Meeting with a Contact

While there are technically three guys who work at Florozon, I had only met one of them once at the workshop they hosted. I was able to set up a meeting with him to see his views of the NGO sector. He has worked since 1994 in the civil society sector, and since 1998 with NGOs specifically. Many of the views stated below are his, and just give another perspective to the  debate.

He said that the sector has changed in the last five years in a positive sense. In the post-conflict society, there was some activism, mostly in youth organizations. The organizations were mostly with sports, schools, labor unions. In the beginning of transnational period, there was additional input from external sources. They began activism with issues of the environment, humanitarian aid connected to the Balkan wars. After 2001, there were organizations who dealt with peace issues and human rights. During their unlucky circumstances, it developed positively.

The problem with civil society in Macedonia, according to him, is that they mainly lack activism. Most NGOs are not member based or financed well. The knowledge and skills of NGO workers are still in development. Many people are not involved in civil society due to their fear of the government. there were some attempts to work critically against the government, but they were often “neutralized immediately.” Some of the attempts were shut down discreetly by discrediting the organizations or threatening the people who work there with jail.

When I asked if there was cooperation with the government, and he commented that there is some. Int he transition, the government didn’t see the benefit of civil society. Soon they realized the power that civil society had and wanted to be involved. Sometimes it is called the 5th sector, and the government tries to discredit NGOs as working for foreign agencies as spies. The political party with power is dealing with establishing small satellites all over the country (the NGOGOs). However, cooperation exists with a lot of analysis on who and why. The EU is pushing for cooperation especially in UNDP. There are areas where the government has no experience, and he thinks that NGOs can help in this area.

My contact is currently working in the government helping them to implement affirmative action. “No matter what, the government should cooperate to better serve.”  He is helping the government to try to link projects to have a better impact. The municipalities have responded favorable to the linkage. They are trying a mediation in schools as well. He wants better cooperation so there is a better institutionalization of the cooperation. He has worked with ‘teaching the teacher’ to reteach for more mediation between different groups, if the government doesn’t like anything they can just forget.

Financially, there are some connections between the government and NGOs. There is funding from casinos and the lottery. There are yearly bases, but they only give money to ‘their’ NGOs. There are special funds for NGOs, but there is a lot of criticism. When the government changes (as in the party changes), the list of recipients changes. If cooperation doesn’t go well, they will loose the money. Many NGOs have never asked for money, because they don’t want the money from the government. Many feel that it lacks impartially. It is seen as corrupted if they take the money; however, if there was a separate organization, they feel it would be corrupted too. Money often comes from international organizations and bilateral agreements.

For cooperation with the municipality, it depends on the individual municipalities. Some municipalities still want NGOs to be obedient. If the municipalities see the NGOs as having some power- they want to work with them. The municipalities will also work closer if the NGO is connected internationally. Sometimes municipalities support small NGOs or smaller projects by NGOs.

The biggest organizations are focused in Skopje, where there is a higher concentration of money. A few have tried to decentralize from Skopje, but most are still there. There is rarely any high profile organizations or money in the non-capital cities.

The current NGOs focus mostly on peace building. They might be dealing with the past and conflict management or  the “burning issues” (more ad-hoc intervention, monuments, identity issues, etc.). Some of the more successful ones focus on youth leadership and identification of potential leaders. Since 2001, most have focused on inter-ethnic cooperation. Many have targeted secondary schools and the youth. Some do this by teaching the directors and teachers of schools other by reaching out to the students. Some organizations want to better teach the OFA an related issues, others focus more on the environment.

This meeting went very well for such a short meeting, he offered to give me some contact information to other NGOs.

Florozon Workshop, Day 1

The next research event that I attended was not a meeting but rather a workshop hosted by Florozon the week before I started volunteering there. I have tons of information both on sustainable culture in the Balkans as well as how Florozon worked with the government to put this workshop on. I want to provide you with all of that information in case you were curious. But first, the workshop was written about in the news (kind of- in websites related to the agencies): Florozon and MOEPP (well they did have it, but I can’t find it any more).

When you walked into the EU Info Center, where it was held, you were greeted and directed towards a table when you could get an information packet (pen, pad of paper, booklet, agenda). I counted over 50 people here. It was to start at 11:30, but I was told “Well you have CET [which MK is a part of] and then you have MK time, one hour later!” [This has since been repeated to me many different times.

They had someone translating the whole talk into English throughout the two days.

There were many important people there including the Ombudsman of the Environment. They are to receive complaints from people about the Environment. They asked people to write to them so they can look into the citizens concerns. Their goal is to inform and promote this discussion and the cooperate with institutions and NGOs. They even claimed that the NGO sector is “our partner.”

There were tons of people there for the first part, when the Minister of the Environment was there. One interesting cultural thing that we (the Fulbrighters) have noticed is that part of the way through a meeting or presentation that they are filming, they will leave and go set up for the press conference, rather than staying for the rest of the speech and then setting up. The Minister was the first person to speak at the workshop (after being introduced). He stated that they would like to work on adopting legislation on the environment so that MK is more aligned with the EU. However,  the implementation is not just the work of the government, it is the requirement of the whole country. He believes that there is good conditions for good access towards good governance. They have raised awareness of legal rights in the people. The main condition for success is the good cooperation between all the organs of the Republic of Macedonia (judicial, etc). There is a necessary cooperation between the organs of the state and NGOs. This will lead to the final goal of the protect of the environment.

Next was a video speech by the Chairman of the Transportation, Communication and Ecology in the Parliament. He stated that this conference will help with legal tights. The Ombudsman should act whenever there is environmental harm. The citizens should be able to believe in their government to protect their rights.

The Minister of Norway was there, they were a partial sponsor, and he gave a short speech. He talked about how MK has adopted adequate laws and regulations towards the environment. The important thing for MK to do, he suggested, was to focus on the actual implementation. Proper monitoring is needed- and civil society can be helpful in this. Together, the different sectors need to jointly build capacity.

There was a short press conference break at this point. The Important People talked to the media about the environment and what was needed. I stood in the background and watched. I even got in a few of the news pictures, but I can’t find that link for you. They provided some snacks and drinks for us as well. At this point, all the news crews left as did many of the people.

When we all went back into the room, the Deputy Ombudsman for the Environment spoke. He talked about how the environment is important, especially for human life. They want maintainable development without violating the rights of future citizens. The government, who I am assuming she was referring to when she used “we,” wants regulations with compensation for the cost. They want the cost to be proportional to their ability to pay. There is a need for development and protection of the environment. MK should undertake protection before the damage i done, rather than try to restore the environment. The current laws aim to prevent risk/damage and mitigate them. There is a need for significance of raising public awareness for the protection of the environment. They need to provide information to kids and their family through schools and NGOs. The Prime Minister  believes that social country and a healthy environment equals a fundamental human right.  The right to access justice can be harmed everyday. There are Inspectorates for the Environment and Forest, and these people are allowed to make suggestions. They expect the NGO sector to be the press Representatives and address the ombudsman (who should be an independent expert and institution). They will then provide a general protection of legal rights. There was a law passed in 2008 about the procedure for Ombudsman. They are supposed to protect legal rights, on behalf of constitutional laws and ratified international agreements. Right now, there is a normative plan, most regulate the area with environmental law . It is relatively new, but regulated. He told us what to do when these rights are violated in MK. First, you should file a complain based upon facts, evidence, and your rights. Specifically who violated those rights. You can initiate those proceedings by yourself or in a group/NGO. There are very few complaints filed annually, and most of those that are filed are on individual rights.

Next,  Csaba Kiss an environmental law expert who manages the Environmental Management and Law Association (EMLA) in Hungary, spoke about the “EU Acquis, methods and practices with the EU Ombudsman.” He mentioned that there was a great number of won cases in Hungary. EMLA works to provide free legal aid to the citizens of the EU. They want to help create an agenda for the Rio conference. Their activities range from capacity building, input into policy making. You can’t expect the environmental agency to be the only protector. The Ombudsman is supposed to act for the people’s rights, but if there is no specific law, then they can not act.In the EU there is an incredible amount of environmental legislation. One way to have legislation is to empower citizens and NGOs. EU organizations have 3 months to respond to complaints against them.

Then Jadranka Ivanova, the Head od the Sector for the EU at the Ministry for Environment. There are 34 chapters for rights in the environment with 10 sub chapters. The EU completes progress monitoring by the EU and there is a timetable of implementation. They have to fulfill questionnaires. The Ministry prepares reports that can be seen at their website. The EU keeps updating their laws, which makes it harder for MK to keep up. In MK, the public can address the ministry and individual sectors. They prepare reports for all projects and how it will effect the environment. When an individual submits a law suit or complaint, the administration court can tell the ministry what they have violated. There are 3 categories of criminal offenses in MK for rights violations, but she didn’t go into detail.

Next, Kiss from EMLA came back to discuss environmental regulation in Hungary/the EU. Some countries never had environmental laws until the EU forced them to. Ireland was the only EU country to not ratify the Aarhus convention. Before the EU, Hungary followed international trends. They were good in certain issues but missing in others. Sometimes the laws were not implemented correctly across the different EU countries. There are many different social concerns for balancing the environmental optimization, but it is better not to compromise. They should let people have access, information and justice. Kiss believes that there should be free access for the people. In Hungary, lawyers can only bring cases, but they don’t pay the court fees, but they do pay 1% of other fees. Court cases must be held in a timely manner. within the first 4-9 months they must hold the first hearing. The first 60 days there must be an hearing in an administration case. There must be legal aid, with a free attorney. There is a limit for the time spent on the case. When EMLA provided training for judges, many didn’t know what the different conventions or laws were.

The Office of the Ombudsman presented about environmental court cases in MK. The different ones that they had presided over, and the different ones that others in the room were involved in. She went really fast while talking and presenting, and the translator could not keep up. So I am not 100% of everything that was discussed.

After her presentation, Kiss came back and presented about a few court cases they had worked in Hungary. In Hungary's new constitution, natural resources are considered heritage; access to healthy food and environments are also important. According to the new constitution there is no human right to a safe environment. And if there is no right, then lawyers or the ombudsman can’t respond. Currently the ombudsman can call the polluters to stop and challenge them in court. They are able to monitor international treaties and the national plan. But this law has recently changed, and stripped them of all their powers. The new law, only allows them to call attention to the problems, participate in the inquiry, and suggest court cases but they can not prosecute.

Then they closed the day and they were going to start up the next day.

Florozon

The next day they they started off my recapping the previous day a bit, then presented the booklet that Florozon had made about your legal rights in MK in regards to environmental legislation. The power had gone out, so it was a really short presentation.

There is some protection of human rights (such as against loud noise), and some NGOs can start the procedures. But there is limited use of the Ombudsman, they can’t stop the purchase of land, only the development of it. People have protested the falling of the lake or other small cases (logging on reserves). They also presented a few other cases:

• the lady who lived on the ground floor of an apartment building. They put a park bench in front of her window, where teenagers were loud and drinking every night. She successfully complained and got the bench moved to another part of the park. However, it required 213 interventions, or a really long time.
• The Vardar waste. It comes from a dump, and went to where the waste was thrown into the river. The waste is from the fast construction of a building near the dump. There needs to be better places for waste. They imitated public debates to move the waste to a better location, however, it was never moved.

There is a lack of citizen’s awareness about their rights. There is also a lack of awareness by the institutions. The most frequent example is noise protection.

There was a bit of a debate between the attendees between the different things that had been done in MK. They were discussing the classical infringement of law with trash. It was hard to follow, because there was a problem with the translators.

The event when on for a bit longer, but I had to go to another meeting that I had set up before learning about the workshop. So I am not sure exactly what it was that they talked about.