1994. Telephone interview with representative.

Helsinki Watch, New York. 8 February 1994. Information faxed to DIRB by representative.

Helsinki Watch, New York. November 1993. News from Helsinki Watch. Vol. 5, No. 21. "Threats to Press Freedoms."

Helsinki Watch, New York. September 1993. Struggling for Ethnic Identity: Ethnic Hungarians in Post-Ceausescu Romania. New York: Human Rights Watch.

Helsinki Watch, New York. January 1993. News from Helsinki Watch. Vol. 5, No. 2. "Lockups in Romania."

Helsinki Watch, New York. September 1991. Destroying Ethnic Identity: The Gypsies of Romania. New York: Human Rights Watch.

Human Rights Law Journal [Kehl am Rhein]. 1993. Vol. 14, No. 3-4. Jochen A. Frohwein. "Report on the Visit to Romania."

Human Rights Watch. December 1993. Human Rights Watch World Report 1994. New York: Human Rights Watch.

Hungarian Human Rights Foundation (HHRF), New York. 9 February 1994. Telephone interview with president.

International Human Rights Law Group (IHRLG), Washington, DC. 27 January 1994. Telephone interview with representative.

International Human Rights Law Group (IHRLG), Washington, DC. August 1993. "Most-Favoured Nation (MFN) Trade Status for Romania: The Current Human Rights Situation."

International Romani Union (IRU). 20-23 April 1993. "Displaced Romanies (Gypsies) Within the New Europe." Draft report presented to the CSCE Human [Dimensions] Seminar, Warsaw.

Lawyers Committee for Human Rights (LCHR). July 1993. Critique: Review of the U.S. Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1992. New York: Lawyers Committee for Human Rights.

Monitorul Oficial [Bucharest]. 27 September 1991. Vol. 3, No. 196. "Lege pentru sanc-ionarea faptelor de inc-lcare a unor norme de convie-uire social-, a ordinii -i lini-tii publice."

Monitorul Oficial [Bucharest]. 25 September 1991. Vol. 3, No. 192. "Lege privind organizarea -t desf--urarea adun-rilor publica."

The New York Times. 13 December 1993. Jane Perlez. "A Newspaper with Zing Makes Romania Smile." (NEXIS)

The New York Times. 30 November 1993. Jane Perlez. "A Suitably Opaque Talk with Romania's Top Spy."

The New York Times. 27 October 1993. Henry Kamm. "Hadareni Journal: Death Is a Neighbor, and the Gypsies Are All Terrified." (NEXIS)

The New York Times. 13 June 1993. David Binder. "Police Were Fewer Than Romanians Feared." (NEXIS)

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 7 January 1994. RFE/RL Research Report. Vol. 3, No. 1. Michael Shafir and Dan Ionescu. "Romania: A Crucially Uneventful Year."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 8-12 November 1993. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 2, No. 46. "Romanian Chief Rabbi Demands Steps Against Anti-Semitism."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 5 November 1993. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 2, No. 44. Dan Ionescu. "Romania Admitted to the Council of Europe."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 4-8 October 1993. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 2, No. 41. "Romanian Intelligence Director Reconfirmed."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 24 September 1993. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 2, No. 38. Michael Shafir. "Romanian Prime Minister Announces Cabinet Changes."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 20-24 September 1993. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 2, No. 39. "Ethnic Violence Kills Four in Romania."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 17 September 1993. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 2, No. 37. Dan Ionescu. "Strike Wave in Romania."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 30 August-3 September 1993. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 2, No. 36. "Magyars Pull Out of Romania's Minorities' Council."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 27 August 1993. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 2, No. 34. Dan Ionescu. "Has Romania's Ruling Party Become Stronger or Weaker?"

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 23-27 August 1993a. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 2, No. 35. "Bilingual Road Signs Controversy in Romania."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 23-27 August 1993b. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 2, No. 35. "Romanian Nationalists Warn Iliescu over Road Signs."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 23 July 1993. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 2, No. 30. "Romanian Corruption Scandal Implicates Top Officials."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 2 July 1993. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 2, No. 27. Michael Shafir. "Romania: The Rechristening of the National Salvation Front."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 11 June 1993. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 2, No. 24. Michael Shafir. "Minorities Council Raises Questions."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 8-12 March 1993. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 2, No. 12. "Greater Romania Party Holds First Congress."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 26 February 1993. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 2, No. 9. Tom Gallagher. "Ethnic Tension in Cluj."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 8-12 February 1993. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 2, No. 8. "Romanian Government on Funar."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 18-22 January 1993. RFE/RL News Briefs. Vol. 2, No. 5. "Romanian Opposition Says Its Offices Bugged."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 27 November 1992. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 1, No. 47. Michael Shafir. "Romania's New Government."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 30 October 1992. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 1, No. 43. Michael Shafir. "Romania's Elections: Why the Democratic Convention Lost."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 10 July 1992. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 1, No. 28. "Weekly Review."

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 31 January 1992. RFE/RL Research Report [Munich]. Vol. 1, No. 5. "Weekly Review."

Radio Romania Network [Bucharest, in Romanian]. 22 October 1993. "Government Statement on U.S. Ratification of Accord." (FBIS-EEU-93-204 25 Oct. 1993, p. 20)

Radio Romania Network [Bucharest, in Romanian]. 12 October 1993. "Parliament Appoints Magureanu as SRI Director." (FBIS-EEU-93-196 13 Oct. 1993, p. 22)

Radio Romania Network [Bucharest, in Romanian]. 24 June 1993. "Control Panel over SRI Discussed." (FBIS-EEU-93-123 29 June 1993, p. 42)

Recosh, Edwin. Project attorney with the International Human Rights Law Group, Washington. 17 January 1994. Telephone interview.

Reuters. 21 December 1993. "Amnesty International Urges Freedom for Romanian Gays." (NEXIS)

Reuters. 12 November 1993. "Amnesty Accuses Romania of Expelling Gypsies." (NEXIS)

Reuters. 25 October 1993. Adrian Dascalu. "Romanian Gypsies Fall Victim to Race Attacks." (NEXIS)

Reuters. 5 October 1993. "Romanian Defector Says Securitate Still Active." (NEXIS)

Reuters. 1 October 1993. "Rights Group Says Romanian Gypsies Victims of Pogrom." (NEXIS)

Reuters. 13 September 1993. Peter Humphrey. "Romanian Spy Chief Fails to Lift Veil of Secrecy." (NEXIS)

The Reuters European Business Report. 2 February 1994. Peter Humphrey. "Romania to Get Left-Nationalist Coalition in March." (NEXIS)

Romania Libera [Bucharest, in Romanian]. 15 September 1993. "Magureanu Interviewed on SRI Report." (FBIS-EEU-93-181 21 Sept. 1993, p. 29-31)

Romania Libera [Bucharest, in Romanian]. 31 August 1993. "SRI Admits Tapping Telephone Conversations." (FBIS-EEU-93-170 3 Sept. 1993, p. 18)

Rompres [Bucharest, in English]. 24 August 1993. "Dailies View Economic Situation, Bilingual Issue." (FBIS-EEU-93-163 25 Aug. 1993, p. 27)

Rompres [Bucharest, in English]. 20 November 1992. "PRM Head Denies Anti-Semitism Charges." (FBIS-EEU-92-226 23 Nov. 1992, p. 25)

SIRDO (Romanian Independent Society of Human Rights). 16 February 1993. Abuses, Corruption or Incompetence of the Justice, Prosecutor's Office and Police of Suceava District. Bucharest: SIRDO.

Uncaptive Minds [New York]. Summer 1993. Vol. 6, No. 2. Liviu Man. "The Independent Press in Romania: Against the Grain."

United Nations Economic and Social Council. 5 February 1993. (E/CN.4/1993/40). "Situation of Human Rights in Romania."

United Nations Economic and Social Council. 3 January 1992. (E/CN.4/1992/28). "Situation of Human Rights in Romania."

United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 5 November 1993. (CCPR/C/79/Add.30). "Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties under Article 40 of the Covenant" (Romania).

Weber, Renate. Representative of the Romanian Helsinki Committee. 7 February 1994. Telephone interview.

 

This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.