An analysis of the implementation of the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (Country-Based Support Schemes) in Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Since its introduction in January 2007, and de facto implementation from the second half of 2008, the reformed European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) has opened up the possibility of more flexible funding reaching civil society organisations and individuals.
Greater attention is now devoted to the need for confidentiality concerning activities undertaken under authoritarian rule, and the option of re-granting to local non-governmental organisations (NGOs) has begun to be taken up in response to calls for proposals in 2009- 2010. As this study sets out, more consultation with other donors, and with EU (European Union) and third-country NGOs, could close the remaining gaps between the promise and reality of the new financial arrangements.
However, the EIDHR remains a standard instrument implemented via a technical approach rather than a political tool with the potential to support or promote democracy in countries ripe for change. Democracy support remains overshadowed by human and social rights issues within EIDHR programming and implementation. Moreover, the new EIDHR Strategy Paper 2011-2013 offers little prospect of significant changes that would raise the priority of democracy support closer to the level of priority given to human rights support.
The 2007 reform of the EIDHR (and Financial Regulation and Implementing Rules) brought about new implementation possibilities and flexibility, but full use is not being made of the changes - due both to lack of practical experience on the side of the EC Delegations in third countries and the European Commission, and also lack of knowledge of the possibilities from the side of civil society.
In countries where the EU seemingly faces no problems at the political level and the country leadership rhetorically adheres to commonly shared goals (democracy, market economy, etc.), there is generally less commitment to tackle sensitive issues related to the state of democracy. At the same time, a large proportion of funding is dedicated to specific human rights areas which can in some cases have a positive impact on the governance structures of a given country (such as in the case of assistance to victims of torture and police abuse).
The EIDHR should have a stronger focus on political pluralism (as, in fact, stipulated in the Strategy Paper 2011-2013), creating alternatives for political dialogue and for projects targeting political parties, including capacity building of political parties in selected third countries. The argument that in some countries (especially those under authoritarian rule) there is no need for support of particular political actors - since they are already receiving a lot of funding and training - is in some instances a valid one, but the EIDHR should work primarily through civil society actors that can offer innovative ways of enlarging the political space.
Civil society organisations consider applications for funding under the EIDHR CBSS (Country-Based Support Schemes) to be difficult and time-consuming. Given the lack of spare administrative capacity of most NGOs, the completion of an application usually necessitates a curtailing of regular activities.
In addition, bureaucratic hurdles face less developed NGOs, and only the more established ones are considered to stand a chance of securing the funding; the EIDHR is considered “second-level” funding. One of the instrument’s major advantages, namely the possibility to fund non-registered NGOs, is not being deployed by the Delegations of the European Union in third countries (this was the case in all four countries analysed for this study) because the Delegations lack the knowledge required to implement it. Likewise, working with funding in cash is considered almost impossible; in sensitive environments, cash contributions have to be channelled through EU-based NGOs or through EU member-states.
The study will be presented by Věra Řiháčková, Senior Research Fellow of EUROPEUM Institute for European Policy, Czech Republic on Tuesday, 1 June 2010 at Residence Palace, Brussels from 12.30-14.00.
For more information about this event, contact Eva Rybková at eva.rybkova [at] pasos.org or +420 731 801 003.