http://www.newpauci.ntaxa.com/file/cGF1Y2lfZmlsZXMyNDE0

Recommendations from the Ukrainian delegation to the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum, 16-17 of November, 2009, Brussels

1. Recommendations to the Forum itself, regarding its structures, meetings, participation (including ideas on inclusiveness in the activities of the Forum after 1617.11 meeting); EaPCSF should be regarded as a tool in reaching of the aims set-up in the Communication from the Commission 823/2008 and not a separate task or activity. CSF should be involved in the development and implementation of Eastern Partnership; Contrary to the participating Governments, the CSOs do not have substantial funding sources to carry out regular and systematic activities. In order to create the financial support to EaP CSOs, it is recommended that Commission shifts some funding from the dominating budget support to competitive project funding, available to CSOs; It is recommended to create all possible formal procedures to enable such funding immediately with the beginning of 2010, to avoid typical delays (+2 years) existing with current ENPI programming cycle; As a quick solution, EIDHR programme seems to be the only instrument, which can be quickly adapted to the new needs; There is a need for small grants scheme, to support cooperation CSOs projects between EaP6 countries, which in practice is does not exist now;

Organizing a new thematic mechanism in the framework of the ENPI, along with Governance Facility and Neighborhood Investment Facility (“Civil Society Facility”) would make the financial support to SCOs more transparent and more effective; CSOs should pay special attention to intensifying contacts between the CSOs, operating with EU and also within EaP6 countries; As current EaP will function within current ENPI instrument, it is desired to analyze whether EaP will work within existing countries strategies, or CSOs should develop additional countries strategies to reflect EaP aims; Develop a civil society strategy for the region, based not on national interests but on regional interests, looking at what are the shared goals for the region as a whole; It is recommended to develop the participation rules for the next Forums – i.e. – some percentage rotation every next time for delegation from every country. participation should be based on practical activities of the Delegates through the year, but should be also used as a tool for involving new CSO to EaP-related activities; It is recommended to organize Next Forums in EaP6 countries; Forum should pay attention to include and plan activities with participants from conflict zones (Abhazia, South Osetia, Transdnistria, Karabah); There is a need for a well–structured web-based recourse on Eastern Partnership with the sites or links to the sites of the policy platforms. The site should monitor new policies development and serve as a possible tool for the broad consultations of EaP and Commission; It is necessary on a compulsory basis to invite working group coordinators to all intergovernmental platform meetings, ministers meetings and summits; it’s not enough just to foresee an ad hoc opportunity of such participation;

­ 1 ­

Recommendations from the Ukrainian delegation to the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum, 16-17 of November, 2009, Brussels

The Forum must have a right to propose issues for agenda of platform meetings ministers meetings and summits (meaning participation in creating agenda of these international structures); More information about these structures activities is to be in wider access; 2. Recommendations on the Eastern Partnership structures; It is recommended to include EaP6 countries representatives into governing structures of EaPCSF; Due to limited awareness on ENP, ENPI and EaP in the target countries, local national platforms may play an important role in building such local awareness on these initiatives, local partnership and participation. CSOs can also monitor implementation of ENPI-funded budget support programs. Local platforms should structure and plan their work; Due to different level of existing cooperation of EaP6 countries and EU, national platform may form their own national priorities;

I t would be appropriate to establish a mixed international Task Force on each of the policy areas with participation of civil society organizations (CSOs), EU institutions, governmental entities of partner countries and businesses especially with the environment issues, with the purpose to exchange experience of approximation to EU policies and legislation between the new members of EU and EP member-countries, and to extend participation of CSOs in European integration processes.

3. Recommendations regarding policy areas covered by the Eastern Partnership, General In order to involve CSOs and policy platforms into development of new policies Commission should encourage EaP6 Governments to cooperate with the national platforms; Build strategic partnerships between civil societies in the region – those partnerships should include not only the six countries of the Eastern Partnership and member states of the EU, but also Turkey; Policy Areas

•

D emocracy, good governance and stability, Monitoring Action plan implementation (Association Agenda); Monitoring the implementation effectiveness of EaP6 countries duties and also the performance of EU structures in this regard; There is a need to monitor how the state implements its commitments on different groups of rights according to the ratified documents. Common innovative methods and tools are to be developed; Special attention is to be paid to institutional and professional development of CSOs, in particular those dealing with human rights. Many of them don’t have capacity to effectively use significant European resources and thus they have no assess to them. There is a space for cooperation, capacity building and experience exchange among human rights organizations from the six countries; Improve the capacity of applying the procedures of Regulatory Impact Assessment and Policy Analysis into routine practice of legislation creation in EaP6 countries. Develop capacity of local CSOs to provide advice in these areas;

­ 2 ­

Recommendations from the Ukrainian delegation to the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum, 16-17 of November, 2009, Brussels

Open the ENPI Good Governance facility to CSOs participation;

•

E conomic integration and convergence with EU policies; Independent civil society organizations are to be attracted to evaluation of the European Commission and EU-members funded projects in the Eastern Partnership countries; Monitoring and advocacy of “deep free trade” model implementation

Special attention should be paid to strengthening of environment protection, environmental policy integration and sustainable development, in particular, in adaptation of environmental laws and regulations of partner countries to Acquis Communautaire and establishment of efficient mechanisms for implementation of relevant EU legislation and joint activities associated with implementation of global environmental conventions, including conventions on climate change matters, regional environmental conventions of UN ECE and protocols to them. The urgent matter is the EU horizontal environmental policy instruments implementation, SEA Directive in particular.

•

Environment, climate change, energy security; A pressure is to be made on the energy supplying countries regarding adherence to human rights; Bartering of human rights for energy interests should be condemned;

To support the reforming energy sector of EP6 participating countries for its closer approximation to rules and requirements of the EU Energy Policy in terms of energy efficiency and development of renewable energy - as a way for reduction of adverse environmental impacts and transition to sustainable development.; Advocacy and independent expertise for improving energy efficiency, energy diversification and wider use of alternative energy sources in EaP6 countries;

To ensure that the environmental protection and sustainable development will be incorporated as priorities into the new policy documents between Ukraine and the EU (namely Association Agreement). In this context the CSOs should be involved to information on negotiation process;

•

P eople to people contacts; To widen Youth in Action Programme to foster youth and school exchanges between EaP6 and EU countries; Legal and regulatory documents are to be accepted on prevention of intolerance to different ethnic groups and religions in mass media; Develop space for dialogues and discussions between people and societies on non-political social communication platforms – not just “nice” CSOs talking to other “nice” CSOs. Human and social links with people from less-secure areas, educational programs should be developed; Methodological support to clearing up historical conflicts between neighboring countries (e.g.

Ukrainian-Polish confrontation in the first half of the XX century) to prepare methodological base, stylistics and specialists for resolving more difficult conflicts like Ukraine-Russia, Belarus-Russia, Georgia-Russia and other ones; Joint advocacy and independent expertise of the freedom of movement, abolition of visa regimes and other administrative barriers for people to people contacts between the EaP6 and the EU;

­ 3 ­

Recommendations from the Ukrainian delegation to the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum, 16-17 of November, 2009, Brussels

Confidence building in the conflict zones (self-proclaimed territories) and Crimea; - Any other recommendations.

Security Challenges Include a security component in the work of the Civil Society Forum of Eastern Partnership – as a security crisis or conflict can jeopardize efforts of building economic prosperity, tolerance and human rights; it can be added as one more policy area or included to democracy, good governance and stability; Awareness-building – raise awareness of need for conflict prevention, peace, democracy and human rights; Create a consortium of civil society organizations working on security issues in the region; Build trust in democratic institutions and help strengthen their capacity – democracy is the best security policy.

Svyatoslav Pavlyuk, PAUCI Foundation Oleksandr Sushko, CPCFPU Svitlana Zalishchuk, Souspilnist Foundation Andrii Kogut, Civic Assembly of Ukraine Yaryna Borenko, European Dialogue Anna Golubovska­Onisimova, Mama­86 Kyryl Zhyvotovskyy, Evropejskij vybor (European Choice) Olga Duhnich, Integration and Development Center Tetiana Polyvana, International Centem for Policy Studies Liuba Palyvoda, CCC Creative Centre Natalia Andrusevych, Resources and Analysis Center "Society and Environment" Victor Kulynych, Polish­Ukrainian Solidarity Tetiana Danyliv, GURT Resourse Center Tymothy Pylate, Eastern Europe Foundation

­ 4 ­