[ - A lot of NGOs close to the power appeared after 2005, including 2008. Can we accuse them of collaborationism?] - It depends on how you understand the phrase ‘close to the power”. If we speak about the NGOs that were registered at the start of the Year of Youth (2008) and implement projects at the Communist Party’s order, I think this is opportunism in most of the cases. I appreciate the NGOs that showed civic spirit and fulfilled their duties in the conditions of the past years, without personal interests. They worked for their own benefit providing social services or made effort to promote legislative initiatives and improve the laws that reached the Parliament. At the ceremony for awarding the best ten journalists of the year, your colleagues said that I often appeared in the news programs alongside Marian Lupu. Yet, I also tried to establish sustainable cooperation with Dorin Chirtoaca for example. As a member of NGO I did my job: I promoted a strategy for developing the civil society at central and local public administration level and helped the NGOs strengthen their nuclei by areas of activity. The fact that certain NGOs appeared in the news programs only in activities carried out in cooperation with the Parliament means two things: the Head of Parliament, and I cannot say other names of Communists, plus some of the Opposition MPs understood that the NGOs have the capacity to contribute to the creation of a concrete, efficient and applicable legal framework, and when the NGOs work with the Opposition, the mass media reports on the given subjects less. The politicization of social subjects is put to ridicule if we want to make advocacy in the Parliament. We are forced to do it only with the parliamentary groups. It would be normal to go first of all to the parliamentary commissions. The given NGOs promoted draft laws on public meetings and voluntariate, the strategy for developing the civil society and other documents. The Communists have been in power for eight years. We cannot wait for eight years for better times to come and then start work. What shall we do meanwhile – criticize and attack those that try to work? [ - You mentioned the law on public assemblies. Is it a success?] - Indisputable, every citizen must have the right to opinion. It is serious when the people are forced to think according to patterns. Sometimes I have the impression that if the police had not tried to stop the protests, there would have been fewer protesters. If the man with the pig and the donkey had been allowed to walk through the city with his animals {(Businessman Anatol Matasaru achieved international fame after dressing a donkey in police clothes and a pig in a jacket with the inscription ‘porcuror’ (a pun deprecative of prosecutor) on December 18. The police hindered him from reaching downtown Chisinau where he intended to stage a manifestation to protest against police abuses. Later a Chisinau court fined him 200 lei – e.n. )}, there would have been less fuss and the human rights NGOs would not have taken to the street on December 25. As regards the negative aspects of the legislation, the laws in this country are so good that their only drawback is the fact that they are not observed, first of all by the authorities. [ - Where is the relation between NGOs and the authorities still tense?] - The communication with the Ministry of Education and Youth was and remains difficult. The minister, who does not have the necessary competence and diplomacy, had the impertinence to fully ignore the NGOs that devised and discussed publicly with 11 social groups the draft law on voluntariate. In 2006, the Coalition for the Promotion of the Volunteering Law presented the draft law at the Forum of the Youth. In 2008, the Ministry of Education and Youth intended to include again the document in the agenda of the Forum of Youth. The Ministry supports mainly populist actions. During two years, there should have been adopted a law on voluntariate so that the relevant organizations could work out the strategy for implementing it. I underline that this is an absolutely inoffensive law that does not affect the economic interests and it would have been great if it had been adopted in the Year of Youth. [ - What actions from the plan for the Year of Youth have been implemented by the NGOs?] - The youth organizations founded before 2008 did their work not looking at the authorities’ decrees. It does not seem normal to me that we should formulate our strategies on the basis of the presidential decrees. The President’s decrees must make the ministries more responsible, but it does not happen so. If 2010 is declared the Year of Responsibility towards Nature, it is rather improbable that I would found an environment protection NGO as there would be other persons ready to do it. [ - The Forum of NGOs of Moldova was resurrected in 2008, after a five-year pause. Why now?] - This is a form of evolution of the civil society. Five years were needed for the NGOs to focus on areas – the National Youth Council, the Network of Social NGOs, the Anticorruption Alliance, etc. We became more mature and created the Consortium for the Development of the Civil Society. We organized the fifth edition of the NGO Forum. At this stage, the NGOs understand that the sector needs a functional and friendlier legal environment for the NGOs, clear advantages of public utility, contracting of social services by the state. [ - What measures the NGOs consider should be taken in 2009 to promote democracy, the state of law and the human rights?] - If a nongovernmental organization fulfills its declared mission, is transparent and recognized for the positive changes it produced in its area, the given organization undoubtedly promotes democracy. I have a special respect for the human rights NGOs that react positively to any openness of the Parliament, the Government and the City Hall. The reactions of the NGOs vary from the use of the Parliament’s openness offered to the civil society through its cooperation strategy and to going caroling: the fir tree, the pig and the donkey.