CIDEC - Citizens' Dialogue for European Consensus by Gradjanske inicijative Gradjanske inicijative

This project is financed by the EU through the European Integration Fund, a programme managed by the EC Delegation to the Republic of Serbia and implemented by Press Now.

Citizens' Association for Democracy and Civic Education

CIDEC - Citizens' Dialogue for European Consensus

Building Partnership between NGOs and Public Administration in the EU Integration Process

This programme has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of Civic Initiatives and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union

This project is financed by the EU through the European Integration Fund, a programme managed by the EC Delegation to the Republic of Serbia and implemented by Press Now.

Citizens' Association for Democracy and Civic Education

CIDEC - Citizens' Dialogue for European Consensus

Building Partnership between NGOs and Public Administration in the EU Integration Process

Belgrade, June 2009

Contents

Introduction ..............................................................................................5 On the project: CIDEC - Citizens’ Dialogue for European Consensus ........................................................................................... 7 Realization of Events ................................................................................................ 11

Building Partnership between NGOs and Public Administration in the EU Integration Process ................................................................13 International Conference, 9 October 2008, Belgrade, Media Centre ............ 15 Report on the Event ............................................................................................ 17 List of Participants in the First International Conference ......................... 74 Round Table in Bujanovac, 31 October 2008 ...................................................77 Report on the Event ............................................................................................ 79 List of Participants in the Public Discussion in Bujanovac

102

Round Table in Novi Sad, 5 November 2008 ..................................................105 Report on the Event ..........................................................................................107 List of Participants in the Public Discussion in Novi Sad .........................124

Comparative Analysis of Experiences in Cooperation between the Nongovernmental Sector and Public Administration in the European Integration Process ................................................129 RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................145

Introduction

This is the ﬁrst in a series of three publications prepared in the scope of the project CIDEC – Citizens’ Dialogue for European Consensus, implemented by Civic Initiatives in cooperation with the European Integration Fund managed by the European Commission Delegation to Serbia, and technically implemented by Press Now. This project has been envisaged as a set of related activities, among which is preparation of these publications that accompany a series of public events – international conferences and local public discussions, on topics important for including citizens into the process of European integrations. Each publication contains a detailed review of three events held under the same name. The ﬁrst publication refers to the topic “Building Partnership between NGOs and Public Administration in the EU Integration Process”, treated at the First International Conference, held in Belgrade on 9 October 2008, as well as at public discussions in Bujanovac on 31 October 2008, and in Novi Sad on 5 November 2008. The second publication reports on events addressing “Institutional Forms and Mechanisms of Citizens’ Participation in the EU Integration Process”, analyzed at the 2nd International Conference in Belgrade, on 28 November 2008, and at public discussions in Novi Pazar on 12 December 2008, and in Zrenjanin on 3 February 2009. The third publication presents events that have started at the 3rd International Conference in Belgrade “Opportunities for Citizens and NGOs to Communicate with EU Institutions” on 3 March 2009, and public discussions in Kruševac, on 26 March 2009, as well as public discussion planned to be held in May 2009.

Each publication contains a detailed review of presentations of experts from abroad and from Serbia, the flow of events, lists of participants, comments, discussion and evaluation. We especially point to documents at the end of each publication, the author of which is the Assistant Professor Tanja Miščević PhD. They summarize findings of each cycle of events and at the same time contain conclusions and recommendations for different actors in the EU integration process. For this publication the Assistant Professor Tanja Miščević PhD has prepared the text “Comparative Analysis of Experiences in Cooperation between the Nongovernmental Sector and Public Administration in the EU Integration Process”.

On the project: CIDEC - Citizens’ Dialogue for European Consensus This project aims to initiate public discussions between participants from civil society and State oﬃcials on European integration of Serbia, and thereby contribute to the political and social consensus on integration of Serbia into EU. In order to have a successful dialogue, civil society organizations and active citizens’ associations must be enabled to be frontmen and implementers of this process. It may be achieved by using the experience of other EU candidate and member countries, which have recently gone through diﬀerent phases of EU integration. The project envisages the following aims and outcomes: General project aim: To contribute to establishment of consensus on EU integration in

Serbia. Special aim: To increase citizens’ support to EU integration by creating condi-

tions for their participation in public discussions. Expected outcomes: Increased awareness and level of knowledge on opportunities for co-

operation between nongovernmental organizations, public administration and media in the EU integration process Initiation of public dialogue, exchange of information and good

practice principles related to the EU integration process 7

Empowered nongovernmental organizations for setting up partner

relations with the Government in the course of the EU accession process Better informed citizens, and more included in public discussions

on EU integration Concrete activities planned in the scope of the one-year project: 1. Three one-day thematic international conferences – One of the key planned activities during the project duration are three one-day international thematic conferences. The conferences are based on experiences of EU candidate and member countries in diﬀerent phases of their integration process. In direct discussion with organizations from Serbia will be analyzed possibilities for application of methods and activities that were evidently successful in their cases.

Lessons learned from presented models of informing and inclusion of citizens into integration flows will help Serbian nongovernmental organizations and associations to avoid mistakes and to do their job efficiently and successfully. International conferences were planned to be held in Belgrade, for some 35 participants, including both representatives of the civil sector and representatives of the state administration, media (journalists and editors-in-chief), European institutions and foreign embassies, international experts from Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia (member countries) and Croatia (candidate country), as well as representatives of the European Integration Office of the Republic of Serbia. 2. Six public discussions – Two discussions were planned to be organized after each conference, a total of six public discussions. Discussions were envisaged as an additional clarification of the conference contents. They will be organized in regional centers all over Serbia (Zrenjanin, Novi Sad, Niš, Kragujevac, Novi Pazar and Bujanovac). Each discussion will be attended by 50 participants, including representatives of local civil society organizations, local authorities and media. The events will be facilitated by two domestic experts. 3. TV production and broadcasting – each event will be taped, edited and offered to nationally and locally covered TV stations. The programme will last up to 30 minutes each. We expect the Association of Local Electronic Media to broadcast this programme for symbolic price. 4. Publications – Based on documents and materials from conferences and discussions, conclusions and recommendations will be put together in three thematic publications. They will be printed in circulation of 500 each, and will also be available on our website. 5. Spreading information on activities and outcomes through media – Information will be communicated to the public in the course of the complete duration of the project. The Project Coordinator from Civic Initiatives will be responsible for the overall information spreading strategy, while the PR Manager 9

will be in charge of daily activities related to cooperation with media. Besides conference materials and three publications, this project brings a number of other materials as well. It includes monthly reports on activities, ﬁnal report with internal evaluation, press releases, NETWORK newsletter. All of the materials will be available to public on Civic Initiatives website as well, while a special link will connect it to the website of the European Integration Oﬃce. For more information please visit the Civic Initiatives websites.

Realization of Events

In the period October 2008 – April 2009 three international conferences were held in Belgrade, and five round tables – public discussions in Bujanovac, Novi Sad, Novi Pazar, Zrenjanin and Kruševac. The final event was planned for May 2009. Guests at conferences were experts from Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia and Macedonia. They presented experiences from their countries, of both governmental and nongovernmental sectors, in the domain of mechanisms of cooperation, citizens’ participation, process monitoring, establishing dialogue and discussions on the topic. Representatives of the EU Integration Office, as well as Ministry of Finance, presented efforts made by their institutions in the EU integration process. Conferences were attended by more than 180 participants (instead of the planned 105) from the governmental and nongovernmental sectors, representatives of media, local self-governments, trade unions, local institutions. Discussions all over Serbia were used for presenting experiences and recommendations set forth during international conferences, as well as for presenting activities of domestic institutions and nongovernmental organizations in this process. Interest for these events surpassed all our expectations – instead of planned 150 participants, at 5 out of 6 events were present over 400 participants from all sectors of the society, including representatives of local community centres. Here is a detailed review of the first series of events, which started at the International Conference in Belgrade, on 9 October 2008, and finished at public discussions in Bujanovac and Novi Sad.

Building Partnership between NGOs and Public Administration in the EU Integration Process

International Conference, 9 October 2008, Belgrade, Media Centre

PROGRAMME 09:00 – 09:30 09:30 – 09:45

Registration Opening: Miljenko Dereta, Executive Director of Civic Initiatives

09:45 – 10:30

Pawel Swieboda, Director of demosEUROPA – Centre for European Strategy – Polish experiences in EU integration processes Croatian experiences as a candidate country for EU membership: Pero Bilušić, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of the Republic of Croatia • Models of partnership cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Croatia and civil society organizations (Kornelija Mlinarević, Project Manager, Regional Development Agency of Slavonija and Baranja) • Challenges and examples of good practice (Sonja Vuković, President of the Regional Forum of Associations of Slavonija and Baranja) • Slovenian experience – Janez Potočnik, EU Commissary for Science and Researches (video statement) Coffee break Macedonian experiences as a candidate country for EU membership: Tanja Hafner Ademi, Balkan Civil Society Development Network Tanja Miščević, EU Integration Office - Experiences of Serbia in the EU integration process Svetlana Logar (Strategic Marketing) – Results of the public opinion research in Serbia, on EU integration processes Discussion/Questions and Answers Lunch

10:30 – 11:45

11:45 – 12:15 12:45 – 12:30 12:30 – 13:15 13:15 – 13:30 13:30 – 14: 30 14:30

Report on the Event The gathering in Belgrade raised high interest, therefore instead of the planned 35 participants the event was attended by 65 representatives of domestic and foreign institutions, nongovernmental organizations from the country and the region, international organizations, donors, representatives of embassies and media. The Conference was opened by Miljenko Dereta, Executive Director of Civic Initiatives, who said that the idea of the gathering was that “through experience of others Serbia learns how to undergo necessary changes on its way to the European Union.” Dereta emphasized that the main aim of the project is to exchange knowledge and experiences with candidate and member countries during the process of its EU accession. “I expect that we shall acquire new knowledge and awareness of opportunities for cooperation between nongovernmental organizations, public administration and media in European integration, as well as initiate a public dialogue, exchange of information and good practice principles related to the EU integration process”, said he, pointing out that “the EU accession process refers to all segments of life and that this dialogue is necessary, so that the European integrations issue would not be an exclusive right of the Government and political elite.” The Director of the Centre for European Strategy “demosEVROPA”, Pawel Swieboda, talked about experiences of Poland in the EU accession process. Swieboda said that this country passed through three levels during the integration process: harmonization of common platform within the Polish authorities, negotiations with EU officials, as well as discussions and Polish public opinion research. He pointed out that, besides having to get well prepared for EU accession, the State administration must also clearly explain to the citizens what the Union is, how it functions and what its significance is. According to his words, the main challenge in the EU accession process is support by the civil sector and all social partners. Partners in the process are, he specified, from the one side, trade unions, associa17

tions of employers and workers, NGOs, interest groups, and from the other side, local self-government, which in Poland has a high level of autonomy, and played an important role in critical chapters, such as regional policy and structural funds, as well as in the domains such as environment, waste, electrical power plants. He emphasized that EU accession is a unified process which requires a complete change of the State administration functioning method, wherefore social partners and public opinion are inevitable. Reminding that the Poles declared on EU accession on a referendum, Swieboda pointed out that on that occasion social partners had a deciding impact on animating broad public from the very beginning. And the beginning, says he, means examining legislation, which begins the moment you start negotiations on membership. “It is the first and most boring phase, when at invitation of the European Commission in Brussels you go chapter by chapter through the present European legislation. The second phase referred to discussion – how to apply EU legislation in specific fields, what flow it should have and what partners should be included. This phase resulted in creation of partner groups (in 1997), which included different ministries and social partners in solving a number of problems. The main negotiator formed a special working group in the scope of his office that addressed communication with social partners and public opinion. Finally, there was the Government’s programme on informing the society”, said Swieboda and added that local self-governments played an important role in the process because they were entrusted with implementation of structural funds. “With 67 billion Euros (net) in the period between 2007 and 2013, Poland is today the major receiver of EU assistance. This is an enormous amount of money and major increase in available funds, because 67 billion from EU with national co-financing amount to almost 100 billion Euros available for different structural projects. It means that local selfgovernments must be prepared for it, and it does 18

not happen overnight. The Forum of joint committee of the Government and local self-governments that has always existed formed a working team for European policies. The main negotiator, as I already said, had a special team for communication policy, however, during negotiations we had two main negotiators, because the Government changed in the course of the negotiations. Nevertheless, both of them were very dedicated, touring the country and talking to people. Very soon, a distribution network was formed, so that information would spread all over Poland. It is important to be as frank and sincere as possible and to orientate towards real problems from the very beginning”, explained Swieboda. One of initiatives was, says he, to establish triangle tables between the forum of the main negotiator, NGOs and other organizations. “This forum, i.e. these triangle tables solved more general issues as compared to the ones I mentioned before. In that sense was to be observed the position of disabled persons as well. The aim of this initiative was to communicate to the public objective general information. For the business community it was important to establish a good discussion on overall importance and effects of reforms. Thereafter, the referendum on EU accession was a completely different challenge”, added Swieboda. “At the end, I wish to add that during the integration process our population got tired of listening to golden promises of EU welfare that never materialized. However, when we became a member, we made public opinion researches and the most satisfied with the fact that we are a part of the system of the European family are peasants (the percentage of satisfied ones grew from 65% to 79%, in the period 2004-2007), as well as young people. The important thing is that with all citizens’ groups satisfaction grows. It is interesting that politicians are in the middle, and I do not know whether they could be called a social group, however, with them the percentage of satisfied ones decreases from 78% or 76% to 67%, so that they are the only ones who actually lose due to EU integration”, defined Swieboda. 19

CIDEC – Citizen`s Dialogue for European Consensus

˝Building Partnership between NGOs and Public Administration in the Process of EU Integration˝ October, 9th 2008, Belgrade, Media Centre Paweł Świeboda President demosEUROPA – Centre for European Strategy

••• Cooperation with the social partners was a key aspect of Poland’s road to the European Union. Who are the social partners? • Primarily: trade unions, employers’ and employees’ associations, organizations of employers and employees, non-governmental organizations, interest groups. A separate category is the local self-government at different levels.

•••

• EU accession is the most far-reaching regime change ever embarked upon in the modern world. Given the scale of the exercise, it must be accompanied by a strong engagement with the public opinion.

••• Different levels: • Building a general degree of consensus for the EU integration, • Enhancing understanding of the way the EU functions, • Consulting with the social partners on the most fundamental changes needed in the regulatory environment while retaining the confidentiality of the negotiations – with the objective of both achieving the best possible negotiating outcome and ensuring smooth implementation of the measures Ensuring cohesive communication with the partners in the EU

••• Organization of the process: Participation of the social partners and local self-government in the screening of EU legislation, the first phase of the accession process. Follow-up discussions to plan the agenda for the implementation of EU legislation in Poland.

Partnership Groups were created in 1997, a year before the launching of negotiations, to bring together government ministries and social partners on a range of issues. Each Partnership Group liaised with a selected subcommittee within the Negotiating Team. The Chief Negotiator created a separate Task Force to communicate with the social partners and the public opinion. Programme for Informing the Society [about EU integration] was adopted by the government on 4 May 1999, a year after negotiations started.

••• Self-government played a key role given its substantive responsibilities in the Polish system of government and role in the implementation of EU funds. The forum was provided by the Joint Committee of the Government and Local Self-Government which established a separate European Policy Task Force. The Chief Negotiator organized a series of conferences in the region under the title of “Understanding Negotiations”. He visited all the voivedships to present the progress of negotiations and consult with the local actors. The negotiating chapter of “Regional policy and coordination of structural instruments” was the main focus of the discussions as well as EU legislation in the area of environment (waste and sewage treatment). A distribution network was created as a result of the close cooperation with the local self-government which enabled feedback to be transmitted to the lower levels of authorities and interested institutions and persons.

••• Consultations concerning negotiating chapters – important for equipping the Negotiating Team with arguments & communicating the margins of the negotiations. Examples: • 26 November 1998 – consultation meeting on the Supplementary Product Certificate (SPC) for medical products and pesticides. Important given the role of generic drug production in Poland. • 6 January 1999 – meeting with over forty representatives of all associations and organizations representing the fishery sector. • 27 April 1999 – consultations with the representatives of small and medium-sized enterprises on the adoption of work safety standards. • November 1999 – launching of the work on impact assessment of the 88/609/EEC directive on large combustion plants, one of the controversial issues in the negotiations.

••• “Triangular tables” – initiative to bring together: • the Chief Negotiator, • Forum of Non-governmental Initiatives, • other organizations.

Examples of issues addressed: position of disabled persons in the light of EU legislations.

••• Impact assessment analysis were carried out in cooperation between the government and the business sector.

••• Final phase of negotiations and the accession referendum.

•••

www.demoseuropa.eu

The Head of the Information Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of Croatia, Pero Bilušić, says that in the process of Croatia’s accession to the European Union was set a broad structure for negotiations in which was included the nongovernmental sector as well. Bilušić emphasized that EU accession is not only accession of the Government or State administration. Its membership encompasses all citizens of the European Union, consequently all segments of the society; it is therefore essential to introduce all segments of the society into the issue. “We say that negotiations for membership are conducted primarily at home, within Croatia. When you reach consensus within the state, it is very easy to negotiate with the European Union. Therefore, the Croatian Government set a broad structure for negotiations with the European Union. Into working groups for conducting negotiations were included the nongovernmental sector, professional organizations, Chamber of Commerce, Association of Employers”, said Bilušić. According to his statement, in all working groups in Croatia part take over 2,000 persons, out of which an important portion comes from the nongovernmental sector. “Regarding communication with citizens related to EU accession in Croatia, to a great extent the nongovernmental sector is included as well, for two reasons: the State administration recognized that numerically it has no capacity to communicate the whole process with citizens by itself, and from the other side, citizens in Croatia, according to all conducted researches, always have more confidence in nongovernmental sector than in the Government. The Government is co-financing information projects implemented by civil society organizations. Every year is announced a competition for financial support, while the other form of support is active participation of representatives of the Ministry in initiatives conducted by nongovernmental organizations, either conferences, seminars or any other activities. Since 2004, after obtaining the status of a candidate country, the Government of the Republic of Croatia started an initiative for the so-called National Forum for EU Accession – public discussions in which are included representatives of the State administration, academic community and nongovernmental sector, with the aim to bring all stakeholders to the same table. There were 18 meetings of the National Forum, starting from the environmental protection, national sovereignty, energy issues, i.e. all essential topics important 27

in the accession process. At the initiative of the Ministry of Foreign Aﬀairs and European Integration was formed a joint committee of the EU Economic and Social Committee and nongovernmental sector of Croatia, for the purpose of including the nongovernmental sector of Croatia into the ﬂows of the European Union as soon as possible, so that through the Economic and Social Committee they could already, in a way, participate in decision making and exercise how the policies evolve inside the European Union. This method of including civil society organizations is very important when consensus inside the country is needed, because then the negotiations with the European Union go smoothly”, he explained. At the end of his presentation, Bilušić particularly pointed out that it is most important to inform citizens about EU, so that they would decide for that policy; he added that at this moment 60% of citizens in Croatia are for EU membership, while 38% are against it. The Project Manager of the Regional Development Agency of Slavonija and Baranja, Kornelija Mlinarević, talked about models of partnership cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Croatia and civil society organizations, but also about the institutional framework, which actually makes possible a dialogue between civil society in Croatia and the Government, particularly in the EU accession process. “Besides the international pact on civil and political rights and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which all of us representatives of civil society know, there is also the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia and, for us particularly important, Law on Associations and Law on Endowments and Foundations”, said she and added that the “Law on Associations is the fundamental document regulating that 28

section of the social sphere and activities of associations as the most numerous method of civil society organizing.” “From strategic documents”, she said, “I would single out the National Strategy for Creation of Stimulating Environment, Code of Positive Practice, Standards and Criteria for Achievement of Financial Support to Programmes and Projects of Citizens’ Associations. The Code is essential for both Croatia and civil society in our country, for this Code actually institutionalizes access to financing of associations because up to then, we may say, the situation was rather chaotic and was not at the advantage of civil society organizations. The Code of Positive Practice, Standards and Criteria reflected very well on lower structures of authorities, too, i.e. on local authorities in Counties, where many elements of the Code were transferred and adapted to local conditions. The Code was passed only last year, after many pains and negotiations”, pointed out Mlinarević. She also said that in 1998 was established the Office for Associations, which to a great extent has alleviated functioning of civil society organizations because it works on creating conditions for partnership relations between civil society and the Government; it promotes intersectoral cooperation, proposes new legal frameworks and improves drafting of programmes and new standards. She added that the National Foundation for Civil Society Development (founded in 2003) renders professional and financial assistance in programmes stimulating sustainability of the non-profit sector, and also promotes partnerships, intersectoral cooperation, civic initiatives, and works on improvement of democracy and democratic institutions of the society. A significant step was made by definitely including representatives of civil society into Government’s councils and different bodies, whereby was opened the opportunity for access to information and for real impact on public policy adoption. Researches have proven that the population does not have a lot of information on EU, on changes that EU membership brings; exactly these information have civil society organizations, whose main function is to disseminate the information among their citizens. Then she drew attention to the fact that organisations themselves have to become better organized: “Lack of organization, fragmentation of interests, lack of coordination in mutual organiza29

tion of civil society, which is an obstacle if you wish to approach the Government with some uniform requirement, and particularly to join umbrella networks. You must first be united at home in order to be able to go out. The point of the story is that, actually, civil society organizations in Croatia must be better coordinated, organized and they must empower themselves in order to be members, in the first place, of some umbrella organizations for which we know to be the only representative ones at some level of European commissions and European Union. It gives them strength and importance that cannot be ignored by the Government, not only of Croatia but of any other country. The main potential of civil society organizations is experience in using funds and preparation for using those funds, which the Government should take benefit of. The European Social Fund and global grants enable access to small civil society organizations, which results in necessity for cooperation between the Government of Croatia and civil society.” See power point presentation of Kornelija Mlinarević 30

˝Cooperation between Civil Society and the Government of the Republic of Croatia˝ Kornelija Mlinarević Regional Development Agency of Slavonia and Baranja www.slavonija.hr Belgrade, 9 October 2008

••• Basic Documents and Regulations INTERNATIONAL PACT ON CIVIC AND POLITICAL RIGHTS European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms CONSTITUION OF RC LAW ON ASSOCIATIONS LAW ON ENDOWMENTS AND FOUNDATIONS

•••

LAW ON ASSOCIATIONS The Law on Associations regulates establishment and activities of associations as the most numerous type of civil society organizations in Croatia. The Law elaborates the right guaranteed by the Constitution to associating of citizens as any form of free and voluntary associating of a number of physical persons or legal entities, for the purpose of the protection of benefits or pleading for the protection of human rights and freedoms, environmental, humanitarian, information, cultural, national, pro-natality, educational social, professional, occupational, sports, technical, health, scientific or other views and aims, without intention to acquire profit. 11.10.2001, Narodne novine No. 88

••• Strategic Documents on Relationship between the State and Associations • NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR CREATION OF STIMULATING ENVIRONMENT FOR CIVIL SOCIETY DEVELOPMENT from 2006 to 2011 (and OPERATIONAL PLAN OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR CREATION OF STIMULATING ENVIRONMENT FOR CIVIL SOCIETY DEVELOPMENT from 2007 to 2011) • CODE OF POSITIVE PRACTICE, STANDARDS AND MEASURES FOR ACHIEVEMENT OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO ASSOCIATIONS’ PROGRAMMES AND PROJECTS, 09.02.2007 Narodne novine No. 16

• PROGRAMME PROPOSAL FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA AND NONGOVERNMENTAL, NON-PROFIT SECTOR IN THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA, 2000

••• Regulations on Institutional Framework DECREE ON THE OFFICE FOR ASSOCIATIONS DECISION ON FORMING A COUNCIL FOR CIVIL SOCIETY DEVELOPMENT, AND APPOINTMENT OF THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL LAW ON NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR CIVIL SOCIETY DEVELOPMENT

••• Office for Associations Established in 1998, for the purpose of performing professional activities from the domain of the Government of RC, with reference to creating conditions for partner relations and intersectoral cooperation with the non-profit sector, mainly with associations in the Republic of Croatia. • proposing new legal frameworks for activities of nongovernmental, non-profit sector in RC; • Monitoring implementation of the adopted proposal of programme of cooperation between the Government of RC and nongovernmental, non-profit sector in the Republic of Croatia;

• proposing improvement of the Programme, designing the programme, standards and recommendations for financing activities of CS organizations from the State budget and other public sources, as well as from pre-accession and structural funds of the European Union.

••• National Foundation for Civil Society Development National Foundation for Civil Society Development was established on the basis of a special law (NN 173/03) by the Croatian Parliament, on 16 October 2003, as a public foundation with the main purpose of promoting and developing civil society in the Republic of Croatia. For the sake of achieving its main purpose, the National Foundation renders professional and financial support to programmes that stimulate sustainability of the non-profit sector, intersectoral cooperation, civic initiatives, philanthropy, volunteering, and improvement of democratic institutions of the society.

••• National Foundation for Civil Society Development Aims that the National Foundation wishes to achieve through its activities are: • encouragement of active citizens, inclusion and participation in community development • capacity building of civil society

• development of intersectoral cooperation and cooperation between civil society organizations • increased public impact and public activities of civil society organizations • development of social entrepreneurship and employment in the non-profit sector • increased influence of civil society in processes of public policy adoption

••• Role of Civil Society Organizations in the Accession Process of Croatia to European Union • initiation of public dialogue on the accession process of Croatia to EU, on different aspects of the process, reforms and their performances • inclusion into implementation of Communication Strategy for informing Croatian public on the EU accession process • participation in the process of accession negotiations and monitoring of progress in meeting conditions for full membership in the Union • cooperation in implementation of external communication strategy towards EU member countries that contributes to better understanding between citizens of Croatia and those countries • stimulation of better usability of EU pre-accession funds and stronger role in the future use of structural funds

••• Council for Civil Society Development • The Council is an advisory and professional body of the Government of the Republic of Croatia, founded in 2002, whose aim is to promote implementation and efficacity of the adopted Programme of Cooperation between the Government of RC and nongovernmental, nonprofit sector in RC, strategy of civil society development, development of philanthropy, social capital, partner relations and intersectoral cooperation under conditions of decentralized system of decision making and financing. • The Council has 21 members, 10 from the State Administration, 8 from civil society organizations and 3 experts who should be from civil society.

••• EVER MORE emphasized the important role of civil society organizations as unavoidable partners in communication with citizens on sometimes very technical issues of harmonization with EU Acquis Communautaire. Recommendations set forth in the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee highlight the importance of civil dialogue empowerment (CONSULTATION) which, besides the present traditional social partners (trade unions and employers) also includes associations and other civil society organizations, in the joint work for the public good.

••• 36

The Most Important Problems and Obstacles to Cooperation • failure to recognize the needs of this sector and interfering into CSOs’ work by authorities • lack of organization, lack of coordination, fragmentation of interests – obstacle to uniform requirements to the Government but also to joining overarching networks in EU • insufficient work on being informed, on capacity building and networking

••• EU Programmes in which Participated (Participate) CSOs • CARDS 2003 – Capacity building and support to civil society organizations in rendering social services – Technical support • CARDS 2003/2004 – Good management and the rule of law – Nonrepayable funds scheme • CARDS 2004 – Support to civil society organizations in the area of environmental protection and sustainable development – Non-repayable funds scheme

••• EU Programmes in which Participated (Participate) CSOs • CARDS 2004 – Rendering social services by the non-profit sector – Non-repayable funds scheme

• CARDS 2004 – Technical assistance to financial support management – Croatia – Technical assistance • PHARE 2006 – Enabling active contribution of the civil society sector in the pre-accession process – Non-repayable funds scheme for fields: Democratization and human rights; Environmental protection; Youth • PHARE 2005 – Capacity building of the Council for Civil Society Development and Office for Associations of the Government of the Republic of Croatia – Technical assistance

••• Some of the Union Programmes Open for Croatia (2007 – 2013) • Integrated Action Programme in Lifelong Learning • Youth in action • Culture 2007 • Europe for Citizens • Consumer programme • Fundamental Rights and Justice Framework Programme (Daphne, Drugs prevention and information, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, Criminal Justice, Civil Justice)

•••

PREPARATION FOR FUTURE PROGRAMMES

PRE-ACCESSION PROGRAMMES

Component 1: transition and institution building

Component 2: regional and cross-border cooperation

Component 3: regional development

Component 4: human potential development

Cohesion funds

INSTRUMENTS OF COHESION POLICY

•••

Component 5: rural development

Future How? (European Social Fund, ESF)

Lobbying • Ministry of Economy • Labour Administration • Council for Civil Society Development

GLOBAL GRANTS

• Central State Office for development strategy - Coordinator for civil society

Enable access to ESF funds for smaller/small CSOs

••• Useful Internet Pages www.uzuvrh.hr www.strategija.hr www.cfcu.mfin.hr www.entereurope.hr www.euroinfo.hr www.myeucenter.org www.delhrv.cec.eu.int www.eucenter.org www.welcomeurope.com www.europa.eu.int www.europa.eu.int

Thank you for your attention

The President of the Regional Forum of Associations of Slavonija and Baranja, Sonja Vuković, spoke about challenges and examples of good practice, but also about experiences of Croatia as an EU candidate country. She underlined that “no one can do it alone and that winner is the one who chooses the best partner”, therefore they started an initiative in Slavonija some 6 to 7 years ago, the aim of which was to organize associations at the local level. For that purpose, she said, was formed the Regional Forum of Associations of Slavonija, with the aim to contribute to development of civil society. “We worked at two levels – cooperation with local self-government units because the development in all programmes of the European Union and according to all models still starts from bottom up. We must get sufficiently empowered, interconnected, i.e. be sufficiently strong and organized to become partners at local, regional and national levels. We started informally in 2002 and did not want to impose ourselves as another umbrella organization; we actually included into the joint work representatives of local self-governments, hoping to find out different models of cooperation”, said Vuković. “Thus was adopted the Charter on Cooperation, which defined some areas of cooperation between local self-government and associations, whose aim was to overcome communication problems, to define the manner of decision making, transparent allocation of funds and assistance to our inclusion into resolution of some public needs and

problems. In late 2004 we signed the first Charter in the Osijek-Baranja County, then in the City of Osijek, thereupon in Vukovar-Srem County, and two years later we signed one more project of cooperation with another 9 local selfgovernments. During all that time we worked in working groups. We did not always get along, we did not have same opinions, however, in a painstaking way we achieved what we called the civil national consensus, because we understood that we are not inter-competitive. Besides the Charter on Cooperation we also drew up the model of transparent allocation of funds”. Vuković added that the Council for Development of Civil Society was founded, for the purpose of creating infrastructure for development, and that the Local Partnership Strategy was made, which presented methods of communication with local self-government and areas to be worked on together. She especially drew attention to the fact that organizations should be better organized and form networks at the regional level, that the knowledge about use of funds they have should be the base for establishing cooperation with State bodies, in particular with local self-government. The aim is to offer that knowledge to some cities, to form city development teams, whereby civil society organizations will not only negotiate, instruct, but also take over the responsibility. They also work on including the business sector into financing of civil society organizations, because strengthening of the public sector, and race for profit lead to the loss of connection between the public and civil sectors. Therefore, civil society organizations should impose themselves through resources they have in the form of knowledge, information, image, as a desirable partner. Critical for further development is communication, better organization, intersectoral cooperation and partner projects. See power point presentation of Sonja Vuković 42

Regional forum of slavonian associations

Partnership as development Model Sonja Vuković, dipl.oec Belgrade, 9 October 2008

••• Regional Forum of Slavonian Associations is a coalition of NGOs organized to strengthen social capital and to promote civil society values in the region of Slavonia. Long term Goals: • To promote and protect civil society values and to initiatate cooperation between CSOs; • To actively participate in the process o creation of development policis at the national, regional and local comumunity levels; • To initiate and develop cooperation models with public and private sectors; • To advocate for and to create conditions and infrastructure for sustainable devlopment of CSOs.

Organizational Development Informal coalition since December 2002 • Building trust and ground for common work • Working groups and joint projects • Registered in october 2006

••• OUR Accomplishments Charters on Cooperation: • Osijek inter-sector working group (participative process) • Formal ground for building partnership between local government and CSOs • Principles and areas of cooperation: • Communication • Participation in Decision Making Processes and Development • Transparent Funding • Public Needs and Outsourcing • Charters were signed: • Osijek-Baranja county 15 December 2004 • City of Osijek 28 December 2004.

• Vukovar-Srijem county 14 January 2005. • 2006/7 also 9 other local communities ( Beli Manastir, Čeminac, Darda, Erdut, Ernestinovo, Lovas, Popovac, Stari Jankovci, Tordinci)

••• Model of transparent Funding Osijek-Baranja county • Partially implemented City of Osijek • Formalized – 3rd run of calls for proposals City of Belišće • Formalized – 3rd year of implementation Baranja working group • Set of workshops for inter-sector team prepared set of documents and procedures acustomed to the 9 local communites • Jointly with the Charter of Cooperation presented to local governments and CSOs in the area • Formalized in Beli Manastir and Darda

•••

Decision making process: Osijek-Baranja county • Board for Civil Initiatives • Advisory board to County council • Represented by tree Forum members • Common goals and action plan (Fund for Civil Society Development and other social infrastructure) • Board for Eu integration – Forum representative • Board for Social Issues – Forum Representative City of Osijek • Board for Civi Society Development • Board for Human Rights and Rights of Minorities

••• OTHER ACCOMPLISHMENTS: • Regional Civic Consenus / Values and principles • Strategy of Regional Development as a result • Survey on Social Cohesion • Participative Creation of the Strategy for Local Partnership

• Manual: Strategy of Local Partnership • Conference on Social Cohesion in Zagreb • Communication Strategy

••• Agenda 2006/09 Priority issues and guidelines: • Communication • Decision Making Process • Development Programs • Building infrastructure for CSOs and civil initiatives development • Regional network of support centers • Creating infrastructure for sustainability of CSOs • (Fund for Social Development/ Local Community Foundations Corporate Social Responsibility / Non-profit Enterprise) • Policy of securing office space for CSOs • Transparent Funding • Public Needs and outsourcing

••• 47

CURRENT ACTIVITIES : • Capacity Building of the two local development teams with the Cities of Vukovar and Našice • Providing know-how (training, consulting) • Capacity building for CSOs in Osijek-Baranja county (training and consulting in PCM, marketing and PR) • Funded by The National Foundation for Civil Society Development, Osijek-Baranja county and City of Osijek • Developing web-magazine • Mapping and feasibility study for establishing the Regional Foundation for Social Development

•••

Challenges

•••

New Global Social System

Profit sector is constantly taking more power from the public

••• “No one is good enough to suceed alone. Win those who choose the best partner.”

••• To To BE a Desirable Partner! Sharing Power (RESOURCES) Partner 1

Partner 2 Power = INFORMATION

Power = MONEY Power = KNOW-HOW Power = CONTACTS Power = POSITION Power = IMAGE

••• Don’t use power, take bigger hammer. - Antony’s law of power

Arthur Bloch: “Murphy’s Law, and Other Reasons Why Things Go Wrong”

••• Critical points of Cooperation

••• Why a snowball, I can be a waterfall...

•••

Developing human resources and strengthening social assets with the aim of achieving social and economic development of the region through education and support for possible carriers of the development, again through strengthening partnership models of cooperation between all three civil society sectors.

••• Programme fields • RURAL DEVELOPMENT • SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP • INTERSECTORAL COOPERATION • SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE BUSINESS PRACTICES

••• L. Jagera 6/3, 31000 Osijek tel: 385 31 213 556 fax: 385 31 213 557 udruga.slap@gmail.com www.pomakonline.com Sonja Vuković mob: 385 /91/510-2172 sonja.slap@gmail.com

Experiences of Macedonia as an EU candidate country were presented by the Coordinator of the Balkan Civil Society Development Network, Tanja Hafner Ademi. She drew attention to the fact that building of partnerships encompasses a triple relation of EU with diﬀerent institutions, Government and civil society organizations as the third partner, and that there are diﬀerent levels of partnership. “In order to develop interaction between the above mentioned actors, a legal framework is necessary, such as the Governmental Strategy for Cooperation with the Civil Sector. Documents at the EU level are also essential, e.g. Stabilization and Association Agreement. The Government must also be aware of the need to treat civil society as a stakeholder and to include it in public administration reforms.” She further pointed out that “good organization of civil society is indispensable, therefore in Macedonia was formed an informal network of organizations, in the form of a civic platform. Every government, including EU, is a huge machinery and as such it prefers to talk with a group, i.e. representatives of networks, and not with individual organizations; when a group representative is appointed it is easier to spread information as well, and to negotiate. EU and the Commission, as one of the partners, should show readiness to give higher political importance to civil society organizations, to point to the concrete method of including civil society into the decision-making process, while civil society must un-

derstand that it is important to use the political influence of EU, and to report on progress. Therefore representatives of EU, of CSOs and representatives of the Government should sit at the same table because all of them have an interest in it. There should be a structure that would make possible inclusion and presentation of the civil sector in negotiations. We have to be included into the whole process, at all partnership levels, therefore is networking important.” In her presentation, she commented on the role of media in the integration process. Ademi says that media in Macedonia are divided regarding the European integration topics, specifically to governmental, pro-Government and the ones linked to business interests and political parties. “When we speak about EU, the problem in Macedonia is superficial reporting, there is no active role of journalists and media in explaining, communicating with people on the topic of integration process, on advantages of EU membership, on benefits that ordinary citizens will have from the membership”, says Ademi and adds, “My organizations works on the project of visa liberalization, because that will be a positive breakthrough towards the European Union. Media rarely report on it, although for an ordinary citizen it is very important whether he/she can freely travel or not. In the European integration system all of us have an important role, media as well. They are responsible for communicating information to people who have to personally experience benefits of EU membership”, concluded Ademi. See power point presentation of Tanja Hafner Ademi

Building Partnership between Public Administration and CSOs in the EU Integration Process: Macedonian experience

Tanja Hafner Ademi, MA thf@mcms.org.mk

•••

Framework for partnership “Basics” 1. It’s a triangular relationship: the Government - EU – CSOs 2. Levels of partnership: policy & strategy vs. operational/implementation 3. The legal framework: national & EU level

••• Framework for partnership • National legislation E.g. Government Strategy for Cooperation with Civil Sector (20072011) Providing dialogue mechanisms (public discussions, submitting opinions, drafting of the national budget, programming of IPA, inclusion in the working groups and advisory bodies) • EU benchmarks, e.g. SAA, Accession/European Partnership E.g. EU Accession Partnership for Macedonia lists “effective implementation of measures adopted to ensure transparency in the administration, in particular in the decision-making process,

and further promotion of active participation by civil society” as a short-term priority under Political criteria • The partnership principle in IPA Regulation – 1st time provides legal basis for inclusion of civil society actors into the programming, implementing, monitoring and evaluation processes of EU assistance on national and regional level • The issue of political will and readiness to engage with civil society as a stakeholder

••• Current situation and experience in Macedonia • Limited participation of CSO’s in policy-making (preparation of legislation, strategic documents) – need for institutionalization of models through further implementation of the Strategy; • The budgeting issue – the need for participative budgeting (e.g. Code of Good Practice for Financial Support of the Associations of Citizens and Foundations) - non-prescriptive standards only to be observed when publishing a call for proposal for CSOs activities from the state budget; no single budget heading and law for financing of civil society • Civic Platform for Macedonia (est.2004) Gathers 29 CSOs from different sectors and interests, offering them an open space for 3Cs developing basic resources (mostly through research, establishment of databases and publications) and opened up space for exchange of

views and joint action (e.g. training, public debates, promotion and sharing of resources, fairs, forums); • Joint cooperation (CSOs and Government) E.g. Conference “Cooperation of the Governments (in WB) with the civil society” organised by the Unit for Cooperation with NGOs in March 2008

••• Challenges • Government - capacities/human resources and time-constraints (EU deadlines); • EU- high expectations of civil society contribution (e.g. promoters of EU values, multipliers of people2people contacts) vs. possibility/ readiness for bigger political leverage to provide “breathing space” for civil dialogue with the Government; • CSOs – EU is not a replacement of donors exiting, it is a strategic policy partner  development of capacities for advocacy and networking (EU-specific) since Brussels already in many respects dictates national politics and this is only expected to increase!

•••

••• Lessons learned • Further implementation of Government Strategy for Cooperation with Civil Sector (e.g. MCIC working on a monitoring report on the Strategy, good governance programme); • Use of political leverage by the EU (e.g. input into the Progress report, regular consultations on MIPDs and AP); • Inclusion of CSO representatives in policy dialogue institutions (e.g. Economic-Social Council/, Joint Consultative Committee, or EU accession negotiations teams); • Need to develop Action plans for implementation of IPA partnership principle (consultations with CSOs); • Consultations with CSO’s/stakeholders on national/sectoral development plans and annual operational document should be made obligatory; • Need to develop capacities of CSOs as well as other stakeholders (e.g. municipalities, professional associations) to engage with EU institutions and process (networking!).

••• Thank you for your attention!

••• 60

The Director of the Oﬃce for European Integration of the Government of Serbia, Tanja Miščević1, said that in October 2008 the Government of Serbia adopted the National Programme of Integration of Serbia into the European Union. It is a strategic programme document on activities of Serbia and harmonization of domestic legislation and practice with standards existing in all negotiating EU processes, said she and added that the document passed through a public debate and became the Programme of Work of the Government in the next four years. Mišćević pointed out that in Serbia, unfortunately, there is no institutionalized relationship between the Government of Serbia and civil society. “When I say that, I do not have ready-made solutions how to improve things; however, we are open for any advice, by our neighbours as well, because we can learn awfully lot”, she added. “Although there is no institutionalization of relationships, we signed with the civil sector a Memorandum of Cooperation. We have a Memorandum signed with universities in Serbia and with the Chamber of Commerce of Serbia as well. Unfortunately, such a Memorandum has not been signed with trade unions”, said Miščević an added that “the aim of the cooperation is that civil society in Serbia should be recognized not only as a participant but also as an owner of EU integration process. This process does not only mean membership in EU but also a reform of Serbia that will lead to membership”, added Miščević. She said that the Council for European Integration is another important instrument in the accession process, which has not been used. “We are getting prepared for the new 1

New Director of the Oﬃce for European Integration is Milica Delević

Government to organize the first session of the Council for European Integration. It is a consultative body within the Government of Serbia, which is a creator of clear political consensus for European integration. We are all aware that it is something still not existing in Serbia, and the Council that will consist of both executive and legislative authorities, as well as representatives of civil society in Serbia should very soon have its first constitutive session”, stated Miščević. She said that, nevertheless, it is not enough and that it would be good to follow models that colleagues from Poland and Croatia spoke about, which imply very clear inclusion of civil society into technical processes of European integration. It is indispensable to include knowledge, capacities and resources that undoubtedly exist in civil society, universities, Chamber of Commerce, so that the process of preparations for negotiations for the future membership of Serbia in the European Union could start in a quality manner, said Miščević. “Serbia has three important plans for the years to come: visa regime liberalization, obtaining the candidate country status, decentralized implementation of funds coming from IPA funds. For us, assistance by the civil sector is very important for realization of these plans. There are higher capacities for programming funds coming from IPA in the nongovernmental than in the governmental sector, there is also much more expertise”, pointed out Tanja Miščević. However, she drew attention to the fact that the civil sector must also solve two important issues: lack of coordination, lack of understanding or lack of unified voice of the civil sector and the ownership over the process. At the end she gave an idea to initiate in Serbia a feasibility study How to Institutionalize Relations between Civil Society and Executive Authorities, and to go with it before the Government of Serbia, as with an agreed solution. The Director of the “Strategic Marketing”, Svetlana Logar, presented results of public opinion research in Serbia on EU integration. She said that 74 percent of citizens support membership of Serbia in the European Union. Logar added that somewhat more positive attitudes towards EU membership started in March 2008, however, they still vary from month to month. According to her words, ratification of the Stabilization and Association Agreement was supported in June by 54 percent of citizens, in July by 65, in August by 54, and in September by 62 62

percent of citizens. She stated the data that although 55 percent of respondents do not know what that Agreement implies, the majority agrees that it will contribute to better life in Serbia (72 percent of respondents). Citizens of Serbia also speciﬁed that SAA and energy agreement with Russia, ratiﬁed in the Parliament on the same day, will have the same importance for the future of Serbia. Svetlana Logar pointed out that data are often contradictory, which indicates to poor communication, i.e. lack of communication by the authorities towards citizens with reference to EU integration. According to her words, it is about a monologue of the political elite towards citizens, which indicates to the necessity and imperative for participation of the civil sector in the whole process. See power point presentation of Svetlana Logar

Attitudes of Citizens of Serbia towards EU and EU Integrations

Citizens’ Dialogue for European Consensus

•••

Methodology Results of field researches – monthly SMR Omnibus Universe Sample size Sample type Sample error

Population of Serbia 18+ years 1000 respondents (minimum) Three-stage random representative stratified sampling ±3.31% for phenomena with 50% incidence (marginal error)

••• Percentage of citizens with positive attitude towards EU 45

Signed SAA + Fiat + Eurovision

Arrested Karadžić

39%

35%

34% %

29%

28%

26% 25 22% 20

22%

17%

22% %

22%

Ratified SAA, T. Nikolić supported SAA

20%

21%

17% ZES: Starting

electoral campaign

Interruption of negotiations on EU association

Formed proE European Government

Kosovo Independence p

0 May 06

6 June

6 July

7 Sept.

Oct. 07

7 Nov.

7 Dec.

feb.08

March 08

May 08

June 08

July 08

Aug.08

sep.08

Chronologically observed, after signing SAA, considerably larger percentage of citizens express positive attitude towards EU

If referendum for membership of Serbia in the European Union was conducted this week, how would you vote? For Against

74 69

69 64

59 55

18 13

Marc M ch 2 2008 8

dec.07 7

18 13

17 10

Sep ptem mberr 2008 2 8

Augu A ust 2 2008 8

Ju uly 2 2008 8

Ju ne 2008 2 8

pril 2 2008 8 Ap

No vem mbarr 200 07

2 7 Oct. 2007

sep p.07 7

ju ul.06 6

ju n.06 6

2006 6 May 2

Considerably larger percentage of citizens would vote on referendum for membership b hi off S Serbia bi iin EU th than th the percentage t off th those h having i positive iti opinion i i of EU

Do you support ratification of SAA in the Parliament? % of citizens supporting pp g SAA ratification 65 54

62 54

Yes 45

June 2008

July 2008

August 2008

September 2008

Considerably C id bl llarger percentage t off citizens iti supportt SAA ratification tifi ti th than th the percentage of those who have positive opinion of EU, although the majority do not even know what SAA actually means

Do you believe that adoption of SAA will contribute to better life of citizens of Serbia? (September, 2008.) 8

Does not know/Has no attitude

20 No, I do not believe that adoption of SAA will have an impact on improvement of citizens' life citizens 43 Yes, but I do not expect improvement in the near future

Yes,, fully y 29

Majority j y of citizens do not actually y know what SAA means for Serbia, however, they y have expectations regarding contribution of SAA to the life standard of citizens of Serbia

What seems more significant, to you personally, for the future of Serbia and its citizens: Stabilization and Association Agreement with the European Union or Energy Agreement with ( p , Russia? ) (September, 2008.) 7

Does not know/Has no attitude

38 Equally significant

Stabilization and Association Agreement with the European Union

Energy Agreement with Russia

Citizens are divided regarding g g evaluation of importance p that SAA with EU and Energy Agreement with Russia have for Serbia

Delivery of Radovan Karadžić to The Hague is in the best interest of Serbia? indictment? Does not know

August ugust 2008 2008.

S b Srebrenica i

20%

Genocide, G id ethnical th i l cleansing l i

Bosnia (genocide, war)

Sarajevo

War crimes

Other answers

There are no crimes crimes, he did not commit any crime

I do not agree at all 28

44%

I mainly disagree

I mainly i l agree

35% I fully f ll agree

Cannot specify any

65%

Although g at the same time more than 60% of citizens believe that EU Association is in interest of Serbia, only slightly more than one third of citizens believe that delivery of Karadžić to The Hague is in interest of Serbia Serbia. The majority of citizens citizens, 65% 65%, cannot specify any event for which Karadžić is indicted!

Is delivery of Ratko Mladić in the best interest of Serbia? 22

Has no H attitude

Yes

June 08

July 08

Aug. 08

8 Sept.

Although g more than 60% of citizens believe that EU Accession is in interest of Serbia just about one third of citizens believe that delivery of Ratko Mladić is in Serbia, interest of Serbia Serbia.

Attitudes towards signing of Stabilization and Association Agreement with EU and status of Kosovo (April 2008) Does not know

13 11

Serbia should not sign SAA 23 Serbia should sign SAA only under condition that countries which recognized Kosovo independence withdraw that recognition 26 Serbia S bi should h ld sign i SAA as soon as the th opportunity t it offers ff b t under but d condition diti that th t it does d nott mean recognition iti off K Kosovo, as well ll 26

Serbia should sign SAA as soon as the opportunity offers

In April p 2008, jjust before signing g g SAA, the majority j y of citizens believed that for signing SAA Serbia should set conditions to the European Union with regard to the status of Kosovo Kosovo.

Which are the most important problems that Serbia is facing at this moment, which worry you personally most of all? Unemployment

Kosovo L Low standard t d d

C Corruption ti

Crime

EU Accession

Se eptem mbar 200 08

Ju ul 200 08

EU Accession has never been among problems that worry citizens (not even interruption p of negotiations g on accession,, in May y 2006), ), however,, there are some breakthroughs in 2008.

Av vgus st 2008

Ma aj 200 08

Jun n 200 08

Marrt 200 08

Feb bruar 200 08

Decem mbar 200 07

Okttoba ar 200 07

No ovem mbar 200 07

Se eptem mbar 200 07

Ju ul 200 07

Av vgus st 2007

Ma aj 200 07

Jun n 200 07

Marrt 200 07

Feb bruar 200 07

Decem mbar 200 06

Okttoba ar 200 06

No ovem mbar 200 06

jjun.0 06

Se eptem mbar 200 06

At the end of the presentation was transmitted the statement made by the European Union Science and Technology Commissary, Janez Potočnik, who, when speaking about Slovenian experience in the EU accession process, said that the civil sector played a very important role. “From the one side, they reminded us and raised questions, while from the other side, they were our allies because they spoke in favour of European Union membership”, said Potočnik and added that for every negotiation area were formed negotiating groups, headed by the line ministry, which included representatives of trade unions, Chamber of Commerce, even the Bank of Slovenia. The Government made public invitation to media and nongovernmental organizations to get included in the process and to become a part of negotiating groups. He pointed out that the Government of Slovenia supported nongovernmental organizations by financing them (and not only the pro-European ones but also those who spoke against Europe). Potočnik specified that “in the EU accession process one should play with open cards, honestly, and one should know that nongovernmental organizations can assist in whatever direction one takes – either the direction of raising questions or the direction of rendering assistance in the process of clarifying things related to the EU membership issue”. At the end of the Conference, in a lively debate, different questions referring European integration were posed, out of which we single out the following: What did the campaign for informing citizens during the EU integration process look like in Poland? Were implementers of the campaign domestic or foreign experts, universities, civil sector or representatives of the European Union? Pawel Swieboda explained that the Government formed a network of experts who travelled all around Poland, which to a great extent helped people in acquiring the necessary expertise. His opinion is that “it is always better that expertise is transferred by people who know local conditions; one should mainly rely on domestic experts from the Government and universities and NGOs.” Swieboda also referred to media in the integration process. “Media were the key challenge, when the turn of referendum on accession came, media were very cooperative, they put 70

great efforts in being objective, while regarding negotiations on accession media really ‘gave a hard time’ to the Government.” Question appeared in long lists with reference to European Union Funds (PROGRES) and their functioning. Participants were also interested in the Polish experiences regarding regional setting up in the accession process, particularly with reference to funds from the Funds, as well as the method of financing of nongovernmental organizations; however, they were in the first place interested in how the triangle relation between the state, NGO and partners in the negotiations functioned. Answering the last question, Pawel Swieboda said that “a platform was organized for NGOs, which were one of the partners in the process, but it was secured that other organizations, too, become interested in participating in this specific form of dialogue (a triangle), so that we invited them as well. Therefore I say that it

was more a triangular relation than a bilateral relation between the Government and the NGO platform. I suppose that it depends on to what extent the platform is inclusive. If all of them are presented through a platform, there is no sense in sending additional invitations to other partners, but I think than in the majority of cases must be preserved the openness of the process, so that for the sake of inclusiveness of the process it must be secured that there is a standing invitation to as large number of organizations as possible to join the dialogue.” Many questions at the Conference were posed to the guests from Croatia and Macedonia as well. Representative of the Ministry of Finance of Serbia, Jelena Pajović, was interested in the methods of financing NGOs in the countries in the region. This question was answered by the President of the Regional Forum of Associations of Slavonija and Baranja, Sonja Vuković, who said that in Croatia, just like in our country, organizations make do in different ways. “At the level of the Regional Forum of Associations, where we have our Council in Osijek, we discussed how to solve it, and at the moment we have been considering to establish a Fund for Co-financing European Projects, for the territory of the city of Osijek. We considered it, too, at the County level. I have to say that the Ministry of the Sea, Traffic and Tourism had a competition whereby all those who signed contracts for European projects could obtain 150 thousand Kunas, i.e. some 20 thousand Euros, as co-financing. We also find a way, 72

for instance, by getting from the Regional Development Agency a person to work for us part-time. He does not get a salary for that from us, his salary paid by the Agency is actually a way of co-financing .” Project Manager of the Regional Development Agency of Slavonija and Baranja, Kornelija Mlinarević, added that the Regional Development Agency, particularly in the north and north-west of Croatia, for years has been having guarantee funds used, among other, for co-financing of such projects, too. Given that units of local and district self-government, i.e. cities, municipalities and Counties, are owners of those agencies, founders, in other words it means that they are the ones who co-finance. Responding to the question which is the best model of organizing civil society in Serbia, which are the first problems to be solved, the Executive Director of Civic Initiatives, Miljenko Dereta, set forth his opinion: “One segment mentioned here, which seems to be important, and we in Serbia are wasting it, is the time factor. I have an impression that our civil society is showing unusual signs of impatience and expecting things to happen overnight. We must start to slowly learn that there are things that require a process of maturing. For instance, our Federation of Nongovernmental Organizations of Serbia organized on the territorial principle, maybe now should be rearranged and clusterized on a new basis, so that another type of networking would be established within civil society.” At the end of the gathering, the Executive Director of Civil Initiatives, Miljenko Dereta, bid farewell to the audience and thanked them for participation and contribution.

List of Participants in the First International Conference NAME AND SURNAME 1 MILJENKO DERETA 2 PAWEL SWIEBODA 3 KORNELIJA MLINAREVIĆ 4 SONJA VUKOVIĆ 5 TANJA HAFNER ADEMI

ORGANIZATION/INSTITUTION Executive Director of Civic Initiatives, CoPresident of FENS Director of demosEUROPA - Centre for European Strategy Regional Development Agency of Slavonija and Baranja, Project Manager Regional Forum of Associations of Slavonija and Baranja, President Balkan Civil Society Development Network Coordinator

CITY Belgrade Warsaw, Poland Osijek, Croatia Osijek, Croatia Skopje, Macedonia

6 TANJA MIŠČEVIĆ

Office for European Integration

Belgrade

7 PERO BILUŠIĆ

Head of the Information Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration of Croatia

Zagreb, Croatia

8 SVETLANA LOGAR

Strategic Marketing

Belgrade

9 RADOMAN IRIĆ

ABC Centre for Safety, Peace and Tolerance, FENS

Vranje

10 SUZANA PONJAVIĆ

Friends of Children of New Belgrade

Belgrade

11 VLADIMIR PAUNOVIĆ

MileniuM, FENS

Kragujevac

12 JELENA MARKOVIĆ 13 GORAN ŠEHOVIĆ

Team of the Vice-Prime Minister of the Republic of Serbia for Implementation of PRS Agency for Cooperation with Nongovernmental Organizations and European Harmonization

Belgrade Belgrade

14 JASNA FILIPOVIĆ

Centre for Development of Non-profit Sector

Belgrade

15 IVANA PONJAVIĆ

European Movement in Serbia

Belgrade

16 MELANIJA KOLOŠNJAI - NENIN Ukrštanje (Interweaving), FENS

Novi Sad

17 PAWEL CZERWINSKI

EMBASSY OF POLAND

Belgrade

18 MARKO PAŠKVAN

EMBASSY OF CROATIA, Third Secretary

Belgrade

19 ANNE SIETSKE BRINKS

EMBASSY OF THE NETHERLANDS

Belgrade

20 JELENA PAJOVIĆ

Ministry of Finance

Belgrade

21 DRAGANA SREĆKOVIĆ

Amity

Belgrade

22 VESNA PETROVIĆ

Belgrade Centre for Human Rights, FENS

Belgrade

23 MILICA RUŽIČIĆ NOVKOVIĆ

Centre Živeti uspravno (Living Upright), FENS

Novi Sad

24 STEVAN NIKOLIĆ

Roma Educative Centre, FENS

Subotica

25 MILADIN DECANOVIĆ

Forum for Vlachs’ Culture, FENS

Bor

26 SAŠA STEFANOVIĆ

Society for the Protection and Improvement of Mental Health of Children and Youth

Niš

27 BOBANA MACANOVIĆ

Autonomous Women’s Centre

Belgrade

28 MIODRAG SHRESTHA

Group 484

Belgrade

29 ROZALIJA ILIĆ

Roma Information Centre

Kragujevac

30 ZORANA IVANKOVIĆ

European Commission Delegation

Belgrade

31 GORDANA ARAKČIĆ

European Commission Delegation

Belgrade

32 BOSILJKA JOKSIMOVIĆ

Cabinet of the Vice-Prime Minister Božidar Đelić

Belgrade

33 KSENIJA MILIVOJEVIĆ

Cabinet of the Vice-Prime Minister for European Integration

Belgrade

BOGDAN GAVANSKI

Institute for Sustainable Communities

Belgrade

VUKOMAN BOŠKOVIĆ

Association of Paraplegics of Belgrade

Belgrade

34 LJERKA EĆIMOVIĆ

Ministry of State Administration and Local SelfGovernment

Belgrade

35 MIRJANA ARSIĆ

Ministry of Youth and Sports

Belgrade

36 LOLA JOKSIMOVIĆ

Ministry of Culture

Belgrade

37 DANIJELA ĐUROVIĆ

UNDP

Belgrade

38 BILJANA STANKOVIĆ

UNDP

Leskovac

SNEŽANA ANDREJA ARAMBAŠIĆ

BCIF

Belgrade

40 RUŽA HELAĆ

Fund for Development of the Non-Profit Sector

Novi Sad

41 MILAN ILIJIN

Prijatelji dece Zemuna (Friends of Zemun Children)

Belgrade

42 MILORAD SANTRAČ

PUBLIC

Subotica

43 PREDRAG MILIČEVIĆ

Committee for Social Affairs, Municipality of Grocka

Belgrade

44 MARKO ULJAREVIĆ

Strategic Marketing

Belgrade

45 DEJAN KOZIĆ

Society for Assistance to Elderly

Belgrade

46 RADE NIKOLIĆ

ABCD

Belgrade

47 MIROSLAV RUŽICA

Minority Relations Forum

Belgrade

48 ALEKSANDRA KRSTIĆ

Production Group MREŽA (Network)

Belgrade

49 NIKOLA TODOROVIĆ

News Agency FONET

Belgrade

50 BRANISLAV STANIŠIĆ

TANJUG

Belgrade

51 LIDIJA FRANOVIĆ

E- newspaper

Belgrade

52 DUŠICA MATICKI

International Radio Serbia

Belgrade

On behalf of Civic Initiatives 1 DUBRAVKA VELAT

Belgrade

2 DEJANA MITEV

Belgrade

3 SUZANA ĐORĐEVIĆ

Belgrade

4 TIJANA MORAČA

Belgrade

5 TANJA AZANJAC - JANJATOVIĆ

Belgrade

6 RADMILA RADIĆ - DUDIĆ

Belgrade

7 BOJANA VUJINOVIĆ

Belgrade

8 RADOJKA PAVLOVIĆ

Belgrade

9 BRANISLAV LOVRENSKI

Belgrade

10 MARKO DANON

Belgrade

Round Table in Bujanovac, 31 October 2008

PROGRAMME

10:30 - 11:00 11:00 - 11:05 11:05 - 11:20 11:20 - 11:35

11:35 - 11:50 11:50 - 12:05 12:05 - 12:20

12:20 - 13:30 13:30

Registration Address of welcome: Shaip Kamberi, President of the Municipality of Bujanovac Presentation of experiences of Poland, Macedonia and Croatia from the First Conference: Miljenko Dereta, Executive Director of Civic Initiatives Sonja Vuković, Regional Forum of Associations of Slavonija and Baranja – Challenges and Good Practice Examples (experiences of Croatia as an Candidate country for EU membership) Danijela Nenadić, Counsellor to the Director of the Coordination Body of Serbia for municipalities of Preševo, Bujanovac and Medveđa Maja Jovanović, Ministry of Finance, Local Office in Niš, Neighbourhood Programme Bulgaria – Serbia Jelena Stevanov, EU Integration Office of the Government of the Republic of Serbia – Model of Cooperation between the Office for EU Integration and Civil Society in Serbia Discussion Lunch for all participants

Report on the Event The round table “Building Partnership between NGOs and Public Administration in the EU Integration Process” held on 31 October in Bujanovac, continued the series of conferences and discussions on the issue of EU accession of Serbia. At the round table, where European integration was discussed, present were some 60 representatives of nongovernmental organizations and domestic institutions. The event was organized jointly by the ABC Centre for Peace from Vranje and Civic Initiatives. The gathering was opened by the Executive Director of Civic Initiatives, Miljenko Dereta, who transferred to the participants the impressions on the First Conference and added that the idea of the project is that “through experience of others Serbia learns how to pass through the necessary changes on its way to the European Union”. Dereta said that at this moment the State wants to help the civil sector, citizens’ initiatives, but unfortunately in the south of Serbia people are still thinking in the old manner. “We wait that somebody else ﬁnishes the business instead of us, while the intention of these round tables is to show people that their initiative is important and that it can be supported”, he added. Participants of the gathering were also addressed by the President of the Municipality of Bujanovac, Shaip Kamberi, who said that the Municipality of Bujanovac for a few years already has been allocating funds from its budget amounting to two and a half million Dinars, for subsidies or assistance to nongovernmental organizations conducting activities in its territory. “What we plan to do at the moment is to strengthen or to broaden cooperation with nongovernmental organizations but also with the private sector. In the scope of the project that we started with USAID, we plan to form a local oﬃce for economic development. In the scope of the project will be formed a council with the Municipal Council or Cabinet of the President of the Municipality, in which will be included both nongovernmental organizations and private companies at the local level. According to recommendations of USAID experts and in our opinion, it should help and initiate not 79

only development of the local community by European standards, but it should also attract foreign investments.” He concluded that cooperation between local administration, local self-government and nongovernmental organizations will continue for sure, but that the business sector must also get included “because it is necessary that we develop economically.” Representative of the Coordination Body for the South of Serbia, Danijela Nenadić, assessed that the decision of the Government of Serbia to recognize faculty diplomas stamped by UNMIK is “the ﬁrst step towards long-term solution of high education in the south of Serbia”. She announced that “in the course of this year may be expected opening of a high education institution in Serbian and Albanian languages, in Medveđa.” According to her words, by the end of the

next year will also be opened a high education institution in Albanian language in Bujanovac, which will have a satellite school in Preševo. “We shall work on the model for this project in cooperation with other countries in the region with similar experiences, in the first place with Montenegro”, said the representative of the Coordination Body. Danijela Nenadić adder that for the Coordination Body it is of extraordinary importance to cooperate with civil society, primarily on projects for youth, education and economic development in the three municipalities in the south of Serbia. “Until January next year, the Coordination Body will not be able to support projects coming from the civil sector, however, we hope that in 2009 we shall start financing some nongovernmental organizations as well”, said she. “I also wish to say that for the Coordination Body it is of key importance to cooperate with civil society. Both the Director of the Coordination Body service, and me as his advisor, have almost a ten-year experience in the civil sector – we actually come from nongovernmental organizations, and for that reason exactly we know to what extent is important assistance and cooperation with the State in organizing civil society. To this end, in our strategy, which I believe you had a chance to see, one of the most important segments is exactly cooperation with civil society. For that reason we were criticized by some persons, who claimed that we gave too much space to civil society, and allegedly dedicated too little to some other topics. However, I believe that it is very important, that it will be a new beginning for these three municipalities, but also for the Coordination Body, which has not had experience so far and did not pay attention to cooperation with civil society. Key words for us here are: young people, education and projects orientated towards economic development of the three municipalities. When I say young people, I have on mind, in the first place, the secondary school population and students, for whom we believe that they can be implementers of changes all over Serbia, as well as in these three municipalities. Up to date, we have initiated and supported a few youth projects to the extent we could afford. Starting from the next year, we hope that the Government of the Republic of Serbia will have understanding and approve to us a budget that implies assistance to civil society organizations. Up to now we were not able to assist to either nongovernmental organizations or media, or any other civil society organizations, because the budget of the Coordination Body was conceived in the 81

manner to allow only direct assistance to municipalities. For the next year was planned assistance to civil society organizations, and we shall do it in a way rather similar to the one conducted by the Ministry of Youth and Sports. We shall announce competitions for nongovernmental organizations and other civil society organizations from the three municipalities. We shall give a chance to organizations from the three municipalities to compete with their projects and in that way obtain funds from the Republic budget for implementation of their projects. I believe this is the best way of cooperation with civil society”, speciﬁed Danijela Nenadić. Representative of the Ministry of Finance of Serbia, in charge of inter-neighbourhood cooperation between Bulgaria and Serbia, Maja Jovanović, explained at the gathering in Bujanovac what was going on with the neighbourhood programme up to now. According to her words, neighbourhood programmes have been presented since July 2003, and so far were announced ﬁve invitations for

collecting project proposals for cross-border cooperation. She added that for projects may compete authorities’ bodies at local and regional levels, public enterprises and utility services, chambers of commerce, nongovernmental organizations, educational, cultural and research institutions, societies and associations in the domains of tourism, culture, sports, and other organizations. Donations are approved for the following regions: Pčinj, Jablanica, Pirot, Zaječar, Niš and Bor from our side, and from the Bulgarian side cross-border regions are: Vidin, Sofia and its district, Ćustendil, Montana, Pernik. Jovanović added that all information on projects and on the neighbourhood programme in general may be found on the official website of the Ministry of Finance. “Here you may find the list of all projects awarded with a donation, here we put all our application forms whenever we make a call.” Regarding allocation of funds by organizations, as she says, it is mainly local self-governments, or municipalities who apply with their projects; however, nongovernmental organizations do not lag behind. “Applying is equable regarding both public institutions and scientific institutions, cultural institutions, regional agencies, regional chambers, whereby the lowest response is by, let’s say, educational institutions. For instance, a small number of persons is applying from elementary, secondary schools and kindergartens. Therefore we tried for this year, 2008, to animate those institutions as much as possible, and we actually received a few projects from a few schools. Hereby I must also remark that health organizations did not apply at all, although neighbourhood programmes have been going on for three years already.” At the end she emphasized that neighbourhood cooperation is important because it helps an even development of the region and contributes to its stability. See power point presentation of Maja Jovanović

Neighbourhood Programme Bulgaria - Serbia Section for Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Serbia

••• What Has Been Going On with the Neighbourhood Programme Up to Now? Neighbourhood Programme 2004 – 2006 Presented by the European Commission in July 2003 • Up to now have been announced five invitations for project proposal collection • In 2006 started implementation of Grant Schemes from 2004, when two invitations were made: JSPF - fund for small projects and LCB – local capacity building • IN 2007 were announced two invitations for project proposal collection in the scope of budget for 2005, specifically: JSPF - fund for small projects and SED – empowerment of economic development • In 2008 was announced one invitation (both components together JSPF+SED) in the scope of budget for 2006, and this invitation is at the moment in the evaluation phase.

TERRITORY COVERED BY THE PROGRAMME

SERBIA DISTRICTS: • Bor • Zaječar • Nišava • Pirot • Jablanica and Pčinj

BULGARIA DISTRICTS: • Vidin • Montana • Pernik • Ćustendil and • District Sofia with municipalities: Godec, Dragoman, Kostinbrod, Svoge and Slivnica

Number of submitted projects Total number of submitted programmes (Serbian / Bulgarian)

Invitation

2006

2007

JSPF

184 (103 / 81)

106 (37 / 69)

LCB/SED

123 (70 / 53)

133 (58 / 75)

2008 154

••• Number of submitted projects by districts JSPF 2006 / 2007 Zaječar district 16 / 5

Pirot district 26 / 4

Pčinj district 12 / 5

Jablanica district 15 / 6 Nišava district 29 / 14 Bor district 5 / 3

••• 86

Number of projects approved for financing by districts in JSPF 2006 / 2007

Number of projects approved for financing by districts in LCB/SED 2006 / 2007

You may read about projects on www.evropa.sr.gov.yu

Allocation of funds by organizations Agency Chamber of Commerce Cultural institution Educational institution Local authority NGO Public enterprize Scientiﬁc institution Remark: Values are in millions of EUR

Projects approved as compared to attendance of our workshops

2006

2007

Number of those who received donation and who attended our info workshops

JSPF

90%

LCB/SED

72%

Invitation

Number of approved projects

••• Communication

EC Delegation

MFIN

Local Office

PROJECT

IPA Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes 2007-2013 1. Hu-Srb 2. Ro-Srb 3. Bg-Srb 4. Adriatic 5. СЕЕ 6. Cro-Srb 7. BiH-Srb 8. Mne-Srb

Main characteristics of IPA funds • Unique instrument for pre-accession assistance intended for • EU membership candidate countries (Croatia, Turkey) • and potential EU membership candidates (Western Balkan countries) • Serbia - Bulgaria (18 909 км2) 11.55 million €

••• Who may apply? • Local and regional authorities • Public and utility companies • Chambers of Commerce • NGOs • Educational, cultural and research institutions • Societies an associations in the field of tourism, culture, sports and other organizations Under what conditions? • Non-profit legal entity • Registered and operating in the territory encompassed by the programme • That has at least one cross-border partner • It is directly responsible for conducting activities • It has adequate experience, as well as direct and stable financial sources • It has not previously acquired financing for activities specified in the project proposal

••• Contacts in Serbia Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Serbia, Kneza Miloša 20, Belgrade Kristina Ašković, Project Coordinator Bulgaria – Serbia kristina.askovic@mfin.sr.gov.yu Telephone: 011/ 3642-788 Local Office in Niš: Maja Jovanović, Head of the Local Office mjovanovic@mier.sr.gov.yu Telephone: 018/ 291-349 Local Office in Bor: Vasilija Stanić, Head of the Local Office vstanic@mier.sr.gov.yu Telephone: 030/ 458-296

Representative of the European Integration Office of the Government of the Republic of Serbia, Jelena Stevanov, spoke about the model of cooperation between the European Integration Office and civil society in Serbia. Stevanov reminded that civil society organizations played an important role in the 5th October overthrow, creation of democracy, and that from a rival of authorities till 2000, since 2000 nongovernmental organizations became partners to authorities that initiate and create policy in the country. She said that there still does not exist an institutionalized relationship between the Government of Serbia and the civil sector. There are a few bodies dealing with cooperation with CSOs, such as: Council for Cooperation of the President of the Republic Boris Tadić, Council for European Integration and the European Integration Office, which has a special department dealing with cooperation with associations. Stevanov noted that the Office signed with citizens’ associations a Memorandum of Cooperation, the aim of which is to recognize civil society not only as a participant but also as an owner of the EU integration process. That process does not mean only membership in EU but also a reform of Serbia that will lead to membership, defined Stevanov. Ahead of Serbia is visa regime liberalization, obtaining a candidate country status, decentralized implementation of funds coming from IPA Funds, and realization that we need assistance by the civil sector, she pointed out at the end of her addressing. See power point presentation of Jelena Stevanov

Cooperation of the European Integration Office with Civil Society Organizations Jelena Stevanov SEIO

••• The Role of Civil Society Organizations in Serbia Background • Civil society organizations played an important role in overthrowing the regime of Slobodan Milošević • In the period since 2000 the role of NGOs in the society has changed – from rivals of authorities they have become partners of authorities

••• Bodies for Cooperation with the Civil Sector • Council for Cooperation of the President of the Republic • Council for European Integrations of the Government of Serbia, founded on 4 September 2002 • European Integration Office

••• 94

Joint Activities • Preparation of the draft Law on Nongovernmental Organizations • NGOs took part in design of strategic documents, such as: • National Strategy for Poverty Reduction • National Strategy for Judicial Reform • National Strategy for European Integration of Serbia • National Strategy for Youth • Ministry of Youth and Sports and NGOs that advocate for interests of youth supported numerous programmes intended for young people, among which promotion of volunteering, as a kind of working experience • Chamber of Commerce of Serbia, in cooperation with civil society, promoted the concept of corporative social accountability

••• Mechanism of Financing • For the first time, 2008 Budget Memorandum anticipated funds for the civil sector • Civil Sector Development Fund of the Executive Council of Vojvodina • Civil Sector Fund of the City of Belgrade

••• 95

Cooperation between the Office and Civil Society Organizations • Memorandum on Cooperation with NGOs in the European Integration Process, signed on 12 July 2005 Purpose: Institutionalization of cooperation between the Office and NGOs in the European Integration Process • Memorandum on Cooperation with the Chamber of Commerce of Serbia, signed in 2004 • Memorandum of Cooperation with Universities in Serbia, signed in October 2006

••• Forms of Cooperation • Regular contacts and exchange of information • Joint projects and activities • Facilitating contacts between NGOs and potential donors • Organizing the Day of Europe and other campaigns related to EU • Regular meetings organized by the Office • Giving recommendations • Participation of the Office representatives in lectures and trainings organized by partner NGOs • Joint organization of conferences and round tables

• The Office issues bulletins intended for civil society • On the website of the Office there is a special corner dedicated to civil society

••• Cooperation with Media • Daily communication with media • Organizing trainings for journalists (at the local level) • Competition for the best media contribution to the EU Integration topic (in cooperation with the European Commission Delegation in Serbia) • Press corner on the website of the Office

••• Thank you for your attention

Due to great interest that presentation of Sonja Vuković aroused at the First Conference in Belgrade, the President of the Regional Forum of Associations of Slavonija and Baranja, at the gathering in Bujanovac, Sonja Vuković, also spoke about challenges and good practice examples in the context of experiences of Croatia, as a candidate country for EU membership. She remarked that the Forum is an NGO coalition, organized in a manner to strengthen the social capital and to promote civil society values in the region of Slavonija, for the purpose of initiating cooperation between CSOs, active participation in creation of development policies at the national, regional and local levels, initiation and development of a model of cooperation with the private and public sectors, as well as pleading for creation of conditions of infrastructure for sustainable development of CSOs. Some of the questions and answers heard during the discussion we transfer integrally. The owner of Ema Radio from Bujanovac, Oliver Trajković, asked whether and to what extent all that we heard refers to media as well. The Executive Director of Civic Initiatives, Miljenko Dereta, said that media partially are a part of the nongovernmental sector, i.e. of civil society. “It refers to media, too, whereby they have a business part, which is, of course, supported by some other market rules; however, here are some special programmes that are always related to media, primarily to the independent media.” President of the Regional Forum of Associations of Slavonija and Baranja, Sonja Vuković, was interested to what extent organizations from this area mutually cooperate on projects. Are there any good practice examples? The answer to this question gave the President of the ABC Centre for Peace, Security and Tolerance from Vranje, Suzana Popović, who said that “the problem in the Pčinj District is that civil society organizations do not have actually well established mechanisms of cooperation. Unlike this, I should say general picture, the organization I come from, ABC Centre, mainly works on projects in which we have at least one partner. So up to now we had several, maybe even ten very successful projects, on which we worked in partnership. We also worked on major projects, e.g. with “Generator” from Vranje, ﬁnanced by the European Agency for Reconstruction, 99

i.e. European Union. However, I believe that more discussion on the topic would contribute to more organized approach to it, that a larger number of organizations should apply together for programmes and that, as we have just said, everyone in this story should do his/her own job. I think this is something really missing in the Pčinj District.” Lidija Stojković from the Civil Resources Centre from Bujanovac added that organizations from the south of Serbia are only now “getting a running start”. “So we formed here a network, i.e. a coalition of local nongovernmental organizations that so far encompasses some twenty organizations. In the scope of it we prepared 15 projects. It is a small step for us “but big for the mankind”, I mean for this com-

100

munity. We meet monthly and our future steps rely on partnerships, therefore we shall now apply for major projects. I must say that this coalition to a great extent helps exchange of experiences, exchange of information and achievement of higher goals. From the Municipality of Bujanovac we required a joint room in which we would meet and work. I believe that with these associations we would do a lot in the near future.” Director of the Library in Bujanovac, Galip Beqiri, pointed out that, as a Director of the Library, he can by no means get through to the Minister of Culture, “and I would like to make him acquainted with the problems, with a small fund of books. Since a representative of the Coordination body is here, I would like to make contacts through them and to get the Minister acquainted with our problems.” Representative of the Coordination Body for municipalities of Bujanovac, Preševo and Medveđa, Danijela Nenadić, said that the “Coordination Body is doing its best to link different institutions from the three municipalities with line ministries, as well as with the Ministry of Culture, in which there are people ready to help. Therefore I beg you to send an official invitation through the Office in Bujanovac, and we will forward it. I know that you already did it, however, the situation is different now. Send an invitation”, said Nenadić.

101

List of Participants in the Public Discussion in Bujanovac 1 Miljenko Dereta

Executive Director of Civic Initiatives

Belgrade

2 Shaip Kamberi

President of the Municipality of Bujanovac

Bujanovac

President of the Regional Forum of Associations of Slavonija and Baranja Advisor to the Director of the Coordination Body of Serbia for municipalities of Preševo, Bujanovac and Medveđa Ministry of Finance, Local Office in Niš – Neighborhood Programme Bulgaria – Serbia European Integration Office of the Government of the Republic of Serbia

Osijek, Croatia

3 Sonja Vuković 4 Danijela Nenadić 5 Maja Jovanović 6 Jelena Stevanov

Belgrade Niš Belgrade

7 Suzana Popović

ABC Center

Vranje

8 Radoman Irić

B92

Vranje

9 Zoran Dimitrijević

Sports Centre Mladost (Youth)

Bujanovac

10 Oliver Trajković

EMA Radio

Bujanovac

11 Zoran Tilinek

Nexus

Vranje

12 Mihailo Mitić

Tax Administration

Vranje

13 Feizuli Feizi

Vice-President of the Assembly of the Municipality of Bujanovac

Bujanovac

14 Aslani Ali

Defense Department for Emergency Situations

Bujanovac

15 Manojlović Jovica

Movement for Trgovište

Trgovište

16 Jovanović Vojkan

Ministry of Finance - CBC

Niš

17 Behlul Nasufi

CMO Preševo

Preševo

18 Sellami Bektashi

Coordination Body for Preševo, Bujanovac and Medveđa

Bujanovac

19 Ramadan Demirović

FK Zufo

Bujanovac

20 Enver Idić

Roma Centre for Democracy

Bujanovac

102

21 Ibro Idić

Roma Association Bujanovac

Bujanovac

22 Dejan Cvetković

Cadastre

Preševo

23 Miroslava Stanić

RTV Vranje

Vranje

24 Nenad ilić

Regional Development Centre Vranje

Vranje

25 Darko Tomić

TV 017

Vranje

26 Violca Sadiki

Culture Centre

Bujanovac

27 Sevdaill Hyseni

Perspektiva (Perspective)

Bujanovac

28 Faruk Daliu

RTV Bujanovac

Bujanovac

29 Fisnike Rexhepi

Perspektiva

Bujanovac

30 Samire Velihi

Perspektiva

Bujanovac

31 Nebojša Selistarević

City of Vranje

Vranje

32 Ana Mikić

NTV 017

Vranje

33 Burnan Nalili

District Jail

Bujanovac

34 Života Matić

Politika

Bujanovac

35 Lidija Stojković

CRC

Bujanovac

36 Dragan Jovanović

Generator

Vranje

37 Kenan Rašitović

O.F.E.R.

Bujanovac

38 Nexhad Bellulli

RTV Spektri

Bujanovac

39 Illaz KASUMI

RTV Bujanovac

Bujanovac

RTV Bujanovac

Bujanovac

41 Danijela Stanković

DFID

Bujanovac

42 Galip Beqiri

Director of the Library

Bujanovac

43 Slađana Majdak

BETA

Belgrade

44 Ismail Paiaziti

Secretary to the Municipality Council

Bujanovac

103

45 Ivan Tomić

TV FOX

Belgrade

46 Abdula Memeti

PRESS CENTRE

Bujanovac

47 Salim Demirović

RHC

Bujanovac

48 Musliu Shefket

Perspektiva

Bujanovac

49 Dušan Krivec

PG Mreža (Network)

Belgrade

50 Bratislav Stamenković DAI

Vranje

51 Nenad Tošković

P U Naša radost (Our Joy)

Bujanovac

52 Maša Tilinek

Generator

Vranje

53 Srđan Ilić

TV FOX

Vranje

54 Dejan Ilić

RTV 017

Vranje

55 Xhahid Ramadani

RTV Bujanovac

Bujanovac

56 Isuf Memeti

RTV Aldi

Preševo

57 Dejan Kostić

District Jail

Vranje

58 Rexhip Ilazi

USAID DDES

Vranje

59 Dragoslav Žebeljan

PG Mreža

Belgrade

60 Marko Stevanović

PG Mreža

Belgrade

61 Martin Brooks

Head of OSCE Office in Bujanovac

Bujanovac

On behalf of organizer, Civic Initiatives: 1 Dubravka Velat

Civic Initiatives

Belgrade

2 Dejana Mitev

Civic Initiatives

Belgrade

3 Suzana Đorđević

Civic Initiatives

Belgrade

4 Marko Danon

Civic Initiatives

Belgrade

104

Round Table in Novi Sad, 5 November 2008

PROGRAMME

10:30 - 11:00 11:00 - 11:05 11:05 - 11:20 11:20 - 11:40

11:40 - 12:00

12:00 - 12:10 12:10 – 13:30 13:30

Registration Address of welcome: Ana Segedinski, Director of the Fund for the Development of the Non-Profit Sector of AP Vojvodina Presentation of experiences of Poland, Macedonia and Croatia from the First Conference: Miljenko Dereta, Executive Director of Civic Initiatives Bojana Milićević, Ministry of Finance, Coordinator of the Neighbourhood Programme Hungary – Serbia (forms of cooperation with NGOs at the local level) Jelena Stevanov, Office for EU Integration of the Government of the Republic of Serbia – Model of Cooperation between the Office for EU Integration and Civil Society in Serbia Igor Bajić, Office for European Affairs of the Executive Council of AP Vojvodina Discussion Lunch for all participants in the Restaurant, Bulevar Mihaila Pupina 18

105

106

Report on the Event

Conclusion of the round table held in Novi Sad on 5 November 2008, was that the State and NGOs can work together and “supplement each other”, so that citizens would get included into the process of changes and European integrations as actively as possible. The gathering in that city was attended by some 60 representatives of institutions, civil sector and funds, as well as numerous representatives of local media. Explaining the aims of the CIDEC project, the Executive Director of Civic Initiatives, Miljenko Dereta, said that the purpose of the project is that citizens recognize their direct interest in the European integration process. “The process of changes is long-lasting but unstoppable”, he specified and added that experiences of other countries are valuable for the purpose to avoid traps and mistakes they made in the process. Dereta pointed out that the practice to date proves that the State and NGOs can work together, supplement each other, so that citizens would get included into the process of changes and European integration ahead of us as actively as possible. He also emphasized that the aim of the project is to get citizens informed of how they may assist and get included in European integration. Quoting the Director of the Centre for European Strategy “demos EVROPA”, Pawel Swieboda from Poland, who said that EU accession is the most comprehensive change of the regime performed in the modern world up to now, Dereta pointed out that it is necessary to have social and political consensus that Europe is our goal. According to his words, Poland included in this process all social partners, trade unions, associations of employers, chambers of commerce. Slovenia announced competition for NGOs that wish to take part in the dialogue with the State, and through the budget it financed all forms of assistance given to NGOs. Croatia is an example for the whole region, explained Dereta. Besides passing two laws on NGOs, Croatia also formed a Foundation that allocated funds to NGOs by clear criteria. The Foundation is financed 50% from lottery funds of this country. Also, Dereta pointed out that, after seven years, the new Law on Associations is in the process of adoption in the Assembly of Serbia. 107

The Director of the Fund for the Development of the Non-Profit Sector of AP Vojvodina and co-organizer of the gathering, Ana Segedinski, reminded that the Assembly of AP Vojvodina formed in 2003 the Fund for the Development of the Non-Profit Sector, for the purpose to create as favourable as possible social environment for development of citizens’ associations in Vojvodina. In that way, she says, was given support to the nongovernmental sector, building of civil society, rule of the law, social solidarity, respect of diversity, peaceful conflict resolution, exchange of experiences and knowledge, as well as intersectoral cooperation. She said that the Fund up to now has organized six thematic competitions, for the purpose of financing and co-financing project proposals of citizens’ associations, several public discussion, round tables, public meetings, debates and conferences,

108

and she added that the doors of the Fund are always open for all questions, proposals and suggestions as well. She added that one of the Fund’s programme tasks is democratization of the society, and this discussion is one of the methods to initiate democratic processes. The Fund is an example how institutions may be in function of development and support to the nongovernmental sector. The Coordinator of the Inter-Neighbourhood Relations Programme with the Ministry of Finance of Serbia, Bojana Milićević, spoke about the cross-border cooperation programmes with Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Montenegro. She said that this programme aims at helping citizens to get included into European integration by achieving a uniform and sustainable socio-economic development of the region, by getting non-member countries closer and acquainted with the EU practice and procedures, by getting jointly engaged in projects in order to solve problems and to provide for higher security in the border area. Bearing in mind that in our environment all countries are either members of the European Union or candidate countries for EU membership, cross-border cooperation is of great importance, repeated Milićević and added that all those who are going to work on cross-border cooperation projects have the door open, as well as experience that will be a comparative advantage when we become a candidate country and afterwards a member country of the European Union. “Advantage of cross-border cooperation, when it refers to Serbia, is that the neighbouring countries, too, have similar problems, which in the first place reflect in high unemployment, obsolete technology, inefficiency in business operations and in environmental protection. Benefit of cross-border cooperation reflects primarily in economic development and support to the development of business operations, then in introduction of contemporary methods, equipment and information technology in business and development of regional products. Such a form of cooperation may provide positive results in the environmental protection and reduction of pollution, in solving problems of urban and regional dump sites, but may also define legal assistance to discriminated groups, improve interethnic relations and protect cultural heritage”, explained Milićević. Higher participation in cross-border cooperation, as she said, is prevented by lack of qual109

ity projects but also by lack of information on existence and way of functioning of European Union funds. Nevertheless, the importance of the Inter-Neighbourhood Relations Programme proves the fact that non-repayable funds are provided (85% grants; 15% IPA co-ﬁnancing), projects are implemented by EU regulations, and cooperation with neighbouring countries is made possible, added Milićević. See power point presentation of Bojana Milićević

110

Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes (2007-2013) in Serbia Novi Sad, 5 November 2008

••• IPA Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes 2007-2013

Hu-Srb Ro-Srb Bg- Srb Adriatic СЕЕ Cro-Srb BiH- Srb Mne-Srb

111

Hungary - Serbia IPA Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes 2007-2009 Annual budget 2007 - 4 032 500 2008 - 6 889 525 2009 - 7 530 765 TOTAL 18 452 790 Information Centre: Subotica

Area covered by the programme : West Bačka District North Bačka District North Banat District South Bačka District Central Banat District South Banat and Srem as attached regions

112

Romania - Serbia IPA Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes 2007-2009 Annual budget 2007 - 4 274 252 2008 - 7 302 563 2009 – 7 982 247 TOTAL 19 559 062 Antenna: Vršac

Area covered by the programme : North Banat District Central Banat District South Banat District Braničevo District Bor District

113

Bulgaria - Serbia IPA Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes 2007-2009 Annual budget 2007 - 2 524 310 2008 - 4 312 780 2009 - 4 714 194 TOTAL 11 551 284 Antenna: Niš

Area covered by the programme : Bor District Zaječar District Nišava District Pirot District Jablanica District Pčinj District

114

Croatia - Serbia IPA Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes 2007-2013

Annual budget: 1.8 mill € - Croatia: 0.8 mill € - Serbia: 1 mill € Antenna: Sremska Mitrovica Serbia – Croatia (11 703 км2) Districts: North Bačka West Bačka South Bačka Srem

115

Serbia - BiH IPA Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes 2007-2013

Annual budget: 1,8 mill € BiH: 0.7 mill € Serbia: 1.1 mill € Joint technical secretariat: Užice

Serbia – BiH (15 370 км2) Districts: Srem Mačva Kolubara Zlatibor

116

Serbia – Montenegro IPA Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes 2007-2013

Annual budget:: 1.1 mil € - MNE: 0.6 mil € - Serbia: 0.5 mil € Joint technical secretariat: Prijepolje

Serbia - Montenegro (10 063 км2) Districts: Zlatibor Raška

117

Cross-Border Cooperation Programmes in Serbia • EU support to cooperation between border regions of member countries and countries outside EU bordering with them Aims: • To achieve equal and sustainable socio-economic development of the region • To get non-member countries closer and acquainted with EU practice and procedures • Joint engagement in projects for the purpose of joint problem resolution • Providing higher security in the border region

••• Importance of Cross-Border Cooperation Programme • In-kind grants (85% grant : 15% IPA co-financing) • Projects are implemented by EU rules – preparation for structural funds • Cooperation with neighbouring countries

•••

118

Priorities 1. INFRASTRUCTURE 2. ECONOMY, EDUCATION AND CULTURE

••• Thank you for your attention!

••• Contact www.evropa.gov.rs cbc@mfin.gov.rs Bojana.milicevic@mfin.gov.rs Fax: (+38111) 36 12 230

119

Representative of the European Integration Office of the Government of the Republic of Serbia, Jelena Stevanov, said that the European Integration Office signed a Memorandum of Cooperation with 74 nongovernmental organizations in Serbia and added that unfortunately the Office does not have funds for financing NGO projects, but that it expects great assistance by the civil sector in European processes. She also said that for the first time this year were projected funds for NGO financing and remarked in that context that the Office adheres to two criteria in cooperation with civil society organizations: that the organization exists for two years and that it has a project addressing European integration.

120

The gathering was also addressed by the Advisor for European integration processes in the Office for European Affairs of the Executive Council of AP Vojvodina, Igor Bajić, who spoke about opportunities for cross-border cooperation and the importance of European integration. He said that activities of the Office, aiming at EU membership of our country as soon as possible, are based on the principle “three pillars – the first one: promotion of European ideas; the second one: activities related to the use of European pre-accession and development funds; and the third: regional cooperation with regions, cities and municipalities of EU member countries.” Bajić emphasized that the “third pillar”, i.e. regional cooperation is very important, because in that way one gets in direct contact with institutions of the European Union and its structural and cohesion funds. In Novi Sad, too, participants were interested in most different issues – from the method of financing citizens’ associations in the region to procedures that the neighbouring countries and associations had to fulfill on their path to the European Union, and State bodies for cooperation with civil society organizations. Participants were also interested in inter-neighbour cooperation, as well as opportunities for application for new projects. Many of them were interested in the Law on Associations as well, volunteering, and there were questions related to networking of organizations for the purpose of better cooperation, interneighbour dialogue, establishing trust and building new partner relations, both at the level of Serbia and at the level of the entire region. We single out some of the questions and answers: Participants in the round table were interested in IPA funds. In view of that the Coordinator of the Inter-Neighbourhood Relations Programme with the Ministry of Finance of Serbia, Bojana Milićević, announced that IPA Programme that starts the next year will include the whole cross-border region of Serbia. “Neighbourhood programmes between Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria have been going on for three years already. This year we have opened new offices, in Sremska Mitrovica for the neighbourhood programme towards Croatia, in Užice for the neighbourhood programme towards Bosnia and Herzegovina, in Prijepolje for the neighbourhood programme towards Montenegro, in Niš for the neighbourhood programme between Bulgaria and Serbia, in Vršac 121

between Romania and Serbia, and in Subotica for the neighbourhood programme between Hungary and Serbia. Characteristic for the IPA Funds is that spending of funds is very close to spending of structure funds, whereby there is no advanced payment, unfortunately. We are now under negotiations and we try to achieve that a part of advanced payment is paid to organizations that submit a project. Up to now the Serbian side had one million of Euros and the list of Serbian projects was made in a manner that, let’s say, the top ten on the list obtain a donation. Bulgarians, for instance, did the same from their side, whereby they had four million of Euros available for spending, given that they are in the European Union. We shall have in this IPA Fund five million Euros now, and a joint list of projects will be made. Given that the Bulgarians, let’s say, have somewhat more experience in project proposal writing, and that they have projects prepared maybe for the next three to four years, I make a plea to our organizations to make an effort and apply with as many projects as possible because I am afraid that Bulgarians will mainly absorb the funds and not we.” When asked about financing NGOs from the Government coffers, the representative of the Government’s Office for European Integration, Jelena Stevanov, said that it is positive that the Memorandum of Budget for 2008 for the first time projected funds for the civil sector. She added that besides the Memorandum, there are numerous sources of financing, such as the Executive Council of Vojvodina, 122

which established its own Fund for the Development of the Non-Profit Sector, as well as the Fund for the Civil Sector of the City of Belgrade. At the end of the event in Novi Sad was set forth the expectation that by the end of November the Assembly of Serbia will adopt the Law on Associations, and it was said that discussions on forming an Office for NGOs with the Government of Serbia are underway. Participants were informed about the manner in which will be regulated access to the State budget, negotiations about forming a Fund for allocation of funds, but also how to assist NGOs in bridging over financial problems that each European project brings along, in order to accelerate the European integration process and make it efficient.

123

List of Participants in the Public Discussion in Novi Sad IME I PREZIME

ORGANIZACIJA / INSTITUCIJA

GRAD

1 Miljenko Dereta

Executive Director of Civic Initiatives

Belgrade

2 Bojana Milićević

Ministry of Finance

Belgrade

3 Jelena Stevanov

European Integration Office

Belgrade

4 Ana Segedinski

Fund for the Development of the Non-Profit Sector Novi Sad of AP Vojvodina

5 Igor Bajić

Advisor at the Office for EU Affairs

Novi Sad

6 Vojislava Subotić

Women’s Active NERADIN

Neradin

7 Snežana Stanković

Province Secretariat for Sports and Youth

Novi Sad

8 Ferenc Fabrik

ESPERANCA

Novi Sad

9 Stanko Zečević

Elementary School Svetozar Miletić

10 Nada Bašić

Citizens’ Association Alzheimer

Sr. Kamenica

11 Slobodanka Suvačarov Citizens’ Association Alzheimer

Sr. Kamenica

12 Damir Krkobabić

Ecumenical Humanitarian Organization

Novi Sad

13 Ljiljana Jerkov

Municipality of Sremski Karlovci

Sr. Karlovci

14 Jadranka Pjevac 15 Dr Tivadar Tot

Association for Reconstruction and Development Sr. Karlovci SK.ARSK Sr. Karlovci Assembly of APV, Committee for European IntegraNovi Sad tions and International Inter-cooperation

16 Veselina Pelagić

SFS Center

17 Dino Toplica

MATICA AŠKALIJA (Central Cultural Society of AshNovi Sad kalis)

Novi Sad

18 Farkas Istvan

Fund KONA

19 Radmila Anić

MAJČINA KOLEVKA (Mother’s Cradle)

Subotica

20 Ljubica Krnjajić

Fire-fighting Union of the City of Novi Sad

Novi Sad

124

21 Snežana Rakas 22 Csernik Terez 23 Gordana Radulović

The First Association for Environment and ProtecNovi Sad tion from the Fire Effects ECOFIRE Association for Development of the Municipality of Mali Iđoš Mali Iđoš Association for Development of the Municipality of Mali Iđoš Mali Iđoš

24 Sava Vasiljević

Society VIDOVDAN

Vrdnik

25 Vasilije Jovanović

Society VIDOVDAN

Vrdnik

26 Dušan Jovanović

Roma Tone - Romano Tono

Vrdnik

27 Stanka Janković

Roma Resource Centre of the Ecumenical HumaniNovi Sad tarian Organization

28 Svetlana Rackov-Ješić

MDSJK Zrenjanin

Zrenjanin

29 Eva Tikvicki

Fund SFS Center

Novi Sad

30 Dejan Kovačević

Province Secretariat for Sports and Youth

Novi Sad

31 Goran Bošović

Human Resources Management Service, Executive Novi Sad Council of APV

32 Nenad Nikolić

Association for Development of Tomaševac

Tomaševac

33 Vesna Krčmar

University Extension Božidar Adžija

Novi Sad

34 Nada Dabić

Esperanca Novi Sad

Novi Sad

35 Aleksandra Panović

Association of Dystrophic and Similar Illnesses JBO Novi Sad

Milica Mima Novković

Ružičić

Center Živeti Uspravno (Living Upright)

Novi Sad

37 Jelena Zlojutro

Province Secretariat for Local Self- Government

Novi Sad

38 Maja Pavlica

Association of Journalists EKO VEST

Novi Sad

39 Sofija Pualić-Špeko

EKO POKRET PLAVI DUNAV (Ecological Movement Novi Sad The Blue Danube)

40 Gizela Štanjo-Tot

Editorial Board MAGYAR SZO

Novi Sad

41 Zoran Jovanović

NGO Group for Development Projects

Novi Sad

42 Mirjana Pušin

Journalists’ School of Novi Sad

Novi Sad

125

43 Vera Ćurčić

PKV

Novi Sad

44 Klara-Toth Glemba

Province Secretariat for Social Policy and DemogNovi Sad raphy

45 Dragana Baboj

EKO POKRET PLAVI DUNAV

Novi Sad

46 Gyula Halasz

MAGYAR SZO

Novi Sad

47 Spomenka Zelenović

Province Secretariat for Labour, Employment and Novi Sad Gender Equality

48 Mariana Olar

RNS Romanian Programme

Novi Sad

49 Marko Stevanović

PG Mreža (Network)

Belgrade

50 Zorica Badnjar

RTV MOST (Bridge)

Novi Sad

51 Milica Lakobrija

Faculty of Management

Novi Sad

52 Slaviša Lazić

Faculty of Management

Novi Sad

53 Smiljana Marinković

Faculty of Management

Novi Sad

54 Sara Dereta

Faculty of Management

Novi Sad

55 Tamara Maksimović

Faculty of Management

Novi Sad

56 Stanislava Smiljanjić

Faculty of Management

Novi Sad

57 Kovacs K. Aron

Faculty of Management

Novi Sad

On behalf of Civic Initiatives: 1 Dubravka Velat

Civic Initiatives

Belgrade

2 Dejana Mitev

Civic Initiatives

Belgrade

3 Suzana Đorđević

Civic Initiatives

Belgrade

4 Branislav Lovrenski

Civic Initiatives

Belgrade

126

The next cycle of events in the scope of the CDEC Programme is appointed for 28 November 2008, in the Conference Room of the National Bank of Serbia, in Belgrade. The topic of the Conference is “Institutional Forms and Mechanisms of Citizens’ Participation in the EU Integration Process”. It is planned that at the Conference speaks a representative of the Delegation of the European Commission in the Republic of Serbia, a representative of the European Union Integration Office of the Government of the Republic of Serbia, a representative of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Serbia, Director of the Programme for European Policies and Citizens’ Participation of the Open Society Institute from Sofia, Assya Kavrakova, Executive Director of the Foundation for Civil Society Development from Romania, Ionut Sibian, and Nadia Ćuk, on behalf of the Council of Europe Office in Belgrade. Expected attendance at the Conference is some 40 representatives of domestic institutions, civil society, donors and officials from the EU member countries. After the International Conference were also planned two rounds tables. A detailed report on the next cycle of events will be presented in the second publication.

127

128

Comparative Analysis of Experiences in Cooperation between the Nongovernmental Sector and Public Administration in the European Integration Process

Docent Tanja Miščević PhD Faculty of Political Sciences Belgrade University 129

130

Building Partnership between the Nongovernmental Sector and Public Administration in the European Integration Process – some experiences The accession process of a country to the European Union (EU) is a process of major reforms in the society and country, but it is also, particularly for countries in transition, the key mechanism or instrument for achieving transfer from one legal, economic and political system into another. Also, this process does not imply only inclusion into the Union referring only to governments or state administrations, or their Parliament; this process refers to everything, encompasses all citizens, and it is therefore very important to include all segments of the society into this complex business. Besides complexity, one of the key features of the EU accession process, that we also call the process of European integration of countries, is the issue of its ownership – inclusion of all segments of the society is possible only when they themselves realize that they are owners of the process as well, i.e. that ownership over the European integration process must be shared between the public and civil sectors, and in that way animate and include as big number of partners as possible. We may ﬁnd the framework for partnership between the public and civil sectors in the base of the European integration process – in the basic contractual relation for countries of the Westerns Balkans, Stabilization and Association Agreement, in political criteria of European partnership, the partnership principle included into the Decree on Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA), Enlargement Strategies prepared annually by the European Commission, but also in strategic documents that each country prepares for its European integration process. Winning support by the public, but by all potential partners as well, is certainly a challenge faced by every country moving towards EU membership, which is very clearly shown in their experiences. According to their place in the integration process, partners may divide into two 131

groups: civil society organizations on the one side, and local self-government on the other, whose main task is to implement the Union legislation, particularly related to environmental protection, sewerage, plants for waste recycling. Benefit from the partner may be big, but he must be treated as equal, as the one who also may contribute to a great extent to the success of this process. Besides these, we would say principal attitudes, about which we may all agree, remains a much more concrete question – what practically, actually, civil society organizations may do to improve the European integration process in countries wishing to achieve EU membership? Answer to this question may be obtained by following some older experiences of countries that were going along this road in the course of the last two decades of the 20th century, such as e.g. Poland and Slovenia, but also by following more recent experiences, particularly developed in Croatia, as a West Balkan country that got ahead in its European integration process farther than any other country. The first and main space for their activities is initiating and, of course, participating in the public dialogue about the country’s accession process, steering it in the direction that would provide answers to key questions regarding advantages and disadvantages of the whole process, its elements and, of course, conditions that the country must fulfil in order to meet the process requirements. Civil society organizations must get included into conducting of communication in the European integration process, both in the part oriented towards informing the local public (as well as different trainings, as an element of learning about the process), and in the part turned to the public opinion of EU member countries – information on, or advocacy for the need of the country to become a member of the Union that comes from civil society organizations often has a greater positive effect in the public than when conducted by the State. By opening negotiations on membership, civil society organizations, in particular universities, institutes, trade unions and business associations (chambers of commerce), and nongovernmental organizations specialized for special issues

132

as well, take very active part in negotiations on accession and in monitoring of fulfilment of conditions for membership, and they are a significant assistance, support but also control of the State and its administration in the issue. Ever more, civil society organizations may significantly participate in improvement of better use of different EU funds as well, whether it refers to pre-accession assistance funds or, later, to structural funds of the Union. We must pay attention to four key issues of this cooperation; the first one refers to defining why organizations must and may get included into informing and communicating with broader public in the European integration process, how institutionalized dialogue between the public and civil sectors can be achieved, how is civil society included into technical processes of EU accession in the country and, finally, both at the end but for sure at the beginning, why the citizens’ society must get organized for the sake of all these processes.

The Role of the Society in Information and Communication Process of the European Integration of a Country A very important element of the European integration process is its transparency, which requires significant changes in communication between citizens and the State about its flow. That communication must be as frank and sincere as possible, but also oriented towards real problems in order not to create an illusion that this process will bring equal benefits for all. Observed in that manner, communication of the EU accession process of a country requires inclusion of the civil sector as well, for at least two reasons: the state administration has no numerical capacity to cover, besides its technical work, also the communication process by itself, and from the other side, as proved by experiences of other countries, citizens have much more confidence in the nongovernmental sector. Communication must also pay attention to the fact that in EU itself there is no significant goodwill for further enlargement, but 133

also, particularly in its later phases, domestic public becomes very tired of the long European integration process. Special problem in it are continuously repeated promises, made both by the domestic political elite and by EU officials, while actual breakthroughs citizens do not feel, which mainly tires the public, exhausts it with stories about EU but also with monotonous arguments. Such a feeling of the public may be used by the political powers that do not wish EU membership, that use as their arguments all unfulfilled promises, which brings to the phenomenon and strengthening of populism. However, it is interesting to note by the example of Poland, the results of exactly the ones who were the most sceptical regarding EU membership, i.e. agricultural producers, who, after the country joined EU, are high on the list of those satisfied with the EU membership of the country. Such an important change of attitude may also be used as an argument, particularly in countries now under integration process, as a base for communication with the public. Absence of civil society in communication with the public opinion on the European integration issues actually leaves space for a monologue of the political elite with citizens, and also opens the additional question of expertise implementers in communication (i.e. the one who is trusted) – are they domestic or foreign experts, university or civil society, or political elite only. There is no doubt that the role of media is very big in informing and communication about the European integration process, however, from the experience of other counties it may be seen that they, too, have to go through the process of learning and maturing, because they are to a great extent burdened by their editorial policy, which is defined by their ownership structure. Special problem is that it is more than visible that media report on the European integration process only when there are negative news (“bad news sell newspaper”), and do not have an active and research role in explaining the essence, conditions, steps in the European integration process. While some explanations for the reason of such participation of media in communication on the European in-

134

tegration process may be found in the general position of the media, especially because of economic and existential position of journalists, the answer is actually in lack of wish or interest to pay attention to the learning process about the process itself, which is already rather complex. Most often journalists’ attitude is that there is no need for further learning, therefore it is very difficult to encourage them to write about the topic of European integrations at all – it may be done in a manner that citizens themselves ask as many information as possible about the European integration process (like, for instance, in Croatia, where the integration process is the fifth on the list of topics of interest for citizens). Communication of the European integration process does not only imply transferring European ideas to the public opinion, it should also help understanding the way in which the Union works, so that both the public and State would be ready for membership. All partners in this communication must be its multipliers and catalysers, and they are also entrusted with transferring messages to partners in EU, which is a very important task. The example of Croatia has proven the benefit of co-financing the projects for public informing implemented by civil society organizations, selected at public competitions for financial resources from the State institutions. However, State bodies must also actively participate in initiatives conducted by nongovernmental organizations – their participation in conferences, seminars and trainings and discussion with the public does not have only the role of presenting but also of explaining directions in the given issues. There are some very interesting examples of these joint activities of the public and civil sectors regarding communication, e.g. initiative in the form of the National Forum for EU Accession in Croatia, which is actually a public discussion that includes representatives of the State administration, academic community and nongovernmental sector on a specific complex topic (environmental protection, national sovereignty, energy etc.). State administrations (particularly Ministries of Foreign Affairs)

135

are very often initiators of establishment of standing contacts between the domestic civil society and EU institutions. This is the case of forming a joint committee of EU Economic and Social Council and civil society of Croatia – main aim of this cooperation is to try to include the nongovernmental sector into the process of decision making and policy creation in EU, before the country becomes a member of the Union.

Institutionalization and Improvement of Civil Society Development However, in order to actually give opportunity to civil society to get included in all these processes and take over its role but responsibility as well, it is necessary to establish some aspect of permanent dialogue between the public and civil sectors, actually some kind of institutionalization for creating a framework for improvement of civil society position. The Croatian experience of institutional framework for the dialogue between civil society and the Government shows that legal base for establishing this relationship is based on diﬀerent documents and regulations – both international (Political and Civil Rights Pact, European Convention on Human Rights etc.) and national (the Constitution and relevant laws on citizens’ associations and foundations, but also regulations partially referring to the matter, such as the Labour Law, the Law on Sports etc.). On the basis of these basic documents was created a framework for institutionalization of relations between the Government and civil sector, which in its early phase (mid 1990s) was based on the Programme Proposal for cooperation between the State and nongovernmental sector, and later on the:  National Strategy for Creation of Stimulating Environment for

Civil Society Development and Operational Plan for its implementation (this programme contains operationalization of aims 136

with measures, responsible persons and deadlines for Strategy implementation). It gives main guidelines that should be achieved by 2011, for the purpose of improving the present legal, ﬁnancial and institutional system of assistance to civil society development, and of creating a new one, so that organizations, actively and on an equal footing, together with other sectors would perform for the public good interest. The Strategy, as is a case in Macedonia as well, is an important mechanism for continuous dialogue – space for public discussions, for giving opinions of civil society organizations with reference to issues of general signiﬁcance etc.  Council for Civil Society Development may exist as an advisory

and expert body of the Government; its aim is improvement of implementation and eﬃciency of the adopted programme of cooperation or civil society development strategy. The Council also works on improvement and development of social capital and partnership relations, as well as intersectoral cooperation between the public and civil sectors. The Council for Civil Society Development in the case of Croatia has an interesting structure, because it consists of more members from civil society organizations than from the public administration. A very important document is also the Code of Positive Practice,

Standards and Criteria for Achievement of Financial Support to Programmes and Projects of Citizens’ Associations, which contains main standards and principles of acting of State administration bodies in the procedure of approving ﬁnancial assistance to programmes of civil society organizations and projects which are of interest for public good, from the State budget funds. This institutionalization of approach of ﬁnancing citizens’ associations by the State helps capacities of organizations based on knowledge, net-

137

working, partnership and other positive values, whereby is avoided chaotic quality and lack of clear criteria. Croatian experiences prove that existence of the Code reﬂected positively on lower levels of authorities as well, therefore its elements were transferred and adjusted to conditions in local self- governments or regional structures.  The main task of the Oﬃce for Citizens’ Associations, formed in

Croatia by a Government’s Decree, is to promote and create conditions for partnership relations between civil society and the Government. Its aim is also to improve the intersectoral cooperation and to propose new legal frameworks, improved drawing up of programmes and new standards for the purpose of improvement of relations between the public and civil sectors. This is, actually, the central body of encounter of the two sectors and the place from where originate ideas for further improvement of activities.  National Foundation is a public fund established by the State on

the basis of a Law, which obtains funds from the national budget, for the purpose of rendering financial assistance to the programmes that improve sustainability of the non-profit sector, but also partnership, intersectoral cooperation, increased impact of the civil sector on making public policy decisions, civic initiatives, and that improve democracy and work of democratic society institutions. Experiences of countries, particularly Croatia, which owns this complete and widely spread network, prove that through existence of these bodies the attitude of the nongovernmental sector in issues of general importance becomes ever more visible and present. The unambiguous result of these institutionalizations is bigger opportunity for civil society to have access to information, which certainly increases their ability to have an impact on the flow of European integration process in a country.

138

Participation of Civil Society in the Process of Negotiations of the Country referring EU Membership and Other Technical Processes Up to now, it was noticeable in Serbia that it is much easier to include representatives of civil society into creation of political consensus, or debate on it, even communication on this process, than into evolvement of the technical process of European integration process implementation. However, with negotiations on membership opened, such a situations certainly must not remain as a rule, therefore in this segment, too, civil society organizations have to be included ever more. The logic of inclusion of civil society into the EU membership negotiation process in Slovenia was found in arguments that, on the one side, these organizations should remind the Government of its liabilities and advocate speciﬁc issues (advocacy). However, on the other side, civil society is also support to the State in acquiring the consent of citizens for membership (public avernance), therefore it is, too, one of the main participants in the process of explaining and understanding the achieved agreements during membership negotiations. Yet, not only the part of professional public organized in civil society organizations but also individual experts may be invited to take part in the negotiation process: in Slovenia it was carried out through a public invitation. Therefore very often countries (of which also speaks the Croatian experience) set a wide structure for negotiations with EU, because in negotiating groups (that prepare platforms for negotiations and directly take part in them) also include the nongovernmental sector, professional organizations, chambers of commerce, associations of employers (in all of the 35 working groups for negotiations in Croatia were included some 2,000 persons). Poland’s experience is even broader, because all of these partners were included in negotia139

tions from the legislation screening process, but also in agreements on how to apply the Union legislation in specific areas, by what speed and tempo should that introduction of European standards into domestic legislation evolve, what organizations should be additionally included etc. In that way were actually formed partner groups, consisting of representatives of line ministries and specialized civil society organizations committed to resolution of special problems; these partner groups later gradually got included in the negotiation team work. Polish experience shows that it may be of great benefit if the main negotiator forms special relations within his team, which are in charge of communication with the public opinion and civil society. The model of “triangle tables”, consisting of the main negotiator, nongovernmental organizations and all other partners who may be interested in specific especially important or delicate issues, also proved to be successful. They were actually forums in which more general issues were solved jointly, but they were also an instrument for transferring objective information to the public. Croatian experience, on the other hand, proves that it is very good for general understanding, but also for control of the negotiation flow, to have a body in the Parliament that will be to a great extent included in the very flow of negotiations on membership. It is about the National Committee for Negotiations Monitoring, which has an advisory role, but which is also authorized to review each negotiating position, even to decline it, because in this body decisions are made by consensus. This Committee in the Croatian Parliament consists of representatives of the Parliament, Chamber of Commerce, employers, President’s cabinet, trade unions, academic community, and the chairman is always a delegate of an oppositional party, thus making greater the importance of decisions that may be made, and the significance of the consensus created by its existence. Inclusion of civil society organizations into technical processes also has its reach in the use of EU funds resources, available to the country, particu140

larly taking into account the important fact that IPA for the first time introduces the partnership principle as the base for inclusion of civil society into programming, implementation, supervision and the process of evaluation of assistance coming from EU, on both national and regional levels. However, the required partnership principle was not sufficient for the civil sector in the Western Balkan countries, Serbia as well, to be sufficiently included into IPA programming. Additional but important problem is co-financing, i.e. financial participation in projects financed by IPA, for which organizations most often do not have enough funds. Actually, the final period in the project duration must be financed by the organization itself, i.e. final activities related to the project, which can hardly endure even major nongovernmental organizations, not to speak about the small local civil society organizations. Therefore the State could assist through its funds in order to help them survive through this period; the funds would be provided from the national budget. Croatia’s example shows that such funds may be created as guarantee funds, primarily of the regional development agencies, which can be used, besides their main activities, also for this aspect of assistance, as support to civil society organizations.

Self-Organizing of Civil Society However, all these requirements for good cooperation between the civil and public sectors cannot be realized until civil sector organizations themselves become better coordinated, organized and until they empower themselves. On the other hand, it gives them both strength and importance that no country or government can ignore. Exactly this lack of organization, fragmentation of interests, lack of mutual coordination of civil society organizations is their signiﬁcant drawback, and thereby a problem when they themselves wish to initiate some uniform requirements. One voice of nongovernmental organizations does not mean absolute unisonity in individual attitudes; it marks their need to be included in the European integration process. Also, for civil 141

society organizations a great problem is lack of information and the need for serious work on their own capacities. A method of organizing may also be the model of informal citizens’ platform that exists in Macedonia, brings together 29 civil society organizations and helps them build their basic capacities, through research, creation of databases and publications, which is the space for exchange of attitudes and joint activities (training, public discussions, improvement and exchange of capacities, but also organizing fairs, forums). This is an informal network that offers the space for forming common attitudes on different issues, as well as for programming funds coming from IPA. Necessary organization, besides at the central level, must be achieved on both regional and local levels as well, actually, at those levels in particular. The main requirement for getting an equal partner status is much more complex at these levels, since all organizations of this civil society at the local level are too small, and the authorities cannot listen to all of their individual requirements. Croatia’s experience shows that for this reason, too, it is necessary to work with local self-governments and regional authorities, because development starts at that level exactly; they concluded charters on cooperation, which help raising awareness that the public and civil sectors are not competitors. Based on these charters, regional and local authorities with civil society organizations in their territories, through organization of seminars, discussion but also creation of different strategies (development, environmental protection) create citizens’, national consensus necessary for the European integration process of the country. As we said, at this level, too, it is advisable to adopt a model of transparent allocation of funds, but also a model of a fund that would financially assist the development of civil society at the local and regional levels, and which would be an assistance centre (decentralization of the National Foundation).

142

Civil society and its organizations are often not aware of resources they dispose of, but very often, too, they are not even ready to assume responsibility, because they are not empowered enough nor interconnected. However, experience of others in the European integration process shows that civil society not only should not run away from that responsibility but, on the contrary, it should very actively require to share responsibility for this general process of reforms in society, because, on the other hand, it implies that they are included in it as well. **** Of course, it should not be forgotten that the European Union is also a partner in this relationship – it expects from civil society to contribute in its own country to processes of its democratization, to promote European values, to improve contacts between people. Therefore experiences proved that in relationship between the public and civil sectors the Union cannot stay fully out of the way, that it must show its readiness and opportunity to give higher political importance to civil society organizations. Such support by EU gives to civil society more maneuvering space, i.e. the Union may point to concrete methods of how civil society should include into the decision-making process on public policies in the country moving towards membership. Its role in this is not only to ﬁnancially support empowerment of civil society. Actually, the European Union, as many experiences prove, is not just a replacement for donors, it is a partner of civil society in the European integration process of the country.

143

144

RECOMMENDATIONS Accession of a country to the European Union, process of major reforms in the society and country, key instrument for achieving transfer from one legal, economic and political system to another, must besides State bodies include all citizens and all segments of society. However, inclusion of all of them is possible only when they themselves realize that they are owners of the process, too, i.e. that ownership over European integration process must be shared between the public and civil sector, by including in it as many partners as possible – besides civil society, the State partner is also local self-government, whose main task is to implement the Union legislation. Experiences of others in the European integration process proves that civil society not only should not run away from that responsibility but, on the contrary, it should very actively require to share responsibility for this general process of reforms in society, because, on the other hand, it implies that they are included in the process as well. Of course, an important role and by all means partnership in this process, both the country and civil society must eﬀectuate with EU, its bodies and its member states.

145

146

GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ALL PARTICIPANTS IN THE EUROPEAN INTEGRATION PROCESS One of the most evident points of encounter between the governmental and nongovernmental sectors, as well as EU, in the European integration process is participation and communication of the European integration process of the country, which must be as frank and sincere as possible, but also oriented towards actual problems, in order not to create an illusion that this process will bring equal benefits for all. Inclusion of the civil sector is indispensable because of the capacity of the State administration, as well as higher confidence of citizens in civil society organizations. On the other hand, in communication of the European integration process EU must be equally included, because it is necessary to start from the fact that there is no significant goodwill in the Union for further enlargement, but also, particularly in later phases of the process, domestic public becomes very tired of its long duration. Special problem are promises, made both by domestic and European officials, particularly because citizens do not feel actual breakthroughs, which tires them, stories about EU exhaust them, as well as monotonous arguments. Such a situation may be used by the political powers that do not wish EU membership, which brings to the phenomenon and strengthening of populism. If civil society is not present in this communication, there is room left for monologue of the political elite with citizens. There is no doubt that the role of media is immeasurably big in informing and communication about the European integration process; however, they, too, have to go through the process of learning and maturing, because they are 147

to a great extent burdened by their editorial policy and ownership structure. Experiences show that media report on the European integration process only when there are negative news (“bad news sell newspaper”), and do not have an active and research role in explaining the essence, conditions, steps in the European integration process. On the other hand, the country, just like the European Union, always beneﬁts from co-ﬁnancing the projects of public informing implemented transparently by civil society organizations. Also, State bodies and EU representatives should actively participate in initiatives conducted by nongovernmental organizations – participation in conferences, seminars and trainings, as well as discussion with the public have the function of explaining directions in the given issues.

148

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE COUNTRY For the purpose of realizing the role of civil society in the European integration process of the country it is necessary to establish some aspect of permanent dialogue between the public and civil sectors, some kind of institutionalization and of creating a framework through which the country renders assistance for improvement of civil society organizations’ position. In that way their attitude becomes more noticeable and present, their opportunity for access to information increases, thus strengthening their ability to have an impact on evolvement of the European integration process of the country. Experiences of countries in the European integration process prove that framework for such institutionalization of relationships rest on the following elements: Strategic Document and Its Implementation Programme, which gives

basic guidelines for improvement or building of legal, ﬁnancial and institutional system of assistance to civil society development. It is also a signiﬁcant mechanism for a continued dialogue – space for public discussions, giving opinion by civil society organizations with reference to issues of general importance etc. The implementation programme contains operationalization of strategic goals with measures, responsible persons and deadlines for their implementation. Central Advisory Body is a professional body consisting of repre-

sentatives of the Government and nongovernmental sector, with the aim to improve implementation and eﬃciency of the adopted programme of cooperation or strategy of civil society development. This body also works on improvement and development of social capital and partner relations and intersectoral cooperation between the public and civil sectors. 149

Rulebook or Good Practice Instructions for allocation of ﬁnancial

assistance for civil society organizations’ programmes and projects from the State budget funds. It is good to transfer and adjust the existence of such clear rules of ﬁnancing to conditions in local selfgovernments or regional structures. The main aim of the Government’s body for improvement of the

position of citizens’ associations, which is formed by a Government’s decree, is to promote and create conditions for partners’ relations between civil society and the Government. It also aims at improving intersectoral cooperation and proposing new legal frameworks, improved preparation of programmes and new standards, for the purpose of improvement of relations between the public and civil sectors. This is actually the central body of encounter of the two sectors and the place from where ideas on further improvement of activities stem. Public Fund established by the State through law, is ﬁnanced from

the national budget, for the purpose of rendering ﬁnancial assistance to the programmes that improve sustainability of the non-profit sector, but also partnership, intersectoral cooperation, increased impact of the civil sector on passing public policies, civic initiatives, and that improve democracy and work of democratic society institutions. Particularly interesting and complex is participation of civil society in the process of negotiations of the country on EU membership and other technical processes, which is explained by the fact that these organizations should advocate speciﬁc issues, but also give support to the State in obtaining citizens’ consent for membership. Therefore States include in negotiating groups, which prepare the platform for conducting negotiations and take immediate part in them, also the nongovernmental sector, professional organizations, 150

chambers of commerce, association of employers, and they do it from the very beginning of the process and screening process. Through agreements on how to apply the Union legislation in specific areas, on the speed and tempo that introduction of European standards into domestic legislation should evolve, which organizations should be additionally included etc., partner groups are formed, consisting of representatives of line ministries and specialized civil society organizations dedicated to resolution of special problems. There are also good experiences during the membership negotiation process with the model of “triangle tables” that consisted of the main negotiator, nongovernmental organizations and all other partners who may be interested in specific particularly important or delicate issues – these are forums in which were jointly solved more general issues, but they also served as an instrument to transfer objective information to the public. On the other hand, it is proven to be very good for the control of the entire process flow to have a body in the Parliament, too, which will be included to a great extent in the very flow of negotiations on membership; this body (national council, convent) has an advisory role but also authorization to review every negotiations position, even to decline it, because decisions in this body are made by consensus. The body, committee or council consists of representatives of the Parliament, associations of employers and workers, academic community, and the chairman is always a delegate of an oppositional party, thus making greater the importance of decisions that may be made, and the significance of the consensus created by its existence. Inclusion of civil society organizations into technical processes also has its reach in the use of EU funds resources, available to the country, particularly taking into account the important fact that the Instrument for the Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) for the first time introduces the partnership principle as the base for inclusion of civil society into programming, implementation, supervision and the process of evaluation of assistance coming from EU, on 151

both national and regional levels. An important problem, too, is co-financing, i.e. financial participation in projects financed by IPA, for which organizations most often do not have enough funds, and the final period in the project duration must be financed by the organization itself. Under such circumstances, the State could assist through its budget funds, so that this period could be survived.

152

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CIVIL SOCIETY All these requirements for good cooperation between the public and civil sectors cannot be realized until civil sector organizations among themselves become better coordinated, organized and until they empower themselves. Exactly this lack of organization, fragmentation of interests, lack of mutual coordination of civil society organizations is their significant drawback, whereby they decrease their potentials when wishing to initiate some uniform requirements themselves. A method of organizing at the central level may also be the model of informal citizens’ platform, which helps the grouped organizations to create and build their basic capacities, through research, setting databases and issuing publications, which is the space for exchange of attitudes and joint activities (trainings, public discussions, improvement and exchange of capacities, but also organizing fairs, forums). It is indispensable to achieve self-organizing, on both regional and local levels, because it is more complex to acquire an equal partner status at these levels, given that all civil society organizations at the local level are too small to deliver individual requirements. Experiences show that a model of organizing may be to conclude charters on cooperation of local and regional authorities with civil society organizations, which through organization of seminars, discussions but also creation of different strategies (development, environmental protection) creates citizens’, national consensus necessary for the European integration process of the country, and helps raising awareness of the fact that the public and civil sectors are no competitors. Realization of this model of cooperation at the local and regional levels also requires forming of a fund that would financially assist the development of civil society, which may be achieved through decentralization of the national public foundation for assistance and support to civil society development. 153

154

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION Since the European Union is an important partner in the European integration of a country, it also must show its readiness and opportunity to give higher political importance to civil society. Such support by EU, its bodies and member countries, too, gives to civil society more maneuvering space for participation and development of its role. The Union may point to concrete methods of how civil society should be included into the decision-making process on public policies in the country moving towards membership, with reference to lessons learned and development of integration processes within itself. The European Union is not just a replacement for donors, it is a partner of civil society in the European integration process of a country. Very often, the main instrument of permanent communication between civil society and the European Union is a structured dialogue with the EU Economic and Social Council. It is noticeable from experiences of others that exactly the State administration is the initiator of establishment of permanent contacts between the domestic civil society and EU institutions. The most usual relation of civil society with EU is Economic and Social Council, a body competent to deal with these issues in the Union. Cooperation with civil society may be achieved by forming standing committees of Ecosoc and civil society organizations of a country. Also, the European Commission must have the need for continuous and structural dialogue with civil society, primarily for the purpose of collecting impartial evaluations on the progress of the country in the European integration process, necessary for making annual evaluations on the tempo of integration of the country.

155

Publisher: Civic Initiatives, Belgrade For Publisher: Miljenko Dereta Proofreading: Katarina Krajinović Design: Ivan Valenčak DTP and printing: Yu TOP Agency, Novi Sad

On Civic Initiatives A group of eminent NGO activists included in the antiwar movement and non-nationalist democratic opposition analyzed and evaluated relative failure of democratic movements against Milošević’s regime, and in May 1996 founded Civic Initiatives, a citizen’s association for democracy and civic education. The set aim is to contribute to creation of a social, civic base that could support democratic changes by educating citizens about their rights, democracy, civil society, and how to be active citizens, in order to be able to make decisions on their own lives. Our vision is a society of equal and active citizens who make decisions on how to live their lives in a democratic country with a rule of law, and with full respect of human rights. Our mission is to empower civil society through education, promotion of democracy and support to active citizens’ status. Our main values are equality and equal opportunities, sharing with others, commitment, tolerance, solidarity, care for people, creation of links and partner relations with others, without imposing, as well as permanent education for all. People are the greatest values and resource of our organization. CI strategy is that only by eliminating regional, national, ethnic, religious, gender and social barriers it is possible to build a stronger, more efficient and potentially sustainable NGO community, and thereby contribute to development of the society in general. We strive to overcome fear and isolation, inherited from the past and increased during the Milošević’s regime, by linking people who would not meet otherwise, which encourages cooperation, joint activities, exchange of ideas, learning from each other. For that reason Civic Initiatives focus their activities on nongovernmental organizations outside Belgrade, establishing relations with smaller towns and rural localities all over Serbia, because they believe that it is important to link local groups with the ones in the capital. We decided not to open local offices of Civic Initiatives but to base our work on cooperation with strong and independent local partners.