Council for a Community of Democracies

REGIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE COMMUNITY OF DEMOCRACIES
Bucharest, Romania, 14-15 November 2003

Reported by: Dick Rowson, Council for a Community of Democracies

Theme: “Partnerships between Governments, Civil Society and International Organizations for Strengthening Democracy”

Attendees: 130 participants

35 government delegates from 19 countries (missing were: Macedonia, Armenia, Lithuania, Estonia and Belarus) in the region (plus Italy)
10 delegates from 8 CD Convening Group countries attended (Mexico, Chile, Korea, Mali, Poland, South Africa, India, United States)
9 delegates from 6 international organizations (UNDP, Council of Europe, European Commission, OSCE, European Parliament and Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe.
76 NGO representatives from 26 countries (including 3 outside the region, namely: the Transnational Radical Party from Italy, UN Habitat from Kenya and CCD and NED from the United States). Freedom House and OSI European representatives attended.

Venue: Conference was held in two adjacent hotels, the Crowne Plaza for the government meetings and the Best Western Parc Hotel for the NGO Forum. Opening, mid-way and closing receptions and a sit-down luncheon were held for all participants providing four social occasions for government/NGO intermingling (a fifth occasion was provided by the joint “partnership” panel at the end of the conference, which I chaired). Both plenaries were held in the Parc Hotel.

Outline of Program and Results:

OPENING PLENARY (all attending), Friday, 9 – 10 a.m.: Mircea Geoana, Romania’s Foreign Minister, related this conference to the call for such a meeting in the Seoul Plan of Action and to the contribution this conference was expected to make to the agenda of Santiago, 2005, biennial CD Conference. Albert van Klaveren, Chile’s Ambassador to the European Community (replaced Portales of Chile’s Foreign Ministry), reinforced Geoana’s remarks by referring to the desire of the CD Convening Group to incorporate proposals from this conference and other gatherings precedent to the 2005 CD biennial, into plans for Santiago. Nicole Bibbins, Special Advisor to Paula Dobriansky, conveyed “a message of support for the regional conference and NGO Forum from the Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs.” Similar statements of support were delivered by Soknan Han Jung, UN Resident Coordinator in Romania, Raymond Shonholtz, President, Partners for Democratic Change – USA and Ana Vasilache, Executive Director of the NGO Forum and the Partners for Local Development Foundation. Victoria Popescu, Secretary General of the Regional Conference and Director, UN and Global Affairs Division, Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, chaired this session.

Following the plenary, the conference broke into two sections:

One - The “CD REGIONAL CONFERENCE” (government officials), all day Friday:

Panel I: Monitoring Public Institutions, Friday morning

I attended this panel, since it offered an opportunity to observe the “government” discussions; I sacrificed participation in the first part of the NGO Forum.

The panel was moderated by Adrian Severin, member of the Romanian Parliament and included: Mihai Turterean, Director in the Romanian Ministry of Public Administration & Interior; Prof. Antoni Kaminski, University of Warsaw; and Gianfranco Dell’alba, Member of the European Parliament.
• Following a visual presentation of the intricate, internal monitoring system of Romania’s government bureaucracy, the discussion focused on the more important need for “transparency and accountability” of public institutions. The delegates agreed that this depended on partnerships with NGOs and the media and was an essential part of the general exercise of strengthening democracy. Prof. Kaminski presented a cogent analysis of the “rule of law” in Poland and of the partnership between government and civil society in his country. Dell’alba spoke of the salutary role, which membership in an external body (in this case, the European Parliament of the European Union) plays in helping ensure transparency and accountability of member-nations’ public institutions through cross-national pressures exerted by this popularly elected, international body. The Russian delegate, in a thinly veiled defense of current trends in Russia, spoke against “a universal model of democracy” (further on this point, next).

Panel II: Developing Mechanisms of regional cooperation to promote and consolidate democratic principles, values and institutions in Central and Eastern Europe, Friday afternoon

As I did not attend this panel session, the following summary is based on the rapporteur’s report and a draft of the Chairman’s Statement.

This panel was moderated by Marcia V.J. Kran, Chief Technical Advisor of UNDP’s Regional Programme on Democratic Governance and included: John Riddle, Deputy Special Coordinator of the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe; Johannes de Jonge, Director for External Relations, Council of Europe; Giuseppe Calvetta, Director, Division for Human Rights, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Italy, EU Presidency
Two general points were made: (1) “Sharing best practices and experiences across borders could bring value added to the consolidation of democratic governance in the region;” (2) There is a strong “interconnection between respect for human rights and rule of law, on the one hand, and stability and economic development” using the “assistance of international organizations,” on the other. Note: A sixty-eight page summary of “best practices” drawn from experiences submitted by attending NGOs and a “concept paper” offering guidelines on “Education for Democracy”,” Regional Mechanisms for Cooperation” and “Good Governance and Corruption” was distributed at the conference and is available for review.
“Large support was expressed for enhancing the Community of Democracies process in promoting a culture of democracy…as well as establishing a ‘democracy caucus’ within the United Nations.”
The Russian delegation view voiced in the Panel I session that “no universal model of democracy” exists, “but rather several democratic systems,” was challenged by other delegates who stressed the need “to pursue the general principles and values of a democratic society,” whatever the system. It was clear from the discussion that the delegates maintained that absence of “a model” must not be used as an excuse for abandoning democratic values.

CD Regional NGO Forum, all day Friday

An initial morning session was devoted to forming working round tables followed by discussions by each of “best practices” regarding “promoting good governance and fighting corruption” and “promoting democracy education” with reports by each to the re-assembled group.
In the afternoon, the same round tables examined the problem of how to achieve maximum impact of these NGO activities on government.
There was to be a “presentation of the organization process for transmitting recommendations to the NGO Forum, Chile 2005,” but time ran out.
The NGO Forum, at its final meeting, Friday afternoon, decided to seek a place on the final plenary (Panel III) at which the Forum would demonstrate how NGOs have developed the requisite professional skills, which enable them to work as equal partners with governments and international organizations – replacing presentation a summary report of their deliberations at the concluding session. Permission to do this was granted by Ms. Popescu, S/G of the Conference (see “Panel III”, below, for a summary of that presentation) and an NGO Forum representative was added to Panel III on “partnerships”. A full report of the NGO Forum discussions is being prepared by Ana Vasilache, director, and will be attached to the Chairman’s Statement (this will be circulated, on receipt).
What did appear in the Chairman’s Statement presented at the Concluding Session (in addition to a summary of the NGO Forum’s presentation on the “NGO capacity for partnership”), is the following:
1. “In conjunction with the Regional Conference of the Community of Democracies, an NGO Forum was held with the same general topic” (as on the “government” side). It was attended by NGOs from 21 Central and East European countries (including Partners for Democratic Change, Freedom House and OSI’s Local Government Initiative), the U.S. (CCD and NED), Western Europe (Transnational Radical Party) and, international organizations (UN Habitat – Kenya, UNDP and the World Bank).
2. The NGO Forum concluded that “promoting good governance and fighting corruption” and “democracy education” is achievable only in a “partnership of governments, nongovernmental organizations and international organizations.”
3. “Recommendations were formulated on the means to increase the impact of their activities in these two fields and on building effective partnerships with governments and international organizations.”

As a participant in one of Forum’s round tables, I discovered that the 100 copies of the “Global Strategic Plan for Democracy Education” developed by a meeting of participants in the Non-Governmental Forum in Seoul, meeting in Pocantico, NY, with representatives from key U.S. government agencies and international organizations and intended for distribution to Forum delegates, had mistakenly been distributed to the government delegates. As there was a clear demand for this Plan at the Forum, arrangements have been made to add it to the CD Regional Conference NGO Forum’s website, www.bucharest-cd-ngoforum.ro. Its availability will be noted in the final draft of the Chairman’s Statement and in the attached NGO Forum summary by Ana Vasilache.

Panel III, Promoting Partnerships between governments, civil society and international organizations (Joint, plenary session), Saturday morning

This panel was moderated by Richard C. Rowson, President and CEO of the Council for a Community of Democracies and included: Boyan Belev, Acting Head of Directorate of UN and Security Council, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria; Steven Wagenseil, First Deputy Director, Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, OSCE; Cristina Guseth, Director, Freedom House, Romania; and Nune Yeghiazaryan, Co-Founder of the Social & Economic Analysis Centre of Armenia and Simona Botea-Lupu, Team Leader – Social Sector & Civil Society, European Commission Delegation, Romania.
The inclusion of the NGO Forum’s presentation of “NGO capacity for partnership” on this panel, worked out well. It set the stage by arguing that the “mandated tasks” of government “must be enhanced through partnership and engagement with civil society” -- from “commenting on (government) plans” to “assisting with implementation of designated programs.” For example, regarding countries in the process of democratic transition where “democracy works best when boosted from the bottom upwards,” Ms. Yeghiazaryan pointed out that civil society organizations offer three kinds of assistance to governments: (1) “significant knowledge, skills and know-how;” (2) advice offered from “a depth of knowledge of laws and services of government;” (3) “NGOs can raise public awareness” and help make government “accessible to the general public.”
OSCE’s Steve Wagenseil, put this statement into the context of his international organization’s “broker” role in bringing NGOs and national governments together, and OSCE’s role in helping NGOs “shield” the political opposition by “voicing” their legitimate demands.
Cristina Guseth spoke of Freedom House’s role in training Romanian government managers and strengthening their partnerships with civil society, using U.S. State Department grants; she described how this led to a cooperative effort with NGOs in Slovakia, resulting in the passage of Romanian “freedom of information” legislation.
Boyan Belev described the broad base of “civil society” as it operates in Bulgaria, i.e., encompassing in addition to NGOs, business, the media, foundations, and quasi-governmental groups;
The European Commission’s representative, Simona Botea Lupu, described how the Commission is helping ease the “certification” process for NGOs seeking to interact with the European Union.
There were some interesting ideas raised during the “Q&A” period: (1) the Slovak NGO representative raised the “funding” issue and said Slovakia has joined with three other countries and has established a “common fund”, which has raised 5 million Kroner for NGOs; (2) A Korean NGO representative described how use of the website and internet to exchange “best practices” with other countries’ NGOs, has become the key to their operations; (3) A Ukrainian NGO delegate described formation in his country of a “consultative council” composed of representatives from the Foreign Ministry, the media and his NGO, established to promote public understanding of foreign policy issues; (4) Matteo Mecacci, representing the Transnational Radical Party praised efforts by a UN Democracy Group made up of NGOs, which advocated formation of a UN Democracy Caucus and pressured CD’s Convening Group to convene its Foreign Ministers at the current UN General Assembly to declare support for such a caucus, as a prime example of “partnership” between NGOs, governments and international organizations; (5) and the Director-General of the Council of Europe spoke of the Council’s use of “quads”, four-way partnerships among local, regional, national and governmental’ leaders in the fight against torture, in creating confidence-building measures and supporting human rights.
Note: A fuller report on this session will be included in Ana Vasilache’s overall report (referred to earlier) on the NGO Forum and attached to the “Chairman’s Statement.”

Comments and recommendations

Appropriate to UNDP’s role as a major funder of this conference, was a large eight-foot high “UNDP Conference”, stand-alone poster-column standing outside the NGO Forum conference center; however, nothing on it reminded NGO delegates that this was also a “Community of Democracies Regional NGO Forum.” It was also interesting to note that behind the opening session panel there were two flags: that of Romania and the United Nations flag. In this case, the title and theme of the conference was projected in large lettering, on a screen behind the panel.
Following Panel III on “partnership”, a very telling suggestion was put to me by Dr. Urban Rusnak, Deputy Director of the Slovak Department of Analyses and Policy Planning, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Vilma Anyzova, Director of the Ceske Centrum (Czech Center). They argued vigorously for a totally integrated meeting, not two separate conferences, as was the case here, and at other CD conferences they had attended. While they agreed that the conference’s principal call for “partnership” took on substance in both the government and NGO sides, a true “engagement” on the issues and a challenging debate on the merits among NGO, government and international organizations, did not occur. The joint session at the end was too late and did not allow for that kind of debate. Rusnak and Anyzova saw the “heavy hand of the traditional conference-style” as precluding such an exchange.
Added to this viewpoint, which I believe was shared by others (especially the media representatives with whose “coordinator” I exchanged views throughout the meeting), was an interesting suggestion made by the very able Armenian NGO delegate, Nune Yeghiazaryan who presented the NGO Forum’s case for a stronger and more comprehensive NGO role in the “partnership” proposed at this conference. Why, she asked, should not the “government officials” side at the meeting be invited to define how they view collaboration with NGOs? That could make it easier, she argued, for the two parties (including I.O.s) to come together on a basis agreed to by all. Then, working within that framework, it would be possible, to discuss as true partners, at an “integrated” conference, issues such as corruption, democracy education and good governance. I find this approach an intriguing one, which combined with the Slovak Government/Czech NGO suggestion (above) we should discuss at our next meeting (December 2nd) of the expanded U.S. Coordinating Committee, as it relates to our planning for Santiago 2005.
I intend to follow up with Ambassdor Amadou N’DiayeMali’s Director of Political Affairs, a government delegate at the Bucharest Conference, whom I met, and raise the issue of the CD biennial meeting scheduled for Africa in 2007, and the prospect of joining with South Africa in undertaking the hosting task. I was told the South African government representative was present, but I did not see or meet him.

I conclude with an interesting encounter over breakfast with Johannes de Jonge, the Director-General for External Affairs of the Council of Europe. He was intrigued when I mentioned that I had attended the inaugural meeting of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg in 1949 as an accredited press representative (as Editor-in-Chief of the “Columbia Journal of International Affairs”, a position I held as a graduate student). I mentioned that I had written, at the time, an article about that historic meeting, which was published in the “Winter 1950” issue of the “Columbia Journal.” He asked that I send him a copy, which, subsequently I did on my return to Washington. He happened to be speaking at the government session later that day, and took the occasion to announce to all present that he had just encountered the only person whom he had ever met who attended that meeting in Strasbourg. I await his critique of that long-ago article, which concludes with a statement that appears to have stood the test of time:

“It is in ‘style’ today to base all progress toward European union on the communist threat, but Europeans want something more than mere opposition to an external threat. The machinery of the Council of Europe provides a means of voicing this desire for a better Europe than is offered by purely national divisions.”

29 November 2003