Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty: Social Work Approaches and Practices from Southeast Europe (European Social Work Education and Practice) 3031117271, 9783031117275

Citation preview

European Social Work Education and Practice

Vjollca Krasniqi Jane McPherson   Editors

Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty Social Work Approaches and Practices from Southeast Europe

European Social Work Education and Practice Series Editors Nino Žganec, Department of Social Work, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia Marion Laging, Faculty of Social Work, Health Care, Esslingen University of Applied Sciences, Esslingen am Neckar, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

European Social Work Education and Practice is a Series developed within the frame of the contributions of the European Association of Schools of Social Work (EASSW) on the current developments of social work education and its links to the practice of social work in a European context. The Series supports the international dialogue among social work academics, practitioners, service users, and decision-­ makers. The aim of the Series is to provide a platform for identification and discussion of various challenges and developments within European social work. Similar to other professions, social work also is constantly contending with new demands regarding changing fields of work, new financial models, rising competition among the institutions, new groups and types of service users, and many other challenges. All of these circumstances require professionals to be well prepared and to provide new responses on how to work in the context of globalization and neoliberalism while adhering to the principles of solidarity, social justice, and humanity. More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/16359

Vjollca Krasniqi  •  Jane McPherson Editors

Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty Social Work Approaches and Practices from Southeast Europe

Editors Vjollca Krasniqi Faculty of Philosophy Department of Social Work University of Prishtina Prishtina, Kosovo

Jane McPherson School of Social Work University of Georgia Athens, Georgia, USA

ISSN 2662-2440     ISSN 2662-2459 (electronic) European Social Work Education and Practice ISBN 978-3-031-11727-5    ISBN 978-3-031-11728-2 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11728-2 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Foreword

In the best of circumstances and with adequate resources, establishing and delivering social work education is both challenging and complex. Calling out these challenges and complexities is exactly what Vjollca Krasniqi and Jane McPherson have done in this volume, Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty: Social Work Approaches and Practices from Southeast Europe. With human rights as the critical framework for establishing and delivering social work education and practice, Krasniqi and McPherson have brought together educator practitioners who examine a human rightsbased approach to social work education from a Southeast European perspective. Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty critically presents the educational and social historical contexts of social work education and practice in Southeast European nations. The authors explore the transition from the historical context of needs-­based services to rights-based approaches and practices. They illustrate the dualism occurring between social work education that promotes human rights approaches versus social work practice that often supports a needs-based paradigm, requiring practitioners to adhere to legal regulations with little or no attention to human rights. They carefully examine the historical contexts influenced by gender inequality, discrimination, oppression, political instability, and social exclusion, which have limited the adoption of a rights-based approach to services. The authors offer a careful analysis of the intersection of the issues confronting social work approaches to human rights and social justice in Southeast Europe, and they identify and examine the challenges and obstacles faced by social work educators as they integrate a rights-based framework in social work education. As identified by title, the organizing framework of this book is human rights in the context of the uncertainties facing social work education and practice. This framework includes an explicit grounding of practice in human rights principles: human dignity, nondiscrimination, participation, transparency, and accountability. Each principle with its multiple facets compels social workers to examine the causes of inequities and find avenues to address them. Staying true to the values and ethics of the profession, this book lays out the limitations and criticisms of rights-based approaches, outlines suggestions for how these approaches can be integrated into social work education and practice, and presents future directions for social work v

vi

Foreword

practice responses to the ongoing challenges to human rights and aspirations for equality in Southeast Europe. The book is an introduction for those interested in understanding the history and current political context of social work education programs and practice in Southeast Europe. In addition, it will be useful as a primary or secondary text in a course on international social work approaches and practices or human rights and social justice. The array of topics provides a glimpse of the challenges and complexities of establishing and delivering social work education in systems impacted by ineffective leadership, political repression, marginalization of vulnerable groups, and social inequalities. It is easy for faculty and students to become cynical about human rights and social justice when it seems as if the whole world is engaged in unjust practices and not paying attention to the plight of our marginalized and vulnerable citizens. We recognize that rights-based approaches seem abstract and well-meaning, but often have little influence over professional practice. We acknowledge that our goal to change the profession is often obstructed by the social and political climate of the host country. This is exactly why Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty is an important resource for understanding international social work education and practice; for engaging in the discourse around human rights, social justice, and rights-­based approaches; and for connecting interpersonal practices (micro perspectives) with community work, policy development, advocacy, and social action (macro perspectives). As social work educators, a large portion of our careers has focused on international social work education and practice, with an emphasis on Southeast Europe. This book speaks to the importance of recognizing and affirming the differences in educational and cultural contexts, which significantly impact the design and delivery of social work education and practice. The validity and importance of this book is demonstrated throughout each chapter. With this in mind, we invite readers to suspend judgment based on their own historical, educational, and cultural contexts. We invite them to recognize the importance of the need for strong linkages between academe, practice, and policy. We invite them to open their minds to a significant shift from the dominant needs-based approach to a rights-based approach to reposition and redefine social work as a human rights profession. Co-Founder, Southeast European Barbara W. Shank, MSW, PhD, LICSW Women’s Leadership Initiative Secretary, International Association of Schools of Social Work Board Chair Emerita, Council on Social Work Education Dean and Professor Emerita, University of St. Thomas St. Paul, MN, USA Co-Founder, Southeast European Women’s Julia M. Watkins, MSW, PhD Leadership Initiative President, Dennis A and Julia M Watkins Foundation Executive Director Emerita, Council on Social Work Education President Emerita, American University in Bulgaria Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria

Acknowledgements

This book would not exist without the groundwork and ongoing support of Dr. Julia M. Watkins and Dr. Barbara W. Shank, two farsighted leaders in global social work education who are enthusiastic advocates for social work scholarship in Southeast Europe. Through their support of the region’s women scholars, the editors of this book—along with many of the contributors to it—first met at the 2015 Annual Program Meeting of the U.S. Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) in Denver, Colorado. We are extremely grateful to Dr. Shank and Dr. Watkins for their unwavering encouragement, and we are honored by their foreword to this volume. At the CSWE conference in 2015, Dr. Vjollca Krasniqi and colleagues presented “Challenges and Opportunities in Post-Communist Southeast Europe,” and Dr. Jane McPherson shared her work on “Social Work as a Human Rights Profession.” We attended each other’s presentations, and through our subsequent discussions, messages, and visits, we developed long-term collaborations and friendships. We formed our transnational research collaborative—Rights-Based Social Work Practice in Southeastern Europe—in 2016, and are grateful to Dr. Nino Žganec and colleagues at the University of Zagreb for hosting our first meeting in September of that year. In 2017, our collaborative, which included Drs. Elona Dhembo and Erika Bejko of the University of Tirana; Drs. Sanela Šadić and Sanela Bašić of the University of Sarajevo; and Drs. Nino Žganec, Marina Milić Babić, and Gordana Berc of the University of Zagreb, along with Drs. Krasniqi and McPherson, successfully obtained seed funding for our joint research from the International Association of Schools of Social Work. We would like to thank all the colleagues who have contributed their time and wisdom as authors in this book, as well as those who have worked alongside us and helped shape our thinking, including Dr. Elona Dhembo (University of Tirana), Dr. Sanela Bašić  (University of Sarajevo), Dr. Ana Marija Sobočan (University of Ljubljana), and Dr. Tatiana Villarreal-Otálora (Kennesaw State University). Dr. Sanela Šadić, Dr. Gordana Berc, Dr. Nino Žganec, Yvanna Panter, Elizabeth Craig, and Jon Jefferson all provided feedback on individual chapters that enriched the book as a whole. Dr. Carmen Luca Sugawara (Indiana University) kindly offered

vii

viii

Acknowledgements

moral and material support as we edited the first draft of this manuscript in Berlin, Germany, in February 2022. Dr. Nino Žganec first approached us about the possibility of putting together this volume, and we are grateful to him and to Dr. Marion Laging, co-editors of Springer’s European Social Work Education and Practice Series, for helping see this project through to completion. Our copy editor, Teresa Barensfeld, worked on every chapter and contributed enormously to the project with her skills and attention to detail. Kat Farlowe, graphic designer at the University of Georgia School of Social Work, generously contributed the beautiful maps that are included in the text. The professionals at Springer, including Olivia Ramya Chitranjan, Janet Kim, Brian Halm, and Misao Taguchi, have been gracious and helpful as we turned the germ of an idea into the book you hold in your hands today. In all cases, these professionals were quick to respond to our queries and worked hard to make this book the best it could be. We are truly indebted also to those who have funded our collaboration: The Dennis A. and Julia M.  Watkins Foundation, the International Association of Schools of Social Work, and both the School of Social Work and the Office of the Provost at the University of Georgia. We are grateful to  Christina Autry at the University of Georgia School of Social Work for managing our accounting. Finally, we thank our families for their patience, good humor, and kindness as we have completed this work. We are deeply grateful. University of Prishtina Prishtina, Kosovo

Vjollca Krasniqi

University of Georgia Athens, Georgia, USA

Jane McPherson

Contents

1

 Human Rights, Social Work, and Uncertainty: The View from Southeast Europe����������������������������������������������������������������������������    1 Vjollca Krasniqi and Jane McPherson

2

 Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma and Among Roma People: A Human Rights Perspective in Slovenian Social Work ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   13 Darja Zaviršek

3

 Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia: A Long Way to Mutual Recognition������������������������������������������������������   35 Nino Žganec, Gordana Berc, and Marina Milić Babić

4

 Pathways to a Rights-Based Paradigm in Social Work: The Case of Bosnia and Herzegovina ����������������������������������������������������   61 Sanela Bašić

5

 Human Rights and Social Work in Pandemic Times in Kosovo����������   89 Vjollca Krasniqi

6

 Social Work and Local Democracy: Promoting Human Rights Through Community Action in Albania������������������������������������������������  109 Marsela Dauti and Erika Bejko

7

 Human Rights and Social Work Practices in the Age of Uncertainty: The Case of Romania����������������������������������������������������  129 Florin Lazăr and Smaranda Witec

8

 Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria: Policy, Practice, and Education������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  147 Lilyana Strakova, Boncho Gospodinov, and Rossitsa Simeonova

Index������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  171

ix

About the Editors and Contributors

Editors and Contributors Vjollca Krasniqi  is Associate Professor in the Faculty of Philosophy, Department of Social Work and the Faculty of Arts, University of Prishtina, Kosovo. She holds a PhD in social work from the University of Ljubljana; an MSc degree in gender, development, and globalization from the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE); and a bachelor’s degree in philosophy and sociology from the University of Prishtina. Her research interests are gender, human rights, nation-­building, and social policy. She has led and participated in numerous international research projects and published widely on these topics. She is member of the Executive Board of the East European Sub-Regional Association of Schools of Social Work. She has actively engaged on gender equality and dealing with the past issues in Kosovo and the wider Balkan region. She has served on the boards of directors of several civil society organizations in Kosovo. Jane McPherson  is Associate Professor and Director of Global Engagement at the University of Georgia School of Social Work in Athens, Georgia, USA. Her scholarship examines social work through a human rights lens, and she applies human rights principles to research, teaching, and practice. Her measurable framework for human rights practice in social work and its accompanying scales have been widely translated for use around the world. Locally and globally, she promotes participatory, transparent, accountable, and antidiscriminatory social work practices—especially those that address the unequal distribution of wealth, health, political power, and community wellness. Prior to becoming a scholar, Dr. McPherson practiced social work for over 20 years, working in maternal-child health, child welfare, bereavement, and in the treatment of survivors of political torture.

xi

xii

Editors and Contributors

Contributors Marina Milić Babić  is Associate Professor in the Faculty of Law, Department of Social Work, University of Zagreb, Croatia. Her research interests are related to human rights; counseling services; gestalt therapy; and support services for students in high education, children, and people with disabilities. She has published 36 articles and 2 books. Sanela Bašić  is Associate Professor in the Faculty of Political Sciences, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina. She has published internationally on welfare policy, gender and labor market, ethnic conflict, postconflict, peace building, and reconciliation. She was a recipient of the Academic Fellowship Program of the Open Society Foundation (2010–2014), a member of the Executive Committee of the European Association of Schools of Social Work (2007–2017), and its secretary (2015–2017). Erika  Bejko  is assistant professor of Social Work at the University of Tirana, Albania. Her research focuses on issues of international cooperation, local development, humanitarian aid, and evidence-based practice. Currently, she teaches courses on quantitative and qualitative research methods in social work. Dr. Bejko holds a PhD from the Department of Social Work and Social Policy at the University of Tirana. Gordana  Berc  is Professor in the Faculty of Law, Department of Social Work, University of Zagreb, Croatia. Her current research interests are related to youth and families, school social work, family services, and counseling methods. Dr. Berc has published 42 articles and participated in national and international research projects. Marsela Dauti  is Associate Professor of Social Work at the University of Tirana, Albania. Her research focuses on issues of political inclusion, democratic accountability, and government responsiveness. Dr. Dauti supports policy makers, development practitioners, and human rights activists in using evidence in their work. She holds a PhD from the Brown School of Social Work at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. Boncho  Gospodinov  is Professor of Education (Educational Research) in the Faculty of Education, Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, Bulgaria. Since the late 1990s, he has been instrumental in establishing and developing social work as an academic subject in the Faculty of Education. From 2006 to 2016, he was chair of the management board of the Bulgarian Association for Social Work Education. His academic interests focus on education, didactics, social work theory, and practice, research in education, and social work.

Editors and Contributors

xiii

Florin Lazâr  is Professor in the Department of Social Work, Faculty of Sociology and Social Work, University of Bucharest, Romania. He is member of the editorial board of the European Journal of Social Work, and he participates in the leadership of European Association of Schools of Social Work, European Social Work Research Association, and of the National College of Social Workers from Romania. Rossitsa  Simeonova  is Associate  Professor of Social Work Management in the Faculty of Education, Department of Social Work, Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, Bulgaria. She has 25 years of experience as an academic lecturer and as a trainer-consultant in social work and educational practice. Her research interests are quality management, leadership and organizational culture, change management, educational evaluation, and child rights. She is a member of the management board of the Bulgarian Association for Social Work Education. Lilyana Strakova  is Professor in the Faculty of Education at Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski in Bulgaria. She teaches the courses titled Professional Values and Norms in Social Work, Civic Education, Anticorruption Education, and others. Dr. Strakova is author of over 60 publications in the field of social work and education. She manages the Center for Civic Education in the Faculty of Education, as well as the master’s program, Modern Educational Technologies, for training and retraining of teachers. Smaranda  Witec  is Vice Dean of the Faculty of Sociology and Social Work, University of Bucharest, PhD lecturer in the Department of Social Work, and President of the Bucharest Territorial Structure of the National College of Social Workers, Romania. Darja Zaviršek  is Professor in the Faculty of Social Work, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia, where she is also chair of the Social Justice and Inclusion Department. She is a professor of the international master’s level course, Social Work as a Human Rights Profession, at the Alice Salomon University of Applied Sciences in Berlin. She is the founder and president of the Eastern European Sub-Regional Association of the Schools of Social Work. Her research interests include disability, gender and critical studies, and the history of social welfare. Nino Žganec  is Professor at the University of Zagreb, Croatia. His professional and scientific interests include community social work, ethics and human rights, organization of social services, and international social work. He is experienced in political engagement and has served in leadership roles in the European Association of Schools of Social Work, the International Association of Schools of Social Work, the European Anti-Poverty Network, and the Croatian Anti-Poverty Network.

List of Figures

Fig. 1.1 Southeast Europe������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 1 Fig. 2.1 Slovenia in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 13 Fig. 2.2 Professors of social work from the University of Ljubljana protest the death of a Roma baby in front of the Faculty of Social Work, holding an Amnesty International banner: “Shall this be the last tragedy! #The Minute of Silence for Ahmetay,” February 2020����������� 24 Fig. 3.1 Croatia in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 35 Fig. 3.2 The building of the Department of Social Work, Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb����������������������������������������������������������������������������� 38 Fig. 3.3 Social work students preparing for performing of different roles in human rights protection�������������������������������������������������������������������� 39 Fig. 3.4 The art can play important role in social work and human rights education����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 52 Fig. 4.1 Bosnia and Hercegovina in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 61 Fig. 4.2 College of Social Work, established in 1958 in Sarajevo��������������������� 67 Fig. 4.3 Guest lecture of Dr. Darja Zaviršek on the occasion of the World Social Work Day in 2013, “Social Work in Between Structural Inequalities and Human Rights Principles”������������������������� 73 Fig. 5.1 Kosovo in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 89 Fig. 5.2 Center for Social Work in Prishtina������������������������������������������������������ 96 Fig. 5.3 Kosovo citizens protesting by observing social distance during COVID-19 pandemic in Prishtina������������������������������������������� 100

xv

xvi

List of Figures

Fig. 6.1 Albania in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 109 Fig. 6.2 Public hearing held in Ana e Malit����������������������������������������������������� 115 Fig. 7.1 Romania in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 129 Fig. 7.2 The first school of social work in Bucharest, 1929����������������������������� 131 Fig. 7.3 Cover of the first official publication of the high school of social work “Princess Ileana,” Bucharest, 1929����������������������������� 132 Fig. 7.4 National Gala of Excellence in Social Work organized annually by the National College of Social Workers, on World Social Work Day, Bucharest, 2019������������������������������������������� 136 Fig. 8.1 Bulgaria in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 147 Fig. 8.2 Building of the Faculty of Education, University of Sofia St. Kliment Ohridski������������������������������������������������������������������ 163 Fig. 8.3 Social Work magazine publication of the Faculty of Education, University of Sofia St. Kliment Ohridski�������������������������������������������� 164

List of Tables

Table 4.1 Human rights in social work education���������������������������������������������� 74 Table 4.2 Knowledge of human rights���������������������������������������������������������������� 76 Table 8.1 P  eople with disabilities hired by employers through services and programs provided by the state labor agency����������������������������� 157 Table 8.2 Courses in social work programs related to human rights���������������� 167

xvii

Chapter 1

Human Rights, Social Work, and Uncertainty: The View from Southeast Europe Vjollca Krasniqi and Jane McPherson

Fig. 1.1  Southeast Europe. (Map Credit: Kat Farlowe)

V. Krasniqi (*) Faculty of Philosophy, Department of Social Work, University of Prishtina, Prishtina, Kosovo e-mail: [email protected] J. McPherson School of Social Work, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 V. Krasniqi, J. McPherson (eds.), Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11728-2_1

1

2

V. Krasniqi and J. McPherson

1.1  S  outheast Europe: A Region of Continuous Transition and Uncertainty In early 2022, as we put the finishing touches on this manuscript, the world is more than 2 years into the COVID-19 pandemic that has turned lives upside down—creating uncertainty—around the globe and across Southeast Europe. This uncertainty is exacerbated now by the reality of war on the region’s eastern border. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine means that Southeast Europe must brace itself for a flood of new refugees and a future whose story will be rewritten once again by conflict. In the Southeast European region, this uncertainty is nothing new. For more than three decades, the region has felt the pains and pleasures of its transition from socialism to capitalism and liberal democracy, and the region has endured the trauma and destruction of war. Still, this “normalized state of exception,” to borrow from Walter Benjamin (1968, p. 257), should not be understood simply as a condition of stagnation or chaos, but rather as one that carries within it the possibility of transcendence. Uncertainty, in this sense, can open the door to transformation, resilience, and development. In this volume, we investigate the impact of these transitions and uncertainties on the social work profession in Southeast Europe, we examine these transformations, and we explore how human rights have been integrated (or not) into professional social work practice and education. Authors from across the region—representing the seven nations of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Kosovo, Romania, and Slovenia—reflect on their national and social work histories and consider how effective social work has been at coping with transition and promoting human rights in their respective countries. In so doing, these authors identify barriers—structural, cultural, and individual—that prevent social workers from engaging in human rights–based approaches to professional practice. Though barriers and challenges abound, these authors conclude that social work can and must play a role in expanding access to the full gamut of human rights for all people in the region. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War in 1989, Southeast Europe has been engaged in a process of accelerated disruption, evolution, and change. Indeed, the region has been shaped by rupture. The dissolution of Yugoslavia opened the door for the emergence of new states—Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and the stilldisputed nation of Kosovo—and also created uncertainty and conflict as new borders were drawn. War and interethnic violence in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Kosovo prompted the international community to intervene by deploying United Nations (UN) peacekeepers in Bosnia and Herzegovina, carrying out aerial bombings against Serb military and police forces in Kosovo, and by establishing UN protectorates in both countries. Though there is peace now, the ethnic divisions and tension within Bosnia and Herzegovina and between Serbia and Kosovo remain. In former Yugoslavia and across the Southeast European region, the end of the communist era required nations to develop new state systems and political

1  Human Rights, Social Work and Uncertainty in Southeast Europe

3

parties, while coping with structural adjustments to their national economies imposed by international organizations, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. In many countries, optimistic projects and policies promising to bring democracy and stability have often been short-lived and incomplete. All of this uncertainty has led directly to an increased sense of insecurity and the erosion of social trust across the region (Gordy & Efendić, 2020). At the same time, the integration of selected countries into the European Union (EU) and the exclusion of others have created tensions with the potential to impact future development regionally. In Southeast Europe, the end of socialism resulted in a shift from a centralized state system toward market economies, democracy, an ideology of human rights, and Europeanization. Europeanization—as measured by EU accession—has been widely sought by Southeast European nations, though the goal has not yet been universally met (Gordy & Efendić, 2020, p. 9). Indeed, the process of EU integration divides the countries covered in this book, given that only four countries— Slovenia, Croatia, Romania, and Bulgaria—have been granted full membership in the EU. Albania is an official candidate country; Bosnia and Herzegovina applied for EU membership in February 2016; and Kosovo signed a Stabilization Association Agreement with the EU that entered into force in April 2016. As Florian Bieber argues, “structurally, with accession and conditionality at least formally in place, no group of countries is at least formally under greater pressure to adopt democratic institutions and comply with the rule of law requirements of the EU than the Western Balkans” (Bieber, 2021 p. 3). The nonhistoric term “Western Balkans” refers to the nations of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia. Thus, EU integration is an unfinished policy in Southeast Europe that translates into further uncertainty, leaving the region vulnerable to competing geopolitical alternatives—for example, from Russia or China—for economic influence and political dominance (Gordy & Efendić, 2020, p. 23). The vast majority of citizens in the Western Balkans countries favor EU membership; only Serbia’s citizens are split, with half favoring and half against EU integration (European Western Balkans, 2021).

1.2 Southeast Europe: Difference and Diversity This book is situated within the larger context of scholarship on transition in Eastern and Southeast Europe after 1989, focusing on the collapse of socialism and the erosion of the socialist state. In this volume, transition is not understood as a uniform or coherent process, but rather one that entails multiple ruptures and continuities. We are skeptical of the assumption that “history and all aspects of society change in concert and in the same direction” (Gal & Kligman, 2000, p. 11) and look instead for diversities of process, experience, and outcome. The Southeast European states covered in this volume are diverse in terms of ethnicity, language, and culture, but they

4

V. Krasniqi and J. McPherson

are similar in terms of socialist and/or communist legacy, a recent shift to liberal democracy and market economy, and an orientation toward the EU, even though they evidence different dynamics of change and divergent landscapes of human rights and social work. Hence, the volume is attentive to how the past is made meaningful in the present: how do experiences of state socialism, wars in the 1990s, and subsequent Europeanization shape contemporary societies in Southeast Europe region? This volume seeks to trace these dynamics through the lens of human rights integration in social work practice and education. Southeast European nations “have been doubly marginalized, not rich or powerful enough to be part of the Global North, not poor or powerless enough to be part of the Global South” (Stubbs et al., 2019, p. 11). This liminal location has led to a persistent narrative of Southeast Europe as a region “stuck in eternal transition towards an elusive modernity” (Müller, 2017, quoted in Stubbs et al., 2019, p. 11). Southeast Europe thus has been marginalized both socially and politically by the uneven forces of globalization. Open borders—both within the region and as a bridge to Europe—were established as an expression of freedom and human rights but can now be seen also as a cause of insecurity and uncertainty. Outward migration of regional populations has transformed issues of rights, economics, and freedom of movement into a discourse of security both within the region and in the larger European context. Though freedom of movement has created a shared identity and unity among the EU members states, not all citizens of Southeast Europe can travel visa-free in Europe as defined by the EU: Kosovo’s citizens must still endure a lengthy visa process to enter the Schengen zone. Kosovo citizens’ ability to travel remains restricted globally, as they can travel freely only to Turkey and the Maldives Islands, as well as Albania, North Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia.

1.3 Southeast Europe: Current Challenges The region faces additional difficulties that include long-standing concerns, like migration, integration of minority groups, and women’s rights, and new challenges, like COVID-19. Several authors in this volume focus on these concerns in their analyses, and here we provide very short introductions to some of those concerns. • Throughout its history, the Southeast European region has been a hub for migration—both immigration and outmigration—with diverse patterns and many categories of individuals moving in and out of the region. For example, as a consequence of the wars in the 1990s and the related slow pace of economic development, many Southeast Europeans sought refuge and better economic opportunities in the EU. While some of these migrants were granted citizenship in “receiving” countries, many faced involuntary expulsion, especially those from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Albania (Watkins & Zaviršek, 2019, p. 1). The regional diaspora that remains in the EU (and elsewhere) is an important source of income for the region, especially in the poorer countries of Albania,

1  Human Rights, Social Work and Uncertainty in Southeast Europe

5

Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, and Kosovo (Migration Policy Institute, 2020). More recently, in 2015 and 2016, Southeast Europe found itself on the receiving end of the so-called migrant crises, when nearly a million refugees from Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan attempted to pass through the region on their way to Europe (Watkins & Zaviršek, 2019, p. 1). When evaluating the regional social work response to this crisis, Zaviršek and Rajgelj (2019) observed that social workers lacked appropriate skills and were not encouraged by their governmental authorities to engage with the refugees. Today, citizens and social workers in the region are preparing themselves for another round of migration and dislocation, as refugees fleeing the Russian war in Ukraine cross their national borders. Social workers are again being called upon to honor their commitments to human rights and refugee protection. • Minority rights, global geopolitics, poverty, and the crisis of liberal democracy all influence the development of Southeast European states today. First, the lack of economic development in the region threatens democratic gains and is a huge barrier to human rights and social work in the region. And critically, though many nations in the region aspire toward greater democracy, they do so against the backdrop of a world that is increasingly becoming more undemocratic. The democratic decline in Southeast Europe (Bieber, 2021; Kapidžić, 2020) is fueled by nationalist ideologies, politically solidified ethnic-based identifications, and political elites who limit the equal distribution of rights and oppose social cohesion. In Southeast Europe, interethnic collaboration continues to be limited by cultural as well as structural factors (e.g., segregated schools). As part of the EU acquis communautaire compliance, several Southeast Europe countries have adopted more inclusive policies on ethnic minorities. Still, implementation of these policies lags, and promoting the human rights of ethnic minorities, especially those of the Roma people, remains a challenge for social workers across the region. Antigypsyism1 is prevalent across the region, and Roma people are subjected to racism, hate speech, and violence. Social workers need to reflect upon and root out anti-Roma bias in their own practices, adopt culturally ­appropriate social work strategies to challenge discrimination against the Roma (Urh, 2014), and partner with the Roma community to ensure the human rights of Roma people in employment, housing, education, health, social services, and participation in public life. • Lack of gender equality in the region is another key challenge for the social work profession. Especially given social work’s identity as a “female profession,” in that the majority of our practitioners and service users are women, it is especially important that we advocate for women’s rights and women’s empowerment. The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed structural and institutional limitations to addressing violations of women’s rights and gender-based discrimination,  The term “antigypsyism” is used per the definition and guidelines provided by the Council of Europe’s ECRI General Policy Recommendation No. 13 on Combating Antigypsyism and Discrimination Against Roma, https://rm.coe.int/ecri-general-policy-recommendation-no-13-oncombating-anti-gypsyism-an/16808b5aee 1

6

V. Krasniqi and J. McPherson

including within social work practice. Violence against women is a fact of life for many women in Southeastern Europe, and legal protections and social services are weak (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe [OSCE], 2019). Moreover, the majority of women who experience violence lack information on available social services that they can turn to for support (OSCE, 2019). Social workers must take rights-based and intersectional approaches to confront discrimination and advance the rights of women, gender-diverse persons, and those with nonheteronormative gender identities. • The COVID-19 pandemic and the unprecedented scale of the public health lockdowns since 2020 have created new conversations around human rights, individual human freedoms, economic freedoms, media freedoms, the right to information, and the rule of law in Southeast Europe and around the world. In Southeast Europe, the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged regional governments—and the social work profession—to provide needed services in ways that are fully respectful of all citizens’ political and social rights. Though some countries in the region have relatively higher gross domestic products than others, no country in Southeast Europe was prepared to handle the scale of the pandemic, which has posed major challenges to the region’s underfunded and fragile health and social service systems (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2020).

1.4 The Interplay of Human Rights and Social Work in Southeast Europe Globally, social work identifies itself as a “human rights profession” (Mapp et al., 2019), and even the Global Definition of Social Work asserts that “advocating and upholding human rights and social justice is the motivation and justification for social work” (International Federation of Social Work and International Association of Schools of Social Work, 2014). Still, social work cannot be understood as synonymous with human rights promotion, as not all forms of social work practice promote human rights, and social workers have also participated in violating human rights, for example, by collaborating with unjust or exclusionary social policies (Chapman & Withers, 2019; Ioakimidis & Trimikliniotis, 2020). Recent scholarship focuses on identifying the elements of social work practice that truly do expand access to human rights. Jim Ife’s foundational scholarship (Ife, 2008, 2009) makes it clear that human rights must emerge in dialogue with communities and must not be imposed by social workers or others from above; also, there is a growing body of literature that explores how human rights principles can and should be integrated into social work practice across international contexts (Cemlyn, 2008; Chen & Tang, 2019; Hawkins & Knox, 2014; Krasniqi, 2019; Krasniqi et al., 2022; Sewpaul, 2016; Staub-Bernasconi, 2016; Šadić et  al., 2020). When social workers take a human rights approach, they view human needs through the lens of

1  Human Rights, Social Work and Uncertainty in Southeast Europe

7

human rights and explore how people’s basic rights to food, housing, employment, education, and so forth can be better and more equitably met (McPherson et  al., 2017). Rights-based social workers also connect with service users as knowledgeable partners—even experts—rather than imagining them to be passive recipients of charity and services (Mapp et al., 2019). A rights-based approach challenges social workers to promote values of justice and human dignity, even (and especially) when those values are threatened by austerity-promoting public policies and bureaucratic procedure (Reynaert et al., 2019). All of this is relevant to social work practice in Southeast Europe, where the interplay between social work and human rights is complex. Social work throughout the region dates back to the early twentieth century and grew from roots in socialist state ideologies and religious charity rather than human rights. In Romania and Bulgaria, social work education was established after World War I, but then was suspended under the communist regime after World War II (Zaviršek, 2014). In Yugoslavia, Zaviršek (2008) argued that “the development of schools of social work was a product of the Cold War equilibrium as Yugoslavia positioned itself as communist country open to the West”; US social workers advised on the development of the Yugoslav social work curriculum in the early 1950s and helped establish state Centers for Social Work in the early 1960s (Zaviršek, 2008, pp. 736–738). According to Zaviršek, social work in socialist Yugoslavia was deployed as a strategy for social control and for carrying out state social policy goals. In Albania, social work was nonexistent before the Second World War and also during the communist regime. The establishment of social work studies at the University of Tirana in 1992 marked the beginning of the social work profession in that country. In the 1990s, the collapse of social and economic rights in Southeast Europe presented a real challenge to the social work profession as social workers sought to provide assistance to citizens confronted with the loss of their social rights (e.g., housing, employment, and income support) in the postsocialist transition. It was during this transition after 1991 that social work education became fully established in most of Southeast Europe, generally with the support of international organizations and Western academics (mainly from the United States and Europe) who engaged in the development of local social work departments, schools, and study programs (Zaviršek, 2014, p. 272). Over the last three decades in Southeast Europe, social work education and practice have generally integrated human rights within discourses of democratization and institution building. In the postsocialist era, the statist idea of citizens existing as part of the collective has been replaced with an ideology of self-determination and human rights (Zaviršek, 2014, p. 271). Still, the full integration of human rights into social work is a work in progress, as the contributions in this volume demonstrate. Regional challenges to human rights are significant and multifaceted: they include neoliberal approaches to social policy, persistent patterns of social exclusion, entrenched poverty, traditional gender ideologies, and ethnic nationalism— and many of these challenges have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Individual social workers face challenges as well: personal or cultural prejudices can interfere with social workers fully honoring the dignity of service users;

8

V. Krasniqi and J. McPherson

overwhelming bureaucratic requirements focus social workers’ attention on paperwork rather than rights; and the pervasive “gatekeeper” role that social workers are assigned at government Centers for Social Work often puts them in the position of denying people’s access to goods and services rather than expanding their service users’ access to rights. To move forward, social work must embrace the promotion of human rights in daily practice to ensure an equal distribution of rights in society without discrimination on any identity grounds, including gender, sexuality, ethnicity, race, class, religion, ability, and language. Social work should adopt human rights for genuine empowerment of the profession and democratic consolidation of the society. Only such a simultaneous process will allow social work to develop as a human rights profession and encourage professionals to step out of their traditional roles of social service providers and become fully fledged human rights defenders. Having provided an orientation to the region as well as to the context and purpose of this book, we will now briefly describe each of the volume’s chapters and point to some of the interconnections among them. The chapters are presented in an order that is approximately West to East, beginning with Slovenia and ending in Bulgaria. This ordering has the advantage of placing the countries of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia—Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Kosovo—in intellectual as well as geopolitical proximity. Chapters on Albania, Romania, and Bulgaria provide additional rich and necessary perspective on the region. Future volumes addressing these themes in the region would be enhanced by the inclusion of voices from Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia. Each of the chapters in this book addresses common themes of social work, human rights, and transition, but they also focus on particular local histories and current concerns. Darja Zaviršek explores the history of Roma population in Slovenia and the complex interaction between the Roma community’s access to rights and the social work profession. The author provides insight into the transgenerational, institutionalized, and individualized racism—also known as antigypsyism—that affects the daily lives of Romani women, men, and children today. Zaviršek illustrates how social work practices have echoed the dominant myths of Slovenian national homogeneity that cast the Roma people in the role of “Other.” The author challenges social workers to go beyond their normative practices in order to support the Roma community’s human rights to education, employment, housing, sanitation, and even their Romani language. Zaviršek poses important questions for social workers and calls for rights-based approaches and advocacy on Roma rights in Slovenia. Nino Žganec, Gordana Berc, and Marina Milić Babić discuss the influence of socialist and communist ideology on the development of social work as an academic discipline in Croatia. They trace the roots of rights-based approaches to social work in civil-society organizations as they emerged after 1990, aiming to strengthen democracy and protect human rights. Though social workers have

1  Human Rights, Social Work and Uncertainty in Southeast Europe

9

become better prepared to protect and promote human rights, they are still hampered in practice by the enormity of the administrative tasks that they are assigned at government Centers for Social Work, as well as by the lack of education opportunities for professionals, and government social policy that fails to ensure universal access. The authors challenge social workers to strengthen their professional competence through local and international solidarity. Sanela Bašič investigates how social work education and practice in Bosnia and Herzegovina have been shaped by human rights discourses during this time of prolonged political, economic, and social uncertainty. Drawing on survey data with social work students and qualitative interviews with social work practitioners, Bašič provides critical insights and compelling arguments about the deployment of human rights into social work practice in contemporary Bosnia and Herzegovina. Bašič describes a complex social work context that is plagued by fragmentation; unstable political, economic, and social institutions; and increasing social vulnerabilities. Bašič argues that persistent feelings of insecurity along with the disillusionment and hopelessness borne of years of conflict challenge both human rights and social work in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Vjollca Krasniqi discusses how rights-based methods shape social work practice and professional identity in Kosovo and how professional norms are shaped in return. Though human rights have become an integral part of Kosovo social work practice and education, Krasniqi shows that there are still barriers to social workers becoming true human rights professionals. Moreover, Krasniqi demonstrates how these challenges have become increasingly visible as the unprecedented and uncertain times of the COVID-19 pandemic have impacted the well-being of Kosovo’s people and limited citizens’ access to their human rights. Krasniqi argues that social workers will need to work with policy makers to create the conditions to fully integrate human rights into social work practices now and in the future postpandemic Kosovo. Marsela Dauti and Erika Bejko situate social work in Albania within global trends of democratic decline, posing challenges to a politically oriented social work agenda locally and globally. They discuss the role of social workers in strengthening local democracy and advancing human rights in Albania by taking a close look at the local councils and the interaction between community members and elected representatives. Dauti and Bejko highlight the importance of developing community-based interventions with a focus on human rights and argue that social workers should engage in political spaces to advance democracy and promote human rights. They advocate for community practice and political engagement along with the casework in Albania. Florin Lazăr and Smaranda Witec discuss the social work profession as it has reestablished itself as an academic discipline and as a practice profession in Romania since the fall of Communism in 1989, and they explore this professional growth in the context of “a quasi-constant” three-decade dive into sociopolitical, legislative, and public health uncertainty. According to Lazăr and Witec, during the early years of this national transition, human rights were front and center on the public agenda, mainly through the efforts of national and international civil-­

10

V. Krasniqi and J. McPherson

society organizations focused on the rights of vulnerable groups. The authors argue here that social work’s activism has become more visible in the last decade and that social workers are among those demanding and creating change. Specifically, they highlight the current COVID-19 pandemic, which catalyzed a consolidation among the social work profession to build up their long-term advocacy efforts to protect the rights of Romania’s vulnerable citizens. Lilyana Strakova, Boncho Gospodinov, and Rossitsa Simeonova address the integration of human rights standards in social policy and the development of social work in postsocialist Bulgaria. They show that human rights were an integral part of Bulgaria’s postsocialist transition and that this trend accelerated when Bulgaria became an EU member. The authors highlight several structural limitations that challenge the legal framework of human rights in Bulgaria by looking specifically at social work in the areas of poverty, disability, and child rights. Moreover, they discuss the development of social work education in Bulgaria and argue for further integration of human rights in the social work curriculum to enable new generations of social workers to respond to human rights issues and foster the identity of social work as a human rights profession.

1.5 Conclusion We believe that readers of this volume will come away enlightened. The authors of the chapters included here are leaders in regional, continental, and global social work education, theory, and practice. Regional readers will gain new perspectives on their own experiences, and international readers will have their eyes opened to social work as it is practiced in this critical region of the world. In this introductory chapter, we hope that we have created curiosity about the complex interplay of human rights and social work in Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Kosovo, Romania, and Slovenia. Now, we invite you to enjoy the book.

References Benjamin, W. (1968). Illuminations: Essays and reflections (Hannah Arendt, Ed. & Harry Zohn, Trans.). Schocken Books. Bieber, F. (2021). The rise of authoritarianism in the Western Balkans. Palgrave Macmillan. Cemlyn, S. (2008). Human rights and gypsies and travellers: An exploration of the application of a human rights perspective to social work with a minority community in Britain. British Journal of Social Work, 38(1), 153–173. Chapman, C., & Withers, A. J. (2019). Violent history of benevolence: Interlocking oppression in the moral economies of social working. University of Toronto Press. Chen, H. Y., & Tang, I. C. (2019). Social workers’ attitudes toward human rights in a sample from Taiwan. International Social Work, 62(1), 295–308.

1  Human Rights, Social Work and Uncertainty in Southeast Europe

11

European Western Balkans. (2021). Public opinion poll in the Western Balkans on the EU Integration. https://europeanwesternbalkans.com/2021/11/08/public-­opinion-poll-­in-­the-westernbalkans-on-­the-­eu-­integration/ Gal, S., & Kligman, G. (2000). The politics of gender after socialism. Princeton University Press. Gordy, E., & Efendić, A. (2020). Engaging policy to address gaps between formality and informality in the Western Balkans. In E. Gordy & A. Efendić (Eds.), Meaningful reform in the Western Balkans: Between formal institutions and informal practices (pp. 7–21). Peter Lang. Hawkins, C. A., & Knox, K. (2014). Educating for international social work: Human rights leadership. International Social Work, 57(3), 248–257. Ife, J. (2008). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice (Revised ed.). Cambridge University Press. Ife, J. (2009). Human rights from below: Achieving rights through community development. Cambridge University Press. International Federation of Social Work and International Association of Schools of Social Work. (2014). Global definition of social work. https://www.ifsw.org/what-­is-­social-­work/ global-­definition-­of-­social-­work/ Ioakimidis, V., & Trimikliniotis, N. (2020). Making sense of social work’s troubled past: Professional identity, collective memory and the quest for historical justice. British Journal of Social Work, 50(6), 1890–1908. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcaa040 Kapidžić, D. (2020). The rise of illiberal politics in Southeast Europe. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 20(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2020.1709701 Krasniqi, V. (2019). Migration and human rights in Kosovo: Perspectives for social work education. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 4(1), 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s41134-­018-­0073-­4 Krasniqi, V., McPherson, J., & Villarreal-Otálora, T. (2022). Are we putting human rights into social work practice in Kosovo? British Journal of Social Work, 52, 291–310. https://doi. org/10.1093/bjsw/bcaa235 Mapp, S., McPherson, J., Androff, D. A., & Gatenio Gabel, S. (2019). Social work is a human rights profession. Social Work, 64(3), 259–269. McPherson, J., Siebert, C.  F., & Siebert, D.  C. (2017). Measuring rights-based perspectives: A validation of the human rights lens in social work scale. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 8(2), 233–257. Migration Policy Institute. (2020). Southeastern Europe looks to engage its diaspora to offset the impact of depopulation. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/southeastern-­europe-­seeks-­ offset-­depopulation-­diaspora-­ties Müller, M. (2017). What about the global east? (SSRN paper). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2020). Tackling coronavirus (Covid-19). Contributing to a global effort. Covid-19 Response in South East European Economies. https://www.wb6cif.eu/wp-­content/uploads/2020/05/Strategic-­Response-­to-­ Covid-­19-­in-­SEE.pdf Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). (2019). OSCE-led survey on violence against women: Main report. Well-being and safety of women. https://www.osce.org/ files/f/documents/9/2/413237_0.pdf Reynaert, D., Dijkstra, P., Knevel, J., Hartman, J., Tirions, M., Geraghty, C., Gradener, J., Lochtenberg, M., & van den Hoven, R. (2019). Human rights at the heart of the social work curriculum. Social Work Education, 38(1), 21–33. Šadić, S., McPherson, J., Villarreal-Otálora, T., & Bašić, S. (2020). Rights-based social work in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Validating tools for education and practice. International Social Work. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872820912310 Sewpaul, V. (2016). The west and the rest divide: Human rights, culture and social work. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 1(1), 30–39. Staub-Bernasconi, S. (2016). Social work and human rights: Linking two traditions of human rights in social work. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 1(1), 40–49.

12

V. Krasniqi and J. McPherson

Stubbs, P., An, S., & Chubarova, T. (2019). Poverty, inequality and well-being in the global east: Bringing the “social” back in. In S. An, T. Chubarova, B. Deacon, & P. Stubbs (Eds.), Social policy, poverty, and inequality in central and eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union: Agency and institutions in flux (pp.  11–45). Ibidem Verlag. https://gripinequality.org/wp-­ content/uploads/2020/04/isbn1308_x14.pdf Urh, Š. (2014). Roma community, Roma minority. In Encyclopedia of social work. National Association of Social Workers Press and Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/ acrefore/9780199975839.013.1015 Watkins, J., & Zaviršek, D. (2019). Editorial. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 4, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-­019-­00093-­1 Zaviršek, D. (2008). Engendering social work education under state socialism in Yugoslavia. British Journal of Social Work, 38, 734–750. Zaviršek, D. (2014). Social work education in Eastern Europe: Can post-communism be followed by diversity? In C. Noble, H. Strauss, & B. Littlechild (Eds.), Global social work: Crossing borders, blurring boundaries (pp. 271–283). Sydney University Press. Zaviršek, D., & Rajgelj, B. (2019). Anti-refugee sentiment without refugees: Human rights violations and social work in post-socialist countries of southeasters Europe in their social contexts. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 4, 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-­018-­0083-­2

Chapter 2

Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma and Among Roma People: A Human Rights Perspective in Slovenian Social Work Darja Zaviršek

Fig. 2.1 Slovenia in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe. (Map Credit: Kat Farlowe) D. Zaviršek (*) Faculty of Social Work, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 V. Krasniqi, J. McPherson (eds.), Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11728-2_2

13

14

D. Zaviršek

2.1  Introduction In December 2019, a 2-month-old baby named Ahmetaj, the third child of a 19-yearold mother, died in a Roma settlement in Slovenia. The death was surprising because it occurred in Slovenia, a country where infant mortality is almost nonexistent. Further, the fresh bite marks of a rat were found on the baby’s face. The mother reported that she did not know what happened to her child because it was dark inside the family shack, which had no electricity or running water (Amnesty International Slovenia, This shall this be the last tragedy—It is known who has to act. https://www.amnesty.si/smrt-romskega-dojencka-odziv , 2020). Not long after this incident, the lack of sanitation in Roma settlements came to national attention when the spread of the novel coronavirus in 2020 necessitated frequent handwashing. For Slovenian social workers, these circumstances raise important questions: Could social work take immediate action to provide Roma settlements with external water cisterns for their health and safety in a time of emergency? Could social workers speak out against the harmful state policies that allow such conditions to exist? How do social work ethics and human rights require social workers to intervene with and advocate for Roma communities in Slovenia? The Slovenian Roma are not a homogeneous group—there are significant differences between the rural Roma communities and the Roma people who live in urban areas. Still, transgenerational poverty is a common denominator among them. In the political and economic climate of global neoliberalism in which postsocialist countries entered the European Union in the 1990s, the Roma began massively leaving Slovenia (and its Eastern European neighbors) for Western Europe, where they sought work. Currently, with a population of ten to twelve million individuals, the Roma are the largest ethnic minority in Europe, and six million now live in European Union countries (including Slovenia). This chapter provides a historical overview to help social work practitioners and scholars understand the transgenerational, institutionalized, and individualized racism—also known as antigypsyism1 that continues to affect the daily lives of Romani women, men, and children today. It presents the results of research conducted between 2005 and 2022, which provides insight into the impact of antigypsyism on Slovenian social workers and other helping professionals who work with Roma and engage in Roma communities. The chapter not only shows that antigypsyism is internalized in forms of everyday racism but also draws attention to social practices within Roma communities that violate international human rights norms, particularly child marriage and gender-based violence against girls. During their social work training, Slovenian social workers usually have little opportunity to reflect on their own antigypsyism and often turn a blind eye to these practices. This chapter will highlight some elements of reflective antiracist social work that should be  The term “antigypsyism” is used per the definition and guidelines provided by the Council of Europe’s ECRI General Policy Recommendation No. 13 on Combating Antigypsyism and Discrimination Against Roma, https://rm.coe.int/ecri-general-policy-recommendation-no-13-oncombating-anti-gypsyism-an/16808b5aee 1

2  Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma People in Slovenia

15

practiced in Slovenia and throughout Europe instead of the trend to “Europeanize” Roma (Srode et  al., 2014; Munté et  al., 2011; Vermeersch, 2012; Vincze, 2014). National codes of social work ethics complemented by global standards of social work ethics and international human rights norms are necessary to achieve critical and engaged social work.

2.2 Understanding Antigypsyism in Slovenian Social Work In Slovenia, the majority of Roma live in the Prekmurje and the Dolenjska regions, in Bela Krajina and Posavje, and many live in larger cities such as Ljubljana and Maribor. Even though the historical accounts place Roma in the territory of what is today Slovenia as early as in the fifteenth century,2 many people, including experts in social protection, still describe the Roma as migrants and outsiders, as though they were a foreign population (Janko Spreizer, 2012, 2018). Non-Roma Slovenians (Roma people call them civilians, gadža, or pavri) are believed to have been living in the territory of today’s Slovenia from time immemorial. The imaginary perception of the uniformity and continuity of a group of people living in a particular geographic area is founded on the myth that a monoethnic population shares “blood and soil” in the uniform territory of a state (Šumi, 2012; Šumi & Janko Spreizer, 2011). Supposedly, the “blood ties rights” (Lat. ius sanguinis) make a person an inhabitant of a particular state and, therefore, a person of Slovenian, German, Hungarian, Austrian, and so on, descent. Rare professional conferences on the “Roma question” demonstrate a continuous unintentional and unconscious racism,3 suggesting that the other is a problem in itself. Social workers need to question whether Slovenian (or more generally, European) social work training echoes these dominant myths of national homogeneity that portray the Roma people as needy outsiders or whether it rejects these racist constructions. Do social workers support the Roma community’s “human rights from below” (Ife, 2009) including the right to Romani language, education, employment, housing, access to services, and equity, or is there a belief that the national Constitution grants equal rights to all citizens, and therefore social workers should treat everyone the same? In Slovenia, social work training has failed to internalize a sufficient level of antiracist social work knowledge including about antigypsyism. The “differentiated universalism” has been absent (Lister, 1998), while the universalist approach tells  From the seventeenth century onward, the data are more complete, and Roma names are found in birth registers. At first, due to the activities they took on and because they were denied hospitality from local authorities and the majority population, they changed their dwelling places often (the proverbial “nomadic character” of Roma). Later, mainly in the Prekmurje region, in the Dolenjska region, Bela Krajina, and Posavje, they gained the status of permanent residents. 3  The “Jewish question” and the “Gypsy question” were discussed through the lenses of scientific racism during Nazi period and will be described further on. 2

16

D. Zaviršek

only half of the truth and is not sufficient for the development of social work practice as a human rights profession. Social workers are asked to work with families, but the very definition of family is based mostly on a heteronormative, nuclear-­ family model of Slovenian origin. The Slovenian Association of the Centers of Social Work did not even organize a conference on “Social Work with Roma” until 2013. The norm has been for non-Roma experts working in social welfare institutions to objectivize the Roma (they made them the object of their observation, judgment, and definition), ethnicize, culturalize, and pathologize them. These approaches form a triple structure of historically constructed antigypsyism within social work practice. The history of racism against Roma deserves attention. The term “antigypsyism” is said to have originated in Russia as early as the nineteenth century and was later adopted by Jean-Pierre Liégeois, director of the Centre for Gypsy Studies (Wippermann, 2015, p. 227). Increasingly, the term is used in the social sciences (Humljan Urh, 2014a, b; Urh, 2010; Zaviršek, 2010 2012), and Wippermann (2015) describes antigypsyism as an ideology, mentality, or policy based on social, religious, romantic, and racial prejudice against Roma, seeing them as cheaters, lazy, devil’s children, baby snatchers, and racially inferior. In times of scarcity and political turmoil in Slovenia and beyond, the Roma have been used as scapegoats and blamed for all human difficulties. The history of the Roma in Europe  has been  characterized by  the experience of prejudice and discrimination: religious antigypsyism (the prejudice that Roma are not Christian and are associated with the devil),4 romantic antigypsyism (the images of cheerful and carefree Roma whose lives are full of song), racist antigypsyism (the belief that the Roma have innate negative personality characteristics), and social antigypsyism (the rejection of Roma as bad workers, neighbors, and community members). Roma people have been used as a projection screen for everything that the majority population rejected or saw as negative. According to Wippermann (2015), the stereotype that “the gypsies snatch children” is actually a reversed social experience, as it was the non-Roma who were actually taking

 Historical accounts report that the Roma came to the European part of the then Byzantine Empire through Constantinople between the ninth and eleventh centuries. Wippermann (2015) showed that they were first known by the Greek denomination atsigganoi, because the Ancient Greeks felt that the newcomers belonged to the Christian community called athinganoi (“the untouchables”). Historically, it is impossible to explain whether this was a self-label or a label given by others, but it had a negative connotation. The Athinganoi were reproached for wanting to be untouchable, because they avoided contact with the Christians and did not fully respect the dogma of the church. Supposedly, they belonged to the gnostic sect of the adherents to the Persian religion of Zarathustra, who believed in a good and an evil god. Despite many unanswered historical questions, it is well documented that European inhabitants reproached the Roma for being bad Christians, as they did not pray only to God but also to the evil forces. In the period between the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, accounts were found of the arrival of the Roma to the Greek Peloponnese peninsula, where they were called Little Egyptians (aigypsios), another label that expressed the prejudices of Ancient Greeks against the Egyptians. 4

2  Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma People in Slovenia

17

children away from the Roma and placing them in church boarding schools or with “better” families for resocialization. Let’s deconstruct and contextualize the triple structure of antigypsyism. Ethnization is a process by which the actions and characteristics of the members of an ethnic group are judged mainly by the fact that they are members of that ethnic group. Thus, ethnicity becomes the explanatory basis of any other human characteristics, which are put aside as less relevant or even irrelevant, even when people are living without running water or sanitation. The impact on social work practice is enormous because ethnicity becomes more important than other social markers and facts, for example, if someone is a child or lives in extreme poverty or avoids going to school because of the everyday racism experienced there. Ethnization is often expressed by statements like, “Your child has a talent for music, no surprise, since he is Roma” (Zaviršek, 2012, p. 186). It prevents social workers from intervening when early “marriage”5 or other forms of violence take place against children or women. Sometimes social workers romanticize the community and assume that a child will be cared for by the community, without having an in-depth understanding of the relations among people in that community. The relations are often seen as a priori nonconflict and cohesive, where solidarity and collective care for children prevail. Such romanticizing prevents social workers from seeing a potential danger for the Roma children. A child’s body bears the symbolic inscription of past conflicts among adults, and therefore the amount of care a child receives depends on whose child he or she is. One Slovenian social worker expressed these attitudes in an interview in 2019, explaining, “You can see his willie, he walks around naked and nobody takes care of him...[and]...nobody will take care of him because he is his mother’s son … children are called names and scolded with their parents’ names.”  Culturalization, similar to ethnization, reduces people to being part of an imaginary culture that is understood as something essential and timeless, which creates social distance between the two constructed groups. Within the majority population, culture signifies a degree of education, appropriate manners, and moral habits, whereas the opposite traits are attributed to the pathologies of Roma culture. Poverty is often explained as culture. A Roma man was asked, “What is Roma culture?” and he replied, “I don’t remember us having any culturally specific rituals when I was little. We were like Slovenian people, it’s just that we were poor” (Humlijan Urh, 2014b). The belief that Roma people do not like to work overlooks the fact that employers in Slovenia avoid hiring individuals with Romani family names (Brajdić, Hudorović, Baranja, etc.). Some young Roma who succeed in finishing higher education often change their family names to typical Slovenian or German6 names to  The term “marriage,” when discussing minor children, is put in quotation marks, since these are symbolic marriages that have no basis in the Slovenian legislation and are considered illegal (girls usually from 13 to 16 years of age). According to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), child “marriage” is a form of sexual abuse against girls. 6  Roma people who live close to Slovenia-Austria border can find jobs in the Austrian region of Steiermark and in Corinthia, where Slovenia-based Roma are hired en masse; men mostly work in factories, some women work in plant nurseries, and some in health and social protection services. 5

18

D. Zaviršek

avoid such prejudice (Djoković, 2011). In 2018, a Roma social worker reported that she decided to change her family name even though she was encouraged by the principles of antiracist social work to problematize such practice and to resist everyday racism. Pathologization is a process by which the characteristics of a particular person or group are constructed as natural, congenital characteristics, for which medical terms are used (Zaviršek, 2000). These medical terms often describe ethnic minorities as being inclined toward certain physical or mental diseases, pathological violence, and “lower intelligence” or even “inferior mental development.”7 Such constructed individualized or collectivized characteristics are used to explain social facts, such as poverty, living in vulnerable social contexts, and even marginalization. For example, some professionals in social services promote racist stereotypes by saying to parents who are in the process of intercountry adoption: “Think carefully, if you wish to adopt a child from Macedonia, because Roma children are weak in mathematics!” (Zaviršek, 2012, p. 187). Another social worker recalled a different experience, “I used to work with a family whose children were successful in school because they didn’t tell anyone that they were Roma. [The children] had the same obligations as other children, and now both girls are in secondary school” (Zaviršek et al., 2019, p. 50). Legally, Roma people are recognized as a minority Slovenian ethnic group (about 10,000 to 12,000 people) divided into autochthonous Roma (supposedly those who are mentioned in historical accounts of present-day Slovenia from the fifteenth century onward) and non-autochthonous Roma (those who came to Slovenia as economic migrants in the 1960s and those who came as refugees from the war zones and economically devastated areas of Yugoslavia after 1991). Such fragmentation of the “social fields,” to use Balibar’s (2004) expression, enables the hierarchization of people and their more efficient management and control, since individuals are seen mainly through the prism of their length of settlement in a particular territory (“blood adherence”) and not from the perspective of rights and needs. Many Roma also belong to the “erased” inhabitants of Slovenia (over 25,000 persons with the Yugoslav passport were deleted from the register of the Slovenian citizens in 1992 and many Roma were among them), which has contributed to the economic deprivation of families and individuals, mental health problems, and well-documented long-term social suffering (Zorn, 2005, 2009). The Slovenian Roma are the poorest social group in the country, and the experience of poverty is transgenerational. Amnesty International’s Slovenia inquiry showed that one-fifth of Roma settlements at the time did not have access to drinking water or adequate sanitation. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (2013, p. 10) also warned the Slovenian government that most Roma still live separated from the majority population—in isolated settlements on the margins of

 The term is used within the categorization of people who are labeled as persons with intellectual disabilities. It is important to stress that these terms are arbitrary, fluid, and change constantly and that epistemological flexibility is needed. 7

2  Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma People in Slovenia

19

greater cities: “In general, Roma settlements remain below the minimum standard of living and are not well maintained, while the houses of Roma residents are in very poor condition.” In the absence of adequate data, it is estimated that 1% of Roma are employed and that most Roma families receive social transfers in the form of child allowances and financial benefits.

2.3 The Historic Roots of Today’s Antigypsyism Social workers need to understand and reflect upon the historic roots of antigypsyism and its widespread presence within the Slovenian social context. The historical processes also help social workers to question the extent to which “Roma culture” and “Roma way of life” are caused and constructed by historical marginalization. It is also essential to understand that during Yugoslavian state socialism, Roma people experienced stigma and were seen as lumpenproletariat,8 “unwilling to integrate.” In Slovenia as well as in the other postsocialist countries (e.g., Romania, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Serbia, and Northern Macedonia) where most Roma people live, the position of the Roma worsened after 1991 due to political regime changes and the impact of neoliberal social policies. Under socialist rule, some Roma were employed as nonskilled or semiskilled workers in heavy industry, while others made ends meet by manufacturing metal products, mending things, and engaging in local craftsmanship. With the end of communist leadership, several countries, including Slovenia, saw the disruption of obsolete and noncompetitive heavy industry, while local craftsmanship was replaced by less expensive products from the Global South. Thus, in postsocialist Europe, employment and employability of Romani people decreased to almost zero, while their other cash-generating activities (e.g., collecting used metal, old paper, and used plastic bottles) became less profitable. This sudden increase in poverty after 1991 only reinforced the prejudice against the Roma. All over Europe, and most particularly in postsocialist countries, the phenomenon of NIMBYism appeared (NIMBY = not in my backyard), in which regions and nations made their Roma populations unwelcome. A tragic event occurred in the Slovenian Dolenjska region in 2006, when approximately 50 members of the Roma Strojan family were chased away from the area where they had been living. Even a visit from the Slovenian Prime Minister to arrange alternative emergency accommodation9 for the Strojans failed to calm the local villagers. The same crowd that had previously destroyed the family’s dwelling gathered again to  The term “lumpenproletariat” was used by Yugoslav communists to describe the lowest level of unskilled workers: Those who were not regularly employed, considered to lack proletariat consciousness, and suspected of deviant behavior. The Roma were explicitly defined as lumpenproletariat. 9   Drnovšek visited Roma family Strojan. December 25, 2006. https://www.mojvideo.com/ video-drnovsek-pri-strojanovih/75c2b643afb4ecbfc8ec 8

20

D. Zaviršek

prevent the family from getting a temporary container residence. It was a situation of extreme dehumanization that echoed Primo Levi’s (1947/1986) If This Is a Man, in which he described the dehumanizing strategies in the extermination camp Auschwitz. The phenomenon of using the Roma as scapegoats is an ongoing problem. In Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic, attacks equivalent to the pogroms of the past have been made on Roma settlements since 1991: Civilians attack the settlements with Molotov cocktails and burn down their housing.10 Coercive sterilization of Roma men and women is another genocidal strategy that occurred during the communist period and also after 1991 (Center for Reproductive Rights, 2003; European Roma Rights Centre, 2009; Izsák, 2004; Marks, 2017; Votavová, 2018). Numerous political parties in postsocialist countries have supported racism and hatred by the majority population against Roma. During the 1990s when the integration of children with special needs in schools took place in all postsocialist countries, Roma children were more than ten times more likely to be diagnosed with intellectual disabilities compared to non-Roma children and therefore sent to special schools (Roma Initiatives Office, 2015; Zaviršek, 2000). Parallel education was seen as good enough for Roma children, while ethnic Slovenian children with mild disabilities entered ordinary schools in larger numbers than before. One social worker from Slovenia echoed these anti-Roma sentiments, saying, “They will not get a job anyway. No harm then, if they go to special school!” (Zaviršek, 2001, 2010). It is not known why in the fifteenth century the Roma left Greece and neighboring Balkan countries and traveled to what was then the German Empire and other western countries. In Greece, they were called atsingganoi and aigypsios, and it is likely that the Roma themselves took on the Greek denominations. The medieval chronicles report that they gained some rights in new countries (the right to unlimited travel, to move settlements, and to trade; they were allowed to solve conflicts within their own courts). Nevertheless, the Roma in the German Empire and in all other European countries were discriminated against, persecuted, and seen as scapegoats for any affliction whatsoever (Wippermann, 2015). The German historian Wolfgang  Wippermann (2015) showed how this is reflected in the language. The Greek alias atsigganoi passed into the German language, and the Roma were called Zigeuner (from the terms zieh- and Gauner). According to some explanations, the term gauner stems from the Hebrew expression jowon, which was used to label the Greek tribe of Ionians, who were known to be rogue traders. The German term Gauner denotes a swindler, a thief, and a brigand. The brigands who roamed were considered even more perilous, and this is where the term Zieh-Gauner or zigeuner come from (Wippermann, 2015, p. 153).  More on this in films: Hungary: Towards the Abyss, directed by Glenn Ellis, 2013 (25 min), People and Power, 22/3/2013. Al Jazeera, https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/peopleandpower/2013/05/201351674859600711.html; and Slovenian Roma Discrimination—Parallel Lives (Vzporedna življenja), Amnesty International, 2011, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= gJCNVzPDcbs 10

2  Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma People in Slovenia

21

Roma denominations in other countries were similarly stigmatizing. In Sweden, they were called Tatars, due to the belief that they were Mongols who embarked upon expansionist mission in the thirteenth century to Christian countries; in France, bohémiens, due to the belief that they were Czechs or Gitan; in Spain, gitano; and in other countries, tzigan, tsigan, zigenar, and cigan. The term cigan was created contextually, in the climate of racist prejudices against and persecution of the Roma. During the period before World War II, Bettina Sluzalek (2001) described how unemployment and the economic crisis in the Weimar Republic encouraged the growing need to control the population and keep order. The fear of “disorder” was projected onto the Roma and Sinti, and they were represented as the “true source of disorder.” In 1935, under National Socialism, Germany banned racially mixed marriages and labeled Jews and Gypsies as racially alien (Ger. Artfremde). With the pathological gaze labeling the Roma and Sinti as genetically ill, the sterilization of the Roma due to “genealogical mental impairment” became part of the state program. Although the Roma actively opposed it, racial persecution deepened. The Nazi authority brought them to organized assembly centers as early as in 1936 (the most well-known assembly center was Berlin-Marzahn), which was seen as a measure that would “cleanse” the city of Gypsies before the forthcoming Reich Olympics Games. More draconian measures followed. With Himmler’s proclamation on December 8, 1938, on the “fight against the Gypsy plague” (Ger. Bekämpfung der Zigeunerplage), the Roma were labeled as shirkers and asocial, and in 1939, the Nazi regime banned them from leaving their dwellings. In Munich, a police headquarters of the Reich was established to fight against the Gypsies (Ger. Reichszigeunerzentrale). From spring 1939 onward, they began to record “gypsies, gypsy mongrels and persons roaming in a gypsy way.” Every identified person was photographed in three positions, their fingerprints were taken, and other characteristics were recorded. In November 1939, they put “suspicious Gypsies” into concentration camps; in 1942, they expelled the Roma from military service in the German armed forces. Robert Ritter, a neurologist, who was particularly active in the racial classification of Roma, was appointed head of the Race Hygiene Research Unit (Rassenhygienischen Forschungsstelle) in Berlin and dedicated himself more particularly to the genealogical biological research of Roma and “gypsy mixed race.” Ritter, along with his colleagues, traveled through the Reich to assess as many Roma as possible and labeled them in his classifications as primitive and asocial, as people with no history and culture, with no continuity and no ability to change (Nerdinger, 2017, p. 129). For this reason, he felt that they needed to be sterilized. In his extensive classification, Ritter recorded 24,000 Roma, and his records covered photographs, plaster casts, pictures of family trees, physical characteristics, and blood types.11 Social workers were instrumental during the process and provided the Nazis with necessary information and locations of Roma settlements.

 Ritter divided Roma people into “pure Gypsy” (ger. Vollzigeuner, marked with a Z), “Gypsy Mongrel with predominantly Gypsy blood (mongrel or half-breed)” (Ger. Zigeunermischling, marked as ZM+), “Gypsy Mongrel with equal parts German and Gypsy blood” (ZM), “Gypsy Mongrels with predominantly German blood” (ZM−), and “non-Gypsy” (Ger. Nichtzigeuner, NZ). 11

22

D. Zaviršek

The German state racism led to a Holocaust (Porrajmos in the Romani language) directed at Roma people. Ritter’s reports were used in deportations and killings at the Reich’s police headquarters. His closest assistants were Adolf Würth, who dealt with Roma from the Balkans; Karl Morawek, who dealt with Polish and Hungarian Gypsies; and Eva Justin, who dealt with children. Justin’s work testifies to the cooperation of various institutions and professions in the extermination of the Roma. Since she spoke Romani, she earned the trust of the Roma and was able to get close to them. This enabled her to finish her doctoral thesis in 1943, and she accompanied her research findings in a publication titled “Biographical Destinies of Gypsy Children and Their Offspring” (Sluzalek, 2001, p. 13). The core of her research comprised Sinti, the children from the St. Josefspflege Catholic orphanage in Mulfingen in Baden-Württemberg. The children were kept in the orphanage until 1944 without being deported to concentration camps purely because Justin needed them as the “objects” of her research. Two months after she finished her doctoral thesis, 39 children from the orphanage were sent to the concentration camp Auschwitz-Birkenau, where only 4 survived.12 Discrimination against Roma people  continues. In the South Serbia town of Bujanovac in 2018, some local primary school parents demanded that Roma children be removed from classes where they were schooled with non-Roma children, citing the Roma children’s lack of intelligence. Matteo  Salvini, a  former Italian Minister of Internal Affairs, encouraged a population census of Roma, for the purpose of expatriating them. In 2019, Swedish authorities attempted to  criminalize homelessness and begging (following the Hungarian example), a measure that was predominantly targeted against the Roma. There continue to be forcible evictions of Roma families in numerous European cities (Evictions Unlimited, 2019).

2.4 The Detrimental Social Consequences of Harmful Social Norms Against Girls in some Roma Families and the Lack of Social Work Responses For most of the Roma, as is the case for most non-Roma people, the family (Romane familiji)13 has always been a fundamental social norm. People do everything possible to preserve its continuity, help each other, come back to it, and mutually take  Since 1943, Auschwitz-Birkenau had “a Gypsy camp” where they brought the Roma and Sinti from everywhere and officially recorded the murder of 20,943. There were an additional 19,329 Roma and Sinti who were gassed and whom the authorities did not manage to record (Sluzalek, 2001, p. 15). The notorious camp doctor, Josef Mengele, performed experiments on the Roma, injecting them with typhus bacteria, salt, and similar. The term Porrajmos, a Romani word for genocide and the Nazi extermination, describes the memory of around half a million murdered Roma and Sinti (Toš, 2015). 13  In Romani language: Roma family (plural). 12

2  Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma People in Slovenia

23

care of its members. For Roma women and men, similar to non-Roma people living in Slovenia, the family serves as a safeguard and is sometimes the only network they have, even if it may also be a place where violence and abuse takes place. The rejection that many Roma experience from the gadža community prevents them from being able to physically separate from their families, as young married couples end up returning to the Roma settlement after being refused housing elsewhere. As in most non-Roma families, children in Roma families are given special relevance. They are a source of joy, pride, and prestige for their parents, as well as a symbol of hope for the family’s future economic well-being. Roma parents are often very protective of their children (Baranja, 2017), sometimes holding them back from going to school, where they are often the object of contempt, in a bid to protect them (Košak, 2009). Gadža often see Roma children with prejudice and ignorance. Particularly boys are often demonized as being dangerous and intentionally inflicting violence, and Roma girls are seen as oversexualized. The idealized image of the child is shattered and becomes its opposite; thus, the boys are dangerous (similar to migrant children), and the girls are children of no importance. Sometimes they are seen as “more grown-up than non-Roma children,” that they “develop faster,” are “manipulative,” and not children at all. Much research (Smith, 2010) shows that children who live in high-risk environments must manage their own lives and protect themselves through their behavior in order to suffer the least amount of damage and trauma as possible and are therefore seen as “more grown-up.” Roma children, no doubt, need numerous skills to survive in a high-risk environment (at home, at school, and in the broader community of civilians), whereas most children of the majority population do not need these skills or acquire them later in life, as they live, predominantly, in a more protected environment. In the lives of many Roma girls, there are many harmful social norms that have a great impact on their upbringing and life course. Girls are less desired than boys and have lower social status within the family and community. They receive less support for schooling, as they are seen as less competent than boys and reduced to their reproductive and caring functions. They take on the household responsibilities of adults, including the care of smaller children. They often experience sexual violence and are secondary victims in cases when their mothers experience violence. In Slovenia, “marriage” of Roma girls used to be, as late as in 2013 (and it is sometimes today) considered as a socially acceptable norm by welfare workers, police, teachers, and health professionals (Zaviršek, 2018). The media critically addressed the issue, and  not the  professional organizations (Hočevar & Rajšek, 2015; Kajtazović, 2015; Krebelj, 2015; Markelj, 2015; Stanković, 2016). Such thinking is slowly changing. Sometimes, when the girl turned 15 years of age, parents have the right to seek formal consent for the marriage of their daughters from the centers for social work, and in such cases, social workers issue a waiver of minor age. Social workers, teachers, and police officers often see child “marriage” as part of “Roma culture” and the “will of the child,” and children are given false autonomy (“The girl wanted to leave”; “The girl said she wanted to stay with her boyfriend”). In 2013, two social workers, directors of social welfare centers from Ljubljana, explained why they decided to support the 13-year-old girl who wanted to “marry.”

24

D. Zaviršek

Fig. 2.2  Professors of social work from the University of Ljubljana protest the death of a Roma baby in front of the Faculty of Social Work, holding an Amnesty International banner: “Shall this be the last tragedy! #The Minute of Silence for Ahmetay,” February 2020. (Photo credit: Darja Zaviršek)

2  Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma People in Slovenia

25

They told the journalists that they felt that the girl in question was “mature enough” to make her own decision to get married (Zaviršek, 2018). Sometimes the police and the social work center were informed about the “wedding” a few days before, but the girl did not receive protection. Interprofessional cooperation is poor, and social workers often have no support from other services, as well as no shelter to take the girl to a safe environment. If a girl claimed that she was happy with the “marriage,” the mentioned services did not actively protect the child. In one primary school, a father said that he would not buy his daughter textbooks, because she was going to get married, so it would be a waste of money. Nobody took any action. Why do social workers rarely intervene to prevent violence against girls, especially from sexual abuse in cases of child “marriage,” including in cases of human or child trafficking (CAHROM, 2015)?14 Where do the double standards come from, and why is a marriage that would be not acceptable for “our” children considered acceptable among Roma children? Antigypsyism as a harmful professional practice is only part of the answer. Another part is social workers’ belief that addressing these forms of sexual violence would further pathologize and marginalize Roma communities. This is the internalized guilt that social workers face when they work with Roma: Social workers think that they could do the Roma some good by not intervening when the family decides to “marry” the daughter. Moreover, intervening in families is one of the most difficult tasks of social work, especially when there is a gap between Roma and civilians and when there is a lack of resources and interprofessional cooperation. Many social workers in Slovenia are women who sometimes disclose that they are afraid to interfere in Roma families out of fear for their own safety (Zaviršek et al., 2019). Among the non-Roma, child “marriage” causes outrage, which is another expression of antigypsyism. Hegemonic womanhood (Rommelspacher, 1995) is manifested by the ethnic majority women who regain a general feeling of superiority against the ethnically “other” women, who supposedly do not protect their children. Dominant women who, through neoliberal hegemonic masculinism, are mostly subordinate, feel superior to women who are in a lower position in the symbolic and social hierarchy and see themselves as more progressive and better mothers (Zaviršek, 2018, p. 26). As the majority society sees the Roma as different, violence against girls and women is routinely overlooked, normalized, and culturalized. A social worker who is herself a Slovenian Roma rightly said: Social workers threaten [Roma] parents, saying they will be sent to jail if they don’t send their children to school, but at the same time, they don’t follow through; they are full of

 The United Nations Population Fund estimates that between 2011 and 2020, more than 140 million children, mostly girls, have been forced into marriage. Retrieved June 29, 2021, from http:// www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2013/3/child-marriages-39000-every-day-more-than-140-milliongirls-will-marry-between-2011-and-2020 14

26

D. Zaviršek hollow words and warnings; it is similar in cases where child marriage is involved; a child disappears from school and nobody asks where she is; no one knows why she has stopped attending school, nobody is held responsible (M. B., social worker; Zaviršek, 2018, p. 26).

Some Roma girls live a childhood that is entirely oriented toward “marriage,” as they are exposed to the subtle messaging that they should get “married” as young as possible. The family members control their virginity, which is part of the family’s reputation (“We are pure for our men,” said a young Roma woman from Ljubljana in 2018). Some girls experience numerous limitations at school (they are not allowed to train in gymnastics or participate in extracurricular activities or school excursions that last several days). The adults create the idealized image of marriage that portrays a girl in a beautiful dress adorned with flowers in the middle of a great party; on the contrary, “marriage” may also be presented to a young girl as a punishment for her improper behavior. “Marriage” is believed to protect girls against poverty and male violence. It is most important that a family is able to provide a young virginal girl, so that she will be well-off, and the family will get a good purchase price. Here the chains of care are transformed into chains of violence in the same way as the lack of access to mainstream education is transformed to everyday poverty. Some Slovenian Roma “marry” Roma girls from Kosovo, Northern Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Slovenia, while Slovenian Roma girls are taken to France, Austria, and Germany. In research on child “marriage” in Slovenia, the Centers of Social Work have reported more than a hundred cases of child marriage in 2014, while nongovernmental organizations have assessed that these cases are actually in the several hundreds: the youngest known girls were 12 and 13  years old, while among boys, the youngest were 16 and 17 years old (Narat et al., 2014, p. 45). According to data from the Center for Social Work in Novo Mesto, 90% of Roma girls and 60% of Roma boys in their area get married before they turn 18; several similar cases are also observed in the Podravje region (Narat et al., 2014, p. 45). After getting “married,” girls drop out of school and get pregnant. Child marriage, pregnancy, and the birth of a child all tend to distance a girl from her peers and cut her off from the broader environment. Youth, lack of education, and responsibility for the continuous care of children make young Roma women economically and socially dependent on their husbands and older female family members. Poorly educated mothers have virtually no chance to find employment and cannot help their children with homework at school. Lack of education and social isolation also make them easy prey in a manipulative environment (“During the news program they listened to predictions about the end of the world and took them literally, not sending their children to school or kindergarten the next day,” reported a social worker in 2019). As a rule, children of child marriages are born into a cycle of poverty. From the human rights perspective, “marriage” of minor girls is a form of child abuse, as the girl’s body and sexuality are exploited for the economic benefit of the family. In some families, the custom of “honoring the bloody sheet” is still

2  Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma People in Slovenia

27

practiced. “Girls are afraid that they won’t bleed on their wedding night,” said a social worker in 2018 (Zaviršek et al., 2019, p. 77). Child marriages are often a deal between two families that involve a payment exchanged by men for the purchase of a bride. In some cases, in Slovenia, the remuneration amounts from between 15,000 and 30,000 euros (Stojiljković, 2015); the payment depends on various factors, one of the most relevant being the girl’s appearance. With “marriage,” a girl is transferred from the authority of one man to the authority of another, and her sexuality is controlled first by her father and then by her husband. Sometimes, men need to settle an old debt or buy certain goods with the remuneration for the bride, for example, one poor family paid for their heating and electricity consumption by offering their daughter in “marriage”. Here is the story of an adult Roma woman who reflected on her marriage with a social worker from the Slovenian NGO Mozaik: I was fifteen years old, and we enjoyed good living conditions in Bosnia, although we never had a lot of money. I had no idea of the tradition of child marriage. One day, I met a young man from Slovenia. He asked my mum if he could marry me. My mum did not approve of the marriage, because he did not have enough money for a “dowry.” Therefore, he suggested that I run away with him to Slovenia. I did run away with him, because it was fun and because I liked him—I was thinking as a child, as a teenager. His uncle gave me a young woman’s Slovenian passport and told me to use her surname if they asked me at border control. When I joined him in the slums in Slovenia, I was shocked by the poor infrastructure, the shack; I could not imagine how I would possibly live there. My arrival was attended by a lot of people. They all greeted me. I was approached by the aunt of my future husband, who told me to follow her into a bathroom. In the bathroom, the adult women were waiting for me. They took my clothes off, tried to keep me calm by telling me not to be afraid, and checked over my naked body. Then, they took me to the bedroom where he was waiting for me. We had intercourse and I bled. After that, it took me several days to be able to walk normally, because I was in so much pain. I was fifteen years old, and my body wasn’t developed yet. I had no idea that this was a part of the wedding (Zaviršek et al., 2019, p. 30).

This testimonial demonstrates the problem of apparent voluntary consent to marriage by a teenage girl. The girl had inadequate life experience to consent voluntarily, and her family did not protect her or inform her of the consequences of getting “married”. The girl’s body promptly became the property of a man and his relatives. She experienced a violent intrusion into her physical privacy by various adults and the sexual violence of her now husband. It is important to stress that “marriages” of minors appear only in some Roma communities and families and that social isolation strengthens poverty, which increases the probability of harmful social norms and school dropout. Social workers need to reflect upon the variety of conditions that make some Roma girls become the category of “children at risk”.  The level of risk is often defined as a consequence of the lack of parental care, while the structural obstacles and social inequalities are not taken into consideration. From the human rights, antiracist, and gender-aware perspective, the concept of a “child under threat” includes different contextual situations, for example, economic deprivation, deprivation due to ethnic background and skin color, deprivation due to gender (greater

28

D. Zaviršek

probability of sexual abuse of girls in Roma families), deprivation of respectful and loving parents or guardians (particularly when parents are too young to take on the parental responsibilities), and deprivation of the children with disabilities in Roma communities and the treatment of different illnesses due to social inequalities (children with different impairments are at risk of violence and neglect; Roma children are under more threat for chronic disease, obesity, and similar due to poverty and hindered access to health services). Due to violence and poverty, Roma women often experience hidden homelessness: They must flee from home, live with their female friends and acquaintances, find accommodation out of necessity, and agree to a sexual relationship with another man. Sometimes they even must leave safe houses due to antigypsyism. Antigypsyism, as it was already mentioned, often prevents social workers from intervening in Roma families to protect children and women. Harmful social norms related to children and physical and sexual violence against women by men are seen as part of Roma culture. The practice of child marriage is justified, on the one hand, by the invocation of this imagined culture and, on the other hand, by a set of beliefs of the “early maturity” of Roma girls compared to non-Roma girls. Although the concept of childhood is not a universal or coherent category, the UN Convention on the Rights of Children and national legislation oblige social workers to protect any child regardless of the “culture” the child is from.

2.5 National and International Social Work Ethical Principles Against Harmful Social Norms In Slovenia, there are two social work codes of ethics. The Code of Ethics of Social Workers of the Republic of Slovenia (2006) disallows discriminatory practices in working with people and says that social workers “are not allowed to exclude, limit or neglect people based on race, skin color, gender identity, national or ethnic origin, financial or social position, life-style, sexual, religious or ideological orientation, social label or reduced mental or physical ability” (Article 3). The older Code of Ethical Principles in Social Welfare (2002) discusses ethics in terms of a principle of common good, which provides guidance for the work of professionals in social care regardless of the service user’s formal status and regardless of the personal or structural circumstances in which people find themselves. The Code of Ethics of Social Workers of the Republic of Slovenia (2006) requires that professionals working in social protection respect “all international human rights documents that have been adopted and ratified by the Republic of Slovenia” (Article 2). In the cases analyzed above, we see violations of two international human rights treaties: The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The latter has been violated through the miscategorization and segregation of Roma children and through subjecting them to parallel education (special schools, special classes). The Code of Ethics of Social Workers of the Republic of Slovenia also stresses the principle of diversity, as “a

2  Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma People in Slovenia

29

person, family or group has the right to receive help regardless of their biological, personal, situational, national, religious, ideological, or political differences” (Article 3). It also says that all persons should be accepted “as they are” (Article 3). In comparison to the Global Social Work Statement of Ethical Principles (IASSW, 2018), both national ethical codes are rather broad and do not problematize the issues of gender power inequalities or “difference” or “culture” and do not ask for differentiated universalism of the social work practice. The global statement highlights that “social workers recognize that culture sometimes serves as a disguise to violate human rights” (Principle 3.2). Therefore, social workers “serve as cultural mediators to enable consensus building, find an appropriate balance between competing human rights and advocate for the rights of marginalized, stigmatized, excluded, exploited and oppressed individuals and groups of persons.” The statement equally emphasizes that “social workers recognize that constructing and dealing with socio-economic concerns as cultural issues often deny or minimize underlying structural factors to psychosocial challenges” (Principle 3.2). “Marrying” a child off may be useful from the perspective of individual family members, but it is harmful to the girl; therefore, she must be protected. Some family members may normalize male violence against women  as a “cultural norm”, while the gender-aware social work knowledge informs social workers that it is harmful to the physical and psychological health of women to live in a violent context. From a human rights perspective, the differentiated universalism asks for specific social work responses. Among them is paying attention to gendered power structures in families to address inequalities within a life course. Roma girls, for example, need special encouragement and support, and parents must be encouraged to stand up for their children and especially daughters, who are structurally worse off than their male peers and most vulnerable. Roma mothers, traditionally closest to the children, need constant encouragement to get education for themselves and for their children. Social workers might provide a safe environment and a trusting relationship in which Roma girls and women feel that they can discuss topics that they cannot discuss with their family members (reproductive rights, gender-based violence). Professionals should make a risk assessment for every Roma family that they suspect might be subject to violence, and there should be intersectional and transdisciplinary connections among professional to protect the victims and survivors. It should be emphasized that Global Social Work Statement of Ethical Principles (IASSW, 2018) has for the first time drawn attention to the perspective of the oppressive nature of culture, explaining that, in some communities, culture is used to abuse, exploit, and oppress particular members. There are not only social workers who avoid intervening, claiming that early “marriage” is part of “Roma culture,” but also some Roma claim that civilians are not allowed to intervene into what is their “own culture.” In such situations, the Global Social Work Statement might encourage and empower social workers that “culture” in such contexts is a rationalization for violence and reproduces gender power inequalities.

30

D. Zaviršek

The Global Social Work Statement of Ethical Principles (IASSW, 2018) also draws attention to moral relativism, a critical topic, which is not included in the Slovenian codes of social work ethics. It says that “social workers recognize that respect for and acceptance of diversity must not be used to stretch the boundaries of moral relativism to the point that the rights of some groups, including the right to life (e.g., of women and sexual, ethnic, and religious minorities), are violated” (Principle 3.2). Moral relativism is often linked with the abovementioned culturalization (“Roma girls are more mature, so they can get married”; “It is natural that Roma women give birth easily, without any complications”). Finally, the appeal for self-determination and personal decision-making on the part of the service users is of essential relevance in the global statement and is therefore an important addition to the national codes of ethics. It says “that the dominant socio-political and cultural discourses and practices contribute to many taken-for-­ granted assumptions and entrapments of thinking, which manifest in the normalization and naturalization of a range of prejudices, oppression, marginalization, exploitation, violence and exclusions” (Principle 4.7). In 2010 when media (Kobal 2010) reported about a Roma girl who was sold to the groom’s family and social workers felt that the girl was mature enough for such a step, the Romani Union of Slovenia made a public declaration that forced marriages are a form of human trafficking and not “cultural tradition” (NGO Report on the Implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and its Optional Protocols in Slovenia 2013, p. 8). Some Slovenian Roma actively oppose early “marriage”. “We sell animals, not women,” said a Romani police officer in 2017 and continued that her father stopped communicating with a friend when he heard him talk about an arranged marriage (Zaviršek et al., 2019, p. 33). Some Roma mothers speak against child “marriage” and felt themselves under constant threat of violence (“I’d rather kill him than sell him my daughter”; “It’s good that you’ve lost your virginity, because now you’re not suitable for marriage, so they will leave you alone,” said one mother to her daughter). Social workers at Slovenia women’s safe houses for women fleeing domestic violence often recall a well-known example of a Roma mother who fled from one city to another to protect her daughters from “marriage”. “These women are frozen in sadness,” said a social worker bitterly.15 Sometimes social workers are as powerless as the service users they are supposed to protect. For example, Roma from the Prekmurje region believe that people working in public services, especially social workers, teachers, special educators, and police officers, do not adequately protect women’s rights (Zaviršek, 2018, p. 24). The application of national codes of ethics and international documents, as well as global ethical principles that address antigypsyism and its harmful social practices more specifically than national codes, is of great importance to social workers. Inclusive social work practice must be based on differentiated universalism. Romani children have the right to be listened to, to be believed, and to be assured of stability,  This occurred during the conference on violence against women, project Vesna, Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities of the Republic of Slovenia, Brdo pri Kranju, November 2014. 15

2  Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma People in Slovenia

31

continuity, and long-term support in a community, and not to be stigmatized because of the social, economic, ethnic, cognitive, or physical circumstances in which their parents or guardians live. They have the right to be protected from harmful cultural practices, and social workers could be their best advocates.

2.6 Conclusion To practice social work as a human rights profession, social workers need to internalize intercultural competencies and gain a historical perspective to work with Roma families. Sometimes an interpreter is needed to avoid miscommunication and distrust from both sides when working in the community. At the same time, it is important to understand the epistemological flexibility in which culture is real, constructed, and oftentimes instrumentalized to cover structural inequalities. Still, there are almost no social workers of Slovenian Roma origin. At the Faculty of Social Work in Ljubljana, the only educational institution that trains social workers in Slovenia, only two Romani women graduated with bachelor’s and master’s degrees in social work between 1991 and 2021, and  neither of them works as a social worker. Some Slovenian Roma are employed to teach Roma children in elementary school (romski pomočnik), which leads to good results, as the children stay longer in school and are more successful. With more resources to build a stronger network of support for children and stronger political will, more children would complete elementary school, which would contribute to ending intergenerational poverty and marginality. Faced with increasing bureaucratization, social workers report that they do not have time to work with Roma families in their local contexts within settlements. Some schools have eliminated social worker positions due to austerity measures and the weak social status of the social work profession in the country, and the number of social workers in schools has been declining since 1991. In such a situation, social workers can hardly advocate for Roma rights or participate in initiatives aimed at bringing running water to Roma settlements or preventing anti-Roma statements in schools. Membership in the EU (since 2004) has partially encouraged the Slovenian government to develop national programs to improve the lives of Slovenian Roma (National Program Measures for Roma 2017), but the gap between formal principles and actual implementation, as illustrated in the examples described and analyzed above, remains wide. Acknowledgments  This chapter is part of an ongoing research project “Social work as a Social Apparatus of Solidarity: Selected Problems in an Historic and Experiential Optics” (2019–2023) funded by the National Research Agency of Slovenia (project number: J5-2566). The project was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Social Work, University of Ljubljana.

32

D. Zaviršek

References Amnesty International Slovenia. (2020, January 31). This shall this be the last tragedy—It is known who has to act. https://www.amnesty.si/smrt-­romskega-­dojencka-­odziv Balibar, É. (2004). We, the people of Europe? Reflection on transnational citizenship. Princeton University Press. Baranja, M. (2017). Položaj slovenskih romskih mater v romski skupnosti in zunaj nje. Socialno delo, 56(2), 99–110. CAHROM. (2015). Thematic report on child/early and forced marriages within Roma communities in the context of the promotion of gender equality. Council of Europe. https://rm.coe. int/1680651475 Center for Reproductive Rights. (2003). Body and soul. Forced sterilization and other assaults on Roma reproductive freedom in Slovakia. https://reproductiverights.org/document/body-­and-­ soul-­forced-­sterilization-­and-­other-­assaults-­on-­roma-­reproductive-­freedom Code of Ethical Principles in Social Welfare. (2002). Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 59/02. Kodeks etičnih načel v socialnem varstvu (pisrs.si) Djoković, N. (2011). Etnizirana obravnava romskih otrok v osnovni šoli. Unpublished diploma work. Fakulteta za socialno delo. European Roma Rights Centre. (2009, November 23). Czech prime minister apologizes to victims of coercive sterilisation. http://www.errc.org/cikk.php?cikk=3056 Evictions Unlimited. (2019, September 3). European Roma and travellers forum, ERTF. https:// www.ertf.org/ Global Social Work Statement of Ethical Principles (IASSW). (2018). https://www.iassw-­aiets. org/global-­social-­work-­statement-­of-­ethical-­principles-­iassw/ Hočevar, B., & Rajšek, B. (2015, January 14). Romske poroke niso del tradicije temveč zloraba [Roma marriages are not tradition, but abuse]. Delo. https://www.delo.si/novice/slovenija/ romske-­porole-­niso-­del-­tradicije-­temvec-­zloraba.html Humljan Urh, Š. (2014a). Everyone is blaming us! Conceptualising current anti-Roma racism in Europe and its necessary implications for anti-racist social work. Critical and Radical Social Work, 2(1), 59–76. Humljan Urh, Š. (2014b). Kulturni vidiki hendikepa Romov. Socialno delo, 53(3–5), 183–198. Ife, J. (2009). Human rights from below. Cambridge University Press. Izsák, R. (2004). “Gypsy rooms” and other discriminatory treatment against Romani women in Hungarian hospitals. http://www.errc.org/cikk.php?cikk=2063 Janko Spreizer, A. (2012). Emotional geographies of exclusion in a selected Roma settlement. ART4-1, Spreizer, pp. 174–189. Janko Spreizer, A. (2018). Roma, social exclusion and Romani settlements as marginalized place: The case of Loke. In S. Pelc & M. Koderman (Eds.), Nature, tourism and ethnicity as drivers of (de)marginalization (Perspectives on geographical marginality) (Vol. 3, pp. 157–168). https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-­3-­319-­59002-­8-­11 Kajtazović, R. (2015, July 31). V dobrem in slabem [Through thick and thin]. Mladina. https:// www.mladina.si/168417/v-­dobrem-­in-­slabem Kobal, J. (2010, November 30). Poroka romske šolarke. 24ur Novice. https://www.24ur.com/novice/slovenija/preverjeno-­poroka-­romske-­solarke.html Košak, A. (2009). Nasprotja in konflikti med primarno socializacijo Romov in procesom šolanja. Unpublished master’s thesis. Faculty of Social Work. http://dk.fdv.uni-­lj.si/magistrska/pdfs/ mag_kosak-­alenka.pdf Krebelj, J. (2015, February 16). Za prisilne poroke romskih deklic ni opravičila [There is no excuse for forced marriages of Roma girls]. Primorske novice. http://www.primorske.si/novice/ slovenija/za-­prisilne-­poroke-­romskih-­deklic-­ni-­opravicila-­ Levi, P. (1986). If this is a man. Remembering Auschwitz. MW Books (Original work published 1947).

2  Overcoming Troubling Practices Against Roma People in Slovenia

33

Lister, R. (1998). Citizenship and difference: Towards a differentiated universalism. European Journal of Social Theory, 1(1), 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/136843198001001006 Markelj, L. (2015, May 20). Mlade romske mamice—zatiskamo si oči, ko imajo otroci otroke. Dolenjski list, št, 5. https://www.lokalno.si/2015/05/20/134756/aktualno/DL_Mlade_romske_ mamice__zatiskamo_si_oci__ko_imajo_otroci_otroke/ Marks, S. (2017). The Romani minority, coercive sterilization, and languages of denial in the Czech lands. History Workshop Journal, 84. https://doi.org/10.1093/hwj/dbx033 Munté, A., Serradell, O., & Sordé, T. (2011). From research to policy: Roma participation through communicative organization. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(3), 256–266. Narat, T., Kobal Tomc, B., Kovač, N., Lebar, L., & (2014). Prisilne poroke romskih deklic. http:// www.irssv.si/upload2/Prisilne%20poroke%20romskih%20deklic.pdf National Programme Measures for Roma 2017–2021. (2017). Government of the Republic of Slovenia. https://www.gov.si/assets/vladne-­sluzbe/UN/Dokumenti-­Romi/65d892da3a/NPUR_ 2017_2021.pdf Nerdinger, W. (2017). Die Verfolgung der Sinti und Roma in Muenchen und Bayern 1933–1945. NS_Dokumentationszentrum Muenchen, Metropol. NGO Report to the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and its Optional protocols in Slovenia. (2013). Slovene NGO Coalition ZIPOM. http://www.sredisce-­zipom.si/ data/upload/Slovenian_NGO_report_2013___final.docx Roma Initiatives Office. (2015, April 29). European Commission targets Slovakia over Roma school discrimination. Open Society Foundations. https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/ newsroom/european-­commission-­targets-­slovakia-­over-­roma-­school-­discrimination Rommelspacher, B. (1995). Dominanzkultur. Texte zu Fremdheit und Macht. Orlanda. Sluzalek, B. (2001). Die Geschichte der Verfolgung der Sinti und Roma. In V: Roma Theater Pralipe, Z 2001. Die Tinte unter meiner Haut (pp. 7–17). Kwik Color GmbH. Smith, R. (2010). Universal child? Palgrave Macmillan. Srode, T., Serradell, O., Puigvert, L., & Munté, A. (2014). Solidarity networks that challenge racialized discourses: The case of Romani immigrant women in Spain. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 21(1), 87–102. Stanković, D. (2016, November 30). Zgodnje poroke niso delo romske kulture, so pa kruta resničnost [Early marriages are not a part of Roma culture, but rather a harsh reality]. Dnevnik. https://www.dnevnik.si/1042755628 Stojiljković, G. (2015). Prodali so me kot kravo, zdaj pa z menoj ravnajo kot s psom. Siol. net. https://siol.net/novice/slovenija/prodali-­so-­me-­kot-­kravo-­zdaj-­pa-­z-­menoj-­ravnajo-­kot-­ s-­psom-­283296# Šumi, I. (2012). Unable to heal: Debate on the national self in postsocialist Slovenia. In R. Hudson & G. Bowman (Eds.), After Yugoslavia: Identities and politics within the successor states (pp. 153–181). Palgrave Macmillan. Šumi, I., & Janko Spreizer, A. (2011). That which soils the nation’s body: Discriminatory discourse of Slovenian academics on the Romany, foreigners and women. Anthropological Notebooks, 17(3), 101–121. The Code of Ethics of Social Workers of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubljana. (2006). https://dsdds. splet.arnes.si/files/2021/03/Kodeks-­etike-­socialnih-­delavk-­in-­delavcev-­Slovenije_2021.pdf Toš, M. (2015, January 23). Porrajmos, pozabljeni holokavst. Sobotna priloga. https://www.delo. si/sobotna/porrajmos-­pozabljeni-­holokavst.html Urh, Š. (2010). Etnična (ne)občutljivost v izobraževanju za socialno delo. Socialno delo, 49(2–3), 73–84. Vermeersch, P. (2012). Reframing the Roma: EU initiatives and the politics of reinterpretation. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 38(8), 1195–1212. https://doi.org/10.108 0/1369183X.2012.689175 Vincze, E. (2014). The racialization of Roma in the “new” Europe and the political potential of Romani women. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 21(4), 443–449.

34

D. Zaviršek

Votavová, J. (2018, January 24). Illegally sterilized Romani women from Slovakia and the Czech Republic launch online petition as part of their fight for justice. Romea News. http://www. romea.cz/en/news/world/illegally-­sterilized-­romani-­women-­from-­slovakia-­and-­the-­czech-­ republic-­launch-­online-­petition-­as-­part-­of-­their-­fight-­for Wippermann, W. (2015). Niemand ist ein Zigeuner. Zur Ächtung eines europäischen Vorurteils. Edition Körber-Stiftung. Zaviršek, D. (2000). Hendikep kot kulturna travma. Cf*. Zaviršek, D. (2001). Lost in public care: The ethnic rights of the ethnic minority children. In L. Dominelli, H. Soydan, & W. Lorenz (Eds.), Beyond racial divides: Ethnicities in social work practice (pp. 171–188). Ashgate. Zaviršek, D. (2010). Etnizacija in patologizacija Romov in romskih skupnosti: Socialno-­ antropološki in socialnodelavni teoretski koncepti. Socialno delo, 49(2–3), 85–97. Zaviršek, D. (2012). Notranje in meddržavne posvojitve. Fakulteta za socialno delo. Zaviršek, D. (2018). Skrb kot nasilje. cf*. Zaviršek, D., Djoković, N., Radešić, L., Meden, K., Đogić, K., & Kožman, M. (2019). Roma families: The textbook for the ethical practice in social work and other helping professions supporting Slovenian Roma. Mozaik. Open access: http://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:doc-­X9LIMKMB Zorn, J. (2005). Ethnic citizenship in the Slovenian state. Citizenship Studies, 9(2), 135–152. Zorn, J. (2009). A case for Slovene nationalism: Initial citizenship rules and the erasure. Nations and Nationalism, 15(29), 280–298.

Chapter 3

Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia: A Long Way to Mutual Recognition Nino Žganec, Gordana Berc, and Marina Milić Babić

Fig. 3.1  Croatia in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe. (Map Credit: Kat Farlowe)

N. Žganec (*) · G. Berc · M. M. Babić Faculty of Law, Department of Social Work, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 V. Krasniqi, J. McPherson (eds.), Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11728-2_3

35

36

N. Žganec et al.

3.1 Introduction This chapter discusses the historical process of how social work in Croatia approaches human rights. First, we look at the influences during the period of socialism, followed by the democratic transition of Croatian society and new social challenges that occurred immediately after the beginning of 1990s. Second, the main part of this chapter deals with the issues of incorporating a human rights paradigm into the social work curriculum and professional practice of social work in Croatia. Finally, we explore some of the most important contemporary challenges in human rights protection and promotion and the role of the social work. In this part, among others, the impact of some current crises such as COVID-19 and the earthquake in Croatia will be tackled.

3.2 Social Work History in Croatia: Context and Practice Stemming from a practical activity, rather than an organized and established profession, social work development in Croatia may be considered from different perspectives. Accordingly, social work education has resulted from an acknowledged social reality that demanded professional responses to existing social challenges. Similar developments in social work occurred in many other countries. Müller (2013) described social work development in Germany, evolving from assistance to a profession. Admittedly, formal social work education had begun much earlier in Germany. In the former Yugoslavia, the first higher education institution for social work training was established during the communist regime at the beginning of the 1950s. At that time, the so-called Eastern Bloc, encompassing countries under the former Soviet Union’s control, considered that the state did not have to set up professional welfare services for vulnerable social groups; the official doctrine ordained that the socialist regime itself guaranteed universal social security and well-being. Lacking the political will to align society to modern democratic principles, political indoctrination, in fact, hampered the development of the social work profession. Under these circumstances, human rights matters were inferior and addressed only in the frame of the cardinal paradigms of the communist ideology. Against this background, the decision to establish formal social work education in Croatia, a part of the former communist Yugoslavia, seemed indeed remarkable, signaling a departure of the communist leadership in Yugoslavia from the mainstream Eastern Bloc. Similar divergence occurred in many other areas in the former Yugoslavia, symbolically placing this communist country in the middle ground between the East and the West. Social work history in Croatia is best examined through the activities of key actors, institutions, and organizations, as well as past actions and initiatives. In that regard, there is significant historical evidence from the end of the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth century, notably in the interwar period and during

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

37

World War II.  The studies by Ajduković and Branica (2006), Ajduković (2006), Prlenda (2006), Zaviršek (2006), and others featured significant data. Notably, the Ordinance of the Governor of the Kingdom of Croatia and Slavonia of December 6, 1920, on establishing the royal state social school in Zagreb (Ajduković & Branica, 2006), testified to a recognized need for social work education as early as 1921. Regretfully, the Ordinance was never implemented, according to the existing sources. Puljiz (2006) discerned three main periods in the historical development of social work and social policy up to the 1960s. Puljiz called the first period, which preceded World War I, the “end of the long nineteenth century.” Croatian society was underdeveloped at the time, dwelling on the outskirts of the Austro-Hungarian Empire far from the European development hub, with a prevailing rural population and rudimentary social institutions mostly acting independently of state control. In the second period, between the wars, Croatia faced even less favorable circumstances for progress than in the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. At that time, the state, then the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenians (and the Kingdom of Yugoslavia from 1931) introduced the first consequential social laws. However, for various reasons, the state failed to implement the regulations in this case. Finally, the third period lasted from the end of World War II until 1960. Considerable state interference in all areas, including the social sphere, marked this period in particular, and formal social work education also started in this period. From that point up to the present, there have been three main stages. The initial stage lasted from 1952 to 1971, with social worker education at the college level only. In the following stage, from 1972 to 1981, a parallel system of education existed at two levels: college studies for social workers and higher university studies awarding graduate degrees in social work. The final stage started in 1982 with the integration of social work education into the (joint) Social Work Department at the Faculty of Law at the University of Zagreb. As of 1985, a 4-year program for a graduate degree in social work became the exclusive pathway. In 2001, the classification of scientific fields in Croatia finally admitted social work to the social sciences. Postgraduate and doctoral studies have equally been established, and the Bologna process transformed higher education (Fig. 3.2).

3.3 Human Rights and Social Work Education in Croatia: Dealing with Uncertainties From the very beginning, social work focused on human rights protection and promotion. According to the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW, 1988), “social work has represented a human rights profession from its inception, with the inherent value of each human being as its guiding principle.” Within different theoretical and methodological frameworks, the social work profession has shown an indisputable interest in broader issues of human rights protection and promotion.

38

N. Žganec et al.

Fig. 3.2  The building of the Department of Social Work, Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb

However, this has equally obstructed unrestrained development of the profession in certain countries as human rights engagement questioned social inequalities, social injustice, oppression, denial of rights to certain social groups, as well as matters concerning democratic standards. Notwithstanding its divergence from the rigid Eastern Bloc, the nondemocratic regime of former Yugoslavia still did not allow for free development of the profession. This was evident in education and professional practice directed at human rights protection and development. As further explained, social work education incorporated the communist ideology in certain courses, creating a blend of social work and ideological indoctrination, which served to protect the regime in power. Under such circumstances, could one even consider social work as a rights-based profession, or did it rather represent a para-political, and not educational, activity, simply masked as social work? The very beginnings of social work education in Croatia likely corresponded to the second premise. As further demonstrated, education later seemed to have uncoupled social work from the political doctrine and gradually transformed it into a hub, or a birthplace, of professionals committed to human rights protection and promotion. During its first 40  years, social work education in Croatia was absorbed by numerous organizational and structural matters, such as the type of education, duration and formal organization of studies, and their independence or affiliation to “more prestigious” studies. In contrast, during the following 20 years, social work education considered content-related matters, such as updating the curriculum, enhancing theoretical and research practice, advancing international cooperation, and introducing postgraduate studies. It equally strived to strengthen the ties with the broader community, notably through professors’ engagement in raising the professional standards in the social work and social policy domains. These activities

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

39

demonstrated the intention to develop social work as a profession and a scientific discipline based on human rights. In the latest stage of its development, a formal introduction of human rights education to relevant courses at the postgraduate, graduate, and undergraduate levels has significantly contributed to that end. Social work education in Croatia introduced human rights into the curriculum during the 2000s as an elective course at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels and as a mandatory course at the graduate level. The elective course at the undergraduate level introduces students to the basic concepts and theoretical approaches, including the principal human rights treaties. At the graduate and postgraduate levels, the human rights curriculum is more closely related to social work practice and different beneficiaries to whom social workers cater. Students hence acquire relevant skills to work in human rights protection and development and to face social challenges in their future practice from an informed perspective (Fig. 3.3). In the social work history of Croatia, we can see the typical example of the “age of uncertainty.” Croatian society was overwhelmed with some major crises such as the transition from socialism to market economy, which was followed by war. After 10  years of economic and social stabilization after the war, the global economic crisis occurred in the second half of the 2000s. Then, some years after accessing to the European Union (EU), the global pandemic COVID-19 broke out, and Croatia was additionally hit by two rather strong earthquakes. All this put social work professionals into a quite demanding position, whereby they needed not only good knowledge of professional skills but also full commitment to the best practice of human rights protection.

Fig. 3.3  Social work students preparing for performing of different roles in human rights protection

40

N. Žganec et al.

3.4 Social Work During the Socialist Time in Croatia: Needs Versus Rights After the end of World War II, in late 1952, the communist government in power established the College for Social Work, which offered 2-year study programs. During this period, Croatia was recovering from the dire consequences of war, with various vulnerable groups facing adverse circumstances, including children, the elderly, persons with disabilities, and many others. The war took many lives, most at the prime of their lives, as Puljiz (2006) noted. It is assumed that 400,000 people perished during the war in Croatia, which represented one of the highest death tolls in Europe. Moreover, a declining birthrate further aggravated demographics and significantly impeded development. Industry collapsed, along with other economic activities, since elementary infrastructure and many housing units were destroyed. Overall, living conditions deteriorated for the majority of the population. The war particularly affected the central, mountainous parts of Croatia, where the fiercest battles took place. At that time, some forms of social work education had already existed in an estimated 40 countries in the world. That prompted the government in power to form an expert group, acting as a knowledge hub for social worker education. The United Nations provided noteworthy technical assistance to support the capacity building of future teaching staff, who participated in numerous study visits to other countries. In 1953, the first students enrolled in the College for Social Work in Zagreb, the first educational institution in the former Yugoslavia of this kind. Some development analysts (e.g., Bošnjak, 1973) discerned two stages of the postwar period. The first stage started at the end of the war in 1945 and ended in 1953, the year when social work education began. This was the stage of administrative socialism with attributes of a firm state centralism. The second stage lasted from 1953 to 1965, marked by self-governance and decentralization. It ended with the economic reform in the 1960s, which introduced a market orientation and raised the independence of economic actors. The need to decentralize public administration prompted the advancement of social services. Their task was to prevent and alleviate the consequences of hardships faced by different social groups at the local level. In 1959, the Center for Social and Medicinal Work, as the first social work center, was established in Pula. It represented a milestone in establishing the institutional framework of social work. Social work centers served to register and address social cases in the local community. Among other tasks, the centers provided guardianship and other professional social protection services. These centers in Croatia provided effective social protection. Moreover, they were globally recognized as an institutional innovation in the field of social protection (Puljiz, 2006). Social work practices gradually diversified within many fields and different types of institutions, creating prerequisites for an established profession through education. The foundation of a professional association in the mid-1950s contributed to that end, along with the Republic Institute for Social Work as the central organization that developed professional standards in social work practice at the beginning of the 1960s.

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

41

Social work was thus established as an institutional structure that created favorable conditions for accelerated development. Notwithstanding, as Zaviršek (2006) observed, social work simultaneously represented a rather undesirable but necessary profession. The initially divided attitudes resulted in a split perception of social workers and the social work profession, not only among the communist leadership but also in everyday life. Social workers were necessary because they dispensed social benefits and “protection.” At the same time, they were scorned as the government instrument of control, punishment, and espionage. From this perspective, Zaviršek (2014) found that social work education seemed imposed from the top, in a sense, to control the everyday life of citizens. The notion of “socialist social work” during the communist regime presumed that social work fulfilled social policy goals. Accordingly, the role of social workers consisted primarily of providing welfare services and family protection (including foster care for children who lost their parents or were abandoned during the war, and welfare services for divorced and single mothers), as well as in preventing disorders (notably alcoholism and voluntary unemployment). As in other parts of the former Yugoslavia, the curriculum of the first school for social work in Zagreb was heavily burdened with ideology, attempting to integrate social work education into the prevalent communist paradigm based on Marxist ideology. The government in power was eager to demonstrate the commitment of the socialist regime to addressing social issues. Although social work was considered “bourgeois theory and practice,” the new communist leadership needed social welfare and social workers to fulfill social policy goals and ensure institutional protection by the state (Zaviršek, 2006). Such circumstances, stemming from an instrumental, rather than an essential, need to develop a new social work profession, were unfavorable for addressing human rights issues. Accordingly, there was no indication of teaching human rights in university courses during the entire period of the communist rule. On the contrary, numerous law courses encumbered the curriculum, alongside notions from the fields of medicine, pedagogy, psychology, sociology, and economics. On the one hand, social work studies paid tribute to their integration into the faculty of law; on the other hand, this reflected the intention to prepare social workers mainly for administrative functions in social work centers and only peripherally for performing social work in its proper professional sense. Notwithstanding, social work education did, in fact, indirectly address human rights issues. Namely, the authorities of the former Yugoslavia made a noteworthy effort to adopt the fundamental international instruments for human rights protection. For example, at the beginning of the 1970s, Yugoslavia ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The ratification of other important treaties preceded or followed the two covenants, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as the last international convention adopted by the former state. This legislative practice certainly reflected on social work education, which, at least partially, imparted the content of the international legal instruments to students. In this period, a limited and inconsistent approach to human rights protection and promotion could be attributed to the

42

N. Žganec et al.

prevailing notion that social workers should primarily address human needs (by countering the consequences of unmet needs) rather than engaging in human rights protection and development.

3.5 Democratic Transition of Croatian Society and New Social Challenges 3.5.1 Main Sociopolitical Influences to the Professional Development of Social Work Several key processes marked the fifth decade of the professional development of social work in Croatia, starting in the 1990s. First, the former Yugoslavia broke apart, Croatia gained independence, and a multiparty democratic regime was introduced at the very beginning of the 1990s. Second, the outbreak of war on the territory of the former Yugoslavia led to large-scale destruction, human casualties, and degradation of the barely initiated democratic practices. Third, all social and economic structures transitioned from socialism to capitalism. Finally, Croatian society set on its European course. Maldini (2006) described the democratic transition as a liberalization process that awarded increasing civil and political rights to individuals. According to Maldini, political culture, as a prevailing social value orientation, shaped the democratic development, alongside other objective factors such as economic development or the autonomous will of social actors. Croatian citizens hoped for this kind of democratic transition (as did the citizens of other republics of the former Yugoslavia). However, historical developments in the region did not favor such a transition. Namely, the wars of the 1990s greatly affected democratic transition in terms of legislation and, even more so, in everyday life. The political structures in power, with leadership that shaped careers and governing style in the former, nondemocratic order, could not respond adequately to the call for a democratic transition of the society. According to Jakopović (2002), two decisive steps toward democratic transition were taken in the short term: the organization of free democratic elections and the establishment of a legitimate democratic government. However, Jakopović stressed, some postcommunist countries still struggled to establish a new political and institutional order. Notwithstanding, democratic processes progressed despite obstacles, according to some common democracy indicators. In that regard, Dahl (1971) suggested that a political system could be considered democratic if it fulfilled certain prerequisites. These included (1) freedom of association, (2) freedom of expression, (3) active election rights, (4) passive election rights, (5) right of political elites to compete for votes and support in elections, (6) existence of alternative sources of information, (7) free and fair elections, and (8) institutions that conformed government policies to election votes and other forms of civic expression. Although Croatia formally met most of these prerequisites in the 1990s, many deviations occurred in their implementation. The US Department of State observed in its annual Human Rights Report in 1999:

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

43

The Government’s human rights record remained poor; although improvement was noted in certain areas, serious problems continued in others. The Government restricted press freedom, using the courts and administrative bodies selectively to shut down or restrain newspapers, radio, and television stations critical of the Government or simply outside of its control (U.S. Department of State, 1999, p. 1).

Rather slow democratic transition marked the 1990s as the quest to secure political power, followed by the economic recovery of a war-ravaged country, took precedence over human rights protection. At the beginning of the 1990s, Croatia’s economic policy took quite a few disadvantageous steps. The industrial production in the country had plummeted after 1989; by 1994, production volume amounted to only 50% of the 1988 total. Although Croatia, along with Slovenia, was best prepared for the post-Yugloslavia transition, the emerging “tycoon privatization” led to an economic slowdown, paired with war and damage from that war  estimated at over US$200 billion. The global economic crisis in the second half of the 2000s further impeded progress, lowering the income level in Croatia in 2015 once again to less than the 1989 level (Jurčić, 2019). These circumstances did not facilitate the democratic transition, nor did they create the structural conditions for an expeditious development of human rights standards. Alvis (2005) and Lockard (2008) affirm that the transition from one political and social regime to another, especially  in times of tumultuous socioeconomic changes and political, religious, and cultural turmoil, represents the most sensitive period for a new democracy.

3.5.2 Europeanization as New Impetus European orientation was pivotal for Croatian society at the end of the 1990s and particularly during the 2000s. The Republic of Croatia set out to join the EU, which required adopting the European legal framework referred to as acquis communautaire and reaching a high degree of human rights protection. Bulmer and Lequesne (2005) affirmed that this so-called Europeanization, with the integration of EU policy and legislation into the national policy framework, fit into the broader process of building a nation-state, domestic transition, and Western integration in the postcommunist countries on the road to full-fledged EU membership during the 15 years of preaccession. In Croatia’s case, the integration policies directly correlated with the postcommunist dynamics of democratic transition, market transition, and liberalization. The EU insisted on the adoption and full implementation of the acquis communautaire before awarding membership, particularly on the establishment of institutions that had not existed or functioned properly during the communist regime. The Copenhagen criteria of 1993 defined the main prerequisites, including democratic stability, rule of law, respect for human rights, protection of minorities, functioning market economy, and competitiveness in the EU market. Such high expectations from a relatively young state tested Croatia’s institutions, as well as the readiness of individuals to understand and meet the demands. In this respect, social work and social workers emerged as the key actors and advocates for social change.

44

N. Žganec et al.

3.5.3 Social Work Becomes Visible in the Field of Human Rights Advocacy and Protection A growing number of recently graduated social workers joined the civil society organizations that played a pivotal role in establishing democratic and human rights protection standards during the period of Croatia’s independence. The increased number of civil society organizations—from 12,000  in 1990 to 27,000  in 2005 (Bežovan et  al., 2005)—demonstrated the dynamic development of civil society, which was, in turn, supported by many social workers. Progress continued in subsequent years. Social workers also became better prepared to protect and promote human rights, as human rights were embedded in the Croatian social work curriculum. During the early democratic transition in the 1990s and at the beginning of the 2000s, an unsuitable institutional and regulatory framework, as well as the priorities for the social work practice, seriously impeded the coherent development of a rights-based social work profession. Namely, social work practice largely focused on administrative tasks, and social workers were expected to direct social protection services mainly to the most vulnerable groups. In the 1990s, the scope of professional activities was highly restricted, with the social welfare system operating under crisis conditions and focusing on protecting the populations affected by war. As of the 2000s, persons at risk for poverty and other vulnerable groups started to receive greater attention. In that period, discussions began on social work as a profession directed at human rights protection, which was not entirely welcomed by the centralized public structures in charge of organizing, financing, and governing the social services that employed most social work graduates. Such circumstances prompted social work professors to redouble their efforts to include human rights protection and promotion in teaching and learning.

3.5.4 Importance of Human Rights in Social Work Education and Professional Practice Social work has been addressing human rights from its beginnings, although this aspect has not been conveyed by education or professional practice consistently throughout the historical development of the profession. For quite a long period, human rights was not at the core of social work practice in Croatia. However, during the 1980s and the 1990s, and especially at the beginning of the 2000s, international organizations—the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) and the International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW)—explicitly linked social work to human rights in their official documents. In that regard, in the mid-­1990s, IFSW defined two goals of human rights advocacy: the protection of dignity and the protection of fundamental freedoms. Human Rights and Social Work: A Manual for Schools of Social Work and the Social Work Profession (United Nations, 1994) reinforced the ties between social work and human rights. In 2000,

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

45

a new global definition of social work was adopted (IFSW and IASSW, 2001). According to Hare (2004), social work then represented a human rights profession. The international development and the internationally accepted definition of social work on behalf of IASSW and IFSW in 2014 further contributed to that end. According to that definition, “social work represented a practically-oriented profession and an academic discipline that promoted social change and development, social cohesion, empowerment and liberation of the people. The principles of social justice, human rights, collective responsibility and the respect for diversity were at the heart of social work” (IFSW & IASSW, 2014). This approach to the social work profession at the international level encouraged social workers in Croatia to dedicate greater attention to human rights through education and professional practice. A hesitant attitude toward human rights from the early period engendered a disproportionate inclination of social work toward human needs. According to Ife (2001), the dichotomy between the focus on needs and the affirmation of rights assumed that unmet needs led to dissatisfaction, while a nonrespect of rights entailed their violation and, consequently, legal and legitimate claims of restitution. The rights-based approach to social work presumed a rights holder and, at the other end, a provider responsible for affirming and delivering rights. According to Ife (2004), the rights-based approach represented a framework for action and a methodological instrument for fulfilling the social work mission. This approach relied on the notion that each person, as a human being, is a legitimate rights holder. The international legal system of human rights protection also relied on this fundamental principle. In this respect, social work education has been invited to devise an appropriate model of teaching human rights and equally to train students in the critical assessment of the human rights concept and its further enrichment with new contributions. A recent IFSW paper titled Global Standards for Social Work Education and Training (IFSW, 2020) stated: Social, economic and environmental justice are fundamental pillars underpinning social work theory, policy and practice. All schools must a) prepare students to be able to apply human rights principles (as articulated in the International Bill of Rights and core international human rights treaties) to frame their understanding of how current social issues affect social, economic and environmental justice; b) ensure that their students understand the importance of social, economic, political and environmental justice and develop relevant intervention knowledge and skills; c) contribute to collective efforts within and beyond school structures to achieve social, economic and environmental justice.

Many authors discuss the importance of human rights training for social work, including Ife (2008), McPherson and Abell (2012), Hawkins and Knox (2014), Staub-Bernasconi (2016), Reynaert et al. (2019), and others. Human rights education is closely tied to social work values and ethics so that these two important areas would inevitably overlap in a joint course or a joint teaching module. While human rights refer to entitlements based on liberty or claim rights, ethics involves procedures and decision-making processes to access rights. Education should propose effective teaching methods that prepare students to face real-world challenges and instances of human rights violations. For this reason, human rights education should involve professionals with direct experience in human rights protection and

46

N. Žganec et al.

promotion. Moreover, service beneficiaries could also share their experiences with the denial of their rights. Audiovisual technology, vignettes, case studies, study visits, and critical thinking and problem-solving tasks represent some of the methods that could raise the quality of human rights education  within social work. Education also should incorporate the principal international and national regulatory framework on human rights protection, as well as key notions from human rights history and theory. Students should receive training in measurement and assessment instruments so that they could determine whether the rights are truly respected or whether, and how, they should intervene for their protection. Inconsistencies between education, theory, and practice are frequently evoked in social work education. At times, discrepancies stem from inadequate teaching content or methods, and in certain countries, from underdeveloped models of social work practice. The latter notably applies to countries (including Croatia) with low investment in social services development, particularly concerning innovative methods and techniques, new operational procedures, or restructured models of social work organization and service provision. This primarily concerns public welfare services that the authorities may use to maintain social peace and stability rather than to genuinely contribute to social security, social justice, and comprehensive human rights protection. Human rights education in postcommunist countries needs to equip students with skills for identifying social challenges and undertaking action for human rights protection and development. The social work profession strives to introduce positive social change, transform social relations, prevent social risks, and remove the causes of neglect that generally affect the most vulnerable social groups. Social workers are often directly exposed to the same adversities that affect the communities they serve, and they undergo the same process of removing the obstacles and recovering from the effects of natural disasters or other calamities. Severe hardships, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the earthquakes that have simultaneously afflicted Croatian citizens, may jeopardize the exercise of basic human rights. Such circumstances call for well-trained professionals who are capable of identifying issues and designing solutions. The core principles of social work ethics presume dignity and respect for the inherent value of each individual. Central to the protection of basic human rights, this value should be imparted so that students can understand and apply it in their future professional practice. That is, understanding core values lies at the heart of understanding the human rights concept. However, students should also learn about many other key aspects of human rights, such as the distinction between the negative (civil and political) and the positive (economic, social, and cultural) rights, the legal system of human rights protection, standard and accepted procedures for addressing human rights violations in the community, procedures and mobilization of resources for human rights protection, and many other important aspects. Moreover, social work practitioners should be able to concretely and adequately apply their skills, critically self-assess their practice, and continuously improve it. Lifelong professional training, supervision, and evaluation are vital to that end. Research assessment may help practitioners evaluate the quality and the appropriateness of their practices, identifying shortcomings and areas for improvement.

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

47

Maintaining a continuous link and cooperation between educational institutions and practice is pivotal as it benefits both sides—the education and the profession. Ife (2004) suggested several principles of designing rights-based social work practice. These principles presume a broad understanding and a multidisciplinary approach to human rights. Given the constructed character and the community ownership over human rights, it is necessary to identify rights and responsibilities in interaction with affected individuals and groups. This concerns not only individual responsibilities but also the responsibilities of the community, the private sector, and the state. Ultimately, all social work practice, in some respect, should be based on human rights. Therefore, social work practice should critically examine issues concerning professionalism (particularly linked to the administrative model of service provision, hierarchical relationships, involuntary beneficiaries, etc.), organization of social services, available resources, and ethical issues in the profession. The ethical issues include prioritizing, trust, boundaries, and the social work paradox that arises from the dichotomies of representing beneficiaries versus representing the employer, partnering with beneficiaries versus abiding by the rules and regulations, assisting beneficiaries versus limited resources, among others. As Šadić (2014) has pointed out, a rights-based social work practice presumes the application of the rights-based approach to everyday service provision. Šadić further argued that human rights should steer social policy planning and design, regulatory interventions, and access to social rights at social services. Finally, monitoring and evaluation should follow up on policies, programs, and practices for accessing social rights. Directed at human rights protection and promotion, as well as positive social change, the social work profession should not merely serve to execute the procedures prescribed by the social protection system of a particular country; it should rather actively contribute to the living standard and the quality of life of citizens. Social work should notably engage in social policymaking; social and other relevant legislation; arranging the institutional framework; ensuring the financial, material, and other resources; and promoting the principles of human rights protection. Many models of social work practice exist today, ranging from clinical to critical and radical. Social workers thus have many opportunities for specializing in their practice. At times, the rights-based model of social work practice may ask for courage from social workers to defy the pressure from their employers or organizations to act against the principles of human rights protection. Unfortunately, this is a common occurrence in the social work practice, especially in countries with underdeveloped social policy and social protection mechanisms. According to Mihr and Rosemann (2004), from the human rights aspect, social work education relies on three pillars that impart cognitive and normative content; sensibility for promoting professional attitudes; and skills development based on knowledge and attitudes acquired in the previous two pillars. All three pillars are equally important in fostering a coherent understanding and promotion of human rights and allowing future social workers to practice their profession in line with its original postulates. Social work education in Croatia strives to conform to this proposed framework.

48

N. Žganec et al.

In this respect, Croatia marked quite limited progress in the 20 years following the reform interventions in the social protection system. Social services have remained quite centralized, the regulatory framework is deficient and unresponsive to the actual needs of beneficiaries, the resources at social workers’ disposal are inadequate, and the prevailing attitude toward social service beneficiaries is seen as patronizing and frequently accusatory. Such circumstances further restrict opportunities for social workers to practice the human rights–based approach and improve the public image of social workers who are generally not regarded as acting in the best interest of beneficiaries. To strengthen the human rights–based social work practice, Croatia should pursue the following avenues. First, the introduction of mandatory courses at all levels of social work education should reinforce human rights training (currently, the human rights course is mandatory only at the graduate level). Second, the research component should be strengthened both in qualitative and quantitative research. Third, social work practitioners should have access to continuous lifelong learning on human rights to steer their professional focus and counter the effects of the prevailing administrative approach (particularly at public welfare services). Fourth, the awareness of employers, as well as social policymakers, should be raised on the importance of the human rights–based approach to social work, along with adequate institutional arrangements that support it. Finally, raising the awareness of beneficiaries on human rights matters is central to the effective implementation of the human rights–based approach to social work. Beneficiaries are frequently not familiar with their rights, nor do they realize when or how their rights are being violated. The following section will address human rights protection concerning different social groups in Croatia and various responses offered by social workers.

3.6 Contemporary Challenges in Human Rights Protection and Promotion in Croatia: The Role of Social Work As mentioned above, Croatia has integrated the provisions of the principal international treaties on human rights protection into its legislation. That includes the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; Convention on the Rights of the Child; Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide; Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; and many others. Furthermore, Croatia has ratified the major European conventions, such as the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, accepting the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights over the pleas of natural persons, civil society organizations, or groups of individuals concerning rights violations, as per the Convention, against the Republic of Croatia. Croatia thus gave the mandate to the European Court of Human Rights, assuming a legal obligation to execute its

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

49

final verdicts in cases where it represented the accused party. Finally, Croatia also adopted the recommendations of the United Nations Vienna Declaration of 1993 to develop national action plans and implement measures to protect human rights. Accordingly, national plans for human rights protection and promotion are periodically drafted in Croatia; albeit the latest plan was for the period from 2013 to 2016. Afterward, public authorities renounced drafting new plans, and the civil society stepped in, assuming a prominent place with its activities in the field. The leading network of civil society organizations in Croatia for the promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms, the Human Rights House, underscored in its annual Human Rights Review for Croatia in 2018 (Human Rights House, 2019) that the country was significantly lagging behind the adoption of key public policies for human rights protection and promotion (such as the National Plan for Human Rights Protection and Promotion, National Policy for Gender Equality, and other policies). Croatia also declined to ratify the fundamental international conventions such as the revised European Social Charter and the UN Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (https://www.kucaljudskihprava.hr/wp-­ content/uploads/2019/03/Ljudska-prava-u-Hrvatskoj-2018.pdf). The review highlighted many other issues in human rights protection and promotion in Croatia. Notably, the authorities were also found to be slow to adopt the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.  An important mission of social work is to consider how the developments in the field of human rights protection impact relevant social phenomena, such as poverty, discrimination, and the protection of the rights of vulnerable groups. In this regard, key indicators in different domains reflect the actual position of various social groups. The Croatian Bureau of Statistics collects and analyzes data on poverty and social exclusion, continuously setting the rate of those at risk of poverty at around 20% and the rate of risk of poverty and social exclusion in Croatia at 25%. Almost 9% of Croatian citizens face severe material deprivation (Croatian Bureau of Statistics, 2018). The elderly are at a higher risk, particularly women, with an average at-risk rate of 28%. Against this background, social workers’ activities focus more on alleviation and recovery from the consequences of poverty than its prevention. The current model of social service provision in Croatia does not offer adequate incentives or coherent mechanisms directed at prevention. On the contrary, the administrative model in place is encumbered with bureaucratic work, not leaving sufficient time for social workers to conduct targeted programs for empowering individuals, families, and communities and raising their resilience to poverty and social exclusion. Community-­ based practices are particularly underrepresented in social work in Croatia. Moreover, social service providers (under the ministry in charge of social policy) do not seem eager to change their practices: comprehensive reform of the social welfare system has not reached the policy agenda for over 20 years. According to the

50

N. Žganec et al.

European Anti-Poverty Network (2021), “ending poverty is a political choice.” This approach to combating poverty requires structured efforts from social workers in removing key circumstances that foster poverty. For Croatia, that includes combating corruption, promoting investment in social security, greater transparency of public finances, raised capacities of social services, amendments to the regulatory framework, and investment in professionals employed by social services. It also requires social workers to engage in legal, social, and political action and hence contribute to human rights protection and promotion. Discrimination is in the spotlight of the civil society and political action in Croatia. In the context of the recent war, the protection of ethnic minorities has been in particular focus (notably concerning the Serbian minority, which has the highest representation). The latest report of the Public Ombudswoman of the Republic of Croatia (2019, p. 9) stated, “the data on discrimination was encouraging; the number of citizens who had felt discriminated decreased by 17% compared to the same survey in 2015. Notwithstanding, many challenges remained, notably in the world of work and employment, mostly concerning unequal treatment of older employees, persons with medical conditions, union members, and equally persons with different political beliefs, ethnic or national origin.” Members of the Roma and Serbian minorities, as well as migrants, frequently report facing discrimination, including stigmatisation in the public discourse and physical violence, notably against the ethnic Serbs. By all parameters, persons with disabilities belong to one of the most vulnerable social groups in Croatia. According to Benjak et al. (2015), the number of persons with disabilities continuously increased from 2008 to 2012 in Croatia, along with an increasing prevalence of disabilities, reaching its peak at 12.1% in 2012. According to the Croatian Public Health Institute, the share of persons with disabilities reached 12.4% of the population by mid-2019 (Benjak et al., 2019). Furthermore, according to the Croatian Employment Service (HZZ, 2019), there were 154,832 persons in employment in 2019, 2820 of whom were persons with disabilities. This represented a decrease of 12.7% compared to 2018, when 3231 persons with disabilities were employed. In total employment of persons with disabilities, 1634 were men (57.9%) and 1186 were women (42.1%). According to the Croatian Employment Service, the share of employed persons with disabilities in total employment was 1.8%. The statistical data hence indicated very low status for persons with disabilities, who are deprived of elementary human rights, including those proclaimed in different regulations in Croatia, as well as in the adopted international legal framework. Although comprehensive research studies on human rights protection and promotion for persons with disabilities are scarce in Croatia, other partial findings depict a gloomy reality. For example, research by Buljevac and Leutar (2017) on stigmatization of persons with intellectual disabilities is indicative of different manifestations and aspects of stigmatization of persons with disabilities and their family members. Stigma, exclusion, poverty, low participation in education, and unemployment constitute only a fraction of challenges encountered by persons with disabilities in Croatia. Social workers frequently represent the only available assistance, which gives them some insight into the position of the families of persons with disabilities. Notwithstanding, low availability of social benefits and services for

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

51

persons with disabilities further restricts possible social work interventions. Disability benefits are exceptionally low, and administrative inconsistencies in the healthcare sector impede access to orthopedic aids, while administrative and other barriers to accessing social rights remain significant. Employers are not adequately incentivized to hire persons with disabilities despite regulations on the so-called quota-­based model of employment, which imposes financial fines for employers who do not hire persons with disabilities. Likewise, the education system is slow to adjust, notwithstanding recent improvements in primary education. However, progression to higher levels of education is virtually impossible for most persons with disabilities. Thus, the social workers’ role is pivotal in raising the quality of life for persons with disabilities. For this reason, social work in Croatia should design new interventions and services to justify its professional mission in the future. An inappropriately high share of beneficiaries in institutional care, placed in the so-called total institutions, presents considerable challenges for human rights protection of persons with disabilities in Croatia. Although Croatia has formally declared (and officially committed in accession to the EU) that it will undertake comprehensive deinstitutionalization, to this date, there are several thousand beneficiaries in social welfare institutions, counting those with ten or more beneficiaries each. Therefore, social workers should promote and facilitate deinstitutionalization, inclusion, development of noninstitutional services, and prevention of institutionalization. Unfortunately, due to unfavorable circumstances of their practice and their formal position, notably in the public sector, stronger engagement in this respect may lead to open confrontation between social workers with their employers and mainstream policies. Against the backdrop of Croatia’s exceptionally high rate of precarious labor in the EU, many, especially young, social workers are not willing to risk their jobs, and hence they conform to standard procedures (Fig. 3.4). Homeless people represent another acutely neglected social group in Croatia with very fragile access to their human rights. Although reliable data on the overall number of homeless persons in Croatia are not available, it is estimated that the homeless population numbers between  500 and several thousand persons (Družić Ljubotina et  al., 2016). Upon analyzing the position and support networks for the homeless, Družić Ljubotina et al. formulated valuable recommendations for social workers and their future activities in protecting the human rights of this particularly vulnerable group. The recommendations concerned accommodation, appropriate housing conditions, and new housing modalities for the homeless; inclusion of homeless persons in the labor market; provision of integrated psychosocial support and assistance to homeless persons; development of innovative social services for the homeless; and other services. The homeless have become even more at risk, and their position has likely become more aggravated due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which deserves further examination and interventions. Without a doubt, children also belong to the most vulnerable social groups in the country and the world. In Croatia, poverty further aggravates children’s position. Stubbs et  al. (2017) estimate  that children’s poverty rate was 21.1% in Croatia. Accordingly, Croatia’s poverty rates affecting the general population and children

52

N. Žganec et al.

Fig. 3.4  The art can play important role in social work and human rights education

are above the EU average. The negative trend in children’s poverty is particularly distressing, with the poverty rate increasing by 1.5 percentage points for children in Croatia from 2010 to 2014, which is higher than in other EU countries where it increased by 0.66 percentage points on average. Abuse and neglect are also among the most serious issues in children’s rights protection. In the absence of relevant detailed assessment in Croatia, some research studies (e.g., Bilić et al., 2012) show that 15.9% of children experienced physical abuse; 16.5%, emotional abuse; 14.8%, domestic violence; 14%, sexual abuse; and 2.5%, neglect. Children’s rights protection is therefore high on the social work agenda globally and in Croatia, with the responsibility on the social work profession for its outcomes. Nonetheless, as in the case of other vulnerable groups and despite good practice examples, social work practice does not always fulfill its professional role. For example, over a thousand children are still placed in institutions in Croatia, and social workers have not been effective in preventing placement in institutional care. Moreover, children in foster homes often do not receive appropriate care due to inadequate support to foster parents, disregard for meaningful engagement with birth families, as well as unstructured procedures for speeding up adoption whenever possible or necessary. Social work ought to address the contemporary challenges of children’s rights protection in Croatia with higher confidence and greater competence. In addition, the effects of the pandemic and two recent strong earthquakes in Croatia have impacted children’s rights protection. Finally, senior citizens represent a particularly vulnerable social group. Croatia has one of the oldest populations in Europe and the world. The latest census (Croatian Bureau of Statistics, 2013) showed that persons aged 65 or over outnumbered children from 0 to 14 for the first time. The share of people aged 65 or over was 17.7%, and the share of children aged 0–14 was 15.2%. Moreover, the proportion of people at very advanced ages had also increased, with the share of persons aged 80 or over reaching 3.9% in 2011 (compared to 0.8% in 1953). The next census in 2021 is expected to confirm these population trends. Žganec et  al. (2008)

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

53

suggested that the elderly population is  vulnerable according to several criteria. Compared to younger generations, the elderly are frequently marginalized in terms of their social and economic power, health condition, and the like. Within the elderly population, women occupy a particularly difficult position, as they generally live longer and have fewer financial resources at their disposal, as compared to men. Old age is also significant predictor of poverty. Elderly people are more vulnerable to different forms of exploitation, abuse, and discrimination. Even though the international community has yet to adopt a convention on the rights of older persons, there are many other international and national regulations that protect the rights of the elderly. Social work practice may thus rely on a rather coherent legal framework. To protect the rights of the elderly, social workers in Croatia can also rely on a long-­ standing tradition and established practice that has been evolving in the social work profession for decades. Croatia has a well-developed institutional model of care for the elderly, with 3–4% of elderly persons residing in retirement homes. Along with high awareness and family solidarity in assuming care for the elderly, community-­ based noninstitutional care has also been gradually expanding, albeit at a slow pace. Furthermore, there are significant shortcomings in palliative care and highly deficient capacities of hospices. Social workers protecting the rights of the elderly in Croatia are highly engaged in addressing the effects of poverty, preventing abuse, and, occasionally, arranging community-based care. Social workers in civil society organizations also play a noteworthy part in community-based care. Given the projected increase of the proportion of elderly citizens in the population, care for the elderly should come to the forefront of social work, particularly in light of the recent public health crisis, projected economic downturn, declining intergenerational solidarity, and possible deterioration of the overall quality of life, which might further deprive the elderly of their rights. The examples discussed above illustrate some major deficient areas and social groups deprived of their human rights to a certain extent in Croatia. Social work and social workers should indeed ensure support in many other areas and to other social groups, such as gender and ethnic minorities; migrants; people with different religious, cultural, or racial backgrounds; and others. Croatian society is relatively closed to diversity, multiculturalism, and multicultural practices (as demonstrated by the persistent prejudices toward LGBTIQ+ persons, as well as gender-based or other forms of discrimination in everyday life). Social workers should strengthen their competences and readiness in that respect as well, not only to cope with contemporary social challenges but also to promote new practices and standards in human rights protection.

3.7 Continuing Uncertainties: Challenges to Human Rights The impact of the recent crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic and earthquakes during 2020 brought some new challenges to human rights protection in Croatia. The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic stopped the significant economic growth Croatia

54

N. Žganec et al.

had experienced in the years that preceded it. Although in the first pandemic wave in the first half of 2020, Croatia managed rather well and without many human casualties, the circumstances in the general population worsened, with obvious signs of apathy and fear. Some people lost their jobs, while many had to change their usual working as well as living routines. The government reacted with targeted financial support for the economy, but the measures directed to the most vulnerable societal groups—people in poverty, those with disabilities, or those who were unemployed—were lacking. The main government headquarters responsible for the management of the COVID-19 crisis (called Stožer in Croatian) lost the people’s trust due to a series of unusual, inconsistent decisions. Social services were put in an especially difficult position, since hybrid social service provision was introduced, which decreased the quality of social services. Social workers were instructed to provide their services online, and many of them worked from home. The pandemic had not only impacted the quality of their services, but it also had a negative impact on the social workers’ mental and physical health. There are still not reliable data regarding the main impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on all aspects of Croatian society, but there is much partial evidence that the pandemic worsened domestic violence, mental health, addictions, the suicide rate, and many other social issues. Besides the pandemic, a strong earthquake hit Zagreb, the Croatian capital city, in March 2020. A second big earthquake hit the central part of Croatia in December 2020. The estimated cost of the Zagreb earthquake is 11.6 billion euros, and the second earthquake  caused an additional 5 billion euros  of damage. The consequences of the earthquakes combined with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in thousands of people losing their homes or their loved ones. Public social services and professional social work were unable to adequately respond to these disasters, and thus the country saw renewed involvement of international humanitarian organizations, such as the Red Cross and Caritas. Professional social work lacks both human and material resources. Hence, the need for major reform of the social sector is more than obvious. Some actions in this direction have already been announced by the Croatian government, but the professional community of social workers needs a more participative process in policymaking to ensure that future social services are based on best principles of professional knowledge and human rights standards.

3.8 Conclusion Social work has a long-standing tradition in Croatia that has seen periods of dynamic professional development under different political and social circumstances. Despite considerable challenges encountered by social workers, social work and human rights education strongly contribute to overall social progress, along with the immediate practical experience of social workers in human rights protection and promotion for the benefit of different social groups in Croatia.

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

55

The impact of human rights–based social work is evident in times of social crises, natural disasters, and technical crises. In the past 30 years, social workers in Croatia practiced their profession under different crisis circumstances, including war and economic downturn, as well as the recent pandemic and natural disasters, such as two strong earthquakes. Social workers hence gained valuable experience and gradually shaped their profession and have subsequently received increasing social recognition. The public social welfare system employs most of the  social workers in Croatia. Social welfare centers are the principal social service providers, though the system also encompasses other types of institutions. These institutions provide accommodation, care, and assistance to various beneficiaries, and they facilitate the provision of noninstitutional services. Unfortunately, reform initiatives from the beginning of the 2000s did not produce a tangible impact. According to Žganec (2008), the lack of professional discussions and evidence-based public debates, engaging the professional and the broader public, has recently further impeded a generally slow development of the social welfare system in Croatia. The nonengagement of key professional associations in reform initiatives about the social welfare system represents another important obstacle. A marked focus of the public welfare system, and notably social welfare centers, on administrative procedures is particularly worrisome for service provision, as is the propensity for institutional placement of beneficiaries (infirmaries). These two factors further limit the opportunities for social worker engagement in human rights protection and promotion, along with other issues such as too many responsibilities, inadequate investment in social services, understaffed social services, and insufficient lifelong learning opportunities—to mention a few. Although human rights are still not taught as part of the mandatory curriculum at all levels of education, awareness of their importance is increasing. In the future, human rights education in Croatia should connect teachers and students, practitioners (from the public, private, and civil society sectors), and service users. Students should receive training in critical thinking and in taking  structural approaches to social problems, which would more effectively  prepare  future social workers to be human rights professionals. Certainly, it is necessary for social work to contribute to the promotion and the introduction of positive social change. Despite important improvements in human rights protection, numerous discriminatory practices persist based on cultural, gender, ethnicity, age, and other aspects of diversity in Croatia. In their practice, social workers commonly encounter persons exposed to discrimination, which requires an adequate preparedness for recognizing different manifestations of discrimination, promoting zero tolerance to discrimination, and developing social work practice in line with the highest anti-­ discriminatory and anti-oppressive standards. At all levels, human rights education plays an important part in developing antidiscrimination competencies in professional practice, particularly through targeted lifelong learning programs. An added aspect of social work development comes from the contemporary globalization processes and negative effects of neoliberalism; decreasing solidarity; individualism; as well as persisting and impermissible racism, discrimination,

56

N. Žganec et al.

different forms of social injustice, exclusion, and inequality. Education, research, and practice should encompass all three historical phases of human rights to advance social work as a human rights profession in Croatia and other parts of the world. Disregard for earlier iterations of human rights under the presumption of their effective protection by the adopted international or national regulations may, in fact, negatively affect the position of service users who continue to see their rights violated. Social workers should, therefore, perform continuous monitoring and collaborate with civil society organizations, especially those that are actively engaged in human rights protection at the international level. Human rights protection indeed remains an ongoing mission in the present and for the future. Social work should strive to offer people hope for future progress in human rights protection. However, this cannot be achieved by good intentions but rather through practical social work interventions based on evidence, research results, knowledge, and good practice. As human rights protection does not evolve only in the national context, social workers should strengthen their professional connections and solidarity on different levels, including internationally. In this respect, international social work associations such as the IFSW, IASSW, International Council on Social Welfare (ICSW), and regional associations bear a specific responsibility for fostering discussions on and standards for social work protection and promotion. Social workers in Croatia are becoming increasingly aware of this necessity and actively engage in international social work through education, research, and professional practice. Finally, in the aftermath of the current COVID-19 pandemic, the social work profession is invited to rise to the considerable challenges ahead.

References Ajduković, M. (2006). Djelovanje Diane Budisavljević: rad s djecom stradalom u 2. svjetskom ratu [Engagement of Diana Budisavljević: Activities concerning children affected by World War II]. Ljetopis socijalnog rada [Annual Journal of Social Work], 13(1), 101–114. Ajduković, M., & Branica, V. (2006). Počeci socijalnog rada u Hrvatskoj između dva svjetska rata [Beginnings of social work in Croatia in the interwar period]. Ljetopis socijalnog rada [Annual Journal of Social Work], 13(1), 29–45. Alvis, R. E. (2005). Religion and the rise of nationalism: A profile of an east-central European city. Syracuse University Press. Benjak, T., Škes, M., Štefančić, V., Draušnik, Ž., & Vajagić, M. (2015). Analiza šestogodišnjeg kretanja broja osoba s invaliditetom u Republici Hrvatskoj i Gradu Zagrebu 2008–2013 [Analysis of six-year trends concerning the number of persons with disabilities in the Republic of Croatia and the City of Zagreb 2008–2013]. Hrvatska revija za rehabilitacijska istraživanja 2015 [Croatian Review of Rehabilitation Research 2015], 51(2), 96–109. Benjak, T., Henig, R., Ivanić, M., Petreski, N.  T., Radošević, M., Vejzović, Z., & Vuljanić, A. (2019). Izvješće o osobama s invaliditetom u Republici Hrvatskoj [Report on persons with disabilities in the Republic of Croatia]. Hrvatski Zavod za javno zdravstvo [Croatian Public Health Institute]. Bežovan, G., Zrinšćak, S., & Vugec, M. (2005). Civicus-ov indeks civilnog društva u Hrvatskoj. Civilno društvo u procesu stjecanja povjerenja u Hrvatskoj i izgradnje partnerstva s državom

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

57

i drugim dionicima [CIVICUS Civil Society Index for Croatia. Civil Society in the process of gaining trust in Croatia and building partnerships with the state and other stakeholders]. CERANEO: Centar za razvoj neprofitnih organizacija [CERANEO: Center for the Development of Non-Profit Organizations], CIVICUS: Svjetski savez za građansku participaciju [CIVICUS: Global Alliance for Civic Participation]. Bilić, V., Buljan-Flander, G., & Hrpka, H. (2012). Nasilje nad djecom i među djecom [Violence against children and among children]. Naklada Slap [Slap Editions]. Bošnjak, V. (1973). Razvoj socijalne zaštite od 1945–1965. [Development of social protection from 1945–1965], Socijalni rad [Social Work], 2, 3–4, 5–10. Buljevac, M., & Leutar, Z. (2017). “Nekad su mi znali reći da nisam bolja od svog sina”—Stigma obitelji temeljem intelektualnih teškoća člana obitelji [“They used to tell me that I was no better than my son”—Stigmatizing families based on the intellectual disability of a family member]. Hrvatska revija za rehabilitacijska istraživanja [Croatian Review of Rehabilitation Research], 53(2), 17–31. Bulmer, S., & Lequesne, C. (Eds.). (2005). The member states of the European Union. Oxford University Press. Croatian Bureau of Statistics [Državni Zavod za statistiku]. (2013). Popis stanovništva, kućanstva i stanova 2011. Stanovništvo prema spolu i starosti [Census of population, households and dwellings 2011, population by sex and age]. Državni zavod za statistiku [Croatian Bureau of Statistics]. https://www.dzs.hr/Hrv_Eng/publication/2012/SI-­1468.pdf Croatian Bureau of Statistics [Državni Zavod za statistiku]. (2018). Pokazatelji siromaštva i socijalne isključenosti 2018 [Indicators of Poverty and Social Exclusion 2018]. https://www.dzs. hr/Hrv_Eng/publication/2019/14-­01-­01_01_2019.htm Dahl, R. A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. Yale University Press. Družić Ljubotina, O., Kletečki Radović, M., & Ogresta, J. (2016). Slika podrške beskućnicima u Hrvatskoj [State of support to the homeless in Croatia]. Gradski ured za socijalnu zaštitu i osobe s invaliditetom [City Office for Social Protection and Persons with Disabilities]. European Anti-Poverty Network. (2021). https://www.eapn.eu/ Hare, I. (2004). Defining social work for the 21st century: The international federation of social workers’ revised definition of social work. International Social Work, 47(3), 407–424. Hawkins, C. A., & Knox, K. (2014). Educating for international social work: Human rights leadership. International Social Work, 57(3), 248–257. House of Human Rights. (2019). Human Rights in Croatia: The review for the year 2018. Zagreb [Kuća ljudskih prava. (2019). Ljudska prava u Hrvatskoj: Pregled stanja za 2018. godinu, Zagreb]. HZZ: Hrvatski Zavod za zapošljavanje [Croatian Employment Service]. (2019). Izvješće o aktivnostima Hrvatskoga zavoda za zapošljavanje u području zapošljavanja osoba s invaliditetom u razdoblju od 1. siječnja do 31. prosinca 2019 [Report on the activities of Croatian Employment Service in the area of employment of persons with disabilities in the period from January 1 until December 31, 2019]. https://www.hzz.hr/statistika/statistika-­zaposljavanja-­osobe-­s-­ invaliditetom.php Ife, J. (2001). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice. Cambridge University Press. Ife, J. (2004). Social work and human rights: A foundation for policy and practice. Australian Social Work, 57(2), 209–211. Ife, J. (2008). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice (Rev. ed.). Cambridge University Press. International Federation of Social Work (IFSW) and International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW). (2014). Global definition of social work. https://www.ifsw.org/global-­ definition-­of-­social-­work/ International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW). (1988). Human rights, international policy papers. IFSW.

58

N. Žganec et al.

International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW). (2020). Global standards for social work education and training. https://www.ifsw.org/global-­standards-­for-­social-­work-­education -­and-­training International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) and International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW). (2001). Statement on the definition of social work. International Federation of Social Workers, International Association of Schools of Social Work. Jakopović, D. (2002). Demokratizacija u Hrvatskoj—pogled izvana [Democratic transition in Croatia–An external perspective]. Diskrepancija [Discrepancy], 3(5/6), 51–60. Jurčić, L. (2019). Hrvatska stagnira u Europskoj uniji [Croatia stagnates in the European Union]. Ekonomski pregled [Economic Review], 70(6), 902–938. Lockard, C. A. (2008). Societies, networks, and transitions: A global history. Houghton Mifflin. Maldini, P. (2006). Obnovljena religioznost i demokratizacija hrvatskog društva [Renewed religious sentiment and democratic transition of Croatian society]. Društvena istraživanja [Social Research], 15, 6(86), 1105–1125. McPherson, J., & Abell, N. (2012). Human rights engagement and exposure in social work: New scales to challenge social work education. Research on Social Work Practice, 22(6), 704–713. Mihr, A., & Rosemann, N. (2004). Bildungsziel Menschenrechte. Standards und Perspektiven für Deutschland. Wochenschauverlag. Müller, C. W. (2013). Wie Helfen zum Beruf wurde. Eine Methodengeschichte der Sozialen Arbeit (6th ed.). Beltz Juventa Verlag. Prlenda, S. (2006). Kako istražiti povijest socijalnog rada u Hrvatskoj—povijesni izvori za razdoblje 1900–1945 [How to research social work history in Croatia–Historical sources for the 1900–1945 period]. Ljetopis socijalnog rada [Annual Journal of Social Work], 13(1), 75–84. Public Ombudswoman of the Republic of Croatia. (2019, March). Izvješće pučke pravobraniteljice za 2019 [Public ombudswoman report 2019]. https://www.ombudsman.hr/ wp-­content/uploads/2020/04/Izvje%C5%A1%C4%87e-­pu%C4%8Dke-­pravobraniteljice-­ za-­2019._3.pdf Puljiz, V. (2006). Socijalna politika i socijalne djelatnosti u Hrvatskoj u razdoblju 1900–1960 [Social policy and social activity in Croatia in the 1900–1960 period]. Ljetopis socijalnog rada [Annual Journal of Social Work], 13(1), 7–27. Reynaert, D., Dijkstra, P., Knevel, J., Hartman, J., Tirions, M., Geraghty, C., Gradener, J., Lochtenberg, M., & van den Hoven, R. (2019). Human rights at the heart of the social work curriculum. Social Work Education, 38(1), 21–33. Šadić, S. (2014). Ljudska prava i socijalni rad [Human rights and social work]. Univerzitet u Sarajevu, Fakultet političkih nauka [University of Sarajevo, Faculty of Political Science]. Staub-Bernasconi, S. (2016). Social work and human rights–Linking two traditions of human rights in social work. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 1(1), 40–49. Stubbs, P., Ledić, M., Rubil, I., & Zrinščak, S. (2017). Dječje siromaštvo i strategije nošenja sa siromaštvom kućanstava u Hrvatskoj [Children’s poverty and strategies for coping with poverty by households in Croatia]. EIZG i Zaklada Adris [Institute of Economics Zagreb & Foundation Adris]. U.S.  Department of State. (1999, February 25). Country reports on human rights practices. Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, U.S. Department of State. https://1997-­2001.state.gov/global/human_rights/1999_hrp_report/croatia.htm United Nations. (1994). Human rights and social work: A manual for schools of social work and the social work profession. Centre for Human Rights. Zaviršek, D. (2006). Spol, socijalna skrb i obrazovanje za socijalni rad u početku socijalističke vlasti u Sloveniji [Sex, social welfare and social work education at the start of the socialist regime in Slovenia]. Ljetopis socijalnog rada [Annual Journal of Social Work], 13(1), 63–74.

3  Integrating Social Work with Human Rights in Croatia

59

Zaviršek, D. (2014). Social work education in Eastern Europe: Can post-Communism be followed by diversity? In C. Noble, H. Strauss, & B. Littlechild (Eds.), Global social work: Crossing borders, blurring boundaries (pp. 271–282). Sydney University Press. Žganec, N. (2008). Socijalna skrb u Hrvatskoj–smjerovi razvoja i reformi [Social welfare in Croatia–Development and reform trends]. Revija za socijalnu politiku [Social Policy Review], 15(3), 379–393. Žganec, N., Rusac, S., & Laklija, M. (2008). Trendovi u skrbi za osobe starije životne dobi u Republici Hrvatskoj i u zemljama Europske unije [Trends in care provision for the elderly in the Republic of Croatia and the European Union Countries]. Revija za socijalnu politiku [Social Policy Review], 15(2), 171–188.

Chapter 4

Pathways to a Rights-Based Paradigm in Social Work: The Case of Bosnia and Herzegovina Sanela Bašić

Fig. 4.1  Bosnia and Hercegovina in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe. (Map Credit: Kat Farlowe)

S. Bašić (*) Social Work Department, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 V. Krasniqi, J. McPherson (eds.), Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11728-2_4

61

62

S. Bašić

4.1 Introduction With the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic at the end of 2019, the world has entered a new global era of fear, anxiety, and uncertainty. The ensuing crisis has drastically and irreversibly changed the world by destabilizing the established social order, disrupting the global economy, and shifting our relationships with technology, community, education, politics, and culture. For many, this has produced unprecedented feelings of fear and vulnerability regarding our human future. Yet, unlike other developed societies across the world in which the pandemic emerged as a crisis and has produced instabilities to which most citizens were unaccustomed, in Southeast Europe generally and in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) specifically, “crisis” and uncertainty are something of a permanent state of affairs. Initially, this uncertainty was triggered by the disintegration of Yugoslavia in 1991, which brought about the collapse of socialism and the rise of nationalist ideologies. In a world that seemed determined to move toward “the end of history” and was disillusioned by the inability of socialist economic and political systems to deliver prosperity, progress, and decent living conditions for all, Bosnians—and other former Yugoslavs and socialists—embraced democracy and market capitalism and became the new “transitional” Europe. But just a decade later, Bosnians found themselves in a postsocialist desert (Horvat & Štiks, 2015) facing crises that, to varying degrees, produced numerous and complex social fractures that have directly resulted in the destabilization of political, economic, and social institutions, as well as an explosion of social vulnerabilities. There are now at least two generations of Bosnian citizens born and raised in this atmosphere, with its multiplicity of threats and uncertainties. It is no surprise that persistent feelings of insecurity and fear about the future are widespread in BiH, along with a sense of disillusionment and hopelessness about the capacity of citizens to change our own living conditions. The limits of postwar and transitional reconstruction have been reached, and attempts to affect political change and reorganize key social institutions in accordance with human rights have failed (European Stability Initiative, 2014). Apart from the process of “Europeanization” that BiH continues as it pursues the uncertain goal of European Union (EU) integration, no legitimate alternative vision of politics, economy, or society has been articulated in BiH. Bearing this in mind, the purpose of this chapter is to explore if and how social work practice in BiH may be affected by international human rights discourse and to identify opportunities to redefine the professional paradigm of BiH social work to include a human rights perspective. To do so, the analysis draws on an evaluation of primary and secondary sources, empirical evidence from quantitative research undertaken by the author with social work students to assess their acquired knowledge of important human rights issues, and data from interviews with social work practitioners. In 2017, a national survey was conducted as part of a wider regional research project on rights-based social work in Southeast Europe. The aim of the project, which

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

63

was partly funded by the International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW), was to translate and adapt scales that had previously been validated in other nations for use in measuring human rights in social work in the Southeast European contexts. The main objective was to develop applicable tools for measuring human rights in education and in practice, and in the process, to gain deeper insight into the effects of a shift in the educational paradigm toward a rights-based approach. Data were thus collected through a survey distributed at three schools of social work (in Sarajevo, Banja Luka, and Mostar). A total of 296 students volunteered to participate in the study, in which they were asked to complete a pen-and-­ paper questionnaire comprising items taken from multiple scales measuring the nexus between human rights and social work: Human Rights Exposure in Social Work (one scale, McPherson & Abell, 2012), Human Rights Engagement in Social Work (one scale, McPherson & Abell, 2012), Human Rights Lens in Social Work (two scales, McPherson et al., 2017), and Human Rights Methods in Social Work (eight scales, McPherson & Abell, 2020). The full results from the BiH validation of these scales were published by Šadić et al. (2020). The results of this research enable valuable insights into the relevance of a human rights approach to social work students in BiH. Initially, I intended to also gather empirical evidence from focus group interviews with social work professionals in public social work centers in Sarajevo, Mostar, and Banja Luka. However, when formulating this project, it was hard to anticipate the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic at the global scale and its profound consequences on our private and professional lives. Not surprisingly, conducting field research under pandemic conditions proved impossible due to (partial) lockdowns, closure of social welfare institutions, and travel and contact restrictions. Therefore, instead of the initially planned focus groups, data from interviews with social work practitioners were acquired through five in-depth interviews conducted online (via Skype) with five practitioners employed with the Center for Social Work in the Sarajevo Canton (the largest social work institution in BiH), between September and November 2020. All of the interview subjects were women who had completed either a diploma degree (4 study years) or an MA degree (5 study years) in social work; all had at least 10 years of professional experience in the field. The central point of the discussion was the place and relevance of human rights in their daily practice, for example, whether and how they translate fundamental human rights (such as the rights to decent standard of living, to social care) into practice and how certain methods of social work are being amplified to inform social work practice at the micro and macro level. Although this sample is not representative, the findings are nonetheless valuable in contextualizing the significance of human rights to practitioners in the field of social work in the referent section. For ethical reasons, the anonymity of participants is maintained. This chapter is organized as follows: Sect. 4.2 discusses the emergence of professional social work as an integral part of the socialist welfare state in the aftermath of World War II. The discussion focuses on the political mandate of social work as a newly emerging profession and its impacts on professional

64

S. Bašić

identity and professional approaches in practice. In Sect. 4.3, the political, social, and economic effects of the postwar (1992–1995) and postsocialist transition are reviewed. Ethnonationalism as an underlying driving force of the conflict over BiH and politics of postconflict recovery and state building are discussed through a human rights lens. Section 4.4 offers a comprehensive discussion of the shift from a needs-based paradigm to a rights-based perspective in social work education. The analysis also includes the relevance of a human rights approach to social work students in BiH. The relationship between human rights and social work practice is examined in Sect. 4.5. Here, the emphasis is on the pitfalls of integration of human rights into social work practice, specifically examined in relation to poverty, disability, and human rights of women and children. Section 4.6 considers the prospects for rights-­based social work practice in BiH.

4.2 A (Social) Needs Paradigm as a Basis for the Emerging Social Work Profession During Socialism In the aftermath of World War II, the West/East divide was the main cause of uncertainty at both the global and European levels. The discourse of “otherness” that has prevailed for centuries in the Western imagination of the Balkans was not framed in the language of culture following the war but in the language of ideology. (The term “Southeast Europe” for the Western Balkans is relatively new; see Todorova, 2015.) While the societies of Eastern Europe shared a modernist vision of progress and development, they differed from the West in the way that they could bring this to fruition. In Socialist Yugoslavia, victory in World War II enabled the new communist elite to impose a novel political and economic system based on the concept of a so-called people’s democracy under the authority of a single party. On the premise that the establishment of a parliamentary democracy would thwart plans for rapid economic development, the concept of total political unification was promoted, ultimately leading to the totalitarian dictatorship of the communist party and subsequently to a totalitarian society. The process of creating and strengthening the collective consciousness of citizens resulted in the subordination of individual rights and freedoms to the collective in the political sphere, and the imposition of ideological (class) solidarity in the social sphere (Bašić, 2010). Nationwide programs to develop a new socialist society and improve living conditions of the population were launched. This meant not only rapid economic and social transformation (modernization and industrialization) but also the establishment of a distinctive model of state social policy as a guarantor of social security. The key pillars of this social policy were free public healthcare, free public education (from preschool through higher education), public housing, a comprehensive social security/insurance system (for workers), and a residual

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

65

social protection/assistance system (for the vulnerable) (Bašić, 2009). Obviously, this emerging welfare state was a point of legitimacy for the ruling communist party; it derived political and economic power from granting the security of lifelong employment to citizens, along with social security and social protection for workers (Kolarič, 2009). In the context of Bosnia-Herzegovina, by combining intensive industrialization with extensive social policy, the communist leadership successfully transformed this former agrarian society into an industrialized one. Economic growth and expansion in education and employment in conjunction with urbanization and encompassing welfare policies dramatically transformed the society. The industrialization reached its peak in the 1970s, often referred to as a “golden age” (Čusto, 2019; Lasić, 2015). The standard of living (which was higher than in other socialist countries) as well as the consumer needs of the population were rising. Subsequently, economic prosperity gave birth to a (socialist) consumer society (Mladenovski, 2007). Through the prism of Marshall’s (1964) citizenship theory, which constructs the development of the (Western) welfare state as a gradual extension of human rights (civil, political, and social) from the nineteenth century, the socialist welfare state of Yugoslavia represented a deviation: social rights preceded civil and political rights. To explain this deviation from the norm, Kornai (1998) introduced the notion of a “premature welfare state,” describing how communist elites privileged so-called welfare rights, such as the rights to employment, healthcare, education, social security, and housing, over (individual) civil and political rights. However, this seemed perfectly coherent with Marxist teachings and theory that there can be no political emancipation without the liberation of humans from hunger, poverty, disease, illiteracy, and inhumane living conditions, which represent major obstacles to authentic freedom. In that respect, welfare rights that enable social liberation were constructed as a part and parcel of the larger socialist liberation project. The Yugoslav social welfare system was two-tiered, modeled on the distinction between rights and needs. Social security was primarily derived from the system of “first security,” a contributory social insurance program rooted in the right to employment, and only residually from the system of “second security” aimed at needs-based social assistance or protection for nonworkers. As had been true in the modern Western societies that “invented” social work as a key mechanism for mitigating the risks of exclusion (Erath, 2010), space also opened in Yugoslavia for social work—after initial concerns over its “bourgeoisie origin” (Zaviršek, 2009) subsided—as an emancipatory practice that contributes to humanizing and socializing the needs of people (Bašić, 2013a; Miković, 2005; Zaviršek, 2009). Initially, the Yugoslav social work profession developed within the social protection system, offering services to those who, for various reasons, were unable to participate in (socialist) progress and thus needed the support of society to meet their needs. That is, they could not work and therefore could not access their social rights in that way. Over the course of time, communist elites promoted the expansion of social work into other fields of professional practice, such as industry or employment, healthcare, and education, with variable

66

S. Bašić

success. Interestingly, the Council of Social Welfare of the Republic of BiH— the institution responsible for the inclusion of social work within social protection at the republic level under Yugoslavism—understood a “social worker” to be a professional whose main task was to work toward the realization of the legal rights of citizens (Miković, 2005). Yet, this discourse of rights did not permeate social work in practice, and the emerging profession was incorporated into the system of social policy with a mandate to solve and prevent social problems and satisfy social needs. In other words, the role of social workers was to provide support so that people could improve their functioning and strengthen their interactions with various aspects of life and any number of institutions. To that end, social work has long been understood as a “helping profession.” This professional self-­understanding is reflected in the definition of social work offered by Muhamed Dervišbegović, who for decades was a leading figure in Bosnian social work education and academia. He wrote that social work “is a professionally and scientifically based discipline related to taking measures and actions on prevention, e.g., to hinder social problems in local communities, groups, and individuals, as well as addressing the state and social needs of individuals, groups, and communities, with their full engagement, when they need assistance” (Dervišbegović, 1998, p. 34). Among other helping professions, a point of reference for social work as a system has been the “vulnerability” of individuals, groups, or communities to which social workers provide services, which are meant to enable users to surmount barriers and eliminate obstacles that prevent them from attaining adequate social or living standards (Dervišbegović, 1998). However, this language of inclusion (and even its practice) failed to overcome ideological divides in socialist BiH, where “politically unworthy” families that included fascists or their supporters and sympathizers were excluded from support networks (Zaviršek, 2005). In practical terms, the provision of services to people in need of social work interventions was not framed exclusively in terms of social protection rights but was conditioned on an assessment of needs within a statutorily defined framework and included discretionary practices by social workers. Effectively, even though diverse social work practice methods were taught at the School of Social Work in Sarajevo, established in 1958, professional practice throughout the socialist period was marked by individual orientations and dominated by casework. Evaluations of practice development show that most social workers, in centers for social work and in other areas of professional practice, relied entirely on casework and used other social work methods and techniques only very sporadically and unsystematically (Dervišbegović, 1971, 1979). Dervišbegović (1979) observed deficiencies in social work approaches that included a lack of reference to macro practice such as community work or community organization and coordination or cooperation, which he identified as a sign of an underdeveloped profession.

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

67

Fig. 4.2  College of Social Work, established in 1958 in Sarajevo

4.3 “The Wind of Change”: From Human Rights Abuses to a Culture of Human Rights? The fall of the Berlin Wall was the symbolic expression that activated the fall of communism in Central and Eastern Europe. Economists have consistently told us that communism failed due to its inability to bring economic prosperity, mostly in the form of consumer goods and services, which is an attractive but oversimplified analysis. We are witnessing in real time that capitalism also produces rising inequality and poverty, including in the most prosperous and wealthy parts of the world like the EU, where almost 100 million people (21.1%) lived at risk of poverty and social exclusion in 2019 (Eurostat, 2019). Yet capitalism has not collapsed. It would be more accurate to argue that socialism failed, among other reasons, because the youth of the time were dissatisfied with their lack of individual freedoms, their desire for greater access to political and civil rights, and the lack of prosperity. The movement toward a new, democratic, liberal, and capitalist paradigm of the future was not peaceful. In Southeast Europe, a new era of uncertainty followed. Socialist Yugoslavia, once a favorite of leftist thinkers in the West on account of its unique governing structures in comparison with other “real socialist” countries like the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, ended up in the throes of violent ethnopolitical conflict and the first genocide in Europe since the Holocaust. It is too difficult to offer a full historiography of the bloody dissolution of Yugoslavia, and other

68

S. Bašić

contributors to this volume may touch upon specific issues that arose as a result, but the fact is this: During the 1990s (1991–1999), five subsequent wars over independence from Yugoslavia were fought in Slovenia, Croatia, BiH, Kosovo, and Macedonia, during which some of the most horrific war crimes and violations of human rights imaginable were perpetrated. How was this possible? Because the collective turned to ethnonationalism as a stand-in for communism. Faced with the chaos and uncertainty of the postsocialist space, including deep socioeconomic and political destabilization, people in the region increasingly turned to ethnic nationalism, especially as it appeared to be the most viable alternative to communist ideology. But where communism had valued class over the individual, emerging nationalist movements valued the ethnic nation over the individual. The vocabulary of ethnic nationalism is that of territory, blood lines, fear, hate, xenophobia, and, finally, violence (Mink, 2008). And in multiethnic societies such as BiH, where three different ethnic groups have lived intertwined together for centuries, ethnonationalism had fatal and tumultuous consequences by default. The idea that “states should be tailored according to nations” (Altermatt, 1997) can only be implemented through drastic means of social terror and violence, and attempts to realize this idea in BiH meant a new, brutal sort of social engineering. For 3 1/2 years, beginning in 1992, a culture of violence permeated daily life and led to the destruction of a formerly vibrant multiethnic state and society: a previously stable society fractured along ethnic lines. Images of the most savage violence flooded Western media, repopularizing the term “Balkanization” and its pejorative meaning, so that alarm about creeping Balkanization (i.e., that a series of ethnonational movements could be inspired) spread across Europe. Some of the leading philosophers of our time described the political conflict in BiH as a “hyperreal hell” (Baudrillard, 1996) and evidence of the “perverse reverse side of civilization” (Žižek, 1999). Balibar (2011) has rightly observed, though, that the problem of ethnic division and oppression cannot be perceived as something external to Europe but in fact as a projection of European race relations, arguing that the fate of European identity is still being decided in the former Yugoslavia, and more generally in the Balkans. So, the Balkans—and its contemporary euphemism Southeast Europe—is not only a descriptor of a geographical region. The term Balkan has though centuries implied and even today implies a strong symbolic connotation. Despite political correctness, the Balkans are framed as Europe’s other, with no other region in Europe being constructed in similar way. Traditionally, in Western imaginations, the Balkans have been represented as a disease, a deviation, as something not fully European (Veremis, 2014). Recently, the discourse of laziness has been, for example, widely used by the Western media and politicians in their portrayal of Greek people in the context of the 2008 financial crisis. Speaking with Edward Said (1999), we might eventually identify deep-rooted orientalism as an underlying reason, while detailed and impressive elaboration of the Western prejudice over “Balkan” was provided by Todorova (2015). Today, we witness the revival of this myth in the “European” approach to the migration crisis that started a decade ago upon the intensification of conflicts in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. Wars in Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq forced millions

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

69

of people to flee and seek refuge from authoritarian and violent political regimes. For many refugees and migrants, the countries of the EU became a wishful final destination. The crisis reached a peak in 2015, when over a million people—literally by foot over the so-called Balkan route—entered the EU. Since the closure of the Balkan route, BiH has become a transit country, a sort of “unwanted waiting room” for thousands of migrants hoping to somehow enter Croatia and move further (Cocco, 2017). BiH has no coherent policies for the people on move. They are placed in several refugee camps (Sarajevo and Bihać), left to survive under severe hardship (without proper accommodations or basic life necessities), and not recognized as a vulnerable group in need of social services. Support is mainly provided by international organizations (e.g., the International Organization for Migration [IOM]), nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and private individuals. Obviously, as the idea of the “fortress Europe” grasped power and relevance, migrants from the Middle East and Africa were rejected exclusively for their otherness. In November 1995, under US leadership, the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina (known as Dayton Peace Agreement) was finalized. Expectations were very high that the Agreement would not only put an end to the violence but would also serve as a comprehensive framework for postconflict peacebuilding under the auspices of and with the significant involvement of the international community. BiH became a de facto international protectorate under a United Nations High Representative, who was given considerable legislative and executive powers. Any number of UN and EU agencies were directly involved in postconflict state building (Fisher, 2006), the aims of which were ambitious and included, among other things, forming a new central government, holding democratic elections, ensuring freedom of movement and the right to return for refugees and internally displaced persons, and prosecuting alleged war criminals in international and domestic courts. The politics of postconflict reconstruction were based on the notion that a relapse into new conflict could be prevented only if large sectors of society adopted a human rights perspective, that is, if they defined themselves in moral terms. This made the human rights agenda a top priority. There was a need to address human rights violations committed during the war (within mechanisms of transitional justice) as well as a need to create preconditions for a future built on the rule of law and a culture of human rights. This required the following: 1. The incorporation of international human rights standards. For example, Article II of the Bosnian Constitution (Annex 4 of the Dayton Peace Agreement) stipulates that “Bosnia and Herzegovina and both Entities shall ensure the highest level of internationally recognized human rights and fundamental freedoms.” It further asserts that the rights and freedoms set forth in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and its Protocols shall apply directly in BiH and take priority over domestic laws. Additionally, the Agreement on Human Rights (Annex 6 of the Dayton Peace Agreement) lists 15 other international agreements that relate to human rights and to which the state of BiH is committed.

70

S. Bašić

2. The establishment of new bodies or institutions to monitor human rights implementation within governing structures. Several institutions have been designed for this purpose and are tasked with protecting, monitoring, and promoting the human right of citizens—such as the Commission on Human Rights within the Bosnian parliament and respective committees within legislative bodies at the entity level, the Human Rights Ombudsmen, the Human Rights Chamber, and the state-level Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees. Generally, within the governing system in BiH, there are several institutions obliged with protecting the human rights of citizens and with monitoring human rights implementation or promoting human rights. To that end, along with postconflict recovery and state building, human rights issues largely dominated the social development agenda of the first postwar decade. Human rights language was introduced initially by influential international organizations (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR], United Nations Development Programme [UNDP], IOM, etc.) and was then adopted within Bosnian civil society (nongovernmental) organizations fighting against discrimination, marginalization, and exclusion. Formed during the war, NGOs first engaged in the delivery of humanitarian relief. Later, as part of their mission, these organizations began advocating for the protection of marginalized and excluded groups such as refugees and internally displaced persons, children, people with disabilities, women, and Roma. Although their modus operandi was generally project-based and donor-driven by focusing on human rights and social issues, the activities of civil society organizations significantly contributed to raising public awareness and recognition of human rights concerns over discrimination, marginalization, and social exclusion (Sejfija, 2006; Stubbs, 2001). But instead of bringing prosperity, the promise of individual and collective well-­ being, democracy, and respect for human rights, the postwar transition in BiH has apparently stalled, while the country is stuck in a perpetual state of political, economic, and social crisis. Social decline is evident in the growth and intensification of poverty and social exclusion, shrinking social welfare programs, the destabilization of communities, and widespread dissatisfaction with politics and political decision-­making (Bašić, 2013b; Ćurak, 2004; Fočo, 2019; Mujkić, 2007). Public confidence in the power of human rights and the rule of law is low, as the state institutions tasked with respecting and protecting them are weak and under the control of the ruling political party (Šalaj, 2009). Pervasive corruption and clientelism permeates social institutions, and citizens are inclined to trust more in “personal connections” than in human rights guarantees made by the state (UNDP, 2009). Indeed, there is an obvious lack of human rights culture in BiH, as demonstrated by a lack of awareness that human rights exist, and thus their denial; an ignorance among citizens of their rights and a tendency to accept violations of those rights; a lack of self-confidence in exercising rights; an indifference to the rights of others and an unwillingness to defend them; and discrimination against human rights advocates (Dimitrijević, 2002, p. 9).

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

71

The social work profession has not been immune to the influence of external systems, particularly political and legal systems, or to policies of ethnic division and fragmentation. I have previously and vehemently (Bašić, 2013a, 2015a) criticized the unquestioning readiness of some social workers to adapt to violent, ethnopolitical narratives during the war, as well as the elasticity or flexibility of the social work profession to adapt to the exclusionary, oppressive (post)war context despite a decades-long history of professional practice and education grounded in generic humanism and a universalistic approach to social work (Zaviršek et al., 2007). To remedy this, social work educators must “facilitate the internalization of human rights standards which would allow future generations to live in a society that respects and protects human rights” (Bašić, 2015a, p. 17).

4.4 Social Work Responses: Integrating Human Rights Perspectives into Social Work Education In defiance of attempts to co-opt social work practice within the prevailing narratives of a divided BiH in transition, social work educators have in fact committed themselves to the new global focus of the social work profession—changing structures and institutions that prevent the realization of citizens’ rights and the promotion of emancipation and social justice. A first opportunity to introduce or strengthen human rights perspectives in social work education in BiH arose in the context of the Bologna reform process of higher education, implemented in Europe beginning in 2003. To meet the requirements set forth in both the Bologna Declaration (1999) and the Lisbon Declaration (2007), the University of Sarajevo initiated a process of restructuring its system of higher education in 2005, including by modernizing its social work curricula to align with European standards. Educators in the School of Social Work, which is affiliated with the Faculty of Political Sciences, have enthusiastically taken on the development of new teaching modules, innovative teaching content, and increasingly diverse curricula and extracurricular teaching activities that acknowledge the growing relevance of human rights. Presenting, analyzing, and teaching social issues from a human rights perspective have provided a new and powerful lens through which these educators can ask students to examine everyday social injustices in social work settings. Embrace of this human rights perspective and the integration of human rights content into social work curricula have already started to inform the professional discourse of social work, particularly in social work theory, research, and teaching. All four schools of social work in BiH (in Sarajevo, Tuzla, Banja Luka, and Mostar) now offer content on human rights within their social work curricula. Some courses are basic, obligatory modules at the master’s level that focus mostly on international human rights documents, and the content of these courses varies depending on the academic background of the instructor(s). Lacking human resources, schools of social work often recruit teachers from other academic specialties

72

S. Bašić

(especially the legal sciences), which unavoidably influence the way human rights knowledge is delivered. Social work schools also offer more specialized human rights modules, which center specific social issues (such as poverty, disability, or interpersonal violence) and/or specific populations (children and youth, women, disabled, and the elderly) and offer a detailed review and understanding of the relevant or applicable international and domestic human rights standards used to assess the living conditions of a service user, to identify context-driven human rights violations and coping strategies, and to develop methods for action. Ife (2001) spoke of two approaches to integrating human rights into social work curricula: inductive and deductive. Social work educators in BiH mainly employ a deductive approach to teaching human rights practice—starting from the most influential international conventions on human rights and then deriving practice from them (Ife, 2001, p. 133) to educate students about formal protection mechanisms at the national and international levels—but also to develop skills for defending human rights when they are violated. This means understanding the ways in which citizens can act individually or collectively to act if they have their rights violated. Students at social work schools in BiH are also exposed to a constantly growing number of textbooks and/or teaching materials linking human rights and social work (Gadžo-Šašić, 2020; Habul, 2007; Miković, 2004, 2009; Šadić, 2014) as well as to diverse extracurricular activities that promote a human rights approach to social work, such as a conference organized every year since 2012 on World Social Work Day. The conference was launched to encourage dialogue between academia and the professional social work community on the potential for a (self-)critical redefining of the professional paradigm to focus on well-being and prosperity for all people on the principles of human rights, citizenship, and social justice. Conceived as a forum for deliberative reflection on innovative social work approaches that promote, advocate, and achieve inclusive, democratic, just, and solidary societies, the conference has hosted respected regional scholars in social work and social sciences (including Darja Zaviršek from the Faculty of Social Work in Ljubljana, Kim Strom-Gottfried from the University of North Carolina, and Vjollca Krasniqi from the Faculty of Philosophy in Prishtina) (Fig. 4.3). In the transition period, an increasing number of students are broadening their educational opportunities beyond secondary education. From an individual or student perspective, higher education level is taken as a predictor of a higher employability, higher income, and higher security of education. From society’s perspective, rising levels of education are contributing to economic growth and prosperity (Breen, 2004; Canton, 2007). Therefore, education (level) is a key determinant of individual position on the labor market, given that the level of formal qualifications as indicator of knowledge, skills, and competencies determines the employability. Yet earning a university degree in social work (and other social sciences and humanities in particular) does not guarantee employment. In BiH society, the transition from university to employment is highly limited by the lack of economic opportunities and a productive employment framework in which everyone could eventually make use of their individual resources and capacities. Consequently, the number of (highly educated) youth is constantly rising, and with that, the youth unemployment

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

73

Fig. 4.3  Guest lecture of Dr. Darja Zaviršek on the occasion of the World Social Work Day in 2013, “Social Work in Between Structural Inequalities and Human Rights Principles”

rate is the highest in the region (Agency for Statistics of Bosnia and Herzegovina [BHAS], 2019; Bašić, 2015b). Unfortunately, their capacities are not meaningfully mobilized and integrated into social life, resulting in individual vulnerability and precarity as well as decline in social development. For graduated social work students, the context in which social work as a professional activity is practiced mainly within public-sector agencies worsens the employment prospects, because employability depends not on an objective demand for professionals but on wider politics and policies of employment in the public sector. Those policies are under huge political influence, and public-sector institutions and agencies often serve ruling political parties as a source of employment for their membership. Empirical evidence from a survey conducted in 2017, part of the research on human rights and social work students in BiH, supported by the IASSW, offers valuable insight into the effects of this shift toward a rights-based perspective in social work and the relevance of a human rights approach to social work students in BiH (see Tables 4.1 and 4.2). In total, 291 students from schools of social work in Sarajevo, Banja Luka, and Mostar participated in the research. The original scales (McPherson & Abell, 2012, 2020; McPherson et al., 2017) were translated into the Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian languages using the forward and back translation method (Tran, 2009) and linguistically adjusted (Cubillos Vega et al., 2018). Prior to conducting (main) research, the (translated) questionnaire was piloted among social work students at the School of Social Work in Sarajevo to verify whether meanings were clear and understandable to respondents. Because the issue of race addresses in the statement “The high rate of incarceration among black men in the United States is a human rights issue that is appropriate for social intervention” has no relevance in Bosnian context, it has been replaced by the statement “A large number of Roma people have no settled housing, which is a matter of human rights

74

S. Bašić

Table 4.1  Human rights in social work education Statements on human rights in Strongly Somewhat Educationa disagree Disagree disagree I have read the 13.2 12.8 9.1 UDHR My social work 4.1. 5.7 4.7 curriculum covered the UDHR My social work 4.1 5.7 10.1 education covered human rights violations in BiH My coursework 3.7 6.4 8.8 covered international human rights issues Social work was a 1.0 2.4 3.0 good way to learn about human rights I have read about 2.0 2.0 5.4 social and cultural rights I learn about 1.0 3.7 5.1 human rights in my work My friends and 6.8 9.8 8.4 family discuss human rights issues with me I am aware that the 2.7 3.4 4.7 UN has a role in monitoring international human rights I know that 2.0 1.0 4.4 association of social work respects the UDHR

Neither agree nor Somewhat Strongly disagree agree Agree agree 8.4 22.3 18.6 13.5 11.5

19.6

33.8

20.3

17.9

24.0

27.0

10.1

21.6

27.4

23.6

6.8

9.1

23.0

35.1

26.0

10.8

29.1

32.4

17.9

13.5

24.3

35.1

14.9

20.6

25.0

16.6

9.5

22.3

18.6

28.7

18.9

16.6

16.2

39.9

19.6

Items from the Human Rights Exposure in Social Work Scale-BiH version (Šadić et al. 2020)

a

and important for social workers,” given that Roma people constitute the largest and most disadvantaged (minority) group in BiH. This research showed that a sufficient amount of human rights content is presented to social work students, with 54% of respondents having read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR; United Nations, 1948) and nearly one quarter reporting that the Declaration was covered in their curriculum (see Table 4.1). The education of social work students who were surveyed also included domestic and international human rights violations or issues (61.1% and 57.8%, respectively),

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

75

and a significant four out of five respondents said they had read about social and cultural rights, with 84% responding that they consider social work a good way to learn about human rights. By all accounts, this new pedagogical approach has indeed contributed to raising human rights awareness among social work students, which improves their ability to identify human rights violations in their everyday lives. Asked to identify specific social conditions as human rights violations, participants identified a lack of access to medical care (88%), unjust wages (82%), domestic violence (81%), poverty (80%), and hunger (74%) at the highest rates (see Table 4.2). Moreover, this growing human rights awareness was on display in the attitude of respondents toward torture, with only 16% agreeing even somewhat that torture is acceptable under certain circumstances. In general, most respondents considered the experiences of social work clients through the lens of human rights (81.3%), though interestingly, fewer viewed the problems they address with their own clients as human rights violations (62.9%). Clearly, social work students understand the concept of human rights and possess solid knowledge about human rights documents and the social conditions and practices that constitute human rights violations. Still, the question arises as to whether social work practitioners are embracing human rights in ways that allow them to make connections between human rights and their daily professional practices, especially as social work students regularly report that there is a gap between the theory they are taught in school and the practice they observe in the field.

4.5 Translating a Human Rights Approach into Social Work Practice: From Needs to Rights and Back Interviews conducted with social work practitioners—ideas and quotations from which are included in this text—suggest that a sort of dualism is at work, with social work educators promoting human rights approaches, while practitioners adhere to a needs-based paradigm. Many social work practitioners in BiH simply do not endorse human rights as a point of reference for their practice; they view this human rights perspective as abstract and well intentioned but of little use, a form of political rhetoric without any real normative capacity or strength to influence professional practice. Contrary to respecting human rights as contained in international treaties and conventions, practitioners feel obliged to respect and implement legal regulations contained in domestic laws. And in that respect, the key criteria guiding and informing their practice and forming their point of view is the idea of (social) needs, not of rights per se (social worker, Sarajevo, interviewee). Some suggest that a human rights and human needs perspective cannot be reconciled. Of course, human rights arise from human needs, and if one is addressing human needs, then those needs surely fall within our universal understanding of human rights. Yet, it is obvious that many social work practitioners see themselves

Table 4.2  Knowledge of human rightsa Neither agree Statements on human rights Strongly Somewhat nor disagree Knowledge disagree Disagree disagree 0.7 3.0 3.0 18.6 Hunger is government’s failure to protect people’s human right to food 0.7 1.0 1.0 5.1 Lack of access to medical care is a human rights violation 1.0 2.0 15.2 Poverty is a violation 1.0 of human right to a decent standard of living 3.0 2.4 4.7 23.6 Unequal access to goods and services in society is a human rights issue 1.7 0.7 3.0 12.2 It is common for social work clients to experience violations of their human rights 2.0 0.3 1.7 19.8 Clients’ needs are often related to violations of one of their human rights 2.4 2.0 5.1 27.0 When I look at my clients, I see rights violations where others see failure or pathology 1.0 0.7 2.0 19.6 Clients generally need social services because human rights have been violated 2.0 3.4 3.0 27.7 The problems I address in my social work practice tend to be my clients’ human rights violations 2.4 1.7 2.0 10.5 A large number of Roma people have not settled housing issues, which is a matter of human rights and important for social workers

Somewhat Strongly agree Agree agree 18.9 29.1 26.0

11.5

29.1

47.6

17.9

32.4

29.7

17.9

31.1

12.2

23.6

36.1

21.6

24.0

36.5

15.2

25.7

26.7

10.5

26.0

35.5

14.5

26.0

28.7

7.4

20.9

41.2

20.3

(continued)

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

77

Table 4.2 (continued) Statements on human rights Knowledge Sometimes torture is necessary to protect national security Domestic violence is an area of social work practice that is motivated by concern for victims’ human rights Poverty is not a matter of human rights issue I believe that everyone has a right to just wages, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection

Neither agree Strongly Somewhat nor disagree disagree Disagree disagree 26.4 24.7 5.7 25.0

Somewhat Strongly agree Agree agree 9.8 2.7 3.4

0.7

2.4

2.4

9.8

17.2

38.9

25.3

22.6

28.0

10.5

20.6

9.1

4.7

3.0

1.0

0.7

1.4

13.2

20.9

32.1

29.1

Items from the Human Rights Engagement in Social Work Scale-BiH version (not previously published)

a

more as functionaries of the state—whose professional conduct is driven by external principles or parameters of efficiency, accountability, risk management, avoidance of omission, and the like—than as advocates for the human rights of their service users (social worker, Sarajevo, interviewee). To better understand how these external factors, including the legal system, shape professional self-understanding in the social work field, the subsections that follow examine this wider legal and organizational context by briefly outlining some examples of professional practice vis-à-vis specific human rights issues. First, note that, although the governing system in BiH is exceptionally fragmented, the administrative structure of the state consists of four highly independent levels of governance: two entities (Federation of BiH [FBiH] and Republika Srpska [RS]), ten cantons (in the FBiH), Brčko district (as a separate governance unit), and municipalities. As stated, the state has no responsibility in development and implementation of social welfare. The (legislative and institutional) competencies lie with the two entities, while further fragmentation of competencies occurs in the FBiH where social welfare is shared responsibility of the entity and ten cantons. In practice, this means that social workers act under laws on social protection (13 in total) that are similar across the country, based on the concept of social protection inherited from the socialist period. The social protection system is defined as a set of

78

S. Bašić

cause-consequence relationships between elements of social system resources and citizens who are in special need due to a variety of social problems and social risks. The responsibility for implementing social protection is divided between entities or cantons and local or municipal governments, but the latter take on most of the burden of establishing and operating centers for social work. Laws on social protection define three main types of intervention to citizens in need: financial benefits, benefits in-kind, and social services. These systemic interventions are, according to the law, mainly provided through rights gained, but this concept of rights constitutes a legal form specific to the social protection system, that is, as a right to social protection. This narrow definition of rights as needs-based, which is a legacy of socialist period, is clearly in tension with the concept of human rights as an all-­encompassing approach.

4.5.1 Professional Social Work Approaches to Poverty In contemporary Bosnian society, rising inequality and poverty are the most pressing of challenges; BiH rates are among the poorest countries in Europe. In 2015, according to official statistics, 16.9% of the population of BiH (more than half a million people) lived under the poverty line (BHAS, 2018). The number of people at risk of poverty and social exclusion is even higher, and if poverty is measured against EU standards using the so-called AROPE indicators—which assess income poverty, material deprivation, and work intensity—the poverty rate in BiH is an overwhelming 58%. In other words, over half the population is at risk (European Bank for Reconstruction and Development 2011). Indeed, persistent poverty itself produces strong trends toward social exclusion among affected groups, particularly children and youth, women, the elderly, people with disabilities, Roma, and internally displaced persons (UNDP, 2007). These levels and patterns of poverty in BiH can be attributed to the combined effects of war and destruction, a fragile and weak state, high rates of corruption, and numerous deficits in our economy, our institutions, and our democracy (Bašić, 2013b; Bićanić & Franičević, 2005). It is to be expected that the current pandemic will inevitably lead to a new cycle of impoverishment, especially given tens of thousands of job losses and the widespread practice of degrading and devaluing the rights of workers. Rising unemployment leads to the almost automatic creation of a “surplus” of people who are unemployed and have little chance of being included and integrated into production flows and the workforce, increasing the insecurity and risk among those who stay at work by abolishing and/or reducing basic labor rights, which itself creates new zones of vulnerability and leads to a significant deterioration in living standards. This has already been documented in a recent UNDP (2020) study on the social impacts of COVID-19, in which 48% of participants reported a worsening of their financial situation during the pandemic, 16% of whom said they borrowed money to meet basic needs (p. 20).

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

79

In referent legislation, the categories of social work service users are broadly defined and cover most of categories that are not targeted by other social transfer systems including children, persons with disabilities, the elderly, as well as families with children. Social protection programs entail basic elements such as social assistance (as a monetary benefit), social services, foster and institutional care, and family benefits. However, when it comes to the access to (social) rights within the current social protection system(s), which should at least in theory provide a set of monetary benefits and services that guarantee existential minimum to those in need, the system performs highly selectively. The availability of benefits and services is conditional upon very strict and means-tested qualifying criteria, with a wide discretionary power on the side of social workers. For example, right to social assistance is set far below poverty line, which targets those who are unable to work and without sufficient resources or other family members who are legally responsible to support them or who are unable to perform that role (Law on Social Protection, Protection of Families with Children and Protection of Civilian War Victims FBiH of 1999). The effects of this troubling policy are further exaggerated—particularly in FBiH—by systemic discrimination produced by inconsistent and differing criteria mandating the access to those rights and levels of benefits between the cantons. Bašić (2017) investigated the changes in family policy by analyzing referring policies and practice in FBiH, RS, and Brčko District in relation to monetary benefits, time allocation (maternity and parental leave), and other services for children. Bašić mapped exiting gaps at the level of availability, beneficiaries, general and specific conditions, and the level of benefits, which led the author to conclude that “transitional changes in family policy have brought back pre-socialist past marked by maternalistic familism” (p. 46). Instead of advocating against the vulnerability of the poor and these patterns of poverty (Nadkarani & Dhaske, 2012, p. 235), social workers are among those obliged to implement the very welfare policies that produce the systemic inequality affecting service users through exclusion from social benefits and discriminatory practices in public policy areas (employment, pensions, healthcare, social protection, etc.). This is reflected in the discrepancy between the attitudes of student respondents in our 2017 survey—who demonstrated a clear understanding of poverty as a human rights violation (along with lack of access to medical care, unjust wages, and domestic violence)—and the attitudes of practitioners, who may understand poverty to be the most profound driving force behind the social problems they encounter in their practice (substance abuse, intimate partner violence, child abuse and neglect, youth delinquency, etc.) but feel no sense of direct personal responsibility to address it because “politics, policy makers, and the economy should solve it” (social worker, Sarajevo, interviewee). From this point of view, social work has no role in the fight against poverty, and moreover, it is acceptable if the ways the institutional settings and organizational frameworks within which social workers operate disregard human rights—including the “right to social security and … the economic, social, and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality” (UDHR, Art. 22).

80

S. Bašić

Broadly speaking, though, a life of dignity requires a certain level of needs satisfaction: the protection from physical harm and a minimum of certain rights and freedoms essential to leading a self-respecting human existence. Looking at poverty as a violation of the (basic) human right to a dignified life may enable even practitioners who are tied to a needs-based approach to strengthen claims on resources and to practice empowerment that gives people in poverty a greater voice and visibility. Additionally, and equally importantly, this may help practitioners think about poverty from the perspective of those who are affected and facilitate their critical reflection on the ways in which the institutional settings they work in contribute to perpetuating abuse. This will give practitioners important tools to advocate for a moral or ethical reimagining of existing welfare programs.

4.5.2 Professional Social Work Approaches to Disability In March 2010, BiH ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and its Optional Protocols, the main principles of which are equality and nondiscrimination. Article 28 of the Convention stipulates that “State Parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to social protection and to the enjoyment of that right without discrimination on the basis of disability and shall take appropriate steps to safeguard and promote the realization of this right” (United Nations, 2006). Needless to say, social protection legislation in BiH has not yet been harmonized with international standards set forth by the CRPD: in their daily lives, people with disabilities face any number of discriminatory practices within the same system that is designed to assure their inclusion into wider Bosnian society. Notably, a main source of this institutionalized discrimination is in fact in the laws on social protection, which arbitrarily discriminate among beneficiaries based on the cause or source of their disability and divides them into three groups with different rights, benefits, and services: (1) disabled war veterans, (2) disabled civilian war victims, and (3) persons with disabilities (from illness, accident, or by birth). Exemplifying how this kind of categorization can be a basis for unequal treatment, particularly when benefits are constructed around the notion of status, the most protected category in BiH is the disabled war veteran (who receives the highest level of financial benefit, which is status-based and is not means-tested), and the least protected is the person with a congenital or acquired disability unrelated to war (who receives the lowest level of financial benefit, which is needs-based and means-tested). Current legislation has thus been the subject of fierce criticism by members of the academic (social work) community, human rights organizations, and associations of people with disabilities. Many have argued that the laws regulating social protection in BiH must be harmonized with the norms of the CRPD, for example, by extending the same rights and eligibility criteria to all persons with disabilities, without regard for the cause or source of their disability and/or their place of residence (Bašić, 2014; Gadžo-Šašić 2020; Habul, 2007; Organization for Security and

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

81

Co-operation in Europe [OSCE], 2012). The obligation of the state (and its institutions) to implement a range of community services for people with disabilities has also been emphasized by advocates, including the right to education for children from vulnerable groups (such as those with autism). So far, this advocacy has had little effect, as no serious attempts at meaningful reform have been initiated. This means that social work aimed at people with disabilities remains paradoxically grounded in discriminatory norms and practices, with almost inescapably negative impacts on outcomes for service users.

4.5.3 Professional Social Work Approaches to Addressing the Rights of Children and Women Along with people with disabilities, children and women traditionally constitute the most vulnerable populations in society. It is thus an essential goal of welfare policies to enhance the quality of life of children and women. In 2019, the centers of social work in BiH provided 664,944 treatment interventions, of which 201,153 were directed toward female beneficiaries and 126,324 toward children (BHAS, 2020); and there are numerous examples of human rights violations committed against children and women—in social protection, education, healthcare, employment, and more—even though BiH has signed all relevant conventions meant to safeguard these rights. For example, under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (United Nations, 1989), a state is obliged to guarantee a standard of living adequate for every child’s physical, mental, spiritual, moral, and social development (Article 27). While the responsibility for creating living conditions that will enable a child to flourish and develop lies primarily with their parents, (state) welfare policies—particularly investments in social and educational programs—also play a role. From socialism, BiH has inherited several programs designed to support families with children through three types of interventions, each intended to contribute to maintaining quality of life and compensating for child-rearing costs: financial (child allowances), maternity and parental leave, and services (preschool, childcare, and education). In practice, however, the social protection system is a major source of human rights violations involving children, such as through discrimination related to (access to) the right to child benefits. These benefits, which are administered by local social work centers, are selective instead of universal and are means-tested under highly restrictive regulations. In practical terms, the benefit received by families is generally insufficient to meet even the basic needs of a child, and in some administrative units (cantons), it is not even paid out regularly. The most devastating consequence of an ineffective system of child benefits is widespread poverty among families with children (Bašić, 2013b, 2017), and social workers must be accountable for implementing policies with this impact.

82

S. Bašić

The political and economic transition of BiH has had pronounced gendered aspects. The situation for women has deteriorated significantly in the postwar period, and gender inequalities have increased so sharply that authors of a 2007 UNDP report on social inclusion were induced to conclude that social conditions in BiH constituted a “historically reversed situation” marked by “the revival of patriarchal society embedded in war activities and explosions of radical nationalism” (UNDP, 2007, p. 23). The promotion and advocacy of social change geared toward gender equality and equal opportunities for men and women as a prerequisite for transition to a peaceful, inclusive, egalitarian society could be an important aspect of social work. The current position of women in countries throughout Southeast Europe is one born of deep contradictions—socialist legacies of women’s emancipation on one hand, and the structures and values of conservative patriarchy, nationalism, and war on the other. The power structures and social norms that exist in BiH today impact the lives and opportunities of both women and men in areas such as the labor market and the welfare system, but it is women who are disproportionately oppressed by these structures. It is difficult to rank the most pressing issues affecting women, but gender-based and domestic violence surely top the list, and available data from BiH shows that women and girls experience very high rates of domestic violence (Agencija za ravnopravnost spolova, 2013). In fact, nearly half (47.2%) of women surveyed in 2013 reported experiencing violence at some point since the age of 15. A more recent OSCE (2019, pp.  21–30) study on the well-being and security of women in BiH confirmed that violence against women remains widespread, with just under half of women (48%) once again responding that they have experienced some type of violence (including intimate partner violence, nonpartner violence, stalking, or sexual harassment), and 38% reporting that they have been the victim of domestic and/or intimate partner violence since the age of 15. Domestic violence crimes are regulated through laws at the entity level in BiH, but the state is also a signatory to the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Council of Europe, 2011) as of March 2013. So far, however, the state has failed to harmonize domestic legislation with the standards of the Convention to provide appropriate measures of prevention, protection, assistance, and compensation for women survivors of domestic violence. This means that huge gaps persist in access to and levels of protection for victims (and their children). When domestic violence laws in BiH were written, they envisioned that the protection of women survivors of domestic violence would develop as a coordinated multidisciplinary response or practice among institutions of law enforcement (police and prosecutors), social uplift (centers of social work), and health and welfare (women’s shelters). Under welfare sector reform, new legislative framework for service provision in both entities (FBiH and RS) was adopted, introducing the combined system of welfare (“welfare mix”), for example, including civil society (nongovernmental) and private-sector organization in the provision of welfare services (Habul, 2007). As the centers for social work lacked resources to tackle the issue of domestic violence and provide support for victims, specialized services

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

83

(medical assistance, crisis intervention, psychosocial rehabilitation, SOS helplines, etc.) developed within civil society sector. Currently, support to victims of family violence is provided by eight safehouses or shelters for women run by a women’s NGO. But a system of protection for women is simply nonexistent in some places (such as cantons where women victims of domestic violence are not legally entitled to social rights, and the provision of support is left to the discretion of local government) and is entirely ineffective in others. Even social work structures based on an intersectoral approach, interprofessional knowledge, and expertise (as is the reputation of referral mechanisms in urban centers such as Sarajevo, Banja Luka, and Tuzla) are practiced within a conservative values system, and though social work professionals are largely female, they often value “family unification/preservation” over support for women victims of violence (Grbić Pavlović, 2020; United Nations, 2013). Moreover, social workers frequently act as “gatekeepers” of services provided within the NGO sector to grant safety to victims of domestic violence (such as safehouses), which cannot offer support to victims without a referral from relevant authorities, in this case from the centers of social work (United Nations, 2013). This constitutes yet another area of professional practice in which the formal acknowledgment that domestic violence violates basic human rights—which state institutions are obliged to uphold and protect—has not bridged the considerable gap between best practice and accepted practice. Understandably, this has fueled a growing sense of dissatisfaction and distrust among the public and service users regarding the social work profession and social workers. This can be seen in the steady rise in complaints filed against social workers with the Human Rights Ombudsmen of BiH, from 89 in 2014 to 154 in 2018. These complaints mainly relate to the rights of children, economic and social rights, and the rights of people with disabilities (Institucija Ombudsmena za ljudska prava BiH, 2019, p. 8).

4.6 The Prospects for Rights-Based Social Work Practice This chapter has explored whether and in what ways a human rights discourse has influenced or shaped social work practice in contemporary Bosnian society, plagued as it is by prolonged political, economic, and social uncertainties. Traditionally, social work practice as an interdisciplinary means of support for vulnerable individuals and groups derived its self-understanding from a focus on needs satisfaction. But the transition to democracy has included an embrace of human rights as a normative order grounded in the protection of individual(s), in contrast to the collectivist ideologies of the past (both communist and nationalist). In that context, the opportunity has emerged to reposition and redefine social work in BiH as a human rights profession. Efforts have been made over recent decades to integrate human rights content into educational curricula, to ensure that social work students are prepared to analyze the issues and problems facing service users from a human rights perspective. The positive

84

S. Bašić

effects of this “pedagogical turn” are evident in social work students who report having a solid understanding of human right concepts, human rights law (conventions and other documents), and the ability to identify human rights violations. However, as Reichert (2003) has rightly warned, knowledge alone is not a sufficient tool with which to apply human rights in practice; social workers must also be skilled at translating human rights into the work of social work, which “requires an understanding of governmental agencies, clients, and social work concepts” (Reichert, 2003). In the case of BiH, if practitioners are to take a human rights perspective to social work seriously, they will have to acknowledge the ways the profession itself reflects oppressive (power) structures and explicitly and/or implicitly contributes to human rights violations and abuses. Given that welfare programs often legitimize the institutional discrimination that marginalizes citizens and service users, the social work profession is part of this unjust system, embedded into the political infrastructure. Instead of becoming active protagonists of social change based on their professional knowledge and experience working with vulnerable individual, groups, and communities, social workers in BiH have withdrawn into a bureaucratic and administrative practice model focused mainly on addressing individual-level consequences of social problems—such as disability, trauma and mental health, and child abuse and neglect. Yet, without confronting oppressive social systems that discriminate arbitrarily among service users, social work practice reflects the interests and values of political elites. Among practitioners, however, it is often unacknowledged that they are susceptible or even prone to acting in an unjust and discriminatory manner as agents for this system, in which they are responsible for implementing unjust and discriminatory welfare policies, laws, and procedures. Accordingly, we can turn the words of Florynce Kennedy (1970) toward the social work profession: “When a system of oppression has become institutionalized it is unnecessary for individuals to be oppressive.” Social work practitioners lament over the external limits to their full professional engagement—including the rising number of clients they are assigned and the associated workload, minimal human resources, and the deficient capacities of social work institutions that are understaffed, worsening working conditions, insufficient financial resources within the social protection system itself, the low political priority of this system, and more. And indeed, within the context of “shared trauma,” these professionals are affected not only by the risks and insecurities faced by citizens and service users (from precarious employment to low wages to anxiety over the future) but also by the professional risks (such as burnout) and personal risks (such as a rising number of physical attacks by service users, with severe or even deadly injuries). The examples of practice discussed in previous sections reveal how aspirations to move forward in the profession are obstructed by the social and political climate in BiH and, further, that bridging this gap will be extremely difficult. Nonetheless, the professional practice of social workers has an acute need for a new paradigm that integrates a human rights approach into the needs-based model. This could extend from the recognition that social work not only should assist individuals and groups (as was claimed during communism) but also should be committed to social change more broadly. Viewing the profession in this way links interpersonal practice with community work, policy

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

85

development, advocacy, and social action (macro perspectives) and highlights the urgency to address the contextual and environmental barriers that hinder the realization of human rights among service users. Unlike many service users, social workers are trained to think (and hopefully act) from a perspective of empowerment—of themselves and service users alike—with the objective that we stop seeing each other as passive victims of destiny and start seeing each other as political actors who can, through solidary and collective efforts, influence and change living conditions and push for the reorganization of social institutions so their practices align with the principles of human dignity. To achieve this, social work professionals must step out of their comfort zones, break path-­ dependent patterns of practice that focus on individuals, and (re-)engage with social reforms, policies, and community approaches (empowerment, advocacy, the involvement of service users, etc.). They must center political, economic, and social rights in the standards of conduct advocated by professional organizations and institutions, instead of relying on external loci of control that perpetuate fear, insecurity, and discrimination. In short, social workers must ensure that social work organizations and professional structures follow human rights principles. In this extraordinary time of anxiety and uncertainty, human rights are as vital and indispensable as ever; simply put, these rights offer a framework for ensuring that governments protect everyone in a society. By positioning human rights commitments at the core of social work, the profession can frame an alternative narrative that contributes to ensuring that (social) policy responses are guided by the (ethical) compass of human rights, representing an institutionalization of minimal (social) justice in the postpandemic era.

References Agencija za ravnopravnost spolova. (2013). Rasprostranjenost i karakteristke nasilja nad ženama u BiH. https://arsbih.gov.ba/project/rasprostranjenost-­i-­karakteristike-nasilja-nad-zenama-­ubosni-­i-­hercegovini/ Altermatt, U. (1997). Das Fanal von Sarajevo: Ethnonationalismus in Europa. Schoening. Balibar, E. (2011). Nasilje i civilnost. Wellekova predavanja 1996. Centar za medije i komunikacije & Multimedijalni institut (Original work published 2010). Bašić, S. (2009). On the pathways from projects to systematic change. Teorija in Praksa, 3, 217–366. Bašić, S. (2010). Socijalnozaštite aktivnosti i socijalni rad u Bosni i Hercegovini (1918–2006) [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Faculty of Political Sciences of the University of Sarajevo. Bašić, S. (2013a). Challenges of social development and social work profession in the post-conflict and transitional society: The experience of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Ljetopis socijalnog rada, 20(1), 117–143. Bašić, S. (2013b). Social inequalities, social polarization and poverty in BiH. Dialogue: Journal for Philosophy and Social Theory, 1–2, 62–84. Bašić, S. (2014). People with disabilities at the European semi-periphery. The case of Bosnia. Socialno delo, 3(5), 295–302. Bašić, S. (2015a). Educating for peace in the aftermath of genocide: Lessons (not) learnt from Bosnia. Social Dialogue Magazine, 10, 13–18.

86

S. Bašić

Bašić, S. (2015b). Obrazovanje, zapošljavanje i mobilnost mladih. In J. Žiga et al. (Eds.), Studija o mladima u Bosni i Herzegovini 2014. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. https://library.fes.de/pdf-­files/ bueros/sarajevo/11436.pdf. Bašić, S. (2017). Porodična politika u tranziciji: ka novom familijarizmu. Sarajevski žurnal za društvena pitanja, 1–2, 25–48. Baudrillard, J. (1996). Four no pity for Sarajevo: The West’s Serbinization: When the west stands in for the dead. In T. Cushmen & S. G. Meštrović (Eds.), This time we knew: Western responses to genocide in Bosnia (pp. 79–89). New York University Press. BHAS. (2018). Anketa o potrošnji domaćinstava 2015. https://bhas.gov.ba/data/Publikacije/Bilteni/ 2018/CIS_01_2015_Y1_0_HR.pdf BHAS. (2019). Anketa o radnoj snazi. https://bhas.gov.ba/data/Publikacije/Bilteni/2019/LAB_00_ 2019_TB_0_BS.pdf BHAS. (2020). Socijalna zaštita u BiH 2014–2019. https://bhas.gov.ba/data/Publikacije/Bilteni/ 2020/SOC_00_2019_TB_0_BS.pdf Bićanić, I., & Franičević, V. (2005). Izazovi stvarnoga i subjektivnoga siromaštva i porasta nejednakosti u ekonomijama jugoistične Europe u tranziciji. Finansijska teorija i praksa, 29(1), 13–36. Bologna Declaration. (1999). The Bologna Declaration of 19 June 1999. European Ministers of Education. http://ehea.info/Upload/document/ministerial_declarations/1999_Bologna_ Declaration_English_553028.pdf Breen, R. (2004). Social mobility in Europe. Oxford University Press. Canton, E. (2007). Social return to education: Macro—Evidence. De Economist, 155(4), 449–468. Cocco, E. (2017). Where is the European frontier? The Balkan migration crisis and its impact on relations between the EU and the Western Balkans. European View, 16, 293–302. Council of Europe. (2011). Convention on preventing and combatting violence against women and domestic violence. https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-­list/-­/conventions/rms/ 090000168008482e?module=treaty-­detail&treatynum=210 Cubillos Vega, C., Ferran Aranaz, M., & McPherson, J. (2018). Bringing human rights to social work: Validating cultural appropriate rights-based practice in Spain. International Social Work, 62(5), 1343–1357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872818777799 Ćurak, N. (2004). Dejtonski nacionalizam. Buybook. Čusto, A. (2019). Urbanizacija na kraju grada—“Obećao si da ćemo živjeti u neboderu.” In Historijski muzej Bosne i Hercegovine (Ed.), Fakti i artefakti (pp.  12–34). Zbornih radova Historijskog muzeja BiH Sarajevo. Dervišbegović, M. (1971). Obrazovanje socijalnih radnika. In M.  Papo, M.  Dervišbegović, & V.  Trninić (Eds.), Obrazovanje socijalnih radnika u Socijalističkoj Republici Bosni i Hercegovini (pp. 10–25). Viša škola za socijalne radnike. Dervišbegović, M. (1979). Dostignuti nivo razvijenosti metoda socijalnoga rada u našem samoupravno orijentisanom socijalnom radu, s posebnim osvrtom na centre za socijalni rad. Viša škola za socijalne radnike. Dervišbegović, M. (1998). Socijalni rad—teorija i praksa (drugo i dopunjeno izdanje). Univerzitetska knjiga. Dimitrijević, V. (2002). The culture of human rights in Yugoslavia. In M. Todorović (Ed.), Culture of human rights (pp. 9–13). Human Rights Center. Erath, P. (2010). Social work in Europe—European social work. In P. Erath & B. Littlechild (Eds.), Social work across Europe (pp. 1–21). Ostrava University Press. https://periodika.osu.cz/eris/ dok/2010-­02/article-­social_work_in_eu.pdf European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. (2011). Life in transition after the crisis. https://www.ebrd.com/news/publications/special-­reports/life-­in-­transition-­survey-­ii.html European Stability Initiative. (2014). Protests and Illusions—How Bosnia and Herzegovina lost a decade. https://www.esiweb.org/publications/protests-­and-­illusions-­how-­bosnia-and-herzegovina-­ lost-­decade Eurostat. (2019). Living conditions in Europe—Poverty and social exclusion. https://ec.europa. eu/eurostat/statistics-­explained/index.php?title=Living_conditions_in_Europe_-­_poverty_ and_social_exclusion

4  Social Work’s Rights-Based Paradigm in Bosnia and Herzegovina

87

Fisher, M. (Ed.). (2006). Peacebuilding and civil society in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Ten years after Dayton. Lit Verlag. Fočo, S. (2019). Rasturena država. Filozofski fakultet Univerziteta u Sarajevu. Gadžo-Šašić, S. (2020). Socijalni rad s osobama s invaliditetom. Fakultet političkih nauka Univerziteta u Sarajevu. Grbić Pavlović, N. (2020). Nasilje u porodici u doba pandemije. https://library.fes.de/pdf-­files/ bueros/sarajevo/16867.pdf Habul, U. (2007). Socijalna zaštita u BiH—Tranzicija, zakonodavstvo, praksa. Fakultet političkih nauka Univerziteta u Sarajevu. Horvat, S., & Štiks, I. (Eds.). (2015). Welcome to the desert of post-socialism: Radical politics after Yugoslavia. Verso Press. Ife, J. (2001). Human rights and social work: Towards rights-based practice. Cambridge University Press. Institucija Ombudsmena za ljudska prava BiH. (2019). Specijalni izvještaj o stanju i problemima s kojima se susreću centri/službi za socijalni rad u BiH. https://www.ombudsmen.gov.ba/documents/obmudsmen_doc2019112015101009eng.pdf Kennedy, F. (1970). Sisterhood is powerful: An anthology of writings from the women’s liberation movement. Random House. Kolarič, Z. (2009). Their sector organization in the changing welfare systems of central and eastern European countries. Teorija in Praksa, 3, 221–223. Kornai, J. (1998). Reforma socijalnog sektora u postsocijalističkim zemljama: normativni pristup. In S. Zrinščak (Ed.), Globalizacija i socijalna država (pp. 229–265). Studijski centar socijalnoga rada Pravnog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. Lasić, M. (2015). Prokletstvo kulture selektivnog sjećanja. Friedrich Ebert Foundation. http:// library.fes.de/pdf-­files/bueros/sarajevo/11336.pdf Lisbon Declaration. (2007). Europe’s University beyond 2010: Diversity with a common purpose. European University Association. https://eua.eu/downloads/publications/lisbon%20declaration%20%20europes%20universities%20beyond%202010%20diversity%20with%20a%20 common%20purpose%20en%20fr%20de%20es%20it.pdf. Marshall, T. H. (1964). Class, citizenship, and social development. Doubleday. McPherson, J., & Abell, N. (2012). Human rights engagement and exposure in social work: New scales to challenge social work education. Research on Social Work Practice, 22, 704–713. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731512454196 McPherson, J., & Abell, N. (2020). Measuring rights-based practice: Introducing the human rights methods in social work scales. British Journal of Social Work, 50, 222–242. https://doi. org/10.1093/bjsw/bcz132 McPherson, J., Siebert, C.  F., & Siebert, D.  C. (2017). Measuring rights-based perspectives: A validation of the human rights lens in social work scale. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 8(2), 233–257. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/692017 Miković, M. (2004). Maloljetnička delinkvencija i socijalni rad. Magistrat. Miković, M. (2005). Historija socijalnoga rada i obrazovanja socijalnih radnika u BiH.  In A.  Gavrilović (Ed.), Održivi razvoja i socijalni rad—Studija slučaja regionalne mreže na Balkanu (pp. 91–101). Filozofski fakultet Univerziteta u Banja Luci. Miković, M. (2009). Osnove socijalne politike. Fakultet političkih nauka Univerziteta u Sarajevu. Mink, A. (2008). Novi srednji vijek. Naklada Alfa. Mladenovski, M. (Ed.). (2007). Obični ljudi u neobičnoj zemlji: svakodnevni život u Bosni i Hercegovini, Hrvatskoj i Srbiji, 1945–1990: Jugoslavija između istoka i zapada. Udruženje za društvenu istoriju EUROCLIO. Mujkić, A. (2007). Mi, građani ethnopolisa. Šahinpašić. Nadkarani, V., & Dhaske, G. (2012). Poverty and human needs. In L. M. Healy & R. Link (Eds.), Handbook of international social work: Human rights, development, and the global profession (pp. 232–236). Oxford University Press.

88

S. Bašić

OSCE. (2012). Pravo na socijalnu skrb u BiH—Pitanja primjerenosti i jednakosti. https://www. osce.org/hr/bih/107170 OSCE. (2019). Dobrobit i blagostanje žena u BiH. https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/f/7/ 439724_0.pdf Reichert, E. (2003). Social work and human rights: A foundation for policy and practice. Columbia University Press. Šadić, S. (2014). Ljudska prava i socijalni rad. Fakultet političkih nauka Univerziteta u Sarajevu. Šadić, S., McPherson, J., Villareal-Otarola, T., & Bašić, S. (2020). Rights-based social work in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Validating tools for education and practice. International Social Work, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872820912310. Said, E. (1999). Orijentalizam. Svjetlost. Šalaj, B. (2009). Socijalno povjerenje u BiH. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. https://library.fes.de/pdf-­ files/bueros/sarajevo/06159.pdf Sejfija, I. (2006). From the “civil sector” to civil society? Progress and prospects. In M. Fischer (Ed.), Peace-building and civil society in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Ten years after Dayton (pp. 125–140). Lit Verlag. Stubbs, P. (2001). Social sector? Or the devaluation of social policy? Regulating welfare regimes in contemporary Bosnia-Herzegovina. In Ž. Papić (Ed.), International support policies to Southeast Europe countries—Lessons (not) learnt in Bosnia-Herzegovina (pp. 123–139). Mueller. Todorova, M. (2015). Imaginarni Balkan (Updated ed.). Naklada Ljevak. Tran, T. V. (2009). Developing cross-cultural measurement (pocket guide to social work research methods). Oxford University Press. UNDP. (2007). National human development report 2007: Social inclusion in Bosnia and Herzegovina. https://www.ba.undp.org/content/bosnia_and_herzegovina/en/home/library/nhdr/nhdr-­ 2007.html UNDP. (2009). The ties that bind. Social capital in BiH (National Human Development Report). http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/bosnia_nhdr_2009_summary_en.pdf UNDP. (2020). Social impact of Covid-19 in BiH: Household survey. https://www.ba.undp.org/ content/bosnia_and_herzegovina/en/home/library/publications/SocialImpactAssessment.html United Nations. (1948). Universal declaration of human rights. https://www.un.org/en/about-­us/ universal-­declaration-­of-­human-­rights United Nations. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx United Nations. (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. https://www.un.org/ development/desa/disabilities/convention-­on-­the-­rights-­of-­persons-­with-­disabilities.html United Nations. (2013). Report of the special rapporteur on violence against women, its causes, and consequences. Addendum: Mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina. https://www.refworld.org/ docid/51b86ce44.html Veremis, T. (2014). The modern Balkans: A concise guide to nationalism and politics, the rise and decline of the nation state. London School of Economics and Political Sciences. Zaviršek, D. (2005). Razvoj edukacije za socijalni rad u Sloveniji tokom perioda 1940–1960. In S. Hessle & D. Zaviršek (Eds.), Održivi razvoj i socijalni rad-Studija slučaja regionalne mreže na Balkanu (pp. 55–73). Filozofski fakultet Univerziteta u Banja Luci. Zaviršek, D. (2009). The political construction of social work history in socialism. https://www. indosow.net Zaviršek, D., Zorn, J., Rihter, Lj., & S. Žnidares Demšar. (Eds). (2007). Ethnicity in eastern Europe: A challenge for social work education. Fakultet za Socialno Delo. Žižek, S. (1999). The spectre of Balkan. Journal of the International Institute, 6(2) https://quod.lib. umich.edu/j/jii/4750978.0006.202/%2D%2Dspectre-­of-­balkan?rgn=main;view=fulltext

Chapter 5

Human Rights and Social Work in Pandemic Times in Kosovo Vjollca Krasniqi

Fig. 5.1  Kosovo in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe. (Map Credit: Kat Farlowe) V. Krasniqi (*) Faculty of Philosophy, Department of Social Work, University of Prishtina, Prishtina, Kosovo e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 V. Krasniqi, J. McPherson (eds.), Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11728-2_5

89

90

V. Krasniqi

5.1 Introduction Within the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Kosovo (like Vojvodina) was a self-governing autonomous province, though without all the rights of the Yugoslav republics: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, Serbia, Slovenia, and Macedonia. Then, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Serbian leader Slobodan Milošević used Kosovo’s extensive autonomy to fuel ethnic nationalism in Serbia, making Kosovo the enemy of his mythical image of a Serbian nation that should include Kosovo within its borders. Milošević’s ethnic nationalist policies led to wars in the 1990s in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia, and Kosovo (Krasniqi et  al., 2020, p. 465). Following the dissolution of Yugoslavia in 1991, Milošević’s regime unilaterally suspended the autonomy of Kosovo, which opened the door to political repression and myriad human rights violations against the Kosovar Albanians, who constituted the majority of the province’s population. Initially, Kosovar Albanians responded with peaceful resistance from 1991 to 1998 and by self-organizing a parallel system of governance, education, health, and welfare (Clark, 2000). Nonviolent resistance was challenged in 1996 by the rise of the Kosovo Liberation Army, who entered into guerilla fighting against Serbian security forces, resulting in severe reprisals. Increasing violence prompted NATO military intervention—an aerial bombing campaign lasting 78 days—from March to June 1999. NATO intervention ended Serbian rule in Kosovo, but Kosovo did not yet gain independence. Instead, it became a protectorate, administered by the United Nations and other international institutions, including the European Union (EU), the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and NATO from 1999 to 2008. Kosovo declared independence on February 17, 2008. To date, 117 states have recognized Kosovo as an independent state, while Serbia, supported by Russia, continues to oppose Kosovo’s independence. Kosovo has ratified all the major international human rights treaties, thereby asserting its intention to protect civil, political, social, economic, and cultural rights, as well as the rights of women, children, people with disabilities, minorities, and other marginalized and/or vulnerable groups. Since independence, human rights norms and standards have anchored Kosovo’s governance and public policy across political, economic, social, and cultural domains, and civil society. In Kosovo, as part of postwar reconstruction and state building, human rights principles and standards have permeated political discourse, legal reform, social policy, institutional practices, and civil society initiatives. At the same time, human rights have become an integral part of the social work discipline and practice, which reflects this broader frame of the institution building and public discourses in which rights-based approaches have assumed the center stage. Like the nation itself, social work in Kosovo is in flux and developing. Unlike in other post-Yugoslav states, social work practice in Kosovo evolved without the benefit of a formal program of education until 2012, when a bachelor’s study program in social work was introduced at the University of Prishtina. Still, social work has emerged as a fully fledged profession responding to complex problems including poverty, inequality, and social exclusion.

5  Human Rights and Social Work in Pandemic Times in Kosovo

91

This chapter discusses the relationship between human rights and social work in Kosovo. It pays particular attention to the dynamics of social work practice and education in relation to human rights and explores how rights-based approaches are shaping social work professional identity. The analysis further examines the role of the COVID-19 pandemic in challenging human rights, triggering a crisis of political legitimacy and governance, and deepening social inequalities. Social work’s responses to the pandemic and to its impact on the most vulnerable citizens and social groups will be critically explored. The COVID-19 pandemic has accentuated the need for rightsbased approaches in social work practice and education, and this chapter will show how a greater integration between social work and human rights can help address the limitations of rights and insecurities of the present time as well as provide a path forward for a postpandemic Kosovo. This chapter is organized into four main sections. Section 5.2 begins with an overview of the institutional and legal frame on human rights. It also discusses the human rights challenges and opportunities in relation to the most vulnerable persons and social groups, and for institutional accountability to safeguard and uphold the rights of the Kosovo citizens in general and marginalized social groups, in particular. Section 5.3 examines social work history and discusses how professional education in social work is helping create a coherent professional social work identity. Here the emphasis is on the relationship between human rights and social work practice and the integration of human rights into social work education. Section 5.4 discusses the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the Kosovo government’s policy responses to safeguard the human rights of individuals and communities affected the most by the pandemic crises. Here, the analysis looks at the protests in Kosovo during the COVID-19 lockdown and the crises of the political legitimacy that combined to create an atmosphere of uncertainty but also opened the potential for greater individual political agency. Section 5.5. explores social work responses to protect the human rights of those most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and how this all impacted social work education. In conclusion, the chapter offers strategies for social work to respond to the limitations of human rights and inequality for a postpandemic Kosovo.

5.2 The Context of Human Rights: Institutional and Legal Framework As moral and legal norms, human rights grant freedoms and entitlements for all human beings, and human dignity shapes the relationship between the individual and the state. The state is therefore the chief guarantor of human rights. Even before independence, human rights were becoming prominent in the protectorate’s legislation, public policy, and institutional practices. The Constitution of Kosovo of 2008 foregrounds human rights, asserting that human dignity is inviolable and is the basis of all human rights and fundamental freedoms (Kosovo Assembly, 2008a, Article 23). Human rights and fundamental freedoms are guaranteed by including

92

V. Krasniqi

adherence to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations, 1948) along with other international conventions within the Constitution itself (Kosovo Assembly, 2008a, Article 22). Kosovo’s state-building project is premised on civic terms and citizenship rights. The Constitution defines “Kosovo as a multi-ethnic society consisting of Albanian and other communities” (Kosovo Assembly, 2008a, Article 3). It emphasizes minority rights (Articles 57–63) and ethnic reconciliation (Article 58). Moreover, human rights play an important role in the “Europeanization” discourse. Europeanization is a process requiring institutional change as a condition for EU membership (Radaelli, 2003). Though the Constitution embraces European values and political norms, Kosovo’s political relationship to Europe remains tenuous, and it is unclear currently when—and even if—Kosovo will be welcomed into the EU. Still, Kosovo continues to do all that would be required of a newcomer state to the EU, including implementing an acquis communautaire—which includes human rights. The European Convention on Human Rights is applicable in the Constitution of Kosovo, hence part of the domestic legal system (Article 22.2), and in September 2020, the Kosovar Assembly adopted the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, better known as “the Istanbul Convention” (Council of Europe, 2011). Aiming to further ensure the full respect of human rights as part of the Europeanization agenda, Kosovo adopted the laws on the ombudsperson (Kosovo Assembly, 2015a), gender equality (Kosovo Assembly, 2015b), and antidiscrimination (Kosovo Assembly, 2015c). The independent ombudsperson institution is vested with the power to promote, monitor, and support equal treatment without discrimination (Kosovo Assembly, 2015a, Article 1.2), and it has a mandate to investigate alleged human rights violations, based on any suspicion of a violation (ex officio investigation). In addition, the ombudsperson is charged with monitoring laws and policies to ensure compliance with international human rights standards (Kosovo Assembly, 2015a, Article 16.4).1 Moreover, since the declaration of independence in 2008, several strategic documents and action plans on human rights at the national level have addressed education and public awareness on human rights, enhancement of institutional measures for protection of human rights, and enforcement of human rights in the judiciary (Office of the Prime Minister, 2008). In addition, there are three key state institutional mechanisms mandated to oversee and address human rights. They include the Committee on Human Rights, Gender Equality, Missing Persons and Petitions, which is a permanent committee of the Assembly of Kosovo with the power to draft laws and monitor the implementation of existing laws on human rights. The Office of Good Governance, Human Rights, Equal Opportunities and Non-Discrimination

 In 2019, the ombudsperson received 2014 complaints on human rights violations. Out of those, 943 have been taken up for investigation, and 54 cases were opened ex officio (European Commission, 2020a, pp. 28–29). In 2020, the number of complaints declined due to the COVID-19 pandemic to 1419, of which 720 have been opened for investigation and 43 cases were opened ex officio (European Commission, 2021a, p. 29). 1

5  Human Rights and Social Work in Pandemic Times in Kosovo

93

has the responsibility to advise on policymaking and the implementation of human rights laws. In addition, the Inter-Ministerial Coordinating Group on Human Rights is as a high-level political mechanism with a mission to monitor the status and implementation of human rights policies. In sum, since it achieved independence in 2008, Kosovo has worked hard to adopt and implement the full range of human rights treaties, laws, and policies.

5.2.1 Human Rights Challenges in Kosovo The promotion of liberal values, human rights, and the discourse of multiethnicity can be seen as the backbone of the state building in Kosovo. However, despite being enshrined in the Constitution and the wider national legal framework, access to human rights in Kosovo is clearly challenged by multiple forms of inequality and discrimination (e.g., gender, economic, ethnic, and age), as well as weak national institutions. Citizens—and social workers—must remain vigilant to ensure that human rights are de facto implemented in Kosovo. In Kosovo, political rights have been given primary attention, but as Marx argued long ago, attention to civil and political rights easily ignores the material constraints on freedom and rights posed by economic inequality and deprivation (Marx, 1844/1978). Marx’s observations resonate with the current context in Kosovo as the complexities of human rights today are entangled with larger structural issues such as poverty, migration, ethnic relations, and social exclusion. Kosovo has the youngest population in Europe, with 55% of its citizens under the age of 30.7 years. It is a lower-middleincome country and the poorest in Europe, with a per capita gross domestic product (GDP) of around €2700 (Multidimensional Poverty Analysis Report 2017, 2017, p. 3). Unemployment is widespread, most pronounced among women with 31.4% compared to men at 25.7%. Youth unemployment is 54.1% (Kosovo Agency of Statistics, 2020, p. 12). The public sector accounts for around 45% of all formal jobs in Kosovo (p. 34) and offers job security but medium-range salaries. The net salaries of most employees in the public sector range from €400 to €500 per month (p. 26). The vast majority of social workers are public sector employees. These data speak to the structural challenges of human rights more broadly and social and economic rights in particular. The human rights issues are manifold. They relate to freedom of expression and opinion; the right to information; labor rights, particularly for women and young people; gender inequality; discrimination of the LGBTI+ community; and “the right to truth” for families of the missing persons in the 1998–1999 war in Kosovo (Civil Society Report on Human Rights in 2019 in Kosovo, 2020).2 The most vulnerable groups—including children, women, the elderly, people with disabilities, LGBTI+ groups and persons, ethnic minorities,

 By the end of the Kosovo war in June 1999, 4400 to 4500 persons were estimated to be missing. More than 1600 remain unaccounted for, and the families are still waiting for answers about the fate and whereabouts of their loved ones (https://www.icrc.org/en/document/23-years-1630-peoplestill-missing-kosovo). 2

94

V. Krasniqi

asylum seekers and refugees, internally displaced persons, and prisoners—all need special human rights protections (Equal Rights for All Coalition, 2016, p. 19). Serbia’s resistance to Kosovo statehood within the international community means that Kosovo exists in a liminal space of contested sovereignty. Furthermore, Serbia’s maintenance of parallel structures within Kosovo (e.g., education, healthcare, social services, and local governance) further prevents the full integration of the Serbian minority within the Kosovo state, limiting the Kosovar Serb community’s full enjoyment of rights. Moreover, the challenges to human rights relate to weak implementation of human rights legislation, weak oversight, and lack of coordination (European Commission, 2020a, p. 6). The state mechanisms such as the Office of Good Governance in the Prime Minister’s Office lack human, financial, and administrative resources to fulfill its mandate, and the Inter-Ministerial Coordination Group for Human Rights lacks a set course of action and planning (European Commission, 2020a, pp. 28–29). These challenges require political commitment and leadership to ensure that human rights enjoy greater prominence in public policy and are enacted across institutions and civil society in Kosovo.

5.3 History and Dynamics of the Social Work Profession in Kosovo When looking at the history of social work and the current state of the social work profession in Kosovo, it is instructive to follow Payne (2006) who has argued that “the only valid approach to understand social work is to examine its social construction” (p. 21), meaning that the political roots of the profession must be taken into consideration. As Payne argued, “when states have limited economic resources for the social provision and when there is lack of assumption on states’ responsibility for social provision, social work is not prominent” (Payne, 2014, p. 11). The profession of social work in Kosovo finds itself in just such a country, with limited resources as well as limited state responsibility; as Payne suggested, the profession is not prominent. The origins of social work in Kosovo are rooted in the Yugoslav state system of social rights and helping people in need. The institutional forms that social work took and the ideas and values it embraced during the Yugoslav era were shaped by the socialist focus on the working class (Zaviršek, 2008). The socialist social policy in Yugoslavia, Paul Stubbs has argued, was “built on a Bismarckian-type insurance-­based system accompanied with literacy campaigns, free health and education for all; a basic safety net of social protection; social housing; and gender equality even though with no significant changes on women’s double burden of paid work and work at home” (Stubbs, 2019, p. 36). During socialism, Centers for Social Work were the principal institutions where social policy was translated into practice to address the social rights and needs of vulnerable citizens. This was the case in Kosovo during socialism, too. Following

5  Human Rights and Social Work in Pandemic Times in Kosovo

95

the dissolution of Yugoslavia in 1991 when Milošević suspended the autonomy of Kosovo, Kosovar Albanian social workers were expelled from their positions in government Centers for Social Work, leaving the profession without a presence until 1999 (Clark, 2000). However, in Kosovo today, social policy has experienced a rupture with its socialist legacy. Under the administration of the United Nations (UN) protectorate after the 1998–1999 war, social policy was heavily influenced by major international organizations, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, with their distinctly capitalist monetary views. In postwar and postindependence Kosovo, the state is attempting to address the needs of individuals and groups most affected by political shifts, economic adjustments, and the human rights violations and violence during the 1998–1999 war. Today, social policy provides basic social security guarantees financed through taxation, including social assistance and social care services for families in poverty, a universal basic pension for persons above 65 years of age, universal primary healthcare, a pension for people living with disabilities, and benefits for persons with war-related disabilities and for immediate survivors of those who died during the 1998–1999 war. Government-sponsored Centers for Social Work are Kosovo’s major social service providers, and they provide coverage across the whole territory of Kosovo. Due to the recent decentralization of the social service sector, other private, licensed social service providers also provide some services. Decentralization of welfare results in greater control at the local government and community levels, marking a shift from a centralized system to one of more complex and multilevel coordination. Decentralization and pluralization of the welfare system are complementary processes (Svetilik, 1993, pp. 43–44). In fact, decentralization of social provisions has proven to be a challenge not only in its degree of decentralization but also as to who is ultimately responsible for the provision, methods, and quality of social services. Despite the challenges, decentralization has sometimes facilitated the improvement in social care services as the management of these services has come closer to local communities. Social work agencies have thus evolved into polyvalent and hybrid organizations that include local, national, and transnational actors (Fig. 5.2). In Kosovo, there are 38 Centers for Social Work located in each of its 38 municipalities, plus 22 nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) licensed to offer social services. The NGOs tend to focus on gender equality and women’s rights; minority rights, especially the rights of Roma, Ashkali, and Egyptian communities;3 rights of the LGBTI+ communities; migrant and returnee rights; child welfare; poverty and unemployment; and disability. Centers for Social Work are the key public institutions mandated to provide social and family services, including counseling, consultation on healthcare and social protection, and/or referral services. Currently, however, these centers serve mainly as providers of administrative support for  The six main ethnic groups living in Kosovo are Albanians, comprising 92% of the population; 5.3% are Serbs; and 2.7% are Bosniak, Gorani, Turkish, Roma, Ashkali, and Egyptian minorities. The Ashkali and Egyptians are Albanian-speaking ethnic minorities, and Roma are a Serbianspeaking ethnic minority. 3

96

V. Krasniqi

Fig. 5.2  Center for Social Work in Prishtina

people applying for mandated forms of social assistance, including compensation for children living with disabilities and payments for foster families. It is ironic that the centers often play no role in providing social services. Centers for Social Work face manifold limitations related to budget, finances, human resources, infrastructure, and cooperation with community-based groups. These limitations hamper the ability of government-staffed Centers for Social Work to respond to crisis situations, and these limitations have been clearly visible during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Kosovo, NGOs are more flexible and have been able to shift their services in times of crisis; they are licensed to offer social services that are victimcentered, such as rehabilitation and reintegration services to persons and communities. The weakness of the NGO sector as a provider of social services is its dependence on (often international) donors for funding. Though the Kosovo government provides some funding to NGOs, the lack of systematic and sustainable funding leaves this sector underfunded and financially unstable (European Commission, 2020b, pp. 5–6). This instability impacts the communities they serve as well as those they are unable to reach.

5  Human Rights and Social Work in Pandemic Times in Kosovo

97

5.3.1 Human Rights and Social Work: Evolving Professional Identity of Social Worker in Kosovo The human rights perspective is indispensable for exploring the causes and consequences of inequalities and addressing them. Human rights practice in social work requires social workers to see individuals and communities through a human rights lens, employ methods that promote human rights, and set rights-based goals (McPherson, 2015). Ideally, this framework enables social workers to understand their work in the context of national and international human rights standards while doing their daily work to improve the living conditions of vulnerable groups and persons in Kosovo. Still, social work is located at the intersection of the individual and the society and is therefore dependent on the state. In Kosovo, social workers must achieve their goals in an environment of limited resources and increasing needs. The identity of social work in Kosovo is in flux, a work in progress. Social workers in Kosovo stand between multiple old and new paradigms in their everyday practice. The first stemming from the legacy of socialist state approaches to welfare; then, the neoliberal restructuring of the economy under the auspices of the international community; and finally, the new paradigm being shaped by the liberal rationale of postwar reconstruction and institution building. Kosovo social work is playing a role in the transition to the new paradigm, partly through its embrace of human rights. In Kosovo, social workers have adopted rights-based approaches and integrated human rights into their Code of Ethics, for example, which requires social workers to prevent and address discrimination in social work practice, social policy, and employment (Kosovo Government, 2009, Article 3.06.c). While social workers seek to define their work or profession in relation to universal values of human rights, the research indicates that there is a need for dialogue to forge a closer relationship between social work and human rights in everyday practice in Kosovo. In this vein, Krasniqi et  al. (2021) have explored the use of rights-­based methods (McPherson & Abell, 2020) among Kosovo social workers. In their survey of 100 practicing social workers at government Centers for Social Work, Krasniqi et al. (2021) found that social workers were subscribing to human rights–based methods, though they were more likely to use individually focused methods—including accountability, strengths perspective, antidiscrimination, and participation—rather than community-based or political methods, such as capacity building, micro and macro integration, collaboration, and activism. Based on these results, they argued for further training to support rights-based social work practice, especially the importance of using both micro and macro methods to advance human rights, promote social work ethics, and empower social workers as agents of transformative change and social justice in Kosovo (Krasniqi et al., 2021). Training must include a solid foundation in the rights-based principles of human dignity, nondiscrimination, participation, transparency, and accountability, which can empower social work professionals to embrace more ethical innovations in practice and policy (Mapp et al., 2019).

98

V. Krasniqi

Social work is of paramount importance for human rights as a precondition for a cohesive society in Kosovo. Integration of human rights into social work enables valuing both the individual and the community and enhancing their well-being through rights-based social provisions. No doubt, there is a need for dialogue, education, and promotion of human rights approaches and models in social work practice in Kosovo, as Kosovar social workers continue to readapt and recreate their profession concomitant with human rights principles. An important step toward professional development has been the adoption of the law on regulated professions that includes social work among the regulated professions. The law stipulates that, upon graduation, students should take 1 year of practice along with a licensing exam (Kosovo Assembly, 2016).

5.3.2 Human Rights and Social Work Education Integration of human rights into social work education began in earnest in 1994 with the beginning of the UN Decade for Human Rights Education and with the publication that same year of a manual to guide social work educators by the UN Centre for Human Rights (Steen, 2021; UN Centre for Human Rights, 1994). Since then, many study programs across the world have adopted a human rights lens in social work curriculum development. The history of social work education in Kosovo is rather brief, as the first bachelor study program commenced in 2012 at the University of Prishtina, and it is currently the only program offered in Kosovo. During socialism, the first generation of Kosovar social workers studied in universities in Zagreb and Belgrade; after the breakup of Yugoslavia in 1991, Kosovars lost access to professional training until 2012. Traditionally, professional social workers in Kosovo with degrees in social work constituted a small group within the profession, as most social workers obtained degrees in allied fields like law, psychology, sociology, and pedagogy. The topography of social work practice is changing as new social work graduates from the University of Prishtina join the profession (Krasniqi, 2018). The structure of the undergraduate social work program reflects the Europe-wide process of higher education reform. The Bologna Declaration of 1999 seeks to reform and standardize higher education across the European states that signed the Declaration. The Bologna Declaration redefines the role of the universities in light of EU integration and creates a common system of European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) that enables student mobility between countries at all levels of higher education (European Commission, 2015). The undergraduate social work program at the University of Prishtina is a 3-year generalist social work program that requires 15 weeks of field education. The curriculum is built at the nexus of theoretical and practical approaches to social work. Specifically, the program responds to increased local demands for more effective social services as well as the desire to develop institutions of knowledge and research that can respond skillfully to new economic, political, and social justice challenges in Kosovo. Human rights, gender, and diversity, as well as social inclusion, have been

5  Human Rights and Social Work in Pandemic Times in Kosovo

99

made integral parts of the social work curriculum (Krasniqi, 2018, p. 7). Not only are human rights integrated throughout the curriculum, but the program also requires a mandatory stand-alone course on human rights. The curriculum aims to develop critical thinking skills, nurture skills for professional social work practice, enhance capacities for reflective practice, and inculcate respect for social work values of diversity, human rights, and social justice. The program adopts international program accreditation standards, and it goes through external peer review every 3 years. The social work curriculum also places emphasis on field education. For 15 weeks, students complete internships at Centers for Social Work and other nongovernmental social service providers. Moreover, field education is accompanied by mandatory supervision. Integration of human rights into field education is of paramount importance for both students and social workers, empowering them to adapt human rights methods in daily practice and beyond. Social work education seeks to meet the social objective of human rights for all and full social integration of all Kosovo citizens.

5.4 The COVID-19 Pandemic: Limitations on Freedoms and Rights in Kosovo The World Health Organization declared a COVID-19 pandemic on March 11, 2020, and the Kosovo government responded by enforcing lockdown measures and limiting movement for 10 weeks. As in many countries in the Southeast Europe region and across the world, the pandemic posed many challenges, related not only to public health, the economy, and welfare but also to politics and governance. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, Kosovo has experienced governmental instability. The shifting between two governments in March 2020 negatively affected management of the pandemic—and it also negatively impacted access to basic human rights for the most vulnerable groups. Legal collisions around freedoms and rights and institutional authority led to the politicization of the COVID-19 pandemic and also to a larger political crisis. Critical policies needed to cope with the pandemic—for example, social and pension assistance for impacted groups and support for workers exposed to the risks of infection—were overshadowed by the crises of governance. A bit of background is useful here. In the 2019 parliamentary elections, the Self-­ Determination Movement (Vetëvendosje, or VV), a leftist party, received the most votes, followed by the Democratic League of Kosovo (Lidhja Demokratike e Kosovës, or LDK), a center-right party. It took 4 months of negotiation for the VV and the LDK to successfully form a governing coalition, and the VV’s Albin Kurti was finally confirmed as Prime Minister in February 2020. Soon after assuming power and just 5 days after the first COVID-19 outbreak in Kosovo, Kurti sacked his LDK interior minister because Kurti did not want to impose a state emergency to handle the COVID-19 pandemic, as that would have shifted the power of state away

100

V. Krasniqi

from him and to his political adversary, the president of Kosovo. In retaliation, LDK filed a no-confidence vote, which was supported by a majority of Parliament in March 2020. Many citizens expressed disgust that the political upheaval took place just as COVID-19 cases were rising. They responded by protesting—in a manner that respected COVID-19 social distancing measures—by banging pots from the terraces and in the main squares of the capital Prishtina (Krasniqi & Kusari, 2021). The president decreed that a new coalition government be formed without elections, and Parliament reconvened. More chaos ensued, and the government was dissolved again in June 2020 by the Constitutional Court (Constitutional Court of Kosovo, 2020). The Kosovo Parliament was then dispersed until national elections were held in February 2021. In the absence of Parliament, much-needed legislation was delayed for months. After having been ousted in March 2020, the VV came back in full force. In coalition with the Guxo party and its high-profile leader, Vjosa Osmani-­ Sadriu, the coalition won with more than 50% of the vote. VV and Guxo promised to fight corruption and promote accountability, transparency, and social justice (Fig. 5.3). All of this upheaval occurred in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, as new public health laws were being put into place that imposed limitations on fundamental freedoms, especially freedom of movement, and the rights to free assembly, education, information, and privacy (Kosovo Assembly, 2020, Article 6.1). Certainly, the COVID-19 pandemic and the concurrent political crises effectively stalled the

Fig. 5.3  Kosovo citizens protesting by observing social distance during COVID-19 pandemic in Prishtina. (Source: Vetëvendosje Movement. By permission of Vetëvendosje Movement)

5  Human Rights and Social Work in Pandemic Times in Kosovo

101

legislative process and delayed necessary social welfare legislation. Two laws especially—the law on social and family services (Kosovo Assembly, 2005) and the new law on local government finance (Kosovo Assembly, 2008b)—are still waiting for parliamentary approval in 2022. These laws would finance social services through new and more flexible grants and also allow social services a wider range of strategies for meeting the needs of diverse individuals and communities. Overall, the COVID-19 pandemic in Kosovo has been overshadowed by the crises of political legitimacy and political party polarization. Over and over again, the pandemic has exposed the fragility of Kosovo’s political system (Emini, 2021, p. 6) and left social services without needed support.

5.5 Social Work Responses During the COVID-19 Pandemic In Kosovo and around the world, the COVID-19 pandemic has altered many aspects of institutional and everyday life. Particularly, lockdown and social distancing measures have had an enormous impact on social work practice and education. During periods of lockdown, most social services moved online, as did social work education. The COVID-19 pandemic tested Kosovo’s social protection system and taxed the limited resources allocated to prevent social inequality, discrimination, and human rights violations against the most vulnerable groups. Most affected were the 18% of the population living below the absolute consumption poverty line (less than €1.85 per day) and the additional 5.1% in extreme poverty (less than €1.31 per day). Rural populations, female-led households, members of minority groups, and those without access to health services all suffered disproportionately (UNKT, 2020, p. 13). In a country that was suffering economically before the pandemic, COVID-19 has imposed painful reductions in economic activity and negatively impacted the livelihoods of people. The Kosovo economy contracted by 5.6% in the first months of the pandemic. In April 2020, just 1 month into the pandemic, there were already 32,377 new job seekers, almost half of them women (GAP, 2020, p. 3). The pandemic crises affected women more severely, as they already have relatively high unemployment and low economic activity.  Indeed, Kosovar women’s labor force participation is lower than every other country in Southeast Europe and is in fact the lowest in the world (World Bank, 2017, p. 1). Kosovo relied heavily on diaspora workers to help make up for these COVID-related economic losses; remittances increased by 18% in 2020 compared to 2019 and stood at 13.6% of GDP (OECD, 2021). In response to the COVID-19 pandemic in April 2020, the government issued 15 new measures, 3 of which relate to social protection. Measure 1 included a double payment for all beneficiaries on social welfare (March–May 2020). Measure 2 provided a supplement of €30 (April–May 2020) for all beneficiaries of social and pension schemes who received a monthly salary of less than €100 (provided that they received only one government benefit). In addition, Measure 15 created

102

V. Krasniqi

monthly cash assistance of €130 for Kosovo citizens who were unemployed or without any income for the period April–June 2020. These measures supported citizens’ rights to social security (Office of the Prime Minister, 2020). The Centers for Social Work were mandated to manage Measure 15 and also to distribute COVID-19 hygiene kits, attend to families at risk, and respond to domestic violence cases (KOMF, 2021, p. 16). COVID-19 has had a profound impact on social workers, as the number of individuals needing social protection increased during the pandemic, while at the same time, in accordance with the government’s antiCOVID-19 measures, the Centers for Social Work staff who were over 60 years old or with chronic illness were released from work (p. 16). Domestic and gender-based violence—a shadow pandemic—has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic (United Nations Women, 2020). In Kosovo, the real scale of domestic violence is still unknown despite the increased reporting of cases in recent years. An overwhelming majority of those affected by domestic violence are women, though domestic violence is also directed toward children, people with disabilities, and the elderly, and against non-heteronormative people. The Kosovo government attempted to protect women from domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic through an institutional campaign providing women with information on their rights, creating exemptions for victims related to restrictions on movement, and ensuring that shelter would be available (European Commission, 2020a, p. 29). From the start of the COVID-19 pandemic until May 2020, around 550 survivors of domestic violence were admitted to shelters in Kosovo, an elevated number compared to nonpandemic times (United Nations Women, 2020). It has been widely documented that prepandemic social services for survivors of domestic violence were less than adequate, characterized by poor coordination, lack of resources, and lack of gender awareness among the judges, persecutors, and social workers (Kosovo Women’s Network, 2009, 2015). Social workers often overlook gender and power imbalances in favor of an idealized notion of traditional family (Krasniqi, 2019, p. 94). This situation calls for rights-based training on antidiscrimination to empower social workers to adopt gender-sensitive responses to combat stigma, prevent injuries, and support survivors of domestic violence. Overall, COVID-19 has been a setback for human rights in terms of gender equality. The government’s recovery package ignored the gendered impact of COVID-19 and the specific economic and safety-related risks for women and girls. Furthermore, the government undertook no analysis to ensure that there was no gender bias in COVID-19 recovery policy (Kosovo Women’s Network, 2020). The lack of a gender-responsive approach to the COVID-19 recovery policy has once again relegated women’s rights to a secondary concern and left the landscape of inequality between women and men unchallenged. The COVID-19 pandemic also impacted NGO social service funding: The majority of NGOs expressed that the year 2020 was the most challenging since 2000 (KOMF, 2021). Kosovo’s package for economic recovery (of €365,000,000), aimed at alleviating the negative impact of the pandemic across the economic, social, and health sectors, had limitations and thus proved to be insufficient in altering the social inequalities and barriers faced by youth; women; and the Roma,

5  Human Rights and Social Work in Pandemic Times in Kosovo

103

Ashkali, and Egyptian communities in Kosovo (Muçaj, 2021). The Roma, Ashkali, and Egyptian communities are the most marginalized among Kosovo communities, and they experience high levels of unemployment and low levels of educational attainment. The unemployment rate of Roma, Ashkali, and Egyptian youth, aged 18–24 years, is 78% (Memeti & Jasharaj, 2020, p. 11). A great majority of the members of the Roma, Ashkali, and Egyptian communities receive social assistance, as their employment is scarce, and do seasonal, unskilled work; a few of them are employed in the public sector as teachers or civil servants (OSCE, 2020, p. 5). Roma communities in Kosovo, Southeast Europe, and beyond face social exclusion and antigypsyism4— a form of racism fueled by prejudice and stereotypes. The EU policy against antigypsyism (European Commission, 2021b) is a positive development, contending that Roma integration must be on a par with strategies to fight antigypsyism, given that prejudices and discrimination lead to violations of the human rights of Roma communities. Fighting antigypsyism constitutes another important dimension of human rights approaches and methods for social work practice in Kosovo.

5.5.1 Social Work Education During COVID-19: Challenges and Perspectives The COVID-19 pandemic altered every aspect of social life in Kosovo, including well-established routines of higher education, which posed challenges for administrators, educators, and students. Yet, it also offered new opportunities mediated by information technology for novel forms of teaching and learning. At the outset of the COVID-19 crisis, when lockdown measures were put in place, the education system in general, and higher education in particular, moved to a novel online mode of operation. Kosovo’s higher education institutions switched to online teaching beginning in mid-March 2020 and lasted over 18 months until October 2021, when universities resumed in-person teaching. The long-term effects of COVID-19 on higher education are still difficult to gauge. Research is needed to understand the impact of COVID-19 on learning and teaching, research, and overall university– community engagement during the pandemic in Kosovo. The COVID-19 pandemic accentuated the role of social work education in addressing social issues and human rights. Teaching social work had never been more relevant and necessary as we faced the risks and dealt with the effects of the pandemic. New questions for reflection arose pertaining to the best strategies for helping students achieve learning outcomes while also addressing the needs of students and helping the whole community cope with COVID-19. In this context,  The term “antigypsyism” is used per the definition and guidelines provided by the Council of Europe’s ECRI General Policy Recommendation No. 13 on Combating Antigypsyism and Discrimination Against Roma, https://rm.coe.int/ecri-general-policy-recommendation-no-13-oncombating-anti-gypsyism-an/16808b5aee. 4

104

V. Krasniqi

safeguarding the human rights of students and their communities is critical. These challenges have necessitated the search for innovative pedagogies in social work education that place human rights at the core of the curriculum, even in an online educational environment. The COVID-19 pandemic has amplified the importance of understanding the immediate needs of students and their communities and mapping their human rights situations, and in this way, the pandemic has also presented opportunities. We imagine that the post-COVID-19 educational experience will continue to employ web-­ based tools to promote collaboration that breaks down institutional and geographical barriers and allows greater access, for example, for students living with disabilities. COVID-19 has enabled the process of internationalization at the University of Prishtina, even though the process has been virtual rather than face-to-face. Certainly, the pandemic posed enormous challenges to fieldwork education within the social work program. As noted earlier, a practicum of 15 weeks is a mandatory portion of Kosovo’s social work curriculum. During the pandemic lockdown, social work practice itself went online, and the Centers for Social Work operated with reduced staff due to government measures that released social workers with chronic illnesses and those over 60 years old from duty. While information technology is not new in everyday life, adapting social work education and practice to the online environment has been a novel experience in Kosovo, and it has had a profound impact on the philosophy and practice of social service provisioning. The shift online reduced interpersonal exchanges between social workers and individuals seeking assistance as well as between students and their social work educators. This has impacted the relationship between social workers and social service beneficiaries as experiences, sentiments, and needs cannot be easily conveyed in or through online media, and it may have negatively impacted social workers’ ability to employ rights-based interventions, such as community collaboration and capacity building. Certainly, the need to seek services online excluded individuals and communities that lacked access to the requisite devices; in this way, the shift to online social services may have deprived those seeking help of their human rights to social security, necessary social services, information, and more. The issue of limited technological resources impacted students as well, especially those from lowresourced families and/or those with limited space at home for actively participating in online classes.

5.6 Conclusion This chapter has highlighted how the COVID-19 pandemic presented the young nation of Kosovo—and its social work professionals—with unprecedented challenges. There is no similar pandemic or other public health disaster in Kosovo’s recent history; though many Kosovar Albanian social workers have memories of the war and disruption during the 1990s, Milošević suspended professional social work practice within the Kosovar Albanian community during those years, so there is no well of professional experience to draw upon.

5  Human Rights and Social Work in Pandemic Times in Kosovo

105

Even in an ideal world of useful professional memory and rights-based approaches to social work practice, the uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic would have put a significant strain on social work responses. In the real world, Kosovo experienced a global pandemic exacerbated by political chaos, and Kosovo’s citizens had to cope with political, educational, and social service systems that were unprepared for such massive disruption. As we have explored here, this lack of preparedness led to citizens experiencing widespread violations of their rights, including education (for students without access to the online environment), social security and a decent standard of living (for those who lost jobs or whose economic well-­ being was negatively impacted), personal safety (for victims of domestic violence who could not find assistance), and necessary social services (for those who faced virtual or other barriers to connecting with social workers in such precarious times). A human rights–based approach to social work education is not a panacea, but strengthening teaching in this critical area will ensure that Kosovo’s social workers will know how to help citizens access their full human rights during times of stability and during times of crisis. An important challenge for social work in Kosovo, however, is to move rights-based ideas out of the classroom and into the Centers for Social Work and into social work practice more broadly. Currently, social workers are often prevented from full engagement in rights-based practice by social policies that require them to act as gatekeepers. In these circumstances, it may be the job of social workers to actually deny citizens and communities their rights through the bureaucratic denial of benefits. Obviously, such bureaucratic forms of abuse violate social work ethics as well as human rights. To respond to this dilemma, closer synergies must be forged between academia, social work practice, and policymakers to ensure that human rights guide the making of both social policy and social work practice. Also, the lessons learned during this crisis must be archived to ensure institutional memory for social work in the post-COVID world. Moving toward these goals in postpandemic times will allow Kosovo as a nation—as well as social work as a profession—to be more prepared to promote human rights and dignity when the nation faces a crisis in the future. Social work has a pivotal role to play at times of profound societal distress; grounding our work in human rights principles and methods is a critical first step to addressing uncertainty.

References Civil Society Report on Human Rights in 2019  in Kosovo. (2020). https://www.ohchr.org/ Documents/Press/kosovo_cso_2019_human_rights_report_en.pdf Clark, H. (2000). Civil resistance in Kosovo. Pluto Press. Constitutional Court of Kosovo. (2020). Decisions from the review session held on 21 December 2020. https://gjk-­ks.org/en/decisions-­from-­the-­review-­session-­held-­on-­21-­december-­2020/ Council of Europe. (2011). Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. https://rm.coe.int/168008482e Emini, D. (2021). Democracy and human rights. A Kosovo drama in five acts.. http://library.fes. de/pdf-­files/id-­moe/17355.pdf

106

V. Krasniqi

Equal Rights for All Coalition. (2016). Human rights strategy for Kosovo 2016–2022: A way forward. European Center for Minority Issues Kosovo, Prishtina: Kosovo. European Commission. (2015). The European higher education area. In 2015 Bologna process implementation report. https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-­policies/eurydice/content/european-­ higher-­education-­area-­2015-­bologna-­process-­implementation-­report_en European Commission. (2020a). Kosovo* 2020 report. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-­enlar­ gement/sites/near/files/kosovo_report_2020.pdf European Commission. (2020b). Kosovo* EU4 social protection following the COVID-19 crisis. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-­enlargement/system/files/2020-­08/ipa_2019_041248.03_ eu4_social_protection.pdf European Commission. (2021a). Kosovo* 2021 report. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-­ enlargement/kosovo-­report-­2021_en European Commission. (2021b). Combatting Antigypsyism: Expert reports building on forward-­ looking aspects of the evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/post2020_eu_roma_in_antigypsyism.pdf GAP. (2020). The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the labor market. https://www.institutigap. org/documents/28751_covid_labor%20market.pdf KOMF. (2021). Shërbimet Sociale në Kohë Pandemie [Social services in the times of pandemic]. https://komf.zombiesoup.co/wp-­content/uploads/2021/04/Raporti-­i-­Monitorimit-­2021-­Shqip_ compressed.pdf Kosovo Agency of Statistics. (2020). Labour force survey Q2 2020. https://ask.rks-­gov.net/media/ 5860/lfs-­q2-­2020.pdf Kosovo Assembly. (2005). Law No. 02/L-17 on social and family services. https://mpms.rks-­gov. net/wpdm-­package/law-­no-­02-­l-­17-­on-­social-­and-­family-­services-­pdf/?wpdmdl=1372&ind= TGF3IE5vLiAwMiBMLTE3ICBPTiBTT0NJQUwgQU5EIEZBTUlMWSBTRVJWSUNFUy 5wZGY Kosovo Assembly. (2008a). The Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo. https://gzk.rks-­gov.net/ ActDetail.aspx?ActID=3702 Kosovo Assembly. (2008b). Law No. 03/L-049. On local government finance. https://mapl.rks-­ gov.net/wp-­content/uploads/2017/10/Law-­On-­Local-­Government-­Finance.pdf Kosovo Assembly. (2015a). Law No.05/L-109 on Ombudsperson. https://gzk.rks-­gov.net/Act DocumentDetail.aspx?ActID=10922 Kosovo Assembly. (2015b). Kosovo Assembly (2015) Law No. 05/L -020 on gender equality. https://gzk.rks-­gov.net/ActDocumentDetail.aspx?ActID=10923 Kosovo Assembly. (2015c). Law No. 05/L-021 on the protection from discrimination. https://gzk. rks-­gov.net/ActDocumentDetail.aspx?ActID=10924 Kosovo Assembly. (2016). Law No.05/L-066 on regulated professions in the Republic of Kosovo. https://gzk.rks-­gov.net/ActDocumentDetail.aspx?ActID=13072 Kosovo Assembly. (2020). Law No. 07/L-006 on preventing and combatting Covid-19 pandemics in the territory of the Republic of Kosovo. https://gzk.rks-­gov.net/ActDocumentDetail. aspx?ActID=30819 Kosovo Government. (2009). Kodi Etik për Ofruesit e Shërbimeve Sociale të Republikës së Kosovës [Code of ethics for social service providers in the Republic of Kosovo]. Government of Kosovo, Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare. Kosovo Women’s Network. (2009). More than words on paper: The response of justice provider to domestic violence in Kosovo. https://womensnetwork.org/wp-­content/uploads/2018/ 10/20130715145120182.pdf Kosovo Women’s Network. (2015). Kosovo women’s network strategy 2015–2018. https://womensnetwork.org/wp-­content/uploads/2018/10/kwn_strategy_2015_2018_eng.pdf Kosovo Women’s Network. (2020). Addressing Covid-19 from a gender perspective: Recom­ mendations to the government of Kosovo. https://womensnetwork.org/wp-­content/uploads/ 2020/04/Addressing-­COVID-­19-­from-­a-­Gender-­Perspective_04_04_2020.pdf Krasniqi, V. (2018). Migration and human rights in Kosovo: Perspectives for social work education. International Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 4, 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s41134-­018-­0073-­4

5  Human Rights and Social Work in Pandemic Times in Kosovo

107

Krasniqi, V. (2019). Domestic violence: Gendered state rationality and women’s activism in Kosovo. In M.  Auferbauer, G.  Berc, & R.  Sundby (Eds.), Social development: Ways of understanding society and practicing social work. Social issues (pp. 87–103). Lit Verlag. Krasniqi, V., & Kusari, K. (2021). The interplay between public and private: Protest, resistance, and social work during Covid-19 in Kosova. Social Dialogue Magazine, 24. https://socialdialogue.online/sd24/10_article.html Krasniqi, V., Sokolić, I., & Kostovicova, D. (2020). Skirts as flags: Transitional justice, gender and everyday nationalism in Kosovo. Nations and Nationalism, 26(2), 461–476. https://doi. org/10.1111/nana.12593 Krasniqi, V., McPherson, J., & Villarreal-Otálora, T. (2021). Are we putting human rights into social work practice in Kosovo? British Journal of Social Work, 52(1), 291–310. https://doi. org/10.1093/bjsw/bcaa235 Mapp, S., McPherson, J., Androff, D., & Gatenio Gabel, S. (2019). Social work is a human rights profession. Social Work (United States), 64(3), 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swz023 Marx, K. (1978). On the Jewish question (Robert Tucker, Ed.). Norton (Originally published 1844). McPherson, J. (2015). Human rights practice in social work: A rights-based framework & two new measures (Doctoral dissertation). http://purl.flvc.org/fsu/fd/FSU_migr_etd-­9401 McPherson, J., & Abell, N. (2020). Measuring rights-based practice: Introducing the human rights methods in social work scales. British Journal of Social Work, 50, 222–242. https://doi. org/10.1093/bjsw/bcz132 Memeti, A., & Jasharaj, D. (2020). The challenges of the Roma, Ashkali, Egyptian community in Kosovo during the COVID-19 pandemic. Admovere. https://admovere.org/wp-­content/ uploads/2020/07/ENG-­_-­Sfidat-­e-­komunitetit-­rom-­ashkali-­dhe-­egjiptian-­ne-­kosove-­gjate-­ pandemise-­COVID-­19-­ENG-­02-­1.pdf Muçaj, F. (2021). Inclusion of women, youth and non-majority communities in the economic recovery package. https://www.institutigap.org/news/2695 Multidimensional Poverty Analysis Report 2017. (2017). https://sidase-­wp-­files-­prod.s3.eu-­north-­ 1.amazonaws.com/app/uploads/2020/12/01095837/kosovo-­mdpa.pdf OECD. (2021). The covid-crises in Kosovo*. https://www.oecd.org/south-­east-­europe/COVID-­19-­ Crisis-­in-­Kosovo.pdf Office of the Prime Minister. (2008). Strategjia dhe Plani i Veprimit për të drejtat e njeriut në Republikën e Kosovës 2009-2011[Strategy and action plan on human rights in the Republic of Kosovo 2009-2011]. http://www.downsyndromekosova.org/wp-­content/uploads/2014/07/ Strategjia-­e-­te-­drejtave-­te-­njeriut-­2009_20111.pdf Office of the Prime Minister. (2020). Approval of emergency fiscal package. https://kryeministri. rks-­gov.net/en/approval-­of-­emergency-­fiscal-­package/ OSCE. (2020). Overview of Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian communities in Kosovo. https://www. osce.org/files/f/documents/6/7/443587_1.pdf Payne, M. (2006). What is professional social work? Policy Press. Payne, M. (2014). European social work and their identities. ERIS Web Journal, 5(2), 1–14. Radaelli, C. (2003). The Europeanization of public policy. In K. Featherstone & C. Radaelli (Eds.), The politics of Europeanisation: Theory and analysis (pp. 27–56). Oxford University Press. Steen, J. (2021). Human rights in field education: Key challenges and ways forward. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 6, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-­021-­00163-­3 Stubbs, P. (2019). Revisiting social policy and socialism: Notes on the Yugoslav exception. Global Social Policy, 19(1–2), 35–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468018119849218 Svetilik, I. (1993). Regulation of the plural and mixed welfare system. In A. Evers & I. Svetilik (Eds.), New welfare mixes in care for the elderly (pp. 33–51). Ashgate International. UN Centre for Human Rights. (1994). Human rights and social work: A manual for schools of social work and the social work profession. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/209246?ln=en#record-­ files-­collapse-­header United Nations. (1948). Universal declaration of human rights. https://www.un.org/en/about-­us/ universal-­declaration-­of-­human-­rights

108

V. Krasniqi

United Nations Women. (2020). Women survivors of violence receive vital support from shelters in Kosovo during the pandemic. https://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2020/6/feature­survivors-­receive-­support-­from-­shelters-­in-­kosovo UNKT. (2020). United Nations Kosovo team socio-economic response plan to Covid-19. https:// unsdg.un.org/sites/default/files/2020-­10/KSO_Socioeconomic-­Response-­Plan_2020.pdf World Bank. (2017). Promoting women’s access to economic opportunities. Policy note. http:// documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/602391521457602814/pdf/124362-­PN-­P144969-­ PUBLIC-­KSVGenderPolicyNote.pdf Zaviršek, D. (2008). Engendering social work education under state socialism in Yugoslavia. British Journal of Social Work, 38(4), 734–750.

Chapter 6

Social Work and Local Democracy: Promoting Human Rights Through Community Action in Albania Marsela Dauti and Erika Bejko

Fig. 6.1  Albania in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe. (Map Credit: Kat Farlowe) M. Dauti (*) · E. Bejko Department of Social Work and Social Policy, University of Tirana, Tirana, Albania © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 V. Krasniqi, J. McPherson (eds.), Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11728-2_6

109

110

M. Dauti and E. Bejko

6.1 Introduction Today, less than half of the world’s population lives in democracies (Maerz et  al., 2020). The number of autocracies is increasing, and this trend is accelerating. Eastern Europe—together with Central Asia—has “fallen to a record democratic low since the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991” (Freedom House, 2020, p. 5). Government leaders in countries undergoing autocratization are openly attacking the media, undermining the efforts of civil society organizations, restricting the freedom of speech, and threatening free and fair elections (Bieber, 2018; Freedom House, 2020; Maerz et al., 2020). These developments have worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic (Maerz et al., 2020). Social workers have responded to the global challenge of autocratization by calling for greater engagement in political processes (Truell, 2018). The 2020–2030 Global Agenda for Social Work emphasizes the importance of promoting greater engagement of communities in decision-making processes. The agenda underscores “the critical importance of building systems of local and global participatory democracy” (Truell, 2020, p. 114). In this chapter, we discuss the ways that social workers can advance democratization processes and human rights in local communities. We draw lessons for social workers based on our investigation of the interaction between elected representatives and community members in the local councils of Albania. The study of interaction between elected representatives and community members in contexts such as Albania is important because it is through their interaction with representatives that community members make demands for better access to services such as education, health, housing, and social services. Further, representation is studied in a context where the transition from centralized to decentralized governance—after the fall of communism—has faced several setbacks, and in recent years, the democracy score has been on decline (Freedom House, 2018, 2021; Transparency International, 2019). We drew on a mixed methods study conducted in 11 local councils during August– December 2016 and 2018. Combining quantitative and qualitative data from council meetings, we examined, first, the engagement of community members during meetings—attendance, floor taking, and issues raised—and second, the ways that officials responded to the requests of community members. The study shows that a small number of community members attended council meetings, and those who took the floor addressed cases that concerned aspects such as access to social housing programs, social welfare programs, and state compensation for natural disasters. On their side, officials mainly viewed community members as a nuisance and sought to control their narratives. Inherent in officials’ reactions was the view that community members are powerless and, further, that they were expected to comply with—not contest—authorities. These findings suggest that to improve representation and strengthen local democracy, social workers in Albania need to highlight more explicitly that social work is “intrinsically political” (Gray et al., 2002, p. 99) and develop community-­ based interventions that put human rights at their core. Our study has relevance for

6  Social Work, Local Democracy and Human Rights in Albania

111

the engagement of social workers in community action in other weak democracies. Some of the challenges that social workers face in Albanian communities are found in other contexts (Truell, 2018), and the concern that social workers’ political engagement is limited is global (Pawar, 2014). Our analysis makes three contributions. First, we advance the current discussion of how social workers can play a critical role in advancing democratization processes, especially in the light of the ongoing rise of authoritarianism. Second, we bring together two bodies of scholarly work—political social work practice and community practice—and highlight the ways that social workers can engage with community members and elected representatives. Third, we highlight the importance of studying elected representatives, specifically how representatives respond to the demands of community members. The study of interaction between elected representatives and community members in the case of Albania provides lessons for other weak democracies. As autocratization is now a global phenomenon (Bieber, 2018; Maerz et al., 2020), and social workers—despite the context—share common challenges at the community level, we think that this is an opportunity to discuss the kind of community action that can be undertaken to promote human rights and social justice and counteract the rise of authoritarianism. We also discuss the role of social work education and the importance of preparing students to address the challenges posed by the rise of authoritarianism and crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The rest of this chapter is organized in the following way: We review the literature on political social work practice and community action and provide contextual information on local democracy and human rights in Albania. We connect our discussion with the development of social work education in the country and the challenges to human rights posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. After describing the methodology, we focus our attention on findings that concern the attendance of council meetings, frequency of speech, cases addressed by community members, and officials’ responses to the claims of community members. The final section focuses on implications for social work practice and community action.

6.2 Political Social Work Practice and Community Action To advance democratization processes and promote human rights—for instance, foster greater transparency of government officials and inclusion of community members in political decision-making—social workers should engage in political spaces. We bring together two bodies of scholarly work—political social work practice and community practice—to describe social workers’ engagement in political processes. Political social work practice refers to “navigating and influencing power and political dynamics associated with social change” (Pritzker & Lane, 2017, p. 80). The scholarly work on political social work—mainly US-based—has grown especially in recent years. Responding to political and social developments in the United

112

M. Dauti and E. Bejko

States, the social work community has placed greater emphasis on the ways that social workers can engage in politics and influence decision-making (Gehlert et al., 2020; McClendon et al., 2020; Pritzker et al., 2020). Initiatives such as Voting is Social Work (Abramovitz et al., 2019) and Voter Access and Engagement (McClendon et al., 2020) seek to address barriers to voting, especially in marginalized communities. Social workers’ engagement in political processes, however, remains at low levels. The study of Abramovitz et al. (2019) shows that social workers in the United States often view voting as a “partisan activity,” distrust the political system, or think that their “vote does not make a difference” (p. 636). Evidence from other countries shows a similar pattern—social workers are involved in what could be characterized as less demanding political activities. Studying the political engagement of social workers in South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand, Gray et al. (2002) found that the most common activities of social workers were those of engaging in discussions about politics and voting. Social workers were less engaged in activities such as campaigning, activism, and witnessing. Similarly, Iovu (2019) found that social workers in Romania were more likely to use the strengths perspective as a method of work and less likely to engage in activism. The focus on voting—the cornerstone of democracy—is important; however, it is not sufficient (Truell, 2018). One of the characteristics of authoritarian leaders is that, besides threatening-free and fair elections, they undermine media independence and shun civil society organizations (Maerz et al., 2020). Addressing the barriers to voting should be part of larger social work action in  local communities. Social workers should consider what happens in between elections, especially the ways that community members interact with their representatives and what representatives do on behalf of community members. The focus in between elections is particularly important in weak democracies such as Albania, where election results are often contested because of problems such as vote buying and manipulation (Erebara, 2020a; Kera & Hysa, 2020; National Democratic Institute, 2013). Our observation is that the literature on political social work in the United States has mainly placed emphasis on what social workers as individuals can do: For instance, run for office, engage with voters, or advocate on behalf of their clients. There have not been many discussions about how social workers can engage more effectively with communities—besides addressing voter suppression—and counteract the democratic decline and the deepening dissatisfaction with politics. Some scholars raise the concern that social work has become “apolitical” (Reisch, 2013, p. 74), highlighting that the moral and political foundations of social work in countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom have weakened, and social workers are mainly technocrats who emphasize evidence-based practice, overlooking the importance of social transformation (Chu et al., 2009; Reisch, 2016). Other scholars call for greater emphasis on a rights-based social work practice that is guided by the principles of human dignity, nondiscrimination, participation, transparency, and accountability (Mapp et al., 2019; McPherson, 2020). The second body of scholarly work—mainly focusing on developing countries— examines the ways that social workers engage with local communities to affect

6  Social Work, Local Democracy and Human Rights in Albania

113

change. In a review of social workers’ engagement in community practice in developing countries, Pawar (2014) found that social workers’ political engagement “is usually minimal or nil” (p. 6). One of the early explanations for the little emphasis on community practice and political engagement is that the models of social work education and practice in developing countries are based on countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom that overemphasize casework (Hokenstad et al., 1992). Another concern is that the development of the social work profession has been one way; that is, greater emphasis has been placed on importing models from developed to developing countries and overlooking what community social workers in developed countries can learn from their counterparts in developing countries (Hokenstad et al., 1992). In this chapter, we bring these two bodies of scholarly work—political social work and community practice—together. We expand the focus beyond voting and look at the interaction between community members and elected representatives in between elections. Similar to scholars studying community practice in developing countries, we emphasize the importance of engaging in political spaces such as local councils and promoting human rights through community action. We suggest that in contexts such as Albania social workers should reframe the problems that community members face in political spaces—such as exclusion, unfair treatment, discrimination, and the underprovision of services—as violations of human rights, not merely problems of democratic transition or democratic decline that will gradually diminish. A greater engagement of social workers in political processes is a global imperative. Authoritarian leaders—despite the context—share similar characteristics: They weaken welfare programs, undermine human rights, attack the media, and co-opt civil society organizations (Bieber, 2018; Maerz et  al., 2020). Social workers will benefit from sharing their knowledge about how to counteract the rise of authoritarianism in different contexts and safeguard human rights. Another contribution of this chapter concerns elected representatives. We focus our attention on how representatives respond to the demands of community members. To date, more emphasis has been placed on the barriers that community members face (e.g., the lack of time or the lack of trust in officials, see, e.g., Howard, 2003; Krastev, 2009; Uslaner, 2003, who discuss the barriers that citizens in postcommunist countries faced especially in the early years of postcommunism). An assumption is that once the barriers that community members face are removed and they engage in political spaces, better representation will be ensured because representatives will respond to the demands of community members. The extent to which representatives respond to the demands of community members, however, is open to question. A concern in weak democracies is that the forums where community members and their representatives come together are merely “talking shops” that are used to advance already-made agendas (Dauti, 2019; Lorch & Bunk, 2016). In such a context, promoting greater engagement of community members in political spaces can deepen dissatisfaction and distrust (Krastev, 2009). Our focus on elected representatives is based on the notion that in contexts characterized by low levels of government responsiveness, it is equally important for social workers to engage with community members and elected representatives.

114

M. Dauti and E. Bejko

6.3 Studying Local Democracy and Human Rights in Albania Albania has a long legacy of a repressive government. It is often characterized as “one of the most isolated” countries during the communist period (Ikonomi & Woodcock, 2010, p. 154). During communism, the freedom of speech, the freedom of movement, and the freedom of religion, among others, were restricted (Biberaj, 1990). Public meetings where community members and government officials came together to address issues of concern were used to ensure that community members complied with party directives. Public denunciation and humiliation followed when such directives were ignored or violated (Niemietz, 2019). A key challenge during the postcommunist period has been breaking with the communist past of state control and repression. After the fall of communism, development agencies (e.g., the United States Agency for International Development, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, and United Nations agencies) have supported the creation and growth of participatory spaces. Initiatives such as citizen advisory panels, community scorecards, and participatory budgeting have encouraged community participation in decision-making (Dauti, 2015, 2019). Law 8652 (of 2000) on the Organization and Functioning of Local Governments (later on, Law 139 on Local Self-­ Governance) established the right of citizens to participate in decision-making (Dauti, 2017). A concern, however, is that participatory initiatives do not reflect a meaningful engagement of citizens in decision-making but rather short-term projects of organizations that do not challenge the status quo (Dauti, 2019). On their side, civil society organizations raise the concern that the government is using them to legitimize already-made decisions (Dauti & Bejko, 2015). One of us—a few years ago—was struck when she heard the mayor of a municipality proudly saying during a consultancy meeting: “We organize meetings with interest groups because it makes them feel included, but we have our own advisors in the cabinet to help us make decisions.” Figure 6.2 displays a public hearing held in northern Albania. The mayor of the municipality of Shkodra, the head of the council, the administrator, and a councilor discuss local development projects with community members. Studies show that citizens distrust officials, and they are skeptical of participatory initiatives. More than 80% of Albanians report that corruption is widespread (Vrugtman & Bino, 2020). Public hearings are mainly perceived as “formal meetings” or, in other words, meetings that are organized to comply with formal rules but not to genuinely consider people’s opinions (Dauti, 2017; Vrugtman & Bino, 2020). Participation in public hearings—both at the central and local level—is low. A commonly held view is that councilors do not represent citizens’ interests (Vrugtman & Bino, 2020). Our study focuses on local councils—the representative bodies of municipalities. The size of local councils ranges from 15 to 61 members, depending on the size of the municipality. Councilors represent different political parties. Council meetings— typically—are held once a month. Some of the responsibilities of councilors include

6  Social Work, Local Democracy and Human Rights in Albania

115

Fig. 6.2  Public hearing held in Ana e Malit. (Source. Municipality of Shkodra 2021)

approving the budget of the municipality, overseeing the work of local government officials, and determining local taxes and tariffs. Councilors—elected every 4 years—discuss and vote for draft decisions. Some decisions concern individuals or groups of individuals (e.g., access to social housing, the cash assistance program), while others concern communities (e.g., investments in education infrastructure, water supply). Elected representatives often serve as brokers—they connect community members with municipal departments especially when community members face difficulties accessing municipal services. We examine the interaction between community members and elected representatives during council meetings. It is common during council meetings for representatives to introduce cases of community members who have communicated with them and have asked for help. Typically, community members address inquiries or complaints about access to social welfare programs (Dauti, 2021). Previous studies reveal low levels of community participation in council meetings (Agolli et al., 2013; Vrugtman & Bino, 2020). Council meetings—by law—are open unless the mayor or one-fifth of councilors request otherwise. Such requests may occur when councilors discuss the establishment of council commissions, the approval of the internal regulation of the council, and the approval of the budget (see Law 139 on Local Self-Governance). The interaction between elected representatives and community members is quite personal, especially in small communities. Community members make inquiries through phone calls or while interacting with councilors in shops, cafés, schools, or streets. Formal methods of communication, such as written requests, are not common (Dauti, 2021). Councilors also invite community members to attend meetings and take the floor to communicate their concerns. At the time of fieldwork, most

116

M. Dauti and E. Bejko

councils did not have formal regulations to guide the relationship between elected representatives and community members. The decision to invite community members into meetings and give them the floor is quite arbitrary. Some councilors engage with community members and invite them to take the floor, while others—as we found during fieldwork—do not follow this practice. Councilors’ decisions have a direct effect on the populations that social workers serve. Councilors make decisions on the distribution of social welfare programs— programs that target groups such as the homeless, persons with disabilities, the unemployed, single parents, and survivors of domestic violence and trafficking (Dauti, 2021). Despite this, social work scholars have paid little attention to the study of local councils. In this chapter, we focus our attention on the interaction between elected representatives and community members, particularly how representatives respond to the demands of community members. The study of interaction has important implications for our understanding of representation and the ways that social workers can engage in community action to improve representation, strengthen democracy, and promote human rights. Do council meetings provide a space for community members to address their concerns and hold elected representatives to account? How do elected representatives respond to the demands of community members? How can social workers promote a relationship of accountability between elected representatives and community members? To address these questions, we attended council meetings and collected information on the characteristics of community members and their interaction with elected representatives. Before turning to the methodology, we discuss social work education and the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic in Albania.

6.4 Social Work Education in Albania Compared to other countries in the region, the social work profession in Albania has a shorter history. The Department of Social Work and Social Policy was established in 1992. The development of the first social work program was supported by the Grand Valley State University School of Social Work in the United States. The program mirrored a generalist social work program taught in the United States, with an emphasis on micro practice—a legacy that has continued to current times (Agolli et al., 2021). Further education reforms such as the Bologna Process have strengthened the emphasis of human rights on social work education (Bejko & Dhëmbo, 2019). Bachelor-level courses such as Introduction to Social Work, Gender and Social Work, Ethics in Social Work, Social Work in the Justice System, Human Rights and Social Work, and Social Policy highlight the importance of human rights for social work theory, practice, and research. A recent review of the social work curricula recommended equipping students with knowledge of “the system and organization of social services in Albania, the current policies at the local and national level, and the future of social services” (Duci et al., 2021, p. 73).

6  Social Work, Local Democracy and Human Rights in Albania

117

Similar to other countries in the region, social work in Albania faces numerous challenges. Social work education places greater emphasis on the importance of fulfilling social needs than on advancing human rights and social justice. We have observed that social workers barely address issues of poor governance such as corruption and lack of government transparency. Social workers feel powerless to affect political decision-making, and they are often excluded from political spaces where decisions are made. While to date no study has been published on the extent that social workers use human rights methods to inform their work, we anticipate that the pattern is not too different from other countries in the region such as Kosovo (Krasniqi et al., 2021), Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Romania (Iovu, 2019)—social workers mainly draw on micro practice methods. These weaknesses became obvious during the COVID-19 pandemic: Social workers were mainly involved in service delivery, not political decision-making (Dauti et al., 2020). During the COVID-19 pandemic, poverty deepened (United Nations Albania, 2020). A recent study shows that exorbitant health costs have pushed families into poverty and insecurity (Bogdani, 2021). Social isolation has been taxing, especially for the elderly and persons with disabilities (Dauti, 2020; Helsinki Committee, 2020; Together for Life, 2021). A study conducted in April 2020 found that 62% of Roma and Egyptian families did not have access to the internet (Helsinki Committee, 2020). The lack of access to the internet or electronic devices has led to school interruption, especially for children in remote areas, Roma children, and children with disabilities. In 2020, 11,000 children could not attend online classes (United Nations Albania, 2020). A study conducted with service users (n = 263) in 33 social service agencies found that concerns over health and mental health went hand in hand with worries over food scarcity and poverty. Service users faced problems such as lack of food, medicine, water, and electricity. Other problems included unemployment, physical pain, fear of virus transmission, and lack of stable housing (Dauti, 2020). To respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, the government introduced the in-home assistance program (Council of Ministers, Decision no. 236) and provided financial aid to business employees whose work was interrupted because of the pandemic and to individuals who benefited from the state programs of economic aid and unemployment benefits (Council of Minister, Decision no. 254). These programs addressed the immediate needs of the population; however, they were far from sufficient. Poor families that relied on the informal market—mainly Roma and Egyptians—were not qualified as beneficiaries. The distribution of benefits suffered from problems such as poor targeting and allocation (Bogdani, 2020; Helsinki Committee, 2020; Ndrevataj, 2020). Studies revealed the importance of designing and implementing social programs that could address the long-term consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, such as the provision of long-term cash assistance programs; business recovery programs; hybrid social services; and greater investments in transportation, playgrounds, and outdoor activities to mitigate the impact of isolation (Dauti, 2020). The challenge for social workers is to translate these priorities into government action. Social workers operate in a political environment that has become increasingly difficult (Korçari, 2020). The democracy score—a composite score that captures different

118

M. Dauti and E. Bejko

aspects including democratic governance, electoral processes, civil society, media, judicial framework and independence, and corruption—has been on a decline (Freedom House, 2020, 2021). The Freedom House rates Albania as a partly free country, with a democracy percentage of 46 out of 100 (Freedom House, 2021). During the COVID-19 pandemic, government transparency worsened (Erebara, 2020b; Helsinki Committee, 2020). Policy proposals were developed behind closed doors, avoiding consultations with civil society organizations (Helsinki Committee, 2020).

6.5 Methodology This chapter draws on a mixed methods study conducted in 11 local councils—purposefully selected to capture regional diversity—during August–December 2016 and 2018. The purpose of the study was to examine the relationship between women’s political representation and the quality of government in local councils. A local research team attended 75 council meetings. Two types of data were collected. The first type of data consisted of the recording of council meetings, which were then transcribed verbatim by the research team. The transcription followed a predetermined format, which indicated the position of the speaker (e.g., the head of the council, councilor, municipal official, or community member), gender, and the order of taking the floor (e.g., first, second, and so forth). The second type of data consisted of information on the characteristics of community members who attended meetings. A roster list—collecting information on gender, employment status, and sector—was distributed to attendees during each meeting. We combined quantitative and qualitative measures. First, to obtain insights into the engagement of community members in council meetings, we used measures of attendance and frequency of speech. Attendance was calculated by counting the number of community members who attended meetings. The frequency of speech was calculated by counting the number of times that community members took the floor, which was divided by the total number of times that all participants took the floor. Then, we drew comparisons by gender and employment status and sector. Second, to understand how officials responded to the requests of community members, we examined their interactions. We used a grounded-theory approach to investigate the repertoire of practices that were meaningful for the local context. Specifically, we followed the conversation of citizens with officials from the beginning to the end: From the moment the citizen was invited to introduce the case—or the citizen engaged in conversation—to the moment that the discussion moved to another topic. We coded the text for themes using open coding and linked the themes into an explanatory model to explain officials’ responses. In the process of developing themes, we looked for indigenous categories, metaphors, analogies, and transitions (Ryan & Bernard, 2003). We validated the model by comparing themes across individuals and communities. Even though we briefly discuss the experiences of community members, our primary focus is on officials—the ways they responded to the inquiries of community members.

6  Social Work, Local Democracy and Human Rights in Albania

119

6.6 Findings 6.6.1 Meeting Attendance In all, 36 meetings (48%) were attended by 116 community members, an equal number of women and men. The highest number of attendees were unemployed (n = 35) and business owners (n = 21). Other attendees were civil society representatives, farmers, students, senior citizens, journalists, state officials, and members of the parliament. The average meeting lasted around 80 min.

6.6.2 Frequency of Speech Meeting participants took the floor 16,367 times. Councilors took the floor more than half of the floor-taking time (52.34%), followed by the head or vice head of the council (28.55%), the mayor or vice mayor (10.46%), and municipal staff (7.63%). These actors took 99% of the floor-taking time. Community members took the floor 95 times (0.58%). Only one civil society representative took the floor, and this happened only once (0.006%). The civil society representative provided information about an awareness-raising campaign on gender-based violence that was about to start in the community. A business owner took the floor seven times (0.04), a journalist only once (0.006%), and a member of the parliament took the floor five times (0.03%).

6.6.3 Cases Addressed by Community Members Community members took the floor in 13 meetings and introduced 17 cases. We looked into the types of cases and found that cases addressed issues concerning social housing programs (three cases), conflicts over property (four cases), financial support for impoverished families (two cases), access to road infrastructure (one case), access to water (one case), access to the street cleaning service (one case), state compensation for natural disasters (one case), access to social welfare programs (two cases), tax relief for business owners (one case), and denunciation of corruption that concerned the diversion of funds for flood compensation in a rural area (one case). The stories of community members shared a common theme—fatigue from long, bureaucratic procedures mixed with distrust in  local government officials and a sense of injustice perpetrated by the state. Community members often used the word ping-pong to characterize their experiences in state offices; ping-pong captures the idea that community members have to visit the same state offices repeatedly to address their problems. The following example serves as an illustration of

120

M. Dauti and E. Bejko

the kind of difficulties that community members face. In this example, the elderly woman who took the floor described that her house was destroyed from an earthquake in 2010 and she had been waiting for state compensation and social housing for 8 years. Because the council has known my problem for years and I have eight years that sorollatem [translation: I am wandering] in the ministry in Tirana and still the documentation is not being issued.... I don’t know if he [the mayor] has included my name or not [in the list of social housing beneficiaries].... Now, I want an answer, so you can discuss it as a council because I would like to hear the discussion for the family (Meeting held in 2018).

Her last demand—insisting that she would listen to the discussion—indicates that she distrusted officials. She was demanding that officials would be transparent about the ways that they make decisions and that they not discuss her case behind closed doors. The stories of people who took the floor were often filled with anger, distrust, dissatisfaction, and protest. They characterized the state as exploitative. For them, the state was not just ignoring their demands: It was exploiting them by stealing their property or allocating resources and opportunities that they deserved to the richest. Following officials’ responses, community members were either passive recipients of the information or took a proactive role and contested officials. In the former case, they followed up by saying, for instance, “you know it better,” “as you wish,” or “sorry for bothering you.” In the latter case, they asked for further information, denounced “unprecedented corruption,” called officials “fraud,” and held officials to account for failing to take action. The following example is from a discussion held in a council where, referring to discussions, state compensation following a natural disaster was misappropriated and the compensation was distributed to party militants and the village chief. This is how a woman who took the floor described her situation: The house has completely collapsed because of the earthquake. It is almost uninhabitable according to the evaluation—people came and assessed it. When I compare it with others, the evaluation is laughable. My house had two floors, 160 square meters and it is evaluated with 6 million. Compared to others, there is a person who receives 8 million, a person who is abroad—not here—receives 15 million. I don’t want to know what is happening to others. I want the comparison with myself ... please, I want the evaluation, the second commission should come and conduct the evaluation for my house. You ridiculed me once, now I will not allow it. I will make this public, to the state as well. I want only justice (Meeting held in 2018).

A central theme in her story is the unfair treatment by the evaluation committee. She held local officials to account by sharing information from the neighborhood. It was quite common for community members to highlight their feelings of injustice by drawing comparisons with others who they thought had misappropriated resources or had unfairly benefited because of their ties with officials. Denunciations of power abuse and injustice were quite common.

6  Social Work, Local Democracy and Human Rights in Albania

121

6.6.4 Officials’ Responses to the Claims of Community Members The analysis of council transcripts revealed that officials mainly viewed community members as a nuisance. When community members took the floor, officials sought to control narratives by limiting the kind of information that community members could communicate or by describing problems on their behalf. Further—to keep the situation under control—they reminded community members about their powerlessness and threatened them with being ejected from the meeting. Inherent in officials’ reactions was the view that community members are powerless, and they are expected to comply with—not contest—authorities. Citizens as a Nuisance  Officials sought to avoid giving community members the floor unless they met strong resistance. “I am not giving you the floor. It is not allowed,” said the head of the council to a community member (meeting held in 2018). This rule—however—was not written, and officials seemed to have different interpretations of whether community members could take the floor. Another strategy was giving community members the floor but not following up on the information that they provided. Officials moved on to the next item of the meeting agenda, ignoring the demand. When community members confronted officials or exposed their actions—or inactions—they were asked to leave the room. After a community member representing a group of landowners stated that the municipality was trying to “rob our property,” the head of the council said, “Now, please, we listened to you. Please let’s continue with the agenda. We have listened to you, let us do our duty [interrupted]. Please let us continue now [interrupted]” (meeting held in 2016). The head of the council acted like nothing happened, reinforcing the idea that council meetings are merely “talking shops.” This was not an isolated example. Narrative Control  Officials sought to dominate conversations by controlling the narratives of community members. They did so in quite overt ways. Officials introduced cases on behalf of community members even when they insisted taking the floor. The narrative was also controlled by limiting citizens on the amount of detail they could provide. The example below illustrates how a citizen denouncing a case of corruption struggled to make his voice heard (meeting held in 2016). Head of the council, man: Then, the next people, the people. Councilor, woman: They should introduce themselves and who they are because in the council [interrupted] Head of the council, man: As long as the meetings are open. Councilor, woman: No. Councilor, woman: They are not open. We should know. Councilor, woman: We should know the person we are dealing with. Head of the council, man: Okay, okay, okay. The people [interrupted] Community member, man: Let me introduce myself. Head of the council, man: It is not necessary. I will introduce you. Go out and I, who said, who gave you permission to get inside, will introduce you.

122

M. Dauti and E. Bejko

Community member, man: I will introduce myself and I will explain the situation. Head of the council, man: One more time, I have not, please, please. [Name omitted], the door is there. Do you agree? Community member, man: I agree. Head of the council, man: I have accepted you. I said you will come to the meeting. Community member, man: I will wait when my turn comes. Head of the council, man: No, I will not give permission. I have not called you to discuss here but to be present and listen to what is being discussed. One more time, listen to me now. You have called me on the phone, and you have told me that you want to participate.

This interaction reveals three interrelated aspects. First, there was a lack of understanding and, further, agreement between the head of the council and councilors whether meetings are open. Second, the councilor was highly suspicious of the intent of the community member, which led to tension in the room. Third, the community member was insisting that he take the floor and he was eagerly expecting his turn. But the message that he received from the head of the council and the councilor was that his voice was not important. We Heard the Plight, Now Leave  Another theme can be captured by the typical response ta dëgjuam hallin, tani dil (we heard the plight, now leave). Officials invited community members to leave the room after they communicated their concerns. The expectation was that community members would describe their problems but not listen to the discussions that were held. The following conversation between a community member and the head of the council (meeting held in 2018) illustrates this dynamic. The woman, introduced by a councilor, described her impoverishment and asked for support with social housing and financial assistance. Citizen, woman: Something, something factual from your side as a municipal council. Can you guarantee 20 thousand old lekë for my children? Can you do it? Head of the council, man: We listened to the word. You are free to go. We will discuss it.

Officials’ actions reveal that they view citizens as powerless. Citizens’ main task was to communicate their problems, withdraw, and be silent. Further, officials did not see any problem in asking community members to leave the room, even though meetings should be open. They acted as all-powerful. By asking community members to leave the room, officials sought to control discussions. Officials used the threat of physically removing citizens from meetings to keep their protests under control. “The door is right there,” said the head of the council to a community member who persistently asked to take the floor. This was a threat—a disciplinary measure—that the official would undertake to punish the citizen. After trying several times to contest officials, the citizen gave up and apologized. You Cannot Give Orders to Us  Officials repeatedly reminded citizens about their subordinate position to them. “Please, please lady, you lady cannot come here and give orders to us,” said the vice head of the council to a community member. Then, he added, “You should keep this in mind” (meeting held in 2018). This was the response to a woman’s request for transparency concerning the social housing program. Officials’ reminders of the power difference went hand in hand with disre-

6  Social Work, Local Democracy and Human Rights in Albania

123

spect and threats. Councilors communicated to the citizens that by allowing them to take the floor, they were doing them a favor. This attitude reinforced the idea that citizens had to foster personal relations with officials to communicate their concerns. While there were instances of councilors who advocated for citizens and encouraged them to take the floor, there were also cases of councilors who did the opposite: They said that meetings are not open to the public and asked community members to leave the room.

6.7 Conclusions This chapter examined the interaction between elected representatives and community members in the local councils of Albania. We focused on local councils—a formal space where community members can interact with their representatives and address issues of concern. Although several studies focus on the reasons that community members do not engage in spaces where decisions are made (Howard, 2003; Krastev, 2009; Uslaner, 2003), we shifted the focus to officials’ responses. Combining quantitative and qualitative measures to examine citizens’ engagement in council meetings and their interaction with officials, we found that council meetings provide little space for citizens and civil society organizations. Even in those instances when community members attended meetings and took the floor, their experiences were far from positive. Officials mainly viewed community members as a nuisance; they sought to control the narratives of community members by limiting the kind of information they could communicate or by describing problems on their behalf. Inherent in officials’ reactions was the view that community members are powerless and they are expected to comply with authorities. Our results highlight the difficulties that community members face in political spaces. Even when community members overcome barriers (e.g., the lack of time) and engage in council meetings, their experiences are quite discouraging; their efforts to make their voices heard are met with strong resistance. These findings pose questions on the kind of interventions that social workers can implement at the community level. How can council meetings transform into spaces where the interaction between officials and community members is based on the principles of human dignity, nondiscrimination, participation, transparency, and accountability (Mapp et al., 2019)? What kind of community-based interventions could improve representation, especially in the light of democratic backsliding? Next, we elaborate on particular actions that social workers can undertake to improve representation in councils and more broadly to strengthen democracy in Albanian communities.

124

M. Dauti and E. Bejko

6.8 Implications for Social Work Practice Community-based interventions that address the barriers that community members face—the reasons they do not engage in decision-making—are often built on the assumption that once the barriers are removed, community members will show greater interest. The main lesson from our analysis is that in contexts characterized by low levels of government responsiveness, interventions that focus on community members alone will not have positive, sustainable results. Social workers should pay greater attention to officials—address their resistance to the requests of community members and develop strategies that can enhance officials’ responsiveness. These efforts could have a positive impact on the quality of political representation and, gradually, strengthen local democracy. Specifically, we propose that community-based interventions increase the visibility of what is happening during council meetings through human rights and local democracy campaigns. The experiences of community members who attend council meetings and take the floor—even though in small numbers—so far have not gained visibility in public discussions. Through organized efforts, social workers can communicate information on the kind of issues that community members raise and their experiences when taking the floor. While describing experiences, social workers can highlight the ways through which community members seek to counteract injustice and exercise power (Sanyal, 2015). By sharing these examples, social workers can encourage other people to attend meetings and raise their voice. Concurrently, social workers should increase the visibility of officials’ responses, especially their resistance to the requests of community members. As the information becomes visible, officials may feel more pressure to consider citizens’ claims and treat them fairly. These efforts—as we discuss below—should highlight that officials’ responses undermine human rights and perpetuate injustice. We suggest that social workers reframe the challenges that community members face during council meetings as human rights issues that need immediate attention and highlight the principles of human dignity, nondiscrimination, participation, transparency, and accountability in their efforts (Mapp et al., 2019). Social workers can refer to these principles, first, to identify concerning issues in the interaction between elected representatives and community members, and, second, to discuss how should an interaction that is driven by human rights principles look like. Social workers can highlight, for instance, that participation in decisions that affect someone’s welfare is not a privilege but a human right (Mapp et al., 2019), or equal access to public services and participation in the government are not personal favors but human rights. Corruption, unfair treatment, discrimination, and exclusion should be framed as violations of human rights not merely problems of democratic transition or democratic decline that will gradually disappear. One of the advantages of this approach is that it considers community members as agents who want to realize their human rights not victims of a system that does not work. For this shift to occur, it is important that social workers are better trained on political social work practice—a lesson that became too obvious during the COVID-19 pandemic (Dauti et al., 2020).

6  Social Work, Local Democracy and Human Rights in Albania

125

Finally, we suggest that social workers have greater leverage in local councils, and, given the importance of local councils for the populations that social workers work with, they strategize for greater influence. Social workers engaged in civil society organizations are particularly well-positioned to participate in council meetings and advocate for issues that community members are concerned about. It is also important that social workers consider other, complementary strategies that can have long-term results such as they push for the development and implementation of council rules that regulate the relationship between representatives and community members and transform local councils into democratic spaces where the relationship between representatives and community members is driven by human rights principles. Data Availability The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in DiVA at http:// www.diva-­portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1414035&dswid=-­5688. Acknowledgments  We are grateful to Geldona Metaj for excellent fieldwork coordination, the research team, and Women’s Network Equality in Decision-Making for fieldwork support. The project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 792969, and United Nations Development Programme—Albanias, contract number ALB-092-2016.

References Abramovitz, M., Sherraden, M., Hill, K., Smith, T. R., Lewis, B., & Mizrahi, T. (2019). Voting is social work: Voices from the National Social Work Voter Mobilization campaign. Journal of Social Work Education, 55(4), 626–644. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1656690 Agolli, A., Guga, B., & Kapexhiu, E. (2013). Participation of citizens and civil society in decision making. Partners Albania. Agolli, I., Kalaja, D., & Ajdini, J. (2021). Historia e shërbimeve sociale dhe profesioni i punës sociale në Shqipëri [The history of social services and the social work profession in Albania]. United Nations Children’s Fund. Bejko, E., & Dhëmbo, E. (2019, June 6). Translating human rights: Creating culturally-relevant human rights measures for social work in Albania. In European Association of Schools of Social Work conference, Madrid, Spain. Biberaj, E. (1990). Albania: A socialist maverick. Westview Press. Bieber, F. (2018). Patterns of competitive authoritarianism in the Western Balkans. East European Politics, 34(3), 337–354. Bogdani, N. (2020, April 1). Pa punë dhe pa ndihma: Karantina thellon varfërinë e komunitetit rom dhe egjiptian [Without job and without assistance: The quarantine deepens the poverty of Roma and Egyptian community]. https://www.reporter.al/pa-­pune-­dhe-­pa-­ndihmakarantina-­ thellon-­varferine-­e-­komunitetit-­rom-­dhe-­egjiptian/?fbclid=IwAR2MzrS1AX25Dxe60LBibnn juv90w94G81XJO7u7YcXCFO681TKXlPYyxi8 Bogdani, N. (2021, February 22). Shpenzimet e kurimit për Covid-19 po sakatojnë mirëqenien e familjeve shqiptare [The cost of treatment for Covid-19 is crippling the welfare of Albanian families]. https://www.reporter.al/shpenzime-­e-­kurimit-­per-­covid-­19-­po-­sakatojne-­ mireqenien-­e-­familjeve-­shqiptare/

126

M. Dauti and E. Bejko

Chu, W.  C. K., Tsui, M., & Yan, M. (2009). Social work as a moral and political practice. International Social Work, 52(3), 287–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872808102064 Dauti, M. (2015). Outcomes of participatory decision making: Evidence from Albania. East European Politics & Societies and Cultures, 29(1), 226–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325414536260 Dauti, M. (2017). The impact of decentralization on participation in formal organizations in Albania: Lessons for community-based interventions. International Social Work, 60(6), 1523–1536. Dauti, M. (2019). Do community scorecards enhance the responsiveness of government officials? Evidence from the implementation of a development project in Albania. Social Development Issues: Alternative Approaches to Global Human Needs, 41(1), 1–14. Dauti, M. (2020). Endline data for the program Leave No One Behind: Assessing the impact of the program and preparing for the long-term consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic. United Nations Development Programme. Dauti, M. (2021). “The newcomer effect”: Gender quotas, state reforms and service responsiveness in local councils. International Journal of Social Welfare, 30(3), 330–341. Dauti, M., & Bejko, E. (2015). Përdorimi i evidencës shkencore në hartimin e politikave të mbrojtjes sociale në Shqipëri [The use of scientific evidence in designing social protection policies]. Institute for Democracy and Mediation. Dauti, M., Dhëmbo, E., Bejko, E., & Allmuça, M. (2020). Rethinking the transformative role of the social work profession in Albania: Some lessons learned from the response to COVID-19. International Social Work, 63(5), 640–645. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872820940356 Duci, V., Osmanaj, E., & Dizdari, V. (2021). Social work curricula review: Social services in social work education in Albania. United Nations Children’s Fund. Erebara, Gj. (2020a, July 28). Over 20 election officials arrested in Albania for 2017 vote manipulation. Balkan Investigative Reporting Network Albania. https://balkaninsight.com/2020/07/28/ over-­20-­election-­officials-­arrested-­in-­albania-­for-­2017-­vote-­manipulation/ Erebara, Gj. (2020b, April 29). COVID-19 worsening environment for media freedom, report warns. Balkan Investigative Reporting Network Albania. https://balkaninsight.com/2020/04/29/covid-­ 19-­is-­aggravating-­an-­already-­difficult-­environment-­for-­media-­freedom-­report/ Freedom House. (2018). Nations in transit 2018: Confronting illiberalism. https://freedomhouse. org/report/nations-­transit/nations-­transit-­2018 Freedom House. (2020). Nations in transit 2020: Dropping the democratic facade. https:// freedomhouse.org/report/nations-­transit/2020/dropping-­democratic-­facade Freedom House. (2021). Nations in transit 2021: Albania. https://freedomhouse.org/country/ albania/nations-­transit/2021 Gehlert, S., Manderscheid, R., Teasley, M., McClain, A., & Butts, S. (2020, January 18). Leveraging social work research expertise to influence public policy to improve American’s wellbeing [Roundtable]. In Society for Social Work and Research 24th annual conference, Washington DC. Gray, M., van Rooyen, C. C., Rennie, G., & Gaha, J. (2002). The political participation of social workers: A comparative study. International Journal of Social Welfare, 11(2), 99–110. https:// doi.org/10.1111/1468-­2397.00204 Helsinki Committee. (2020). Të drejtat e njeriut në kushtet e Covid-19 [Human rights during the COVID-19 pandemic]. Helsinki Committee. Hokenstad, M. C., Khinduka, S. K., & Midgley, J. (Eds.). (1992). Profiles in international social work. NASW Press. Howard, M.  M. (2003). Why post-communist citizens do not join voluntary organizations. In G.  Badescu & E.  M. Uslaner (Eds.), Social capital and the transition to democracy (pp. 165–183). Routledge. Ikonomi, L., & Woodcock, S. (2010). Imoraliteti në familje: Nxitja e ankesave të grave për të përforcuar pushtetin e partisë në Revolucionin Kulturor Shqiptar [Immorality in the family: Eliciting women’s complaints to further party power in Albania’s Cultural Revolution]. Përpjekja, 32–33, 153–180.

6  Social Work, Local Democracy and Human Rights in Albania

127

Iovu, M.-B. (2019). Usage of human rights practice by Romanian social workers. International Social Work. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872819828429 Kera, G., & Hysa, A. (2020). Influencing votes, winning elections: Clientelist practices and private funding of electoral campaigns in Albania. Journal of Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 20(1), 123–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2019.1709698 Korçari, I. (2020). Democracy decline and shrinking civic space—How to reverse the trends. Institute for Democracy and Mediation. Krasniqi, V., McPherson, J., & Villarreal-Otálora, T. (2021). Are we putting human rights into social work practice in Kosovo? The British Journal of Social Work. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcaa235 Krastev, I. (2009). Deepening dissatisfaction. Journal of Democracy, 21(1), 113–119. https://doi. org/10.1353/jod.0.0149 Lorch, J., & Bunk, B. (2016). Using civil society as an authoritarian legitimation strategy: Algeria and Mozambique in comparative perspective. Democratization, 24(6), 987–1005. https://doi. org/10.1080/13510347.2016.1256285 Maerz, S. F., Lührmann, A., Hellmeier, S., Grahn, S., & Lindberg, S. I. (2020). State of the world 2019: Autocratization surges—Resistance grows. Democratization. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2020.1758670 Mapp, S., McPherson, J., Androff, D., & Gabel, S. G. (2019). Social work is a human rights profession. Social Work, 64(3), 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swz023 McClendon, G., Pitzer, K., Sherraden, M., & Aguilar, A. (2020, January 16). Political social work: Voter access through a lens of race and poverty in a hyper-segregated community in the U.S. In Society for Social Work and Research 24th annual conference, Washington DC. McPherson, J. (2020). Now is the time for a rights-based approach to social work practice. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 5(2), 61–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-­020-­00125-­1 National Democratic Institute. (2013). Albania election watch. https://www.ndi.org/sites/default/ files/NDI-­Albania-­Election-­Watch-­Report-­June-­14.pdf Ndrevataj, E. (2020, April 8). Përjashtimi nga ndihma e kthen në mjerim izolimin për komunitetin rom dhe egjiptian [The exclusion from aid turns the isolation of the Roma and Egyptian community to destitution]. https://citizens-­channel.com/2020/04/08/komunitetirom-­dhe-­egjiptian-­ apel-­per-­ndihme-­nuk-­do-­vdesim-­nga-­virusi-­por-­nga-­uria/?fbclid=IwAR38AV1JR9EwlZoFx6 mbptrQj6EbzuydgYntiM_0yU0yMhrCzBy9WKu9D0o Niemietz, K. (2019). Socialism: The failed idea that never dies. London Publishing. Pawar, M. (2014). Social work practice with local communities in developing countries: Imperatives for political engagement. SAGE Open, 4(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014538640 Pritzker, S., & Lane, S.  R. (2017). Political social work: History, forms, and opportunities for innovation. Social Work, 62(1), 80–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/sww072 Pritzker, S., Marschall, M., & King, D. (2020, January 16). Policy barriers to civic engagement: Community-engaged research to inform policy change. In Society for Social Work and Research 24th annual conference, Washington, DC. Reisch, M. (2013). What is the future of social work? Critical and Radical Social Work, 1(1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1332/204986013X665974 Reisch, M. (2016). Why macro practice matters. Human Service Organizations, Management, Leadership & Governance, 41(1), 6–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/23303131.2016.1179537 Ryan, G.  W., & Bernard, H.  R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods, 15(1), 85–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X02239569 Sanyal, P. (2015). The role of emotions in deliberative development. In P. Heller & V. Rao (Eds.), Deliberation and development: Rethinking the role of voice and collective action in unequal societies (pp. 167–191). World Bank. Together for Life. (2021). The impact of Covid-19 on people with disabilities in Albania. https:// togetherforlife.org.al/wp-­content/uploads/2021/01/Impact-­of-­COVID-­19-­to-­People-­with-­ Disabilities-­in-­Albania.pdf

128

M. Dauti and E. Bejko

Transparency International. (2019). Corruption Perceptions Index 2019. https://www.transparency. org/cpi2019?/news/feature/cpi-­2019 Truell, R. (2018). The future of social work and its crucial role in shaping democracy. International Social Work, 61(6), 755–757. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872818811217 Truell, R. (2020). The next global agenda, creating a vision we can all get behind. International Social Work, 63(1), 113–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872819885319 United Nations Albania. (2020). UN Albania Covid-19 socio-economic recovery and response plan. https://www.unicef.org/albania/media/3101/file/UN%20ALBANIA%20COVID-­19%20 SOCIO-­ECONOMIC%20RECOVERY%20&%20RESPONSE%20PLAN.pdf Uslaner, E. M. (2003). Trust and civic engagement in East and West. In G. Badescu & E. M. Uslaner (Eds.), Social capital and the transition to democracy (pp. 81–94). Routledge. Vrugtman, L., & Bino, B. (2020). Opinion poll 2019: Trust in governance. Institute for Democracy and Mediation.

Chapter 7

Human Rights and Social Work Practices in the Age of Uncertainty: The Case of Romania Florin Lazăr and Smaranda Witec

Fig. 7.1  Romania in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe. (Map Credit: Kat Farlowe) F. Lazăr (*) Faculty of Sociology and Social Work, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania e-mail: [email protected] S. Witec Faculty of Sociology and Social Work, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania The National College of Social Workers, Bucharest, Romania e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 V. Krasniqi, J. McPherson (eds.), Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11728-2_7

129

130

F. Lazăr and S. Witec

7.1 Introduction Although the history of social work as a professional activity in Romania dates back to the period between the First and the Second World Wars (the first school of social work was created in 1929), it was only after the fall of the communism in December 1989 that social work was fully restored as an academic discipline and profession. The evolution of the last three decades, though important, has been uneven, and the profession has experienced near-constant uncertainty. While coping with countrywide socioeconomic turmoil, social workers have also dealt with a frequently changing legislative framework (e.g., from 2001 to 2011, three different social work laws were issued). At the same time, human rights were high on the public agenda, mainly through the efforts of national and international civil society organizations to highlight the challenges experienced by Romania’s vulnerable groups. Most recently, during the last decade, social activism has become more visible, and social workers were among the agents of change, although not always in the spotlight. The current COVID-19 pandemic spurred a consolidation of the social work profession and an increased visibility for social work within the Romanian social policy realm. The protection of the rights of various vulnerable groups represented one of the main factors contributing to this consolidation of the profession, alongside long-­ term advocacy efforts of social workers and their professional organization.

7.2 A Short History of Social Work in Romania As in other European countries, social work activities in the Romanian territories are rooted in the tradition of Christian charity. In the second half of the nineteenth century, the social work service of the Bucharest City Hall for children in need was established in 1881. In 1929, with the support of the Romanian Royal House, the Ministry of Health, the Romanian Social Institute, and the Christian Women’s Association, the first school of social work was established, the Principesa Ileana School of Social Work (Lazăr, 2015). At the time, social work was seen as a way to address the social diseases of the society, which were understood to be located within the afflicted individuals (Lazăr, 2021) (Fig. 7.2). The first school of social work in Bucharest, 1929. Moreover, social work was considered to contribute to the creation of the newly established Romanian nation-­state by supporting poor, ablebodied peasants and workers to rise out of poverty and become independent citizens (Mănuilă, 1936). The curriculum of the newly established school comprised courses on social work ethics as well as practice placements in a hospital (Coltea) and a community-center (Mănoiu & Epureanu, 1996), suggesting that the rights of the most vulnerable were addressed in the education of social workers since the very beginning. The teaching staff included sociologists, law graduates, doctors, philosophers, and social work academics (who had been trained mainly in the United States and England). Some of the teaching staff of the school had been involved in the fascist government that ruled the country during the Second World War. The first

7  Human Rights and Social Work Practices in Romania

131

Fig. 7.2  The first school of social work in Bucharest, 1929

issue of a new journal, which began in 1929, Asistența Socială- Buletinul Școalei Superioare de Asistență Socială “Principesa Ileana,” published the detailed curriculum of the education program (later made available online on the website of Revista de Asistenta Sociala (Social Work Review), which reissued the journal in 2002) (Figs. 7.2 and 7.3).1 After the Communist Party abruptly took power in 1947, the fate of social work education in Romania was sealed in 1952: the course was relocated from university education to post-high school vocational training, and in 1969, it was completely dissolved. Residential care for abandoned children, people with disabilities, and the elderly were the only forms of “social work” that continued to exist. With the support of the repressive apparatus of the political police (Securitate), political rights were severely reduced and became largely symbolic (e.g., only the Communist Party existed, and elections were arranged); social rights apparently were expanding (e.g., universal education and health care), though social workers were no longer visible (previously trained social workers were moved to do administrative work).  A scanned copy is available here: http://www.swreview.ro/uploads_ro/1514/1001/Social_Work_ no._1-1929.pdf 1

132

F. Lazăr and S. Witec

Fig. 7.3  Cover of the first official publication of the high school of social work “Princess Ileana,” Bucharest, 1929

7  Human Rights and Social Work Practices in Romania

133

During this period, the communists implemented aggressive pronatalist policies forbidding abortion, which led both to illegal abortions (which severely affected women’s reproductive health) and to many children abandoned in residential institutions (Zamfir & Zamfir, 1995). The degrading standard of living in the 1980s and the frequent violation of basic human rights by the communist state apparatus created the conditions from which the popular uprising of December 1989 arose. Some of the first measures taken by the new postcommunist government included lifting the ban on abortion, opening travel, and allowing freedom of expression. The change of the regime from communism to democracy created great expectations that the rights of all citizens would be respected (Zamfir, 1999). Starting in the early 1990s, public protests against political leaders and any restraints on the rights of citizens were frequent, and a solid civil society was quickly established. The dramatic situation of children and people with disabilities living in residential institutions led to special attention to their rights by national and international organizations. Many newly created nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) developed social work programs to support deinstitutionalization and a different way of managing these institutions in which human rights principles would be put into practice.

7.3 Contextualizing Human Rights After the Romanian Revolution of December 1989 and Positioning Social Work as a Human Rights Profession As Romania moved from communism to democracy, the perspective on human rights evolved also (Dobre, 2012), and Romania ratified the main international and European human rights conventions and treaties (Trocan, 2010). Although the transfer of these treaties and conventions into national legislation was sometimes delayed (Iovu, 2021), the process of joining the European Union in 2007 represented an important factor in their adoption and implementation. In 1991, a new Constitution was adopted in Romania, which enshrines the rights, freedoms, and duties of citizens. In 2003, this Constitution underwent amendments that added broader provisions, based on European regulations. Article 20 of the Romanian Constitution gives international conventions and provisions priority over domestic ones: (1) Constitutional provisions concerning the citizens’ rights and freedoms of citizens shall be interpreted and enforced in conformity with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, with the covenants and other treaties Romania is a party to. (2) Where any inconsistencies exist between the covenants and treaties on the fundamental human rights Romania is a party of, and the national laws, the international regulations shall take precedence, unless the Constitution or national laws comprise more favorable provisions (Romanian Constitution, 2003).

134

F. Lazăr and S. Witec

The above-cited article clearly states that international treaties and covenants prevail over domestic laws in matters related to the human rights of its citizens. The socioeconomic instability from the first decade of postcommunism accompanied the newly established profession, and not until 2001 was the first law passed to establish the social work system. That law was replaced in 2006 and again in 2011. The legislative uncertainty is visible in the frequent change of laws and regulations within the social welfare system. In some cases, laws were not accompanied by the complementary implementation norms, making it impossible to apply the laws for many years (e.g., a law on domestic violence was issued in 2003 but was not implemented for more than 10 years). The 2006 law on the social work system (Law no. 47) states some of the key human rights principles guiding social work practice (e.g., nondiscrimination, respect, dignity, self-determination, and social justice), marking an important milestone in the adoption of human rights principles into Romanian social work. Nevertheless, legislative changes and slow implementation created uncertainty, and practicing social work within a context of uncertainty is a challenge. In the area of rights of vulnerable groups, for instance, Romania is at the beginning of a long and winding road, with inclusion as a first step, then the establishment of rights, followed by internalization of those rights by the population in law as well as practice. As Roth and Toma (2014) point out, although Romania adopted the international human rights laws for multiple vulnerable groups (e.g., children, people with disabilities, women, and minorities), the full implementation of those laws is lagging far behind expectations, especially when vulnerabilities intersect. In one of the few studies to focus on the use of a human rights perspective by Romanian social workers, Mihai Iovu (2021) shows that social workers are more likely to engage in nondiscriminatory practices but less prone to activism. In Iovu’s work, both resilience and work satisfaction are positively associated with a more robust utilization of a human rights approach. Human rights are congruent with social work values, ethics, and practices (IFSW, 2010). The social work profession values the dignity and worth of all human beings and promotes specific programs that enhance their social well-being. Still, the social work approach to human rights needs to be holistic, and not the mere application of the laws (Harms-Smith et al. 2019). Social workers must also realize that there can be risk in these forms of advocacy: By campaigning for the rights of the oppressed, social workers can also expose themselves to risk by authoritarian regimes (Healy, 2008). One of the stated missions of social work is to establish a close relationship with human rights and to advance values such as dignity, respect, and social justice. Social work builds on human rights, creates premises for quality, and seeks to inspire people with potential to be leaders and agents of change, ensuring that vulnerable people are given the opportunity to be heard. Social work needs to be more proactive in promoting a human rights perspective and in advocating for the rights of the disadvantaged groups, as well as advancing the societal-level changes required to fulfill the rights of all the people in need (McPherson et al., 2017). Social workers have a leading role to make the voices of the oppressed heard (IFSW, 1996).

7  Human Rights and Social Work Practices in Romania

135

Rights-based social work makes a significant step forward—from simply responding to individual human needs to taking into account underlying human rights—and it asserts that meeting these fundamental needs is also related to the organization of professional practice. Given that social work defines itself as a human rights profession, understanding and applying human rights are therefore essential in the training of social workers and in their professional practice. Social work’s professional codes of ethics represent the main tool to enhance this specific role of social workers (Mapp et al., 2019). Despite a slow start in building human rights principles into social work practice, in the second decade of the postcommunist period, Romanian social work began moving from simply including these principles in legislation to actually implementing them as the regulation of the profession expanded. In the next section, we will present these regulations in relation to a human rights approach.

7.4 Human Rights and the Regulation of the Professional Practice of Social Work in Romania The Romanian National College of Social Workers (CNASR) was established in 2005 based on Law 466/2004 as a “professional, non-governmental, public interest, apolitical, non-profit organization, with legal personality, autonomous and independent” (Article 26). The professional body of social workers in Romania, CNASR, comprised almost 11,000 members in December 2021 (Fig. 7.4). In 2008, CNASR’s Code of Ethics for the Social Work Profession was published in the Romanian government’s Official Gazette (CNASR, 2008). The Code of Ethics guides the actions taken and provides the framework within which individual social workers make decisions regarding their relationships with assisted persons, colleagues, and employing agencies. It provides a set of professional values, principles, and standards to help social workers make good decisions with their clients. The CNASR Code of Ethics for the Social Work Profession explicitly includes human rights in two articles (Articles 9 and 14), according to which, “the social worker promotes social, economic, political and cultural values, compatible with the principles of social justice” (Article 9) and has the social responsibilities to advocate for the improvement of social conditions to meet basic human needs and promote social justice, to act to facilitate access to specific services and the possibility to choose for vulnerable people, disadvantaged or in difficulty, to promote the conditions that encourage compliance social and cultural diversity, to promote encouraging policies and practices awareness and respect for human diversity, to facilitate and inform the public about participation in community life and social change which intervene, to provide professional services in emergency situations, in the conditions of the law and of the norms regarding the exercise of the profession of social worker, to recognize the fundamental importance of relationships and promote them in professional practice, encouraging relationships between people in order to promote, restores, maintains and/or improves the quality of life, to ensure the observance of the fundamental rights of human rights and the application of international law to which Romania has acceded. Also the

136

F. Lazăr and S. Witec

Fig. 7.4  National Gala of Excellence in Social Work organized annually by the National College of Social Workers, on World Social Work Day, Bucharest, 2019 social workers treat all cases given to assistance, depending on the conclusions of the risk, needs and assessment resources, treat the cases of minors in difficulty with priority, the principle is automatically activated in the child’s best interests, under the terms of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, in this regard having the obligation to self-referral and will always keep in mind that their own behavior is a model for members of the community, acting accordingly (Article14).

The Code of Ethics complements the existing legislation that emphasizes the guiding principles of the Romanian social work system. These principles include a human rights perspective (e.g., social solidarity, human dignity, partnership, participation of the clients, shared decision-making, and freedom to choose the social services provider). However, the new law is also imbued with the neoliberal ethos, as is pointed out by Lazăr et al. (2019) (e.g., these other principles include activation, efficacy, efficiency, competition, equity, and targeting). In 2019, CNASR created a Code of Social Work Practice to accompany the 2008 Deontological Code of the Social Work Profession, establishing for the first time a set of rules for the practice of Romanian social work. The Code of Social Work Practice is unique in this region of Europe, and it has the support of professionals, as well as local and central authorities. The Code brings with it a number of guarantees for social workers and employers that can lead to positive change and solutions to improve social work practice. One of its fundamental tenets holds that the field of social work focuses on improving people’s lives by providing and developing appropriate social services. Another holds social workers responsible for contributing through the knowledge and skills of each member of the professional community, for providing support through social welfare programs, and for making efforts to protect the professional community against unethical or incompetent social work practice. The Code of Social Work Practice covers professional standards, skills, and the process for evaluating the quality of social workers’ work in each stage of their career. It also identifies seven levels of responsibility of the social worker in social intervention, including involvement in continuing vocational education. For this

7  Human Rights and Social Work Practices in Romania

137

purpose, the continuing education framework program explicitly mentions mandatory participation in a course to facilitate acquiring a transversal/cross-cutting competence in the field of knowledge and the  promotion of human rights (CNASR, 2019). A Romanian social worker should know “the national and international legislation on human rights and carr[y] out his/her professional activities by respecting human rights” (CNASR, 2019, p. 59). The Code identifies social workers’ responsibilities in practice with individuals, groups, and communities, as well as their roles as agents of social change in different organizational contexts (IFSW, 1996). To promote the content of the Code, several webinars were organized by CNASR throughout 2020 and 2021, as well as specific podcasts on key topics in the Code. More than 2000 social workers participated in these webinars.

7.5 Vulnerabilities in Social Work Practice, Human Rights Challenges, and Best Practices During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Romania The COVID-19 pandemic had the unintended effect in Romania of consolidating the social work profession. During this time of national and international crisis, social work stepped up to play an active role at the national, regional, and local levels to develop and distribute the services that were needed by citizens. The social work system successfully adapted to a multiplicity of new social challenges. Knowing and understanding the needs of the clients and the problems of the social welfare system and taking responsibility for drawing attention to these problems and to the importance of the human resource consolidated and elevated the role of the social work system in supporting the human rights of all Romanian citizens. Paradoxically, therefore, COVID-19 created not only a crisis but also an opportunity: The opportunity for social workers to highlight their work and its importance in the social functioning of the society. Moreover, the human rights perspective proved to be one of the key drivers of this shift, as social workers were considered “essential workers,” helping ensure the rights of vulnerable groups. While social work’s strengths and capacities are not new, Romanian society became increasingly aware of our newly visible profession during the pandemic, which therefore represents a significant milestone—and a success upon which social workers must now capitalize. As in other parts of the world, the COVID-19 pandemic more severely affected vulnerable groups, who saw their incomes shrink; their social ties cut; and their access to social, education, and healthcare services severely reduced (UNICEF, 2020). In Romania, vulnerable children and families, the Roma population, and the dependent elderly all suffered, and their experiences can be usefully analyzed from a human rights perspective.

138

F. Lazăr and S. Witec

7.5.1 Vulnerable Children In Romania, as in many countries, children’s health seems to have been less affected by COVID-19 than that of adults; still, the impact on their well-being has been significant (United Nations, 2020). For children with disabilities, children from ethnic minorities, and children living in poverty or in rural or disadvantaged communities, the impact has been especially severe (Save the Children, 2021). Eurostat data (2021) describe the situation of Romanian children: In 2020, 41.5% were at risk of poverty or social exclusion—the highest rate in the European Union, and an increase of 1.5 percentage points compared with 2019. UNICEF (2020, p. 37) noted, “the main groups affected by the current situation are children from poor families, Roma children, children left behind by migrant workers, children living in overcrowded dwellings and disabled children.” Children living in poverty are less likely to have had access to necessary technology to attend online education when the lockdown measures were in place during the first phase of the pandemic. Access for children with disabilities to rehabilitation and therapy was also denied for most of the first year of the pandemic, as many programs and services were closed down, and these children had scant access to any online services that became available. Children with disabilities living in more privileged families were also impacted, as online services were only infrequently available. Roma children, who already experienced social exclusion and discrimination before the pandemic, found their previous disadvantages amplified by COVID-19. Their parents’ already limited employment opportunities were reduced; their community’s low digital skills compounded the children’s lack of preparedness for virtual school; and their communities experienced even deeper poverty (UNICEF, 2020). Limited mobility during the lockdown affected daily laborers, who are the main type of workers among many Roma families (UNICEF, 2020). Similar reports from the region (EU Fundamental Rights Agency, 2020b; REF, 2020) point to the general vulnerabilities of Roma and Traveler parents and children in accessing education and healthcare services; moreover, the disparities in the access to computers and home internet connections can widen the gaps in children’s educational performances in the absence of targeted policies and thus jeopardize the fulfillment of their right to education (REF, 2020.) Children left behind by parents who are working abroad are another vulnerable group. At the end of June 2021, there were 75,803 Romania children in this situation, of whom 12,664 had both parents abroad and 54,201 had one parent living in another country (NARPDCA, 2021). The total number of children with at least one parent living abroad has decreased in the last 5 years, since in 2016 a record 95,308 children were in this situation (Scorcia-Popescu, 2020). Due to the restrictions imposed throughout Europe, many Romanian migrants returned home, as they lost their jobs and their financial security was jeopardized (Zamfir & Zamfir, 2020). It is worth mentioning that Romanians represent one of the largest migrant groups within the European continent in several countries such as Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom,

7  Human Rights and Social Work Practices in Romania

139

and Germany. In most cases, children with both parents abroad stay with grandparents or relatives, but around 3%–4% end up in foster care and almost 1% in residential care (Scorcia-Popescu, 2020). Children of underage mothers are another vulnerable group: 7977 underage mothers were registered in 2019, of whom 700 gave birth before turning 15 (Save the Children, 2021). Children of these young mothers are almost always more vulnerable than other children, for multiple reasons; for instance, they may not get immunized on time or have regular access to medical services. During the pandemic in April 2020, 23% of young parents were unable to purchase medicines for their children, while 15% said they did not have access to medical services for their children (Save the Children, 2021). The COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown measures introduced in Romania presented a complex challenge for schools and their communities: Schools had to find quick solutions to switch to online learning; teachers had to learn how to use virtual tools, adapt curricula to online formats, and learn to promote child well-being and the capacity of pupils to follow lessons online. Children living in poverty did not have the access to the necessary equipment (devices, internet connection) to attend online education, and their parents were less likely to be able to support them in the learning process due to their own limited digital skills (UNICEF, 2020). Research carried out in May–June 2020  in rural Romania showed that “more than 60% of parents did not work and 40% of those surveyed failed to provide food, medicines or hygiene products altogether”; in addition, “40% of rural students did not attend online classes” (World Vision, 2020). It is estimated that about one-third of Romanian children could not access online education from March to June 2020 (Eurochild, 2020). In rural areas, almost two-thirds of teachers organized online classes, while the others used different ways of working with children (e.g., worksheets, exercises sent via WhatsApp or email). In families with more than one child in school, almost half of them could provide access to a digital device for every child (World Vision, 2020). Some NGOs and civil society organizations (e.g., the Church) continued to support children living in rural and disadvantaged communities throughout the pandemic period in order to prevent school dropout (Alexa & Baciu, 2021). Community social work services represented for some vulnerable families with children the only form of support (Lăcătuș-Iakab & Lăcătuș-Iakab, 2020). In the second part of 2020, the Ministry of Education responded by loaning laptops and tablets to students from poor families, through schools and local authorities. In September 2021, the Romanian government published an Emergency Ordinance creating the National Child Support Program. The ordinance was motivated by the fact that “the COVID-19 pandemic has particularly affected vulnerable populations, and children have been among those who have fully felt its immediate effects, while at the same time running the risk of being affected by long-term isolation, lack of access to formal education, lack of psycho-emotional support and increasing incidence of domestic and online violence” (Emergency Ordinance no. 105, 2021). The program established a national telephone number, 119, for reporting cases of abuse, neglect, exploitation, and any other forms of violence against children, and

140

F. Lazăr and S. Witec

developed the necessary infrastructure for its operation in situations that do not require the immediate intervention of specialized agencies within the 112 Emergency Service. While the official data suggest a decrease in child abuse and neglect reported  to child protection services, civil society reports and qualitative studies highlight the challenges faced by victims of domestic violence (including children) in accessing social services, as well as an increase in police reporting of such situations in 2020 (Alexandru et al., 2021). As of January 2022, therapy is available for children affected by the COVID-19 pandemic; the national telephone number for reporting cases of abuse, neglect, exploitation, and any other form of violence against the child is open; people are able to support the police in identifying missing children through the RoALERT system; and all counties in the country will have listening rooms for child victims of crime, supported by teams of dedicated specialists. The National Child Support Program is one of the first government child support programs in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and it can be considered a strong example of rights-based policy and practice. Throughout the pandemic, social work services for children and families have been instrumental in ensuring that the rights of vulnerable children have been addressed. The response measures varied from material support for poor families to online or telephone support therapies or counseling to providing masks and hand sanitizers to recommendations and guidelines to reduce health risks for staff working with children and families.

7.5.2 Roma Population In Romania, the Research Institute for the Quality of Life (ICCV) has analyzed the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on the social work system and on the quality of life in a series of policy papers published in April and May 2020. Two of the reports underline the disproportionate impact of restrictions of movement experienced by persons with precarious socioeconomic status (Zamfir & Zamfir, 2020). These persons are less likely to be able to observe stay-at-home measures for several reasons: They are involved in activities that cannot be performed from home; they need to go out often in search of work or other sources of income; and they live in crowded households, unable to observe social distancing measures. Roma are among  the most affected groups, because up to 80% of the Roma are living in poverty, have precarious income, and/or live in crowded households (EU Fundamental Rights Agency, 2020a). The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated poverty and inequality for Roma communities; “the most affected are members of Roma communities that are highly concentrated and lack access to water, who face a high degree of poverty and who are located in municipalities that do not have sufficient financial resources to cover basic needs in emergency situations” (EU Fundamental Rights Agency, 2020a, p. 20). The aggravation of poverty is likely to be more present among the Roma population, as many work in unsecure employment and with limited coverage by

7  Human Rights and Social Work Practices in Romania

141

social and health insurance (Korunovska & Jovanovic, 2020). Another report from Roma Education Fund pointed out additional challenges that Roma families face are massive job layouts, unsecure or lack of basic income, lower ability to afford healthy diets, which is particularly worrying for children’s physical and brain development. Limited food supplies, poor access to medical coverage and health services, access to clean drinking water to hygiene products and electricity. The lack of these basic facilities additionally worsens the health status of Roma, both parents and children and increase their vulnerability to the pandemic. The outbreak discriminatory practices by several state authorities in terms of locking down Roma settlements will have a long-term negative impact on the educational achievements of Roma. As well as it will further stigmatize Roma communities leading to deepened isolation (REF, 2020, p. 2).

Discrimination, social exclusion, and the increased risk of poverty have long ranked among the most common problems of Roma communities—problems that were only intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic. Social workers and community social services have provided crucial responses to these problems, as part of broader measures aimed at helping poor families and children. These responses were not necessarily tailored to the specific needs of the Roma communities, but nevertheless they are steps in the right direction—steps that can lead to future progress in rights-based practice.

7.5.3 Elderly People: Good Practices as Response of the Social Welfare System in the Context of COVID-19 Elderly people are another group most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. First, as many of the elderly have health problems (comorbidities), they are more vulnerable to developing serious complications due to Sars-Cov-2 infection, and they have higher complication and mortality rates if they do become infected (United Nations, 2020). Second, those who were alone or with limited social support found it difficult to manage restrictions during lockdowns. Moreover, those living in residential care or nursing homes have been at higher risk of infection and painful isolation as they lived in a closed group, with family visits and interactions allowed only virtually or by phone. All these show that the rights of elderly people have been severely limited during the pandemic (Akerkar, 2020) much more than before (Lebret, 2020). In Romania, COVID-19 restrictions reduced the capacity for elderly persons to receive personal care, access healthcare services, and obtain basic food and medicines. Moreover, some experienced poor health, poor understanding of the social behavior needed to comply with precautions, lack of access to information, and lack of emotional support (Bugnariu, 2020). Social workers have been instrumental, as the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection has developed methodological provisions, instructions, information, and circulars on the management and prevention of the spread of COVID-19 virus in residential social services (Truell, 2020). The General Directorates of Social Assistance and Child Protection managed direct communication and real-time

142

F. Lazăr and S. Witec

reporting throughout the country, and private companies provided material support to public social services. In an effort to manage and limit the spread of the pandemic in residential centers for the elderly, the central government ordered a series of measures—both legislative measures and measures of support and guidance for staff members. Thus, in health units and in social work services, it was possible to hire supplementary staff, without competition when necessary, for a determined period of 6 months. As part of the response measure to support social work practice, the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection mandated preventive isolation measures at the workplace (many of the public and private residential services had already voluntarily taken the measure of preventive isolation at work). One of the support and guidance measures was the mapping of the situation of all residential centers for the elderly (public and private), to follow closely the evolution of the pandemic and to take action as needed in specific situations. The Ministry of European Investments and Projects (2020) has mentioned the project “Support for vulnerable people in the context of the COVID-19 epidemic”—implemented by the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection in partnership with the Professional Non-Governmental Association of Social Work as an example of good practice in helping protect the elderly and other vulnerable populations from the spread of COVID-19. From May 2020 to March 2021, local and central public authorities developed measures to provide the necessary support to mitigate the effects of limiting the right of movement of persons. More than 100,000 elderly or disabled people affected by the isolation imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic have been supported by 1000 social workers and community workers. The activities carried out included operating a national call center that coordinated and monitored requests from vulnerable people in need of support, as well as mapping and analyzing social needs at the national level. In this regard, a single point of contact has been created at the national level to ensure communication between people in vulnerable groups affected by the measures taken by the authorities regarding the restriction of the right to travel and local and central public authorities with responsibilities in the field of social work. These measures were necessary in order to identify the problems and needs of people in vulnerable groups and to improve the situation in vulnerable groups.

7.6 Social Workers’ Response to Uncertainty During the Pandemic In the early months of the pandemic, social workers and those working in residential institutions or care experienced high levels of stress, being at the frontline of a social welfare system facing the uncertainty of the new pandemic. After March 11, 2020, when a state of emergency was declared in Romania, many social workers—such as those working in residential care or hospital settings—were forced into lockdown at their workplace every 2 weeks. Most NGO activities with clients were suspended for a few months in 2020, and many were moved to an online format whenever

7  Human Rights and Social Work Practices in Romania

143

possible or feasible. To respond to the pandemic’s uncertainties and to guide practitioners, the National College of Social Workers (CNASR) issued guidelines and recommendations for social workers in several fields of practice (e.g., penitentiaries, child protection, elderly, and community services).2 Furthermore, in collaboration and with financial support from UNICEF, a series of free webinars for social workers was delivered monthly in 2020, 2021, and 2022. One of these webinars, covering human rights and its application to social work practice, was based on the transversal competencies included in the recently approved Code of Practice. Other online meetings with social workers were dedicated to specific areas of practice and included high-ranking officials and practitioners. In addition to these initiatives from the professional organization of social workers, many social programs were developed by NGOs and civil society organizations to support different vulnerable groups (e.g., elderly, people with disabilities, and children from poor families). In research carried out during May 2020, Bacter et al. (2021) showed that social workers’ workload increased, while the time spent for fieldwork decreased; it is worth mentioning that communication with clients did not decrease, despite the impact of social distancing measures, since phone and internet contact increased substantially. Romanian social workers responded to the pandemic’s uncertainties by increasing their solidarity with clients and within the social work community. This response thus contributed to the respect for human rights principles enshrined in the profession’s core values. As Cioarță (2019) pointed out before the pandemic, the social activism of social workers is manifested in their everyday practice, although it is not always recognized as such by the social workers themselves. A recent survey among registered social workers (Iovu & Lazăr, 2021) highlighted that human rights competencies (e.g., nondiscrimination, respect for the rights of their clients, and respect for diversity) are highly valued by Romanian social workers, especially by younger generations.

7.7 Conclusion The early establishment of Romanian social work education and practice after the end of the First World War was interrupted by the communist regime. After being resurrected after the fall of communism in 1990, the social work profession was reconstructed and evolved from a needs-based approach to a human rights approach. This transition mirrored the wider socioeconomic transition of the Romanian society from communism to neoliberalism, moving from merely stating human rights principles to establishing them as guiding principles of the Code of Practice. Despite the socioeconomic uncertainty, the changing legislation, and the emergence of new

 https://cnasr.ro/2020-03-24-recomandari-sectoriale-pentru-asisten-ii-sociali-care-activeaza-indiverse-sub-domenii-ale-asisten-ei-sociale 2

144

F. Lazăr and S. Witec

challenges and crises, the Romanian social work profession has matured and become stronger, with human rights principles at the forefront of this transformation.

References Akerkar, S. (2020). Affirming radical equality in the context of Covid-19: Human rights of older people and people with disabilities. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 12, 276–283. https:// doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huaa032. https://academic.oup.com/jhrp/article/12/2/276/5922871 Alexa, S., & Baciu, E. L. (2021). 15 challenges in supporting disadvantaged children’s access to education during the Covid-19 pandemic: The experience of a Romanian nonprofit organization. Social Work Review/Revista de Asistenta Sociala, XX(1), 43–58. Alexandru, M., Kozma, A., & Baciu, A. (2021). Aspects of the socio-medical situation of victims of domestic violence from Romania in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. Romanian Journal of Legal Medicine, 29(2), 186–191. Bacter, C., Săveanu, S., & Marc, C. (2021). Social work during the COVID-19 pandemic. Administrative and personal response to new challenges. Social Change Review, 19. https:// doi.org/10.2478/scr-­2021-­0004 Bugnariu, A.  I. (2020). The effects of physical isolation on the elderly in Romania, during the Covid-19 pandemic. Pangeea, 20(20), 116–121. Cioarţă, I. (2019). Activism and its manifestations in social work profession in Romania-between conceptualisation and practice? Social Work Review/Revista de Asistenta Sociala, XVIII, 3, 29–43. CNASR. (2008, March 6). Code of ethics for the social work profession (Romania). Official Gazette, no. 173. https://main.components.ro/uploads/12c6a09675620f589055800ba6ceceee/2017/06/ Codul_deontologic_al_profesiei_de_asistent_social.pdf CNASR. (2019). Code of social worker practice (Romania). https://main.components.ro/upload s/12c6a09675620f589055800ba6ceceee/2020/01/cnasr_catalog-­a5_-­148x210mm-­_lowres_ protect-­1-­bun-­de-­print.pdf Constitution of Romania. (2003). http://www.cdep.ro/pls/dic/site.page?den=act2_2&par1=2 Dobre, R. R. (2012). Evolution of human rights development in Romania. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 4967–4972. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271561404_ Evolution_of_Human_Rights_Development_in_Romania/link/57d9a18c08ae5f03b49a0ef3/ download Emergency Ordinance no. 105 of 23 September 2021 on the Approval and Implementation of the National Child Support Program, in the Context of the COVID-19 pandemic—“Caring for children”. (2021). Romanian Government. Official Gazette no. 917 of 24 September 2021. http://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/246646 EU Fundamental Rights Agency. (2020a). Implications of COVID-19 pandemic on Roma and Travellers communities Country: Romania. https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/ ro_report_-­_covid-­19_impact_on_roma_en.pdf EU Fundamental Rights Agency. (2020b). Coronavirus Pandemic in the EU—Impact on Roma and Travellers. https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-­2020-­coronavirus-­pandemic-­ eu-­bulletin-­roma_en.pdf Eurochild. (2020). Growing up in lockdown: Europe’s children in the age of Covid-19. Report. https://eurochild.org/uploads/2020/12/2020-­Eurochild-­Semester-­Report.pdf Eurostat. (2021). People at risk of poverty or social exclusion by age and sex—New definition [ilc_ peps01n]. Last update: 17-12-2021. https://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do Harms-Smith, L., Martinez-Herrero M.  I., Arnell, P., Bolger, J., Butler-Warke, A., Cook, W., Downie, M., Farmen, N., Nichols, J., & MacDermott, D. (2019). Social work and human

7  Human Rights and Social Work Practices in Romania

145

rights: A practice guide. BASW. https://www.basw.co.uk/system/files/resources/Social%20 Work%20and%20Human%20Rights%20A%20Practice%20Guide.%20DEC%202019.pdf Healy, L. M. (2008). Exploring the history of social work as a human rights profession. International Social Work, 51(6), 735–748. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872808095247 International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW). (1996). Human rights. International policy papers. IFSW. https://www.ifsw.org/human-­rights-­policy/ International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) Europe. (2010). Standards in social work practice meeting human rights. International Federation of Social Workers European Region. http:// cdn.ifsw.org/assets/ifsw_45904-­8.pdf Iovu, M. B. (2021). Usage of the human rights practice by Romanian social workers. International Social Work, 6(4), 481–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872819828429 Iovu, M.  B., & Lazăr, F. (2021). Social work competencies: A descriptive analysis on practice behaviours among Romanian social workers. European Journal of Social Work. Online ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2021.1934408 Korunovska, N., & Jovanovic, Z. (2020). Roma in the Covid-19 crisis: An early warning from six EU member states. Open Society Foundation. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/ resources/Roma%20in%20the%20COVID-­19%20crisis%20-­% 20An%20early%20warning%20from%20six%20EU%20Member%20States.pdf Lăcătuș-Iakab, A.  T., & Lăcătuș-Iakab, B.  O. (2020). Challenges for social workers during the coronavirus pandemic. Scientific Annals of the “Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University, Iaşi. New Series Sociology and Social Work Section, 13(2). Lazăr, F. (2015). Social work and welfare policy in Romania: History and current challenges. Quaderni del Csal, Numero speciale di Visioni LatinoAmericane, Luglio, 7(13), 65–82. Lazăr, F. (2021). The revival of Romanian social work education and its prospects. In N. Zganec & M.  Laging (Eds.), Social work education in Europe: Traditions and transformations (pp. 193–209). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-­3-­030-­69701-­3_10 Lazăr, F., Mihai, A., Gaba, D., Ciocănel, A., Rentea, G., & Munch, S. (2019). Romanian social workers facing the challenges of neo-liberalism. European Journal of Social Work, 22(2), 326–337. Lebret, A. (2020). Covid-19 and derogation to human rights. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 7(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa015 Mănoiu, F., & Epureanu, V. (1996). Asistența socială în România [Social work in Romania]. All, Bucuresti. Mănuilă, V. (1936). Asistenta sociala ca factor de politică socială [Social work as a social policy factor]. ARHIVA PENTRU ȘTIINTA ȘI REFORMA SOCIALA Omagiu Profesorului D. GUSTI: II. XXV de ani de Invatamant Universitar (1910-1935), Anul XIV, 960–963. Mapp, S., McPherson, J., Androff, D., & Gabel, S. G. (2019). Social work is a human rights profession. Social Work, 64(3), 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swz023 McPherson, J., Siebert, C.  F., & Siebert, D.  C. (2017). Measuring rights-based perspectives: A validation of the human rights lens in social work scale. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 8(2), 233–257. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/692017 Ministry of European Investments and Projects. (2020). https://mfe.gov.ro/varstnici/ NARPDCA. (2021). Statistics. Situation of children with parents going to work abroad. 30 June 2021. http://andpdca.gov.ro/w/date-­statistice-­copii-­si-­adoptii/ Roma Education Fund (REF). (2020). Roma Education Fund’s statement on Covid 19 effecting Roma communities and access to education. https://www.romaeducationfund.org/wp-­content/ uploads/2020/04/Roma-­Education-­Fund-­Statement-­on-­COVID-­19-­pandemic.pdf Roth, M., & Toma, S. (2014). The plight of Romanian social protection: Addressing the vulnerabilities and well-being in Romanian Roma families. International Journal of Human Rights, 18(6), 714–734. http://migrom.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/wp-­content/uploads/2015/10/Toma_ 2014.pdf Save the Children. (2021). Guaranteeing children’s future. https://resource-­centre-­uploads. s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/Guaranteeing-­Childrens-­Future-­Report-­Full-­compressed.pdf

146

F. Lazăr and S. Witec

Scorcia-Popescu, R. (2020). Child abandonment and migration–Romanian study. Revista de Asistenţă Socială, 19(3), 135–143. Trocan, L. M. (2010). The evolution of human rights in Romania. Dny práva—2010—Days of Law, 1. ed. Masaryk University. https://www.law.muni.cz/sborniky/dny_prava_2010/files/prispevky/ 11_evropa/LAURA%20MAGDALENA_TROCAN_(4718).pdf Truell, R. (2020). News from our societies–IFSW: Covid-19: The struggle, success and expansion of social work–Reflections on the profession’s global response, 5 months on. International Social Work, 63(4), 545–548. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872820936448 UNICEF. (2020). Rapid assessment of the situation of children and their families with a focus on the vulnerable ones in the context of the Covid-19 outbreak in Romania. https://www.unicef.org/romania/documents/rapid-­a ssessment-­s ituation-­c hildren-­a nd -­their-­families-­focus-­vulnerable-­ones-­context United Nations. (2020). COVID-19 and human rights. We are all in this together. https://www. un.org/victimsofterrorism/sites/www.un.org.victimsofterrorism/files/un_-­_human_rights_ and_covid_april_2020.pdf World Vision. (2020). Bunastarea copilului din mediul rural [Child wellbeing in rural area]. Risoprint. Cluj-Napoca. Romania. https://worldvision.ro/wp-­content/uploads/2020/11/Raport-­ de-­Bunastare-­a-­Copilului-­din-­Mediul-­Rural-­2020.pdf Zamfir, C. (1999). Politici sociale in Romania: 1990–1998 [Social policies in Romania: 1990–1998]. Ed. Expert. Zamfir, E., & Zamfir, C. (coord.). (1995). Politici sociale: România în context European [Social policies: Romania in a European context]. Editura Alternative. Zamfir, C., & Zamfir, E. (2020). Calitatea vieţii în timpul pandemiei: Probleme şi politici de răspuns [Quality of life during the pandemic: Problems and response policies]. Institutul de Cercetare a Calitatii Vietii, Academia Romana. https://acad.ro/SARS-­CoV-­2/doc/d01-­CalitateaVietii.pdf

Chapter 8

Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria: Policy, Practice, and Education Lilyana Strakova, Boncho Gospodinov, and Rossitsa Simeonova

Fig. 8.1  Bulgaria in relation to its neighboring countries in Southeast Europe. (Map Credit: Kat Farlowe) L. Strakova · R. Simeonova (*) Department of Social Work, Faculty of Education, Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, Sofia, Bulgaria e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] B. Gospodinov Department of Didactics, Faculty of Education, Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, Sofia, Bulgaria e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 V. Krasniqi, J. McPherson (eds.), Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11728-2_8

147

148

L. Strakova et al.

8.1 Introduction Human rights policies and practices are one of the European Union’s (EU) main concerns. Such considerations take priority in all spheres of public life, social policy, and social work for each of the member states, including Bulgaria, and they have become a major focus for many social programs and affirmative action measures, with the goal of achieving social equality through inclusion and equal opportunity. Historically, modernity is understood in relation to revolutions, which reject the social hierarchy of traditional society and proclaim the natural rights of humans and citizens. The French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) established the notion that people are born free and equal in their inviolable rights, an idea maintained as the core belief of contemporary, international, human rights law. In the legal literature, this principle of equality in general grants each individual the same rights and obligations and guarantees each individual the right to equal treatment by and equal protection from state institutions under the law. This principle also refers not only to providing equitable outcomes but also to arranging for equal opportunities to pursue such outcomes. Even in the most developed rule of law state systems, legal equality guarantees an equal start and equal access for individuals—who may achieve different results, depending on their capabilities and positions in the broader social structure. Hence, social policy and social work are of particular significance for equal opportunity by directly addressing human needs and safeguarding human rights. Social work practice and education have a special humane and moral responsibility. Social work plays a crucial role in society: to address the discrepancies between the assets (talents; abilities; disabilities; and adverse and/or unhealthy economic, physical, social, emotional, and environmental circumstances) and the minimum standard requirements for decent living conditions and the empowerment of both individuals and communities. Bulgaria’s social development since 1989 and during the following transitional period has been marked by political and economic instability, which resulted in a sense of uncertainty in a large part of the population, especially vulnerable social groups. In this context, the main challenges for social policy and social work were the rising unemployment; high emigration rate; increasing poverty; and insufficient provision of diverse social services, especially in the community, targeting vulnerable social groups—people with disabilities, older people, children deprived of parental care, deinstitutionalization of childcare, and the like. These challenges required sustained efforts and significant resources—financial and human—as an element of the social policy and practice. The expectations of the citizens for rapid and positive social and economic changes combined with the slow processes leading to improved well-being and quality of life increased the sense of insecurity and dissatisfaction. Against this backdrop, this chapter explores human rights, social work practice, and social work education in Bulgaria; it is organized into these three main themes. First, human rights are considered within the broader framework of Bulgaria’s

8  Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria

149

membership in the EU; then we shift to rights-based approaches at both the policy and institutional levels. In this second section, we provide an overview of human rights considerations within social policy and social work. We specifically discuss human rights and social work with regard to children’s rights and the rights of people with disabilities in relation to economic insecurity and uncertainty. Finally, the chapter looks at the history of social work education and the integration of human rights considerations into the social work curricula of institutions of higher education in Bulgaria. In conclusion, we emphasize the need for the further integration of rights-based approaches in social work as an impetus for greater equality and nondiscrimination nationwide.

8.2 Human Rights in the Bulgarian Context Bulgaria became a full-fledged member of the EU in 2007 and has continuously sought greater alignment with EU policies. This endeavor has entailed the adoption of certain principles that underlie legislation and political and state institutions, as well as certain human rights principles and standards. The EU standards adopted by Bulgaria have tasked social policy with the goal of achieving social inclusion and equality for vulnerable groups and protection from discrimination on any demographic basis, such as age, gender, religion, economic or social status, disability, and so on. Social work practice has for the last 14 years shown that the existence of antidiscrimination legislation is not sufficient to achieve equality and the protection of the rights of certain groups of individuals. The legal framework related to human rights and the implementation of equality policies is a new domain for public policy in Bulgaria. Indeed, since 2007, various projects have been implemented by social workers and educators, lawyers, sociologists, political scientists, and other specialists to train civil servants, university administrators, and nongovernmental organization employees. Numerous and diverse training activities regarding the nature of the EU and national policies and practices promoting equality and equal opportunities have been implemented to raise the level of awareness and to strengthen the response at various levels of Bulgarian society (within the Phare Service Contract BG 2004/016–919.04.01., the technical assistance of the instrument for pre-accession assistance—referred to as IPA—of the EU to build a network of regional training centers for the implementation and application of EU law and the protection of human rights) (Learning from experience-some reflections on how training can help develop administrative capacity, 2008). Training manuals have been developed to assist trainers, lecturers, and experts to teach topics related to human rights, which are especially important for the former socialist countries, such as Bulgaria (see Equality Policies and Equal Opportunities, 2007; Strakova et al., 2008). The main goals of these large-scale training activities were, and remain to be, to raise awareness of the general principles and norms of the antidiscrimination policies of the EU; to increase respect for fundamental human

150

L. Strakova et al.

rights and the principles of equality as proclaimed in all international human rights protocols; and to draw attention to current, national, antidiscrimination norms and policies. At the same time, ongoing economic prospects in Bulgaria were constantly being analyzed, and attempts were being made to plan to develop and assess social policy areas and social work interventions that contribute to the protection of the rights of all citizens, with a special focus on vulnerable social groups. Socioeconomic research in recent years has shown a decline in optimism about the development of the world economy. There is still no satisfactory and generally accepted answer as to why such a decline is occurring. One of the most common reasons cited for the slowdown of economic growth is the exhaustion of fiscal stimulus effects in the United States accompanied by a gradual tightening of monetary policy and stagnation in the Euro zone (see Yotsov et al., 2019–2020). According to data from these same studies, the rate of economic growth in Bulgaria decreased from 3.6% in 2017 to 3.1% in 2018. Despite this slowdown, growth remains above the national average among EU nations, but it is among the lowest of the new member states. Reports show that despite a generally positive economic outlook, maintaining the current pace of economic growth means that convergence with the EU’s average per capita income remains far in the future (Yotsov et al., 2019–2020). Therefore, we argue that social policy and social work aimed at protecting rights will face challenges where resources for social provisions are not sufficient because of economic stagnation. According to experts (Yotsov et al., 2019–2020), the growth achieved cannot yet be defined as inclusive, and it will have no tangible impact on poverty reduction or economic and social inequalities. In Bulgaria, poverty and income inequality are the highest of the EU states. A tax system based on proportional income taxation has not reduced market income inequality but rather has deepened it (see Yotsov et al., 2019–2020). The lack of sustainable economic development and reduced investments creates a sense of insecurity among Bulgarian citizens, which is further heightened by the postsocialist transition that adversely affected employment patterns, unemployment rates, social security schemes, and wages. Labor market developments (see Chap. 6 of the National Strategy for Reducing Poverty and Promoting Social Inclusion 2030; see Council of Ministers, 2020) demonstrate a decline in employment after 2017 and small changes in key indicators, which deepened negative trends. The official number of unemployed and inactive is declining, but this drop is significantly supported by demographic factors. The labor force has shrunken, especially in care-related professions. This has prompted government actions aimed at motivating the discouraged and the inactive population who are willing to work. In this respect, Labor Offices at the regional and municipal levels endorse proactive social policies and successful social work activities. Today, intensive dialogues are taking place among the policy-makers about changes in labor protection mechanisms and policies. Economic pessimism and uncertainty have led to a decrease in employer demand in the labor market. Employees, who in the past were attracted and retained through higher salaries,

8  Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria

151

have been let go; the significance of wages as a motivator for employment is declining. The expected positive inflation in the coming years requires the rethinking of social policy for the protection of wages and new social measures for those who will be left without an income. The National Strategy for Reducing Poverty and Promoting Social Inclusion 2030, as adopted by the Bulgarian government (2020), states that the directive of social policy and social work is not simply to soften the negative effects of poverty and inequality but rather to address inequality at a deeper level, at the root causes of poverty. The research community (universities, think tanks, and public and professional organizations) has launched a meaningful public debate on the root causes of poverty, especially among vulnerable social groups and the importance of social and economic mechanisms that can improve the quality of life for such groups. Poverty is not just a lack of income among the population; it entails both the lack of funds to meet basic needs and a lack of conditions, prerequisites, and opportunities for leading a dignified and fulfilling life. The economic analyses of leading experts from Bulgarian Academy of Science prove that demographic changes (low birthrate, high mortality rate, decrease in and the aging of the population, migration flows, etc.) also affect the sustainability, economic growth, and stability of the labor market and that of the social, pension, health, and education systems. Key aspects of antipoverty policies are a guarantee of fundamental rights (economic, social, cultural, civil, and political) and respect for human dignity. There is a close link between poverty and human rights; poverty can be both a cause and a result of human rights violations. Important for poverty reduction are a fulfillment of the right to health, education, decent work, adequate food and housing, personal security, and equal access to justice (UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2006). The Strategy for Reducing Poverty and Promoting Social Inclusion 2030 through social work mechanisms emphasize that guaranteeing human rights as a factor in achieving sustainable development is also enshrined in the UN Sustainable Development Goals (https://sdgs.un.org/goals), which should be achieved by 2030. The fight against poverty is one of the most important goals of the UN Agenda 2030 and is linked to its basic principle of “no one left behind.” Actions to achieve progress under Goal 1 (“End poverty in all its forms everywhere”) are multifaceted and cover measures to increase employment, invest in education, provide social assistance, improve housing, and the like. Poverty, social inclusion, and the protection of human rights have become particularly important in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Clearly, the poor are among the most at-risk groups of the population and the most affected. The pandemic has caused employment problems and put hundreds of thousands of workers at risk of losing their jobs or receiving lower incomes. According to the International Labour Organization (ILO), the pandemic will have a detrimental impact on the world economy, with far more serious consequences than those of the financial crisis and global recession of 2008–2009 (National Strategy for Reducing Poverty and Promoting Social Inclusion 2030; see Council of Ministers, 2020, p. 9).

152

L. Strakova et al.

8.3 Human Rights, Social Policy, and Social Work The social protection system is facing challenges related to negative demographic trends, a decline in the working-age population, and structural changes in the labor market. Changes were aimed at improving legislation in the areas of family benefits for children, social assistance, pension reform, and income for retirees. In Bulgaria, much emphasis is given to children’s rights and to policies to protect the rights of children from vulnerable social groups and to reduce family poverty in order to achieve social inclusion and social cohesion. Social measures for the prevention and reduction of child poverty are outlined in accordance with The European Child Guarantee (2021) and its directives. Social measures include the provision of a free education and health care for all children, as well as adequate housing and nutrition. It is widely recognized that the institutionalization of a comprehensive and integrated approach to tackling child poverty can ensure the protection of children’s rights. Children with disabilities, children in institutions, migrant children, including refugee children, and children living in families at risk are considered vulnerable in Bulgaria, and they are among the first priorities in national policy and social work. The focus of the strategy toward poverty reduction (2030) among children is also in line with Principle 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Council of Europe, n.d.a), stating that children have the right to an affordable education at an early age and to quality care and protection from poverty; as well, children from disadvantaged families are entitled to special measures to promote equal opportunities. Since Bulgaria’s admission to the EU in 2007, significant and targeted efforts have been made to improve access to education for children and students from disadvantaged families, and such access has been identified as one of the challenges of any social inclusion policy. Activities in support of children with special education needs and an increase in the identification of both early school leavers and those who have never attended school have been intensified. Significant policies for the prevention of school dropout rates are devoted to improving the reach of programs for children in preschool education and improving the quality of early education (see Nonchev & Strakova, 2006). Significant progress is being reported on the implementation of one of the key priorities of the National Strategy for Reducing Poverty and Promoting Social Inclusion 2030, aimed at the deinstitutionalization of care and the development of cross-sectional services for social inclusion. In response to serious challenges in the social services sector, a number of reforms have been undertaken related to the process of the deinstitutionalization of care for both children and adults. A noteworthy result has been a sustainable increase in social services in the community and a reduction in the number of specialized institutions. The deinstitutionalization of child care is one of the largest reforms in the social sector and has been successfully implemented in Bulgaria. The most significant result of these reforms is the predominance of care in family environments as compared to the number of children placed in residential institutional care. Children’s

8  Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria

153

rights have been included in the curricula of those universities that are training future social workers. Thus, conditions have been created for the protection of children’s rights in accordance with the requirements of the UN Convention on the Protection of Children’s Rights (Strakova, 2018). However, it is evident that, unlike the system for social services in support of children and families, the development of the system for social services for long-­ term care for adults and the elderly is not at such an advanced stage. In 2019, the Law on Social Services (2019) was adopted (in force since July 1, 2020), regulating all key issues relevant to the sector, namely, the provision, use, financing, quality, control, and monitoring of services.

8.4 Human Rights and Antidiscriminatory Policy Social programs and measures in Bulgaria are aimed at improving the quality of life of people from vulnerable social groups. Social policy and social work are of particular significance to human rights. Social policy and social work address rights pertaining to the following: • Personal rights (guarantee the inviolability of the individual and ensure autonomy from the state’s authority). • Political rights (protect the opportunity for each individual to participate in the political process). • Social, economic, and cultural rights (ensure the autonomy of the individual). International mechanisms for the adoption and implementation of universal human rights standards are divided into statutory (regulated by the UN Charter), contractually established (established by universal conventions), and operating within the specialized organizations of the UN system (the ILO, UNESCO, WHO). The protection of rights requires actions to be undertaken by individuals, civil society, public organizations, private corporations, government agencies, and international organizations and institutions. Fundamental rights include the right to peace, the right to development, the right to information and communication, the right to a healthy and favorable environment, and the right to a common cultural heritage. These safeguards also include the rights of every child and their family members to enjoy national and universal values and to develop their culture in accordance with their ethnicity; their freedom of artistic expression, scientific discovery, and technical creativity; and their right to a healthy and favorable environment in accordance with established standards (Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria, 1991, Articles 54 and 55). From 1997 to 2007, after the publication of the Treaty of Amsterdam (1997) and the first years after 2000 in the countries of Eastern European, including Bulgaria, some practices led to the need for more explicit legitimization of the protection of human rights in a special Law on Protection Against Discrimination  (2004). In Bulgaria, this law was enforced on January 01, 2004, and affirmed nondiscrimination

154

L. Strakova et al.

as one of the basic values of the EU and the European Development of Bulgaria. The law defines various forms of discrimination, such as direct and indirect harassment or refusal to offer reasonable accommodation, and it proposes measures to address discrimination. One of the frequently asked questions in societies in transition, such as that in Bulgaria with limited financial resources, is: “Do the European directives for equality allow for the introduction of a principle of positive social measures?” These directives explicitly recognize that outlawing discrimination does not necessarily mean that it will be sufficient to ensure equal opportunity for everyone in society. Special measures may be needed to compensate for a lag due to racial or ethnic origin, age, or other demographic characteristics. For example, people from vulnerable social groups (e.g., ethnic minorities) may need special training and special support merely to have the opportunity of finding a job. In practice, providing special provisions for such individuals is one way to improve their chances. The directives allow the use of such positive social measures. Positive measures are planned and implemented for a certain period of time and, as such, are temporary. Bulgarian antidiscrimination legislation is fully in line with the basic EU directives aimed at protecting human rights. The equality of citizens before the law, a basic constitutional principle and law (Article 6, paragraph 2), is part of other important laws in Bulgaria, including the Labor Code, the Law on Combating the Trafficking of Human Beings, the Law on Religions, the Law on the Protection against Domestic Violence, the Law on Preschool and School Education, the Law on Civil Servants, the Law on the Ombudsman, and the Law on People with Disabilities. Altogether, this body of laws aims at achieving the de facto equality of people from vulnerable groups in Bulgaria with regard to their participation in public life and civic society. In order to enact protections for human rights in practice along with the implementation of human rights laws, the following Bulgarian State and nonstate bodies were mandated: the National Assembly; the Ombudsman; the Commission for Protection against Discrimination; the Commission on Human Rights and Religion; the Council of Ministers—a National Council for Ethnic and Demographic Issues; the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy—a Directorate for Living Standards, Demographic Policy and Equal Opportunities; the Subcommittee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality; the National Commission for Combating the Trafficking of Human Beings; and various other civil society groups. Since 2000, the national antidiscrimination policy has focused on increasing the protections of and support for people from vulnerable groups, and one of its most important enactments was the adoption and implementation of an annual National Action Plan for Employment (2013–2021), which addresses the main goals and priorities of government employment policy in Bulgaria, in line with the European Employment Strategy and its basic principles since 2008: “flexibility and security in the labor market.” A special training center for human resources development and regional initiatives at the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy has been established, through which over the years (since 2006) hundreds of unemployed people have received qualifications for various professions: young people up to 29 years of age, those unemployed over 50, those unemployed of Roma origin, those with disabilities,

8  Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria

155

those with low qualifications, and the like. One of the main goals of these governmental employment measures is to promote small- and medium-sized businesses by supporting start-ups among the unemployed. Other forms of aid provided are literacy and professional qualifications training, internships, and apprenticeships under the guidance of a mentor in order to include the unemployed with no education in the labor market. An important provision that has been successfully developing for more than 10 years is the Career Start Program, through which unemployed young people with higher education gain work experience in state and municipal administration. Studies conducted by the renowned human rights organization, the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee (2019; 2020)  (founded in Sofia in 1992; see https://www. bghelsinki.org/en/home), show that discrimination occurs due to failures to provide an accessible situational environment for people with disabilities (e.g., in the prison in Varna, which prevented a relative of a prisoner [his sister] from visiting him and waiting in a suitable place). Moreover, the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee has provided numerous cases of complaints from citizens who felt unequally treated on various grounds and turned for advice, assistance, or protection of their rights to the Commission for Protection against Discrimination, to the Court, or to other nongovernmental organizations, government agencies, and so forth (https://www.bghelsinki.org/en/what-­we-­do/reports). All these cases are extremely valuable because they show, with facts, where deficits or gaps exist in the legislation or in the application of laws. Such examples demonstrate the level of protection or lack thereof for human rights in our country and are an effective mechanism for improving measures to protect the citizens who are most in need. A longitudinal survey carried out among students majoring in social work at Sofia University over the past 5 years about their views on prioritizing social programs and measures for vulnerable groups shows the following: At the highest priority, according to these students, resources should be directed to children from vulnerable social groups so that they can have better opportunities for education and social inclusion; a second priority is given to people with disabilities, including children with disabilities; third, to ethnic minorities; fourth, to refugees; and last, to other groups in need of social support for better social integration. These findings are indicative of the sensitivity that the young people who are future social workers demonstrate in the priority assignment of social programs and measures for various vulnerable groups in Bulgarian society. As such, they show the commitment of social workers to rights-based approaches. An important component of positive social measures in the European context, which is transposed onto Bulgarian national social policy and social work, is the adoption of social programs that provide special privileges to facilitate fuller social inclusion and subsequent positive integration for those in need. For example, explicit measures should be taken to alleviate the underrepresented sex in pursuing certain professional activities or to make up for the lag in professional career opportunities (the Law on Protection against Discrimination, the Labor Code in Bulgaria, etc.). On the basis of the EU Directive 76/207/EEC Equal Treatment of Men and Women (1976), the EU Court of Justice has established a practice that regulates the

156

L. Strakova et al.

possibility for member states to adopt and maintain quota systems in employment to address the underrepresentation of particular social groups.

8.4.1 Disability Policy and Practice The Employment Equality Directive regulates wider possibilities for applying positive measures for people with disabilities and their integration to full employment  (see Updated Strategy for Ensuring Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities 2008–2015 (2012)). Bulgaria follows the main guidelines of the European Employment Strategy, which specifically identifies the challenges of people with disabilities when seeking professional development. The Bulgarian State adheres to human rights and fundamental freedoms and has ratified significant international documents that have a direct bearing on human rights and improvements in the quality of life for all people (i.e., the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Social Charter; see Council of Europe, n.d.-a, n.d.-b). An example of the successful application of EU social policy to the field of social work for people with disabilities in Bulgaria is the long-term interaction between Inclusion Europe and the Bulgarian Association for People with Intellectual Disabilities (BALIZ). Over the years, this cooperation has been connected both at the state level and at the level of nongovernment organizations (NGOs). In recent years in Bulgaria, the prestige of NGOs dedicated to the social inclusion of people with mental disabilities has increased with the creation of such groups as Maria’s World Foundation (Sofia) and Empathy–Pazardzhik, among others. A fundamental strategic document in the policy of the Bulgarian government is the Updated Strategy for Ensuring Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities 2008–2015 (2012) and the National Strategy for People with Disabilities 2016–2020 (2016). Their main goal is to achieve equality and equal opportunities for people with disabilities, to ensure full and active participation in all areas of public life, and to provide employment and more favorable opportunities for skills development. Considering the diversity of disabilities that exist among individuals, this strategy identifies specific activities (seven operational objectives) in various aspects of rehabilitation and the social integration of people with disabilities. Special measures have been taken in the last 5  years to increase employment opportunities for people with disabilities: creating conditions for permanent jobs, giving employers incentives to ensure longer-term and quality jobs, increasing the number of job openings, changing the attitudes of employers regarding the employment of persons from vulnerable groups in the labor market, stimulating the professional training and qualification of people with disabilities, and stimulating the development of independent economic activities of people with disabilities. Helping employers build an accessible work environment to increase employment opportunities for people with disabilities continues (see Table 8.1). Since 2015, public discussions have been held in Bulgaria at various levels with the active participation of mothers of children with disabilities in order to change the

8  Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria

157

Table 8.1  People with disabilities hired by employers through services and programs provided by the state labor agency (State Labor Agency. Information bulletin for the labour market (2016–2021) https://www.az.government.bg/stats/3/) Year Number of people employed

2017 6730

2018 6831

2019 11,778

2020 6442

2021 7142

model of care and social services for children with disabilities. A positive influence in the children’s development in various forms of day care is accepted after a detailed study, planning, and the realization of the needs of the children are met. Municipal authorities are encouraged to open various forms of day care, including alternatives to nurseries and kindergartens, such as family centers. The creation of an accessible and supportive educational environment for children with special education needs continues: resource teachers to support children with disabilities within the school in which they study; diagnostics, consultations, and rehabilitation activities; special education programs and opportunities for training with individually paced activities; adaptive teaching aids and electronic resources; the provision of services for the parents of children with disabilities in order to facilitate their upbringing; and the provision of an inclusive educational environment for such children at the secondary level and a supportive environment for completing higher education. For 15 years, priority has been given to the development of social services in the community for children with disabilities in Bulgaria. The main actors and agents of change are the State Agency for Child Protection, the Social Assistance Agency, the Employment Agency, the Agency for People with Disabilities, and many nongovernment organizations. A wide range of social services have been created in families or close-to-family environments: personal assistants, social assistants, domestic assistants, day care centers, domestic social patronage (home care), community support centers, and others. Moreover, because of public awareness campaigns, citizens are becoming increasingly aware of the difficulties that people with disabilities face, and this understanding has made citizens more empathetic and supportive at a local level—in the neighborhood and in the home environment—propelling them to help build ramps, for example. In addition, the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy rewards employers annually who have hired people with permanent disabilities or have specially adapted jobs for people with permanent disabilities. A National Council for People with Disabilities has been established and is functioning at the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria, which also includes people with disabilities, because their involvement is crucial in the planning and development of social services for people with disabilities, as well as for other vulnerable groups, where a governing principle is “nothing for us without us.”

8.4.2 Social Work with Vulnerable Groups Social work with children from ethnic minorities is key for Bulgarian society. A nationally representative survey was conducted in 2006–2007, showing that about 63% of all school dropouts are of Roma ethnicity (Strakova, 2007). Other partial

158

L. Strakova et al.

surveys have confirmed these results over the years as well. The remaining 37% are almost equally distributed among children from the Bulgarian ethnic majority and the Turkish ethnic group, who speak Turkish at home. Following the survey findings, measures to reduce the number of dropouts from compulsory education (up to 16 years of age according to the Pre-school and School Education Act) were introduced. Such measures include the following: • All-day organization of the education of students from grades 1 to 4 to achieve better learning of the Bulgarian language and to receive extra assistance from teachers in preparation for classes. • Mandatory admission to kindergarten at age 5 for children who do not have favorable conditions for upbringing and development at home. • Financial support for children entering first grade. • Free distribution of textbooks to all children grades 1–7. • Provision of hot meals at school if necessary for children from vulnerable social groups. • Appointment of a social worker at schools with a larger number of children at risk of dropping out of school or a mediator to actively interact with the families of children from vulnerable social groups. The main goals that underlie these and many other specific social programs and measures are to provide conditions for the favorable development of all children— physical, mental, socioemotional—and to create better opportunities for social inclusion through literacy, vocational training, and help in choosing a profession that will make them more financially independent and better integrated as young people. More generally, the aim is to achieve ethnic equality, which is a key priority on the EU’s political agenda. All aspects of human rights considerations are integral to the development of social policy and social work in Bulgaria in the direction of the social integration of people from vulnerable social groups.

8.4.3 Human Rights Challenges in an Age of Uncertainty In the current reality of the COVID-19 pandemic, a serious challenge is to provide targeted and timely support to the growing number of people in need, including people facing greater economic insecurity, including people with atypical employment, low-income families, single parents, and families from vulnerable ethnic groups, among others. The pandemic crisis has exacerbated the need to strengthen support for families with children, given the socioeconomic consequences, especially for the most vulnerable groups of families with children. To provide support for those affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, the government has taken measures to provide additional material and financial support to families with children. Aimed at sustainable transitions toward employment, 76 Centers for Employment and Social Assistance in Bulgaria offer unemployed people flexible, individualized, and integrated services. An example of the implementation of this integrated

8  Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria

159

approach is a better connection between the provision of family and social benefits and the regular attendance of children in preschool and preparatory programs. With regard to providing housing and support for the homeless, a key challenge and priority remain the improvement of coordination between the various stakeholders at all levels—national, regional, and municipal. One of the obstacles to achieving better and more timely social work is insufficient staffing and funds for the implementation of social policies. Many young people with a university degree in social work are still unemployed in the public sector of social services but are looking for employment in private social work organizations, where the salaries are higher than in the public sector. Real difficulties in extending social support to all those in need of social protection are also due to high levels of income and economic inequality, including strong regional differences, the high proportion of people at risk of impoverishment, regional disparities, and the uneven distribution of social services. At the same time, the low level of computer skills among the population is notable. Also apparent are low levels of education, which restrict access to the labor market, and the relatively low percentage of children attending kindergarten. In recent years, Bulgaria has achieved significant results in social inclusion through the implementation of a comprehensive and integrated approach in various sectors of social policy and social work. However, despite such positive developments, a number of unresolved issues remain. According to a set of social indicators as defined by EU standards, Bulgaria still has one of the highest proportions of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion, as well as high levels of income inequality. Negative demographic indicators pose serious challenges to the function of social security and assistance systems such as health care, social services, the education system, and the public financial sector. The education and training system continues to face serious challenges, including ensuring quality inclusive education and tackling early school abstinence. The low percentage of children attending kindergarten, well below the EU average, is among the most serious challenges identified. The average level of computer skills among the population remains low as well. The profile of homeless people has also changed in recent years, consisting mainly of women, families with children, young people, and people of foreign origin. An important task in social work in protecting the rights of these people is to provide access to social housing or assistance for good quality housing, thereby providing shelter and services to the homeless to promote their social inclusion. At the same time, the Bulgarian national picture of social work and social policy is difficult to compare with that of the more developed European democracies. Economic, social, and demographic dynamics and processes in the individual member states are very different. All the negative phenomena, which modern social work tries to minimize in achieving protections for the rights of the most vulnerable social groups, have deep roots and thus endure. For Bulgarian society, they are related to the collapse of the social state after 1989, its bank failures, the widespread loss of household savings, privatization, the rampant processes of the “conquest of the

160

L. Strakova et al.

state,” the emigration of young and educated people to developed European democracies and the United States, as well as corruption. The COVID-19 pandemic has seriously challenged social systems in all countries. The main challenge has been, and continues to be, to provide additional resources and opportunities to support the most vulnerable as well as to reach as many people as possible in need while maintaining the resilience of the system. Income support and the provision of affordable and quality social services have become even more important than before. The pandemic has challenged all users of social services to develop their computer skills further to have better access to social services for better employment and economic opportunities and for social solidarity. Governments, including that in Bulgaria, have become more concerned about raising the level of digital literacy for all those in need of additional social assistance and for greater participation in the labor market, shown by a commitment to social policy and social work.

8.5 Social Work Education and Human Rights in Bulgaria As a result of the socioeconomic and political changes throughout Bulgaria and more widely in Southeast Europe during the last decade of the twentieth century, larger groups of people were unable to get their urgent needs met, were left unassisted, and in many cases found it difficult just to survive. Many people were faced with social challenges, which led to a greater demand for qualified social workers to provide assistance to those in need. To address these challenges, schools of social work were established, and social work emerged as an accredited profession in Bulgaria (Gospodinov, 2007). At first, the social work field in Bulgaria was both familiar and unfamiliar. On the one hand, its familiar aspects had existed in medical colleges, which trained staff with the qualifications of “social workers” for the needs of the social care system. On the other hand, social work was unfamiliar, as the practices of social work per se had not been developed as they had in other countries. The need for dedicated social work was undeniable, as the necessity of providing qualified professional assistance to large groups of people in need was obvious. But at the same time, social work itself was controversial because there were many uncertainties as to what social work essentially was and what its status in society should be. For several years (1993–2000) in Bulgaria, a number of publications appeared representing different opinions as to what social work was (Kusev, 1998; Petrova & Vladinska, 1994; Petrova-Dimitrova, 2000; Todorova, 1999; Vladinska, 1993, 1996; Vladinska & Petrova, 1993). The diversity of opinions regarding the purview of social work was not included in the development of each scientific field, nor was pluralism among expert standpoints or the familiar and commonly accepted differences of opinions and interpretive approaches, common for representatives of the same scientific or professional community. The country simply lacked experts with the appropriate training and qualifications in social work, and therefore, the research and representations of its social problems came from a mixture of social sciences and humanities.

8  Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria

161

Almost all of them approached social issues from the viewpoint of the particular sciences and disciplines they represented. Despite good intentions, this approach was proven unproductive because of the simplification that was introduced and a onesided interpretation of social work (Gospodinov, 2007). An awareness of the need for adequate education and training in social work has been characterized by ambiguity and often by an unawareness about what social work is, what the professional’s roles are, what competencies the social workers should have, and, last but not least, what kind of training is needed and how to carry it out. In the early 1990s, these uncertainties materialized differently across different universities with diverse approaches and disparate educational content in their social work programs. Education programs, which started to include specializations with different names, became accredited at that time, but they were still called “social activities” rather than social work.

8.5.1 Social Work Study Programs Social work education in Bulgaria began in 1991, when three universities simultaneously started enrolling and training students (see Gospodinov, 2007):  • The  Special Pedagogy Department at the  Faculty of Preschool and Primary School Education at Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski opened a program in “defectology”—social work that was subsequently transformed into social pedagogy. The Social Pedagogy and Social Work Department still exists at this faculty. • The  Department of Medical and Social Sciences of the  Medico-Pedagogical Faculty at Southwestern University Neophyte Rilski in Blagoevgrad introduced a program on Social Pedagogy and Social Support. After the introduction of the Unified States Requirements in 1996, this program changed its name to Social Activities (social work). • The New Bulgarian University began a clinical social work master’s program in September 1991, launched by an international and interdisciplinary team of professionals —psychologists and psychiatrists from Bulgaria, clinical social workers from the United States, and psychoanalysts from the United Kingdom. This is the program where the term “social work” was used for the first time in Bulgaria. One year later in 1992, a program entitled Social Activities (social work) was opened for the first time in Bulgaria  at the newly established Faculty of Public Health at the University of Veliko Tarnovo St. Cyril and Methodius. Since the academic year 1999–2000, this program has been offered by the Faculty of Economics, Department of Organization and Methodology of Social Activities. In 1993, the Social Activities (social work) Program was begun both by Burgas Free University and Varna Free University. Notably, the opening of this program at Burgas Free University was preceded by a comprehensive study on the need for qualified social workers in the region and by a prognosis about their efficacy over

162

L. Strakova et al.

the next 15 years. Currently, this program is part of the structure of the Center for Humanities at Varna Free University. From 1995 to 1998, the Free University of Burgas and Veliko Tarnovo University together, with partners from the Netherlands, participated in the project TEMPUS JEP-09567-95—the Partnership in Social and Health Care Education Support (PISCES). The goal of the project was to develop a curriculum and resources for a social work program with the main tasks as follows: 1. Training of a managerial team to establish a social work program with the following components: a curriculum, team, and practice. 2. Training of academic staff to teach new courses and to lead practice in social work. 3. Training of students (undergraduate and graduate) in social work practices. 4. Developing textbooks for students. The work on this project contributed to an enrichment of the fundamental concepts of social work education. In the 1996–1997 academic year at the Technical University of Gabrovo, a social activities (social work) program was launched by the Faculty of Economics as a result of the implementation of the joint European Project S-JEP 08–95,091 program, PHARE TEMPUS.  The project involved the Higher School of Public Administration and Finance in Ludwigsburg (Germany), the contractor; Technical University in Gabrovo, the coordinator; and North Dutch University, Institute of Management and Public Administration in Leeuwarden, a partner. The program was situated in the Social Sciences Department. In 1997, a Social Activities Program was introduced at the Faculty of Education at Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski. In 2006, in this university, the Social Work Department was established in Bulgaria for the first time bearing that name (Fig. 8.2). The Faculty of Education at Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski also published the first Bulgarian applied science magazine for social work (Fig. 8.3). In 2001, the Social Activities Program was launched by the Medical Faculty at Thracian University in Stara Zagora. The program was situated in the Department of “Social Activities and Sports.” This was the first case where a social activities program was introduced entirely according to changes in the Higher Education Act of 1999 and with a positive evaluation from the National Evaluation and Accreditation Agency. At the Konstantin Preslavsky University of Shumen, a social activities program was instituted in 2003 by the Faculty of Education, Department of Social Activities. In 2007, the same occurred at the Plovdiv University Paisii Hilendarski. In 2012, at the Faculty of Public Health and Health Care at the University of Ruse Angel Kanchev, the Department of Public Health and Social Services was established with an accredited social activities program, and the admission and training of students began. Accredited social activities study programs were offered at nine universities in Bulgaria in 2021 (in 2017, there were 11), and master’s and doctoral programs in social work were offered by seven universities (https://rsvu.mon.bg/rsvu4/#/). Most universities offer several master’s programs, including five at Sofia University alone

8  Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria

163

Fig. 8.2  Building of the Faculty of Education, University of Sofia St. Kliment Ohridski. (Photo by Vladislav Gospodinov)

(https://www.uni-­sofia.bg/index.php/eng/the_university/faculties/faculty_of_education/degree_programmes/master_s_degree_programmes). In conjunction with the establishment and development of social work undergraduate and graduate programs at universities, the training of social workers at the college level has also changed and developed. As already mentioned, until 1989, professionals qualified as “social workers” in Bulgaria were prepared in some of the extant medical colleges, with a focus primarily on medical training. Graduates addressed therapeutic issues rather than social. After 1989, some of these colleges were closed, and others became subsumed by medical universities. Some of them (Sofia, Varna, Pleven, etc.) still offer social work programs today.

8.5.2 The Development of Social Work Curricula and Its Current Status Since 1991, a few stages in the development and implementation of social work education programs in bulgaria can be distinguished (see Gospodinov, 2007). The first stage spanned from 1991 to 1995, when higher education in the country and social work education in particular was regulated by the old Higher Education

164

L. Strakova et al.

Fig. 8.3  Social Work magazine publication of the Faculty of Education, University of Sofia St. Kliment Ohridski

Act (1995). According to this statute, the structure of higher education included colleges (institutions) with a 2-year period of training, institutions of higher education (universities) with a 4- to 6-year (full- or part-time) period of training, and graduate schools, awarding degrees equivalent to a master’s degree. As already outlined above, medical colleges provided specializations in “social work.” Some of them, for example, in Veliko Tarnovo, served as a basis for the establishment of university education in social work. The old Higher Education Act did not set a rigorous framework for designing curricula in different specializations at the universities, which affected social work education in a very specific way. On the one hand, a certain degree of freedom in developing curricula enabled each of the departments at different universities to apply their own approach to building their social work programs, which in and of itself was positive. On the other hand, a lack of sound knowledge regarding social

8  Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria

165

work theory led to the creation of extremely diverse and, in many cases, very divergent curricula in providing basic training in similar areas. The lack of attention given to what the general characteristics of practice in social work should be in Bulgaria led to unwarranted “overexposure” in the curricula to some highly specialized, practical approaches, mostly therapeutic and psychological. However, the need for greater coherence among the universities to ensure comparable social work education in this regard gradually began to surface. A significant external catalyst for this change was the passing of a new Higher Education Act in 1995. The main change affecting the process of development of social work education presented here was the formation of bachelor’s and master’s degree programs. Their introduction marked the beginning of the second stage in social work education development. This period resulted in a virtual consensus on specialized training: that it could and should be provided primarily in the master’s degree programs. The first master’s programs in social work were established at Varna Free University in 1995, at Southwestern University in 1996, and at Burgas Free University in 1998. Additionally, a legally premised impetus in achieving this consensus was the passing of an ordinance regarding the state requirements for the acquisition of a higher education in the professional field of social activities for bachelor’s and master’s degrees with a professional qualification in social work in 1996. The introduction of this ordinance represents the third stage in the development of social work education in Bulgaria. One of its most significant features was that any curriculum for the bachelor’s degree had to incorporate compulsory courses with a defined number of minimum class hours (credits). Such programs essentially had to establish core subjects or courses (known as the core curriculum) that were compulsory for the curriculum at all universities and ensure (together with required hours for practical training) a relatively comparable basic education for all future social workers. Much attention was paid to these criteria for accreditation, which became mandatory after changes in the Higher Education Act of 1999. This measure was a serious and somewhat successful attempt to resolve some of the existing problems with and inconsistencies in the institutionalization of programs of study in social work. For some of these challenges, however, no solutions were offered; for example, the nature of the relationship between the theoretical and practical training of students was not considered at all, while other issues were caused by the ordinance itself: The potential for eminent and experienced practitioners to become involved in students’ training was eliminated (Todorova, 1999). This omission combined with the introduction of other courses in the curriculum of largely unchallenged content (e.g., general sociology, sociology of labor, social psychology, labor law, etc.) and other courses for which there was not enough clarity regarding content (e.g., Introduction to Social Work) led to a number of difficulties and even paradoxes. Thus, professionals involved in the education and training of social workers faced many challenges requiring resolution. This accumulated experience, together with the ordinance regarding the state’s requirements for the acquisition of degrees in higher education (at the bachelor’s, master’s, and specialist levels), which came into force in 2002 and essentially

166

L. Strakova et al.

launched the fourth stage in the development of social work education in the country, became preconditions for the effective implementation at different universities with different approaches in the design of the curricula for undergraduate and graduate degrees. These programs were shaped by the differences in the profiles of individual universities and faculty members and the specifics of the regions in which they were situated and their practical needs. At the same time, they have come much closer to a common, theoretical conceptual framework in social work, which has been taking shape worldwide over the last four to five decades and has established a clear concept of general and specialized practice in social work. As a direct result, the core courses in undergraduate curricula at all universities have improved both in content and structurally. Modules with elective courses have been introduced at Shumen University, Southwestern University, and University of Thrace, for example, and fully modular and specialized training has been successfully implemented at Sofia University. At all Bulgarian universities, relationships with social work institutions have widened and deepened, leading to a significant improvement in the quality of the training of future social workers. Considerable development of education in master’s programs was evident as well as in the undergraduate programs. All universities in the country offering social work master’s programs have at least two successful graduate programs— one for professionals (having a bachelor’s degree in social work) and one for nonprofessionals (not having a bachelor’s degree in social work). Since 2004, social work education in Bulgaria is carried out according to the Higher Education Act and the ordinance on the state requirements for the acquisition of higher education and educational qualification degrees (bachelor’s, master’s, and specialist) and the ordinance on implementing a system of accumulation and transfer of credits within the higher education institutions. These regulations govern the minimum training period for acquisition of an educational degree for all university specializations, the minimum and maximum total hours for all courses in a program, and the total number of credits that each student has to accumulate in order to graduate successfully.

8.5.3 Human Rights in Social Work Education Clearly, social work education has embraced human rights. Several social work study programs at Bulgarian universities have integrated human rights into the curriculum (see Table 8.2). However, information about the curriculum of bachelor’s and master’s programs in social work at Bulgarian universities is not publicly available in most cases (academic staff and students have extended access). The syllabi for courses in social work are rarely available on universities’ websites (again accessible only to students). The data presented in Table 8.2 are based on our knowledge of and long-term teaching experiences in social work programs in the country.

8  Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria

167

Table 8.2  Courses in social work programs related to human rights Course title Human Rights Children’s Rights, Protection of Children’s Rights, Protection Against Violence, Social Work with Children at Risk Antioppressive and Antidiscriminatory Social Work Professional Values and Norms in Social Work, Social and Professional Ethics and Deontology Social Policy

Organization and Management of Social Work, Social Activities

Social Work with Different Groups: People with Disabilities, Refugees, Ethnic Groups, Victims of Trafficking, Immigrants, Victims of Violence, etc. Labor Law/Family Law

Social Legislation and Protection Social Security Systems

Universities University of Russe Sofia University, Southwestern University, University of Russe, Medical University of Pleven Southwestern University, University of Russe, Technical University of Gabrovo Sofia University, Plovdiv University, Veliko Turnovo University, Southwestern University, Thracian University, University of Russe Sofia University, Plovdiv University, Southwestern University, Thracian University, University of Russe, Technical University of Gabrovo, Medical University of Pleven Sofia University, Plovdiv University, Veliko Turnovo University, Southwestern University, Thracian University, University of Russe, Technical University of Gabrovo, Medical University of Pleven Sofia University, Plovdiv University, Southwestern University, Thracian University, University of Russe, Technical University of Gabrovo, Medical University of Pleven Sofia University, Veliko Turnovo University, Southwestern University, University of Russe, Technical University of Gabrovo, Medical University of Pleven Sofia University, Plovdiv University, University of Russe, Medical University of Pleven Sofia University, Plovdiv University

8.6 Conclusion This chapter has provided an overview of the intersections between human rights and social work policy, practice, and education in Bulgaria. We discussed human rights in relation to specific economic, social, demographic, and legal dimensions in the national context of Bulgaria. Specific challenges in social work practice with vulnerable and underprivileged social groups were outlined in relation to human dignity, antidiscriminatory legislation, and human rights principles. This chapter offered a history of social work education, along with a brief overview of human rights courses in the curriculum. This chapter has emphasized that there is a growing demand for social work to address the human rights of vulnerable individuals and communities. Today, rights-­ based approaches play a crucial role in social work practice, policy, and education. The close links between social work and human rights should be explicitly recognized today as we live in an age of uncertainty with increased economic, political, and social risks. Human rights ensure human dignity and are an important instrument for achieving social equality.

168

L. Strakova et al.

References Council of Europe. (n.d.-a). European Convention on Human Rights. https://www.echr.coe.int/ Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf Council of Europe. (n.d.-b). European Social Charter. https://www.coe.int/en/web/european-­ social-­charter Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. (1789). https://constitutionnet.org/sites/ default/files/declaration_of_the_rights_of_man_1789.pdf Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council (EPSCO). (2021). European Child Guarantee. https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1428&langId=en EU Directive 76/207/EEC. Equal treatment of men and women. (1976). https://eur-­lex.europa.eu/ legal-­content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A31976L0207 Gospodinov, B. (2007). Social work education in Bulgaria—genesis, development, current state of play, perspectives. In: Problems of social work. Sofia. (Господинов, Б. (2007). Образованието по социална работа в България – възникване, развитие, актуално състояние, перспективи. В: Проблеми на социалната работа. София). Kusev, I. (1998). Fundamentals of social work. Sofia. [Кусев, И. (1998). Основи на социалната работа. София, Кабри.] Learning from experience—some reflections on how training can help develop administrative capacity. (2008). Phare Service Contract BG 2004/016–919.04.01. https://publicadminreform. webs.com/key%20papers/Learning%20from%20experience.pdf Nonchev, A., & Strakova, L. (2006). Reasons for school dropout in Bulgaria. Results from sociological survey. Sofia. [Нончев, А., Стракова, Л. (2006). Причини за отпадане на децата от училище в България. Анализ на резултатите от проведено социологическо изследване. София.] Petrova, N., & Vladinska, N. (1994). The profession of social worker/social pedagogue. Education and Profession, 1. [Петрова, Н., Владинска, N. (1994) Професията социален работник/ социален педагог. Образование и професия, кн.1.] Petrova-Dimitrova, N. (2000). Fundamentals and methods of social work. Sofia. [Петрова-­ Димитрова, Н. (2000). Основи и методи на социалната работа. София.] Strakova, L. (2007). Reasons for school dropout of children. Annual of Sofia University. Faculty of Education, Social activities Book, vol. 101. [Стракова, Л. (2007). Причини за отпадането на децата от училище. Годишник на СУ „Св. Климент Охридски“, Факултет по педагогика, Книга „Социални дейности“, том 101.] ISSN-2367-4652, COBISS.BG-ID–1291430884. Strakova, L. (2018). Children’s rights and civil education. Pedagogy, 9, 1265–1272. [Стракова, Л. (2018). Правата на децата и гражданското образование. Педагогика, 9, 1265–1272.] ISSN 0861–3982 (print), Web of Science: Emerging Sources Citation Index. Strakova, L., et al. (2008). European policies of equality and equal opportunities. Module training. Methodological manual. Sofia. [Стракова, Л. и др. (2008). Европейски политики на равнопоставеност и равни възможности. Модулно обучение, методическо ръководство. София.] Todorova, E. (1999). Real help. [Тодорова, Е. (1999). Реалната помощ. С., Албатрос/ ВСУ “Черноризец Храбър”.] Treaty of Amsterdam. (1997). https://www.europarl.europa.eu/about-­parliament/en/in-­the-­past/ the-­parliament-­and-­the-­treaties/treaty-­of-­amsterdam UN 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. (2015). https://sdgs.un.org/goals UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2006). Principles and guidelines for a human rights approach to poverty reduction strategies. HR/PUB/06/12. https://www.refworld.org/ docid/46ceaef92.html Vladinska, N. (1993). The development of social work and the profession of social worker/ social pedagogue in the USA and Germany. V. Tarnovo. [Владинска, Н. (1993). Развитие на социалното дело и професията социален работник/ социален педагог в САЩ и ФРГ. ВТУ „Св. св. Кирил и Методий”, В. Търново.]

8  Human Rights and Social Work in Bulgaria

169

Vladinska, N. (1996). Personality, education and competency of the social worker (problems of the profession). Issues of Labour, 12. [Владинска, Н. (1996). Личност, образование и компетентност на социалния работник (проблеми на професията). Проблеми на труда, кн.12.] Vladinska, N., & Petrova, N. (1993). The profession of the social worker/social pedagogue. Education and Profession, 6–8. [Владинска, Н., Петрова, Н. (1993) Професията социален работник / социален педагог. Образование и професия, кн. 6–8.] Yotsov, V. et al. (2019–2020). Economic development and policies in Bulgaria: Evaluations and prospects. Annual reports 2019, 2020. Economic Research Institute, Bulgarian Academy of Science. [Йоцов, В. и др. Икономическо развитие и политики в България: оценки и очаквания. Годишни доклади 2019 и 2020. Институт за икономически изследвания. Българска академия на науките.] https://www.iki.bas.bg/en/annual-­report-­2019, https:// www.iki.bas.bg/en/annual-­report-­2020 Агенция по заетостта. Информационни бюлетини за пазара на труда (2016–2021). [Labour Agency. Information bulletin for the labour market (2016–2021).] https://www.az.government. bg/stats/3/ Актуализирана Стратегия за осигуряване на равни възможности на хората с увреждания 2008–2015 г. (2012) [Updated Strategy for Ensuring Equal Opportunities for People with Disabilities 2008–2015 (2012)] https://www.strategy.bg/FileHandler.ashx?fileId=2353 Закон за висшето образование. (1995). [Higher Education Act. (1995).] https://www.lex.bg/ laws/ldoc/2133647361 Закон за защита от дискриминация. (2004). [Law on Protection Against Discrimination. (2004).] https://www.lex.bg/laws/ldoc/2135472223 Закон за социалните услуги. (2019). [Law on Social Services. (2019).] https://lex.bg/bg/laws/ ldoc/2137191914 Кодекс на труда [Labor Code]. In force since 1.1.1987. Last amendments 29.03.2022. https:// www.lex.bg/laws/ldoc/1594373121 Конституция на Република България. (1991). [National Assembly of the Republic of Bulgaria. (1991).] Constitution. https://www.parliament.bg/en/const Министерски съвет. Решение №976 от 31.12.2020. Стратегия за намаляване на бедността и насърчаване на социалното включване 2030 [Council of Ministers. Decision No. 976/31.12.2020. National strategy for reducing poverty and promoting social inclusion 2030]. https://strategy.bg/StrategicDocuments/View.aspx?Id=1345 МОН. Рейтингова система на висшите училища в България [Ministry of Education and Science. Rating system of higher education institutions in Bulgaria]. https://rsvu.mon.bg Национална стратегия за хората с увреждания 2016–2020 (2016) [National strategy for people with disabilities 2016–2020 (2016)]. https://www.strategy.bg/StrategicDocuments/View.aspx? Id=1048 Национални планове за действие по заетостта (2013–2021). [NationalAction Plans for Employment (2013–2021).] https://www.mlsp.government.bg/natsionalni-­planove-­za-­deystvie-­po-­zaetostta Политики на равнопоставеност и равни възможности. (2007). Национален център за социална рехабилитация. София. [Equality Policies and Equal Opportunities. (2007). National Center for social rehabilitation. Sofia.] Правата на човек в България през 2019 г. Български Хелзинкски Комитет. [Human Rights in Bulgaria in 2019. Bulgarian Helsinki Committee.] https://bghelsinki.org/web/files/reports/123/ files/BHC-­Human-­Rights-­in-­Bulgaria-­in-­2019-­bg_issn-­2367-­6930.pdf Правата на човек в България през 2020 г. Български Хелзинкски Комитет. [Human Rights in Bulgaria in 2020. Bulgarian Helsinki Committee.] https://bghelsinki.org/web/files/reports/147/ files/BHC-­Human-­Rights-­in-­Bulgaria-­in-­2020-­bg_issn-­2367-­6930.pdf

Index

A Albania, 2–4, 7–10, 109–125 Antigypsyism, 5, 8, 14–22, 25, 28, 30, 103 B Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2–5, 8–10, 26, 27, 61–85, 90, 95, 117 Bulgaria, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 19, 26, 147–167 C Capitalism, 2, 42, 62, 67 COVID-19, 2, 4–7, 9, 10, 36, 39, 46, 51, 53, 54, 56, 62, 63, 91, 96, 99–105, 110, 111, 116–118, 124, 130, 137–142, 151, 158, 160 Croatia, 2, 3, 8, 10, 35–56, 68, 69, 90 D Democracy, 2–5, 8, 9, 42, 43, 62, 64, 70, 78, 83, 110–113, 116–118, 123, 133, 159, 160 Disability, 10, 18, 20, 28, 40, 48, 50, 51, 54, 70, 72, 78–81, 84, 90, 93, 95, 96, 102, 104, 116, 117, 131, 133, 134, 138, 143, 148, 149, 152, 154–157, 167 Domestic violence, 14, 29, 30, 52, 54, 75, 77, 79, 82, 83, 92, 102, 105, 116, 119, 134, 140, 154

E Ethnicity, 8, 17, 55, 153, 157 Europeanization, 3, 4, 43, 62, 92 European Union (EU), 3–5, 10, 14, 31, 39, 43, 51, 52, 62, 67, 69, 78, 90, 92, 98, 103, 133, 138, 140, 148–150, 152, 154–156, 159 G Gender, 5–8, 14, 27–29, 53, 54, 82, 92–95, 98, 102, 116, 118, 119, 149 I International Federation of Social Work (IFSW), 6, 37, 44, 45, 56, 134, 137 K Kosovo, 2–5, 8–10, 26, 68, 89–105, 117 L LGBTQI+, 53, 93, 95 M Migration, 2, 4, 5, 18, 68–70, 93, 94, 151, 152, 155, 167

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 V. Krasniqi, J. McPherson (eds.), Human Rights in this Age of Uncertainty, European Social Work Education and Practice, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11728-2

171

172 N Nationalism, 7, 68, 82, 90 National Socialism, 15, 21, 22 Neoliberalism, 7, 14, 19, 25, 55, 97, 136, 143 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), 90 P Postcommunism, 113, 134 Postsocialism, 3, 81 Poverty, 5, 7, 10, 14, 17–19, 26, 28, 31, 44, 49–54, 64, 65, 67, 70, 72, 75, 77–80, 90, 93, 95, 101, 117, 130, 138–141, 148, 150–152, 159 R Roma, 8, 14, 15, 17, 19, 22, 30, 31, 50, 70, 73, 74, 78, 95, 102, 103, 117, 138, 141, 154, 157 antigypsyism, 15–19 detrimental social consequences, 22–28 ethnic minorities, 5 members, 50 population, 140 Slovenian, human rights, 13–31 social work, ethical principles, 28–31 Romania, 2, 3, 7–10, 19, 20, 117, 129–144 Russia, 3, 16, 90

Index S Slovenia, 2, 3, 8, 10, 13–31, 37, 43, 68, 90 Socialism, 2–4, 19, 21, 36, 39, 40, 42, 62, 64–67, 94, 95, 98 Social policy, 6, 7, 9, 10, 19, 37, 38, 41, 47, 49, 64–66, 90, 94, 95, 97, 105, 116, 130, 148–160, 167 Social work education, 7, 9, 10, 36–41, 44–48, 64, 66, 71–75, 91, 98–99, 101, 103–105, 111, 113, 116–118, 131, 143, 148, 149, 160–167 Social work ethics, 14, 15, 28–31, 46, 97, 105, 116, 130, 135, 136 Southeast Europe, 2–10, 13, 35, 61, 64, 68, 82, 89, 101, 103, 109, 129, 147, 160 Soviet Union (USSR), 36, 110 U Ukraine, 2, 5 United Nations (UN), 2, 17, 18, 25, 28, 40, 44, 49, 69, 70, 74, 80–83, 90, 95, 98, 102, 114, 117, 136, 138, 141, 151, 153 W World War I, 7, 37 World War II, 7, 21, 37, 40, 63, 64 Y Yugoslavia, 2, 7, 8, 18, 19, 36–38, 40–42, 62, 64, 65, 67, 68, 90, 94, 95, 98