Civil Society Review 2006. Poll by Info-Prim Neo

[The civil society and the state should have common interests] The head of the Parliamentary faction of the communists, Eugenia Ostapciuc told Info-Prim Neo that the decision on the cooperation of the civil society with the Parliament has been implemented in 2006. She mentioned that the representatives of the civil society cooperated with the MPs in the process of passing or amending several laws. “We believe that the representatives of the civil society should be pleased”, she said. Also, Ostapciuc mentioned about the fact that the representatives of the civil society should have the same interests as the state. When they participate in debates and make proposals, their opinions must not be politicised or populist. Only this way can we accept the proposals, the communist MP added. [Positive but very slow trends] According to Oleg Serebrian, the leader of the Social Liberal Party, the development trend of the civil society was positive but slow in 2006. Regretfully, this fact is due to the financial problems the civil society encounters because it is partially dependent of the foreign financings. No law provides for the financial support of the civil society. “We are the only member of the Council of Europe where this field works under such rough conditions. However, there are positive signs in what concerns the way the civil society develops in rural regions”, Serebrian said. [Miming the process of “consulting the civil society”] Eduard Musuc, the leader of the Social Democrat Party considers that certain progress can be mentioned in 2006 referring to civil society. In this respect he mentioned about the elections from Gagauzia when some NGO did a pretty good job in monitoring the elections compared with the Parliamentary elections of 2005. “The protest of several NGOs regarding the miming of the process of “consulting the civil society” in the Parliament is symptomatic”. Musuc hopes that in 2007 the field will be more independent to the benefit of Moldova. [The government monopolised the leadership of some NGOs] Ion Mereuta, the leader of the Humanist Party of Moldova considers very important that the civil society is not led by the government. It is regretful that the government monopolised the leadership of some NGOs and promoted a strategy based on interests. The civil society must work on its own and involve in promoting public polices, and the specialised NGOs –in collaborating with the ministries and promoting the interests of the social groups they represent. They should become the “watchdogs of the society”, Mereuta said. He also mentioned about the fact that the most of the NGOs are concerned only about obtaining projects and financing. According to the leader of the HPM, some projects disadvantage our religious, human and national values – aspects of the programs “life skills”, “libertinage”, “untraditional families” etc. [PCRM is selectively collaborating with the NGOs] The leader of the National Liberal Party Vitalia Pavlicenco states that when the Parliament passed the law on the collaboration with the civil society she hoped that this cooperation will not be selective and one-sided. Bearing in mind the exit-poll conducted by IPP in the parliamentary elections of 2005, the idea of impartiality in the civil society was compromised. “There are many NGOs, but few of them are well-known and active. The fact that they depend on foreign grants, which they can administrate only if the state is involved, makes them obedient. The attempts of some NGOs to be more active was criticised and attracted the communists’ accusations, which are meant to discourage the combative spirit. The communist faction is selectively collaborating with the NGOs, is not engaging the opposition in this collaboration, and thinks only how to use the civil society for improving their image, Pavlicenco believes. However there are NGOs with dignity, such as Transparency International-Moldova, the Public Organisation “Jurists for Human Rights”, Promo Lex, ADEPT, IDIS “Viitorul”, which are not afraid to say what they truly believe. [The smart part of the civil society turned into closed type JSC] Valentin Krylov, executive secretary of the Socialists’ Party of Moldova “Patria-Rodina” feels like the most prepared and smart part of the civil society has long ago created a closed type JSC that collaborates with the incumbent government, not to the benefit of the civil society but to the benefit of government and West. The other part of the civil society usually does not have the necessary resources for a productive activity. The Moldovan civil society does not carry out activities according to their direct destination. They only mime some actions and promote the policy of the West on the territory of Moldova. [Civil society is the mirror of the entire society] The political analyst Igor Botan, director of Adept, says that the civil society is a true representation of the entire society. Referring to the organisations related to the media field, the analyst says that their solidarity, the coordination of efforts in presenting competent estimations made on their own, must be the proof that this is the voice of the civil society. The situation is due to the fact the grievances of the others, which are welcome, are doubted in a way in light of the achievements, professionalism etc. The same mechanism should be used for the rest of the fields of public interest. According to Botan, this model was tested in 2005, and during the elections in Gagauzia, where the organisations specialised in the electoral field have cooperated quite competently and efficiently. Among the other fields where this model is used are the social, ecological, and the field of public administration etc. It is not accidental that these fields and the best organisations were mentioned in the speech of the speaker of the Parliament at the annual meeting of the leadership of the Parliament with the NGOs, the analyst Igor Botan told Info-Prim Neo.