Assessment vis-à-vis the EU CS Guidelines

Result 3.1.1 The Agreements of Cooperation at lower levels are still pending due to the lack of political will. There were more than 90 municipalities as well as 3 Cantons and Distrikt Brčko that signed Agreement for Cooperation or Strategy for Development of Civil Society but practically, they are not in use mainly because the both sides do not recognize usefulness of such cooperation. At the other institutions, Federation BiH, Republika Srpska, and the rest of Cantons and Municipalities, there are no interest for such cooperation.

Result 3.1.2. Consultation are regular only at level of Council of Ministers through e-Consultation while at the lower levels are still sporadic and rare. There are documents at all levels that stipulate the process, but the institutions are not respect that obligation without any consequences.

Assessment vis-à-vis the EU CS Guidelines

Result 3.2.1. Public institutions rarely invite interested CSO to comment on policy legal initiatives at an early stage. It is only the case if the special expertise is needed or some of documents are related to international request and should be communicated with CSOs’ representatives. 

Result 3.2.2. Public institutions mostly ignore requests and don’t answer to “politically sensitive” questions. The reason of such approach is logical and based at untransparent or irregular procedures. At the other side, the problem is also that there are no consequences for such reaction. 

Result 3.2.3. Decision making and advisory bodies on issues and policies relevant for civil society rarely include CSO representatives. The reasons are the same as explained before, lack of respect, untransparent or irregular procedures. Watchdog CSOs investigate many cases, provide concrete evidence of avoiding procedures, without consequences. 

Assessment vis-à-vis the EU CS Guidelines

Result 3.3.1. CSOs are not included in all stages od developing and providing services. There are various reasons for such approach but mostly are mutual distrust, protection of state institution benefit, lack of the appropriate care and financial resources for adequate services    

Result 3.2.2. CSOs are rarely recipients of funding for services. As noted above there are based at reasons of protection the public institutions, mistrust, and general lack of funds

Result 3.2.3. There were not many contracted services to CSOs. As explained above the various reasons are arguments for lack of contracted services for CSOs 

Result 3.2.4. Regular evaluation of quality and effects/impact of services provided is carried out and publicly available. There are sporadic control but results are not publicly available and timely provided.

Select the fields to be shown. Others will be hidden. Drag and drop to rearrange the order.
  • Image
  • Description
  • Content
Compare