Edita Stejskalová: Justice Minister Petr Blažek, Interior Minister Vít Rakušan, eliminate antigypsyism from the Czech justice system and the police

Several stereotypes have developed here according to which it is believed that criminality is a fixed part of the cultural and genetic “DNA” of the Roma. Some non-Roma believe Roma represent a threat, and that it is therefore acceptable to defend themselves against them by any means necessary. These non-Roma are also able to defend the segregation of Romani people away from non-Roma as a systemic matter. They are able to defend the discrimination against Roma by institutions. They even feel they can understand why the genocide of the Roma committed at Lety u Písku was “necessary”. In the online space, comments to that effect have appeared and keep on appearing underneath many articles published by established news outlets reporting on this discrimination against Romani people, for example, in education, in housing or on the labor market.

In online discussions, the opinion has even been expressed by non-Roma that it should be legal to kill Romani people here. The condition should be that the non-Roma feel threatened. It should not have to be necessary that the non-Roma actually be in danger. These comments have been posted, for example, beneath articles reporting on the neo-Nazis who committed arson against a Romani family in Vítkov, or articles about Romani people dying under strange circumstances at police stations, or in the course of being arrested. The number of such examples is infinite. During the 1990s, this arrogance, this inhumanity, this lack of empathy, this sense of superiority, was openly displayed with regard to Romani hate crime victims as a matter of course. We cannot say that a single court verdict in a case with a Romani victim from that time was unequivocally just. The judges immediately got rid of any claims that the motivation for such crimes had a racial subtext. The courts even refused to concede that attacks were racially motivated in cases where it could be proven that the murderers were members of ultra-right groups.

Jaroslav Šebesta, the murderer from Chotěbuz: “This was an unfortunate accident. I was afraid!“

Source: iDNES.cz

Jaroslav Šebesta of Chotěbuz is the non-Romani murderer who killed Martin Hospodi, a Romani man, by shooting an arrow into his head from a crossbow in April 2013 because he felt threatened. He testified in court that he had been AFRAID. He shot his crossbow at Mr. Hospodi from a distance of 12 meters. Mr. Hospodi posed no immediate threat to him. Šebesta was so afraid that, after shooting Mr. Hospodi in the head, “He went back into the house for another arrow so he could measure how far the first one had gone into the victim’s head. He also got a bread roll for himself. He refused to call an ambulance for Martin Hospodi.” (iDNES.cz, 2013). Mr. Hospodi died as a result of the injuries a couple of days later. The judge sent Šebesta to prison for just 10 years. The evidence was clear and left no room for any defense of his actions. The judge convicted Šebesta of manslaughter. This was not a case of murder, in the judge’s view.

The judge also said he understood Šebesta. He grasped that the murderer must have been “agitated“, saying: “We know some Roma steal. We know and we have verified that Chotěbuz had been dealing with many raids by thieves.“ (iDNES.cz, 2013). How were Romani people and the rest of society supposed to understand this remark by the judge? By saying this, the judge just confirmed the prejudice among no small part of the citizenry that Romani people, as a group, break the law normally, and therefore FEAR of Roma and WORRIES about them are appropriate. In court, Šebesta even gave testimony to the effect that if “whites” had driven up to his building, he would have behaved differently. From the above it follows that Romani people in the Czech Republic are supposed to count on such prejudices possibly costing them their lives. That is the spirit in which they should raise their children.

Murderer Šebesta received messages of admiration and understanding from his civically engagé fellow citizens, both on social media and offline. Yes, they agree that any Romani man who turns up at their fences deserves death. Death is not even enough! That message appeared on social media en masse. Šebesta thanked the citizens of Chotěbuz for initiating a petition of support for him. It was signed by 1,500 citizens. They demanded the court recategorize his actions as self-defense. There were 1,500 Czechs who were not satisfied with the verdict and who attacked it. In their view, the justice system was biased and the judge was incompetent. They were convinced, as was Šebesta, that his sentence was too harsh.

Vít Bárta, head of the Public Affairs Party: Lawmakers, decriminalize the use of non-lethal weapons. The Romani man Martin Hospodi could have been hit with a tennis shoe, not a crossbow arrow.

Source: Vitbarta.cz

In 2013, Vít Bárta, head of the Public Affairs Party (za Věci veřejné – VV), reacted to the imprisonment of Šebesta by campaigning to decriminalize the use of non-lethal weaponry. In March 2013, his party then submitted a bill for such decriminalization to the Chamber of Deputies. The lower house did not adopt the bill. Bárta said on his website in 2013 that Šebesta’s sentence was totally wrong. He even accused lawmakers of having indirectly caused the killing of Mr. Hospodi and the unnecessary imprisonment of Šebesta. He was convinced that if a legal alternative had been available to Šebesta, he could have hit Mr. Hospodi “with a tennis shoe or a rubber bullet“. According to Bárta, Šebesta had no alternative, though (Vít Bárta, 2013). He had no choice but to use the arrow that passed through Mr. Hospodi’s brain and “pacified” him forever. Here it is necessary to remind us all that Public Affairs was part of the coalition government at the time. Bárta was Minister of Transportation in the Nečas cabinet. Public Affairs was incharge of three ministries during the Nečas administration. One of them was the Interior Ministry, managed (or not) by the journalist Radek John. Interior Minister John was for the bill to decriminalize the use of non-lethal weapons. Public Affairs sat in the Chamber of Deputies from 2010 to 2014.

Pensioner Jan Sieber: “There are problems with Romani people everywhere they have over-reproduced.”

Source: Česká televize, iDNES.cz, iDNES.cz

In the case of the death of the Romani man Ladislav Tatar of Tanvald on New Year’s Day in 2012, killed by a non-Romani man named Jan Sieber, the media worked with the narrative that the man who fired the weapon involved was a pensioner, for a change. The impression received by media consumers was that Sieber was a typically defenseless senior citizen. It was meant to seem to the public that he was a priori infirm and weak. However, in the documentary film about the case by Filip Remunda and Vít Klusák called “Life and Death in Tanvald” (Život a smrt v Tanvaldu, Česká televize, 2013) Sieber presented himself as a man in his prime. The impression he made was of a cowboy from the Wild West. He seemed to be ready for anything at any time. He customarily carried a flint on him, and naturally a firearm. In his interview with the filmmakers, he displayed not the slightest regret at having killed a man. His full-strength psychopathy was revealed when the filmmakers asked what message he wanted to send to Mr. Tatar’s family, and the “giggling” pensioner literally said: “…well, they should behave decently.“

From the start of the investigation, the then-Deputy Prosecutor for the Ústecký Region, Lenka Bradáčová, rejected the idea that the killing could have involved a racial subtext. Sieber is a racist, though. In the documentary we hear that according to Sieber, Romani people are a problem wherever they “have over- reproduced” (Česká televize, 2013).  

Since August 2012, Bradáčová is the High State Attorney in Prague. Sieber was considered a hero. The brother of the murder victim was sentenced to two years in prison for his involvement in the case. Their father never managed to re-open the case despite the fact that many doubts and new evidence were raised about it (iDNES.cz, 2013). Basically, doubts remain as to what actually happened. Fear also remains among the Roma in Tanvald about life in our democratic, free republic. The children of the murder victim remain and had to reconcile themselves to the fact that the murderer was acquitted. Those children have had to beware their neighbor, senior citizen Sieber, ever since.

Roma in Tanvald have feared the democratic era the most. They have feared freedom of speech and the political persuasions of their non-Romani neighbors.

Sieber was not the only non-Romani person in Tanvald to consider Romani people “harmful”. Speaking on camera, in the presence of her mother and with her support, a 12-year-old non-Romani girl in Tanvald says self-confidently in the documentary that “there should be fewer of those gypsies” (Česká televize, 2013). I cannot imagine raising my children to hate others, or what is even worse, that I would be proud of them for hating others.

The stupid, uneducated mother interviewed at a public swimming pool in the film has never understood that what is keeping her down is poverty and her membership in the lower middle class of unprivileged whites. She feels that she is not receiving massive support from the elites in politics so that she might be able to give her family more than an afternoon at the public pool. Somebody has to pay for that fact. This pathetic mother believes her daughter’s opinion is an indubitable, objective truth because a child is saying it. She does not believe that her child has been encumbered by her dangerous, flawed raising of her in a way that should be highly unacceptable to society. She seems indifferent and proud of the fact that her child is growing up, uninfluenced by her, like a tree in the forest. She is pathetic and ridiculous. The senior citizen Sieber is also confirmed in his own truth when, in a different interview for iDNES.cz in 2012, he thanks his fellow citizens for their support. In that interview he says, among other things, that he has become an example for the [non-Romani] residents of Tanvald when it comes to arming themselves. These people are all pathetic. They are desperately, fiercely demonstrating their belief in their own ethnic and moral superiority. It is as if they are saying: “If I can’t matter more than a gypsy, then I’m nothing.”

Defense attorney for the perpetrators of arson against a Romani family who were released from their sentences early: “These guys have a lot of other worries…”

Source: Šumperský deník, Lidovky.cz, Romea.cz, Hn.cz, Ministerstvo vnitra, Novinky.cz

On 16 May 2023, a court in Šumperk released two of the perpetrators of arson against a Romani family in Vítkov from their sentences after just 13 years. They had both been sentenced to 20 years in prison. Their good behavior behind bars was the reason for their release, and according to expert opinions, the aim of the punishment was achieved. The judge reasoned that both convicts had met the conditions for release. The prosecutor gave a Solomonic comment on the ruling. He said the arsonists should look into their consciences and serve out the remainder of their sentences. That was his assessment of the case on a human level.

At the level of the law, however, the prosecutor came to the same opinion as the judge. I am convinced that human morality is the basic essence of any legal norm. To separate the interpretation of any legal norm from what is right means the law is applied just at an instrumental level, a procedural one. The arguments used by the judge and the prosecutor reflected just their interpretation of a specific law, which precluded justice for the victims in the bigger picture when it came to how socially serious this crime was, to say nothing of the fact that such an opinion from justice system representatives could serve as a sort of instruction to the neo-Nazis who perpetrated it. The promotion of the most brutal, criminal ideology in the world by using Molotov cocktails against Romani people is worth just 13 years in prison. The compensation to the victims can be paid in instalments.

The judge was also convinced of the correctness of the perpetrator’s early release because once they are free, they will be able to get jobs and regularly pay the compensation owed to their victim. Over the last 13 years, the bank account for the compensation owed to the victim Natalie Siváková, who suffered third-degree burns over 80 % of her body, has received approximately CZK 300,000 [EUR 12,000] total from all four arsonists. (Novinky.cz, 2023). She has undergone more than 100 plastic surgeries. Her mental health has been disturbed. She is a teenager today who will have to live for the rest of her life with her disadvantage in terms of her health and her social life.

Expert witnesses told the court that they had concluded the arsonists could be released because they have acquired perspective on the crime they committed. Expert psychiatrists said the arsonists no longer believe they should celebrate Adolf Hitler’s birthday by throwing Molotov cocktails so they can “fry” as many Roma as possible. The prosecutor leaned on that opinion as well and did not take advantage of his right to appeal their early release. The mother of Natálie Siváková does not believe that the arsonists have acquired perspective, but nobody cares about her opinion.

The attorney for the released arsonists, when speaking to the media, referred to these adult men in familiar terms, as “guys” who have other things to worry about than bothering the family they harmed again once they are free. Use of the term “guys” or “young guys” for these arsonists really caught on in the online space, as I recall. Some media outlets even used the word “youths” to refer to the arsonists. What subliminal message did that send to the public? I believe it sent the message that this was not a crime against humanity, but that “boys will be boys” and this was a youthful error. Calling the neo-Nazis who committed this arson “boys” or “guys” has become domestic usage in the Czech Republic.

Natálie Siváková became a symbol for dissolving the Workers’ Party

In 2009, before the Kudrik/Sivák family were attacked, the Czech Interior Ministry filed a motion with the Supreme Administrative Court for the Workers’ Party (Dělnická strana – DS) to be dissolved. The first such motion failed. The ministry based its motion on legal conclusions drawn from its Department of Security Policy, the police files, the academic political science community and the nonprofit sector. The ministry claimed the DS displayed the characteristics of an anti-system, extremist, ultra-right party.  

Interior Minister Martin Pecina, part of the caretaker government in office at the time, speaking on the “Václav Moravec’s Questions” interview program after the arson attack in 2009, said the crime that was committed in Vítkov could aid his second motion for the DS to be dissolved. He claimed the DS was connected in terms of personnel with the Autonomous Nationalists and the National Resistance groups. That was proven by attorney Jan Sokol before the court when he represented the Interior Ministry in its second lawsuit. Sokol told the court that some members of the Autonomous Nationalists and National Resistance were also members of the DS. During house searches, the police found Autonomous Nationalist materials in the homes of the arsonists who committed the attack in Vítkov. The Supreme Administrative Court dissolved the DS on 31 May 2010.

At that time I had the impression that the Czech Republic knew how to cope with anti-Romani attitudes and extremism in a systematic way. I also perceived that for many institutions and non-Roma, the arson attack on a two-year-old child had been unacceptable. I valued those attitudes, the civic and institutional support, immeasurably. At a personal level, it was the first time I felt like a citizen of my own country.

I believe the Interior Ministry, specifically the Department of Security Policy, has long led the struggle against extremism quite well. I always find their annual reports on extremism and their concepts to be quite high-quality, and their recommendations are effective and matter-of-fact. I appreciate the Babiš cabinet for approving of the term “prejudicial hatred” in 2019 when the Interior Ministry published its Report on Extremism and Prejudicial Hatred for 2018. The ministry explained the adoption of this term, reporting that even though the influence of extremist groups in the Czech Republic had weakened, their rhetoric had slowly been taken over by other entities which could not be unequivocally labeled extremist. An example is the “Freedom and Direct Democracy” (Svoboda a přímá demokracie – SPD) party of Tomio Okamura, which is seated in Parliament. In the Report on Extremism and Prejudicial Hatred for 2020, the Interior Ministry stated that the SPD is one of the most significant groups spreading prejudicial hatred against ethnic groups, Romani people included, in the Czech Republic.

On the other hand, our executive branch has been chronically unable to cope with anti-Romani sentiment, hate crime, and institutional discrimination against the Roma. The number of attacks against Romani people because of their ethnicity is growing. I would refer readers on this point to the Czech Government Strategy for Roma Equality, Inclusion and Participation 2021–2030 (Office of the Government of the Czech Republic, 2020).  

Romani children asked: What would happen to our families if Hitler were to return?

Source: Echo24.cz, Respekt.cz

In conclusion, I would like to remind us of another case where children were the victims of attacks with a racial subtext.

This case happened in 2016 in Jiřetín pod Jedlovou. Czech President Petr Pavel recently gave state honors to the Romani musician Ida Kelarová for her service to the state in the field of culture, child-raising and education in recognition for her decades of organizing summer camps for musically talented Romani children. In 2016, the media reported that somebody fired a weapon at the Romani children attending one of her camps. Kelarová was not satisfied with the approach of the police from Varnsdorf when she reported to them that somebody had fired a weapon at Romani children. The police never even visited the scene. The procedure of the police from Varnsdorf was investigated by the General Inspectorate of the Security Services on the basis of an official complaint filed by Kelarová. The Czech Public Defender of Rights Anna Šabatová also had to review the case. Pressure to investigate had to come from abroad, from the international advocacy organization the European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC). An important role was also played by the ROMEA organization, which was the first to report on the case.  

Shots were fired at the Romani children on 4 August and 8 August 2016. They were fired by a man who lived near the campground where the children were staying. He burst into the camp, fired his weapon more than once, and assaulted Kelarová’s husband. He shouted racist abuse at the Romani children. Kelarová was convinced this was a racially motivated crime. Police never responded even though the reports of the incidents were made through the proper channels. They did make sure, however, to cast doubt on the credibility of Kelarová and the Romani children through the media.

The gunman, Martin Kout, together with his wife, defended themselves by claiming that they are not racists. It got on their nerves that the Romani children were loud and gathered for their evening meals in a strange way. The gunman’s wife said the children would sing as a group, shout, then suddenly fall silent. Mr. Kout and Mrs. Koutová understood this to be a provocation. Kout said the law did not prevent him from firing his gun on his own land. He also said nobody could prove he had fired at the children because they were Romani. Kout said he is not a racist. You can judge that for yourselves:

“I have nothing against those children,” he says and reflects a moment. “I don’t get why they don’t learn to speak Czech normally, why they greeted my wife by saying ‘Good day, ma’am’,” – mimicking Romani dialect -“and why they don’t learn how to speak like we do.”  (Respekt, 2016).

Ida Kelarová filed a motion with the Audit Department of the Police of the Czech Republic to investigate whether the police in Varnsdorf had violated the Act on Police, specifically, Section 2 of Act no. 273/2008, Coll., on the Police of the Czech Republic. That law is the starting point for assessing the duties of the Czech Police and states that the task of the police is to protect people’s security, to prevent criminal activity, and to fulfill the tasks set forth in the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Audit Department replied to Mrs. Ida Kelarová. They said the police in Varnsdorf did nothing wrong. The action of firing a gun and abusing children in racist terms was categorized by the Audit Department as a misdemeanor (Respekt, 2016). Kelarová told Romea.cz in August 2016 that we can be certain the police will not protect Romani people.

I introduced this example under the heading “Romani children ask what would happen to our families if Hitler were to return.” The answer is that he never left, he lives among us still, he lives inside some people. This answer is best captured by the experience described by Petr Kadlec, head of the Center for Education at the Czech Philharmonic. He said the following for Respekt magazine in an article entitled “Court backs Romani children from Ida Kelarová’s music camp” in their issue of 3 September 2016: “…before the concert my colleague, a trumpet player, heard two well-dressed old ladies say to each other over cake that it was a pity Hitler hadn’t lived 10 years longer so that no gypsies would be giving concerts here today.”

The Czech justice system and the police have a problem with Romani people

I hereby call on Justice Minister Petr Blažek and Interior Minister Vít Rakušan to immediately, without delay, eliminate the racism toward the Romani national minority that is systemic in the judicial and police structures. Specific cases involving crime victims who are Romani clearly demonstrate serious wrongdoing, an approach by the judiciary and police that belittles cases featuring a racial motivation for crime. This causes the radicalization of no small part of the non-Romani public, especially in the online space. In the Czech Republic, citizens from the majority society feel entitled to express approval when any and all forms of unlawful approaches are taken toward Romani men and women. 

I call on both ministers to pay attention to the documents in the Strategy for Roma Equality, Inclusion and Participation which define the measures and tools for combating antigypsyism, discrimination, prejudicial hatred and segregation. I call on the ministries to start immediately implementing the tasks therein that fall within their purview.

I call on and demand that both ministries familiarize themselves with the conclusions of the study undertaken by the internationally renowned advocacy organization the European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC), Justice Denied: Roma in the Criminal Justice System of the Czech Republic (2023). I also ask Minister Petr Blažek and Minister Vít Rakušan to stop denying the facts about the discrimination, the prejudicial hatred and the segregation being committed against the Romani national minority. Under no circumstances are these just latent manifestations of racism, as was said during their discussions with the Romani community on ROMEA TV. On the contrary, historically, antigypsyism has been a part of the institutional practice of these systems. These manifestations of antigypsyism fatally impact the current and future generations of Roma and society as a whole.