Civil Society Collaboration (MD0071)

3. Strengthen the platforms and mechanisms of collaboration with civil society
Lead implementing
agency/actor State Chancellery
Commitment description
What is the public problem that the commitment will address? The decision-making mechanism raises concerns related to civic participation both at local and central level. The current mechanism for public consultations does not ensure an active participation of the citizens in the decision-making processes. Additionally, transparency in the decision making processes at the local level raises concerns too.
What is the commitment? The commitment refers to strengthening the collaboration platforms and mechanisms with civil society in order to ensure transparency in decision-making and improving the dialog with civil society.
How will the commitment contribute to solve the public problem? Commitment contains activities related to publication of the results of public consultation around normative acts, developing mechanisms for e-participation in decision-making and publication of administrative acts in the State Register of Local Documents for ensuring transparency at local level.
Why is this commitment relevant to OGP values? • Public participation;
• Access to information
Milestone Activity with a verifiable deliverable Responsible authority Deadline Progress indicators
Developing mechanisms for e-participation in decision-making processes State Chancellery, E-Governance Agency, Ministries, other central administrative authorities Quarter IV, 2019 Electronic participation tools developed.
Ensuring online publication of the results of public consultations Ministries, other central administrative authorities,
State Chancellery Annual Results of the public consultations published.
Monitoring the process of publishing of administrative documents by the local public administration authorities in the State Register of Local Documents State Chancellery Annual Number of published decisions on
http://actelocale.gov.md/

3. Strengthen collaboration with civil society

Language of the commitment as it appears in the action plan: Strengthen the platforms and mechanisms of collaboration with civil society [43]

Milestones

3.1 Developing mechanisms for e-participation in decision-making processes

3.2 Ensuring online publication of the results of public consultations

3.3 Monitoring the process of publishing of administrative documents by the local public administration authorities in the State Register of Local Documents

Start Date: 2019     

End Date: 2020

Context and Objectives

Moldova has made efforts to ensure that decision-making processes are participatory, though steps remain to strengthen collaboration with civil society. [44] Article 3 of the Law on the transparency of the decision-making process [45] requires all public authorities to organize public consultations with civil society and citizens. Nonetheless, the current action plan states that the decision-making mechanism does not secure the active participation of citizens in the process. [46] According to the law on the official webpages of the ministries, each ministry should have a section on their webpages where bills are published for public consultations. [47] In 2012, a central platform (particip.gov.md) for public consultations on bills was created. However, it is poorly promoted, and citizens are mostly unaware of the bills published on it or the timelines for consultations. [48]

This commitment aims to address these issues by strengthening collaboration platforms for civil society. Specifically, it proposes to develop mechanisms for e-participation in decision-making processes (3.1). Since a mechanism for e-participation already exists (particip.gov.md), further clarifications were needed. The former point of contact to OGP at the State Chancellery confirmed that this activity does not envisage the development of a new mechanism, but rather plans to modernize the particip.gov.md platform, a statement that was supported also by the E-Governance Agency. [49] Since the platform already exists and there is no additional information in the action plan on what the modernizations will include, it is difficult to assess its potential impact.

It is also unclear how the State Chancellery will ensure the online publication of public consultations results in all ministries (3.2). The rules of procedure of the government [50] obligate ministries to post on their websites the outcomes of consultations, the tables of divergences, and objections. [51] When civil society submit proposals, ministries must post online what was and was not accepted. The State Chancellery is then responsible for monitoring the process and ensuring that this rule is observed. [52] The way it will ensure it, however, is not yet clear.

Milestone 3.3 calls for monitoring the publishing of administrative documents by local public administration authorities in the state register of local documents. In October 2018, Law no.161 [53] entered into force, requiring local public administration authorities to publish administrative documents in the state register of local documents. [54] The State Chancellery monitors this process.

Interviewed civil society stakeholders welcomed the inclusion of this commitment in the action plan [55] since, in the past, the government often did not publish the outcomes of consultations. But civil society remains concerned about the quality of consultations and the representativeness of the civil society members who are consulted. [56] If implemented as written, this commitment could help ensure that more local public authorities publish all local documents in the registry. The commitment could also provide more information on which solutions/proposals were collected during consultations, which could in turn help civil society to check how inputs were included in the policy-making process. However, the proposed activities lack clear indicators on what steps will be taken to achieve these goals. The potential impact is therefore assessed as minor. While this commitment could strengthen existing practices foreseen by the law, it is unlikely to significantly change the status quo in terms of civil society collaboration.

Next steps

In the next action plan, the IRM recommends including commitments that aim to protect civic space in Moldova, considering persistent issues faced by civil society and journalists. For example, the government could consider collecting and publishing data on documented cases of harassment and interference against civil society and journalists and ensuring adequate legal protection and counsel for CSOs and journalists who report wrongdoings or corruption. The government and civil society could also consider carrying out capacity building for protecting civic space and freedom of expression, particularly for state authorities responsible for protecting these rights. 

Furthermore, the government needs to consider improving the representativeness of civil society during consultations, [57] broadening the circle of civil society representatives participating in consultations specific to each policy area. The government could also focus on ensuring follow-up communication to civil society on which proposals were taken further in the policy documents/bills, rather than providing binary (yes/no) replies on what was accepted and what was not. If the current commitment is carried forward, the government should ensure milestones clearly articulate which mechanisms of e-participation are to be improved.

[43] OGP, Moldova Action Plan 2018-2020, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/moldova-action-plan-2018-2020

[44] Council of Europe (2017), Handbook on transparency and citizen participation, https://rm.coe.int/handbook-moldova-ron/1680788ff5

[45] Republic of Moldova, Law no. 239 of 13.11.2008 on the Decision-Making Process, http://lex.justice.md/viewdoc.php?action=view&view=doc&id=336188&lang=1

[46] OGP, Moldova Action Plan, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/?s=Moldova+Action+PLan

[47] Government Decision no. 188 of 03.04.2012 on the official webpages of the public administration authorities, http://lex.justice.md/viewdoc.php?action=view&view=doc&id=342699&lang=1

[48] IRM, End-of-Term Report 2016-2018, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Moldova_End-of-Term_Report_2016-2018_EN.pdf

[49] Interview Natalia Bejenar, State Chancellery, former OGP Point of Contact, 2 April 2019; Interview Cornelia Amihalachioae, E-Governance Agency, 10 April 2019.

[50] Rules of Procedure of the Government, http://www.legis.md/cautare/getResults?doc_id=119333&lang=ru

[51] Interview Natalia Bejenar, State Chancellery, OGP Point of Contact, 2 April 2019.

[52] Ibid.

[53] Law no. 161 of 07.07.2016 on the amendment of some legislative documents, http://www.legis.md/cautare/getResults?doc_id=95791&lang=ro

[54] State Register of Local Documents, http://actelocale.gov.md/

[55] Interview Tatiana Sava, Researcher at Expert-Grup Independent Think Tank, 1 April 2019.

[56] Interview Tatiana Sava, Researcher at Expert-Grup Independent Think Tank, 1 April 2019; Interview Iana Spinei, Transparency International, 4 April 2019.

[57] Ibid.

3. Strengthen collaboration with civil society

Completion: Substantial

The State Chancellery commissioned a consultant to modernize the Republic of Moldova’s existing consultation platform particip.gov.md. [73] The State Chancellery shared the consultant’s technical concept with the IRM researcher but interviewed civil society stakeholders who use the platform to monitor the legislative process were not consulted during the process. [74] According to the point of contact to OGP, the concept was presented during a State Chancellery sitting in the second part of 2020. [75]

Public authorities are required by law to publish the results of public consultations on their websites. [76] The State Chancellery monitors this process and publishes its general conclusions in annual reports. The Chancellery published the report for 2019. [77] However, a 2019 study noted that authorities do not always publish the results of public consultations online, the methodology for consultations is not clear in the law, the norms concerning appeal procedures are not clear, and further modernization of particip.gov.md is needed. [78] In addition, according to an interviewed expert, public authorities often have a poor understanding of what “participatory” consultations mean in practice. [79]

The State Chancellery continued to monitor the publication of administrative documents by local public authorities in the State Register of Local Documents. According to the law [80] the territorial offices of the State Chancellery must verify the legality of the documents published in the Register. [81] An interviewed civil society expert noted that documents in the register are often uploaded but not made public. [82] The Chancellery explained that this is either due to human error or technical issues, for which the territorial offices notify public authorities and request changes to the setting. [83] In documents which fall under the personal data law, [84] personal data are redacted but still published. In 2019, local public authorities published 61,391 decisions and 151,965 orders, of which 973 decisions and 1,075 orders were repealed, annulled, or suspended. [85] In 2020 they published 211,671 administrative documents, of which 2796 were repealed, annulled, or suspended [86].