KOSOVO

Implemented by:

  2018 2019
Number of registered organizations (per type) (+ how many have registered in 2019) Registered: 541 Associations: 508 Foundations: 32 Registered: 569 Associations: 513 Foundations: 32
Main civil society laws Laws on: · Protection of informants · Establishing social enterprises By-laws on: ·Minimum Standards on Public Consultation in municipalities Laws on: ·Freedom of association in CSOs ·Access to public documents Strategy on: ·Government – CSOs cooperation 2019 – 2023
Relevant changes in legal framework Draft laws on: ·Freedom of association in CSOs ·Labor ·Maternity leave ·Access to public documents Concept documents on: ·Public gatherings ·Volunteering Draft laws on: ·Labor ·Maternity leave Concept documents on: ·Public gatherings ·Volunteering ·Family and social services
State funding (for the previous year) (key bodies and amounts) Public funds distributed to CSOs v. after beneficiaries’ lists sorted out: Total: EUR 24 million v. EUR 9 million Central level: EUR 13 million v EUR 7 million Local level: EUR 8 million v EUR 2 million The Government’s report on public funding distributed to CSOs 2019 it is not published yet.
Human resources (employees and volunteers) Employees that have continuously payed contributions in the past 12 months: 3, 729 Employees with more than one occupation, whereas one of them is employed in the sector: 6, 762 Volunteers: 5,104 Employees that have continuously payed contribution in the past 12 months: 4, 009 Employees with more than one occupation, whereas one of them is employed in the sector: 9, 533 Volunteers: 10,000
CSO-Government Cooperation (relevant and new body: consultation mechanism) ·The online Platform for Public Consultation ·The Office of Good Governance ·Kosovo’s Assembly Media and Mass Communication Department ·Kosovo’s National Council for European Integration ·The online Platform for Public Consultation ·Kosovo’s Assembly Media and Mass Communication Department ·The Council for Implementation of the Government Strategy for Civil Society Development ·The Office of Good Governance ·Kosovo’s National Council for European Integration
Other key challenges (e.g. lack of official data related to CS) ·Lack of official data especially related to the economic value of the sector ·Lack of official data especially related to the economic value of the sector
Key findings
1. The amendment of the Law no.06/L-043 on freedom of association in CSOs has introduced institutes as the third legal form to register an organization. Additionally, it has expanded protection against state’s interference in internal matters of CSOs, and has reduced organization’s registration period from 60 to 30 days. The list of Public Benefit activities has also been extended to: human rights protection and promotion, support to democratic practices and civil society, consumer protection, refugee assistance and support.
2. Legislation on the prevention of money laundering and combating terrorist financing in not in line with FATF Recommendations and the EU Directive 2015/849. As a result, it regards CSOs as reporting entities and subjects them to burdensome requirements. CSOs have reported the following difficulties accessing banking services such as; physical presence of organization’s founders when opening or closing a bank account, non-linear maintenance fees of bank accounts across commercial banks.
3. During the year have been noted two initiatives with the intention to limit freedom of expression. Kosovo Prosecutorial Council adopted Regulation states that its officials may communicate with media and journalists only when the head prosecutor is notified in advance. On the second occasion, the Independent Media Commission initiated drafting a policy that forbids reporting from court rulings of public officials until final ruling.
4. In its third year of implementation the Regulation no. 04/2017 on criteria, standards and procedures on public funding for CSOs struggles with its full implementation. There is an increase of public calls for proposals also the report on public funds distributed to CSOs is annually published. Still, the latter despite the fact that contributes in building a culture of transparency, among beneficiaries categorizes other legal entities as CSOs. Whereas, the other Regulation’s requirements such as monitoring and evaluation of public funds have hardly started to be implemented.
5. The new Strategy for CSOs – central Government cooperation 2019 – 2023 has entered into force in February 2019. Its objectives include: increasing public servants capacities and implementation mechanisms over implementation of the Regulation on minimum standards for public consultation and the Regulation on Public Funding for CSOs, improving the system of public service provision by CSOs and increasing volunteering in public interest programs.
6. Entry into force of the Regulation no.05/2016 on Minimum Standards for Public Consultation in 2017, has established a set of standards and a systemic procedure for public consultation process. Yet, practice shows that not all elements set by the Regulation that make a public consultation process complete and effective are taken into consideration.
Key recommendations
1. The Department for NGOs should increase its capacities for proper implementation of its mandate, in particular, its staff should be trained on international principles of freedom of association and new provisions introduced by the recently adopted law on NGOs.
2. Financial Intelligence Unit, Ministry of Finance and Central bank should draft and adopt the specific regulatory framework reporting, as well as banking services to CSOs based on FATF recommendation 8, respectively by basing it on a sectoral risk assessment.
3. Ministry of Finance and Tax Administration of Kosovo should address the specificities of CSOs in the primary legislation as well as reporting forms, while also it should be harmonized with the NGO Law so to provide with specific benefits for CSOs. Capacities of civil servants for the implementation to effectively run the administrative procedures regarding tax exemption for CSOs should be increased, while businesses should be notified for such procedures.
4. Ministry of Finance together with the other budgetary organizations both on the central and local level should work on increasing transparency of public funds distributed to NGOs, with a focus on monitoring and evaluation. The system of data maintenance in terms of beneficiaries and amounts distributed to NGOs should be improved also capacities of public officials to fully implement requirements derived from the Regulation on public funds should be increased further.
5. The Office for Good Governance in the Office of Prime Minister (OGG OPM) should start allocating the whole budget as promised altogether with increasing its local human capacities for proper implementation of the Strategy for cooperation with civil society. Additionally, the evaluation methodology of the Strategy implementation should be updated in accordance with civil society demands.
6. Central level institutions should ensure that public consultation processes are organized entirely in accordance to the standards specified by the Regulation on public consultation. Percentage of draft policies and laws also presence of the entire elements that comprise an effective public consultation should be increased. Besides online platform for public consultation other means of consultation should be utilized as to allow a wider access from CSOs and general public. Additionally, Ministry of Local Government Administration (MLGA) and municipalities should work on fully operationalizing implementation of minimum standards for public consultation in local level, while also undertaking a public information campaign promoting available opportunities for citizens and CSOs.

Legislation

Freedom of association is guaranteed by Article 44 of the Constitution of Kosovo.  The Law no.06/L-043 on freedom of association in non-governmental organizations has been amended and came into force during the second quarter of 2019. Its drafting has been characterized by enormous efforts of civil society organizations to ensure its alignment with best international standards and practices. Legal provisions guarantee the right to associate without permission, in three legal forms; associations, foundations and institutes. Legal form of institutes is just recently introduced hereby a deadline of one year is provided for existing organizations wishing to change their legal form. Secondary legislation that in addition to other principles also defines registration and operation of institutes is in the drafting process. Association into trade unions, political parties, religious communities, etc. is regulated by respective laws. In 2018, a new law came into force that regulates establishment of social enterprises. It is the first law of this kind in Kosovo. To obtain the status of a social enterprise legal persons should apply to the Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare. Still procedures of registration remain to be defined through secondary legislation. The law determines that social enterprises are allowed to assign up to 30% of their profit for staff’s salaries. Both laws do not contain any restrictive provisions that would require from organizations to operate only in certain areas nor do specify a limit number of organizations to operate under similar purposes.

Freedom of association equally applies to individuals and legal entities that want to establish associations, foundations or institutes. Protection against any form of discrimination is guaranteed as specified by the Law on Protection from Discrimination. No one is to be persecuted for the decision to associate or not to associate, as well as no person shall be required to associate against their will. CSO activities must be in line with the principles of respecting and protection of human rights and freedoms set forth in the Constitution, Laws and international agreements in force. Registration of the organization is not mandatory.

However, the legal framework does not recognize the category of grassroots. Nevertheless, if decided to obtain the legal status certain criteria must be met. Since associations are membership organizations their establishment requires at least three physical or legal persons. Foundations can be established either by one person or a testament also an initial monetary fund is required; whereas institutes can be established by at least one person. The new law has shortened the registration procedure from 60 to 30 days. Registration is free of charge and registration rules are considered simple to follow. The  online platform for CSO registration further eases the process. The Right for appeal is granted by the administrative instruction on the appeal process. However, the same authority is mandated to establish an appeal commission. In addition, no clear rules on functioning of this commission exist. Networks are registered as associations thus same rules and procedures apply as prescribed by the law on freedom of association in CSOs. There are no obstacles that hinder communication including online communication with groups outside the country.

Practice

As of December 31, 2019 the Public Registry of CSOs enumerates 10,124 organizations. The category of field of operation infers that CSOs cover a vast field of areas such as; persons with special needs, women empowerment, democratization and civil society development. Majority of surveyed CSOs, registered during last year did not report any form of pressure from state authorities to register. None of the surveyed CSOs stated to have faced any form of limitations when exercising freedom of association neither offline or online via skype or other social media platforms. In the past few years has been noted an increased presence of non-registered initiatives constituted ad hoc. These initiatives usually focus their activities into women empowerment and environmental protection, whereas a shared characteristic is that they refrain their activities once a particular issue is solved. No representative or member of informal groups has reported to have received requests from state authorities to register nor has been sanctioned for not being registered. Legal aid support provided by the Kosovo Democratic Institute to the citizen’s initiative opposing construction of the hydropower plants in their village is an example of cooperation between non-registered initiatives and CSOs.

Organizations surveys sample has yielded 18 organizations registered during last year. Registration procedure is perceived as easy to follow for 14 of them, whereas for 11 surveyed CSOs registration procedure is not expensive. Around 50% of CSOs stated that registration procedure has lasted more than 60 days (as stipulated by the previous CSO law). 7 out of 18 CSOs have regarded administrative procedures as excessive. Majority of CSOs perceive that decision making from the Department of CSOs was not arbitrary nor politically influenced. Survey data show low levels of networking between Kosovar organizations and their international counterparts. Around 40% of CSOs stated to have not been part of any network, whereas only 15% of surveyed CSOs are part of only one network. Around 10% of surveyed organizations have membership to two respectively three networks. There have been no reported cases of restrictions for participation in a network.

Legislation

The new CSOs law has introduced new measures regarding protection against state interference. In general, state institutions are prohibited to engage in any activity that limits freedom of association. They are expected to create an enabling environment that stimulates CSOs to fulfill and advance their mission and activities.

Even though that there are no official data for 2019, a year before 20 CSOs have been suspended by the NGOs Department. Legal base constitutes the Administrative Instruction GRK – No: 02/2014 on Registration and Functioning of NGOs, on the reasoning of “endangering the security and working against the constitutional order of Kosovo” based on the request of the “competent security body”. There is no information who this body is while prior investigation on the matter was not conducted. This makes the fifth consecutive suspension of CSOs, while KCSF data tell that from 2014 to the date, a total of 70 CSOs were suspended. Twenty – four organizations remain suspended since their suspension decisions are renewed from year to year. There is no enough evidence to conclude that there is persecution against CSOs in Kosovo since number of suspensions as well as organizations suspended each year are the same. The DNGO has begun the process of drafting the secondary legislation for the implementation of the NGO Law. Although civil society is represented in the working group so far only one joint meeting has been held while the rest of the work has continued without civil society participation. It is important that this process is well administered and that the secondary legislation remains within the margins of main principles set by primary legislation.

The law protects against any form of interference when organizations determine their activities and objectives, also when they regulate their internal structures to determine the scope of activities as well as level of governance to work with. Contrary to the previous law the new one contains specific provisions on CSOs protection from third parties’ interference. State institutions are obligated to not violate in any form freedom of association and to allow operation of CSOs, but also to provide protection to CSOs in cases of interference by third parties.

Legislation on financial reporting and accounting rules does not take into account the specific nature of CSOs. Financial reporting requirements are twofold: reporting to Tax Administration of Kosovo on financial transactions and annual financial statements, as well as reporting the following tax payments where applicable; payroll tax, corporate tax, property/rent tax and pension contribution tax. Reporting to the NGO Registration Department is mandatory for organizations with Public Benefit Status. Reporting requirements to Tax Administration as well as sanctions for failing to fulfill these reporting requirements do not take into account peculiarities of CSOs but are identical/proportionate to businesses. Reporting of PBOs (184 PBOs until the end of 2018) is both narrative and financial, and PBOs with an income higher than 100,000 EUR are required to submit an external audit report.

Legislation on the prevention of money laundering and combating terrorist financing is not in line with Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Recommendations and the EU Directive 2015/849, thus it is restrictive for CSOs. The law regards all CSOs as reporting entities and subjects them to burdensome requirements. Such requirements ask that each CSO must have a certified staff on anti-money laundry legislation also to keep track of all CSO beneficiaries. In line with FATF recommendations a risk assessment of the civil society sector was conducted in 2018, that presented a long list of problematic issues. If adopted, they would result in further monitoring and inspecting for CSOs from municipalities and other institutions. Civil society organizations provided detailed comments and recommendations, which were almost entirely accepted by the working group. On the other hand, the Government delayed approval of the risk assessment report, and made it impossible for its recommendations to be considered for the National Strategy on Prevention and Fighting the Informal Economy, Money Laundering, Financing Terrorism and Financial Crimes 2019 – 2023. As a result, the Strategy adopted in May 2019, enlists the CSOs sector among the few sectors that are vulnerable to terrorism financing. The working group on amending the law on AML/CFT held a few meeting during 2019, as well as a series of workshops on proposing ideas for solutions were organized between civil society representatives and civil servants. CSOs may be subject to material sanctions in case of failing to notify the NGO Department within 30 days when changing their organizations’ name, address, mission and vision, or contact information. In such cases fines prescribed by the CSO law include EUR 250 to the organization itself as well as EUR 80 to the authorized person. Nevertheless, these fines are considered proportionate to the circumstances of civil society sector in Kosovo. An organization can decide to terminate its operation on the following circumstances; a voluntary decision is taken by the highest governing body in accordance with the statute, according to the legislation in place the CSO turns insolvent, at the moment of establishment has been set a termination deadline in statute or in the founding act, or based on a court decision. Within the Law on Freedom of Association in NGOs, legal provisions on dissolution of CSOs are in line with the international principles and standards. Despite the existence of an administrative instruction on the establishment of the Committee for Distribution of Remained Assets of the terminated NGOs, the specific procedures and criteria on decisions from this Committee are not in place.

Practice

In general, CSOs in Kosovo operate without state interfering into their internal matters. The survey showed that no organization has been subject of government harassment because of their critics. Neither have been reported cases of invasive oversight in terms of excessive audits. At the other end of the scale, no CSO has committed breaches of law during last year, hence no sanctions were imposed. A limited number of four organizations answered to have experienced state’s interference in their internal matters either through unannounced state visits, unreasonable limitations of their activities, illegitimate attacks against their CSO, or discriminatory administrative measures were applied against their organizations. Several CSOs have reported difficulties accessing banking services. A number of banks have set additional requirements to CSOs, such as the physical presence of organization’s founders when opening or closing a bank account. An organization interviewed[4] stated that “additional requirements to open a bank account caused difficulties for a few NGOs complying with our deadlines therefore a few beneficiaries endangered receiving the grant at all”. Different banks have set different maintenance fees for CSOs accounts. They are not linear ranging from EUR 1-20, decided individually by each bank without coordination with the Central Bank. These discrepancies infer that banks are deliberately denying access to their services because of the civil society sector categorization as vulnerable to terrorist financing.

Legislation

CSOs are allowed to engage in economic activities in order to support their activities in line with the non-for-profit principle. Legislation allows CSOs to engage in economic activities both directly or by owning property and assets. Income generated from such activities should be used only for purposes related to organizations’ mission. Financing of organizations whose activity does not coincide with the legal order and international law is prohibited. CSOs are also allowed to use foreign and private sources of funding, whereas the legislation in force does not prohibit it in any form. The anti-money laundry and prevention of financing of terrorism law used to contain provisions that asked CSOs to require permission before accepting foreign funds either in cash or via a bank transfer, but after the law has been amended such restrictions were removed. The law on freedom of association in CSOs allows fund raising also from individuals, corporations and other sources without limitations.

Practice

In practice, there is a slight increase of CSOs that engage in economic activities, compared to 88% of CSOs that stated to have not done so in 2016. From 22% of CSOs that had economic activity this year, most of them stated to have faced no difficulties. The rest of CSOs stress out the need to simplify tax and accounting procedures, as well as monitoring and evaluation rules. Burdensome excessive requirements were also listed among difficulties. According to research findings foreign donors are the biggest source of funding for Kosovar CSOs with 41%. The EU and most of the bilateral donors are exempt from VAT, same as goods and services for humanitarian purposes. Still, only 5% of donors have been VAT exempted as opposed to 30% of CSOs. Funding from private sources remains a non-viable source of funding for civil society in Kosovo. Less than 20%of surveyed organizations stated to have received donations from private companies and individual donors. There have been no difficulties reported related to complicated administrative procedures.

Legislation

Freedom of assembly in Kosovo is a constitutional right, as per Article 43 of the Constitution. Meanwhile the Law 03/L-118 on Public Gatherings guarantees all Kosovar citizens the right to organize and participate in public gatherings. CSOs enjoy the right to freedom of assembly either individually or through their organization. Competent authorities are obligated to ensure preconditions as required by the law, while administrative procedures are considered easy to follow. Notifying competent authorities 72 hours in advance the public gathering is the only prerequisite to organize one.

The provisions of the law refer only to the citizens of Kosovo, remaining unclear if freedom of assembly extends also to the stateless persons, refugees, foreign national and others. Even though not explicitly, simultaneous and counter – assemblies are not allowed.  The law states that a request to organize an assembly can be denied if at the near or exact time and place has been granted another permission for another assembly. The legal framework requires for prior notification for public gatherings, except in those places where no additional security measures are required. When no response is provided by authorities in due time (48 hours prior to public gathering), the public gathering can take place without any restriction. If the decision to prohibit an assembly is regarded as unjust the law provides that within 48 hours the organizer of the assembly submits a complaint to the police, which again within 48 hours must notify the organizers on the status of the complaint. If the decision is considered dissatisfactory the Law guarantees within three days the right to appeal to a court, through a fast – track procedure. Finally, the legal framework has not changed during the last year. In 2019 the Ministry of Internal Affairs has begun the process of drafting the Law on Public Gatherings. At the moment, the draft law has passed the phase of online public consultation, while it does not seem to address the problematic areas identified by CSOs.

Practice

The survey showed that 52% of CSOs have attended a public assembly of any kind; march, protest or outdoor performance either individually or through their organization, in comparison to 24% of organizations who have organized a public assembly itself. Both groups have reported no limitations when organizing or attending public gatherings. Along similar lines answered the interviewed CSO specialized on monitoring the freedom of public assembly in Kosovo.

Data provided by the Kosovo Police show that in 2019 a permission was issued for 532 public assemblies, compared to only seven of them which were forbidden. Three out of seven restricted public assemblies were accompanied with a written explanation. No appeals were made to the Police for banned or restricted assemblies.

Even though there is no empirical support, over years has been noted an increase in protests organized by the public to make their voices heard over issues like environmental protection, better living standards, or showing discontent with the education reform in Kamenica. Media reports show that police used force against protesters of Bitia condemning hydropower plant construction in their village, where several citizens including children were injured. No other protests where police force was used were reported. Despite the fact of being forbidden by the legal framework, four CSOs have attended counter – assemblies in the last year. They have reported that police protection was ensured. During the protest #Riseup4Rojava in solidarity to the Kurdish people a counter- protest was organized within close vicinity to one another. A group of people condemned the protest, however no incidents were reported. Statistics obtained from Kosovo Police show that no counter-assembly was prohibited, whereas 6 spontaneous assemblies were dispersed due to the lack of notification. In general, nine public assemblies were dispersed in 2019. Last year, security guards of one of the political parties and civil society representatives and activists collided, while the latter where protesting against the draft law on financing of political parties. Three organizations out of 52 that have attended a public assembly stated that media was restricted to attend such assemblies. Also, statistics provided by the public relations office within the Kosovo Police, claim that force was used in one public assembly, while eight protesters were detained during 2019.

Legislation

Freedom of expression is a constitutional right based on the Article 40 which guarantees freedom of expression to all, and can be restricted only if necessary to prevent violence or racial, ethnic or religious hate. No particular primary legislation applies to freedom of expression but a number of laws contain provisions related to it such as: Civil Law Against Defamation, Law on Protection of Informants, Law on Access to Public Documents, Law on Protection of Journalistic Sources, Law on Protection of Personal Data etc. The law on protection of informants and that on Access to Public Documents have gone through the amendment process, during the past two years. The former has been abolished by the new law no.06/L-085 on Protection of Whistleblowers which has replaced the term informant with whistleblower, has expanded the protection from employers to interns, volunteers, trainees and to every other person that provides help of any kind to the whistleblower. The law recognizes three types of whistleblowing; internal, external and public, while no civil, criminal and disciplinary proceedings can be issued against the whistleblower. In addition, the law requests that public institutions with more than 15 employees, and private ones with more than 30 employees to assign a responsible staff on whistleblowing. Despite the primary legislation being in favor of freedom of speech, the government is procrastinating the process of drafting the secondary legislation that would define procedures of dealing with a whistleblower.

The latter has detailed further procedures for obtaining access to public documents, such as proactively updating and publishing lists of documents an institution has in disposal. The legal framework in place does not contain any provisions that would require permission to speak, deliver presentations/lectures in public nor the requirement that publications of organizations must be preapproved. Local media experts have evaluated it as enabling enough nevertheless, its implementation is slow mainly caused by lack of supporting mechanisms.

During 2019 have been noted two cases of public institutions initiating drafting of policies harmful towards freedom of expression. On the first occasion Kosovo Prosecutorial Council adopted a Regulation on public communication that prohibits its officials to communicate with media and journalists regarding “special developments” unless the head prosecutor is notified in advance. The Regulation does not specify what constitutes a “special development”. On the second occasion the Independent Media Commission by the end of 2019, initiated drafting of a policy that would prohibit reporting from court rulings of public officials until final ruling. At the moment that this policy went into public consultation media and civil society submitted their comments to address problematic provisions. As prescribed above all cases of limitations of freedom of speech are clearly prescribed and in line with international law and standards Last years have been characterized by an increasing number of attacks on journalists, while this is said to be related to the lack of institutional protection. Responsible institutions are not doing enough on solving cases of assaults against the journalists by procrastinating investigations, third parties impact on the investigator’s work, low rates of solved cases and short sentences. On this regard, the Basic Court of Prishtina has just recently appointed a coordinator on the attempt to increase the rate of solved cases of assaults against journalists. Such coordinators have also been appointed by the State Prosecutor office and by the Basic Prosecution office. Effectiveness of such recent appointments remain to be evaluated. The penal code has been amended in 2019, while libel is still considered as a misdemeanor rather than part of it. In general, Civil Law against Defamation and Insult does not contain overly protective provisions toward state officials.

Practice

Survey data show that CSOs in Kosovo in general enjoy freedom of expression. More than 80% of respondents claimed to have not been pressured when using critical speech, nor then when they targeted state authorities. Usage of online communication tools without being hacked or blocked was reported by 93% of CSOs, whereas 90% of CSOs stated to have not been threatened because of their opposing opinions. There have been no reported cases of CSOs being sanctioned or imprisoned because of critical reporting. Representatives of the Association of Journalists of Kosovo stated to have not noticed individuals nor CSO representatives to have succumbed to self – censorship.

Nevertheless, when seen through the lens of the media and journalists’ freedom of expression’s exercise it is not at the right level. One journalist was denied entry into Kosovo Assembly premises on the grounds of failing to prove its accreditation. Nevertheless, no media was accredited at the time, due to delays in procedures by Kosovo Assembly. In a separated case, the director of the Air Navigation Service Agency urged its staff to stop communicating with a journalist. He stated that he did not like the journalist’s investigative reporting. Association of Journalists of Kosovo reports that in 2018, 16 investigative journalists were threatened or persecuted, from both state and non-state actors. Municipality officials, business persons and a few cases of attacks by citizens make the list. The Freedom’s House Report 2020 ranks Kosovo as partly free, whereas Reporters without borders 2019 Report shows an increase in ranking for Kosovo, compared to last year from 75 to 78.

Legislation

CSOs have free access to information and are free to receive and impart information through different media. Possibility to communicate and access information, including via the internet and ICT, is legally guaranteed by the law on electronic communication, adopted in 2012. The law on monitoring of electronic communication was adopted in 2015 and civil society representatives were part of its drafting. It prohibits unjustified monitoring of communication channels, except for monitoring based on a court decision, after demonstrating that all other investigative means have been exhausted. The law has built a number of control mechanisms to ensure that any monitoring of electronic communication was legal, such as the courts, parliamentary committees, the Ombudsperson etc.

Practice

There have been no restrictions accessing any source of information, including websites or online communication platforms for 97% of surveyed CSOs. None of the surveyed organizations reported to have been illegally monitored by the authorities including their communication channels, internet or ICT. As well as no CSO has reported to have experienced police harassment because they belong to particular social networking groups. Data from Kosovo Agency of Statistics and EUROSTAT show wide availability of internet access. According to both sources in 2018, 93% of households in Kosovo have internet access at home.

LegislationPractice 0 – 20 Fully disabling environment 20 – 40 Disabling environment 40 – 60 Partially enabling environment60 – 80 Enabling environment 80 – 100 Fully enabling environment

Legislation

There have been no recent changes on the legal framework regarding tax benefits for CSOs. A number of CSOs sources are tax exempted such as: grants, donations and subventions based on the Explanatory Decision published by the TAK in 2016. The legal framework on economic activity remains ambiguous, in particular regarding to the economic activities of CSOs that do not have the Public Benefit Status. According to the Kosovo Tax Administration, the economic/commercial activities of PBOs are exempt from the corporate income tax if the income destination is solely for the public benefit purpose and up to a “reasonable level” of income. While this article mentions only the PBOs, another article on commercial activities talks about all registered CSOs whose “commercial or other activity shall be exclusively related to its public purpose up to a reasonable level of income”. This implies that the economic activity of any registered CSO shall be directly linked to its mission and the income should be up to a reasonable level, whereas all other economic activities are subject to income tax. This incoherence causes difficulties in interpretation and implementation. The legal framework in place argues that the meaning of a “reasonable level of income” should be determined through secondary legislation, drafting of which has never started. In 2016, Ministry of Finance announced plans to functionalize passive investments by utilizing income generated from the privatization process. However, by the end of the same year, the Government removed from the legislative program drafting the law on passive investments, which is neither part of the legislative programs of the subsequent years. The Ministry did not specify for what purposes such investments would be used. There is no legal framework on establishment or operation of endowments in Kosovo, same as there is no policy that foresees tax benefits on endowments.

Practice

Same as in previous years, no CSO has reported any direct or indirect tax on grants and donations. Alternative funding sources altogether with tax benefits are uncommon. Eight percent of CSOs stated to have used economic activity as a source of their funding whereas none of them stated to have received tax benefits for it. Passive investment has been a funding source for 6% of CSOs, while two CSOs and two donor organizations have been tax exempt.  Yet, the annual financial return form does not contain a special category for income from passive investments. CSOs consider procedures of obtaining tax benefits as difficult. More than 40% of CSOs evaluate them as difficult or somehow difficult, whereas only 11% of CSOs think that they are simple to use. Complexity of such procedures might be one of the reasons for the low rate of organizations that have had tax benefits.

Legislation

There have been no changes in tax legislation regarding tax incentives on corporate and individual giving, since 2010 and 2015 respectively. The Law on Personal Income Tax and that on Corporate Income Tax offer 10% deductions of the taxable income of individuals, corporations and other sources, if those donations aim; humanitarian, health, education, religious, scientific, cultural, environment protection and sport purposes. Eligible recipients of such donations are CSOs and any other non-commercial organization that directly performs activities in the above mentioned areas. The provisions for CSOs in the Law on Corporate Income Tax remain ambiguous and it is not clear whether the exemptions on the standard corporate tax are applicable to all CSOs or only to those with Public Benefit Status.

In the first half of 2017 entered into force the law on Sponsorships in the area of culture, youth and sports. The law, which does not specifically mention CSOs among tax exemption beneficiaries, only lists activities that qualify for tax exemptions. It provides 20% income tax exemption for youth and culture related activities based on the Corporate Income Tax. Additionally, sponsorship’s income is exempt from all taxes. From the information given above it can be concluded that legal framework contains positive provisions regarding tax benefits on donations, particularly for those from private donors. Laws on corporate and personal income tax, offer 10% tax deduction on donations, only for a limited number of publicly beneficial activities. The list is far less than the list of public benefit activities determined in the new NGO Law. Areas covered by the NGO Law but not included to receive tax deductions are; human rights protection and promotion, support to democratic practices and civil society, consumer protection, refugee assistance and support.  As a result, the Public Benefit Status does not play any role in receiving tax benefits, making the fiscal legislation incoherent with the public benefit status of the NGO Law. Corporate Social Responsibility is not a common concept among private companies in Kosovo and as a concept is not promoted by the state.

Practice

Similar as in the previous reports, in practice no CSO has reported to have benefited tax deductions for their individual and corporate donations. However, there are no reported cases of limitations on the types of CSOs that can receive tax deductible donations. When asked to evaluate tax exemption procedures on donors giving, 58% of surveyed CSOs stated to have no knowledge on the legal framework or the existence of such procedures. Five organizations answered that there are no tax incentives on donors whereas only 14% of CSOs evaluated them as enough encouraging and comprehensive. CSR concept it is not developed in Kosovo as such no policy document on the matter exists.

Legislation

The year 2019 marks the third year of implementation of the Regulation MF-NR-04/2017 on criteria, standards, and procedures on public funds distribution for CSOs. Its implementation is mandatory for central and local level institutions. It is the first policy that regulates public funds distribution to CSOs, signed after a thorough cooperation between public officials and civil society. Meanwhile the Strategy for Government – CSO cooperation 2019 -2023, through its objectives targets building a co-financing scheme for EU funds for CSOs.

The Regulation has built the decentralized system of public funds distribution where each public institution is responsible for distribution of its own funds aligned to their strategic objectives and field of operation. Regulation requires that public funds intended for CSOs to be planned through specific budget lines in the annual state’s budget. Ministry of Finance upon request creates specific budget codes for each public institution that intend to distribute public funds. This is related to preparations of the annual budget where requests overpass the meant budget, therefore Ministry of Finance takes the final decision on priority areas to support. Yet, since the entry into force of the Regulation such codes were not created. Hence the annual state’s budget of 2019 besides common budget lines like cultural services, youth and sports and gender issues includes no specific lines for CSOs. A few municipalities like Rahovec and Istog had budget lines on funding and co-funding of CSOs projects.

The Law 04/L- 080 on games of chance allowed allocation of a certain amount of funds from the Kosovo Lottery Fund that could be used for funding of social categories, human rights issues, culture and sports. The details of such transfer remained to be determined through secondary legislation, nevertheless by the middle of the last year, a new law that prohibits activities of games of chance in Kosovo entered into force. Every public fund provider is obligated by the Regulation to plan within the annual state’s budget in line with their priorities, strategic objectives and in consultation with civil society organizations. The Regulation specifies that Evaluation Committee should consist of five members one of which should be a representative of CSOs, chosen via a public call.

Practice

According to survey results 37 CSOs have received public funds. Grants for specific activity/project prevail followed by institutional grants allocated to five CSOs while one organization has received coo financing for EU and other projects. Based on their organizations experiences around 70% of respondents consider public funding insufficient to meet their needs. As it is noted above the system of public funds distribution in Kosovo is decentralized. Publication of lists of CSO beneficiaries altogether with the amounts distributed by each local and central institution through the Governments annual report on public funds distributed to CSOs manifests the presence of such system. The Government’s report briefly emphasizes the need to operationalize monitoring and evaluation systems of public funds providers. Although mandatory, public institutions have not managed yet to incorporate specific budget lines for CSOs support in the annual budget. Nevertheless, Government’s report on public funds distributed to CSOS allows to compare amounts distributed to CSOs. Annual Report on Public Funds distributed to NGOs shows that in 2018 EUR 24 million were distributed to CSOs compared to EUR 1.8 billion of the total annual budget. When KCSF’s filtered and sorted out lists of beneficiaries it turned out that from EUR 24 million reported as public financial support only EUR 9 million were distributed to civil society organizations. The rest went out to federations, sports clubs, economic operators, and services provided by CSOs on behalf of state institutions. On average EUR 9,731.71 were delivered per CSO.

Lists of public funds beneficiaries reveal that public institutions categorize funds allocated for sports clubs, federations, religious institutions, private schools, art ensembles, and city theatres, as support for civil society organizations. Total of funds distributed to these entities amounts to EUR 7 million in comparison to EUR 9 million allocated to CSOs. On the other hand, EUR 1 million were distributed to veteran’s organization without open calls excluding criteria and forms set by the public fund’s Regulation. Despite the fact that as nominal values, public funds distributed to CSOs are increasing from year to year (EUR 16 million in 2017 v EUR 24 million in 2018), again after analyzing lists of beneficiaries it turns out that there is a slight decrease in percentage of public funds distributed to CSOs. In 2017, 42% of public funds went to civil society organizations in comparison to 38% in 2018.

After the entry into force of the Regulation on public funds distribution to CSOs, public institutions are more involved to increase public funds availability to CSOs. Albeit, a lot remains to be done in terms of increasing transparency and enhancing their monitoring and reporting systems.

Evaluation Committee should be comprised by three representatives of public institutions, and two external experts one of which must be from civil society. Members of the Compliant Commission are appointed by decision of the chief administrative officer/head of the institution. It is not specified if civil society representatives must be part of it. Amid five institutions with the greatest share of public funds allocated to CSOs, in the central level, two have not published open calls for external experts to join the Evaluation Committee. Whereas on the local level, none of the municipalities has published online the call to join the Evaluation Committee. Only 30% of civil society organizations stated to have been invited to participate in meetings where public funding priorities are decided.

Legislation

The Regulation in force prescribes the entire process of public funds distribution through established uniform criteria, guidelines and documents to submit. The call should be published on each provider’s website and must remain open for at least 15 working days. In order to increase wide outreach and competition usage of alternative ways of communication is encouraged. Besides general criteria such as CSO’s certificate, and fiscal number each call should contain specific criteria based on objectives and scope of activity of each public institution. Guidelines and forms for application should be published online as a package at the moment of opening the call. The following but not limited elements should be part of the call: objectives, criteria to apply, guidelines on submitting the application as well as evaluation criteria, mandatory and non-mandatory documents to be submitted, deadlines, contraction information, monitoring and evaluation information and a tentative calendar for call implementation. 

Within seven days after the call is closed, preliminary results should be published online, also all applicants should be informed in the written on the status of their application. This list becomes final only after the Complaint Commission has reviewed all complaints, in a timeframe of five days. Article 19 of the Regulation requires from all public financial support providers to prevent all conflicts of interest upon selection of beneficiaries as specified by applicable legislation. Appointed members of the Evaluation Committee respectively the Complaints Commission should sign a statement that states that their presence in such commissions constitutes no conflict of interest. If a conflict of interest arises, member/s should be replaced.

Practice

Seventy percent of surveyed CSOs have stated to have encountered open calls for public funds distribution at least once per year. Even though it does not provide a clear estimate on the total of funds distributed without open calls, the Government’s Report on Public Funds distributed to CSOs 2018, recommends undertaking several steps by public institutions in order to increase transparency. Additionally, the Report distinguishes between main public funds distributors on both levels of government. After analyzing their websites, turns out that 4 out of five public funds distributors in the central level have published open calls on their websites. On the contrary, out of 5 greatest public funds distributors in the local level only one has published open calls online.

In the central level only the Office of Prime Minister and the Ministry of Culture Youth and Sports have published the Annual report of public funds distributed to CSOs. This report contains names and funds allocated to organizations also name of the specific activities/projects or programs supported. In the local level none of the five greatest public funds distributors has published the end of the year report. Again, such data are summarized at the end of each year through the Government’s annual report on financial support provided to civil society organizations by all public institutions.

Around 70% of CSOs agree or somehow agree that forms of application are comprehensive whereas criteria to apply are not excessive. Selection criteria are easy to comprehend and publicly available for half of the surveyed CSOs. 73% of surveyed organizations disagree or somehow disagree that decisions on allocation of public funds are fair and do not entail conflict of interest. Findings of the Annual Audit Report 2017 (published in 2018) mention lack of monitoring mechanisms of public funds allocated to CSOs in the field of education.

Legislation

The entry into force of the Regulation for the first time has set a system of monitoring and evaluation of public funds. Provisions of the Regulation state that for each signed contract the provider of financial support assigns a responsible official/team for monitoring the implementation of the project/program. Monitoring of financial support is to be done through regular and financial visits to ensure compatibility with Regulation requirements and fulfillment of the purpose for which financial support is provided. If the monitoring officer/team notices abuses with funds, alerts the chief administrative officer or the head of institution. Meanwhile recommends further measures to be taken in accordance to the extent of the breach committed by the beneficiary. Depending on the breach, measures stipulated by the Regulation range from canceling the contract up to the court proceedings. Additionally, beneficiaries are obligated to report on regular basis regarding the implementation of their projects/programs.

Practice

Organizations that have received public funds stated to have been monitored; 33 of them were required to submit a detailed report of activities and expenses. Seven CSOs stated to have had unannounced monitoring visits, while four of them stated to have been notified by state authorities for their visits. Five organizations stated to have not been monitored at all, whereas two of the respondents claimed to have not been asked to submit any reports on activities and expenses. Government’s report on public funds distributed to CSOs, suggests that public institutions should invest more on their monitoring and evaluation systems. Similar to this, Audit’s annual report 2018 suggests that grants delivered to sport clubs and federations by the Ministry of Culture Youth and Sports, which is the greatest distributor of funds to CSOs have not been monitored in order to show whether the intended purpose has been met. All of this leads to a general glimpse that there is no monitoring and evaluation going on as it is suggested by the Regulation on public funds distribution to CSOs. On the other hand, review of the websites of the core public funds distributors shows that no institution has published monitoring or evaluation report. Whereas, access to public documents has shown that even public institutions itself do not keep track if the monitoring officials are assigned as prescribed by the legal requirements.

Legislation

The law no.06/L-092 on allocation for use and exchange of municipal immovable property is amended in 2019. It aims ensuring effective use of immovable property of the municipality.

The new law same as the previous one, defines only general criteria for all users without taking into account the character of civil society organizations. As such the municipal property can be allocated for use to natural or legal persons through an open public competition, following the proposal of the Mayor and decision of the Municipal Assembly, after an evaluation conducted by the Evaluation Commission. Out of 7 members of the Commission, one of them should be an expert member from civil society. While the procedures can be skipped in some special cases defined by the law, CSOs do not fall in this category. No specific provisions exist on one-time usage of municipal or other public properties by civil society. Main changes introduced by the new law are related to deadlines and creation of evaluation and complaint’s commission. While selection criteria for CSOs interested to utilize non – financial support are left to be developed via secondary legislation. Still, the draft sub – legal act says that each municipality is to develop its own selection criteria. This proposal is entirely in discordance with what civil society organizations have been demanding for. On the other hand, Regulation on public funding for CSOs, states that its provisions are applicable equally to the public non-financial support for CSOs. It applies to central and municipal public properties and to any other form of non-financial support which according to the budget organization must pass through a competitive process. Other forms of state non-financial support are not available. There are several CSOs that offer free spaces to other organizations, as well CSOs that provide free of charge capacity building activities.

Practice

The survey has yielded that around 20% of CSOs have had access to non-financial state support in the past year. Whereas 35% of surveyed CSOs stated to have had never applied for non-financial support from the state in comparison to 25% of them that are not aware about the possibility of using non-financial state’s support. 5% of CSOs have benefited non-financial support through open calls comparing to 17% of them who have contacted direct to the state’s institutions to ask for access. 12 CSOs have claimed that their application was denied through an open call procedure whereas 5 CSOs stated to have been refused after they have directly contacted state’s institutions. In practice, there are no cases of CSOs being denied access to non-financial state support due to their political ties or critical stance. Data derived from the access to public information has shown that non-financial support to CSOs from the municipalities is rare. Common types of nonfinancial support provided are public space for conducting meetings, trainings, anniversaries and internet services. Seven municipalities have provided office space, whereas none of them stated to have provided any type of non-financial support to other entities like businesses. Most of the time public space is provided without an open call but based on CSOs .

Legislation

Initiated in 2014, amending of the Labor Law is still in process. The current law does not have specific provisions on CSOs. As a result, civil society sector is subjected to same requirements as other sectors. Provisions on maternity leave, which are obligatory for all employers, are burdensome for CSOs. Due to prevalence of project funding in the civil society sector, only a few CSOs have sufficient funds to cover their part of payment of maternity leave. Another challenge identified by CSOs is the project – based contracting for their staff, that does not necessarily cover all potential benefits for employees guaranteed by the law, in particular those related to the duration of employment. The draft law has passed the first reading in June 2019. Again, the draft law lacks specific provisions on employment in CSOs. Main changes include provisions that prohibit discrimination of any form against employees, and measures against pregnancy discrimination. The draft law has shortened duration of the fixed term contract from ten to three years, whereas a fixed term contract might be extended no more than twice within a period of three years. An exception is the project based work. This exception has positive association with the dominance of project funding in CSOs, still KCSF’s comments on the draft policy demand further detailing the exception on the basis of civil society funding characteristics. While the labor law is in the amending process, the Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare, has initiated a separate process to draft another law, that on maternity and parental leave. Its drafting is characterized by civil society suggesting that government covers 70% of the salary during the first 6 months of maternity leave.

On the other hand, the draft law presented says otherwise; the first three months of the paid leave are to be paid by the employer that covers 70% of the base salary, while the next 6 months are covered by the government covering 50% of the base salary. The draft law provides the opportunity to extend maternity leave for three extra months without payment. Since both laws complement each other, civil society representatives have demanded their simultaneous proceeding. Yet, since the law on maternity and parental leave entails heavy financial costs to the Government, its introduction to the Parliament it is postponed.

Practice

Majority of CSOs have stated to have no information over Government’s programs for employment (57%), whereas 7% of respondents stated that there are no incentive programs for employment in CSOs. Seven percent of organizations that knew about existence of such programs think that they are not interesting enough. Twenty-three percent of CSOs have not benefited from state’s incentives because they have not hired employees during last year. Only five organizations stated to have benefited from such programs. Kosovo Pension Savings Trust is the body that collects information over the number of employees in civil society sector, full time and part time employees, and total of contributions payed by civil society sector.

Legislation

The legal framework in place regulates only volunteering of youth aged 15-24 according to the Law 03/L-145 on Youth Empowerment and Participation, and the Administrative Instruction no. 01/2016 on youth volunteering. The latter establishes procedures of registration, verification and certification of youth volunteers. Initiated in the second part of 2017, the process of drafting the law on volunteering in general, is still in its beginnings. Recently working group comprised also by civil society representatives is drafting the concept document. Its main principles include: defining principles, conditions and rights of volunteers, setting up a volunteer support body and establishing mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation of volunteers. Available incentives for volunteers include access to capacity building activities and reimbursement of expenses for the period of engagement. Both activities aim to maximize youth involvement in volunteering. On the other hand, government officials interviewed[1] have listed meetings with CSOs and volunteers, and workshops on procedures to certify volunteers as incentives to promote volunteering. The absence of the state programs and mechanisms constitute only wake efforts by the Government side to promote volunteering. The platform for online registration of volunteers has eased the registration process, while procedures are easy to follow. Hence registration procedures do not prohibit spontaneous or volunteering in general.

An agreement should be signed between volunteers and organizations. Youth volunteering should follow certain criteria regarding its length such as: people under 18 years old can volunteer no more than 26 hours per month. Volunteers between 18-24 years old can volunteer no more than 130 hours per month. Volunteers under 16 years old are obligated to validate their engagement through parental or guardian permission. Additionally, Article 3 of the Administrative Instruction says that prior to their engagement new volunteers should be notified regarding their rights, duties, benefits and potential associated risks.

Practice

Youth Department within the Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport, is the only body that generates data regarding the number of registered young volunteers, number of organizations that have volunteers and available incentives on volunteering of youth. The vast majority of CSOs interviewed (86%) stated that they are not aware about any state’s program that promotes volunteer engagement. When such programs exists no difficulties to access them were reported. Around 44% of CSOs think that legal framework is simulative or somehow simulative for organizing volunteer activities. At the other end of the scale, 27% of organizations think that the legal framework it is not at all stimulating. Whereas 11 organizations claimed that there is no legal framework on volunteering. CSOs have not reported any form of restrictions on volunteering.

Legislation

Kosovar CSOs are allowed to provide educational activities, including non-formal ones, in accordance to their statutes and fields of activities. Non –formal education is regulated by the Administrative Instruction on non-formal education for youth, adopted in 2015 by the Ministry of Education Science and Technology. During 2019 have been no developments regarding legislation on promotion of non-formal education. The National Qualifications Authority is the body mandated to accredit and recognize non-formal education. Official curriculum has limited civil society related topics; mostly on primary level of education through the subject of civic education. Yet, interviewed representatives of the Ministry of Youth Culture and Sports consider the legislation in place as appropriate and responsive to the needs of the CSO sector. While representatives from the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology stated “there is no need to change the curriculum since it is considered that civil society related subjects are well included”. What is considered more of an issue for the Ministry is the level of understanding and comprehension of the subject by teachers, nevertheless the Ministry does not have in place a system of monitoring and evaluation for the same issue.

Practice

Considering the fact that topics on civil society are rare in the educational curriculum there are only a few cases of memorandums of understandings between private universities and CSOs for internship and volunteering programs. Provision of non-formal education it is not a wide spread activity amid civil society organizations in Kosovo. Data provided by the National Qualification Authority signify a small presence of CSOs certified to provide trainings and non-formal education. In 2019 only one CSO has been certified whereas the lists provided enumerate three other CSOs certified during previous years mainly offering vocational trainings.

LegislationPractice 0 – 20 Fully disabling environment 20 – 40 Disabling environment 40 – 60 Partially enabling environment60 – 80 Enabling environment 80 – 100 Fully enabling environment

Legislation

The new Strategy for CSOs – central Government cooperation 2019 – 2023 has entered into force in February 2019, following Government’s approval. Its objectives and overall framework address lack of mechanisms and challenges identified during the implementation of the previous Strategy.

The entire strategic objectives and activities of the new Strategy are built on the results of the previous one. Even though implemented minimally, it represents a very solid base for further built-up by the Government, civil society and other stakeholders. Objectives of the new Strategy include increasing public servants’ capacities and implementation mechanisms of the Regulation on Minimum Standards for Public Consultation and the Regulation on Public Funding for CSOs. Also aims to improve the system of public service provision by CSOs, and increasing volunteering in public interest programs. Government has committed a budget of 235.500 EUR for implementation of the Strategy and its Action Plan, which entails indicators, objectives, intended results and a timeframe. Additionally, the Strategy foresees hiring two specific staff engaged solely on its implementation.

Regarding 2013-2017 Strategy, even though committed, the Government did not provide neither the budget nor the human resources. Despite the fact that Ministry of Finance committed to allocate a budget of EUR 137,960 to advance Strategy’s implementation, except meetings held at government premises covered by the budget of the Office of Good Governance (OGG), all other activities were made possible through donor support.

KCSF and a few civil society representatives since beginning were part of the working group drafting the current Strategy for cooperation, providing substantial contribution. In addition, these representatives have demanded greater distribution and involvement of the civil society sector and other actors during drafting process. In addition, Civikos Platform, a local network, during 2018 has conducted extensive consultative meetings with CSOs for the preparation of the new Strategy. In 2007, CiviKos Platform has signed a MoU with Government, where they agreed for a collaborative approach to the development of the Strategy. In 2019 has been established the new Council for implementation of the Strategy, that enumerates 29 members; 15 of them are civil society representatives while the rest are civil servants. Also Council’s members are part of the working teams working on each of the 4 strategic objectives. The rules of procedure of the Council ensure that all initiatives coming from CSOs are taken into consideration, and the same applies for the Working Teams of the Council as well.

Practice

Majority of civil society organizations did not participate in the drafting process of the Strategy for cooperation with the Government. Only around 23% of organizations stated to have participated in the drafting process as opposed to 53% of them who have not been engaged in the process. Additionally, CSOs lack awareness about the existence of the Strategy. Twenty – two percent stated that they have no information that a document on cooperation between the Government and the sector exists whereas 2 organizations stated that in Kosovo there is no document that defines principles of cooperation between civil society organizations and central level of governance. Yet, face to face meetings were held with CSOs in Prishtina and in other largest cities in Kosovo, in order to discuss implementation of the previous Strategy.

The assessment report of the previous strategy for cooperation drafted by the OPM/OGG provides that 78% of Strategy activities were implemented. On the other hand, CSOs condemn this figure because the methodology employed lacks focus on results implementation. Its objectives were met minimally, with actual results evidenced only at the end of its implementation period; characterized by entry into force of the Regulation on Minimum Standards for the Public Consultations Process, and the Regulation on Procedures and Criteria for Public Financing of CSOs. Drafting of both Regulations was based on the contribution given by civil society, either via public consultations or bilateral meetings with public officials. Whereas the objective of public service provision by CSOs and the one on volunteering has not made any progress. The previous strategy for CSOs – Government cooperation has had only its final evaluation, concluded at the end of the implementation period. For the current Strategy, there is commitment for mid-term evaluation. In Kosovo, besides data on a few specific issues, CS sector it is not part of the official statistics generated by public institutions. Yet, working groups of each Strategy’s objectives employ experienced organizations in a given field to ensure CSOs needs are properly addressed.

Legislation

The Council for implementation of the Government Strategy for Civil Society Cooperation is the joint body mandated to monitor and report implementation of Strategy’s activities. The Office for Good Governance within the Office of Prime Minister (OGG/OPM) which is the Secretariat of the Council also serves as the focal unit of the Government for civil society cooperation. Regarding other mechanisms in place; Kosovo Assembly used to have its Office for Donors Coordination and Civil Society relations. Nevertheless, a recent interview with the officials of Kosovo Assembly yielded that the office has been shrink into the department for Media and Mass Communication. Declaration of partnership with civil society has been mentioned as the only mechanism in place for cooperation with CS. While activities in which civil society is regarded as the main contributor entail: event management and promotional events organizing. All of the above are indicators of shallow inclusion and cooperation with CSOs from the Kosovo Assembly. Another mechanism that supports cooperation with civil society is the National Council for European Integration led by the Presidency. It is a consultative and coordinating forum which aims to formulate consensual national policies of Kosovo on European Integration topic. Civil society is represented through three members in this structure elected through an open nomination process.

The Council set up to lead this process is ineffectively managed and lacks transparency in its operations and communications. Rules of procedure of the Council for Strategy imolementation ensure that all initiatives coming from CSOs are taken into consideration, and the same applies for the Working Teams of the Council. Whereas the Action Plan includes detailed sub-activities for each of the measures and strategic objectives, and is developed jointly with civil society.

Practice

The Council for Strategy Implementation, enumerates 29 members; 15 of which are civil society representatives and 14 public officials. This is a standard number of members since the Council’s foundation. Council’s members are part of the working teams working on each of the 4 strategic objectives. The rules of procedure of the Council ensure that all initiatives coming from CSOs are taken into consideration, and the same applies to the Working Teams of the Council. When asked about frequency of communication with relevant public institutions, department for CSO registration of Ministry of Public Administration is mentioned by 48% of respondents. Office of Prime Minister / Office of Good Governance is contacted by 31% of organizations while 24% of interviewees have communicated with the Office of Parliament for donor’s coordination and communication with civil society. There is a slight increase in the budgetary allocations for the current Strategy compared to the previous one. Data obtained from the OPM/OGG tell that EUR 235.500 were planned in total, to facilitate the implementation of the Strategy, whereas for the first year of implementation the budget planned is around EUR 60,000.

Legislation

The entry into force of the Regulation no. 05/2016 on Minimum Standards for Public Consultation in January 2017, marks an important step towards CSOs and general public inclusion to decision making processes. In the past, public consultations did not follow a set of standards nor a systemic procedure, whereas now specific requirements and deadlines apply. The Regulation stipulates that participation of CSOs and general public is mandatory for central level institutions except the Assembly. The Government is obligated to conduct participatory decision – making processes starting from legislative Agenda drafting. A mechanism derived from the Regulation is the online platform for written public consultation, launched in February 2017. A Standard deadline for submitting written feedback is 15 working days, whereas for more complex acts Regulation allows extending this deadline to 60 days. The proposing body is obligated to publish on their website the final report of public consultation which contains the comments received and their addressing. If public consultations are not organized accordingly, the Regulation asks to restore the process to the stage where participatory decision making is mandatory.

In previous years’ civil society organizations have advocated for similar legal provisions also in the municipal level. As a result, in December 2018, the Ministry of Local Governance Administration adopted the Administrative Instruction no.04/2018 on Minimum Standards on Public Consultation in municipalities.

The initiative on itself indicates a positive sign, nevertheless legal provisions lack many of the necessary steps for effective implementation, such as: lack of specific standards, deadlines or implementation mechanisms. Characterized by a prolonged drafting process, the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly are still in the amending phase. In this regard civil society organizations are advocating to address the non-mandatory provisions of CSOs inclusion to policy making.

As of 2017 the Government has started to train its officials on the implementation of the Regulation on minimal standards for public consultation. The Kosovar Institute for Public Administration is the body mandated to increase capacities of civil servants. By the end of 2019, data obtained from the Office of Prime Minister / Office of Good Governance state that in cooperation with the KIPA 56 public officials were trained. Whereas from the same training on the local level of government have benefited 30 civil servants. Trainings cover the whole cycle of including civil society into policy making processes starting from agenda setting to experts’ involvement to general public consultations, with specific requirements for each step. Within 30 days after the Regulation entered into force started the appointment of responsible officials for public consultation coordination. Official data from line ministries shows presence of such officials in each of them. Their responsibilities include coordinating the public consultation process by providing information in preparation of mid-term and annual reports by the office of OPM/OGG. In particular information on numbers of comments received, figures of participation to public consultation from members of the general public and CSOs and information on accepted comments. As stipulated by the Regulation rejected comments should be followed up by arguments.

Practice

According to the OPM/OGG’s annual report on public consultations in the central level of governance, in 2018 out of 245 policy documents adopted, 221 have completed the written consultation process through the Online Platform. Yet, it is unclear if all compulsory elements that make a written public consultation process complete and effective are taken into consideration. Additionally, the report does not provide information if other methods besides written consultations have been used in order to ensure a wide outreach to CSOs and citizens. KCSF’s monitoring Report of public consultation process states that in only half of monitored cases (50%), governmental institutions decided to apply methods other than the Online Platform to gather inputs by members of the public

Seventy – four percent of civil society organizations reported to have not been involved in the drafting process of policies/legislation during last year, neither via invitation from a public institution nor initiated participation on their own. Survey shows that public institutions have been reluctant to include CSOs in decision making processes. Half of the interviewed organizations stated to have never been invited to participate in public consultations. On the other end, only 12% of surveyed CSOs have been regularly invited to participate in public consultations, as opposed to 40% who have been invited from time to time or once in a while. Out of those invited to participate in decision making processes, 60% of organizations said to have been invited in the early phases of the consultation process, whereas only 12 CSOs claimed to have been provided with sufficient information on the content of the draft policies. Enough time (15-20 days as stipulated by law) to comment was provided for 8% of CSOs.

Around 25% of CSOs interviewed stated to have had enough information about the content of a draft document. Instead, KCSF data from the monitoring of the implementation of the standards on public consultation processes, tell that consultation document has been timely published in 83% of cases. Whereas only 60% of them included all necessary parts as ascribed by the Regulation such as: a brief description of the contents of the document, a brief description of the problem which the policy treats, the purpose of the consultation process, and a list of main issues that are part of the document;

Eighty percent of organizations stated that local level of governance publishes draft policies and draft laws on time. Central level of governance has scored slightly lower with around 66% of organizations stating that draft policies and regulations are published on time. Assembly of Kosovo is evaluated to publish on time its draft policies and laws by only 40% of interviewed organizations.

KCSF monitoring results show that the Final Public Consultation Reports, are rarely published in time. These reports which are meant to be compiled and published by the end of each public consultation process, have been published in time in only 37% of monitored cases. Furthermore, the vast majority (90%) of published Final Consultation Reports missed one or more parts such as: a list of consulted stakeholders, methods of consultations used, number of contributions received, number of contributions that were accepted or refused, reasons for refusal of comments, and an overall assessment of the process.

About 13% of CSOs that participated in public consultations, reported that their comments were fully accepted, while 71% stated that their comments were partly taken into consideration. Civil society organizations whose comments were refused received written feedback only in 17% of cases. Even though that according to OPM/OGG by the end of 2018, 157 public officials were trained on the implementation of the regulation on public consultation, their capacities were evaluated as satisfactory only by 8% of organizations.

Legislation

The right to access public information is a guaranteed constitutional right according to Article 41. In 2019 got completed the amendment process and entered into force the Law on Access to Public Documents, started in 2017. The new law has further advanced forms and procedures to access public documents while requires from each institution to publish lists of documents in disposal. Each institution is required to update its archives and to proactively publish new documents. However, the current law does not require publishing of draft documents in procedure. Procedures and mechanisms for access to publish documents/information remain clear as well as monetary sanctions for civil servants and institutions breaching the legal requirements for access to publish information. An Administrative Instruction on the content of websites of public institutions, adopted in May 2015, obliges publication of the Annual Work Plans and draft normative acts for the purpose of public consultations. By the end of 2018 the Government launched the open data portal. Public officials have been assigned and trained, while the platform is considered a step forward to increase CSOs and general public access to official data. Public institutions should answer a request for access to public information/documents within 7 days. Denied requests should be accompanied by detailed reasoning. If the information/document required entails information that might endanger life or personal freedom, an answer has to be provided within 48 hours.

In cases when information/documents required have to be collected from more than one source, then the institution is allowed to have 15 extra days to provide an answer. When a public institution does not have the information but has the knowledge of the institution who has it, should inform the applicant within 5 days from the day of receiving a request. If neither has the information nor the knowledge of the institution in disposal of the document, the law provides 7 days to inform the issuer of the request. Grounds for refusing access to public documents are related to national security, private and personal information, commercial confidentiality etc. The Information and Privacy Agency has the executive power to issue fines in cases of breaching requirements set by the law. Monetary fines range from EUR 3,000 – 10,000 if a request has been denied in different grounds than those stipulated by the law. Public institutions that do not provide an answer at all may be subjected to fines ranging from EUR 1,000 – 3,000.

Practice

The online platform of public consultation launched in February 2017, enables participation of both CSOs and general public. Whereas government units can publish draft annual plans, strategic documents, public policies, laws and other secondary legislation. All of the above mentioned documents need to be consulted with CSOs and general public from the early stage of development. In addition, Kosovo Assembly has launched its Electronic Legislation Monitoring System that enables access and information over documents during each phase of the policy drafting process. The official gazette provides CSOs and the public with the opportunity to have free of charge access to adopted legislation. KCSF’s monitoring report of public consultation process shows a wide discrepancy between the publication of draft-proposals on the Online Platform and the Institutions’ respective official web-sites. Even though obligated to publish on their websites draft-proposals that are up for consultations, that has been the case in only 13% of monitored draft-proposals as opposed to the 97% rate at which they have been published on the Online Platform. Thirty-three of surveyed CSOs have asked for access to public information/documents during the last year. From the total, 12 organizations have received information/documents within the stipulated legal deadlines, whereas 16 of them received information behind the prescribed time-limit. Five CSOs have not received an answer over the request to gain access to public information/documents.

Requests for access to public information were utilized for purposes of this report. A comparison between the central and local level of government shows that in both levels public information is not provided within the legal limit. Two out of six public institutions in the central level provided information on time, meanwhile only the Office of Prime Minister provided the Decision that allows access to public information/documents. Only one third of the municipalities replied within the prescribed time limit, one of them provided the Decision that grants access to the public information. However, requests for access to public information coincided with the lockdown restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which might be the cause behind the slow replies.

According to the Government’s Annual Report civil society prevails with 46% of requests for access to public information made to the local level of governance. BIRN, GAP Institute and FOL Movement are three non-governmental organizations that have filed lawsuits for not being granted access to public information/documents. All of the three organizations have won their cases but the decisions have not yet been implemented.

Legislation

In 2019 no changes have been made to the legislation on participation of civil society in decision making and/or advisory bodies created by public institutions. The legislation at government level allows, but does not oblige the government to invite CSO representatives in these bodies. As an exception, sectorial consultative committees on municipal level should be established and comprised from citizens and civil society, but there are only few municipalities that have fulfilled this obligation. A number of independent or advisory bodies have specific rules of procedure which envisage participation of civil society representatives, including selection procedures. Besides these bodies, there are no other guidelines and standards selection mechanisms that would ensure appropriate participation of civil society.

Practice

Survey results show that vast majority of CSOs in Kosovo are not part of consultative bodies. In the central level of governance around 70% of respondents did not participate in a consultative body. While in the municipality level, around 20% of CSOs did participate. In central level of governance 9% of CSOs were selected through an open call, whereas 8% of CSOs were invited directly by public institutions to participate. In the municipality level 16% of CSOs have applied through an open call also same percentage applies to CSOs that have been invited to participate by a public institution. In the Assembly level 90% of CSOs were not part of advisory bodies. Those who participated reported to have applied through an open call (4%) whereas 19% have been invited directly to participate. CSOs have not reported to have faced difficulties in expressing their opinions or participating in policy making because of their participation in cross – sector bodies.

Legislation

Legal framework on public service provision is in the amending process. The concept document of the Law on family and social services has been approved on the first quarter of 2019. Its objectives include improving quality and increasing transparency of social services, also building a sustainable financing system. Moreover, this law through its specific provisions takes into account the specific nature of civil society sector, also recognizes social service provision in specific areas. In order to address peculiarities of service provision on areas of education and healthcare respective ministries have adopted their own sub legal acts. Legal requirements are equal for CSOs and other of legal entities, whereas there are no additional requirements for CSOs to engage in public service provision. The Regulation no.02/2015 on the criteria and procedures of financial support for subsidies and grants, lists areas within social services that an CSO can engage. Additionally, Ministries’ of Education Science and Technology Administrative Instruction lists types of services that can be provided within the field of education. None of them contain provisions that encourage introduction of new services or practices to deliver services. Aforementioned bylaws define the eligible criteria for social and education services provided by CSOs. To provide social services CSOs should obtain licenses based on defined standards. The licenses are a prerequisite to apply for providing respective services, and this applies to other service providers as well, except state service providers. Provision of education services is not subjected to licensing while an Evaluation Committee established by the Ministry, selects CSOs service providers. The same applies also to other service providers beside CSOs.

Practice

CSOs in Kosovo usually provide services in the area of social care, education, and health care. Survey data show that a small number of CSOs have applied to obtain contracts for public service provision. Only 3 out of 16 CSOs that have applied have been selected to provide public services. Data obtained by the Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare provide a slightly higher number of CSOs engaged in social service provision. According to this data in 2019, twenty-six CSOs have been provided contracts for service provision. CSOs providing social services are required to apply for licenses according to a set of standards determined by the Ministry of Work and Social Welfare.  The latter stated that in 2019 twelve CSOs obtained a license, whereas in total there are 44 organizations licensed to provide social services. Five of the organizations that stated to have applied for state contracts in the last year evaluated licensing procedures as complicated. CSOs inclusion in the entire cycle of developing services is still lagging behind as the number of CSOs being included is a handful.

Legislation

An ongoing problem is the lack of specific budget lines planned for funding service provision by CSOs. Only the Law of Social and Family Services and the Administrative Instruction on allocation of budgetary funds from the category of subsidies and transfers foresee budget allocation for service provision by CSOs and other service providers. Funding is provided only based on public calls for services that are not provided by state authorities, usually for a four to twelve month period.

 In 2009 caused by the lack of budgetary planning happened decentralization of services, shifting financing of social services from the central level to the municipalities. Neither this move proved successful in creating sustainability therefore drafting of the concept document of the law on local government finances foresees creation of a specific grant for social service providers. Its details remain to be defined as the drafting of the document proceeds.

Amendment of the Law on Public Procurement in 2015, has made it adept to characteristics of civil society sector. The new law has removed legal barriers for CSOs receiving public funding for service provision through public procurement. CSOs are recognized as economic operators while the requirement that a CSO should be registered into a commercial register is removed. However, any funding can be awarded only on annual basis, while longer term agreements are not supported.

Practice

In 2019, the budget allocation for contracting social services as well as trainings provided by CSOs is EUR 510,000.00. Five surveyed organizations stated to have been prohibited to apply for public service provision without specific explanations provided. Seventy percent of CSOs that have received funds from state contracts perceive that they are not sufficient to cover basic costs of a service. Especially funding for social services is not sufficient due to improper planning by public institutions. One CSO interviewed explains “the problem arises when the Ministry plans the budget for funding social services. The budget calculates the costs of delivering a service as a whole, and not per the number of people being served. As a result, the funding provided is not enough to cover the whole cycle of providing a service. That is why most shelters have to suspend their activities at the end of the year”. Out of 13 organizations that stated to have received state contracts, 7 of them claimed to have not received funds on time and to have had problems when delivering services. Three organizations have stated to have received funds on time, while three others have stated to have faced delays but losses have been covered by public institutions.

Legislation

The Law on Public Procurement, and the Law of Social and Family Services remain unclear, particularly regarding selection procedures of service providers. The administrative instruction adopted in 2015 lays out general criteria and procedures for grants to CSOs providing social services, same as the administrative instruction on the services for repatriated persons. The law on public procurement contains specific criteria to ensure open and transparent procedures in public procurement, while rules and procedures to select CSOs for service provision await to be defined through secondary legislation. Starting from 2016 the entire process of public procurement is carried through online platform for public procurement. It aims increasing transparency and competition, while general public has full access to tender documents. After the entry into force of the Regulation on public funds distribution, there is a growing trend of service providers being selected through it. Meanwhile, the Regulation covers public financing of projects and programs of CSOs but not services. Since funding of social and other services is addressed through grants and subsidies and subjected to broad criteria, thus it is difficult to assess whether the price is not the lead criteria for funding decisions.

The legal basis provides general provisions addressing the conflict of interest for social service provision by CSOs. For service provision in the field of education the legal framework does not require any prevention of conflict of interest. The sub legal acts on social service provision require open and transparent procedures, while this is not the case with service provision in the field of education. The law provides the right to appeal against competition results. Public Procurement Regulatory Commission and the Anti – Corruption Agency are the two mechanisms for detection and sanction of misconduct in the public procurement. 

Practice

In 2019, 26 CSOs have been contracted for social service provision. Most common areas of providing services entail: social services, vocational trainings, soft skills training and human rights promotion activities. Around 48% of CSOs surveyed think that allocation of state contracts is neither transparent nor fair. Interview with one organization that monitors public procurement monitoring in the local level of government has shown that in practice price is the lead criterion. The other criteria like number of beneficiaries, CSO’s and its staff certification are rarely taken into account. Regarding effectiveness of mechanisms in place the organization answered that “even though they have been notified about the breaches encountered in practice, we have received no information if the necessary measures have been initiated”. Three public officials from the Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare have received trainings on contracting social service providers.

Legislation

Except social services, other services do not have a specific legal basis for monitoring both spending and the quality of service provision. Service provision by CSOs is subjected to the general legal requirements on public spending. The secondary legislation adopted in 2015 includes some general provisions on monitoring of services funded by the Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare. Most of the monitoring is focused on spending verification and technical aspects of service provision, with little qualitative monitoring and assessment. There are no identified cases of regular evaluation of quality and effects/impact of services provided. In general, the system of accountability, monitoring and evaluation of services provided by CSOs lags behind. The Monitoring Committee is the body mandated to monitor grants and subventions to legal entities including CSOs. Monitoring can be conducted by central or local level institutions, depending where respective service is based. The Administrative Instruction on monitoring providers of social and family services defines competences of monitoring officers/committees, including a broad reference to qualitative monitoring of services. On the other hand, the administrative instruction on provision of educational services requires only submitting a narrative report at the end of the financing report.

Practice

Eighty – three percent of CSOs that have obtained state contracts claimed that monitoring of expenses and qualities of services that they have provided is regular and not excessive. When asked to compare monitoring of expenses and quality of public services provided by CSOs to other sector’s service providers, around 64% of respondents stated that state institutions applied the same criteria. Desk research has shown that none of the greatest providers of state’s contracts to CSOs has not published their monitoring and evaluation reports online. Yet, access to public information has revealed that there has been monitoring of social service providers while such reports remain to be shared with the public

LegislationPractice 0 – 20 Fully disabling environment 20 – 40 Disabling environment 40 – 60 Partially enabling environment60 – 80 Enabling environment 80 – 100 Fully enabling environment

During the couple of past years, the topic of civil society development has increasingly become part of the Kosovo Government’s effort to improve the legal framework also following the long term pressure through advocacy from the civil society side. The law of freedom of association in NGOs, the Regulation on public funding for NGOs, the Regulation on minimum standards for public consultation, the second consecutive Strategy on cooperation with CS have all marked a cornerstone of enabling environment for civil society development. Understandably, public institutions remain to create the necessary mechanism for proper implementation of these policies as well as increasing capacities of civil servants.

Whereas a lot more improvement remains to be done regarding the AML/CFT legal framework, which without any sectorial assessment or prior analysis considers the civil society sector as vulnerable of terrorism financing. The exercise of the freedom of expression remains within the international standards, yet civil society organizations should increase their efforts to further improve it as well as to notice and combat attempts that would shrink it.

Recommendation 1

The Department for NGOs should increase its capacities for proper implementation of its mandate, in particular, its staff should be trained on international principles of freedom of association and new provisions introduced by the recently adopted law on NGOs.

Recommendation 2

Ministry of Finance and Tax Administration of Kosovo should address the specificities of CSOs in the primary legislation as well as reporting forms, while also it should be harmonized with the NGO Law so to provide with specific benefits for CSOs. Capacities of civil servants for the implementation to effectively run the administrative procedures regarding tax exemption for CSOs should be increased, while businesses should be notified for such procedures.

Recommendation 3

Ministry of Finance and Tax Administration of Kosovo should address the specificities of CSOs in the primary legislation as well as reporting forms, while also it should be harmonized with the NGO Law so to provide with specific benefits for CSOs. Capacities of civil servants for the implementation to effectively run the administrative procedures regarding tax exemption for CSOs should be increased, while businesses should be notified for such procedures.

Recommendation 4

Ministry of Finance together with the other budgetary organizations both on the central and local level should work on increasing transparency of public funds distributed to NGOs, with a focus on monitoring and evaluation. The system of data maintenance in terms of beneficiaries and amounts distributed to NGOs should be improved also capacities of public officials to fully implement requirements derived from the Regulation on public funds should be increased further.

Recommendation 5

The Office for Good Governance in the Office of Prime Minister (OGG OPM) should start allocating the budget as promised altogether with increasing its human capacities for proper implementation of the Strategy for cooperation with civil society. Additionally, the evaluation methodology of the Strategy should be updated in accordance with civil society demands.

Recommendation 6

Central level institutions should ensure that public consultation processes are organized entirely in accordance to the standards specified by the Regulation on public consultation. Percentage of draft policies and laws also presence of the entire elements that comprise an effective public consultation should be increased. Besides online platform for public consultation other means of consultation should be utilized as to allow a wider access from CSOs and general public. Additionally, Ministry of Local Government Administration (MLGA) and municipalities should work on fully operationalizing implementation of minimum standards for public consultation in local level, while also undertaking a public information campaign promoting available opportunities for citizens and CSOs.

In Kosovo, the year 2018 was characterized by political instability. The Government headed by the Prime Minister Ramush Haradinaj lacked majority in the Parliament therefore a vast number of its meetings failed due to the lack of the quorum. As a result, during the period April – June, around 60 agenda items failed to be considered and got postponed to next Assembly meetings. The Government’s Agenda during the year was entirely focused on the dialogue with Serbia for the normalization of the relation, and the border demarcation with Montenegro; whereas areas directly related to the welfare of citizens like rule of law, economic development, fight against corruption and organized crime, received minimal consideration. In addition, the public discourse was dominated by the Kosovo’s President idea, Hashim Thaqi over border correction between Serbia and Kosovo; an idea which has sparked strong condemnation by the opposition political parties and the general public in Kosovo.

Kosovo’s GDP in 2018 was EUR 6.7 billion the second lowest amongst the Western Balkan countries after Montenegro. Whereas GDP per capita is EUR 3.64 (The World Bank, 2018), which makes Kosovo resident’s average income ten times lower than the European Union’s. The average monthly wage is €360, and growth is dependent on remittances from the diaspora, with around 80% of foreign direct investment coming from Kosovans overseas. Unemployment is around 30% and youth unemployment is over 50%. Kosovo has the lowest average age in Europe, but the economy generates only half the number of jobs annually needed for the young people entering the workforce. (MacDowall, 2020)

The Stabilization and Association Agreement between the Kosovo and European Union is in force since 2016, whereas the European Reform Agenda has been launched in November 2016. Yet, the Government was slow to implement activities that would accelerate the European Integration process. On the other hand, the ratification of border demarcation agreement with Montenegro sets a positive step for the visa liberalization process. In this regard, the European Commission confirmed that Kosovo has fulfilled all the criteria required for visa liberalization set by the European Council. Despite the fact that civil society found itself operating under unfavorable political circumstances that mostly impacted the advocacy process due to the Parliament’s lack of quorum, still a few positive developments were noted. The Financial Intelligence Unit upon the civil society’s long request started the sector risk assessment regarding terrorism financing. Also, for the first time the Government published its annual report on the public consultation process. Despite the drawbacks that the entire public consultation process entails again the report represents a positive step towards improving further the participatory policy making process.

Recent news