In Italy Table of contents

^ENDNOTES

¹²³ The European Court of Human Rights has held that Article 3 of the Convention, read in conjunction with Article 1, requires States not merely to refrain from torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, but also to “secure” this right by providing protection against ill-treatment by private persons. In Costello-Roberts v. United Kingdom the court held “that the responsibility of a State is engaged if a violation of one of the rights and freedoms defined in the Convention is the result of non-observance by that State of its obligation under Article 1 to secure those rights and freedoms in its domestic law to everyone within its jurisdiction” (Costello-Roberts v. United Kingdom, 19 EHRR 112 (1993), para. 26; see also, mutatis mutandis, the Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom Judgement of 13 August 1981, Series A no. 44, p. 20, para. 49 and A v. United Kingdom, Judgment of 23 September 1998, para. 22). Similarly, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has referred to a number of private actions threatening human rights and the State’s duty to deter such activity. In its General Comment of 1992, it clarified that the scope of protection to be undertaken by the State extends to cover torture, or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment committed by people acting in their “private capacity” (HRC, General Comment 20, Article 7, Forty-fourth Session, 1992, para 2). The General Comment reads in part: “It is the duty of the State party to afford everyone protection through legislative and other measures as may be necessary against acts prohibited by Article 7 [i.e. torture, inhuman or degrading treatment], whether inflicted by people acting in their official capacity, outside their official capacity or in a private capacity” (Ibid., para 2). The Committee also declares that States should indicate the provisions of their criminal law which prohibit and specify the penalties applicable “whether committed by public officials or other persons acting on behalf of the State, or by private persons” (Ibid., para. 13). The references to private capacity and private persons thus leaves no doubt that Article 7 of the Covenant covers non-state actors.
¹²⁴ See “Snapshots from around Europe”, Roma Rights 2/1999, at: http://errc.org/rr_nr2_1999/snap03.shtml.
¹²⁵ Case summary based on European Roma Rights Center interview with Mr K.L., January 27, 1999, Milan.
¹²⁶ Case summary based on European Roma Rights Center interview with Ms L.J., January 24, 1999, Palermo.
¹²⁷ European Roma Rights Center interview with Mr F.Z., January 27, 1999, Milan.
¹²⁸ United Nations Human Rights Committee, “Summary Record of the 1679^th meeting: Italy”, CCPR/C/SR.1679, 28 July, 1998, para. 27. During the first two months of 1998, the Italian delegation said that eight such incidents had been reported.
¹²⁹ In its last appearance before the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, members of the Italian delegation stated: “Italian society did not breed sentiments of a racist nature. […] Incidents that could be classified as incidents of “racism” normally fell into different categories. […] The fact of attacking or beating non-Europeans usually had little to do with racial discrimination. In most cases, the behaviour originated in a compelling urge to give reign to the most violent instincts.” (United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Summary record of the 1075^th meeting: Italy”, CERD/C/SR.1075, 6 March, 1995, para. 18). More recently, on May 3, 2000, the Italian delegation told the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights that there was “not so much a problem of discrimination against Roma people as a problem of intolerance. In some towns with a large Roma population, Roma people sometimes jumped the queue to obtain housing, which could cause resentment among the local population.” (See “Summary Record of the 6th Meeting: Italy (E/C.12/2000/SR.6), 3 May 2000”).

5. Discriminatory Treatment of Roma in the Provision of Public Services
The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, a Convention that binds Italy, prohibits discrimination in access to any place or service intended for use by the general public.¹³⁰ Nevertheless, the ERRC has documented numerous instances of discriminatory treatment of Roma in the provision of public services in Italy.
On June 2, 2000, staff at a cafe in the Via della Mercede in Rome refused to allow entry to ERRC volunteer Mariangela Prestipino. Ms Prestipino is dark-skinned. After a brief discussion, the staff member apologised, allowed Ms Prestipino to enter, and explained that he had thought she was a “Gypsy”. In another case, Mrs V.H. (59) told the ERRC in January 1999 that three years previously, she had entered a café in the vicinity of the camp in Mestre and asked the waiter for a cup of coffee. He reportedly answered: “Gypsies are not allowed entry here.”¹³¹ Ms M.D. similarly told the ERRC: “Every time we enter a store, they usually recognize us as being Sinti. They lock the door and check the till. Then they look around the store checking the goods. If they decide that something is missing, they call the police. We are then searched. But we have been charged with theft even when nothing was found on us.”¹³² On December 26, 1997, the daily Il Manifesto reported that a bar in San Salvario, a district of Turin, pursued a policy of not serving foreigners. According to the article, no group is actually banned, as such a practice would be illegal. Rather, the bar staff is under orders not to serve foreigners.¹³³ Similarly, on March 29, 1998, another article in Il Manifesto reported that the owner of a pizza restaurant in Ventimiglia had attempted to charge a Romani customer extra for a pizza solely because of his ethnic origin.¹³⁴ Roma in Florence told the ERRC that they patronize only the few bars in the city where “no one bothers us about who we are.”¹³⁵ The ERRC is aware of one Florence café which recently posted a sign at the entrance stating, “No Gypsies.”¹³⁶ Another sign posted in the town of Cairate (close to the northern town of Varese) was printed by the city itself. It reportedly stated “Camping and loitering by ‘nomads’ is severely prohibited. Transgressors will be punished by law.”¹³⁷