32 Responses to “Votanikos”

1. 1 Aditya Jun 6th, 2007 at 11:16 am

   Hi,
   been a long time since I visited this blog.. the notion of eviction and resettlement as brought about by you is seen in New Delhi too, where I just completed some field work for an NGO.
   It is true that the rich/poor divide plays a role here but what must also be seen is the notion of property.
   Is that state owner of property or ‘a trustee’? that makes the difference between eviction and settlement.

2. 2 Panayote Dimitras Jun 7th, 2007 at 10:05 am

   If someone has the time to translate from Greek the Ta Nea article from yesterday
   and especially the statement by the neutral canteen owner on how the eviction was carried out (and also how the Roma themselves describe it) it will be great.

   Do know that Eleftheros Typos yesterday had a very good article on the same Roma through the eyes of DD whose blog was also presented in it.

   Finally, a piece of good news.

   Some of the evicted Roma (on Saturday) settled in a deserted factory nearby. While we were all visiting them on Tuesday (yes DD your paraphrasing of your friend’s evaluation is accurate, she asked me to tell you), the owner came to evict them illegally (ie without proper procedures).

   He first had pretended he and his friends were the police.

   Then when we came he had to say he is the owner and had called the police, which turned out to be false.

   We called the police and the latter saw they can do nothing if there is no complaint especially as they read the Ombudsman letter to the Ministry stating that these people have to be relocated and not evicted.

   The owner and his lawyer could not file a complaint that day, as they said, and we all left.

   On that afternoon, a local (Kolonos) police station unit went to tell the Roma to leave.

   They called us and we semi-angrily told police they were being abusive of the Roma. So police left and the Roma stayed.

   On Wednesday morning the Kolonos police chief called us and we told him what the legal situation is: either a complaint is filed and police would arrest all ca300 Roma -men, women & children- so they get a legal home in the detention center; or there will be relocation to a place allocated to them by the authorities.

   We asked him not to pressure the Roma again and anyway not to go there without us who represent them legally, as they get scared.

   Nevertheless he did exactly that yesterday afternoon.

   The Roma called us a while later to tell us they were afraid of being stripped of their legal papers or being fined or going to court and they planned to leave.

   We managed to stop them, arguing that if they went they will never get any help from the sate.

   We called the Athens police directorate but the officer in duty apparently never bothered to inform his superiors as it turned out.

   This morning we called the deputy chief of the Athens Police, Mr. Theodoros Moustokas (good cops must be named).

   After having checked, he told us that he gave instructions that police will only execute legal orders and stop visiting the Roma just to “advise” them of the illegality of their settlement there.

   So we stopped three eviction attempts and possibly got a “stay of execution” for a while.

   PASOK and Syn have issued strong statements (PASOKs is very comprehensive too). PASOK was there with us on Tuesday while we expect Syn to go there tomorrow.

   Syn statement

   Pasok statement

   Roma from the remaining settlement in Orfeos keep calling us to ask what about them.

   We repeat to them their rights.

   Let us hope that after all this fuss they will not be evicted.

   Watch out for a BBC World TV story, maybe today; an Ios (Virus) story possibly in this Saturday’s Eleftherotypia; and a Proto Thema article possibly this Sunday. They were all eye witnesses of the Tuesday midday events along with DD et al.

3. 3 Margaret Jun 9th, 2007 at 3:26 pm

   I wondered if you knew exactly what the Greek national law does provide by way of an obligation to house the Roma? Does this alter depending on whether a child, a family, or an adult male is concerned? Is there an equivalent to the English law test of being “unintentionally homeless”?

   I appreciate that the Roma may have nowhere else to go, and this may be why they are where they are at present, but what does Greek law require, first, of a municipality by way of a duty to provide a suitable site for travelling people and, secondly, when Roma occupy private land either short term or long term?

   I presume that nobody (except a Marxist) is going to advocate the the Roma be allowed to occupy private land without the consent of the owner because almost everyone can imagine how they might feel if their own private land was unlawfully occupied - including land owning Roma. So it seems to boil down to what the law requires the municipality to do, and whether there is some form of judicial review available to enforce an individual’s rights.

   I presume that Panyote Dimitras knows the answer to these questions. It would be great to know the answer if only to understand where the rights and wrongs of this event lie.

4. 4 Nick Jun 9th, 2007 at 4:15 pm

   DeviousDiva, I have added a stub of a ‘Social Issues in Greece’ page at the english wikipedia, if you could lend a hand over at this page (in a NPOV way of course), this would be good.

5. 5 talos Jun 9th, 2007 at 11:15 pm

   I’m posting a comment I made over at the European Tribune where DD’s post was crossposted, at her request. It was a reaction to the proposal of writing to the Mayor of Athens (Nikitas Kaklamanis) to complain. It drifts towards a bit more political issues but it might provide some relevant background:

   Kaklamanis doesn’t give a damn. He claims that the cleaning crews, the majority of which were employees of mr. Vovos a really big building contractor who’s bent on “developing” every last square inch of the city’s few and endangered free spaces (Athens has the lowest percentage of urban parks and assorted greenery than any European capital btw) were there just to clean up and never asked the Roma to leave, but rather that they “left on their own” - despite many witnesses that claim the contrary. He also has threatened to counter-sue Dimitras of GHW, who immediately filed a suit against the mayor.
   The municipality claims that where the Roma go is not their business but the peripheral authority’s - which is true but irrelevant: if there are no housing arrangements in place for the Roma to move to (arrangements that they consent to moreover) than the whole action was illegal. Also illegal were mr. Vovos bribes and the fact that the police although they were called to stop the incursion, did nothing, claiming that they were searching for the persons sued (as if they don’t know where the town hall or mr. Vovos company headquarters are).
   Mr. Vovos’ crews were led, escorted and aided by the municipal police making the municipal government the principal perpetrator of this crime. The opposition groups in the city council condemned the actions, but they’re a minority (and an even smaller minority is the left’s council members who are the only ones willing to raise a stink about this - in fact the only ones to fight against the mayor’s plans for the whole area)… Frankly the money involved is such that I’m wagering that nothing will be done. To give you an example, a huge Mall in Athens’ Northern suburbs, built and run by one of the companies owned by Spiros Latsis (who is the richest man in the country and no. 51 in the world), was built and is now working without any problems, despite the fact that it was built illegally, against all building regulations and despite a number of judicial orders for its construction to be stopped - orders which the police somehow always was too late to do anything about. Vovos isn’t quite in the same league as Latsis, but he’s apparently spreading money around - and will have no problem further bribing all involved not to get in the way.

   The area of Votanikos, is part of the “Olive grove” (Elaionas), an area which indeed was the source for olive oil in ancient Athens and is now a huge dump, consisting of warehouses, small factories and machine shops, with minimal planning and little infrastructure. City planners have, for the past few decades, insisted that this area (9 sq. km in total), was Athens’ last chance for a, desperately needed, large metropolitan park. The plans were laid. Panathinaikos’ new ground supposedly tied in nicely with the scheme, but after the stadium was approved, Vovos and others started buying land in the area like crazy, driving prices up and making quite clear that the plans to create a park area > 4 sq.km are unlikely to materialize.
   To return to the plight of the Roma. The only way that the Greek authorities will actually live up to their duty of providing housing for them (the international duties to do so have been circumvented by forming a committee on the issue which has done nothing at all, ever), is if the possibility of holding up construction plans due to EU pressure, forces the Periphery, Vovos or someone to move quickly to do so. So I guess the EU parliament, is a good place to start. The local authorities will just find imaginative excuses or ignore the complaints. A better solution is for Athenians to elect a decent mayor for a change (the Right has a stranglehold on the Mayorship for the past quarter century) but that’s in four years - but I don’t think I’ll live to see that day…

   I might also add here that it was reported in the press that the Roma school DD mentioned in a previous post - to add injury to insult - was recently firebombed by “persons unknown”…

6. 6 Panayote Dimitras Jun 10th, 2007 at 11:43 am

   In the press release from the Greek Helsinki Monitor about the illegal evictions you have the answer why the Mayor of Athens DOES have a legal obligation as even the Ombudsman states and that the state DOES have an obligation. This is the answer to Margaret and Talos here.

   By the way Talos the left opposition has not moved a finger, not even visited those people even though we urged them too, unlike PASOK that came along in the visit. Let us leave political sympathies out of this if we REALLY care about Roma and not party politics. As all these 200 families, ie ca 1500 Roma face imminent eviction while we from our sofas are posting here or writing statements. All written work is IRRELEVANT to prevent them from becoming homeless any day now. Only “MAJOR LEAGUE ACTION” can help.

7. 7 Panayote Dimitras Jun 10th, 2007 at 1:09 pm

   UPDATE!

   The already once evicted Roma just called GHM to inform that police -illegally of course- evicted them from the 120 Iera Odos old factory without any proper legal procedure, but only with threats of action if they did not leave. Scared as they were, they left and settled elsewhere in an opne aera they think is state property.

8. 8 deviousdiva Jun 10th, 2007 at 1:47 pm

   Thanks for the updates, Panayote. As the press release is only in Greek, is it possible for you to do a short summary of the obligations of the Mayor and the State towards the Roma who are being illegally evicted. It would be really helpful the non-Greek speakers reading this blog. Thanks.

9. 9 Panayote Dimitras Jun 10th, 2007 at 1:57 pm

   DD if I ever find the time to write to the internationals it will be there but as YOU know there are only 24 hours in my day and I have zillion things to do as well as this and I am alone

   But in previous postings I had put some material from international texts I think anyway

10. 10 Panayote Dimitras Jun 10th, 2007 at 5:04 pm

    NEW UPDATE!

    After Roma called back GHM it was clarified that six familes felt threatened enough to leave and resettled while the other 20+ upon GHM advice decided to stay there. Please keep in mind that the place belongs to a real estate agent (Riviera S.A.) and police appears as trying to help him evict them wihtout the legal process; just as the developper Vovos helped the City of Athens summarily evict the Roma in first place. This is how the “state of law” funtions in Greece.

11. 11 deviousdiva Jun 10th, 2007 at 5:34 pm

    I do realise you are very busy, Panayote and was just wondering if that was possible. I apologise if you felt I was being pushy. I will try and find the documents you mention but I asked you because I didn’t want to put out the wrong legal information. Thank you for keeping us informed of the situation.

12. 12 Panayote Dimitras Jun 10th, 2007 at 6:55 pm

    DD

    This was written in an Ombudsman letter to the authorities sent ironically three weeks before the evition about these people (and you saw me showing it to the police patrol car which then stopped the eviction process last Tuesday):

    «ενεργοποίηση του Δήμου Αθηναίων προκειμένου να θεσπίσει θετικά μέτρα για τη βελτίωση των συνθηκών διαβίωσης των εν λόγω κατοίκων, είτε με παραχώρηση δημοτικών και κοινοτικών οικοπέδων σε τυχόν αδύναμους δημότες του είτε με την παροχή χρηματικών βοηθημάτων, ειδών διαβίωσης και περίθαλψης σε κατοίκους που αντιμετωπίζουν σοβαρά προβλήματα διαβίωσης (άρθρο 75 Ι ε. & Ν. 3463/2006)» και

    «Τέλος, υπενθυμίζεται ότι η απορρέουσα από το Σύνταγμα και την κοινοτική νομοθεσία ειδική μέριμνα για την ομάδα αυτή επιτάσσει την αποφυγή εκ μέρους των εκάστοτε αρμοδίων αρχών κάθε μέτρου βίαιης αποβολής ή δι άλλου τρόπου αναγκαστικής αποχώρησης από τον τόπο κατοικίας τους, οσοδήποτε παράνομη ή οχληρή και αν είναι η εγκατάσταση, αν δεν έχει προηγηθεί η υπόδειξη συγκεκριμένου χώρου μετεγκατάστασης και νόμιμης παραμονής τους, που πληροί τουλάχιστον τους βασικούς όρους αξιοπρέπειας, και την ενεργό λήψη μέτρων για τη διευθέτηση των πρακτικών πτυχών της μετεγκατάστασης αυτής.»

    I will be most grateful if anyone can help translate this as it will speed up our appeal to the Council of Europe.

    Otherwise pls run a search on UN recommendations to, and European Committee for Social Rights conviciton of, Greece on Roma housing which I recall having posted to a similar question before

13. 13 john z Jun 11th, 2007 at 12:18 am

    I realise that feelings are running high on this issue, so at the risk of offending – apologies in advance – there are a couple of points I’m not clear on.
    Firstly, Talos, you say at Eurotrib that the Votanikos Roma are not Greek Roma but Albanian Roma, who are in Greece illegally. You also say that Greek Roma are against the actions and behaviour of those Roma who have come from Albania. Is this true?
    If it is, I think it provides a fuller picture of what’s going on at Votanikos, and alters the legal and moral dynamics.
    Secondly, Malcolm Brabant in the BBC piece linked by DD says that Votanikos is not only where PAO are to build their new stadium, it is also where the long-awaited Athens mosque – something which DD and PDimi have vociferously campaigned for – will be built. Is this true?
    If so, then we can’t say that the Votanikos development is simply about private greed or something as ‘trivial’ as a football stadium; it is also about satisfying the needs of hundreds of thousands of Muslim immigrants and making concrete the new multicultural nature of Athens, is it not?
    Finally, can anyone explain why the Albanian Roma, since they are finding it so hard to make a go of life in Greece, do not return to Albania? Many failed or disillusioned immigrants return to their country of origin. There’s no shame in this. Indeed, why did the Albanian Roma come to Greece in the first place? I don’t understand. What were their expectations?

14. 14 Margaret Jun 11th, 2007 at 12:19 am

    Panyote,

    I, too, am sorry if I persist with my questions.

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but the international instruments that you mention create an obligation between the international supervisory body and the state, but probably don’t create domestic remedies for individals. Is that correct?

    If so, I was asking whether there were any domestic law remedies available to the Roma, such as a Greek national law provision providing that municipalities have an obligation to house homeless people, or a right of judicial review to challenge the administration, or a right for the Roma to bring proceedings for some sort of prohibitory injunction to prevent their unlawful eviction.

    I understand that even if these remedies exist, their existence might only be theoretical in the that the Roma would need access to legal representation in order to mkae use of them, but still.

    I also understand that you are effectively running GHM by yourself now, but this is a fairly international window for your organisation and I imagine there would be some interest amongst the readership of this blog in the answer to the questions I pose.

15. 15 George Jun 11th, 2007 at 8:22 am

    I have read this post with genuine concern and sympathy for these Roma. Has anyone considered contacting the American Women of Greece (AWOG). I believe they do quite a bit of charity work for groups in need. Additionally, many of their members of the wives of high ranking US Diplomats, so if this situation was elevated to the level of American diplomats, maybe the Greek authorities would pay more attention and take this more seriously?

16. 16 deviousdiva Jun 11th, 2007 at 10:45 am

    There seems to be some misconceptions arising from this post and the subsequent discussion. I will attempt to answer some of the questions.

    John Z
    Feelings are running high on this issue but mainly against the Roma and their plight. Very few people are writing passionately in their defense.

    The Roma I have been posting about are Albanian but Talos wrongly speculated that they could be illegal. This is not true. He asked me to respond as to whether they were or not but I have been fairly absent from my computer as usual over the weekend and neglected to answer. So just to state once and for all here: They are residing legally in Greece and are entitled to all the safeguards and protections of any other person living here.

    As far as I know, there is no evidence of higher levels of racism towards the Albanian Roma from Greek Roma than generally exists in Greek population.

    The building of the mosque in that particular area is not confirmed as far as I know and even if it was, this in no way should take away from the fact that the evictions are illegal regardless of who is building what and where. Yes, I advocate the building of a mosque but do not advocate illegal evictions for any reason. Please do not confuse the two issues. It is not a choice between the much needed mosque and throwing the Roma families on the street. It is a pretty underhand argument, in my opinion.

    Your last question of “why did they come” and “why don’t they go back” ! One of the main reasons that people migrate to other countries is in search of a better life. Nine times out of ten people prefer to stay in the country they were born in but many circumstances lead some to move elsewhere. Who knows what reason any individual has for coming to Greece and what does it matter? They came here. They are legal and they are seeking what is their right. To be treated fairly and equally under the laws of this country.

    The “why don’t they go back” question leads down a slippery slope. It would be easy for a society to solve its problems by telling people to go back to their own country if they don’t like the way that country deals with them, wouldn’t it? It’s always fine and dandy when people are silent. Living on rubbish dumps, doing awful jobs for little wages, being harassed or worse by police, having no access to education, healthcare or even clean water. Its all fine when they are travel around the country and to the islands to pick the fruit and olives. Its all fine, as long as they are silent. But now, as happens so many times all over the world, people are asking for what is rightfully theirs as citizens of a country. And the cries of “why don’t they go back” begin.

    Margaret, apologies for not answering you sooner. I have searched and searched this blog for the comments Panayote mentioned but have failed to find them. There’s quite a lot of material here to wade through ! Anyway, I found this that was posted in response to another mass illegal eviction in Patras last year. I assume the same law applies today:

    The forced evictions carried out in Patras and Hania, Crete, Greece is in violation of its legal obligations under international human rights law for a number of reasons, including:

    1) the evictions have not been deemed to meet the “exceptional circumstances” threshold by an independent and impartial tribunal

    2) all feasible alternatives to the planned evictions have not been considered

    3) sufficient notice was not given to affected persons

    4) the affected community has not be consulted throughout the process

    5) adequate resettlement sites have not been provided.

    and also this:

    As a State Party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Government of Greece is legally obligated to respect the right to adequate housing, including the prohibition on forced evictions, as guaranteed under Article 11

    Evictions can only occur in exceptional circumstances and must conform to a strict set of criteria set out by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in General Comment No. 7. There must be special justification for an eviction, which may only take place after examination of alternatives to eviction with the affected community. There must be adequate notice and information and an opportunity to contest the grounds for eviction. No one may be left homeless as a result of an eviction and alternative accommodation must be provided as far as possible in a location near a person’s place of work or education together with reasonable access to essential services. Any eviction must be carried out humanely. The planned forced evictions and actual threatened evictions of the Roma in Votanikos fall short of all these criteria.

    George. I had not thought of contacting AWOG. I know nothing about them. Do you have contact with them and if so would you be willing to email them about this issue? The more high level people who are aware of this situation the better.

    By the way, welcome to everyone who is new here over the last few weeks. Thank you all for taking the time to read and to comment.

17. 17 DoDo Jun 11th, 2007 at 11:28 am

    I add to your answer to Margaret that the Council of Europe’s The European Committee of Social Rights declared Greece in breach of its commitments under the European Social Charter twice (2005 and 2006) for the evictions in Patras. So what DD wrote was not just NGO opinion but official state of affairs, and the law does apply on a case-by-case basis.

18. 18 Margaret Jun 11th, 2007 at 4:16 pm

    DD,

    Thank you for taking the time to reply to my questions. I apologise for the length of this reply.

    I’m a lawyer, btw. I had asked Panyote a couple of specific questions which related not so much to the international treaties that Greece has signed up to, but to the way those treaties are implemented in Greek Law.

    Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights does impose an obligation on signatory states to ensure that their populations enjoy a right to adequate housing, but, even with the help of the general comments of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights [http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(symbol)/CESCR+General+comment+4.En?OpenDocument] you will see that these provisions remain vague. What they don’t provide is a specific right in national law that the Roma can rely on, a right to be accommodated if they have no accommodation. I wanted to know whether there was such a national (domestic) provision or whether the International Covenant could be relied on in court proceedings in the national court. I doubt that the latter is true, precisely because the provisions of the International Covenant are so vague.

    Also, many of the international measures concentrate on unlawful evictions. It is all very well to outlaw unlawful evictions; it is quite another to insist on a government providing accommodation for those who have been lawfully evicted. The international measures do not outlaw evictions, per se, only unlawful ones. So, if land is unlawfully occupied, I presume that the legal owner of the land can apply to the court to evict those who occupy it unlawfully and the court (and international law) will support their removal. A lawful eviction.

    So, it always comes back to the Greek government and what national measures there are in place to provide accommodation for those who are homeless where they have been lawfully evicted. We know that international law says that Greece (and every other signatory country) must ensure that there is adequate housing, but that is talk between states, not a helpful provision for a poor homeless person. It may be the best there is in Greece, but that is really what I was asking.

    Over here (the UK) there is legislation that ensures that local authorities provide housing for those who are unintentionally homeless and who have a priority need. This takes care of children, families more generally, the old, the infirm and those with mental health problems.
    There is no law which requires the government to provide a healthy man of working age with any accommodation and he will be left to fend for himself.
    Nor is there any law to help those who make themselves intentionally homeless – if, for example, you leave accommodation that you could have stayed in or you haven’t paid your rent and could have done so and are evicted as a result. Temporary accommodation (up to 28 days) still has to be provided but nothing after that.
    There also – quite separately – is an obligation on local authorities to provide sites for gypsies and travellers but in 1994 this obligation was removed and replaced with something much more vague – a requirement for local authorities to “develop and implement strategies” for housing gypsies and travellers. There are now too few sites to accommodate all Gypsies and travellers. I was asking whether there are now similar requirements in Greece imposed on local municipalities.
    Lawful evictions of gypsies or travellers who unlawfully occupy private land must be carried out following the due process of the law – but there is no requirement for private landowners to have regard to humanitarian considerations (as there is with public landowners) though the use of excessive force to evict may result in criminal charges being brought against the landowner.
    Most importantly any gypsy or traveller threatened with unlawful eviction has adequate legal teeth to challenge the eviction, often by way of judicial review in the case of an eviction by a local authority.
    It seems from what Panyote has said that there are no national measures which give the same teeth to challenges by the Roma who have, instead, to rely on the toothless international or European law measures that – at worst – might see Greece being embarassed in some distant international institution. I wanted to check whether this was actually the position.

    The situation with the Roma in Votanikos seems to be that there were illegally occupying private land. I don’t know if they were evicted lawfully or unlawfully, but it would seem clear that at some point they would have been lawfully evicted, that is, that the private landowners would have been able to recover possession of their own land. The Roma have nowhere else to go. Which makes their need to occupy land unlawfully, and their desire to stay put, completely understandable and their eviction very very sad. But it does make their occupation lawful and their eviction unlawful. If there is no national law requiring municipalities to provide accommodation for Roma, or to accommodate homeless, vulnerable people, then this is where pressure needs to be applied. There should be a law, supported by a procedure for challenging a munipality’s failure. Tell me where to write, and I’ll write to the appropriate Minister telling him/her!. If there is adequate national provision, but no money to instruct lawyers, then perhaps a letter to AWOG would produce some funding?

19. 19 George Jun 11th, 2007 at 5:02 pm

    Hello again,

    Regarding AWOG (American Women of Greece)

    I used to know an American lady at the US Embassy who was involved with them but she has since moved away. However, I did a little googling and found their site.

    http://www.awog.gr/

    On their site, I found this reference to Community service, which incidentally refers to them even considering helping a “refugee camp of thousands”. Of course, it would have to pass their evaluation committee. But, all it would take is a phone call or email to get the ball rolling.

    FROM THEIR SITE:

    Community Services is the heart of AWOG. AWOG’s Community Services activities and projects are numerous and diversified to include education, health and social welfare for the people in Greece, particularly those in great need. A committee evaluates each candidate for donations whether it be an institution, a club, an organization or even a refugee camp of thousands.

20. 20 deviousdiva Jun 11th, 2007 at 5:40 pm

    Thank you Margaret for clarifying your questions. Having no background in law or legal matters in general, I am at a distinct disadvantage on this issue. As far as I understand, we were pointing to the fact that the present evictions were illegal as I said in my answer to you. Sadly, as of today, it seems we have lost the battle. Please see the post here.
    I will keep everyone updated on the situation as from today,

21. 21 Panayote Dimitras Jun 11th, 2007 at 8:59 pm

    If one carefully reads the info s/he will see that Votanikos Roma were occupying state land from which they were unlawfully evicted (ie without due process which in Greece means servicing protocols of eviciton that can be appealed against in court).

    These evictions took place despite the legal obligation as spelled out by the Ombudsman. These Roma were repeatedly informed by GHM that they were entitled to relocation. Actually, a few days before their first eviction carried out on orders and in the presence of the Mayor of Athens himself, even the Greek Ombudsman, in its letter to the competent Ministry of Interior copied to the Mayor of Athens (ref. No. 13986.06.2.3 and dated 11 May 2007), concerning the Roma of Votanikos, stated inter alia that:

    “the Municipality of Athens should become active towards instituting positive discrimination measures for the amelioration of the living conditions of the said inhabitants (the Roma of Votanikos) , either by relocating the indigent citizens registered in the local municipal rolls to municipal or state owned plots of land or by providing to those who face grave substinence problems with monetary benefits, clothing and medication etc (art. 75.1 locus e of Law 3463/2006”

    and

    “Lastly, it is reminded that the flowing from the Constitution and the EU legislation special duty of care for this particular group renders it imperative both that the competent authorities abstain from taking any measure of forced eviction or other measure that could lead to their being forced to leave their place of residence, regardless of how illegal or problematic their current settling is, if no specific alternative site meeting the minimum adequate housing standards has been assigned for their and relocation and legal residence and that measures have be taken towards arranging the practical aspects of this relocation.”

    These Roma and the defenders of their right (GHM and the human rights sections of PASOK and Synaspismos) have been advocating that such relocation be implemented and no eviction is carried out before that. However, once more as in the case of Patras, all these rights turned out to be academic exercises, and in the end of the day Roma got evicted with everyone who had the authority and or the power to do something looking the other way.

    In fact it is because of this legal obligation that a committee of competent agency members was formed three weeks before eviction.

    It would be nice if people in the UK do not consider NGOs in Greece as not so able to argue on legal issues.

    Finally, one can be evicted from a private property following an array of legal procedures available that canm be reviewed by courts as well. None was followed here. The police harassed and bullied them and forced them to leave. Now if you call that legal eviction, I call it illegal and in fact racist.

    And since I have received the call this morning from those people asking me where they would sleep tonight and spent the rest of the day appealing to competent bodies internationally I hope one appreciates that there is little time available to inform people on legal theories.

    Oh yes. For those who care DoDo mentioned the ruling of the ECSR on how Greece violates the housing rights of the Roma. Is that conviction irrelevant too? Here it is:

    Last July the ECSR ruled that Greece continued to violate Article 16.

22. 22 Margaret Jun 11th, 2007 at 9:25 pm

    Panayote,

    I appreciate the time you have taken to reply. I must say that I intended no criticism of your NGO. I’ve followed the work of GHM for about the last seven years and have a very good idea of the nature of your work. I have unstinting admiration for the devotion that you and those that have worked alongside you have put into trying to give those who have no voice a voice that is heard in the Council of Europe, the European Court of Human Rights and on the international stage. Not many people would be prepared to undertake the work that you have done, day in, day out, year after year. I am quite aware that your knowledge of international and domestic law relating to the Roma is encyclopaedic.

    Nor did I intend to imply that things were better in the UK - I spend a fair amount of time advising homeless people here and it is often impossible to find them accommodation even if the law protects them in theory. I have also seen the accommodation provided to asylum seekers - I used to work for the Refugee Council. Some of the accommodation early on was little more than a garden shed, in the middle of winter. Correction. It was a garden shed, though painted on the inside.

    It was just, as a lawyer, I like to know what the legal basis is …

    If you think that writing to the Minister will do any good, I’ll happily do that. Which Minister should I write to?

    Good luck with your work.

23. 23 Margaret Jun 11th, 2007 at 9:29 pm

    PS: Sorry, I can see that you have already said that the Ministry of the Interior is the competent Minister. I’ll write then.

24. 24 Margaret Jun 11th, 2007 at 9:32 pm

    Which is it? Public (as you say) or private (as you have also said)?

    “Please keep in mind that the place belongs to a real estate agent (Riviera S.A.) and police appears as trying to help him evict them wihtout the legal process”

25. 25 The man with no name Jun 11th, 2007 at 10:23 pm

    Margaret,

    Give the dog a bone and give the man a break. If you are a lawyer as you say (btw a barrister or a solicitor?) it might help you to read the complaint Panayote refers to (as well as the ones concenring Italy and Bulgaria). There’s lot of informative stuff there, stuff you can use in your work with the homeless people too (I know I have).

    Lets just say this (if I have got it straight as I think I have): an eviction can be doubly illegal, in the sense that both the necessary procedures might not have been followed (eg in UK context image evicting Roma without serving them first with enforcement notices) AND that even if they have, the courts order their eviction WITHOUT ensuring that the Roma have an alternative relocation site. The eviction of the Roma at Votanikos therefore appears to be DOUBLY illegal. Of course, this doesnt mean a fekkin thing. The Roma will have to sleep rough tonite. The enormous irony of the whole thing is the following: the state looks after the homeless people who do nothing or almost nothing for themselves but evicts the Roma who, in the absence of state care, have managed to establish sthng that vaguely resembles a normal life. Funnily enough, not many people will say that homeless people are lazy (notwithstanding that they do almost nothing to protect themselves from eg inclement weather) but will say so for the Roma whose shed building skills could be the envy of any architect.

26. 26 Margaret Jun 12th, 2007 at 12:01 am

    Man with no name,

    Solicitor, since you ask.

    And, because I’m a lawyer, I don’t think it’s terribly helpful to just sigh and say “Isn’t it awful”. It is awful, but I’d hope that something can be done about it. I’m sure Panyote is already doing it…

    I’ve read the decision Panyote linked to. It was very interesting, and informative. It answered all of my general questions, setting out - as it does - the domestic law.

    As for the particular questions relating to this eviction, I gather from your tone, Man with no name, that you think I should leave it. So be it.

    This is what I have understood so far. National law provides that the Secretary General of the region is charged with deciding the capacity and situation of organised settlements for itinerant people, which organised settlements should have water, electricity, sewerage and waste disposal facilities, together with bath facilities and facilities for washing clothes.

    Responsibility is then handed over to the municipality who may make a charge for running the organised sites and are charged with implementing the decisions of the Secretary General. Here is where things fall down, apparently. The municipality does not do what it is supposed to do. So there are no, or not enough, organised sites with the result that the Roma encamp anywhere they can. This is sometimes on private land, sometimes on public land. This situation is apparently frustrating for central government which is why the decision making process in relation to official sites has already been taken back from the municipalities.

    Sometimes - presumably - private landowners who wish to regain possession of their land follow the legal procedure laid down in the Protocol of Administrative Expulsion. Legal aid is - apparently - available to those on low incomes to challenge an order for possession made against them. There is an appeal procedure against the possession order. Presumably, again, the police may assist the private landowner in executing the court order for possession if no appeal is upheld. No problem with that - what is the point of a court order if you cannot enforce it?

    The court has power to suspend any possession order, giving the Roma time to be accommodated or find alternative accommodation.

    Sometimes (and this is possibly what happened at Votanikos) the Protocol was not followed but the police assisted the landowners in an illegal eviction of the Roma who, double catastrophe, have nowhere to go because the municipality has not carried through the Secretary General’s decisions in relation to official sites …

    On other occasions municipalities conduct their own eviction proceedings from publicly owned land and yet still do not provide alternative accommodation.

    All lines seem to lead to the municipality. Is there no way (other than the Ombudsman who doesn’t seem to scare them) of forcing the municipality to meet its obligations? Is there an effective judicial review procedure available?

    I don’t really expect Panyote to answer - he is busy doing the real work on the ground - but I think that is the real question that needs to be answered - is there any way of forcing local authorities to abide by the law?

27. 27 Panayote Dimitras Jun 12th, 2007 at 9:04 am

    Margaret

    Thanks for the kind words.

    If you had read carefully what I wrote you would see that the Protocols are a procedure to evict from STATE land: they are issued by the state authority owning the land and can be appealed against in court. Court decisions on the contrary are needed for an eviction from private land and can be appealed in court as well.

    There is NO legal aid available. Had GHM, occasionally with funds from ERRC, MRGI, COHRE, not provided free legal aid to several Roma eviction cases they would have not appealed against any eviction.

    Actually you ARE wrong about whose responsibility it is. Go to our site in the press releases or the Roma page and find the Commissioner for Human Rights letter to Greek authorities - also probably available here somewhere. He makes clear one thing which is so obvious anyway. That the central government is in the end of the day accountable if local authorities fail to implement the law or the conventions. But here the central state does not care and sorry Margaret the Ombudsman cannot simply not scare them but does not give a damn either.

    Here is from yesterday’s GHM release of a COHRE text to the UN which I recommend you read in full .

    “Greek officials attending a June 7 meeting of the OSCE to discuss the crisis of forced evictions of Roma in the OSCE region were entirely unaware that Greece had been found in violation of three aspects of European Social Charter Article 16 for systemic violations of the rights of Roma to adequate housing, including as a result of a pattern and practice of forced evictions of Roma.”

    The Greek official who excelled in such hypocritical ignorance is a Senior Investigator of the Greek Ombudsman…

    So Margaret in Votanikos there was indeed a multiply illegal eviction, although indeed in the long run these Roma should not have been living either in the initial wretched settlement or in the deserted factory, but in some place with adequate housing the state would provide them. Now they live in the streets.

    And finally do not mix up stopping sites which are not relevant here with permanent homes which are relevant. Stopping sites are necessary for the temporary settlement of Roma who move and there are none in Greece. The crushing majority of Roma are settled in Greece and need permanent homes.

    Please read our extensive report on housing also with details fo the legal system that we cannot expose here:

    “Greece: Continuing Widespread Violation of Roma Housing Rights (October 2006)”

28. 28 The man with no name Jun 12th, 2007 at 10:05 am

    Margaret,

    No offense was intended. The point I am trying to make is that sometimes, you just have to let go. It seems to me that the Roma, much like pretty much any other hr issue in Greece, is a lost cause. One can be chasing windmills for a couple of years but sooner or later one will realise that there is, in fact, nothing he / she can do. Nothing. Zilt. Nada. Nichts.

    Panayote can go to bed with his conscience at rest. He did (more than) his bit and he can genuinely be proud of it.

    Of course, I do expect his retort to be along the lines “screw me but what about hr? What about the Roma? Surely someone should do something about them?”

    He would, of course, be absolutely fekkin right. But he does know the answer to that one: no one can (rather is willing to) do anything. You can go ahead and write your letter but I dont think it will make any difference.

29. 29 DoDo Jun 12th, 2007 at 10:09 am

    Which is it? Public (as you say) or private (as you have also said)?

    Both. The original settlement is/was (by the way, have all Romas living on the construction site been evicted, or only part of them?) on public land, where a stadium is to be built. Some or all who have been evicted from there first occupied a disused factory building, and that one is owned privately.

30. 30 DoDo Jun 12th, 2007 at 10:22 am

    Thanks to Margaret and Panayote for discussing the legal details. I note towards Margaret that while it’s local lawas that matter, the ECSR ruled on the basis of an international treaty with general wording, the European Social Charter.

31. 31 Margaret Jun 12th, 2007 at 10:53 am

    Dear Manwithnoname,

    I wrote the letter anyway

    Margaret

32. 32 Panayote Dimitras Jun 13th, 2007 at 12:23 pm

    As I am working on a related eviction application to the ECSR, I am posting here the wording of the second conviction of Greece by the ECSR last year.

    The ECSR essentially repeated the first finding in July 2006, in its document Conclusions XVIII-1 (Greece) Articles 1, 12, 13, 16 and 19 of the Charter; according to the ECSR,

    “The Committee concludes that the situation in Greece is not in conformity with Article 16 of the Charter for the following reasons:

    – there is still a shortage of housing suited to the size and the needs of Roma families (Follow-up to Complaint No. 15/2003 by the European Roma Rights Centre against Greece);

    – Roma families still do not have sufficient legal protection.”

    See page 14

Leave a Reply

Name

Mail (will not be published)

Website

Notify me of any follow-up comments via e-mail

Enable CommentLuv which will try and parse your last blog post, please be patient while it finds it for you

Preview:

---

---