CSOs in the process of eu integration: monitoring and advocacy tools Tijana Cvjeticanin

1. CSOs in the process of EU
integration:
Monitoring and advocacy tools
Tijana Cvjetićanin
Chernihiv, 17-18.11.2015.

2. The role CSOs can play
Watchdog
monitoring the processes, identifying problems, informing the
public
Partner
assisting the institutions in creating and implementing policies
Agent for change
advocating - putting your own issues on the agenda

3. The role CSOs can play
Not mutually exclusive; can and should complement each
other
A decision on which path to take depends on
The issues being tackled and the goals being set
The political, institutional and social climate
The attitudes of the decision makers
The capacities of the civil society

4. Taking part in the EU accession process
1. Understanding the process
2. Understanding the specific circumstances
3. Getting involved

5. 1. Understanding the process: Legal and political framework
Enlargement policy and conditions for entering
The Copenhagen Criteria, European Neighbourhood Policy,
Eastern Partnership, Association agreement;
EU standards and values
Acquis; EU conventions and agreements;
The EU is not always consistent in following through the
official policies and declared values. CSOs might need to
act as a corrective mechanism to both domestic and EU
decision makers.

6. Examples: BiH experience
● The ECHR decision and the constitutional reform:
The issue of consistency
● 2013 Census and the 2014 Elections:
The issue of accuracy
● Reform agenda:
The issue of transparency

7. 1. Understanding the process: The institutions
Identifying the relevant institutions and bodies
Within EU
Competences/issue specific
Country specific (Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary
Association Committee, Mission of Ukraine to the EU)
In Ukraine
Local (executive and legislative bodies)
EU (Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine, Council of
Europe Office in Ukraine)

8. 1. Understanding the process: The mechanisms
Competences/issue specific institutions of the EU
The Council of Europe: Human rights
Secretary General
Committee of Ministers
Parliamentary Assembly
European Court of Human Rights
Commissioner for Human Rights
Conference of International NGOs
Venice Commission (European Commission for Democracy
through Law): Constitutional law

9. 1.Understanding the specific circumstances
The approach in monitoring/advocating should respond to
the specific conditions of the EU-Ukraine relations
Important questions:
What are the issues important for CSOs in the process?
What are the problems faced in the process?
What are the possibilities for the CSOs to get involved?

10. Getting involved
1. Setting up goals
2. Identifying opportunities
3. Finding partners
4. Working strategically

11. 1. Setting up goals
The long-term/short term goals of CSOs monitoring and
advocating should be:
Determined by the real needs and the specific issues arising
from the EU-Ukraine relations
Realistic
Well planned
Kept in mind in all stages of work

12. 1. Opportunities
Assuming a role in ongoing processes
Taking part in regular activities of the EU accession process
Following any new developments and staying involved
Reacting when needed
Introducing your own issues
Filling in the gaps of the official process

13. BiH experience: Progress report of the European
Commission and the work of the Initiative for monitoring
of EU integration of BiH
● Written contributions to the Progress report
Make sure your voice is heard in the process of making the
official report: Sending your contribution and getting involved
even if not formally invited

14. ● Producing a Shadow report
○ Monitoring of the Political criteria
○ A large CSO coalition formed to cover all the necessary fields,
each in their own area of work/expertise
○ Alternative progress report published each year with the
overview of developments in the relevant fields
○ Important issues, left out of the official report, are covered
○ First-hand experience of CSOs put to use in the monitoring
process

15. ● Making an impact
○ Written in local and English language
○ Public promotion: Press conference and media appearances
○ Web-tools for promotion and access to key findings
○ Distributed to all relevant actors in both EU and in the country
○ Meetings with relevant actors
Alternative progress report is published before the
consultations are closed, so it can be timely distributed to the
EC and other relevant institutions

16. ● Making an impact
○ A comparative overview of the official and the shadow
report:
- How much of the alternative report has been taken into
account?
- Are there significant differences and where?
- What are the implications of the potential differences?

17. Croatia experience: Monitoring + Negotiations
● The Initiative 112:
○ Formed to monitor the implementation of Chapter 23, as the
working groups on this chapter had no CSO representatives
○ Came out with 112 demands of the civil society in the advanced
stage of EU accession process
○ Published a Shadow report
○ Advocated for the demands and managed to extend Chapter 23
by pointing to additional problems

18. 1. Finding partners
Finding allies in the executive/legislative branch
Determining which institutions, or their representatives,
are willing to include the CSOs in the process
Establishing and keeping two-sided communications
Informal contacts with supportive members of the
institutions can be particularly important if the official
policy is not favorable to your goals and causes.

19. 1. Finding partners
Finding allies in the civil sector
Establishing which CSOs share similar goals and ideas
about the process
Joining forces to make bigger impact
Connecting with CSOs from the countries which already
went through the process, to share experience, skills,
knowledge and resources
Having a joint vision is more important than making a
formal coalition

20. 1. Working strategically
Agreeing on common goals
Establishing coordination structure
Determining where and by whom the best contributions can
be made: Staying within the field of expertise
Making a timed plan of activities: Paying attention to the EU
institutions and local “cycles” (elections, scheduled reports,
etc)

21. Case study
● What is the problem to be solved?
○ Decide on an issue you would like to work on
○ What would be the best approach to the problem?
○ Go through the steps to analyze the problem
○ Decide on the plan of activities

22. Case study
● Understanding the process
○ How is the problem regulated in the EU legal frame?
Which EU institutions are in charge?
● Understanding the specific circumstances
○ How is the problem related to the current phase of EU-
Ukraine relations?
○ Which local institutions are in charge? Who can influence
the course of actions?
○ How can you get involved in the process?

23. Case study
● Getting involved
○ Setting up goals:
■ What is the desired outcome?
■ What needs to change in order to achieve that?
■ How can it be achieved?

24. Case study
● Getting involved
○ Identifying opportunities
■ Where do you see a space for CSOs to get
involved?
■ What skills, knowledge and resources could you
put to use to influence the identified problem?

25. Case study
● Getting involved
○ Finding partners
■ Are there institutions/representatives in EU or
Ukraine who could be supportive of your goals?
■ What would be the most efficient way to establish
contact and potential partnership with them?

26. Case study
● Getting involved
○ Finding allies in the civil sector
■ Are there organizations interested in the same
problem?
■ How could they contribute to solving it?
■ What would be the most efficient way to establish
contact and potential partnership with them?

27. Case study
● Getting involved
○ Working strategically
■ Defining roles within the coalition/network
■ Agreeing on internal rules (decision making, public
outreach/relations)
■ Developing a plan of activities to achieve the set
goals (including monitoring, advocacy/public
campaining)