The Discrimination and the Violation of Minority Rights of the Hungarian Community in Romania 2018 by Mikó Imre Association for the Protection of Minority Rights

founded by UDMR | RMDSZ | DAHR

2018

REPORT DISCRIMINATION AND THE VIOLATION OF MINORITY RIGHTS OF THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY IN ROMANIA ON THE

MIKÃ&#x201C; IMRE MINORITY RIGHTS LEGAL SERVICES ASSISTANCE founded by UDMR/RMDSZ/DAHR

REPORT DISCRIMINATION AND THE VIOLATION OF MINORITY RIGHTS OF THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY IN ROMANIA ON THE

CONTENT 1. VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS.......................................................................................................... 7 1.1. Bilingualism in public institutions..............................................................................................................12 1.2. Bilingualism in the judiciary...................................................................................................................13 1.3 Bilingual place name signs....................................................................................................................14 1.4. Bilingual street signs...................................................................................................................................15 1.5. Town hall inscriptions.................................................................................................................................16 1.6. Safety measures............................................................................................................................................18 1.7. Linguistic rights of inmates.....................................................................................................................18 1.8. Driving test in Hungarian.........................................................................................................................19 2. ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION..............................................................................................................................20 2.1. Discrimination in the educational system..................................................................................20 2.1.1. Lack of textbooks for pupils in the minority education system...................20 2.1.2. Teaching Romanian to pupils belonging to minorities........................................21 2.1.3. Hungarian pupils severely discriminated at the English language contest.......................................................................................... 23 2.1.4. Unjust evaluation of Hungarian pupils at the Baccalaureate exam......... 23 2.1.5. The University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology of Târgu Mureș /Marosvásárhely.............................................. 25 2.1.6. Banning the textbook on “The History of Szeklers”..............................................26 2.2. Discrimination in the healthcare system.................................................................................... 27 2.3. Political attacks against the Hungarian community.......................................................... 28 2.4. The “Beke-case”, terrorism charges under dubious circumstances.................... 29 2.5. Szekler Tourism Association................................................................................................................30 3. THE PERSECUTION OF HUNGARIAN SYMBOLS.......................................................................... 32 3.1. Banning the Szekler flag................................................................................................................................ 32 3.2. Banning the administrative flags containing regional symbols................................ 34 3.3. The persecution of the Hungarian flag....................................................................................... 34 4. HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY..... 37 4.1. Political unwillingness to update minority rights.................................................................. 37 4.2. The responsibility of political leaders in combatting hate speech......................... 38 4.3. Incitement to hatred against the Hungarian community..............................................40 4.4. Anti-Hungarian discourse and disinformation in the media....................................... 42 4.5. Hate speech on social media.............................................................................................................46 4.6. Hate speech and violence in sports..............................................................................................48 5. THE RESTITUTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY.....................................................................................50 6. STATISTICS ON THE ACTIVITY OF THE MIKÓ IMRE MINORITY RIGHTS LEGAL SERVICES ASSISTANCE........................................................................ 52 Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................................ 54

1 VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

Several aspects regarding the use of minority languages, mostly in the public administration and the judicial system continue to negatively affect persons belonging to national minorities, giving way to discrimination. The existing legal framework is often incoherent, and it does not provide adequate mechanisms for implementation and monitoring.

1.1. BILINGUALISM IN PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS The legislative framework on linguistic rights for national minorities is by no means coherent, various provisions are spread across a range of laws, there being no comprehensive law on minority language use. Moreover, while laws are generally permissive, concrete norms aimed at implementation, monitoring and follow-up are often lacking. There is a general lack of accountability when it comes to enforcing legal provisions regarding minority rights, which needs to be addressed.

These images depict the notice boards of mayors’ offices in two villages where the percentage of Hungarians exceeds 80%. However, no public information is available in Hungarian.

diction, as well as the deconcentrated public services (offices/institutions belonging to the various ministries) must ensure the right of national minorities to use their mother tongue in their dealings with these institutions. On the level of municipalities, this is relevant in the case of 322 municipalities, while on a county level this is relevant in a total of 6 counties in Romania, where the Hungarian population exceeds the required threshold of 20%: Covasna, Harghita, Mureș, Bihor, Satu Mare and Sălaj.

Given that there has been no improvement regarding the situation of linguistic rights for national minorities within the public administration for several years, the legislation that applies in these cases continues to be Law No. 215 of 2001 on the Local Public Administration. This stipulates that in the administrative territorial units - be these a municipality or a county - in which a national minority constitutes at least 20% of the total population, the authorities of the local public administration, other public institutions under their juris-

In practice this means – among other things – the obligation to make public information available in Hungarian as well. However, as shown in the image above, official documents and information of public interest are mostly available exclusively in Romanian. We have also looked at the websites of all institutions 7

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

belonging to the local and county level public administrations in these six counties, as well as those of the deconcentrated public services and found that 73.89% of these had no information in Hungarian at all, 2.29% had some information available in Hungarian, and only 23.82% had a complete page in Hungarian as well. The situation is the worst in Sălaj county (with a 23% Hungarian population), where only 5.92% of the websites were translated into Hungarian, while the most websites available in Hungarian are the pages of the institutions in Harghita county (where Hungarians make up more than 85% of the population), but

Code, was initially adopted by Parliament in the summer of 2018, then contested by opposition parties, as well as the President, and it was eventually declared unconstitutional in its entirety by the Constitutional Court, based on procedural grounds. These are not singular cases. There seems to be a systematic refusal to update linguistic rights in Romania, which has the potential of further eroding the trust between minority communities and the state. As mentioned above, in the summer of 2018 a new Administrative Code was passed in Parliament and was waiting to be signed

The low percentage of Hungarian content on the websites of the institutions belonging to the local and county level public administrations, as well as those of the deconcentrated public services shows the extent to which public information is still largely unavailable in Hungarian.

even there, pages that have a full Hungarian content as well constitute merely 48.61% of the total websites of public institutions.

by President Klaus Iohannis, who then released a 100-page document, in which he raised concerns regarding several provisions in the respective code. Among other things, the President also questioned the legality of some of the articles relating to the use of the mother tongue by national minorities.

Recent years, but especially the last two years have been marked by so far failed attempts to update linguistic rights for national minorities in Romania. One such initiative was blocked in Parliament in 2017, while another one, an attempt to update the Administrative

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

Repeatedly invoking the fact that the only official language in the country is Romanian,

the President argued against such linguistic rights as bilingual street signs, for instance. This despite the fact that the Council of Europe regularly mentions the use of bilingual street signs in its recommendations for Romania. Iohannis also challenged a provision in the new code which said that in an administrative unit with a significant minority community, the officials working in public institutions are required to speak the language of that minority. Moreover, the proposed legislation included an article expressly stating that in the municipalities where a minority community does not reach the threshold of 20%, and therefore the application of the above-mentioned linguistic rights and others is not required by law, the implementation of these provisions is nonetheless not prohibited. This clarification was very important given that, over the years, Romanian authorities have frequently opposed local council resolutions that aimed to extend linguistic rights, precisely on the grounds that they are not required by law. This is absurd, by any standards, since it contradicts the basic principles of the legal system.

In the past few years the Constitutional Court of Romania declared several pieces of legislation that would have led to the updating of minority rights to be unconstitutional.

in various segments of wider society, most notably in the activities of certain nationalist organisations, like the Civic Association for Dignity in Europe, led by Dan Tanasă, a widely known anti-Hungarian nationalist provocateur, who has made it his mission to fight against the use of the Hungarian language in and by public institutions, as well as the use of Hungarian symbols. (We will discuss the latter aspect in more detail in Chapter 3) Last year, for instance, he sued the Covasna County Council for using a trilingual (Romanian, Hungarian and English) letterhead, a motion that the court dismissed in October.

Not only did the President position himself firmly against the broadening of linguistic rights for minorities, but absurdly, he also questioned already existing practices that have been in place for 17 years. In his reasoning he raised concerns over a widespread proceeding in areas where the majority of the population is Hungarian, namely the fact that local council meetings can be conducted in the language of a minority, with simultaneous interpretation being provided in Romanian. As stated above, this new Administrative Code was eventually declared unconstitutional in its entirety by the Constitutional Court, which invoked procedural objections, basically disputing the process through which the respective code was adopted in the two chambers of Parliament, rather than the issues relating to the specific content of the law.

The absurd and vicious fight of Dan Tanasă against linguistic rights for minorities resulted in several other lawsuits targeting Hungarian inscriptions. After being sued by Tanasă’s organisation, the Civic Association for Dignity in Europe, in October the mayor’s office of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy had to take down an inscription featuring the (old) name of the school in Hungarian (“Reformá-

The general unwillingness of some leading Romanian politicians to update the linguistic rights of national minorities is also reflected

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

tus Székely Mikó Kollégium”) located at the entrance, even though there was also an official bilingual sign of the school’s name, as required by the law. It was subsequently revealed by the mayor that Tanasă also initiated a suit regarding an inscription of the name of the school written in Hungarian in huge block letters on its façade. However, this inscription was written following the renovation of the school several years ago, and it was meant to restore the original inscription that existed in the same place, as can be seen on old pictures. Therefore, this does not count as an official inscription, but rather as being an original, decorative element of an old monument.

After the sign was taken down, the students spelled the name of the school in big block letters put up on the windows of their classrooms, as a sign of protest.

Observations and recommendations:

Another bilingual inscription that Tanasă and his organisation have attacked in the past year is written on a commemorative plaque with a bronze relief of István Széchenyi, displayed on the side of the community centre in the town of Covasna/Kovászna. The bilingual text itself is a brief description of Széchenyi. Tanasă sued the mayor of the town for the absurd reason that - on the plaque – part of the Hungarian text was written above the Romanian one. In a final ruling, the courts deemed that Tanasă’s claims were unsubstantiated. itten on a commemorative plaque with a bronze relief of István Széchenyi, displayed on the side of the community centre in the town of Covasna/Kovászna. The bilingual text itself is a brief description of Széchenyi. Tanasă sued the mayor of the town for the absurd reason that - on the plaque – part of the Hungarian text was written above the Romanian one. In a final ruling, the courts deemed that Tanasă’s claims were unsubstantiated.

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

Following the lawsuit initiated by Dan Tanasă the three-dimensional inscription of the old name of this historic Hungarian school had to be taken down, despite the fact there was also an official bilingual sign (picture on the bottom), as required by law.

The reason why these linguistic rights are not applied in practice, although the obligation is stipulated in the national legislation, is due to the fact that there are currently no mechanisms that ensure their implementation. The aforementioned Law No. 215 of 2001 does not provide the possibility to fine non-compliant local administrations and public institutions. Therefore, both the legislative and the executive bodies of the state should commit, first and foremost, to a more comprehensive approach toward ensuring the use of minority languages in relations with the public administration. To this end, linguistic rights should be set within a legislative framework that specifies concrete measures for implementation, while also ensuring that adequate sanctioning mechanisms are stipulated within the relevant laws on the implementation of linguistic rights for national minorities. Moreover, further positive measures need to be adopted in order to ensure the use of minority languages, most importantly by allocating the necessary human and financial resources needed for implementation. It is also relevant that, when monitoring the situation of the rights of national minorities, international organisations put particular emphasis on studies and data regarding implementation, considering that states often stop at codifying minority rights, including linguistic rights in laws, while doing little to ensure proper application.

Tănasă and his organisation also targeted this bilingual plaque

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

1.3. BILINGUAL PLACE NAME SIGNS

1.2. BILINGUALISM IN THE JUDICIARY The use of minority languages within the Romanian judicial system continues to be problematic, which negatively affects the access to fair trial for citizens belonging to a national minority. This is an issue frequently raised by international organisations, most recently in the 2018 report by the Council of Europe on Romania in light of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.

for the possibility to conduct the entirety of a trial in Hungarian. Nevertheless, the decision whether or not to do so, is ultimately left to the discretion of the judge. All of this points to a chaotic, haphazard and incidental use of minority languages in legal proceedings in Romania, rather than a systematic approach.

Observations and recommendations: The existing legal framework for using the language of minorities in legal proceedings allows for a wide use of these languages. However, in most cases the costs of translation and interpretation have to be supported by the parties themselves, which clearly restricts the basic right of citizens to use their mother tongue in court. A legislative proposal has recently been tacitly passed in the Senate (without a meaningful discussion or debate on the matter), which states that the Ministry of Justice has to cover the costs of translation in civil cases as well. Whether this proposal will eventually become law, is yet to be seen, but the chances of it are very low at this point. Nonetheless, it would be a step in the right direction, in order to ensure that members of a national minority can use their mother tongue during all stages of the legal process, and regardless of the nature of the cases, in a way that does not burden them with additional expenses.

Currently, the regulations regarding legal procedures within the Romanian judicial system allow the use of their mother tongue for members of national minorities only in some cases, while even in those, the costs of translation and interpretation often have to be supported by the parties themselves. For instance, the Civil Code states that both parties can use their mother tongue during the oral phase of a trial, however, the costs of interpretation have to be paid by the parties themselves. This rule does not apply to witnesses as well, meaning that in civil cases witnesses can only testify in Romanian. Moreover, according to the Penal Code, during the investigative phase, as well as during the trial itself, all information must be communicated to the accused party in their mother tongue, both orally and in a written form. In this case, the costs of the translation are supported by the state. However, if the defendant is found to be guilty, they will likely be required to reimburse the costs of translation and/or interpretation.

Several bilingual place name signs have been vandalised in 2018, indicating the intolerance in many cases of the majority population towards Hungarian inscriptions.

After being painted over in 2017, the place name signs marking the entrance into the town of Toplița/Maroshévíz were vandalised again in November of 2018, when the name of the town in Hungarian was painted over with the colours of the Romanian flag. As we have mentioned in our report last year, the population of the town is 22% Hungarian. Similar cases in 2018 occurred in the city of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy and in the village of Lăureni/Kisszentlőrinc. It is not only place name signs, but road signs in general that are often vandalised, as was the case in May, when on a bilingual road sign indicating the direction to a popular tourist destination, Lacul Sf. Ana/ Szent Anna-tó (a lake in Harghita county formed in a volcanic crater), the name in Hungarian was sprayed over. In these cases, the perpetrators are rarely apprehended, if ever, and the acts are thus often repeated, as the incidents in Toplița/Maroshévíz show.

Even in a county like Covasna/Kovászna, where 73% of the population is Hungarian, the possibility to use Hungarian during legal proceedings continues to be quite limited

If the judge, the lawyers and both parties concerned are Hungarian, the existing laws allow

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

A frequent issue regarding bilingualism in areas where there is a significant number of Hungarians concerns the lack of bilingual (Romanian and Hungarian) place name signs, or the vandalisation of these. While the latter is a sign of negative attitudes towards the Hungarian community on the part of the majority population, the former clearly signals the hesitation or even unwillingness of local authorities to acknowledge the multicultural aspect of some municipalities.

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

tute 38%, and just narrowly crossed the border between the two counties, the sign had to be temporarily taken down and relocated within the exact perimeters of Mureș county.

Observations and recommendations: Cases such as the one described above clearly demonstrate the extremely hostile attitude of some Romanian politicians and officials, for whom a sign containing a Hungarian inscription even narrowly being located within their county is unthinkable, pointing to absurd levels of intolerance regarding bilingual inscriptions in Romania. It also highlights the fact that the Hungarian community cannot rely on common sense and good will when it comes to these issues, because most Romanian officials are not willing to move even a step further when it comes to conceding linguistic rights, unless expressly required by law. Therefore, it is crucial that linguistic rights are upheld, strengthened and updated by positive measures and clear legislation.

Vandalisation is not the only problem, and one might argue that these are even given an impulse by the fierce opposition of some Romanian politicians regarding the use of the Hungarian language in official settings and the hostility of authorities in general towards this issue. A case in point is the road sign marking the border between two neighbouring counties,

1.4. BILINGUAL STREET SIGNS

which stipulated that street names should be put up in Hungarian as well. These resolutions were challenged in court by Lucian Goga, the Mureș county prefect, who has been known in recent years to relentlessly attack bilingual signs, as well as taking a harsh stance against Hungarian symbols across the county. One of the said resolutions adopted by the city council and then annulled by the court proposed that the names of the streets and squares should be translated into Hungarian as well, when such a possibility exists, like in the case of proper nouns: Trandafirilor/ Rózsák (Roses), Tineretului/Ifjúság (Youth).

When it comes to bilingual inscriptions, street signs are arguably one of the most controversial issues. The Romanian legislation does not expressly stipulate that street signs should be bilingual in municipalities with a significant minority population. Nonetheless, several international treaties ratified by Romania and various international recommendations regarding the implementation of these treaties, strongly urge states to put up bilingual street signs.

It is regrettable that the courts back local authorities in their vicious pursuit to curb the basic linguistic rights of the Hungarian community. In this context, it is also disappointing that the proposed Administrative Code, which would have allowed, among other things, for bilingual street signs to be put up in the local administrative units where a minority constitutes at least 20% of the population, has been deemed unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court. We strongly believe that, given the animosity of certain Romanian local authorities towards the issue of linguistic rights for the Hungarian minority, the only feasible long-term solution would be a legislative guarantee, such as the much-disputed and eventually invalidated administrative code, which would have required the use of bilingual street signs, as well as ensuring other basic rights for the Hungarian community in Romania.

Any attempt in the past few years to put up bilingual street signs in Târgu Mureș/ Marosvásárhely has been met with hostility and fierce opposition by Romanian local authorities.

Mureș and Alba. After officials in Mureș county replaced the old sign marking the entrance into Alba county with a new one, which also featured the name of the said county in Hungarian (Fehér megye), this sparked outrage among Alba county officials, including Florin Roman, a liberal MP from the county. He argued that the bilingual sign has to be removed, since it is located in Alba county, where the percentage of the Hungarian minority is below 5%, and thus the provisions of Law nr. 215 from 2001 do not apply in this case. And even though the sign was put up by the authorities in Mureș county, where Hungarians consti-

In 2018 the issue of bilingual street signs in Târgu Mureș/Marosvásárhely has unfortunately not advanced. As our organisation has repeatedly signalled, there is an ongoing fight on the part of Romanian authorities against putting up bilingual (Romanian and Hungarian) street signs in Târgu Mureș/Marosvásárhely, one of the major Transylvanian cities, with a Hungarian population of 43%.

Observations and recommendations: Interpretations of Law No. 215 of 2001 lead to applying it exclusively in the case of the place name signs of the municipalities and the inscriptions on the buildings of the local administration and public services, but not street signs. However, in a 2012 report on the application of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, several recommendations were included, interpreting the term “place name” as meaning not only the name of settlements, but also street names.

The latest developments in this matter concerns a first degree ruling by the Mureș Administrative Court, which invalidated two local council resolutions from 2017, both of VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

1.5. TOWN HALL INSCRIPTIONS Due to the vague and often contradictory legal provisions, the local councils generally lose these court cases. The justification presented in court by Tanasă’s organisation and others, for example the Covasna County Prefect’s Office, is that the terms “Községháza” and ”Városháza” were borrowed from Hungary, and are not legally accurate, because they are not the exact translation of the Romanian “Primărie”, which according to them would be “polgármesteri hivatal”. However, several Hungarian-Romanian dictionaries, including the most recent one published in 2011 by

There have been numerous lawsuits, as well as currently ongoing cases against various local councils in Szeklerland for putting up inscriptions that read “Községháza” (used in smaller towns) or ”Városháza” (used in cities) - both meaning “Town hall” in Hungarian, alongside the Romanian equivalent, which is “Primărie”. Szeklerland is a historical region in Eastern Transylvania, composed of Covasna, Harghita and parts of Mureș county, where the Hungarian community constitutes roughly 75% of the total population.

“Town hall” inscriptions that had to be removed in 2018 include the local council building in Dănești/ Csíkdánfalva, as well as in the city of Miercurea Ciuc/Csíkszereda, where the percentage of the Hungarian population is 99% and 81%, respectively.

These lawsuits are mostly initiated by Dan Tanasă’s, the aforementioned provocateur and his NGO. His activity is focused on not only questioning, but actively fighting against the linguistic rights of the Hungarian minority, as demonstrated by the “Town hall” cases, but also other Hungarian or bilingual inscriptions.

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

the Romanian Academy, translate the words “községháza”/”városháza” as “primărie”.

Observations and recommendations:

done, in order to settle lawsuits and avoid fines -, the plaintiffs have looked for something else to object to, like the order of the bilingual inscriptions, or the position of these, which only serves to show that their purpose is to eradicate Hungarian inscriptions, by any means necessary. A proposed amendment to Law No. 215 of 2001, which unfortunately was not passed in Parliament, suggested that in cases such as the “Town hall” inscriptions, historical and linguistic communities should be allowed to use the contextually equivalent translation of Romanian denominations and expressions, instead of their loan translation.

It is difficult to comprehend the actions of the above-mentioned NGO against “Town hall” inscriptions in Romania as anything other than a vicious campaign against the Hungarian community. It is even more disconcerting that these absurd cases are admitted in court, and that local councils successively lose them, which serves to show that the Romanian judicial system is also biased. It creates unnecessary tensions within the Hungarian community and increases distrust towards the institutions of the Romanian state. Romanian authorities fiercely oppose bilingual inscriptions, despite the fact that the Constitution of Romania, as well as various international treaties and agreements ratified by Romania, most notably the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, clearly stipulate the right of minorities to preserve their linguistic identity.

Our organisation conducted a survey in 137 municipalities in Szeklerland, and found that in 31 of these, Hungarian mayors have been called upon to remove the “Town hall” inscriptions in Hungarian, and the local councils that refused to do so, have been subsequently sued. In 25 cases the local councils lost their case in court, 1 lawsuit is still ongoing, while in 5 cases the mayors decided to remove the inscriptions upon first notice. Thus, in recent years, due to the legal pressure from the prefects and the lawsuits initiated by Dan Tanasă, dozens of “Town hall” inscriptions had to be removed, curbing the linguistic rights of these communities. New developments in 2018 include a legally binding court ruling to take down the “Városháza” inscription from the façade of the town hall in Miercurea Ciuc/Csíkszereda, an order that the mayor complied with in September. Similarly, discriminatory rulings came out regarding the town hall inscriptions in Tușnad Băi/Tusnádfürdő, where both the inscription in Hungarian and the one in English were ordered to be removed, as well as the “Községháza” inscription in Dănești/Csíkdánfalva. All of these rulings are final, and the lawsuits have all been initiated by Dan Tanasă’s organisation.

Moreover, in cases where the Romanian “primărie” was translated as “polgármesteri hivatal” - as some local councils in mostly Hungarian-inhabited municipalities have

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

1.6. SAFETY MEASURES

1.7. LINGUISTIC RIGHTS OF INMATES

1.8. DRIVING TEST IN HUNGARIAN

The lack of safety instructions and warning signs in Hungarian is not only discriminatory, but it can also lead to serious injuries.

The rights of Hungarian inmates in jails continue to be severely curtailed.

Members of the Hungarian community have for a few years had the opportunity to take the driving test in Hungarian. This has been very helpful in the case of the written exam, with learning materials also available in Hungarian. However, the second part of the driving test is a practical test with a police officer, who tend to be mostly Romanian, most of whom do not speak Hungarian at all, even in areas where the majority of the population is Hungarian.

The possibility of using oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mother tongue in jails is quite limited. Prisoners are entitled to sessions with a psychologist, as well as lessons with teachers, both of whom are usually Romanian. Hungarian inmates, especially in areas where there is a significant Hungarian population, should be ensured adequate psychological treatment, as well as lessons by a person who speaks their mother tongue. This, however, is hardly the case. For instance, in the prison in Miercurea Ciuc/ CsĂkszereda, located in a county with a 85% Hungarian population, none of the teaching personnel or the psychologists are Hungarian.

A safety sign warning of the risk of an electric shock, displayed exclusively in Romanian: the lack of safety instructions in Hungarian is extremely hazardous.

The use of the mother tongue for national minorities during the practical part of the driving test is not properly ensured.

Our organisation found that in most cases safety instructions and warning signs are only available in Romanian. We have not found any Hungarian inscriptions warning people of high voltage danger, of fire exits or fire exit plans, nor have we seen any explanation in Hungarian about the safety measures provided in swimming pools, for example. The lack of such explanations and bilingual signs in regions where a significant portion of the population is Hungarian is a great risk factor, and leads to an environment where people - especially small children who do not understand Romanian - are prone to accidents that can even be fatal. Our organisation is aware of at least two work-related accidents resulting in serious injury due to the lack of proper information provided to workers in their mother tongue.

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

The linguistic rights of inmates are rarely enforced, even in areas where the majority of the population is Hungarian.

This means that, although the possibility to take the exam in Hungarian exists in theory, it is not assured in the case of the actual driving test, given that police officers tend not to speak Hungarian. To manage this discrepancy, officers usually employ the help of people who want to take the test that speak both Romanian and Hungarian, to translate for the people who do not speak Romanian fluently, and thus might not understand the instructions of the police officer. However, this makes the communication during the test rather problematic and challenging, which is obviously not ideal when one is receiving instructions and has to comply with them on the spot, not to mention that it is not the job of the prospective drivers, who are nervously waiting to take the test themselves, to translate for their colleagues.

VIOLATION OF LINGUISTIC RIGHTS

2.1.2. Teaching Romanian to pupils belonging to minorities

Another issue of concern affecting students belonging to the Hungarian minority continues to be the teaching of the state language.

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION 2.1. DISCRIMINATION IN THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM 2.1.1. Lack of textbooks for pupils in the minority education system At the start of the 2018-2019 school year, there were considerable shortages in textbooks translated into Hungarian at the elementary level, and about a third of the textbooks for fifth and sixth graders had still not arrived in schools. Even more than a month after teaching had started there were still a few textbooks missing, an extreme case being the geography and history books in Hungarian for sixth graders, which only arrived in schools in January of 2019. While this is somewhat of an improvement compared to last year, when students went months without textbooks, it is still far from normal, and it unfairly affects the access to quality education for pupils who study in a minority language.

Regarding access to quality education in the mother tongue, an increasingly concerning matter has to do with the lack of textbooks available in Hungarian in primary and secondary education. At the start of each school year, Hungarian pupils suffer the consequences of a discriminatory and ill-working educational system. An entire generation, starting with the current sixth graders, have been facing the same problem ever since they got into the educational system. They are being taught based on a new national curriculum adopted in 2011, however, many of the textbooks printed according to this new curriculum have in the past years arrived late, well after the start of the school year, mostly because they were still in the process of being drafted, approved or printed. It is worth noting that this is a problem which disproportionately affects Hungarian children, since - besides the usual lengthy hassle of approving textbooks - most of their books also have to be translated from Romanian to Hungarian. Not to mention that the quality of the translations is not always the most adequate, and there have been some cases of poorly translated expressions in textbooks. Teachers attribute this to the fact that texts are sometimes translated word for word, ignoring the context.

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

The most problematic issue regarding this decision was that it had been taken without consulting the experts in minority language education or the representatives of the minority communities. Moreover, the decision and especially the implementation had not been adequately prepared. The Romanian teachers who were supposed to take over Romanian classes are not specialised in teaching primary school children, since this requires a significantly different approach than teaching at higher levels. Furthermore, several school inspectorates at the county level had signalled that there were not enough Romanian teachers to meet the demand.

An entire generation, starting with the current sixth graders, have been facing the same problem ever since they got into the educational system, namely the lack of textbooks translated into Hungarian.

The Romanian government still misunderstands and often mishandles the problems regarding the teaching of the state language to minority students, and thus applies ill-fitting solutions. This was evident last year, when just a few weeks before the start of the school year, an unexpected Government Ordinance came out, which stated that pupils at the primary level who are enrolled in a minority language education system have to be taught Romanian by a teacher who specialises in Romanian language and literature, and not by a primary school teacher, as was the practice before.

The measure was eventually implemented only for a few weeks, but during this time some Hungarian primary school children experienced a veritable cultural shock in terms of not being able to communicate with their Romanian teachers, as most teachers of Romanian language and literature are of Romanian ethnicity and do not speak Hungarian. Following requests made by Hungarian parents and teachers, and at the intervention of the Democratic Alliance of Hungarians in Romania, the government removed the said article from the ordinance. This was followed by the theatrical resignation of the then Minister for Education, Valentin Popa, who said he did not agree with erasing the article. Popa knew at the time that a government reorganisation was coming and he would be replaced, but used this incident to motivate his resignation and to build his political capital by attacking the Hungarian community. Despite the occasional missteps, like the one described above, there has also been some progress when it comes to this issue. In recent years, there has been a slow, but progressive adaptation of the national curriculum for teaching Romanian to minorities. The aim is for these children to study Romanian as a second language, instead of studying it according to the same methodology as children whose mother tongue is Romanian, which was the norm until a few years ago. However, there are still a number of problems when it

Despite the fact that the new curriculum for teaching Romanian to minority students focuses more on communication skills, there is still a considerable emphasis on grammatical theory and analysis.

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

Observations and recommendations:

comes to implementing the new methodology. These issues are most apparent when children have to make the transition from elementary to secondary education, when the Romanian textbook suddenly shifts from a methodology that focuses primarily on communication skills, with close to no grammar, to a methodology in the fifth grade that includes considerably more grammatical analysis.

The methodology of teaching Romanian for minorities should be continuously adapted and improved at a much faster pace, as the effects, results and challenges of the new, revised methodology become more evident, with a special focus on the quality of the textbooks and teaching aids, as well as the compatibility of these with the overall goals and methods set forth in the new methodology. Schools should be given more autonomy in dealing with local needs and deficiencies as well, considering that the exposure to the state language of Hungarian pupils living in scattered communities and those living in regions where Hungarians constitute a majority is vastly different. Any measures taken should be pupil-centred, ensuring that Hungarian children acquire proper language skills in Romanian, which focus primarily on communication competences, thus preventing later disadvantages for Hungarian youth on the Romanian labour market.

Our organisation has sought out the opinions of several teachers who teach Romanian to Hungarian pupils according to the new textbooks based on the new methodology of teaching the state language to minority students. While they agree that there is some improvement compared to the old methodology, a change that is already somewhat detectable in the language skills of pupils, there is still considerable room for upgrade when it comes to both the new methodology and the textbooks. Overall, Romanian teachers agree that content focused on theoretical knowledge should be further reduced, and significantly more practical exercises should be included into these new Romanian textbooks, exercises that focus primarily on useful knowledge and develop the use of everyday Romanian.

And finally, in light of the briefly implemented decision regarding the teaching of Romanian to elementary school children, the government should work together with experts in minority education and with specialised institutions, in order to elaborate reasonable strategies that will help pupils in acquiring adequate communication skills in the state language. Hastily implemented decisions, taken without consulting the representatives of minorities or the experts in the field of minority education, and which are not thoroughly considered in advance, are certainly not the answer for the shortcomings and problematic issues of the Romanian education system in general, nor the faulty and poor teaching of the state language.

It is worth mentioning that even this improved methodology does not yet apply to pupils from 7th to 12th grade, as the implementation of the new methodology is done progressively, meaning that these pupils continue to study Romanian from the same textbooks as children whose mother tongue is Romanian, with difficult literary texts, often written in an archaic form of Romanian, not to mention high level grammatical analysis.

2.1.3. Hungarian pupils severely discriminated at the English language contest

er NGOs, as well as teachers, the said regulation was eventually modified and the discriminatory passage that included translation from Romanian to English and viceversa as a mandatory requirement at the national English language contest was erased.

In January 2018, Hungarian teachers and educational experts raised their concerns about a modified regulation, which stated that starting with that school year the national English language contest organised by the Ministry of Education will also test translation competences.

2.1.4. Unjust evaluation of Hungarian pupils at the Baccalaureate exam Unusually low grades for Hungarian pupils at last year’s Baccalaureate exam raised suspicions of ethnic discrimination, as well as the long overdue issue of separate teaching methodologies and evaluation when it comes to teaching Romanian to students belonging to national minorities.

The regulation specified that texts in English could be translated exclusively to and from Romanian. Teachers argued that this was unconstitutional, as well as extremely discriminatory towards pupils belonging to national minorities, whose mother tongue is not Romanian. The regulation in question meant that these students would have to face the added difficulty of having to translate English into Romanian and viceversa, none of which is their mother tongue. The Covasna County School Inspectorate had previously asked for this regulation to be modified, on grounds that it violated the basic right and principle of equality before the law. However, the Ministry of Education refused to solve the matter, arguing that the national English contest is designed for students with a ”knowledge above average”. This argument nonetheless ignored the fact that the English language contest is supposed to test the pupils’ knowledge of English, not their knowledge of the state language - for which there are separate contests -, and secondly, such a modification clearly put students belonging to national minorities at a disadvantage compared to their Romanian colleagues.

The suspicion of ethnic discrimination arose following unusually low grades for Hungarian pupils in Romanian language and literature at last year’s Baccalaureate exam.

During the 2018 June session of the Baccalaureate exam, the papers of pupils from Covasna county were sent to be evaluated in Mureș county. When the results were published, students, teachers and parents alike were surprised to find that the grades for Romanian language and literature were much lower than expected, which prompted several pupils to contest the results. The contested papers were then re-evaluated in a centre in Sălaj county. The differences between the grades at the first and the second evaluation were significant. Approximately 60 students saw their grades raised with an

Our organisation submitted a complaint regarding this injustice to the National Council for Combating Discrimination (CNCD), in which we presented the above arguments, believing firmly that children should not face discriminatory treatment and the adverse consequences of belonging to a national minority. After similar complaints from othETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

Consequently, a thorough inspection was demanded by teachers, parents, political leaders and NGOs concerning the handling and the evaluation of the papers in Târgu Mureș/Marosvásárhely. The Ministry of Education promised to look into the matter, but the findings of the promised inquiry are yet to be made public.

average of 1.5 points, with some grades increasing by as much as 3 or even 4 points. (In Romania, exam papers are graded on a scale of 1 to 10.) Two pupils, for instance, had their grades raised from 3.80 to 6.95 and from 2.90 to 6.90, respectively. a complaint regarding this injustice to the National Council for Combating Discrimination (CNCD), in which we presented the above arguments, believing firmly that children should not face discriminatory treatment and the adverse consequences of belonging to a national minority. After similar complaints from other NGOs, as well as teachers, the said regulation was eventually modified and the discriminatory passage that included translation from Romanian to English and viceversa as a mandatory requirement at the national English language contest was erased.

Observations and recommendations: So as to avoid similar incidents in the future, it would be helpful to have in each committee assessing the papers of Hungarian pupils a teacher whose mother tongue is Hungarian. However, the only feasible solution in the long term is to implement without further delay the provisions of the 2011 Law on Education, which stipulates, among other things, that students who study in a minority language education system have to be taught Romanian based on a modified curriculum, specifically tailored for pupils whose mother tongue is not Romanian, and to accordingly modify the evaluation of these pupils as well.

While the raising of grades at the second evaluation is not uncommon, the teachers of the pupils affected by this issue stressed that such a discrepancy between the two evaluations, and in the case of so many papers, is highly unusual and points to some kind of irregularity in the way that the papers were corrected at the first centre in Târgu Mureș/ Marosvásárhely. Given that the exam papers are labelled with the abbreviation of the county of provenance, teachers and parents came to suspect that the pupils in question were possibly discriminated against for being Hungarian. While a difference of a few decimal points could be explained as subjective assessment, as an oversight of the evaluating teacher, discrepancies of 3-4 points can hardly be considered a simple mistake. The suspicion thus arose that the teacher(s) who evaluated the papers the first time around had been biased, and knowing that - being from a county with a Hungarian majority - the pupils whose papers they had been reading were most likely Hungarian, they tended to assess their mistakes more severely and thus deduct a considerable amount of points.

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

2.1.5. The University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology of Târgu Mureș /Marosvásárhely

and the discriminatory passage that included translation from Romanian to English and viceversa as a mandatory requirement at the national English language contest was erased.

Ever since its foundation in 1945, there has been a slow but relentless effort to encumber Hungarian training at the University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Târgu Mureș/ Marosvásárhely, an institution originally destined to train Hungarian doctors in their mother tongue. Despite the fact that the Hungarian community has been asking for a separate and independent Hungarian department for years, instead of moving towards an acceptable solution, the situation seems to be deteriorating.

The decision was eventually made official in September, after being approved by the Ministry of Education, and the newly merged institution thus became the University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science and Technology of Tîrgu Mureș/Marosvásárhely. This was followed by the modification of the Charter of the university, in which its multicultural aspect was reiterated, however, without any concrete measures that would reflect it in practice. Despite the outrage of students, professors, prominent political leaders and the entire Hungarian community of Romania in general, the is finalised and the already unstable and never quite fully materialised multicultural aspect of the university is in more peril than ever before, as the percentage of Hungarian students and professors dropped significantly. To add insult to injury, in early 2019 the senate of the university decided to establish an English faculty, after resisting for years the idea of creating a Hungarian department, as required by the 2011 Law on Education, on the grounds that it would violate the autonomy of the university.

The introduction of standardised testing at the university sparked protests among Hungarian students and professors, and renewed the requests for a separate Hungarian department.

On top of this already untenable situation, in December, the Romanian leadership of the University decided to introduce standardised testing at the university, which sparked renewed protests among Hungarian students and professors. They argue that this decision is highly discriminatory since it basically states that students on all lines of study will be tested according to the materials and the bibliography used by Romanian professors, thus excluding all textbooks that are not available in Romanian. Moreover, changing the regulations regarding exams - or any regulations for that matter - in the middle of the academic year is highly irregular. It puts the students of the Hungarian and the English lines of study at a serious disadvantage, given that for an entire semester they have

News surfaced in April of last year that the leadership of the University of Medicine and Pharmacy and those of the Petru Maior University, which is a purely Romanian university, have agreed to merge the two institutions. The objections of the Hungarian professors within the senate of the University of Medicine were not enough to impede the decision, as they made up merely a third of the vote. Előd Nagy, vice-rector of the University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Târgu Mureș/Marosvásárhely, expressed concern over the fact that the Hungarian leadership received no concrete assurances as to how the university would keep its multicultural character in case of a merge. the said regulation was eventually modified 24

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

been studying from one set of books and are now expected to be tested according to a different set of materials. As a sign of protest many Hungarian professors went on to test their students at the recent exam session according to the textbooks and materials that they have been using throughout the year, but were then not allowed to introduce these grades into the electronic register.

2.1.6. Banning the textbook on “The History of Szeklers”

2.2. DISCRIMINATION IN THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM

Hungarian pupils in Szeklerland are prevented from learning about the specific history and culture of their region.

There are numerous issues within the Romanian healthcare system which continue to negatively affect the Hungarian minority and thus prevent their access to quality medical care.

shamed and ill-treated within the healthcare system for not speaking Romanian properly. However, the law in question still lacks a methodology that would ensure proper implementation, since the Ministry of Health has not yet issued the specific measures that typically accompany such laws. As the law currently stands, it is not clear how the expenses of hiring staff that speaks the relevant minority language(s) would be covered. The lack of adequate methodology also makes the application of sanctions in case of non-compliance problematic. Our organisation submitted an inquiry to the Ministry of Health regarding the issue of the much needed methodology, to which the Ministry replied that this is not their competency, basically diverting responsibility to the healthcare institutions.

The situation is currently at a standstill. Hungarian students continue to protest, while the Romanian leadership of the university, the representatives of the Hungarian teaching staff, together with Romanian and Hungarian political leaders are in the process of negotiating a solution, with no results so far.

Observations and recommendations: The above described situation, most notably the resistance of the university’s Romanian leadership to the idea of creating a Hungarian department, is more and more difficult to comprehend, especially in light of the plans to establish an English faculty. First of all, creating separate faculties or departments for minority students in the higher education institutions that are designated as being multicultural by the Ministry of Education, is mandatory under the 2011 National Law on Education. Moreover, it is a reasonable request reiterated time and time again by students and professors alike, since it would solve numerous problems and anomalies that the Hungarian line of study is currently facing, but most importantly it would secure and strengthen the multicultural character of the university and safeguard the future of medical training in Hungarian.

The textbook entitled “The History of Szeklers” continues to be banned from schools

As our organisation has repeatedly signalled, a textbook entitled “The History of Szeklers” has been banned since 2013. Despite the fact that the book was written by renowned historians and academicians, its contents cannot be taught in schools. However, as several international treaties ratified by Romania - including the Framework Convention on the Protection of National Minorities - stipulate, teaching minority youth about their cultural heritage and history is a fundamental right, and just as important for preserving the identity of a community as learning the mother tongue. The lack of any development and the general silence surrounding the issue is disheartening and it proves the effectiveness of the Romanian state when it comes to attempts aimed at suppressing regional identities, in particular the Szekler identity.

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

Vital information concerning vaccines for newborn babies and children is mostly available exclusively in Romanian.

The shortcomings of the current situation were at full display last year, when a young girl from Târgu Secuiesc/Kézdivásárhly, who was on a basketball tournament in Timișoara/Temesvár, was not provided translation when she went in for an exam to a local hospital. Our organisation subsequently filed a complaint to the National Council for Combatting Discrimination, which found that ethnic discrimination had indeed occurred in this case, since the patient had a right to be informed concerning the state of her health in her mother tongue. The hospital received a small fine of 2000 RON (approximately 422 EUR), and the doctor who was found to be at fault was given a warning.

Despite initial opposition, an amendment proposed by the Democratic Alliance of Hungarians in Romania was adopted in Parliament in 2017, extending the linguistic rights of minorities in the fields of healthcare and social assistance. The amendment in question states that in municipalities where a minority population exceeds 20%, or the alternative gap of 5000 inhabitants, members of that minority must be guaranteed the right to be attended within the healthcare system and social services by a person who speaks their mother tongue. Such an extension of the linguistic rights of minorities is an important step forward, since there have been several cases in recent years of patients being

Other problems within the Romanian health-

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

2.3. POLITICAL ATTACKS AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

care system which affect national minorities include the lack of critical information for patients in their mother tongue. These are – in most cases – available exclusively in Romanian, including information on vaccines, or brochures released by the Ministry of Health for mothers with newborn babies. Diagnoses by doctors are also written exclusively in Romanian. Finally, information on medicines is also not available in any language other than Romanian, which is extremely dangerous given that not understanding the use, the proper dosage, or the side effects of a certain medication, can lead to serious consequences for patients.

Prefects in Covasna, Harghita and Mureș county continue to render the work of local administrations significantly more difficult, not shying away from abuses of power or political attacks either and engaging them in futile, disagreeable and time-consuming feuds.

Observations and recommendations: The implementation of linguistic rights within the healthcare system continues to be problematic, despite the existing legislation. Not to mention that, in practice, these rights are virtually non-existent in interethnic environments where Hungarians do not form a majority. Therefore, an adequate methodology that includes clear sanctioning mechanisms is paramount. Moreover, the state should ensure - where possible - that patients are also informed in writing about their condition, as well as concerning relevant information (epidemics, vaccines etc.) in their mother tongue. Finally, pharmaceutical companies should provide the relevant information about medication not only in Romanian, but also in the language of national minorities, especially considering that this information is already available for most medications, since the vast majority of these are distributed by the same companies across Europe.

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

2.4. THE “BEKE-CASE”, TERRORISM CHARGES UNDER DUBIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES

in order to remind of the promises made to national minorities in the Declaration of Alba Iulia/Gyulafehérvár, in which Romanian leaders proclaimed the unification of Transylvania with the Kingdom of Romania in 1918.

The alleged “terrorism” charges against István Beke and Zoltán Szőcs are further proof of the abuse of power on the part of authorities against members of the Szekler community.

Similarly, the prefect of Harghita county, Jean-Adrian Andrei demanded the presence of Hungarian leaders at the celebrations held on the day of the Romanian national anthem. He went as far as asking for written explanations as to why Hungarian representatives were not present.

Observations and recommendations: Sebastian Cucu, the prefect of Covasna county, is known for his frequent and malicious political attacks against Hungarian local leaders.

In the days leading up to the National Day of Romania, which in 2018 marked one hundred years since the formation on the modern Romanian state, Sebastian Cucu, the Covasna county prefect declared that he expects the Hungarian leadership of the county to take part in the celebrations. However, he set clear terms under which he would allow the representatives of the Hungarian community to participate, namely that they should refrain from using the opportunity to give – what the prefect called – “extremist and nationalist” speeches with which they would put a cloud over the festivities. The prefect was alluding to a long-held view by certain Hungarian local leaders, namely Sándor Tamás, the president of the Covasna County Council, and Árpád Antal, the mayor of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy, that they would only participate in the celebrations of Romania’s National Day, if they were allowed to speak

Beke and Szőcs are currently serving 5 years in prison each, despite the fact that they had originally been sentenced to 11 months and no new piece of evidence was presented between the two rulings.

It speaks to the abuses of power often committed by high-ranking Romanian officials in the counties where there is a significant number of Hungarian inhabitants, most notably the prefects, that they have been demanding for years the presence of Hungarian leaders at the various national celebrations, while denying them the opportunity to voice their views and reiterate the legitimate claims of the Hungarian community. Unfortunately, prefects in the mostly Hungarian-inhabited counties use their position to encumber the work of local leaders, which is not the case in counties where Hungarians are a minority.

In November 2015, the Directorate for Investigating Organised Crime and Terrorism (DIICOT) arrested István Beke, the leader of the Sixty-Four Counties Youth Movement in Târgu Secuiesc/Kézdivásárhely, under the charges of terrorism. He was accused of planning to set off a bomb made of petards during the 1st of December festivities celebrating the National Day of Romania. Later that month authorities also arrested Zoltán Szőcs, the president of the same organisation, for allegedly taking part in planning the attack. In July 2018, Romania’s High Court sentenced the two suspects to 5 years in prison each on charges of terrorism. The official accusations of the prosecution from 2016 stand as follows: while Beke was initially accused of attempted attack against the collectivity (also called “acts of terrorism”) and attempt to violate the rules pertaining to explosives, Szőcs was accused of inciting to

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

2.5. SZEKLER TOURISM ASSOCIATION

the above-mentioned two acts. On first degree the court changed the legal classification of the two acts to attempt (Beke) and incitement (Szőcs) to change the constitutional order, sentencing them to 11 months in prison, which was the exact amount of time the two had already spent in prison during the initial trial.

There is a systematic discrimination that affects the historical region of Szeklerland. Romanian authorities often apply double standards and refuse to grant legal personality to associations that mention Szeklerland in their official name.

Absurdly, the High Court, ruling on a second and final degree, changed the legal classification of the acts yet again, back to the original charge of terrorism. This ruling was shocking, unexpected and difficult to comprehend, given that between the second and the first ruling no new piece of evidence was presented which would have warranted this decision. The High Court not only changed the official accusations, but also increased the sentence to 5 years for each of the two suspects.

Szeklerland is a region with a unique identity within Romania, rich in culture, architecture and natural resources. Due to the specific features of this region composed of three counties, it is perfectly suitable for sustainable tourism to be developed. Given the nature of the field of tourism and the administrative structure of Romania, for a region to be able to prosper from the point of view of tourism, a legal entity has to be created to promote that specific region.

Despite its potential to attract tourists, Romanian authorities still refuse to allow the region of Szeklerland to be advertised under a unified brand.

Observations and recommendations: Several attempts have been made to promote the touristic potential of Szeklerland, but sadly all of them have been blocked by the Romanian authorities. The first attempt was the registration of the Pro Turismo Terrae Siculorum Association, with its main purpose of promoting the tourism of Szeklerland. The request for registration was declined first due to the name of the association, the Court asking for the reference to “Szeklerland” to be removed from the name, claiming that it is unconstitutional, because Szeklerland is not a separate administrative territorial unit and thus cannot be a tourist destination. The initiators changed the name of the association to “Szekler Tourist Destinations”, but their request was declined the second time around as well, sustaining the initial decision with the explanation that in Romania there are no regions as administrative units, only counties, cities and villages.

The highly irregular way in which this case was handled, as well as the final ruling, which seems to have been politically motivated and encouraged by the sensationalist media coverage, gives rise to serious doubts regarding the impartiality of the Romanian justice system. Moreover, this decision is likely to increase interethnic tensions, especially in the region of Szeklerland, since it erodes the trust of Romanians in the Hungarian community as “loyal citizens”, as well as the trust of the Hungarian minority in the fairness of the Romanian justice system and in the Romanian state in general.

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

Observations and recommendations:

Since there was no unity in the tourism concept of the counties in the region, the declared aim of the association was to carve out a regional concept for tourism that would result in a strong brand, that would in turn help to develop and promote sustainable regional tourism, enhance the compatibility of tourist operators in the region, thus bringing many tourists to the lovely sites of Szeklerland.

It is our firm belief that only when the authorities and the justice system realise that tourism, by definition, is always linked to a place of interest or a destination, and that a destination will not necessarily coincide with an administrative territorial unit, as it is the case of Szeklerland, will a region be able to promote its own sustainable tourism and thus encourage economic, social and cultural development.

The ruling of the courts is difficult to comprehend and it is obviously a manifestation of the double standards applied to the Hungarian community in Romania. Similar associations have been around for years, fulfilling their goals with great success, and they were also named after historical regions that are not recognised as administrative units in Romania. Bucovinatourism.ro, affiliated with the Suceava County Chamber of Commerce, for example, exists since 2001, Bucovina being a historical region that well extends the boundaries of today’s Suceava county.

ETHNIC DISCRIMINATION

3 THE PERSECUTION OF HUNGARIAN SYMBOLS

lawsuits against the mayors that refused to take the flags down. The vast majority of these court cases (22 in total) have already been lost by the mayors, 3 are still ongoing, in 9 cases the mayors removed the flags upon first notice, and only one case has been won in the city of Odorheiu Secuiesc/Székelyudvarhely.

The persecution led by Romanian political leaders, authorities, as well as extremist organisations and groups against the symbols and identity markers of the Hungarian community continued in 2018.

3.1. BANNING THE SZEKLER FLAG

Last year, the Romanian courts ordered the removal of the Szekler flag from the forefront and the chambers of several institutions and other public places in cities with a significant Hungarian population.

The number of Hungarian mayors losing lawsuits for putting up the Szekler flag continues to grow, with some of them even receiving exorbitant fines.

The mayor of Cristuru Secuiesc/Székelykeresztúr was one of several Hungarian local leaders who were forced to take down the regional symbol of Szeklerland in 2018, in order to avoid exorbitant fines.

In a survey conducted recently, our organisation found that there have been 35 cases in total in which prefects and Romanian NGOs have demanded that Hungarian mayors in Szeklerland remove the Szekler flag from the buildings of the local administration or other public spaces. Most of these have resulted in

THE PERSECUTION OF HUNGARIAN SYMBOLS

The mayor of Miercurea Nirajului/ Nyárádszereda is one of many Hungarian local officials who have been caught up in legal battles in recent years for putting up the Szekler flag on the buildings of the local administration. Mayor Sándor Tóth lost the case in court and was asked to remove

the regional symbol of Szeklerland. He refused to comply because - like many others - he felt the systematic attacks against the symbols of the Hungarian community to be unjust and a double standard, considering - as our organisation has repeatedly signalled - that other historical regions in Romania, such as Bucovina and Moldova, can use their symbols freely. In August, the mayor was fined with 70,000 RON (approximately 15,000 EUR), for refusing to take down the flag. The ruling in itself is unjust, given the above-mentioned double standard, not to mention the extremely high penalty.

however, the mayor decided not to obey this request, which resulted in the said organisation initiating a lawsuit against the mayor. It is worth mentioning that with the exception of the Szekler flag in the main square of Baraolt/Barót, all notices and legal suits in the matter of the use of the Szekler flag by local administrations have been initiated by the organisation of Dan Tanasă, the Civic Association for Dignity in Europe. The amount of lawsuits filed by this organisation, whether against town hall and other Hungarian inscriptions or the Szekler flag, means that approximately every third mayor in Szeklerland has either had (and lost) a court case initiated by Tanasă, or is in the midst of one. This points to a vicious campaign against the linguistic rights and the symbols of the Hungarian community in Romania, one that is unfortunately supported by the authorities and the justice system.

Another court case concerns the flags hoisted on the town hall in Miercurea Ciuc/ Csíkszereda. A second and final ruling in 2016 stated that both the Szekler flag and the administrative flag of the city had to be taken down. Mayor Róbert Kálmán Ráduly contested the order issued to remove the flag in order to buy some time, but last year the decision could not be avoided any longer and he opted for removing the two flags. He wanted to avoid being given a fine, which is what happened when he refused to take down another Szekler flag that was hoisted in front of the local theatre, and for which he received a penalty of 75,000 RON (approximately 15,800 EUR) in June of 2018.

Observations and recommendations: The Szekler flag is the symbol of the historic region of Szeklerland, and as such it is an expression of the identity of the local people. In this regard it is no different than the regional symbols used across Europe in various countries, not to mention the fact that other regions in Romania, like Moldova and Bucovina, can use their flags freely in public spaces. The relentless persecution of the Szekler flag and other local symbols has caused considerable tension within the community. Moreover, due to these actions on the part of Romanian authorities, the previously much more balanced interethnic relations between the Romanian and Hungarian communities in the region have visibly deteriorated.

On October of last year, the Szekler flag had to be removed from the forefront of the mayor’s office in the town of Cristuru Secuiesc/ Székelykeresztúr also. In November the Covasna county prefect ordered the removal of the regional flag of Szeklerland from the main square in the town of Baraolt/Barót as well, with the mayor opting to comply, rather than risking a huge fine. And the last such case the previous year involved the Szekler flag and the administrative flag of the town hoisted in front of the town hall in Băile Tușnad/ Tusnádfürdő. Mayor Tibor Albert received a letter from the organisation of the infamous Dan Tanasă, asking him to remove the flags,

THE PERSECUTION OF HUNGARIAN SYMBOLS

3.2. BANNING THE ADMINISTRATIVE FLAGS CONTAINING REGIONAL SYMBOLS

3.3. THE PERSECUTION OF THE HUNGARIAN FLAG The Hungarian flag is also frequently a target for Romanian authorities, nationalist NGOs and individuals. According to the Romanian legislation, the flag of another country can only be displayed in an official setting, if the Romanian flag is also put up next to it. However, this does not apply to the private sphere, but most importantly, it does not take into account the fact that apart from being the national flag of Hungary, the horizontally displayed red, white and green colours are considered a national symbol by all Hungarians, and thus by the Hungarian community of Romania as well.

Despite the fact that it is legal for territorial administrative units to adopt their own flags, the cities and the counties with a Hungarian majority population are not allowed these same rights. The county councils of Covasna/Kovászna and Harghita/Hargita, as well as the municipalities of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy and Miercurea Ciuc/Csíkszereda adopted administrative flags in recent years, but subsequently lost lawsuits, with the courts declaring these flags illegal. A law entered into force in 2015 which clearly states that territorial administrative units are allowed to adopt such administrative flags, and describes the legal procedure needed for such a council decision to be lawful. Despite the fact that every county in Romania adopted an administrative flag, which was then approved by the Government - an approval ordered to be necessary by the law from 2015 - the above-mentioned two county councils and municipalities, as well as numerous other towns and cities with a Hungarian majority are denied this right based on trumped-up arguments.

The Hungarian and the Szekler flags displayed on the headquarters of the Democratic Alliance of Hungarians in Romania in the town of Sângeorgiu de Pădure/Erdőszentgyörgy have been the subject of an ongoing lawsuit. The former prefect of Mureș county, Lucian Goga, fined the local organisation of DAHR back in 2015 for hoisting the two flags, a decision which Attila Csibi, the mayor of the town, and also the president of the local organisation of DAHR contested in court. The decision was invalidated in 2017 and the mayor subsequently put the two flags in question back on the forefront of the local headquarters of DAHR. Not content, the prefect filed another lawsuit, which he won, and the Hungarian and the Szekler flags were ordered to be taken down in early 2018. The mayor complied, but also appealed the decision in court. He declared, nonetheless, that if his office loses the appeal as well, he will desist with this fight, which costs him a lot of time and energy.

In 2018, the administrative flags were ordered to be removed and were subsequently taken down from the forefront of town halls and mayor’s offices in Băile Tușnad/ Tusnádfürdő, and Covasna/Kovászna. These incidents are further proof that despite numerous international recommendations to the contrary, Romanian authorities continue to blatantly disregard the right of the Hungarian community to use their national and regional symbols.

THE PERSECUTION OF HUNGARIAN SYMBOLS

The disappointment and exhaustion of Attila Csibi and of those Hungarian local leaders who decide to take down the flags after being given notice, rather than risking being caught up in legal battles for years, highlights the absurdity and the injustice of the situation. It also points to the relentlessness and viciousness of Roma34

It is not uncommon that the Hungarian flag is stolen or otherwise vandalised. Such was the case at the DAHR headquarters in Oradea/Nagyvárad. Last year alone, the Hungarian flag that is put up on the forefront of the building was stolen three times and there was also an attempt to set it on fire on the 30th of December, which was caught on camera. Nonetheless, the perpetrators are yet to be apprehended.

Both the Hungarian and the Szekler flag displayed on the headquarters of the Democratic Alliance of Hungarians in Romania in the town of Sângeorgiu de Pădure/Erdőszentgyörgy had to be removed, according to the latest court order.

nian authorities in their campaign against the symbols of the Hungarian community. This particular situation is also doubly unjust and problematic. First of all, as mentioned above, the flags of other countries can be displayed according to the Romanian legislation, provided that the Romanian flag is also hoisted next to them, a criterion that is met in the case of the DAHR headquarters in Sângeorgiu de Pădure/Erdőszentgyörgy. In fact, there were five flags in total displayed on the forefront of the building: the Szekler, the Hungarian, the Romanian, the flag of the European Union and the flag of DAHR. Secondly, the building that the local organisation of DAHR rented to house its headquarters is owned by the church, which means that under the law, it constitutes private property.

The use of the Hungarian flag or even the displaying of its colours has proven to be a cause for serious disputes and legal backlash on more than one occasion. Prior to the 15th of March celebrations in 2018, which is the national day of all Hungarians, the cities of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy and Târgu Secuiesc/Kézdivásárhely had been decorated with flags and ribands in the colours of the Hungarian flag. The Hungarian mayors of these two cities have subsequently been fined by the Covasna county prefect, Sebastian Cucu, with the total sum of 10,000 RON each (approximately 2100 EUR) for putting

THE PERSECUTION OF HUNGARIAN SYMBOLS

Observations and recommendations: Whether we are talking about the Szekler flag, the Hungarian flag, other regional and local symbols or administrative flags with regional symbols, such a measure of persecution against these is unacceptable, given that in numerous international treaties and agreements, as well as through its own national legislation, Romania has committed to preserving the identity of its national minorities. The symbols of any community are an intrinsic element of its identity. We ask that Romania honours its international commitments by adopting relevant laws to this effect, which clearly stipulate the right of minorities to use their national, regional and local symbols.

4 HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY 4.1. POLITICAL UNWILLINGNESS TO UPDATE MINORITY RIGHTS In the summer of 2018 two legislative proposals containing minority-friendly provisions were passed in the Romanian Parliament, however, President Klaus Iohannis refused to sign them into law. One concerns an amendment to the 2011 Law on Education, stating that a linguistic minority must be consulted whenever the issue of establishing, re-organising or closing an educational institution of that linguistic community is raised. This amendment was especially welcome by the Hungarian community in Romania, since in the future it could preempt situations like the one of the Catholic school in Târgu Mureș/Marosvásárhely, a Hungarian schools which – as we have detailed in our report of last year – was closed under false allegations by the National Anticorruption Directorate and re-opened last year after lengthy political bargains. The President refused to promulgate this law, invoking a few passages in the text of the law that were ambiguous, according to Iohannis, including the term “linguistic minority”.

After being stolen three times in the course of 2018, the Hungarian flag put up at the DAHR headquarters in Oradea/Nagyvárad was almost set on fire at the end of the year.

up the Hungarian flag without displaying an equal number of Romanian flags as well. The mayor of Odorheiu Secuiesc/Székelyudvarhely was also fined twice with 5000 RON by the Harghita county prefect under the same charges, once for the March 15th decorations and once for the decorations put up on October 23rd, when Hungarians commemorate the 1956 uprising against Soviet rule. The three mayors have decided to pursue legal action and appeal the decision to fine them. As the mayor of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy, Árpád Antal argued, according to the law, the minorities that have a national organisation are allowed to use their symbols freely.

THE PERSECUTION OF HUNGARIAN SYMBOLS

Harghita and Mureș Counties addressed a letter to President Klaus Iohannis, in which they asked him not to promulgate the said law because - according to them - it would have undermined the status of Romanian as the official language in the country. As we have mentioned in our first chapter, Iohannis did indeed refuse to sign this law, sending it to the Constitutional Court, together with a

A law that made it possible for small minority children, who do not yet speak the state language, to be able to enjoy films at the cinema in their mother tongue, was fiercely opposed by one of the opposition parties.

100-page argumentation, in which he questioned several measures meant to broaden linguistic rights for national minorities. The animosity towards minority-friendly legislation often manifests itself in relation to the most benign initiatives, like the one by the Democratic Alliance of Hungarians in Romania (DAHR), which allowed for films in the cinema to be subtitled or dubbed in the language of national minorities as well. The

The other proposal concerned the new Administrative Code, which contained certain passages that would have advanced the issue of linguistic rights for minorities. The Civic Forum of Romanians from Covasna,

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

4.2. THE RESPONSIBILITY OF POLITICAL LEADERS IN COMBATTING HATE SPEECH

aim behind this law was to allow small children, who do not yet speak the state language, to be able to enjoy films at the cinema in their mother tongue. The law was opposed by the Save Romania Union (USR) under absurd claims. In this case, however, common sense eventually prevailed and the law was passed in parliament.

Unfortunately, not only do political leaders in Romania often fail to condemn expressions of racism, xenophobia and hate speech, but some have themselves promoted negative images of national minorities and other vulnerable groups, going as far as inciting to violence.

Observations and recommendations: The fact that certain politicians, including high-ranking political leaders of the legislative and executive branches continually resist the idea of broadening and updating minority rights breeds mistrust and a deep sense of alienation within the Hungarian community of Romania, while it also inevitably contributes to interethnic tensions. A possible solution that would guarantee basic rights for national minorities is the adoption of the law on minorities, a draft proposal of which was submitted to Parliament by DAHR back in 2005. Such a comprehensive legislative framework would unite all provisions relating to national minorities under one law, and thus eliminate contradictory regulations that allow for interpretations.

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

In early 2018, former prime minister Mihai Tudose threatened to hang Hungarian leaders who put up the Szekler flag.

Mihai Tudose, the former Prime Minister of Romania threatened in early 2018 to hang members of the Hungarian minority in Romania who hoist the Szekler flag, the unofficial regional symbol of three Romanian counties. He made this statement after the presidents of the three Hungarian parties from Transylvania signed a joint statement regarding their efforts to establish a form of autonomy in the said region. The declaration adopted in Cluj-Napoca/Kolozsvár by UDMR/RMDSZ, PCM/MPP and PPMT/ EMNP briefly enumerated the principles meant to clarify their common stance on the various notions of autonomy. The Romanian politicians and public figures reacting to this story completely rejected the idea, saying that it is unacceptable and unconstitutional to speak about autonomy in Romania.

In a talk-show entitled Jocuri de putere (Power games) on Realitatea TV (a show known for giving a platform to nationalist politicians and opinion-makers) which aired on the 10th of January, the former Prime Minister shockingly suggested the hanging of those who support autonomy. He declared that, as Prime Minister, his stance on autonomy was the same as his view on people hoisting the Szekler flag: “I clearly stated that if the Szekler flag will wave, then those who put it up will also wave next to the flag.”

most obvious indicator of the fact that hate speech targeting minorities continues to be a major problem within Romanian society.

After complaints made by several Hungarian NGOs, the National Council for Combatting Discrimination found that Tudose’s statement indeed constitutes discrimination, but he only received an official notice. A few days after making the infamous statement Tudose lost the confidence of his party members and was subsequently forced to step down as Prime Minister, however, this did not happen as a result of his hateful rhetoric, but due to party in-fighting. Moreover, he was allowed to remain a member of the governing Social-Democratic Party (PSD) even after the incident. (Tudose recently announced that he would leave PSD in order to join a new party formed by another former Romanian Prime Minister, also formerly a member of PSD, Victor Ponta.)

Observations and recommendations: Political leaders, parties and organisations must unequivocally condemn expressions of racism, xenophobia and any other form of hate speech directed against vulnerable groups such as national, ethnic or other minorities. Moreover, denouncing these attitudes is not enough in itself, it should always be followed by immediate, clear and adequate actions on behalf of political groups, especially when the person committing the offense is a member of that specific party/ group/organisation. The response should be proportional to the severity of a particular statement involving hate speech, also taking into consideration whether it targets a member of a vulnerable group or an entire community. Furthermore, given that political parties have established networks within local communities and usually have the necessary financial and human resources, they should consider establishing offices that provide legal aid to victims of hate speech and discrimination. Finally, considering that the media are often the ones promoting hate speech against certain vulnerable groups, politicians should openly boycott and therefore refuse to give interviews to/appear on media outlets or specific television programmes which have in the past printed/aired messages of hate speech, either through their own news anchors and reporters, or by giving a platform to politicians, activists and opinion-makers who propagate openly nationalist, racist, xenophobic or any other kind of hateful rhetoric.

This is arguably the most notable case in recent years of a leading Romanian politician uttering openly xenophobic and nationalist statements regarding the members of a national minority, statements that also condone and even promote violence towards a minority on national television. However, this is far from the only instance of high-ranking Romanian politicians openly expressing nationalist and xenophobic messages. Most notably, former President Traian Băsescu often shares messages on social media that are meant to incite hatred toward the Hungarian community in Romania. The fact that such prominent and leading public figures can promote hate speech and intolerance with impunity and even go on to have successful political careers is the 39

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

4.3. INCITEMENT TO HATRED AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY nic conflicts in the mostly Hungarian-inhabited areas, often for the most absurd reasons.

As we have shown throughout this report, incitement to hatred against the Hungarian minority in Romania is still widely present in Romanian society. There has been some improvement, especially compared to the ’90, when hate speech against minorities and especially Hungarians was a mainstay of the Romanian political discourse. Some of these hateful messages have now been relegated to social media, where instigators enjoy relative anonymity, while others are reduced to a few nationalist shows on TV. However, probably the most damaging and efficient hate campaigns are done under the cloak of civil society activism.

Dan Tanasă was especially vocal and active in the days leading up to and immediately following the 1st of December celebrations last year, when Romania celebrated 100 years since the formation of the modern Romanian state. He started by releasing a statement in which he called upon the mayor of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy to put up as many Romanian flags and in the same size as the Hungarian flags put up for the 15th of March, the national day of Hungarians. This of course was an unnecessary Following Tanasă’s campaign against the abovementioned play, on the night of the premier, a group of nationalist protesters stormed the theatre in an attempt to disrupt the performance.

Tanasă demanded explanations from the director of the Romanian theatre company in Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy for choosing to stage a play written by a Hungarian playwright.

posturing on his part, meant solely to incite local Romanians against the mayor and against the Hungarian community, since each year, without exception, the city of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy is decorated days in advance with Romanian flags throughout its main streets and squares.

Such is the case of the provocateur Dan Tanasă and the organisation led by him (Civic Association for Dignity in Europe), which we have frequently mentioned throughout out report. Apart from the very vicious campaigns that they conduct in the form of legal action against the official use of the Hungarian language and against the symbols of the Hungarian community, this organisation is also known for frequently attempting to stir up intereth-

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

For the occasion of the centennial the Romanian theatre company of the same city

gatory campaign against the play had some regrettable effects. On the opening night of the pay on December 1st as part of the centennial celebration, when a group of protesters dressed in Romanian folk costumes and holding Romanian flags stormed the hall of the theatre with the intention of disrupting the performance. The director of the company tried to reason with them, but was eventually forced to ask for help from the police. It was later revealed that the disruptors came from the neighbouring county of Brașov.

decided to stage a piece by a contemporary Hungarian playwright, Csaba Székely, entitled “Not really 1918”. Well before the play even opened, Dan Tanasă took the leadership of the theatre to task for not choosing a play by a Romanian writer and demanded to know details regarding the costs of staging the play and the persons who decided to stage this particular piece. He expressed dismay over the fact that – according to him – this comedy ridicules the formation of Romania, while complaining that the poster of the play features a Hungarian flag as well. Certain members of the local Romanian community raised their voice against Tanasă’s bigotry, arguing that there is nothing offensive or outrageous about staging a play by a Hungarian playwright, as suggested by Tanasă. Unfortunately, despite the Romanian leadership of the theatre explaining and defending their decision, Tanasă’s insti-

Xenophobic stickers targeting the Hungarian community in the city of Oradea/Nagyvárad.

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

4.4. ANTI-HUNGARIAN DISCOURSE AND DISINFORMATION IN THE MEDIA

In May, severe anti-Hungarian inscriptions appeared on stickers in the city of Oradea/ Nagyvárad. The inscriptions, with the Romanian national flag in the background, state that ”We are Romanians and we will defend our land, our people and our history”. Under the text, in the yellow centre bar of the national flag, the word ”Hungary” and the Hungarian flag are crossed out. But the most xenophobic aspect of the inscription is the part at the bottom of the sticker, namely a derogatory and deeply insulting term (bozgor) used by Romanians to refer to the Hungarians. This expression is often used with the purpose of inciting hostility towards the Hungarian community.

It is not uncommon in Romania for the media to attack the Hungarian community by appealing to nationalist sentiments within the majority population and by stoking fear, in order to reach higher ratings.

Observations and recommendations: It is extremely regrettable that instigatory campaigns by professional provocateurs have a place in Romanian public life, and that due to the media such political fringe activity enters the mainstream discourse. It is not enough for the the media and leading politicians to refrain from encouraging such actions. They should publicly distance themselves from and condemn the actions of these nationalist groups and individuals.

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

The show hosted by journalist Rareș Bogdan gives a platform to some of the most xenophobic anti-Hungarian messages on mainstream media.

At the forefront of the nationalistic fearmongering and anti-Hungarian discourse in Romania are often some of the most popular news channels, where politicians, political commentators and journalists frequently voice strongly xenophobic messages targeting the entire Hungarian community of Romania. These talk-shows are fuelled by purposely false and distorted claims regarding the Hungarian minority with the purpose of shocking viewers, particularly a talk-show entitled Jocuri de putere (Power games) on Realitatea TV, hosted by Rareș Bogdan, and a show providing news commentary entitled Lumea lui Banciu (Banciu’s world) on B1 TV, hosted by Radu Banciu. Over the past few years our organisation has filed several complaints regarding xenophobic and anti-Hungarian content on these two shows alone to the National Council for Combatting Discrimination, as well as the National Audiovisual Council. Most of these cases

With a clear intention of misleading viewers, the show Jocuri de putere claimed to be showing images from the same city, while in fact comparing two different cities. The purpose was to falsely imply that on the national day of Romania, there were no Romanian flags put up in Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy, while on the national day of Hungarians the city was decorated with Hungarian flags.

has an extremely nationalist undertone, often appealing to nationalist sentiment by, for instance, playing patriotic songs depicting Transylvania as the land of Romanians. This latter tactic is frequently employed (playing a nationalist song with xenophobic undertones at the beginning of the show, as a means of setting an anti-Hungarian mood) when the topics of the show include the symbols of the Hungarian community, linguistic rights for national minorities, or the much debated issue of autonomy in Szeklerland. Moreover, host Rareș Bogdan continues to invite guests who have in the past expressed severely anti-Hungarian views, often inciting to hatred and even violence against the Hungarian community. A case in point is the journalist Oreste Teodorescu, who in March of 2018, echoing the comments of former

are still in progress, but some have been resolved and resulted in hefty fines being given to the two TV hosts in question. Despite numerous official notices and fines from competent authorities in previous years, the talk-show Jocuri de putere continues to give voice to some of the most hateful, xenophobic and anti-Hungarian messages on mainstream media. The show in general

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

up the majority of the population: “The country is relatively whole at the end of 2018, even if it lost control over two counties. We are talking about Harghita and Covasna, those are not Romanian counties anymore, if we were faithful to the truth. There, Romanians are basically pariahs, they have no business being there.” This is a perfect example of the type of xenophobic, anti-Hungarian messages often expressed by Banciu, who builds a narrative that is anti-establishment and nationalistic at the same time, and thus appeals to disappointed citizens, while seamlessly inserting false claims and extremely distorted negative imagery about national minorities.

the senator that she understands perfectly what he is saying, because unlike him, she is a native speaker of Romanian. When making an argument about why the idea of autonomy is unacceptable according to her, Denise Rifai put particular emphasis on the following expressions: “OUR Constitution”, “OUR country”. She concluded her thoughts by adding: “This land belongs to the Romanian people, not to minorities”, basically saying that the entire Hungarian community, as well as all national minorities are second-class citizens in Romania. Such language is totally inadmissible in any public medium, not to mention on mainstream television. For this particular episode, the show subsequently received a 10,000 RON fine (approximately 2100 EUR) from the National Audiovisual Council, following a complaint submitted by our organisation.

TV host Denise Rifai frequently targets the Hungarian community with false claims and hateful rhetoric.

2017, on the national day of Romania, there were no Romanian flags put up in Sfântu Gheorghe, while on the national day of Hungarians the city was decorated with Hungarian flags. This constitutes willful misleading on the part of the producers of this show, given that the two images shown actually depict two different cities. Furthermore, the information implied by the two pictures, namely that there were no Romanian flags in Sfântu Gheorghe on December 1st 2017 is false, as the main squares and streets of the city are decorated each year with Romanian flags.

prime minister Mihai Tudose, said the following on Jocuri de putere regarding the decorations featuring the colours of the Hungarian flag on the national day of Hungarians (for details see Chapter 3.3): “Let them wave next to the ribands then, to cite the former prime minister, Mr. Tudose. By God, if they are ribands, then may you wave next to them, my dear Árpád.” (referring to the mayor of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy)

Another talk-show on Realitatea TV, which also frequently targets the Hungarian community with false claims and hateful rhetoric, is entitled Talk News and is hosted by Denise Rifai. During a show in December of last year she had on as one of her guests senator Barna Tánczos, a Hungarian MP, whom she barely allowed to speak. At one point, Ms. Rifai told

During the same show in March mentioned above, Jocuri de putere also showed two images, one beside the other, one showing a street in Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy, while the other one showed the main square in Miercurea Ciuc/Csíkszereda. This imagery was meant to demonstrate that in

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

Observations and recommendations: The above described incidents are representative of the corrosive effect that the media can have when it comes to depicting the Hungarian community in Romania, and how it can frame an issue as harmless and - by any European standards - normal phenomenon as the symbol of a local community, or the update of linguistic rights, in a way that further incites negative and dismissive attitudes toward an already controversial issue. Next to the responsibility of political leaders in combatting hate speech towards minorities, the media also undoubtedly have an obligation to present and discuss news in a way that is objective, balanced and does not promote false negative images and stereotypes about minorities.

Journalist Radu Banciu does not shy away from expressing false, exaggerated or sensationalist claims, in order to incite hatred against the Hungarian minority.

Journalist Radu Banciu also frequently tackles in his show topics relating to the Hungarian community in Romania, and he does not shy away from expressing false or exaggerated claims in order to incite hatred against the Hungarian minority. Following the national day of Romania, on his show of December 2nd, Banciu discussed the celebrations held throughout the country on the previous day. While discussing the subject, he made the following statement regarding Harghita and Covasna counties, where Hungarians make

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

4.5. HATE SPEECH ON SOCIAL MEDIA of the Romanian National Anthem, a black flag was raised on the town hall building of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy, next to the national flag. Moreover, he added that “also in Szeklerland, mayors frequently hoist the Szekler flag on town halls and county council buildings instead of the national flag”. These statements are not only misleading, but clearly denote the intention of the former president to incite hatred against Hungarians in Romania. As clarified by the mayor of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy, the black flag was put up due to the fact that one of the honorary citizens of the town has passed away.

Anti-Hungarian sentiment and hate speech are almost completely unchecked on social media, which has become a breeding ground for xenophobic rhetoric in recent years. It is quite alarming that, not only average citizens, but political leaders also use social media as a platform to instigate against Hungarians and thus play the so-called Hungarian card in order to obtain political capital.

Sadly, this is not an isolated incident, as the former president of Romania has frequently employed severe anti-Hungarian discourse in recent years, as a means of creating a political platform for himself. For instance, after it was briefly introduced in September that professors of Romanian language and literature should be the ones to teach Romanian to Hungarian primary school children as well (see Chapter 2.1.2), Băsescu was furious when this practice was reversed. In a message posted on his social media page, the former president wrote: “To sell the Romanian language in the year of the centennial is extremely disgraceful”. His post once again revealed strong anti-Hungarian sentiment,

Former president Traian Băsescu has displayed an openly xenophobic and anti-Hungarian discourse on his social media page in recent years.

Former Romanian president Traian Băsescu posted a text on his Facebook page in which he mentioned that on the 29th of July, the Day

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

being frequently inundated with threatening messages directed at well-known Hungarian political leaders. A case in point is C.R.B, who regularly posts images of Hungarian political leaders, in which threatens them and/or openly incites to violence against them. In July of last year he posted an image depicting a tombstone with the picture of Árpád Antal, the mayor of Sfântu Gheorghe/Sepsiszentgyörgy photoshopped on it.

Observations and recommendations: In light of these frequent and alarming manifestations of xenophobia and hate speech on social media, it is clear that the legislation regulating hate speech in Romania should be amended, with a particular view to addressing the issue of online hate speech, a relatively new phenomenon, which nonetheless, has become widespread and is mostly unregulated.

A facebook post by C.R.B. depicting the tombstone of the mayor of Sfântu Gheorghe/ Sepsiszentgyörgy. Threatening posts against Hungarian political leaders are unfortunately quite common.

with misleading and exaggerated statements: “DAHR, with the complicity of PSD [the governing Social-Democratic Party], are conducting an aggressive campaign of de-Romanianisation and Hungarianisation of the areas inhabited by the Hungarian minority”. As shocking and disappointing as it is to see leading Romanian politicians expressing xenophobic ideas on social media, anti-Hungarian messages are far more rampant among private individuals, social media

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

4.6. HATE SPEECH AND VIOLENCE IN SPORTS parody of the song “Lord, protect the Romanians” resounded from the loudspeakers on the Anghel Iordănescu Stadium in Bucharest. Several words from the original song’s lyrics were replaced with vulgar and xenophobic expressions, inciting violence against the Hungarian community. The Romanian Football Federation subsequently fined Juventus Bucuresti, the organising team, with an amount of approximately 2000 euros. However, sanctions of this amount are symbolic at best, given that teams in the First League have multi-million euro budgets. Therefore, such amounts are not nearly enough to deter similar incidents in the future.

Racist, xenophobic and nationalist hate speech are quite commonplace during sport events in Romania, especially among football fans, who for instance often display blatantly anti-Hungarian inscriptions and chant xenophobic slogans. Regarding these threatening and verbally violent discourses, as well as physical violence during sport matches, the Romanian legislation is rather permissive when it comes to sanctioning the persons responsible for these actions.Be-

Another case of hate speech directed against the team Sepsi OSK occurred on the 27th of August 2018, when the supporters of the opposing team, FC Botoșani, displayed a banner that read “You sing in the language of horses and you dream about autonomy”. The expression “language of the horses” is often used by nationalist groups and individuals in Romania when referring to the Hungarian language. This particular incident was not sanctioned in any way by the Romanian Football Federation. The Mikó Imre Association for the Protection of Minority Rights subsequently filed a complaint regarding the incident to the National Council for Combating Discrimination, however, there was no response to the complaint as of 30.01.2019, which points to another problem when it comes to cases of hate speech and incitement against a certain national or ethnic community, name-

During a football match in August 2018, the fans of FC Botoșani displayed a banner directed at the Hungarian supporters of the opposing team that read: “You sing in the language of horses and you dream about autonomy”

fore the start of a football match on the 9th of April 2018, during a football match between ASC Juventus București and Sepsi OSK in the Romanian First League, players and spectators witnessed an alarming demonstration of anti-Hungarian sentiment directed against the players and the fans of Sepsi OSK, a team that comes from a predominantly Hungarian-inhabited city. During the warm-up, a

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

ly that hate speech in sports is unfortunately often perceived as something which is almost normal, especially among football fans, a kind of collateral characteristic of football fandom, and thus these cases are not considered a priority, not even by official bodies, institutions and organizations that deal with combating and/or sanctioning hate speech.

Observations and recommendations: In their approaches to tackling hate speech and acts of hatred in sports, national bodies, institutions, organizations, sport federations and clubs etc. should clearly distinguish between measures aiming at preventing such phenomena and measures of handling cases that already occurred. Furthermore, it is important to stress the role of sport clubs in combating hate speech among their supporters, by establishing clear regulations and imposing sanctions, such as removing offenders or in some extreme cases even permanently banning them. In terms of sanctions, it is more effective to sanction sport clubs, rather than individuals or groups of individuals, firstly because, as outlined in the preliminary draft report, sanctions often make perpetrators more hostile and are rarely conducive to long-term solutions, and secondly, penalizing teams/ sport clubs will motivate them to more effectively monitor the acts of hate speech committed by their own supporters, especially in the case of repeat offenders. Regarding the latter issue, membership cards for supporters might be a useful way of keeping track of repeat offenders and thus imposing adequate sanctions for these perpetrators.

HATE SPEECH AND INSTIGATION AGAINST THE HUNGARIAN COMMUNITY

THE RESTITUTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY

5 THE RESTITUTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY In 2012 the European Court of Human Rights fined Romania for not settling this case within a reasonable amount of time. The most recent development as far as this particular cultural heritage is concerned is a first degree court decision of the Alba Iulia Court of Appeals, in which the court rejected the request of the Roman Catholic Church to return the library that rightfully belongs to the church.

Despite the numerous international commitments and the national legislation, as signalled several times by our organisation, Romania continues to be in debt regarding the restitution of property confiscated from the church during to communist regime. The restitution process in Romania has been stagnating for years and involves mostly the estates of Hungarian churches and numerous castles, mansions and estates formerly belonging to Hungarian landowners.

The point of the view of the church is that according to the testament of Ignác Batthány, the library and the planetarium were left to the Roman Catholic Church and that in the testament the term “Province of Transylvania” - on the basis of which the Romanian state considers itself the rightful successor - signifies the respective archdiocese within the Catholic church. A similarly absurd decision by the Giurgiu Tribunal concerns the property of the Bánffy family, a woodland of 9300 hectares. Although a 2007 restitution decision clearly stated that the property belongs to the Bánffy family, the decision was attacked in 2014 on the request of the former Mureș County Prefect, Vasile-Liviu Oprea. The decision of the Giurgiu Tribunal is final and states that the property of the Bánffy family belongs to the state.

The Batthyaneum Library in Alba Iulia/ Gyulafehérvár has still not been returned to the its rightful owner, the Roman Catholic Church.

One of the oldest libraries in Transylvania is the Batthyaneum Library in Alba Iulia/ Gyulafehérvár. A 1999 government decision states that the library should be returned to its rightful owner, the Roman Catholic Church.

THE RESTITUTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY

The building that currently hosts the Faculty of Letters of the Babeș-Bolyai University in ClujNapoca/Kolozsvár also initially belonged to the Roman Catholic Church, and was nationalised in 1948.

Observations and recommendations:

Another restitution case involves the building that currently hosts the Faculty of Letters of the Babeș-Bolyai University in Cluj-Napoca/ Kolozsvár, historically known as Marianum, which was founded as a school for girls by the Roman Catholic Church at the beginning of the 20th century. The property was nationalised in 1948, and in recent years the church has been fighting to regain ownership of the said building. However, a first degree ruling by the Alba Iulia Court of Appeals denied the restitution. This is the latest one in a series of questionable rulings, which violate the commitments made by Romania regarding the restitution of private property confiscated during the communist regime. As our organisation has repeatedly stated, the restitution of private property in Romania has all but halted in recent years, with the Hungarian churches being the most affected by this negative tendency.

The issue of the stagnating and often reversed restitution processes in Romania is an affront to the basic right to ownership and an open discriminatory campaign against certain religions, especially those of the minorities. Although Romania has slowly been returning confiscated private properties for years, it has not done so in equal measure, as national and religious minorities are clearly being discriminated against.

THE RESTITUTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY

6 STATISTICS ON THE ACTIVITY OF THE MIKÓ IMRE MINORITY RIGHTS LEGAL SERVICES ASSISTANCE

Observations and recommendations:

Most of the decisions regarding cases that we have submitted to the National Council for Combatting Discrimination have, unfortunately, not been favourable. The ones that have been deemed to be cases of ethnic discrimination include cases like the unfortunate incident of the young girl who was not provided adequate translation in Hungarian while being treated in the hospital, and the discrimination of Hungarian pupils at the English language contest. The processing of claims is nonetheless very slow, which is why we still have 13 ongoing cases, in which the Council has not yet made a decision.

Besides regularly informing the international community concerning the violation of minority and linguistic rights in Romania through our newsletters, reports and recommendations submitted to international organisations, the Mikó Imre Minority Rights Legal Services Assistance has been engaged in numerous lawsuits and filed several complaints to the competent national bodies that deal with issues of discrimination and hate speech. We have 7 currently ongoing lawsuits, involving cases of bilingual inscriptions, the use of the Hungarian community’s symbols, as well as lawsuits against certain individuals on grounds of hate speech. We also regularly submit complaints to the National Council for Combatting Discrimination and the National Audiovisual Council. Most of our complaints submitted to the National Council for Combatting Discrimination and the National Audiovisual Council concern cases of hate speech in the media and in sports. The rest of our complaints fall under the category of discrimination on the base of ethnicity.

Unfortunately, legal cases in Romania evolve very slowly, as does the processing of complaints submitted to the National Council for Combatting Discrimination or the National Audiovisual Council. Most of the lawsuits that our organisation is involved in have been going on for years, while the majority of our complaints, even those submitted in 2017 are still under consideration.

Some of the cases in which our organisation has been successful have resulted in fines as well, while others only led to an official notice.

All of the complaints that we have submitted to the National Audiovisual Council in the last two years have either resulted in favourable rulings, including those concerning the cases of hate speech in the media that we have mentioned in the relevant chapter, or are still under consideration.

STATISTICS ON THE ACTIVITY OF THE MIKÓ IMRE MINORITY RIGHTS LEGAL SERVICES ASSISTANCE

CONCLUSION

In the year 2018 there has been no significant improvement regarding the rights of minorities in Romania. In several crucial aspects, including the updating of linguistic rights, the use of national and regional symbols by the Hungarian community or the restitution of confiscated private property, the situation is much the same, in some cases even worse.

A systematic double standard persists when it comes to the symbols of the Hungarian community in Romania, who are not allowed to use their national, regional and local symbols. The Szekler flag, which is the symbol of the historic region of Szeklerland is viciously persecuted by Romanian authorities, while other regions in Romania, like Moldova and Bucovina, can use their flags freely.

The implementation of linguistic rights continues to be uneven and highly problematic, because there are currently no mechanisms that ensure the unequivocal application of these rights. The lack of proper mechanism and resources when it comes to this issue hinders the use of the mother tongue by national minorities within the local public administration and the judicial system. It also negatively affects basic, everyday occurrences like the use of bilingual place and street name signs, town hall and other inscriptions.

Hate speech and instigation against the Hungarian community sadly also continue to persist in Romanian society, with prominent Romanian political leaders, as well as the mainstream media playing an important role in propagating anti-Hungarian messages, stereotypes and false claims. Instead of promoting hateful rhetoric, the media and leading politicians should publicly distance themselves from and condemn any nationalist messages and actions that target minority communities. Regrettably, this is often not the case in Romanian society, as we have shown through numerous examples in this report.

When it comes to ethnic discrimination the area most affected continues to be the minority education system, whether we are talking about the massive lack of textbooks in primary and secondary education, the faulty teaching of the state language and so on. Other forms of ethnic discrimination that continue to abound include the struggle to provide adequate health care assistance and information in the mother tongue to members of national minorities, abuses of power committed by high-ranking Romanian officials, doubts regarding equality before the law for national minorities etc.

Despite the fact that the protection of the rights of national minorities, as well as the protection of human rights in general, are enshrined in the Constitution of Romania, unfortunately, in many cases, these remain mere guidelines, principles to aspire to at best, given that further legislative guarantees are often lacking, are formulated in a way that allows for interpretation, or simply fail to establish clear mechanisms for implementation, follow-up and sanctions. Therefore, in order to address these issues and also guarantee harmonious interethnic relations in Romania, we consider that it is of utter importance to identify and point out the shortcomings of this discriminatory system and thus draw the attention of the international community to the ongoing violation of rights faced by the Hungarian national minority in Romania.

The issue of the stagnating and often reversed restitution process in Romania also gives reason for concern. Although Romania has slowly been returning confiscated private properties for years, it has not done so in equal measure, as national and religious minorities are clearly being discriminated against.

NOTES