THE ROMA FIASCO

A Personal Account by Judith Kopácsi Gelberger

Introduction

In the late 1990s, Canada unexpectedly became a refuge for thousands of Roma fleeing increasing violence and discrimination in Central and Eastern Europe. What occurred within Canada’s refugee system during those years—especially concerning Hungarian Roma claimants—exposed significant inconsistencies, political pressures, and a troubling gap between documented facts and official decisions.

This is my account as an interpreter, advocate, and witness.

I. The Case That Opened My Eyes

I met Mr. S in the spring of 1997 at a Hungarian cultural event in Toronto. He had just arrived with his wife and two children, seeking asylum as Roma from Hungary. When he told me he planned to represent himself at his hearing, I urged him to reconsider. Without proper representation, he stood little chance.

I connected him with a capable immigration lawyer and offered to interpret for him.

Mr. S was among the first Hungarian Roma to arrive in Canada during a rising wave of migration. He was educated, articulate, and well-known within Hungary’s Roma community. For five years, he worked on Patrin, a Roma-focused TV program broadcast daily by Hungarian State Television. His reports highlighted discrimination, police misconduct, and systemic abuse.

It was dangerous work.

After investigating racist exclusion at a university club and police brutality in Budapest’s 11th district, he started receiving threatening phone calls—both at work and on his unlisted home number. He had previously faced false accusations by police officers and detention over basic reporting equipment.

At his IRB hearing on December 1, 1997, panel members recognized:

• His public profile made him a target

• Roma in Hungary faced widespread hatred and violence

• State protection for Roma was unreliable or nonexistent

The panel determined that the family possessed a well-grounded fear of persecution. They were recognized as Convention refugees.

But this single success came against a darker backdrop.

II. Rising Hostility in Hungary: What I Witnessed

During my frequent visits to Hungary in the 1990s, racism grew increasingly visible. Anti-Roma and anti-Jewish hate literature—including Mein Kampf—was openly sold in bookstores and by street vendors. Slurs were shouted on the streets. Violence went unchallenged.

Two incidents remain vivid:

1. A Conversation That Turned Sour

When I shared with a well-known photo artist my encounter with a Roma poet who could speak in the Lovari dialect alongside a professor of Urdu, he became enraged, complaining that “Gypsies always play the victim.”When I attempted to explain the linguistic link to India, he looked at me and said,“You are no longer a European.”

2. A Subway Confrontation

I saw three young men terrorize a Roma youth on the Budapest subway. Passengers remained silent—terrified. I chose to quietly confront the attackers until others followed my example. The aggressors fled at the next stop.Later, I found out that a young man had been stabbed to death for speaking out against an anti-Semitic insult.

This was the reality Roma faced daily.

III. Joining the Roma Community Centre (Toronto)

In 1997, the Roma Community Centre (RCC) opened in Toronto after over 3,000 Czech Roma arrived in Canada. Their goal was ambitious:

• help Roma integrate into Canadian society,

• educate the public,

• and challenge discrimination.

I joined their board and, in late 1998, travelled to Hungary on a fact-finding mission.

Over five weeks, I interviewed:

• Roma activists

• journalists

• civil-rights lawyers

• human-rights organizations

• the Hungarian Helsinki Committee

Every expert confirmed the same thing:

Roma in Hungary faced systemic discrimination amounting to persecution.State protection was unreliable or absent.

When I visited the Minority Ombudsman’s Office, an assistant initially insisted that Roma faced no discrimination. When I challenged this, he suddenly “remembered” a large box of documentation proving the opposite. This episode captured Hungary’s official approach: deny publicly, admit privately.

IV. The IRB Test Cases: A Turning Point

On January 20, 1999, the IRB released two negative decisions in secretive “test cases” involving Hungarian Roma.

These hearings were unlike anything seen before:

• 10+ sessions

• Claimants were not allowed to bring their own witnesses from Hungary

• The IRB invited Hungarian government officials—not neutral parties

• Independent Roma activists were excluded

• Experts supporting the claimants were dismissed for supposedly lacking recent firsthand experience

The IRB concluded:

Roma face discrimination in Hungary, but not persecution.

This contradicts evidence from NGOs, human rights organizations, researchers, and Roma themselves.

Immediately afterward, acceptance rates for Hungarian Roma collapsed—From 70% in 1998 to just 8% in mid-1999.

More than 1,000 claimants were suddenly at risk.

V. A Community Pushes Back

On February 4, 1999, the Roma Community and Advocacy Centre held a press conference in Toronto to protest the decisions. Present were:

• lawyers,

• refugee advocates,

• academics,

• Roma families,

• and myself.

I stated openly:

“I doubt the IRB wanted to know the truth. Their witnesses were selected to whitewash the situation.”

Refugee lawyers protested the refusal to allow cross-examination of government witnesses. Roma attendees described living under near–apartheid conditions in Hungary.

Meanwhile, the Hungarian Consul General denied all allegations of persecution.

Reports later showed that Roma deported from Canada returned to even worse conditions, having sold everything they owned to flee.

Conclusion

Between 1996 and 1998, Canada recognized Hungarian Roma as a persecuted minority. But the 1999 test cases—shaped by political pressures and conducted without transparency—reversed that recognition.

The consequences were immediate and human:

• Families denied protection

• Children sent back into violence

• A vulnerable minority left without a voice

This is not only a Roma story.It is a story about what happens when institutions fail to listen, when politics outweigh truth, and when the vulnerable are told their suffering is merely “discrimination.”

The Roma deserved—and still deserve—better.

VI. Aftermath and Escalation: Canada Closes Its Doors (2007–2012)

A second wave of injustice — long after the “test cases.”

In 2007, Paul St. Clair, Director of the Roma Community and Advocacy Centre (RCAC), published “Migration of Hungarian Roma to Canada (and Back).” His research revealed an uncomfortable truth:

Many Czech and Hungarian Roma did not abandon their refugee claims because they were unfounded. They left because:

• EU entry seemed to offer new opportunities

• Canada reimposed visas, splitting families

• Social assistance was insufficient

• Job prospects were limited

• Fear of rejection loomed

• Ill relatives back home needed care

• Some gained a minor financial benefit through repeated travel

St. Clair concluded starkly:

Both Hungary and Canada failed the Roma.

Hungary’s Failure

Despite joining the EU, Hungary did not enforce anti-discrimination laws, protect Roma from police abuse, or ensure equal education, housing, or social support.Violence increased. Segregation deepened.

Canada’s Failure

Canada, he argued, squandered an opportunity to pressure Hungary into meaningful reform. Instead, Canada:

• orchestrated the 1999 “Lead Case” that damaged thousands of future Roma claims

• relied on politically convenient conclusions rather than documented reality

• underfunded language training, employment programs, and settlement services

• treated Roma asylum seekers as political inconveniences, not human beings

The consequences grew even harsher in the next decade.

VII. 2012: “None Was Too Many” — A Minister’s Message to the Roma

In December 2012, Canada’s Immigration Minister Jason Kenney travelled to Hungary with a blunt message:

As far as he was concerned, “none” of the Roma belonged in Canada.

No evidence of discrimination, poverty, or violent attacks could shift his position.He ignored:

• systemic police abuse

• segregated schooling

• hate crimes, including firebombings

• public officials calling Roma “animals.”

• Jobbik’s rise and open fascism

Instead, to discourage Roma asylum seekers, the Canadian government launched a $13,000 anti-refugee information campaign in Miskolc, my hometown:

• billboards

• bus shelter posters

• radio spots

• newspaper ads

The message was unmistakable:Do not come to Canada. Your claims are not welcome.

This campaign, predictably, emboldened extremists in Hungary and increased the risks for Roma on the ground.

VIII. Warnings from Human Rights Organizations

Many organizations condemned Canada’s approach, including the Montreal Holocaust Memorial Centre (MHMC). They pointed out:

• Democratically elected governments can still persecute minorities

• Extreme-right movements in Hungary commit violence with impunity

• A Hungarian MP had recently called for lists of all Jews

• Canada’s “Designated Safe Country List” was dangerously misleading

Their warning was clear:

The fact that a country is an EU member does not mean its minorities are safe.

IX. Correcting Misconceptions: The EU Myth

Minister Kenney repeatedly argued that if Roma were truly persecuted, they would relocate to other EU countries.

Experts quickly corrected him:

• EU law bars citizens from seeking asylum in another EU state.

• Roma may move freely for 90 days only, unless they secure employment.

• Given extreme stigma and undereducation, their chances of finding work were negligible.

As Professor Peter Showler stated:

“The fact of the matter is, they cannot seek asylum in other EU countries. That is a binding agreement.”

Yet the minister continued repeating the claim.

X. Two-Tier Refugees and Political Interference

Advocates warned that Canada was creating a biased refugee system, where:

• claimants from “safe countries” (like Hungary) were presumed illegitimate

• political signals influenced IRB members

• appeal rights were slashed

• health care and dental benefits were denied

Critics emphasized that people fleeing persecution often have untreated illnesses precisely because they lacked healthcare at home. Denying them treatment in Canada protected no one.

Former IRB Chair Peter Showler summarized the problem:

“Europe has quick processing and multiple appeals.Canada has quick processing and no meaningful appeals.That is not an improvement.”

The deeper issue remains:

When politicians decide in advance which nationalities are “not real refugees,” the independence of the system collapses.

And indeed, it did.

As I witnessed firsthand in the 1990s, political influence was always present beneath the surface. Independent IRB members who refused to bow to pressure often paid for it with their careers.

XI. The Moral Question

If one wanted to create:

• a refugee system where almost no refugees are welcome,

• a public image of human-rights leadership,

• and a patronage network of appointed positions—

then Canada’s policies toward the Roma from 1999 onward were tragically effective.

But that leads to the unavoidable question:

Is this the Canada we want to live in?

Countries that signed the Geneva Convention are obligated to protect refugees—not to undermine the system for political convenience.

As one commentator wrote:

“If you want Canada to withdraw from the Geneva Convention, petition your MP.But be prepared to live in a country that abandons its moral obligations—to others and to its own citizens.”

I could not agree more.

Conclusion

The Roma were failed twice:first by Hungary, then by Canada.

Their story exposes how easily human rights can be dismissed when politics intrude—And how essential it is to defend the integrity of our refugee system, not merely for those seeking protection today, but for all who may one day depend on it.

 Judith Kopácsi Gelberger