The Status of the Romani Linguistic Minority in Italy
By Zoran Lapov

Italy is, on one hand, a homeland of various historical Sinti and Roma communities; still, many of them emerge as "invisible", since they "do not present particular problems"(!). On the other hand, Italy appears to be one of the EU states having a quite high concentration of non-EU Roma, mainly native to the former-Yugoslav territories and Rumania. Many immigrant Roma, staying in Italy through the system of stay/residence permits renewable at least yearly (or without them), dwell in so-called "campi nomadi" (nomad camps, camps for nomads) of either regular or illegal nature; some of them, though, have managed to arrive at more dignified housing solutions. Due to the meagre results of the policies addressing these minorities, the Italian case must placed for various reasons among the most worrying examples of the entire Union.

In the mid-1980s, some Italian regions - trying to remedy the disadvantaged situation of Roma and Sinti - launched initiatives to enact particular regional laws in favour of these minorities (or "nomads", as they are named in some of these documents). These laws, chiefly aimed at safeguarding the Romani language and culture, deserve to be recalled, "even if Municipalities show a certain resistance in applying [them] too often." (Marta C., 1998, p. 5). They were promoted at a local (i.e. regional) level beginning on August 16th, 1984 with the Veneto Region’s initiative to adopt the regional law n. 41, titled Interventi per la tutela della cultura dei Rom (Interventions aimed at safeguarding the Romas' culture, renewed with the regional law n. 54 of 1989).

Emulating this example, the following regions and provinces issued regional laws on behalf of Roma and Sinti cultural preservation in the second half of the decade: Lazio Region (1985), the Autonomous Province of Trent (1985), Sardinia Region (1988), the Autonomous Friuli-Venezia Giulia Region (1988), Tuscany Region (1988), Emilia Romagna Region (1988), Lombardy Region (1989), including the bill of the Piedmont Region (1986).

During the 1990s, some regions renewed their legislation, while others followed suit and adopted their first laws on the subject. The first was the Umbria Region with its 1990 regional law, followed by: the Autonomous Friuli-Venezia Giulia Region (1991), Liguria Region (1992, new entry), Piedmont Region (1993, repealed), Emilia Romagna Region (1993), Tuscany Region (1995), and Piedmont Region (1997, returned back with another bill); moreover, the Marches Region issued a law with a rather more generic title: Interventi a favore degli emigrati, degli immigrati, dei rifugiati, degli apolidi, dei nomadi e delle loro famiglie (Interventions in favour of emigrants, immigrants, refugees, stateless people, nomads and their families, 1994).

Finally, in the last years, two regions have re-dedicated (or tried to do so) their attention to this topic: the Tuscany Region reformed its regional Law 73/95 through the last legislative act aimed at protection of Roma and Sinti: Law 2/2000; whereas the Piedmont Region made another attempt to launch a regional law addressing these minorities with the Bill n. 61, submitted in 2000.

Nonetheless, such legislative impulses did not succeed in changing the linguistic (or other) situation of Roma and Sinti minorities for better - it has remained extremely neglected and it is still paid minimum attention, especially at the practical level.

A law explicitly addressing linguistic minorities was finally issued on December 15th, 1999, under the title Norme in materia di tutela delle minoranze linguistiche storiche (Regulations on the subject of protection of historical linguistic minorities). According to its title, this Law concerns the historical minority languages spoken in the territory of the Italian. It recognises 12 linguistic minorities ("from 27 recognised by UNESCO", Fenoglio G., 1998, p. 1), namely: the Albanian, Catalan, Germanic (!), Greek, Slovene and Croatian minorities, and "[...] those speaking French, French-Provençal, Friulian, Ladin, Occitan and Sardinian" (Law n. 482, 1999, art. 2, sub-section 1).

Unfortunately, the national legislation (Law n. 482) did not include Roma and Sinti among Italian linguistic minorities under the pretext that these groups were devoid of a compact territorial unity in the country and (according to some others) did not constitute a historical minority group (sic!). The first question does not need further comments, either with regard to its plausibility or to its importance; the second argument exclusively focuses its attention on immigrant Roma, disregarding the historical presence of Roma and Sinti in Italy. Thus, the Roma and Sinti minorities find themselves, once more, excluded from the maps of Italian minorities.

"At first, several bills envisaged the valorisation of [...] citizens of Roma and Sinti ethnic group too. Subsequently, the law was modified, inasmuch as the majority of members of the Italian Parliament did not consider that there would subsist conditions for such a recognition, since a reference of this culture to a specific territory was missing. In fact, following their own traditions, the Gypsy Communities are not sedentary, but prevailingly nomadic." (R. Bolognesi, M. Incerti, 1999, p. 4). This statement is certainly debatable; it is apparent that a lack of deeper knowledge about the Roma/Sinti prevented the authors of the aforesaid law from overcoming the deep-rooted preconceptions surrounding these minorities.

Furthermore, in light of the Romaní language situation and the need to ensure its adequate defense, safeguarding and promotion, we must consider the fact that it is included among the languages listed in the UNESCO Red Book on Endangered languages.

Turning our attention to public education, we cannot claim that attempts to organise school support for Roma children and to implement specific programmes for Roma/Sinti in the education sector in Italy do not exist (as in various other European countries). The question is how and with what purposes these initiatives are designed. One of the elementary problems is that such initiatives are not always accepted by the local authorities (including, but not limited to school/educational officials); in case such measures actually become approved, they habitually have brief lives. Another fundamental oversight lies in the minimum attention paid to the endangered language of the Roma: teaching programmes, after-school activities and school support for Roma children are entirely carried out in the majority and official languages of the country. Further, school support for Roma children is too sporadic and casual. It is usually implemented at a strictly local level; support programmes do not include lectures in or about Romané (or only in extremely rare cases appearing as idea rather than a real event); Romani teachers are not trained, and so on. In conclusion, even though language represents one of the most outstanding identity factors of the Roma/Sinti, the support that it is given in the Italian school system is fully unsatisfactory.

Nor does such a system offer opportunities or requirements for bilingual development; on the contrary, it leads towards a serious deterioration of the Romaní language. Instead of supposed bilingualism, a strong confusion is developing particularly among the school-aged children: after the lessons, they go back home and find themselves again in contact with their mother tongue, Romané, but in a totally discordant context, incompatible with the school one. Possible bilingualism can be noticed amongst adolescents who have completed their schooling process (primary or secondary school). They generally can master both languages - Italian and Romané - with rather positive results; however, it is hard to know how this situation will evolve in the future, in the light of the very meagre interaction between the Romani and the non-Romani social and linguistic spheres.

Having no standard and being omitted from school programmes, Romané finds itself exposed on a daily basis to new lexical entries from Italian, through both everyday communication and the system of public education. Along with the non-recognition of its minority-language status, these factors surely do not favour its preservation.

As a result of this situation, the use of the Romaní language is increasingly extremely limited - it is almost exclusively relegated to the family and community environment, while it has already been abandoned in some communities.

More specifically, Abruzzi and Molise Roma seem to be the most conservative among South-Italian Romani communities with regard to the usage of their native language. In other Roma groups of the Italian South, Romané is in a phase of strong influence from Italian: in most instances it is quite mixed with the latter, while in certain cases it is close to disappearance. In fact, many families fluently avail themselves of various southern dialects, in conformity with the place of settlement.

Sinti dialects are historically permeated with German lexical loans: this is especially the case of variants spoken by German (Sinti Gackane or Taich) and Austrian Sinti (Sinti Estrexarja, Estrajxarja or Estrekarja), who reached Italy later. Sinti also often resort to local Italian dialects, which gradually have replaced the usage of the mother tongue in various Sinti communities.

The Balkan Romani groups, which arrived from the Carpathian-Danubian regions (Kalderaša, Lovar(j)a, Curar(j)a), and from Croatia, Istria and Slovenia during the world wars, still employ Romané within their communities. In the former-Yugoslav Romani groups (which arrived from Bosnia, Herzegovina, Montenegro, Croatia, Kosovo, Serbia and Macedonia) and among some Roma originating from Rumania, Romané - being their mother tongue - is still rather vital. However, considering the general conditions in which Romané-speakers in Italy find themselves (absence of school support, non-recognised minority status, etc.), these communities are equally undefended against the influences of the Italian majority language.

Some Romani groups stopped using Romané some time ago. In some Rumanian communities (e.g. Roma Rudari and Rumuni, many of whom arrived from Serbia, though originally from Rumania) the Romani language was abandoned even before their arrival to Italy; indeed, they habitually employ certain Rumanian variants.

As for the community (of debatable origins and identity) known as Cam(m)inanti, it seems that they have never spoken Romané, but Sicilian (or other) local dialects, as well as their own vernacular, called Baccàgghiu, which is also derived from the Palermo dialects.

Returning to the discourse on the legal recognition of the minority status of the Roma/Sinti minority, some scholars hope that "the gap, [imposed on] this population, will be filled in the future with a suitable law" (Associazione per i popoli minacciati, 1999, p. 1). Still, as far as 'suitable laws' are concerned, organisations representing the Romani minority have been rather cautious in supporting them. They maintain that such measures - as practical experience has confirmed - could be enacted too late to realise their intended objectives; conversely, even if they are adopted and implemented efficiently, they could generate new forms of segregation. Briefly, Roma and Sinti representatives do not claim anything beyond recognition equal to that achieved by other minorities; they believe that this would be a further step towards successful integration into Italian society, rather than continuing to be treated as an unclassified group “hosted” by the majority population, without a permanent or recognized status.

Meanwhile, the Council of Europe and the European Union have been urging the Italian Government to recognise the Roma and Sinti minorities, while condemning Italian policies towards this part of its population. These and other international institutions have intervened to alleviate the difficulties that Roma and Sinti face in Italy, but Italy itself has never become actively occupied with these issues. The segregation and discrimination suffered by the Roma and Sinti minorities in Italy affect every aspect of their lives, both private and public; such treatment affects these groups’ socio-economic integration, their housing, schooling and educational pathways, employment, citizenship...and their civil and cultural rights. It should be mentioned again that in Italy, the Roma and Sinti are NOT recognised as ethnic, linguistic or national minorities, and therefore they do not benefit from the rights protected by this status.

In conclusion, real situations where Romani communities are regarded as active and participating social protagonists, or where policies are aimed at direct interaction with Romani groups and their effective participation, represent rare cases in Italy. In recent months the question of the minority status of the Romani population in Italy has become topical again: new proposals for special laws addressing the Roma and Sinti have been presented, and various meetings discussing this question have been organised.

One of the most important meetings was a seminar held in Rome on December 4th, 2006. The Parliamentarian Groups of Rifondazione Comunista (Communist party - Communist Re-foundation) in the Chamber and the Senate, and the Delegation at the European Parliament organised a seminar on intercultural issues; the event was in fact intended for the elected members and administrators of the Rifondazione Comunista itself. The conference discussed the societies and cultures of European and national Roma and Sinti minorities in order to help elected members and administrators to read, define and plan appropriate public policies. The topics dealt with during this meeting were: political participation of Roma and Sinti in Italy; difficulties and future prospects of immigrant Roma in Italy; Romani children between family, camps, and school; the question of equal educational opportunities; programmes and policies of the European Union aimed at improving the situation of Roma and Sinti communities, and the engagement of national, regional and local authorities; Roma rights and Romani identity in Europe; models and experiences of legislative intervention; and critical analysis of Bill n. 804, Disposizioni per il riconoscimento e la tutela delle popolazioni rom e sinte e per la salvaguardia della loro identità culturale (Provisions for the recognition and protection of the Roma and Sinti populations and for the safeguard of their cultural identity).

Meanwhile, other meetings at various territorial levels took place. As a result of these events the Mantua-based Sinti organisation, Sucar Drom, organised a decisive meeting on March 24th, 2007, in Mantua. Numerous Roma and (especially) Sinti representatives came together at this assembly - the great majority of participants were Sinti, plus a few representatives of South-Italian and immigrant Roma communities. Various issues were tackled at the Mantua meeting, with the question of special legislation for the Romani population in Italy of primary importance. Other issues included:

• Evaluation of the legislative bills proposed with regard to the Romani population/ minority in Italy; participants were asked to make a critical review of these documents in order to offer their comments and suggestions.
• A strong emphasis was placed on persistent discrimination and racism experienced by Romani populations: accordingly, several participants reaffirmed that their struggle should start from this point. In this sense, the participants asserted the need for a body capable of opposing and overcoming the current (dramatic and discriminatory) situation, beginning with the living conditions in "nomad camps". 
• The question of rights generated different needs and demands: Roma representatives underlined the cultural aspects and importance of citizen’s rights, whereas Sinti participants were more concerned with the housing questions; on the other hand, the demands of immigrant Roma (having various origins, experiences, facing numerous difficulties...) concentrate on their rights to positive integration. 
• Discussion of the housing question was largely framed around the issue: nomadism and "campi nomadi" (nomad camps, camps for nomads) or NOT? On one side of the debate numerous participants recalled that "nomad camps" have produced tragic consequences in terms of housing and other forms of segregation, risks of exclusion, social vulnerability, the unfortunate position of "everybody's" target, fomentation of prejudices, and so on. On the other side of the debate, it was stressed that nomadism should be a free living choice. For their part, various Sinti representatives opened discussion about the possibility of having equipped micro-areas or private plots (of land); others warned that such choices could bring back the risk of segregation, or that these plots could even turn into new "nomad camps" over time! 
• Aside from the discussion about the abolition of "nomad camps", the traditional policies of “assistentialism” (paternalism fostering dependency) and social assistance must also be overcome and replaced by Roma and Sinti leadership and self-representation; in this regard, the involved actors should be careful NOT to (re)create policies similar to those which have failed in the past, by simply re-packaging them under different titles, but still containing traits of assistentialism. 
• The appropriateness and usage of the expression/term "tutela" (safeguard, protection) were criticised, especially when related to the Romani culture and language. Who should protect whom, and why should Roma/Sinti communities need external contributions to maintain their culture and language? In fact, it is necessary to overcome a merely folkloric approach to these groups’ cultural history – which often leads to assimilation – in order to achieve real and effective promotion of the Romani culture(s), which are too often denied and trampled upon by stereotypes and prejudices. 
• Other terminology employed to refer to the Roma/Sinti was criticized throughout the conference. Particular attention was given to terms like "Zingari", "Zigani", "Gitani" (i.e. Gypsies), as well as "nomadi" (nomads), "slavi" (Slavs), or combinations like "nomadi slavi" (Slavic nomads): these terms are all loaded with misinformation, prejudices and stereotypes. Therefore the expression popolazione romaní (Romani population) including all Roma and Sinti, plus other possible subdivisions, was re-proposed to be used in various international and national settings.

The above-mentioned discussion points raised the following questions:

• Mistrust and criticism have been expressed towards external pro-Romani representations, associations, and mediators, as well as public (and other) authorities, institutions, and legislators. This clearly represents an appeal to move beyond the failed policies of past years, which were promoted by such external bodies and are one of the factors contributing to the discrimination and segregation experienced by the Romani population in Italy.
• Consequently, proposals for a national Romani representative body re-emerged: such a body was imagined as a consultative body, council or committee which would unite various local representatives in order to represent the Romani (Roma and Sinti) people / nation / minority before the Italian Government.

In conclusion, two main proposals emerged from this event:

1. The first proposal was that all of the present legislative bills regarding the Roma/Sinti be evaluated in order to implement them as soon as possible, with necessary comments, suggestions and adjustments.
2. The second proposal was to establish a representative and experimental committee composed of 1. Roma, 2. Sinti, 3. European (i.e. immigrant) Roma, and 4. external members. This idea was voted upon and unanimously accepted; therefore a new representative body has been founded. This National Committee will be known as Rom e Sinti Insieme (Roma and Sinti Together). The historical character of the event was emphasised by all of the participants. They supported the need for unity and participation, and claimed firm and clear backing for the Committee to assume a guiding role, in interaction with involved non-Romani actors. The promoters of the initiative - Yuri Del Bar (Sinto, Municipal Councillor), Nazzareno Guarnieri (Rom, Rom Sinti@Politica), Radames Gabrielli (Sinto, Nevo Drom Ass.), and Bernardino Torsi (Sinto, President of Sucar Drom Ass.), were appointed to the (interim) technical secretariat of the Committee in collaboration with the Sucar Drom Association. Finally, activation of the Committee’s web site (www.comitatoromanophralipe.it) and email address (romsinti.insieme@libero.it) has been planned. The Committee’s first goal will be to unify the associations and representatives of Roma and Sinti communities which have been operating on behalf of the Romani population in Italy in recent years. This unification is envisioned in the form a federation of associations, to be accomplished (possibly) within a year of the Committee's establishment. Meanwhile, the Committee will act as a representative body of Roma and Sinti before governmental and other institutions. This unifying action should be the basis for formulating a political project capable of improving social, cultural and political conditions, and aimed at social, cultural and political growth of Roma and Sinti communities in Italy. It will therefore be necessary to develop and share common aims, goals, methods, instruments, organisational (and other) strategies, in order to be able to address the major needs and concerns of Romanì communities. The coordinating committee, formed of delegates of various Roma/Sinti groups, is working on the issue of recognition in order to formulate a legislative proposal to be presented to the Italian Government and Parliament. Another issue is the appointment of delegates for participation in IRU (International Romanì Union) and other European bodies. Representatives of various Roma/Sinti associations and communities met again on April 14th, 2007 in Mantua, with the goal of maintaining the momentum of the intentions expressed at the previous assembly of March 24th. Two significant results of this meeting were: the official institution of the Rom e Sinti Insieme Committee; and the election of 22 delegates from various Roma/Sinti communities to officially form the Committee.

Bibliography:

• Associazione per i popoli minacciati, 1999, Legge 15 Dicembre 1999, n. 482 "Norme in materia di tutela delle minoranze linguistiche storiche", Commenti e osservazioni critiche, Gazzetta Ufficiale n. 297 del 20 dicembre 1999; pagina web.
• Bolognesi R., Incerti M. (eds.), 1999, Le Lingue parlate nel territorio dello Stato italiano. Proposte per una politica di Plurilinguismo Integrale; pagina web.
• Brunello P. (ed.), 1996, L'urbanistica del disprezzo. Campi rom e società italiana, Manifestolibri, Roma.
• Consiglio d'Europa, European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), 2002, Commissione Europea contro il Razzismo e l'Intolleranza. Secondo rapporto sull'Italia, 22 Giugno 2001, Strasburgo.
• ERRC, 2000, Il paese dei campi. La segregazione razziale dei Rom in Italia (Campland. Racial Segregation of Roma in Italy), "Rapporti nazionali" (National Reports), n. 9, ottobre 2000, I libri di carta, Roma.
• Fenoglio G., 1998, Tutelate le minoranze, ma non quelle "scomode"; web page.
• Lapov Z., 1998, Nuovi flussi migratori e nuovi stereotipi sul popolo Rom. Il caso italiano, in Campani, Carchedi, Mottura (eds.), Migranti, rifugiati e nomadi: Europa dell'Est in movimento, L'Harmattan Italia, Torino, pp. 159-165.
• Lapov Z., 2001, Un esempio di negazione dell'identità linguistico-culturale: il caso del romané, in Campani, Lapov (eds.), Dinamiche identitarie: multilinguismo ed educazione interculturale, L'Harmattan Italia, Torino, pp. 179-201.
• Lapov Z., 2004, Vacaré romané? Diversità a confronto: percorsi delle identità Rom, FrancoAngli, Milano.
• Lapov Z., 2005, The Former-Yugoslav Roma in Italy: a Struggle for Socio-Cultural Participation or for Survival?, in Chiodi (ed.), The Borders of the Polity. Migration and Security across the EU and the Balkans, Europe and the Balkans International Network, Longo Editore, Ravenna, pp. 119-141.
• Legge n. 482, 15 Dicembre 1999, Norme in materia di tutela delle minoranze linguistiche storiche, in Gazzetta Ufficiale n. 297 del 20 dicembre 1999.
• Marta C., 1998, Politiche sulla integrazione dei Rom. Zingari, Rom, Nomadi: una minoranza di difficile definizione, fonte: PROGETTO LIA, Atti del corso di formazione per operatori pubblici e privati. Secondo livello. Terza parte, Città di Torino, pagina web Immigrazione emigrazione, Torino.
• Osella C. (ed.), 1988, Raccolta di leggi e circolari, Vol. II, Quaderni zingari 11, A.I.Z.O., Torino.
• Regione Toscana, 1988, Interventi per la tutela dell'etnia Rom, Legge regionale n. 17.
• Regione Toscana, 1995, Interventi per i popoli Rom e Sinti, Legge regionale del 18 aprile 1995, n. 73, in Leggi e regolamenti regionali, Firenze.
• Regione Toscana, 2000, Legge regionale n. 2 (riforma della L.R. 73/95).
• Regione Veneto, 1984, Interventi per la tutela della cultura dei Rom, Legge regionale del 16 agosto 1984, n. 41 (rinnovata con la legge regionale n. 54 del 1989).
• Save the Children, 2000, "Denied a Future? The Right to Education of Roma, Gypsy and Traveller Children", First Draft, March 2000.
• Sucar Drom Associazione, 2007, Rom e Sinti Insieme, il progetto politico e la strategia organizzativa, Domenica 15 Aprile 2007; pagina web.
• Sucar Drom Associazione, 2006, Roma, Rifondazione Comunista organizza seminario sui Sinti e i Rom, Venerdì 24 Novembre 2006; pagina web.
• UNESCO Red Book on Endangered languages, Endangered languages in Europe: report, Romani, compiler: Tapani Salminen, 31 Dec 1993, Helsinki.