Antonella Valmorbida: Citizens’ participation at a local level as an instrument of change in Belarus

The coordinator of the Subgroup on Local Government and Public Administration Reform of the Civil Society Forum for the Eastern Partnership gives her evaluation of EU-Belarus interaction.

Belarus represents a challenge for Europe as a whole. It is so much a European country and yet so much a different game. The country is not a member of the Council of Europe and has never actually reached the doorsteps. It is the only European country fully engaged in the Customs Union with Russia.

Belarus is a partner of the Eastern Partnership, sui generis, considering that the only really proactive dimension is the Civil Society one, with the National Platform of the Civil Society Forum for Eastern Partnership. Most of the governmental and parliamentary dimensions are limited to second hand participation and ad hoc arrangements. Despite these difficult conditions, most in Europe agree that “something” should be done. On the other hand bilateral relationships with member states of the European Union to Belarus are often better – but shall we say inconsistent? – with those at the European level.

The European Union – in front of evident breaches of human rights, imprisonment of political opponents, death penalty, strong limitation to freedom of association – is struggling to find a policy: the principle of more-for-more, and in this case less-for-less; a visa ban for a number of officials; a complicated (not fully understood) “modernisation plan” for Belarus; and programmes to support civil society and other stakeholders. Not all of these attempts are successful but, at least, the process continues and the EU is not giving up. This is to be recognised and praised.

Citizen participation– a key to opening closed doors

For ALDA (The Association of Local Democracy Agencies), the European Association for Local Democracy, citizens’ participation in decision making at the local level is an action for change, towards development, democracy and better life for citizens. The same principle is valid for EU countries and for the Eastern Partnership, including Belarus. It implies existence, strength and capacity for both stakeholders of local governance (local authorities and local civil society) and an actual possibility to work together. This approach meets a number of difficulties in the EaP countries and specifically in Belarus. All the EaP countries are still enduring effects from the Soviet system, centralised bureaucracy and a passive citizenry. Legislation is weak – or non-existent and inconsistent - and do not leave autonomy and independence to the local authorities, which are often the extension of the powers of the state. Any possible European orientation would focus on the role of regions and the decentralisation of power (and request a minimum standard of consultation with citizens). This process is highly perceived as a breach in the monolithic and centralised way of power and, therefore, seen as potential threat.

Civil Society and local authorities working together

Among the more effective instruments in capacity building, policy making and awareness raising for civil society in the Eastern Partnership countries, we can refer to the work of the Civil Society Forum for Eastern Partnership. Its Subgroup on Local Government and Public Administration Reform has worked intensively in studying and identifying priorities in 2012 and produced a comparative approach to the citizens’ participation possibilities in the region. The primary references include: European Charter on Local Self Government; Additional protocol to the European Charter of Local Self Government on the right to participate in the affairs of local authority; the strategy for innovation and good governance at the local level; and the Code of Good Practices of Citizens participation. It studied in particular the access to public information, the direct democracy mechanisms and consultative democracy.

Regarding the necessary policies or initiatives to strengthen citizens’ participation at the local level, the following most relevant and general expectation have been expressed. 

1) The Adoption of a special law on citizens' participation in local self-governance; 2) the development of accurate regulations regarding local authorities and the citizens' functions and responsibilities in the process of citizens' participation; 3) stimulation and promotion of citizens' participation on various stages of local policy formation and implementation; 4) the introduction of modern structures and procedures of participation for passing the decisions to the local levels; 5) the promotion of partnership, active citizenship and joint planning campaigns; 6) a more active introduction of civic education programmes; 7) the increase of municipal servants’ qualification in the area of application of practices and forms of procedures on citizen participation; and 8) the allocation of necessary budgetary resources for the implementation of basic programmes of citizens' participation.

Using identified criteria, the analysis also proposed an index of an enabling environment for citizen participation. The aggregated scores by each component reflect the integral score of the citizen participation environment. Thus, the aggregated score for each EaP state is shown in the chart below (1 - the lowest score, 6 - the highest score). In this context, Belarus represents the most difficult enabling environment for citizen participation at the local level.

Based on the analysis, the level of citizen participation in local governance in the EaP countries is quite low. The reasons identified for this includes: the incompleteness of a legislative base; insufficient regulation of some practical mechanisms, forms and procedure for civil participation; a low level political culture of participation; shortage of political will and the lack of a clear vision of the importance of civil participation in decision making; a low level of social development; an insufficiently developed civil sector; a low level of civil activeness among the population; limitations in access to public information; a limited public awareness on the activities of local authorities; a low level of the population’s trust towards local authorities; weak cooperation and coordination between NGOs, local authorities and donor organisations; insufficient application of civil participation and the absence of practicing innovative forms and mechanisms of population inclusion; and a low level of decentralisation along with a weakly developed local self-governance.

For almost 10 years now, ALDA has been developing its activities in the Southern Caucasus and in Belarus. The first Local Democracy Agency started in Georgia (Kutaisi) in 2006 and the second one set in Armenia (Gyumri) in 2011. However, despite constant project activity on local governance, a local development agency (LDA) cannot yet be envisaged in Belarus. The process for similar action is now being addressed for Azerbaijan, with the support of a local consortium of NGOs. The development of these actions has been important but complex. A further positive trend is also presented by the project of the Local Democracy Agency in Ukraine, to be developed in Dnepropetrovsk, with the support of European partners. The concept which stays behind this local action is the possibility to implement concretely a local governance and multi-stakeholder initiative in a relevant area of the country, bringing a valuable message for the rest of the country.

The work of ALDA within the Eastern Partnership is particularly important and visible in Belarus with the support of local partners such as the Lev Sapieha Foundation (particularly focused on local government promotion in Belarus) and EuroBelarus. The approach of ALDA in Belarus is to focus on socially useful and oriented projects (with granting mechanisms), which allow for community development and citizen awareness. The approach to local authorities in this country needs the particular involvement of civil society groups, especially in remote areas far from the capital. ALDA works in the field with local programmes, which have a great potential of local ownership.

European support to local governance

As indicated, the support of the European Union for actions addressing local authorities or local communities, acting closely with civil society groups, could give a strong impetus to consolidate the awareness and capacities of local actors. It will address the methodologies of citizens’ participation without developing highly political sensitive topics but producing changes in daily lives. The non-state actor programmes of the European Union should go in this direction. It has been strongly advised to work not only with local authorities (notoriously weak and not independent from national institutions), but to focus on shared initiatives with civil society. Following a growing and promising trend in this direction in the field of development cooperation programme, the European Union could create a strong precedent in Belarus by working with this approach in a non-democratic context.

Lastly, it is also advisable – and rather sooner than later –  to be consistent regarding the political discourse coming from Brussels and a clear and fierce support for democratic forces and civil society organisations in Belarus. This includes the actual implementation phases in Minsk; as organisations are obliged to follow complicated and heavy rules and regulations (which can be just as complex from the EU side as they are in Belarus), often creating barriers for action and making it nearly impossible to deliver results.

The article was originally published at New Eastern Europe