Interview: Authorities demonstrate corporate interest by obstructing funding of civil society organizations

{Info-Prim Neo interview with Sergiu Ostaf, head of the Human Rights Resource Center} [ - Ever since their emergence, civil society organizations (CSOs) have been accused of representing the interests of foreign forces. Such allegations are most often heard during election campaigns, when CSOs are increasingly active and monitor electoral competitors. Civil society have constantly denied these accusations, but chargers have a great pretext to back their claims: Moldovan CSOs almost fully rely on foreign financing. Can you explain it? Which are the advantages and disadvantages of such a situation?] - Moldovan CSOs have continuously pleaded for better conditions for functioning and development (this request is according to the EU-Moldova plan of actions, to European practices, etc.) and namely: 1) ensuring the functionality of the current fiscal mechanism of drawing income from juridical and natural persons’ donations (currently its application is difficult); 2) introducing the mechanism of redirecting a part of paid taxes to public organizations (such a system exists in all European countries, but not yet in Moldova); 3) encouraging the procurement of CSOs services by state and public institutions (again, a norm in Europe, but not in Moldova). These are stipulated by the Strategy of strengthening civil society for 2009-2012, but the relevant amendments of national legislation are not applied. This shows the Governments’ lack of interest since 2008 to diversify funding sources for CSOs. Thus, the only money CSOs get come from rare donations within Moldova and considerable support from foreign donors. Therefore, if these accusations come from decision makers and politicians, then this is nothing but an excuse for their failure to create better conditions for CSOs’ functioning. It is them who are the most responsible for CSOs’ overdependence on foreign grants. Moreover, civil society gets only 3-5% of the total foreign funding Moldova receives, with the rest 95% going to public authorities. So, the accusations about the CSOs' use of foreign funds are groundless, especially considering that CSOs manage their money transparently. [ - In business, but in daily life as well, there is a practice of placing eggs in several baskets, as a backup to avoid risks. How many “baskets” could the Moldovan CSOs use for financing and which are they, to rebuff the accusations we spoke of and other dangers?] - Diversifying CSOs’ funding sources is a major issue that also concerns their reputation and trustworthiness. A respectable organization won’t admit having more than 50% of funds coming from the same source, except for some concrete periods. A good principle is that a donor cannot provide more than 30% of CSO’s total budget. Income from performed services, internal fundraising efforts and public tender contests should account for 20-30% of CSOs’ budget in the near future. [ - Why were such practices impossible in Moldova until now? Can we compare the situation with that of the press, which was maintained at subsistence level so that Governments could manipulate it?] - Unfortunately, politicians and parties, decision makers (public authorities), with few exceptions, demonstrate a corporate interest by not permitting the development and expanding of civil society. They want to keep control over behavior patterns, practiced values, to promote their political or economic interests. CSOs are seen as rivals because they promote civic values and models, institutions for ensuring accountability and transparence of public interest issues. [ - What is the politicians’ attitude towards CSOs and its financing, depending on their position: government or opposition?] - The political class is heavily influenced by economic groups. The parties’ funding is a very controversial issue, as a narrow circle of influential people fund all Moldovan parties. Less than 20% of society trusts the political class (according to recent data from the Public Policies Institute). There are institutions people trust even less, but CSOs enjoy the trust of 30% of citizens. We must use these data and analyze the legitimacy of public actors. Moreover, politicians benefit of free media exposure in electoral campaigns through hidden publicity. And that’s still not all. Beginning in 2011, political parties will be financed by state in conditions of minimum transparency regarding received and spent money. [ - There have been initiatives about legislative proposals that would regulate CSOs financing, including from internal sources. When will they be ready and implemented? Considering the actual political situation, do you think there is enough political will to solve CSOs financing problems?] - CSOs have developed and proposed (since 2008) a set of projects of amendments, which I have mentioned in my answer to the first question, but they are not examined by the decision makers. [Valeriu Vasilica, Info-Prim Neo]