Borderline policy
Civitas, 25 August 2010
France’s decision to expel its Roma minority has reignited debate on who should decide citizens’ right to free movement: ‘Should it be the host state or the EU?’ asks Natalie Hamill.
In July, French President, Nicholas Sarkozy, pledged to dismantle at least 300 Roma camps and to ‘repatriate’ 700 individuals of Roma ethnicity because, he said, they were ‘sources of illegal trafficking, profoundly shocking living standards, exploitation of children for begging, prostitution and crime’.
The initial Roma evictions will be voluntary – with adults being given €300 (and an additional €100 for each child) to return to their original member state (in most cases Romania). However, Romania has said that, unless its citizens have committed a crime, they are EU nationals and cannot be prevented from leaving Romania again.
Sarkozy’s resolution has garnered mixed responses. Some have said it raises questions on the future of the free movement of EU citizens, whilst others go further, and argue it could potentially set a racist precedence that allows the targeting of specific minority groups. For example, France’s League of Human Rights worries that Sarkozy is using the Roma as scapegoats to improve his popularity in turbulent political times.
However, the Italian interior minister, Roberto Maroni, spoke out in support of Sarkozy’s decision; his only criticism was that the move does not go far enough. In the Italian newspaper, Corriere della Sera, Mr Maroni suggested EU member states should be allowed to expel other member state nationals ‘who violate rules on requirements for living in another member state: a minimum level of income, adequate housing and not being a burden on the social welfare system of the country hosting them’ . The minister, from the Northern League Party, has asked for immigration to play a key role in the September EU Summit.
So far, the EU has remained eerily quiet on this issue. Uncertainty rages as to whether the expulsion of citizens should be a matter for national governments to decide or if it should be tackled at the EU level. Its reluctance to take a clear stance appears to give member states the right to decide which EU nationals can remain within their borders… And yet the EU does seem uncomfortable with France’s decision. The Belgium Government, which currently holds the rotating 6-month EU Presidency, is considering rejecting France’s request for a ministerial meeting if it is to be dominated by the ‘Roma question’ .
France’s policy also calls into question the future of the Schengen Agreement. The idea of expelling EU nationals goes against the EU’s ideals of creating an ‘ever closer union’, including the freedom of movement of peoples. The newest EU members, Bulgaria and Romania, may be negotiating their entry to the Schengen zone, but this is not a promising start.
Immigration is a political hot potato, even more so in times of economic crisis; a delay in the EU’s response can only encourage a blurring of legal lines. A short while ago Italy proposed a similar move to France’s Roma expulsion, but it was quickly quashed by the EU – instead the Italian Government was allowed to fingerprint the Roma population. Two years, and one painful economic recession later, the EU has simply cautioned France to act within the realms of ‘international law’.
Many member states’ struggle to cope with immigration has been worsened by the economic crisis. To avoid minorities being singled out as scapegoats, the EU should clarify that its values apply to all EU citizens, and thereby encourage national governments to adopt fair policies on immigration.