monitoring the implementation of a handbook

MONITORINGthe implementation ofMINORITY RIGHTSon the local level

Stefan DehnertHarald Schenker

A HANDBOOK

Monitoring the Implementation of Minority Rights on the Local Level A HANDBOOK

PublisherFriedrich Ebert Stiftung, Skopje, Bulevar Sveti Kliment Ohridski 21http://www.fes.org.mk

EditorsDEHNERT Stefan; SCHENKER HaraldMonitoring the Implementation of Minority Rights on the Local Level - A Handbook

Cover design and pre-pressPROMO DSGN, Skopje

Copies 300

Copyright by Friedrich Ebert Stiftung

Monitoring the Implementation of Minority Rights on the Local Level - AHandbook / editors Stefan Dehnert/Harald Schenker : Skopje : Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 2007.

CIP - Каталогизација во публикацијаНационална и универзитетска библиотека “Св.Климент Охридски“,Скопје

341.234:352(035)

MONITORING the implementation of minority rights on the local level :a handbook / [editors] Stefan Dehnert, Harald Schenker, - Skopje :Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2007. - 86 стр. : илустр. ; 25 cm

ISBN 978-9989-109-39-31. Dehnert, Stefan [уредник] 2. Schenker, Harald [уредник]а) Малцински права - Имплементација - Локална управа -ПрирачнициCOBISS.MK - ID 70842122


Monitoring the Implementation of

Minority Rights on the Local LevelA Handbook


Contents

Foreword 1

Why monitoring the implementation of minority rights on local level? 3

Aims of the Programme 7

Proposed Methodology 9

Selection of the municipality 10

1. Decision of the Municipal Council 14

Annex I: Example taken from Municipality of Ardino, Bulgaria 17

2. Programme Group 22

3. Administration Self-Evaluation 25

Annex II: Questionnaire used in the pilot projects 29

4. Citizens' Input 44

Annex III: Questionnaire used in the pilot projects 48

5. Stocktaking 60

6. Status Report 63

7. Stakeholder Input 66

8. Proposal to Local Authorities 67

9. Evaluation 69

10. Recurrence 71

Annex IV: Example from the Municipality of Cluj-Napoca, Romania 72

1


Foreword

During the ongoing process of European integration or, in other words, as aresult of their striving for accession to the European Union, all states inSoutheast Europe have been subjected to specific sets of monitoring their per-formances, not only by the European Union, but also by other internationalbodies, such as the Council of Europe. The issue of majority-minorities rela-tions have been and continue to be a sensitive one in Southeast Europe, butalso beyond this region.

It is today a precondition for accession to the European Union to solve poten-tial inter-ethnic conflicts and to balance the system in a way that makes therelations between the majority and ethnic or national minorities one of mutu-al acceptance and respect, based upon the principle of non-discrimination. Toachieve this, most countries have passed a variety of legislation, with success-es in its implementation varying from country to country.

Being involved in minority related issues for some years now, we found that adisparity exists between what is happening on state level - meaning creationof legislation and policy making, and what is the reality on the ground. Thefast processes of decentralisation and thus derogation of power to the locallevel of administration are not always matched by improvement for the minori-ties. In fact, ethnic bias is in the work of local administrations often found asa result of a negative attitude against minorities (although it would be naiveto exclude that this happens), but rather due to lack of specific knowledge, tonarrow interpretation of legislation and implementation regulations, or simplyto the inability or the lack of will to interrupt existing routine, and reflect uponthe result of one's daily work. In all fairness it has to be said that a high workload and tight schedules often leave little space for reflection by the employ-ees in local administrations.

Almost two decades after the fall of communism, citizens in Southeast Europeare still struggling with the lack of transparency and accountability of institu-tions, including the local administrations. Although progress undeniably hasbeen made in some areas, there is still a long way to go until administrationwill fully become a service to the people. It would of course be unfair to claimthat this is fully achieved in the countries of the European Union. The dis-course here has however moved from the idea of service to that of coopera-tion through direct and active participation of the citizens. It comes as no sur-prise that Scandinavia is leading on this issue. But other countries have takensome of the experience and developed their own participation models.

Having all this in mind, it seemed to us that the time has come to tackle thetwo problems mentioned above: the sensitivity of minority issues on local level

2


and the issue of citizens input and participation in the work of local adminis-tration. We think that a combination of the two will further constructive solu-tions for both problems and will result in an increased and measurable levelof inclusive local democracy. This was the background against which we devel-oped the methodology we are proposing in this small handbook.

The Friedrich Ebert Foundation could rely on a network of experts fromSoutheast Europe, which not only discussed and gave their input into the the-oretical approach in a series of workshops, but also carried out the pilot phasein a chosen municipality in their respective countries. The experience gainedthere was again checked against the theory and finally resulted in the method-ology proposed here.

We would like to thank specifically the Albanian Helsinki Committee (Albania),International Center for Minority Studies and Intercultural Relations (Bulgaria),Ethnicity Research Centre (Serbia) and Ethnocultural Diversity ResourceCenter (Romania).

By publishing this handbook, we would like to encourage organisations to pickup the methodology, make good use of it, improve under way and possiblydevelop new ways of enhancing the democratic processes where they aremost impacting on people, namely on the local level.

And one last remark: the handbook you are going to read is not a piece ofadvocacy for minority rights. It takes the existence of the complex of minori-ty rights, protection and participation for granted; it builds upon the premisethat there is good will both among the majority population and the localminority or minorities to contribute jointly to furthering democracy in theirown, common interest.

3


Over the last decades, the complexof minority rights and protection hascome a long way. In the course of the20th century it developed from apolitical instrument invoked and usedby interest groups mainly againstother states to a genuine instrumentof organising societies.

The difficulty in developing and fur-thering a system of rights and pro-tection for minorities lies in theirdual character - they apply atthe same time to individuals andgroups. For decades, the scientificdebate and research have been over-shadowed by the political dimension.In a simplified way it could be statedthat following each of the two worldwars, the issue of collective protec-tion and rights for minorities weretaken on by the political right, whilethe left occupied the terrain of indi-vidual or "human" rights. With thetwo positions apparently being ideo-logically incompatible, little dialogueand thus fruitful research could bedone for a long time.

As a pattern, which of course had itsexceptions, minority rights weremostly invoked by groups, whichfound themselves in the minority inthe new national states, which wereformed after the end of World War Iand partially re-shaped followingWorld War II. Just think of theHungarians in the countries neigh-bouring today's Hungary; or of theGermans in post-war Poland orCzechoslovakia, or in Italy, or in the

first Yugoslavia. Think of Poles inUkraine or Lithuania. The list is verylong.

Moreover, these groups had beenpart of the ruling (often relative)majority population in the supra-national states preceding the wars. Asmall degree of acceptance of thenew reality and the need to reorgan-ise as a group produced clear politi-cal demands, often met with scepti-cism or open hostility by the now rul-ing elites.

At the same time, the former "moth-erlands" quickly took on the role ofprotector of "their" minorities abroad,asking vehemently for minority pro-tection. This was also met with a highdegree of animosity by the neigh-bouring countries, nourishing thesuspicion that the political represen-tatives of the minorities were merelya fifth column of the not so friendlyneighbour state. And indeed, thisproved to be true at least as often asit turned out to be pure paranoia.

While the League of Nations did notmanage to come up with a bindingcatalogue of measures, the UnitedNations, the Council of Europe andother organisations slowly developeda set of rights and measures to pro-tect minorities. It has to be saidthough that the major impulse in thelast decades was the implosion of thecommunist system. The emergingnew democracies in Europe and onthe territory of the former Soviet

Why monitoring the implementation

of minority rights on local level?

Union are almost all characterised bymulti-ethnic mixtures of population.It is due to their insistence and oftenagainst the resistance of Westernpolitical interest groups that consid-erable progress could be made in thelast two decades.

It is also due to the collapse of thecommunist illusion that individualhuman rights are less and less seenas a prerogative of the left and col-lective rights as the playground ofthe political right. Interweaving thetwo approaches can bring fruitfulresults for both individuals andgroups. Multi-layered identi-ties do not preclude ethnic belong-ing. Just as a parenthesis, one of thecontentious issues of our days - reli-gion - cannot be defined as either anindividual of group identity only. It isboth, and when combined with eth-nic belonging it can be quite explo-sive.

Today countries which are charac-terised by a given situation, in whichthe relationship majority-minoritieshas to be defined, find themselvesembedded in, but also bound by aseries of international treaties. Theera of upholding "internal affairs"against other countries has ended.But as always, political habits andmentalities sometimes take longer tocome to terms with this reality, creat-ing a disparity between the virtuallegal reality and the political realityon the ground. What in consequencebecame reality is that no country andno society in Europe can close itseyes anymore to the subject ofminority rights and protection, with-

out being treated by its peers as apariah. The current situation ofBelarus is the best example, ofcourse disregarding Russia's unhelp-ful role there.

The framework of regulations is stillemerging, and the approaches takenby a variety of international bodiesdiffer still. Instruments like theCouncil of Europe's FrameworkConvention on National Minoritiesand its European Charter for Regionalor Minority Languages, the OSCEHigh Commissioner on NationalMinorities' recommendations regard-ing participation of minorities as wellas the Charter of Fundamental Rightsof the European Union are bindingdocuments for the member or partic-ipating states. They set the frame-work and define some monitoringinstruments. Nevertheless, the actualprocess of monitoring is an exercisethat can still be considered in itsincipient phase. It still seems tobe rather difficult to find a systemat-ic approach, which is partially due tothe sometimes substantial differ-ences on local level within one coun-try or even within one region.Europe's diversity is difficult to graspexactly in the area, which makes thisdiversity the most visible: ethnic andlinguistic diversity.

A certain disparity exists stillbetween countries, which are mem-bers of the European Union andthose who aspire to become mem-bers. While the latter are subjectedto a thorough monitoring of the fulfil-ment of all accession criteria, includ-ing good inter-ethnic relations and

4


the implementation of minorityrights, this process comes to a haltwhen they become member states ofthe European Union. There is hopethough that a remedy can be foundto this omission.

Until recently, a number of memberstates blocked a debate about collec-tive rights of minorities, fearing theemergence of this topic within theirown societies. Politics refused tomake a distinction between humanrights, which per se are individual,and the collective nature of minorityrights. The acceptance of a proposalby EU parliamentarians mainly fromthe new member states to found anexecutive agency for funda-mental rights can be considereda step into the right direction. Theagency1 which replaced theEuropean Monitoring Centre onRacism and Xenophobia (EUMC) willbecome operational through 2007and monitor the implementation ofall fundamental rights of the inhabi-tants of the European Union and theaccession states. It will depend verymuch on internal policy making,whether the complex of minorityrights and protection will find an ade-quate place in the work of theagency. The pressure stemming fromthe new member states will be hope-fully kept up and slowly inducechanges into this direction in thework of the European Union.

In Southeast Europe, monitoring ofminority rights and their implementa-tion has been so far conducted in two(or almost three) different ways,namely through the Council of

Europe's Monitoring Mechanism ofthe Framework Convention onNational Minorities, through so-called"shadow reports" to the CoE reports,generated by civil society and finallythrough the EU's accession mecha-nism, mainly in the form of so-called"Stabilisation and AssociationReports" and of candidate countriesprogress reports.

Although all these mechanismsactively seek and are based on localinput from both government institu-tions and civil society, they providefor the overall picture and do notchallenge authorities on other thancentral, state level. Experience how-ever has shown that a variety ofproblems related to minorityrights are generated and exist onlocal level, with the local authori-ties often lacking the instrumentsand the knowledge to address themadequately. Furthermore, all coun-tries in Southeast Europe haveembraced decentralisation as amajor instrument not only of dero-gating power to the local and region-al levels, but also to provide moreeffective citizen participation. The lat-ter has often been paid a lot of lipservice to, while we still find localauthorities mostly acting in a closedenvironment and input from civilsociety being incidental and oftenbased on personal relations ratherthan being a systematic and mutual-ly accepted mechanism.

On the other hand, the process oftransformation towards compatibilitywith the European Union will enforcethe modernisation of local adminis-

5


1 For more information on the agency, see: http://fra.europa.eu

tration. It will be expected fromlocal authorities to self-evaluate their work in order tobe able to properly conduct a policyand resource planning. Often, local

administration finds itself overbur-dened with this task, which is addi-tionally made more difficult by thecomplex of personal relations anddependencies still prevailing.

6


7


The following programme proposes amethodology to monitor the actualimplementation of minority rights onlocal level. It is based upon experi-ence in Scandinavian countries andon a model developed and applied inGermany to monitor the local admin-istrations' orientation towards theirpublic - the citizens.

Why? The main reasoning behindproposing this approach is that theactual relevant interface forminority-majority relations is thelocal level. While constitutional solu-tions have been found in most coun-tries in South East Europe, and legis-lation is well under way, partiallyinstalling regional advisory mecha-nisms, it is the local level, where theday-to-day communication occurs. Itis also the local level, where the def-inition of minority can differ fromthe regional or national one.

As said before, local authorities arethe weakest link in the state powerhierarchy. While the decentralisationprocesses are given high priority inthe reform process, local administra-tion is often left alone with copingwith the tasks and responsibilities.On the other hand, minority organi-sations often formulate theirdemands in a vague, theoretical way,which often ignores the real capacityand willingness of the local adminis-tration to meet these demands.

The proposed methodology wouldprofit both sides. It would provide cit-

izens and their organisations with atool to assess the performance oflocal administration and proposeenhancements in their policies, whileat the same time offering a self-eval-uation tool to the local authoritiesand a way to improve their capacityto properly and openly addressissues raised by their constituents.Since the initiation of the processwould be based on a high level ofconsensus, and the implementationof the model would imply a highdegree of participation both horizon-tal and vertical, it is likely that theresults would be acknowledged bymost actors implied and wouldinduce a political process of address-ing real shortcomings. Issue-basedpolicy making would therefore startto prevail over the rather declarativestyle, which can be still found sooften. The so often stressed principleof citizen participation would mutatefrom a phrase to a practical instru-ment.

This methodology proposes a mech-anism, which would be repetitive initself, thus ensuring continuity in theprocess of assessment, (self)-evalua-tion and implementation. The hope isthat, once established, this methodcould become a valuable instrumentto move issues related to minorityrights forward in a timely and appro-priate way. Ultimately, due to itsinclusive nature and because of itscompromise and consensus basedapproach, this model could constitutea conflict prevention mechanism initself.

Aims of the Programme

With this publication, the methodolo-gy and the know-how behind it arepassing into the public domain, beingavailable to anyone daring and willingenough to embark on this exercise. Ithas been tested in a one-year pilotphase by local implementing partnersin municipalities in Albania, Bulgaria,Macedonia, Romania and Serbia. Thepilot phase was followed by an eval-uation process and by individual dis-cussions with a number of persons.

The methodology was also criticallyreviewed by a network of expertsunder the umbrella of the KingBaudouin Foundation in Brussels(thank you for that opportunity!). Wethink that it is ready to be appliedand improved in the process. Itshould however always and in fair-ness be mentioned that it is amethodology elaborated on behalfthe Friedrich Ebert Foundation.

8


9


The proposed methodology relies ona cyclic, self-repetitive logic, witheach cycle gradually improving the

achieved results. The proposed cycleconsists of ten steps, which buildupon each other in a logical series:

Proposed Methodology

- Decision of municipal council.

- Organisation: constitution of a program group

- Administration self-evaluation

- Polls and citizens' input

- Stocktaking

- Status Report

- Stakeholder input

- Report/Proposal to the local authorities

- Evaluation of Implementation

- Periodical Recurrence

The cyclic recurrence of the proposed model can be illustrated in the follow-ing way:

In the following, the methodologywill be explained along the ten logicalsteps of the project cycle.

Selection of the municipali-ty

The selection process can bedescribed as phase zero of the proj-ect cycle and has to be regarded as amilestone for the success of the proj-ect. The decision has to take intoconsideration a number of factors,which are responsible for the generalframework, in which the project canbe successfully implemented.Erroneous decisions in this incipientphase can and will put the entireproject into jeopardy, making theachieved results less relevant andsustainable. Among the factors to beconsidered, the following seem to bedecisive:

- Is the municipality free of "hot"conflicts? This is an essential pre-condition. The proposed methodolo-gy relies on the willingness of thevarious actors to cooperate and toenhance their capacity to do so. Thepresence of a major conflict situationwould require a number of other con-flict management instruments,before the issues that this approachproposes to tackle became relevant.

- The willingness of decisionmakers to cooperate is in the interestof a maximum success of the project.As mentioned before, this methodol-ogy is about cooperation. This meansthat a certain level of mutual trustinto the motivation of the participat-

ing parties has to either exist or to beestablished before the actual projectcan begin. This again excludesmunicipalities, in which the relationsbetween majority and minorities arecharacterised by a high degree oftension.

- The degree of developmentand functionality of local civilsociety. As will become evident laterin the description of the proposedmethodology, the local civil societyhas an essential and multiple role toplay in the implementation of a proj-ect based on it. It is the role of adecisive party in the implementationof the project - as the implementingorganisation, but also as stakeholder.Civil society organisations play therole of intermediary between the cit-izens of the municipality and the localauthorities. Although this methodolo-gy intends among other things toraise both the awareness and thecapacity of all parties involved, theimplementing organisation needs tohave a certain level of knowledgethat enables it to understand andmanage the political, legal andadministrative implications with theappropriate degree of diplomacy.

- Assessing the risk of misuse ofthe project's aims for political goalsby either of the parties is an exercisethat needs to be done thoroughlybefore making a decision on themunicipality to be chosen. It shouldbe considered normal that eitherparty would try to profit politicallyfrom a positive outcome of a projectbased on this methodology. If thisprofit is based on actual achieve-

10


11


ments, then it is legitimate. Howeverthere is a fine line from there to mis-use. Knowledge of the personalities

of the political actors could be anasset here, as it could help avoidingulterior surprises.

The motivations for considering a specific municipality for the participa-tion in the monitoring exercise can be numerous. The pilot phase gavethe implementing organisations full freedom to choose the municipality.Not surprising, the choices differed substantially from country to coun-try. In Albania, the Southern town of Korçë is characterised by an eth-nic Albanian majority in the town and small groups of Macedonians andVlahs in the surrounding villages. In Bulgaria, the organisers decided togo to Ardino, a remote mountain municipality with villages inhabitedby ethnic Turks and Pomaks. The Macedonian choice was Gostivar, atown in Western Macedonia characterised by complex and not alwayspeaceful relations between ethnic Albanians, Macedonians and Turks.Public and political life in Cluj, one of the larger towns in Romania isshaped by intricate relations between the Romanian majority and theethnic Hungarian minority, which bears a lot of political weight on nation-al level. In Serbia finally, the decision was made in favour of Kovačica,a municipality in the Northern autonomous province of Vojvodina, wherethe Slovak minority is the local majority - a municipality with a trackrecord of relaxed inter-ethnic relations. While each of the choices had itslegitimacy, some turned out to be more suited for this type of exercisethan others.

Depending on the intention of theproject, selection mechanisms canvary. If the donor and/or main imple-menter are not a local organisation, atender process might be consid-ered. This approach is not only themore transparent one, but it offersfrom the very beginning a possibilityto assess the capacity of the organi-sation in carrying out the project.

If the intention is to focus more onthe possible impact of such a projecton national level, a consultation oreven closer forms of cooperation

with the associations oflocal governments could beenvisaged. It will have to be consid-ered depending on the concrete cir-cumstances on the ground, whethera role should be given to these asso-ciations in the selection process. Inboth cases, additional local and polit-ical knowledge is helpful and canagain help avoiding mistakes fromthe beginning, which would - if madeat this point - endanger the entireproject, or at least distort it.

12


With the municipality chosen and thefirst contacts been made, the actualproject cycle can begin. The pro-posed methodology provides for aphased, step-by-step approach. Theten steps are conceived in logicalorder to ensure that the entire workand its results achieved in everyphase are taken to the next step intheir entirety. Thus, when the cycle iscomplete, the work invested in fulfill-ing the ten steps should yield maxi-mum results. In order to do so, it ishowever necessary that all stepsbenefit from the same attention,

amount of preparation and thoroughimplementation. Although some mayseem more important than others,the approach is conceived in such away that only building upon theresults of the previous step will pro-duce results, which do not distort theaims that this type of project tries tofulfil.

It should be stressed again beforeentering the actual project cycle thatthe primary aims of projects basedupon this methodology should not beactual political changes in the status

The experience accumulated in the course of the pilot project showedthat all the above mentioned factors count rather heavily. It turned outthat the size of the municipality is another decisive factor. In theBulgarian case, the municipality of Ardino turned out to be just too smalland remote, with practically no local civil society. Although the projectwas carried out with a high degree of involvement of the implementingorganisation, the very fact that the latter is located in the capital Sofiapresented a major handicap. The relations with local actors becamequite personal - which can be seen both positively and negatively. At acertain moment it seems that these relations were necessary to save theproject, which had gotten into an impasse due to misunderstandings andhurt personal and political pride.

Due to sheer lack of civil society structures on the ground, it is highlyunlikely that the envisaged recurrence of the monitoring exercise evenbeyond donor driven and financed projects would happen. A certaincritical mass of actors with a certain level of specific knowledgeseems to be an indispensable precondition not only for the success of theproject but also for a smooth implementation.

This comment does not imply that the actors involved in Ardino have notgiven their best for the success of their project. And indeed, consideringthe circumstances, the pilot phase did yield results. However a sustain-able application of this methodology with the genuine wish of achievingmore citizens' participation remains rather unlikely.

of minorities, although improvementsare likely to be the outcome and arealways welcome. The methodologyaims much more at providing ameans of evaluation and self-evaluation of the work of localauthorities and at implicitly establish-ing or improving the level of partic-ipative democracy at locallevel. Behind the entire exercise liesthe conviction that the instrument ormethodology proposed by this proj-ect will, if applied properly and inreoccurring cycles, have three majoreffects:

- It will induce a shift in the percep-tion of minority issues on the side ofadministration and political players,and possibly the civil society, con-tributing to a de-politicisation of thesubject;

- It will induce concrete improve-ment in the work of the administra-tion and open it up for genuine citi-zens participation;

- It will contribute to a more con-scious interaction of peopleacross ethnic boundaries.

13


14


In order to facilitate the implementa-tion of a project based on thismethodology, all political actors haveto be informed from the very begin-ning. Once the municipality and theimplementing organisation havebeen chosen, the time is ripe for thisfirst step of the project cycle.

The sensitivities of localpoliticians can be an intricate

issue. In order to be able to under-stand them, a certain level of knowl-edge of the informal power and deci-sion making channels on the groundis needed. Depending on the size ofthe municipality, it will be importantto avoid the impression that personalor political rivalries are underlinedand encouraged by this type of proj-ect. It is essential that elected orappointed political figures but alsothe key persons in the local adminis-tration affected by such a projectunderstand that criticism would occurduring its implementation. Shouldthe method be applied properly, thiscriticism - if based on the real situa-tion- would ultimately be trans-formed into positive results, intoimprovements in policy. This ulti-mately would be to the mutual profitof all the actors.

Experience in the pilot projects showed that this argumentation line ismore difficult to pursue and uphold the smaller the municipality is, andthe more personalised political and administrative functions are. With thediffering degrees of decentralisation and derogation of power in thecountries in South East Europe, the unfortunate situation still persiststhat local politicians treat the municipality as their personal kingdom.This of course presents an additional challenge for the organisationinvolved, especially if it is a local one. In this case, it will be difficult tomaintain the image of neutrality and to pursue a truly neutral role. Thisis another argument in favour of what has been mentioned before,namely that the size of the municipality matters. Organisations carryingout projects based on this methodology will find it easier to act inmunicipalities with a size conducive to a more depersonalisedpolitical scene. Small and remote places present a number of chal-lenges. It depends very much on the possibilities and the capacity of theimplementing organisation, whether it makes sense to carry this exerciseinto that type of municipality in the beginning. Gathering experience firstin larger places seems to be the more promising approach in terms ofresults and familiarity with the process.

15


Once the key players are informed,the next step is to forge a politicalconsensus. Depending on the politi-cal and electoral system, it may benecessary to involve the mayor and -if applicable - the head of the munic-ipal assembly or their representa-tives, as well as the political groupsrepresented in the local assembly.This step is necessary in order toavoid a politicisation of the issue andthus the temptation to capitalisepolitically on success or failure.

The implementing organisation's taskis to explain to the above mentionedparties the nature of the project andto clarify that it is a political exercise,but one that is beyond political partyinterests and boundaries. In thecourse of this presentation and dis-cussion, the participants will agree tothe basic principles of the project.They will express the readiness topass a decision of the local

assembly in support of the proj-ect, thus giving it political legitimacyand a certain weight in the everydaybusiness context of rather over-worked administrations in the region.

In cooperation between the imple-menting agency and the secretariatin charge, a draft decision should beformulated, containing the firm com-mitment of the local authorities tocarry out the monitoring project. Thedraft decision should very clearlystate aims and rationale, targets,expected outputs and a reasonabletime frame for the project. It wouldbe desirable if the project received anappropriate short and catchy name,under which it would be easier to bepresented to wider public, and underwhich it would stand a chance ofbeing remembered in the publicdomain. (See an example in theannex)

In some countries, a decision made by the mayor is a sufficientlyimportant document to provide the project with the legal and politicalweight. It would be advisable though also in this kind of set-up to con-sult all political forces and to secure their support upfront. This wouldincrease legitimacy in a context where there are often rivalries andpower struggles between the mayor and political parties.

Once formulated, the draft decisionshould be circulated among all partiesinvolved, in order to ensure that nosurprises would occur in the plenarysession in which the decision wouldbe passed. It would of course be idealto receive the support of all politicalgroups and/or individuals represent-

ed in the municipal assembly. Shouldthis not be possible, a vast majorityincluding the main political playerswould also do.

Once this step is completed, nothingshould stand in the way of a formaldecision adopted by the municipal

Dec

isio

n of

the

Mun

icip

al C

ounc

il

16


Decision of the M

unicipal Council

assembly, which would thus takeownership of the project and task theadministration with its implementa-tion.

The spirit and contents of the politi-cal decision will be further clarifiedand underlined in a Memoran-

dum of Understanding signedbetween the implementer, the headof the municipal assembly and themayor. The memorandum will clarifythat the role of the three sides doesnot suffice in political agreement, butcontains active support to the imple-mentation of the project.

One idea used in the pilot phase turned out to be particularly useful:while the political decision states an envisaged time frame for the proj-ect, the memorandum is left open ended. Through this a continuouscooperation can be ensured and does not need to be renegotiated priorto each repetition of the project cycle.

17


Annex I: Example taken from Municipality of Ardino, Bulgaria

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND COOPERATION

BETWEEN

THE INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR MINORITY

STUDIES AND INTERCULTURAL RELATIONS,

ARDINO MUNICIPALITY AND ARDINO MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

Dec

isio

n of

the

Mun

icip

al C

ounc

il

18


Today, on 24 February 2006, a Memorandum of Understanding andCooperation is reached between:

1. International Center for Minority Studies and Intercultural Relations (here-after IMIR), represented by Mrs. Antonina Zhelyazkova, Chairperson of theBoard of Directors

2. Ardino Municipality, represented by Mr. Aydin Serkan, the Mayor.

3. Ardino Municipal Council, represented by Mr. Izet Shaban, Chairman of theMunicipal Council.

Parties of this memorandum hereby agree to cooperate on the realization ofthe project Monitoring the Implementation of Minority Rights on LocalLevel. All three parties will work together for the realization of the commongoals:

- To further improve the minority rights situation in the municipality;

- To improve existing and find new ways of cooperation between theMunicipality, Municipal Council, local civic organizations and citizens of theArdino Municipality;

- To facilitate a culture of open dialogue between local authorities and popu-lation of Ardino;

- To provide citizens with a tool for assessing and improving the performanceof the local authorities; and

- To contribute to the understanding that minority rights issues are not a mat-ter of relevance only to the minorities, as the improvement of the quality oflife of all residents is linked to them.

All three parties undertake to actively support the implementation of the proj-ect.

Responsibilities of the parties:

Responsibilities of the implementing organization

1. Budget management.

Decision of the M

unicipal Council

19


2. Advise and assistance concerning questionnaire for public administration;Consultations will be provided on the seminar, organized in the municipality.

3. Questionnaire for citizens (various forms) - full implementation.

4. Web-site: joint decision on content.

5. Preparation of media campaign, informing the citizens on goals and scopeof the project, and on the progress being made during individual phases of theproject.

6. Stocktaking: Preparation of a list of all legally binding means of enforcingminority rights on local level, alongside with possible mechanisms offered bythe municipality, which exceed the legal frame.

7. Preparation of draft status report, containing an evaluation of existingmechanisms, describing already initiated trends and developments as well asproblems and shortcomings. The report will propose concrete ways forimprovement of the minority rights related policy of the local administration.

8. Stakeholder input: organization; the draft report will be sent for commentto relevant associations and organizations with human rights/minority rightscharacter, to minority organizations etc.

9. Preparation of final report, which will include the recommendations receivedfrom the stakeholders, and which will be presented to the municipal council.The report should contain concrete short, medium, and long term recommen-dations with clear targets and for a concrete and reasonable period of time.

10. Evaluation of the number and quality of measures that have been under-taken: during the evaluation period, formal meetings of the program group willtake place in order to assess the progress of the evaluation process.

Responsibilities of the Municipal Representative (Mayor)

1. Participation in the preparation of official decision of municipal authoritiesto be involved in the project.

2. Formal proposition to the Municipal Council to approve the official decisionfor participation in the project.

3. Coordination of the Program Group, including a coordinator, representatives

Dec

isio

n of

the

Mun

icip

al C

ounc

il

20


of the municipal administration, and municipal councilors.

4. To deliver the questionnaire to the administration staff members - comple-tion of the questionnaire.

5. Web-site: joint decision on content and technical implementation andupdating.

6. Preparation of media campaign, informing the citizens on goals and scopeof the project, and on the progress being made on individual phases of theproject.

7. Stakeholder input: organization (selection of appropriate organizations andother interested parties).

8. Presentation of final report to the Municipal Council and formal propositionto the Municipal Council to approve the report.

9. Organization of formal meetings with the implementing organization'sexperts in order to facilitate the evaluation process.

Responsibilities of the Municipal Representative (Chairman of the MunicipalCouncil)

1. To reach an unofficial consensus between representatives of various partiesin the Municipal Council to support the approval of Decision.

2. To deliver the questionnaire to the staff of the Municipal Council - comple-tion of the questionnaire.

3. Coordination of the program group formation, including a coordinator, rep-resentatives of the municipal administration, and municipal councilors.

4. Setting a date for the Municipal Council session for approval of the finalreport.

Decision of the M

unicipal Council

21


Timeframe:

Beginning: January 2006;

End: December 2006.

This Memorandum is prepared in three copies in Bulgarian language.

On behalf of IMIR,

Mrs. Antonina Zhelyazkova, Chairperson of the Board of Directors

___________________ Sofia, 24 February 2006

On behalf of Ardino Municipality,

Mr. Aydin Serkan, the Mayor

___________________ Ardino, 24 February 2006

On behalf of Ardino Municipal Council,

Mr. Izet Shaban, Chairman of the Municipal Council

___________________ Ardino, 24 February 2006

Dec

isio

n of

the

Mun

icip

al C

ounc

il

Once the political and administrativepreparations for the beginning of theproject work have been finalised, thefirst personnel decision needs to bemade. Since a variety of departmentswithin the local administration arelikely to be involved in the varioussteps of the project, a coordina-tion mechanism for these activ-ities will be established.

It is desirable that one person - thecoordinator - be charged with thegeneral responsibility for the entirepart of the project that involves thelocal administration. Who this personshould be and which institution he orshe should come from, is a matter ofresources, capacity and local sensi-tivities. The person could be e.g.someone in the mayor's office orfrom the secretariat of the municipalassembly, or someone from one ofthe departments specifically dealingwith inter-ethnic matters. It is impor-tant that this person enjoys a certainauthority and can act responsibly onbehalf of the mayor or the localassembly - whichever is the officethat nominates the coordinator.Ideally, and in conformity with thelegal situation on the ground, thecoordinator should also be the per-

son assigned to represent theproject to the public on behalfof the administration in partnershipand coordination with the implement-ing organisation. Public in the contextof this project means the media butalso assemblies of citizens in whatev-er form they will take place duringthe project cycle - public debates,stakeholder meetings, hearings, etc.The coordinator should have both theauthority and competence to speakon behalf of the local administration.

Depending on the size of the munici-pality, it would be difficult for thecoordinator to overlook the entireactivity within the administrationalone. On the other hand, the exer-cise carried out in accordance withthis proposed methodology presentsan integrated approach, in which civilsociety, administration and politicalrepresentation interact in a meaning-ful way, without undermining thecompetencies of the single institu-tions and softening the boundariesimposed by existing legislation andimplementing regulations.

In order to meet the first point andunderline the second one, it seems tobe a useful approach to form a pro-gramme group to act as somesort of management board taskedwith the implementation of the proj-ect within the local administration.For reasons of practicability, thegroup should be no larger than fivepersons.

22


23


Members of the group should be: onerepresentative of the implementingorganisation, representatives of thevarious most relevant sectors withinthe municipal administration, whichare confronted with inter-ethnicissues, and representatives of thelocally relevant political forces - whileensuring an appropriate, relevantand constructive representation ofthe political opposition on local levelis to be regarded as a precondition orat least as a valuable asset to thecredibility and transparency of theprocess.

To clarify the tasks of the group,short and concise terms of refer-ence (See annex I for an example)should be drafted by the implement-ing organisation together with thecoordinator. This could include thefollowing: members of the group;frequency of meetings (it dependsvery much on the situation on theground if the meetings should be adhoc or follow a certain schedule - inany case they should not be too fre-quent); the concrete tasks - oversee-ing of the project implementation,

Although the activities to be carried out by the coordinator do by far notrepresent a full time job, a certain amount of time and resourceswill be needed. It is hence essential that this is understood from the verybeginning and these resources be allocated by the local administration.One issue the implementing organisations were confronted with duringthe pilot phase was that in most cases administrations were complainingand criticising the additional burden put on them through projects of thistype, while human resources and additional time were not allocated.Even if in some cases - and certainly in very small municipalities - thisargument may hold water, it is an intrinsic characteristic of administra-tions to complain about resources. This should not in any way discour-age the implementing organisation from exercising gentle and friendlypressure, while underlining the profit that the administration would getfrom the results of the project: a more clear and structured working envi-ronment.

Most countries in South East Europe are still characterised by an over-sized administration. This is reflected on local level, in spite of what theself-perception within the administrations may be. The size is by far notmatched by appropriate resources other than human, and this is wherecomplaints are partially justified. In some cases, especially in remoteareas it might help the implementation of the project if a small dona-tion in kind (a piece of technical equipment or something similar) ismade to the municipality.

Prog

ram

gro

up

24


ensuring participation of the adminis-tration, ensuring timely delivery ofthe results, assistance to the employ-ees in the administration with ques-tions or problems regarding the proj-ect; and finally the time frame for thegroup's functioning.

Since the proposed methodology andthe implementation of projects basedon it seek to improve the accounta-bility of the local administrations'work, the participation of representa-tives of locally existing inter-eth-nic bodies or institutions (e.g.inter-ethnic or minority councils) atthe sessions of the programme group

should be allowed, albeit only asobservers. Experience from compara-ble environments shows that enlarg-ing the programme group would becounter-productive. Too many deci-sion makers would water down thegroup's decision making power. Itshould however be introduced asgood practice wherever these mostlyadvisory bodies exist, that the pro-gramme group informs them aboutdecisions that have been taken. Partof the exercise proposed here is tostart doing away with the practicethat decisions taken with the localadministration are treated like statesecrets.

The pilot phase showed that this part of the project cycle tuned out tobe a lot less problematic than anticipated. The reasons for this smooth-ness can most probably be found among the following: either there is abeginning routine in carrying out projects driven by outside donors with-in local administrations and this approach is adopted on a regular basis;the perception prevailed that the project would be to the mutual benefitof all parties involved and thus motivated the participants; the projectwas not perceived as a direct threat to existing political power set-ups.Perhaps a combination of all these factors ensured that programmegroups functioned very well. A last factor may be that local administra-tions can be much more efficient than the outer perception would indi-cate - if the motivating factors are the right ones.

Program group

The first content producing phase ofthe project cycle is at the same timeone of the crucial ones. In order tobe able to understand the relation-ship majority-minorities with regardsto the local administration it is neces-sary to see what the self-percep-tion of this administration is. Theexpectation is on the one hand to geta picture about strengths and weak-nesses, which then would enableoutsiders to the administrationmachinery, be they experts or regularcitizens to make suggestions for anoptimisation of the services providedby the administration. On the otherhand, the way in which the self-eval-uation is handled by individual officesor persons within the local adminis-tration is telling about how structureshave been built up and where thereis need for improvement.

The first set of expectations isresults-based, and lessons will belearned from these results, eventual-ly leading to more or less contentsrelated recommendations.These will be likely to circle aroundfinding better ways to deliver thenecessary services to those citizens,who belong to ethnic minorities.

The second one is more abstract, in

the sense that it is a systemic one.The results of the self-evaluation areless interesting here. It is the con-stant dialogue between the imple-menting organisation and the localauthorities, which generates obser-vation patterns. These can beused to input into the communicationstyle, into future recommendationsand into altering instruments - likee.g. the questionnaires used for theself-evaluation exercise - to be moresuitable to depicting the specific situ-ation on the ground.

There are two possible approaches tothe self-evaluation of the localadministration: the distribution ofquestionnaires and the individualinterview. Both options have theiradvantages and disadvantages andwill be briefly discussed in the follow-ing.

The Questionnaire

This constitutes the more cost-effi-cient and less resource-intensivealternative. This does not necessarilymean that it is the best one to beapplied. But we shall get back to thispoint a little later.

Just as the other method, it requiressolid knowledge about the func-tioning of local administration in thespecific location - from the legalframework, which is likely to beembedded into the country's nation-al, regional and local legislation,down to the nitty-gritty of competen-cies within and between units anddepartments. Background knowledgeof European and international con-

25


Adm

inis

tratio

n Se

lf -

Eval

uatio

n

26


Administration Self - Evaluation

ventions, such as the Council ofEurope's Framework Convention onNational Minorities or the OSCE HighCommissioner on National Minorities'recommendations regarding partici-pation of minorities is also required,if the exercise should be relevant.

The implementing organisation elab-orates a questionnaire, which con-tains a variety of sets of questions. Inthe following, a proposed struc-ture of such a questionnaire is dis-cussed very briefly. Introductoryquestions should be general and"test" the knowledge about the exis-tence of minorities. A second setwould be dedicated to the legal situ-ation and the implementation proce-dures. A third would address morespecifically the treatment of minori-ties in the light of this legal situation.A fourth section would be dedicatedto new ideas, suggestions forimprovement, etc. The area coveredin this section should not be limited

to the work of the administrationonly, but involve the general situationof the minority-majority relations inthe municipality. There is no reason,why ideas or suggestions could notbe formulated also for larger entities,like the region2 or the national level.The questions should generally beformulated in a way that they lead tothe problems identified by the imple-menting organisation in the prelimi-nary assessment that lead to choos-ing the specific municipality for theproject.

To ensure transparency and account-ability on one hand, but also in orderto avoid possible misunderstandings,the draft questionnaire can be dis-cussed within the programme group,and possible suggestions toimprove it should be taken intoaccount, as long as they do not alterthe general idea and approach, orare contrary to the objectives of theproject.

2 Region in this context means a level of administration between municipal and national, where itexists (e.g. district) and by no means the trans-national region of South East Europe.

As the situation on the ground can vary substantially depending on geo-graphic, demographic, economic, social or political factors, it proved tobe very useful to adapt the questionnaire to local reality, i.e. avoid non-applicable questions, which could stir confusion or, in the worst case,provoke hostile reactions from the respondents. By no means should thequestionnaire create the impression that the organisation behind it isparty to the inter-ethnic set-up and aims at making the local administra-tion look bad. Problems of this kind have occurred in the pilot phase andit took a certain amount of diplomacy to undo misunderstandings andget back to the previous level of trust.

A deadline will be given for theself-evaluation exercise. This needsto be adequately generous, so that

the heads of different units couldconsult with the programme group ifneeded. The implementing organisa-

27


tion as well as the coordinatorassigned from within the administra-tion should be available to provideassistance in explaining how the

issue of minority rights could affectthe work of each and any specificunit.

One of the essential moments of this specific phase is the fear toexpress a personal opinion experienced within local administra-tions. Allowing oneself to express a personal opinion is still a practicethat has not taken on, it seems. The largest group of answers receivedby all organisations involved in the pilot project was "I don't know". Acertain number can probably be attributed to a genuine lack of knowl-edge when it comes to minority rights and protection related issues.However, if we add another typical occurrence, another explanation is atleast possible. Many of the questionnaires bore the same handwriting.This points at two possible scenarios. Either people decided to work ingroups and compensate for the individual lack of knowledge - this wouldbe somewhat understandable and not distort the results too much, asthe "collective" knowledge within the administration is preserved. Thesecond scenario would however be less positive - somebody filled in thequestionnaires on behalf of the administration staff. It is likely that thissomeone would have specific knowledge and a certain responsibility.This would not only distort the answers but also very likely constitutean attempt to make the administration "look good". Unfortunately, theuse of this kind of cosmetic effort is zero. In fact, it fires back at theadministration because if the reality is distorted in this manner, the gapbetween the picture that the administration wants to paint about itselfand the way its work is perceived by the citizens widens. And public per-ception and opinion is rarely taking sides in favour of public administra-tion…

The lessons learned from this important aspect of the project implemen-tation are that genuinely democratic values of the type of the freedomto express an own opinion have still not penetrated public administra-tions in South East Europe to satisfactory depth.

How to deal with this situation in the context of this proposed method-ology? The evaluation discussions resulted in the proposal of a moni-toring of the self-evaluation. From the point of view of the spirit andlogic of this methodology, this would however be a step into the wrongdirection. Instead of providing more space for the employees, in which

Adm

inis

tratio

n Se

lf -

Eval

uatio

n

The Interview

The second approach to the self-evaluation is the individual interview,in which significant samples ofemployees from each department aresubjected to one-to-one talks. Fromthe point of view of the reliability ofthe results this method is certainlypreferable. The main problem with itlies in the amount of resources need-ed to carry it out. Time and staff arethe two main resources needed.Should a sufficiently high budget beat the disposal of the implementingorganisation, the compilation of theresults would be likely to produce a

clearer picture about the self-percep-tion and work of the local administra-tion. This approach has however notbeen tested in the pilot phase, andremains an assumption, even if it isbased on experience acquired else-where.

Generally it has to be stated thatboth capacity and resourcesof the implementing organisationhave a major impact on the quality ofthis phase of the project. It is henceessential that this part is plannedwith the appropriate backgroundknowledge and logistics.

28


they would sense the freedom to express themselves, a monitoringwould just increase the pressure on them and produce more "politicallycorrect" answers.

The long-term effect of this kind of project lies in the results yieldingfrom its recurrence. The current situation should be one more incen-tive to repeat the exercise in regular intervals. With a certain routineestablishing itself, the administration employees would understand thebenefits of answering honestly and to the best of their knowledge.

What could and should be ensured by the programme group is the readi-ness to assist the employees in understanding the questionnaires - clar-ification of terminology and of the wider context. By no means shouldthe programme group or its individual members undertake the answer-ing effort.


29


Annex II: Questionnaire used in the pilot projects

Questionnaire for public administration

Personal information

Gender M F other

Age 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-60 61-99

Marital status ___________________

Religion _______________________

Ethnic apartenence ______________

Education ______________________

How long have you been employed in the public administration? ______ years

General

1) What ethnic and religious minorities live in your municipalities?

1. ________________________

2. ________________________

3. ________________________

4. ________________________

5. ________________________

6. Other (please specify)

7. Don't know (DK)

[extend the number of response options if needed]

Adm

inis

tratio

n Se

lf -

Eval

uatio

n

30


2) How do you get along with people from other communities?

1. Very good

2. Good

3. Medium

4. Bad

5. Very bad

6. DK

3) Do you think that minorities should have / need specific rights for their pro-tection?

1. Yes

2. No

3. Only in some fields

4. DK

[Explain specific rights granted in your area and include in question (e.g.use of mother tongue…)]


31


Legal framework and existing mechanisms

4) What services are delivered by your municipality in regards to minorityrights, protection and promotion? [E.g. use of mother tongue, multilingualforms, translation services…]

1. ________________________

2. ________________________

3. ________________________

4. ________________________

5. ________________________


7. Don't know (DK)

5) To what extent are these possibilities used by minorities?

1. Frequently

2. Not very frequently

3. Insufficiently

4. DK

6) Did the situation of minorities change during the last several years?

1. It changed to better

2. It remained the same

3. It changed to worse

4. DK

Adm

inis

tratio

n Se

lf -

Eval

uatio

n

32


7) In what cases minority community members ask for help regarding minor-ity rights?

1. Discrimination in employment

2. Access to information

3. Legal help

4. Documents issuing


6. DK

8) What chances and concrete possibilities do you see for further integrationof minorities?

1. Organization of joint cultural activities

2. Facultative multicultural education in schools;


4. DK

9) What services beyond the minimum legal obligations does your municipal-ity/department offer?

1. ________________________

2. ________________________

3. ________________________

4. ________________________

5. ________________________

6. Don't know (DK)


33


10) How much do you utilize documents on minority rights in your daily work?

1. Very often

2. Only in certain cases

3. Very rarely

4. Never

5. DK

11) Would you find it useful if trainings for minority rights were provided?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

12) Do you have problems or interference from the central government con-cerning minority rights?

1. Very often

2. Sometimes

3. Rarely

4. Never

5. DK

Adm

inis

tratio

n Se

lf -

Eval

uatio

n

34


13) Have there been any cases of discrimination by the municipality towardsthe members of minorities recently?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

14) If any discrimination occurred, in what fields?

1. Employment

2. Religion

3. Education

4. Language

5. DK

15) Has any member of the municipal public administration been sanctionedfor violations of minority rights?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

16) In your municipality, do members of minorities have the right to use theirmother tongue in school?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK


35


17) Do members of ethnic minorities exercise this right?

1. Yes

2. Only some minorities do

3. No

4. DK

18) Has the municipality taken additional measures to keep children belong-ing to minorities in school for the minimum period required by law?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

19) In what way does your department contribute to more minority participa-tion in public life?

1. ________________________

2. ________________________

3. ________________________

4. ________________________

5. ________________________

6. Don't know (DK)

Adm

inis

tratio

n Se

lf -

Eval

uatio

n

36


20) In which areas has the local government worked toward minority protec-tion and participation?

1. ________________________

2. ________________________

3. ________________________

4. ________________________

5. ________________________

6. Don't know (DK)

21) Do minority members exercise the possibilities more participation?

1. Yes

2. Sometimes

3. No

4. DK

Explain how____________________________________________________________

22) What are the mechanisms for providing information to the public in yourmunicipality?

1. ________________________

2. ________________________

3. ________________________

4. ________________________


37


5. ________________________

6. Don't know (DK)

23) Have there been cases of obstacles for access to information of minorityrepresentatives?

1. Yes

2. Very few cases

3. No

4. DK

24) Do representatives of minorities use their right to access to information?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

25) Do you think that the minority rights would be better implemented if theminority representation in the municipality council were better / broader?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

Adm

inis

tratio

n Se

lf -

Eval

uatio

n

38


26) What mechanisms exist in your municipality for representation of minori-ty members in the municipal assembly?

1. ________________________

2. ________________________

3. ________________________

4. ________________________

5. ________________________

6. Don't know (DK)

27) Is there an official use of minority languages in your municipality?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

28) If this is the case, in what fields do the members of minorities exercisethis right?

1. ________________________

2. ________________________

3. ________________________

4. ________________________

5. ________________________

6. Don't know (DK)


39


29) Does legislation provide for inscriptions / topography in minority lan-guages?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

29a) Is this legislation implemented in your municipality?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

Suggestions

30) Is the distribution of competencies between local, regional and nationallevel sufficiently defined?

1. Yes

2. Not yet

3. No

4. DK

31) If not, than in which areas is it not sufficiently defined?

1. ________________________

2. ________________________

3. ________________________

Adm

inis

tratio

n Se

lf -

Eval

uatio

n

40


4. ________________________

5. ________________________

6. Don't know (DK)

32) Concerning competencies, do you have any suggestions on resolving theproblem?

1. ________________________

2. ________________________

3. ________________________

4. ________________________

5. ________________________

6. Don't know (DK)

33) Which steps would you propose to improve the rights of minorities on locallevel?

1. Training on minority rights for minority members

2. Training on minority rights for public administration

3. Seminars or workshops organized by the municipality

4. Strict implementation of existing anti-discrimination laws


6. DK


41


34) What chances and concrete possibilities do you see for further improve-ment in the relations between majority and minorities?

1. Organization of joint cultural activities

2. Facultative multicultural education in schools


4. DK

35) What concrete measures do you suggest in order to prevent discrimina-tion of minority members?

1. Antidiscrimination legislation

2. Training the public administration

3. Other measures (please specify)

4. DK

36) How do you think that the situation of minorities in terms of education canbe improved?

1. Thorough assessment of the education situation of minorities

2. Draft projects for handling the issue of education of minorities

3. Equal opportunities for all minority groups


5. DK

Adm

inis

tratio

n Se

lf -

Eval

uatio

n

42


37) Are there any concrete measures that you would undertake to improve thethe relations between majority and minorities on local level?

1. Encouraging minority representatives to get better knowledge of offi-cial languages

2. Organizing public events to promote culture and other values of com-munity groups

3. Other measures

4. DK

38) What measures do you suggest for improving the access to informationfor members of minority communities?

1. Normative measures

2. Policy of open municipality

3. Better contacts (PR) with citizens

4. Special bulletin dealing with minority issues

5. Through local media


7. DK

39) How do you think the representation of ethnic minorities should beimproved?

1. Reserved seats in the municipal assembly

2. Proportional employment policy

3. Local "minority issue" offices


43


4. Advisory council consisting of minority members


6. DK

40) Are there any concrete measures that the municipality can offer toimprove the use of mother tongue of member of minorities?

1. Draft by-laws for implementation of existing laws

2. Better implementation of existing laws

3. Other measure (please specify)

4. DK

Adm

inis

tratio

n Se

lf -

Eval

uatio

n

44


The next part of the project cycle isprobably the most difficult one interms of achieving relevant results.Depending on the size of the munici-pality in question, the question ofwhat consists sufficient and relevant

citizens' input cannot be answeredeasily. But first to the methodology.

Citizens have to be informed inorder to be activated. But evenwith a massive public relations cam-paign, previous experience else-where shows that only a small per-centage of people can be motivatedto actively participate in matters ofdirect concern to their daily life. Thesmaller the municipality is, the morethis is becoming a problem. Even ifthe data received can be processedstatistically, their actual relevancebecomes more than questionable.

During the pilot phase, the implementing organisations made a ratherpassive, conservative and erratic use of the possibilitiesoffered by a local media landscape, which is ever craving for relevantnews. Articles were written, TV appearances of NGO representa-tives and/or local politicians took place. Hardly ever read officialnewsletters and Internet portals of the local authorities, whichno one would ever click on were used.

This approach is rather common in the NGO world and is often explainedwith the supposed lack of resources such as funds, time, and staff. Noneof these is entirely the case, and there is no doubt that media campaignsare work-intensive. But considering that the results of a successful cam-paign are likely to materialise in donor interest, an effort seems to beworthwhile.

For projects based on the methodology presented here to be successfulin the sense that their outcome is relevant to the improvement of the sit-uation of minorities, a well thought through and carried out media cam-paign is a must.

45


- Detailed, yet catchy information about the scope and aims ofthe project;

- A public call for citizens' participation, which should explain whythis is to their benefit;

- A website containing the information of the two previous pointsand which is updated on a regular basis with the information aboutprogress reached in the project implementation. The site should alsocontain the documentation emerging from the project. It is worth con-sidering having an interactive part of the website, in which users cancomment on project related issues.

Nevertheless - information dis-semination is the first step in thispart of the project cycle. At the latestat this stage, a media public rela-

tion campaign should have start-ed at full speed. The campaignshould have at least the following ele-ments:

Citi

zen

inpu

t

The pilot phase has shown a certain reticence or even reluctance onthe side of the implementing organisations when it came to make use ofa variety of tools for the purpose of receiving maximum citizens input. Inthe consequence, the reports coming out of this chapter of the exerciselook very much alike. In the preparation for the project, the implement-ing organisations insisted in the preparation of standard question-naires for both the administrative self-evaluation and the citizens' inputphase of the project cycle. Giving in to this request has certainly simpli-fied and standardised the type of responses received in all the five coun-tries, thus making it easier for the implementing organisations to stick totime frames and other constraints of the project cycle. (As the basicstructure of the questionnaire is nevertheless comparable, we attach thequestionnaires for the public administration and the citizens input to thisguidebook.

It has to be questioned though, whether standardised data was neededat all. In the end, the situation in Cluj cannot really be compared withArdino, just as little as the one in Korçë compares in any way with

46


Citizen input

The media campaign should ideallybe carried out through advertis-ing pages in local newspapers,and spots on local TV and radio sta-tions. Minority language mediashould be specifically targeted, butby no means the only onesapproached. In parallel, arrange-ments with local media can be madefor appearances of project relatedpersons (representatives of theimplementing organisation, the coor-dinator from within the administra-tion, related experts) - in the form ofinterviews, participation in dis-cussions, round tables, talkshows, etc.

The pace of the media campaignshould be kept up all during theimplementation of the project, withan alternating choice of instrumentsbeing used at the same time.

Just as the administration self-evalu-ation, the citizen input is a crucial

element of this proposed methodolo-gy. Although this will prove difficult, itis important to receive a substantialnumber of responses in order to beable to form a substantiated opinion.The tools used by the implementingorganisation to gather the neededdata will differ and depend againupon available resources. In order tomaximise the resources, coopera-tion with the local university - ifapplicable - could be sought. Theproject itself could rely on the know-how and the human resources of e.g.the department or faculty for sociolo-gy. Of course it is important that theprofit would be reciprocated -whether making use of students asan internship or through a contractinvolving financial compensation is amatter of local decision.

The following listing of possible toolsis merely a suggestion. Depending onlocal circumstances, it can be alteredand added on:

Kovačica. The relevance of the data is for local use, for the sakes oflearning lessons from it on the local playground and in the local socialand political context.

Furthermore, the production of standardised questionnaires premeditat-ed the use of opinion polls as the main instrument to gather citizens'opinions with regards to the situation of minorities and the performanceof the local administration in this regard. Other methods, which requiremore resources but allow for more flexibility and what is even moreimportant - creativity, have been disregarded in the pilot phase.

47


In order to reach a maximum impactregarding a real citizens' participationin monitoring the local authorities'performance, a broad range of per-sons should be involved at this par-ticular stage of the project cycle. Thegroups of persons included in thisphase will vary from municipality tomunicipality, but will include, if possi-ble, local experts, NGOs, students,media, highly respected personalities

from the ethnic communities, etc.

The sum of all the activities in thisphase of the project together withthe results gathered will present theso-called public opinion, whichwill in the following have to be con-fronted with the picture that the localadministration painted of itself as aresult of the self-evaluation exercisecarried out in parallel to this phase.

- Representative opinion polls - a rather traditional instrument, whichusually produces solid results. Problematic in the sense that it is used toomuch and a certain fatigue if not hostility against being asked to partic-ipate can be observed.

- Polling of target groups - needs some more preparation, but equallysolid in producing results. Same problems may occur, mainly fatigue andmild hostility.

- Delphi method and Cross Impact Analysis - two expert-based methodswith a smaller number of participants, but with a more specialised view.Likely to produce detailed and more in-depth analysis if carried out withexperts. If carried out with focus groups, the results will be broader thanthe ones produced by experts but at least as representative as the onesreceived through polls.

- If the implementing organisation wants to target the municipality'syouth, which is highly desirable in the spirit of the methodology, thequalified use of internet fora and monitored web chats seem the bestinstruments to do so. This however requires qualified staff within theorganisation, which not only possesses the technical know-how but alsothe socio-professional skills to successfully approach young internetusers.

Citi

zen

inpu

t

Annex III: Questionnaire used in the pilot projects

Questionnaire for citizens

Personal information

Gender M F other

Age 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-60 61-99

Marital status ____________________

Religion ________________________

Ethnic affiliation _________________

Education _______________________

General

1) What ethnic and religious minorities live in your municipalities?

1. _________________

2. _________________

3. _________________

4. ________________

5. ________________


7. Don't know (DK)

48


Citizen input

2) How would you evaluate relations between various communities on a scalefrom 1 (excellent) to 5 (very bad)?

3) How do you get along with people from other communities?

1. Very good

2. Good

3. Medium

4. Bad

5. Very bad

6. DK

4) What do you think about other ethnic communities? What are theirmain characteristics?

49


Community 1 Community 2 Community 3 Community 4 Community 5

Community 1

Community 2

Community 3

Community 4

Community 5

Characteristic Characteristic Characteristic Characteristic Characteristic

Community 1

Community 2

Community 3

Community 4

Community 5

Citi

zen

inpu

t

5) Which communities are minorities in your municipality?

1. _________________

2. _________________

3. _________________

4. ________________

5. ________________


7. Don t know (DK)

6) Why do you think that the ethnic groups that live in your municipality areminorities?

1. Language

2. Culture

3. Religion

4. Customs and tradition

5. Number


7. DK

7) Do you believe the minority rights are respected in your municipality?

1. Fully respected

2. Partially respected

50


Citizen input

3. Depends on the ethnic community

4. Not respected at all

5. DK

Legal framework and existing mechanisms

8) What services are delivered by your municipality in regards to minorityrights protection and promotion? (E.g. use of language in public life)

1. _________________

2. _________________

3. _________________

4. ________________

5. _________________


7. Don't know (DK)

9) To what extent are these possibilities used by minorities?

1. Frequently

2. Not very frequently

3. Insufficiently

4. DK

51


Citi

zen

inpu

t

10) Did the situation change during the last several years in regards to minor-ity rights?

1. It changed to better

2. It remained the same

3. It changed to worse

4. DK

11) Do you know of any cases when minority rights of certain citizens wereviolated?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

12) In what minority-related cases would you ask for help?

1. Employment

2. Access to information

3. Legal help

4. Documents issuing


6. DK

52


Citizen input

13) Do you perceive the public administration as helpful in regards to minori-ty rights?

1. Very helpful

2. Sometimes helpful

3. Not very helpful

4. Not helpful at all

5. DK

14) Do you have any recommendations for the municipal administration inregards to minority rights?

1. _________________

2. ________________

3. ________________

4. ________________

6. Don't know (DK)

15) What would you do when you have information that someone's minorityrights are being violated?

1. Report to the police

2. Report to an international organization

3. Report to the municipal organs

4. I would do nothing

5. DK

53


Citi

zen

inpu

t

16) Which international organizations can be helpful with the implementationof minority rights?

1. Helsinki Committee

2. OSCE

4. EU

5. NATO

6. UNHGR

7. Amnesty International

8. Transparency International


17) Have you ever turned to any of them?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

18) Who would you contact if your rights were violated?

1. The police

2. An international organization

3. The municipal organs

4. Informal community leaders

5. DK

54


Citizen input

19) Have you ever turned to the municipal administration for protection ofyour rights?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

20) If not, why not?

1. They do not have the competencies to act upon it

2. They are inefficient and would not do anything

3. I do not trust the municipal organs


21) Does discrimination exist concerning employment of members of minori-ties?

1. Yes

2. Depends on the minority

3. No

4. DK

55


Citi

zen

inpu

t

22) Are there any cases of discrimination by the municipality towards mem-bers of minorities?

1. Yes


3. No

4. DK

23) Do you think that you are treated equally compared to other citizens?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

24) Does discrimination exist concerning education for members of minorities?

1. Yes


3. No

4. DK

25) Are there any measures taken by the local government to improve therelations between majority and minorities?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

56


Citizen input

26) Is there promotion of tolerance and cultural pluralism in the local media?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

27) Did local media report on cases when the municipal administration didsomething to uphold / to violate the minority rights?

1. Very often

2. Rarely

3. Never

4. DK

28) How do the local media present the situation regarding minority rights?

1. Objectively

2. Not very objectively

3. They are biased

4. DK

29) Which media are the most important for minority rights protection?

1. Internet

2. TV

3. Radio

57


Citi

zen

inpu

t

4. Newspapers (dailies, weeklies)

5. DK

30) Do you think that the minority rights would be better implemented if theminority representation in the municipality council were better / broader?

1. Yes

2. No

3. DK

Suggestions

31) Do you have any recommendations for the municipal administration?

1. _________________

2. _________________

3. _________________

4. _________________

5. _________________

6. Don't know (DK)

32) What chances and concrete possibilities do you see for further improve-ments in the relations between majority and minorities?

1. _________________

2. _________________

3. _________________

58


Citizen input

4. _________________

5. _________________

6. Don't know (DK)

33) What would you suggest in order to improve the situation in the field ofminority rights?

1. _________________

2. _________________

3. _________________

4. _________________

5. _________________

6. Don't know (DK) 59


Citi

zen

inpu

t

60


The next phase of the project cycle isa rather academic exercise. Theresults of both administration self-evaluation and the variety of data

obtained from the citizen input exer-cise will now be compiled and com-pared.

In the evaluation process following the pilot projects the decision to keepthis as a separate step has been discussed. In the reporting, both orallyand in written form, the stocktaking was mostly merged with the nextstep, the preparation of a preliminary report. After giving it some consid-eration, we decided to keep it as a logically separate step in theprocess. There are a number of reasons, but the main one from a prac-tical point of view is that this work can be done either in house by theimplementing organisation or as part of the above-mentioned possiblecooperation with a local university. In other words, no special expertiseis required to compile the three listings. The expertise is needed later.Also from a logical point of view, a report can only be produced on thebasis of existing, workable data.

On one hand, the legal situation andthe state of its implementation asseen by the local administration willhave to be presented in a workableway. For this, a division into threeparts seems useful, but is by nomeans binding for implementingorganisations. The reason why thisdivision is proposed is merely practi-cal.

First, it would make sense to produce

an exact listing of national,regional and local legisla-tion (to the extent that this exists)relating to the status of nationalminorities and put it in relation tointernational conventions and treaties- based on the various reports of theCouncil of Europe, the EuropeanUnion, and, where applicable, theOSCE. The angle here would be toanalyse the extent to which interna-tional requirements are met by

61


national legislation or to what extentthey are even exceeded - this havingin mind that they provide for a mini-mum of protection only.

The second listing would entail theimplementation regulationsof existing legislation on one hand,and the evaluation of theadministration staff, indicating

to what extent these regulations areput into practice. Should it be thecase, the listing can also containarrangements or best practices,which the respective municipality isoffering as a service to its citizensbelonging to minorities, and whichexceed the minimum standardrequired by law.

Especially this point about municipal authorities going beyond therequirements of the legislation is often met with scepticism by organisa-tions dealing with minority rights and protection and especially by parti-san or advocacy organisations. Often the argument is voiced that this isa purely theoretical issue. It is not. It is true that it is a rare situation thatpoliticians not only talk about good will and confidence building, butactually take measures. It does happen that municipalities allow e.g. theuse of mother tongue in certain circumstances not foreseen by the law.

For example, some time ago, a municipality in Macedonia, which doesnot exist anymore because it was merged with another one, allowed pri-mary school education for the Turkish minority in their own language inbreach of national legislation and the constitution, but being aware thatboth were in breach of international legally binding standards. The polit-ical gesture was very much in favour of the children belonging to theTurkish minority, who henceforth enjoyed education in their own lan-guage. The legal case became a European issue and was dropped afterthe Macedonian constitution and legislation were adjusted.

The third listing finally should containthe findings from the citi-zens' input, compiled and cate-gorised in an analogue way to the

first two listings, so that a usefulcomparison can be made betweenthe three listings.

Stoc

ktak

ing

62


- Legal requirements;

- Achieved implementation;

- Non-achieved implementation;

- Partially achieved implementation;

- Implementation beyond requirements;

- Recommended improvement.

Stocktaking

The final product of this phase shouldbe a compilation of data for example

along the following headlines:

63


The next step in the project cycle isone that requires a set of skills, whichmay not necessarily be available in-house for some implementing organ-isations.

What is needed here are analyticalskills, in order to take the compileddata material and transform it intopolitical and policy recommenda-tions. Furthermore, a thoroughknowledge of the state of art inminority rights and protection relatedresearch is needed in order to beable to apply the most recent find-ings. Deep knowledge of the interna-tional and national legal and politicalsituation with regards to minorityissues is a must as well. And last, butnot least, good drafting skills are anasset - who wants to read boringreports?

Should the implementing organisa-tion possess such resources amongits staff, it is privileged and can pro-ceed to the drafting exercise. Manyorganisations probably would nothave this kind of expertise. It will inthat case be necessary to hire an

external expert to draft the pre-liminary status report.

The aim of the preliminary statusreport is twofold: on one hand it issupposed to give an overviewabout the status quo, basedon the data acquired during the firststages of the project and compiled inthe previous, stocktaking exercise.On the other hand, the report isintended as a tool for policymakers, containing concrete rec-ommendations for improvement inthe sphere of minority rights and pro-tection.

The first part of the report will berather descriptive by nature. It willcontain a critical review of the exist-ing data, with a special bias on mech-anisms of minority protection andparticipation. The evaluation of exist-ing mechanisms will be supported bythe identification of trends, of alreadyinitiated further development butalso of problems and shortcomings.

The report will also go beyond themere evaluation and propose con-crete amelioration to the minorityrights related policy of the localadministration, developing concreterecommendations for measures to beundertaken as well as for potentialprojects in order to enhance the levelof implementation of minority rights.

The recommendations should circlearound three thematic complexes:

Stat

us r

epor

t

64


Status report

The recommendations will be basedupon thorough knowledge of thelocal sensitivities and competencies.Size and capacity of the local admin-istration should be taken into accountjust as much as the budgetary situa-tion. For recommendations to be use-ful, they have to aim at improving theexisting situation in a step-by-stepapproach. It is important to distin-guish between issues, for which thelocal administration is competent andsuch, where it only has little or noinfluence.

It would also make sense to distin-

guish between short, mid, andlong term recommenda-tions, since they would affect thework of the administration in differ-ent ways. And last but not least, itshould be clearly expressed who theaddressee of each specific recom-mendation is. It will probably be nec-essary to include ideas and recom-mendations to the legislator (thenational parliament, in most cases).These should also be clearly markedas such, in order to avoid misunder-standings and the feeling of unneces-sary pressure exercised upon thelocal administration.

- Improving the implementation of existing legislation and regulatoryframework for the individual and collective rights of citizens belonging tominority groups, especially in their interaction with the public administra-tion;

- Improving the implementation of minority protection mechanisms asrequired by international standards and national legislation. Here espe-cially the interaction of local administration, judiciary and police in thespirit of community policing can be an interesting issue. Also the inter-action between administration and (where applicable) local or regionalbranches of the ombudsman institutions would fall under this category.Another issue of growing importance is the protection of local minoritygroups, which in a larger, national context belong to the majority popu-lation;

- Improving the conditions of minority participation in public life, in theadministration, in the education system, etc. In the context of a generaltrend to decentralisation, more and more competencies in the fields ofeducation, social and health policy will be derogated to a local level, andmechanisms to ensure appropriate minority participation are yet to bedeveloped. In this context, recommendations as to an enhanced interac-tion between the local administration and existing minority or inter-eth-nic councils should be developed, where appropriate.

65


It should go without saying that thereport needs to be drafted in a clearlanguage, trying to avoid "expertspeak", which is not understandableto anyone but the experts them-selves. The report will by nature becritical. It is thus important to formu-

late the criticism in such a way thatthe addressee - mostly employees inthe local administration would notonly not be offended, but would glad-ly take on the recommendations,understanding that it is to every-body's profit.

Stat

us r

epor

t

66


Before the status report can be put inits final form, it should be circulatedto a broad range of stake-holders with the kind request for afriendly review and comments.Among the organisations and per-sons who should receive the draft arerelevant associations and organisa-tions with human rights and/orminority rights character, minorityorganisations. Also local expertscould be considered, as well as uni-versities or research institutes, whichare active in the specific municipalityor region.

It seems useful to send the draft forcomment also to offices of state insti-tutions, which are present in therespective municipality or are incharge of it, and which are not partof the local administration and have aminority issues related mandate. Thelocal or regional offices of theombudsman or the population serv-ice of the ministry of interior wouldbe such types of institution.Naturally, the range and nature ofthese institutions varies a lot fromcountry to country.

Depending on the circumstances, itwould be useful to send the draftreport in this case more as informa-

tion to relevant international bodies,which are active in the municipalityor the region, but also on nationallevel, if they are interested in localand minority affairs. Such officescould be the Council of Europe localoffice, the OSCE missions, UNDPoffices and the EU delegations.Should they want to comment on thecontents, these comments would aswell be taken into consideration.Involving the international factorscan have a positive effect insofar asthe reporting carried out by theorganisations themselves, but alsowith regards to future cooperation. Itshould be taken into considerationthat minority issues are part of theEuropean integration pro-cess and receive a certain amountof attention from the European Unioninstitutions.

Depending on time and resources, itmay be a good idea to organise aroundtable with a more restrictedexpert audience or a hearing with abroad range of stakeholders, in whichthe findings laid down in the draftreport can be discussed in a publicform.

In theory, every citizen should havethe chance to input on the findings ofthe report. The range of instrumentsavailable for this purpose is wide.Creativity is needed here oncemore to find ways to reach out to apopulation, which tends to be passivein its vast majority.

67


Following a waiting period with a setdeadline for input from stakeholders,the draft report will be brought to itsfinal form taking into account thecomments received during the previ-ous step of the project cycle.

The final report, preferably in apublished version accompa-

nied by a CD, will first be present-ed to the local authorities and latermade available for a wider audience.

It depends very much on the situa-tion on the ground, whether handingover of the report will be done in aspecial session of the programmegroup with the mayor and/or thehead of the municipal assembly, or ifthis can be turned into a more publicevent, that would entail a symbolichand-over of the opinion and wishesof the citizens to the local administra-tion. In any case, appropriate pub-lic attention - meaning media -should be drawn to the event or atleast to the fact that the handoverhas taken place.

It is likely that the final report will not be received with a lot of sym-pathy especially by the political decision makers on the ground.Nobody likes to be criticised publicly, and certainly not by one's own con-stituency. It has happened during the pilot phase of this project, and ittook some amount of discussion and backroom diplomacy to get theproject back on track. This is why it is so important that the reports areformulated in a positive manner, so that the addressee doesnot appear to lose face in the entire exercise. In the end the methodol-ogy is about the process and longer-term results rather than about short-lived public criticism.

Depending on the legal situation andthe competencies of local authorities,the decision of the local assemblytaken in step 1 of this proposedmethodology should be revisited and

ideally a binding commitmentshould be made to implement therecommendations within the limits ofthe possible and feasible.

Prop

osal

68


The local authorities should beinformed that the programmegroup will continue its activity andwill evaluate progress in due timeand with due diligence. Ideally, animplementation plan would beelaborated with fixed dates or timeframes for every single commitment.This plan could be elaborated by theprogramme group together with the

heads of relevant departments in themunicipal administration and with theheads of the political groups in thelocal assembly. In the best case sce-nario, this plan would also be madepublic to underline the good will ofthe municipality in contributing toraising the standards of minorities-majority relations on their territory.

This kind of binding commitment was at least partially achieved in Clujduring the pilot phase of the project. There, the main ideas of themethodology, albeit not the recurrent approach, have been integratedinto the five year strategy for the development of the municipality.

Proposal

69


Following a time scheduleagreed upon in advance, an evalua-tion will take place to assess thenumber and quality of measures thathave been undertaken and how theimplementation of minority rights,protection and participation hasdeveloped over the implementationperiod.

The evaluation process will be under-taken by the programme group informal meetings and in discussionswith the heads of the relevantdepartments in the local administra-tion. The progress will be checkedagainst the implementation plan,which has been elaborated in theprevious step in the project cycle.

Considering that the time frame anddynamics of some recommendationsand their implementation would dif-fer, it is possible to consider a suc-

cessive evaluation. Howeverfor reasons of visibility and publicimpact it is recommended to have aone compact evaluationperiod. The timing could be sete.g. by taking the average time frameindicated in the implementation plan.This approach will ensure that short-term progress is visible and not out-dated already, that the implementa-tion of medium term commitmentswill be well under way and possiblyeven some of the long-term ones.Should this be the case, the evalua-tion could indicate progress, whilestill pointing out the tasks lyingahead.

The evaluation should materialise inthe shape of progress reports.Depending on the approach chosenby be implementing organisation,there would be one bigger report ora number of smaller, issue-orientedones. Either way, the wide distribu-tion of these reports to persons andorganisations contacted in the stake-holder input phase and to media, butalso to regional and national govern-ment agencies and offices is essen-tial. This of course implies that ideal-ly also these progress reports shouldbe published.

It is also important to confront the administration with these reportsbecause of the possibility of rotations and changes in staff and the lossof institutional memory that usually goes with this process.Another reason is the fluctuation in the degree of commitment to minor-ity issues within the political scenery. Much of the quite dramatic

Eval

uatio

n

70


Another aim of this exercise is tobring the issue of the implementationof the commitments made by theadministration and the political fac-tors back into public discussion. Theinstruments and contacts used dur-

ing the media campaign in the actualimplementation phase of the projectcan be reactivated and used to amaximum, in order to keeping theissue high in the publicdomain's attention.

progress in minority protection and participation in Romania and Bulgariahappened under pressure from the European Union, due to commit-ments enshrined in the accession treaties and the negotiations leadingup to them. The prospect of inherent accession did certainly have a moti-vating effect.

Now that this pressure is no longer kept up and with the European Unionshowing no real interest in minorities related issues within its boundaries,a regress in the situation on the ground is expected. It will fall into theduties of initiatives like the one proposed by this methodology to keepthe pressure on governments up and insist on the fulfilment of interna-tional, national, regional and local commitments.

Evaluation

71


The concept of this proposedmethodology is that it would have acyclic, re-occurring lifespan. Once the first cycle complet-ed, ways and means to repeat theexercise will be explored and imple-mented. The ultimate aim is to estab-lish a culture of dialoguebetween civil society and localauthorities.

During the implementation of thefirst project cycle, the implementingorganisation should lobby with theauthority in charge - be it the mayoror the head of the local assembly, orthe secretary general of the localassembly - for putting the issue ofimplementation of commitmentsregarding minority right, protectionand participation on the agenda of

the local assembly. Ideally thiswould coincide with the publicationof the evaluation reports. The aimwould be here to make this a recur-ring event in the assembly and toshape the next cycle around thegiven dates.

Through this technical "trick", thedegree of local ownership forthis process would automaticallyincrease, which is on one hand a cen-tral objective of this methodologyand on the other hand a preconditionto achieve relevant, tangible and sus-tainable results.

Improvements will take time, but willcontribute substantially to more cred-ibility on both sides of the imaginary,but still very effective divide betweenlocal administration and civil society.The process will hopefully also con-tribute to the understanding thatminority rights and putting them intopractice is not a matter of relevanceto the minorities only and it does nothave to be a political matter only, butthat in the end it is an exercise oflived citizenship - somethingthat all our societies need badly.

Recu

rrer

ce

72


Annex IV: Example from the Municipality of Cluj-Napoca, Romania

Strategy for the Development of the

Municipality of Cluj-Napoca

Multicultural Cluj

73


Summary

Culture and the relationshipsbetween various cultures and ethnicgroups affect a variety of differentspheres of public life and as a result,play a key role in the realisation ofsocial and economic goals of devel-opment plans. The present documentattempts to make a contribution tothe creation of the framework for theimprovement of interethnic dialogueby means of formulating local policiespromoting interethnic collaborationand a beneficial employment of reli-gious and ethnic diversity in Cluj-Napoca.

The recognition and amplification ofthis cultural diversity in the futuremakes the elaboration, adoption andpromotion of policies tailored for thelocal context that would turn thisdiversity into value a necessity.Although diversity is a value in itself,its integration has both an economic,as well as social dimension, con-tributing to durable local develop-ment. Naturally, the definition of cul-tural diversity is still under debate.However, several features have beenidentified, such as multiculturalism,linguistic diversity, ethno-diversity,cultural rights, diversity of confes-sions, beliefs and traditions. As aresult, cultural diversity implies anintegrative approach in the fields ofpolitics, economy, the social and thelegal spheres.

As a result, the present documentcontains a series of recommenda-tions regarding the beneficialemployment of cultural diversity inthe city of Cluj in an attempt to sup-port local development. The centralrecommendations are the following:

1. Assuming and defining a multicul-tural identity for the city and its pro-motion via all means of mass com-munication;

2. The creation of a ConsultativeCouncil in the sphere of multicultural-ism that would bring together leadingrepresentatives of the various ethnicgroups living in the city;

3. The encouragement and promo-tion of partnerships between publicand private institutions, non-profit organisations in various fieldsof activity: education, culture,tourism, etc.

4. The organisation of multiculturalevents and the elaboration of shortand medium term agendas in thisregard;

5. The city should rely on its multicul-tural potential in encouraging cultur-al tourism;

6. Raising awareness of the Romaproblem as a component of the multicultural potential of the city.

74


Introduction

Cluj-Napoca is a city with a signifi-cant multicultural tradition. From acultural perspective, the city isremarkable due to the wealth of theChristian (Orthodox, Roman andGreek Catholic, Calvinist, Unitarian,Pentecostal, Adventist), Muslim andJudaic communities. The presence ofthese religious communities is com-pleted by ethnic diversity due to thepresence of ethnic Romanians(79.39%), Hungarians (18.96%),Roma (0.95%), Germans (0.07%),Ukrainians (0.5%) as well as Jews,Arabs and Chinese. In the recentpast, Cluj has been welcoming anincreasing number of asylum seek-ers, refugees, migrants, as well asemployees of international compa-nies.

The recognition of this cultural diver-sity and its amplification in the futuremakes the elaboration, adoption andpromotion of policies tailored for thelocal context that would turn thisdiversity into value a necessity.Although diversity is a value in itself,its integration has both an economic,as well as social dimension, con-tributing to durable local develop-ment. Naturally, the definition of cul-tural diversity is still under debate.However, several features have beenidentified, such as multiculturalism,linguistic diversity, ethno-diversity,cultural rights, diversity of confes-sions, beliefs and traditions. As aresult, cultural diversity implies anintegrative approach in the fields ofpolitics, economy, the social and thelegal spheres.

Romania has made significantprogress in regard to the protectionof ethnic minorities. Romanian legis-lation has been enriched by a seriesof provisions that are meant to pro-tect minorities and support them intheir yearnings to maintain theiridentity and traditions. In this gener-al atmosphere of relaxed interethnicrelations, of acceptance and promo-tion of diversity, the negative exam-ple of Cluj was becoming increasing-ly visible.

Local elections in 2004 have broughtabout major changes in theMayoralty of Cluj-Napoca. The impli-cations of this change for the ethnicdiversity of the city are very impor-tant. For the first time in 12 years,the discourse of local authoritiesremained short of ultra-nationalistphraseology, allowing minorities tofeel an integrative part of the localcommunity. In spite of this, the par-ticipation of minorities in public life isstill timid. After such a long period ofexclusion, in which minorities havedeveloped their own mechanismsand institutions of social participa-tion, there is need for a joint initiativeof local actors - public authorities,non-profit organisations, organisa-tions of ethnic minorities - in order toovercome lack of trust, in order toensure the involvement of minoritiesin the life of the local community, andfor the promotion of respect for thevalues of diversity.

Our desire through this document isthe identification of local public poli-cies that will allow to beneficially relyon the cultural diversity of the munic-

75


ipality of Cluj-Napoca in supportingcurrent developments.

The Analysis of Current Affairs

Contemporary scholarly literatureproposes three normative models inthe approach of majority-minorityrelations. These are: the assimila-tionist model, the differentialistmodel and the multicultural model.

The assimilationist model proposesthe "incorporation of minorities intothe majority" by giving up their lan-guage, traditions, cultural and socialvalues, while concomitantly internal-ising those specific for the majoritygroup/population. The individual isresponsible for assuming this task,while the state is implicitly notexpected to bear responsibility foraccommodating preferences and val-ues specific to given groups. Thismodel implies that through the inter-nalisation of language/values/tradi-tions specific for the majority groups,any chance for conflict is excluded.

The second model is the differential-ist one, according to which contactbetween the majority group and theminority group(s) is reduced to aminimum, ensuring the "cohabita-tion" of groups that rarely meet andinteract in this way. The stateassumes no responsibility for accom-modating specific languages/prefer-ences/values, although it allows forthe existence of parallel institutions.

The multiculturalist model implies,however, a more nuanced approachin between the above two through

the acceptance of legitimacy andpotential represented by assumingthe diversity of ethnic groups. Thismodel believes that there arechances for facilitating the participa-tion of various groups in public life insuch a way as to accommodate thelanguage/preference/values specificfor all groups. The participation ofdifferent groups in public life is, fromthe perspective of this model, the keyelement in the restructuring andimprovement of community life andelimination of conflicts. The role ofpublic institutions is diversified andimproved by the encouragement ofcreativity in developing organisation-al combinations that are adequate forthe specific needs of local communi-ties.

Naturally, these theoretical-norma-tive models are hard to find in pureform. They are, however, useful instructuring characteristic policies in astrategic manner, taking into accountthe outcomes of contributions madeby every ethnic group to the life ofthe community it is active in over themedium and long run. From a legalpoint of view, current legislation cre-ates the context for adopting multi-cultural policies at local level.

According to the RomanianConstitution, minorities are guaran-teed the right to maintain, developand express their ethnic, cultural, lin-guistic and religious identity, con-ferred by art. 6 para. 1

The Art. 6 defines the right to identi-ty:

76


(1) The State recognizes and guaran-tees the right of persons belonging tonational minorities, to the preserva-tion, development and expression oftheir ethnic, cultural, linguistic andreligious identity.

(2) The protecting measures takenby the Romanian State for thepreservation, development andexpression of identity of the personsbelonging to national minorities shallconform to the principles of equalityand non-discrimination in relation tothe other Romanian citizens.

By Art. 16, is guaranteed the equali-ty of citizens:

(1) Citizens are equal before the lawand public authorities, without anyprivilege or discrimination.

(2) No one is above the law.

(3) Access to a public office or digni-ty, civil or military, is granted to per-sons whose citizenship is only andexclusively Romanian, and whosedomicile is in Romania.

In addition, art. 4 para. 2 states theequality of all citizens of Romaniairrespective of nationality, race, eth-nicity, religion, or language.

Also the Romanian Constitutionestablish: the right to education ofminorities (Art. 32, para. 3: The rightof persons belonging to nationalminorities to learn their mothertongue, and their right to be educat-ed in this language are guaranteed;the ways to exercise these rights

shall be regulated by law), parlia-mentary representation of minorities(Art. 59, para. 2: Organizations of cit-izens belonging to national minori-ties, which fail to obtain the numberof votes for representation inParliament, have the right to oneDeputy seat each, under the terms ofthe electoral law. Citizens of a nation-al minority are entitled to be repre-sented by one organization only), theright for interpreter during juridicalprocedure (Art. 127, para. 2: Citizensbelonging to national minorities, aswell as persons who cannot under-stand or speak Romanian have theright to take cognizance of all actsand files of the case, to speak beforethe Court and formulate conclusions,through an interpreter; in criminal tri-als, this right shall be ensured free ofcharge).

Cabinet Decision no. 137/2000regarding the prevention and sanc-tioning of all forms of discrimination,later adopted as law no. 48/2002defines discrimination and stipulatesits punishment. In this regard, anorganism was founded, called theNational Council for CombatingDiscrimination, whose aim is tosupervise the respect for the provi-sions of the anti-discrimination legis-lation.

Emergency Ordinance 22/1997regarding local public administrationbrought significant positive changesas far as the use of minority lan-guages in public administration areconcerned. Legislation is applicablein localities in which at least 20% ofthe population belongs to a minority

77


community. The normative act con-tains provisions regarding the use ofbilingual signs and inscriptions, theuse of minority languages in commu-nicating with local authorities, both inwriting, as well as in oral interactions,the publishing of announcements ofpublic interest in minority languages,as well, the use of minority lan-guages during Council meetings(local or county level) if at least onethird of the councillors belong to aminority group (translation intoRomanian must be offered), and theuse of minority languages in court.

As a more recent development, anew law regulating public administra-tion, passed in 2001, includes newprovisions regarding the use of moth-er tongues in administration; in areaswhere minorities constitute over 20%of the population, all regulationsadopted by local councils must bepublished in the mother tongue, aswell, while individual decisions maybe translated on demand. Similarly, ifrepresentatives of minorities consti-tute at least one third of all the rep-resentatives in the local council,meetings may be held in Romanianor in the minority language and mustbe assisted by an interpreter.

The Law regarding local publicadministration (Law no. 215/2001),at article 90 stipulates:

"(1) In the relations between citizensand the authorities of local publicadministration the Romanian lan-guage is used.

(2) In the territorial administrative

units, in which citizens belonging to anational minority represent morethan 20% of the number of inhabitat-nts, in their relations with the author-ities of local public administration andtheir specialized bodies, can addressthem orally or in writing in theirmother tongue as well and they willreceive answers both in Romanianand in their mother tongue.

(3) In the conditions stipulated atparagraph (2 ), on the public rela-tions posts there will also beemployed persons that know themother tongue of the citizens belong-ing to the respective minority.

(4) The authorities of the local publicadministrations will assure theinscriptioning in the mother tongueof the citizens belonging to therespective minority, of the names oflocalities and the public institutionsunder their authority, as well as theinscriptioning of announcements ofpublic interest, in the conditions stip-ulated in paragraph (2).

(5) The official documents are oblig-atorily made up in Romanian."

Education in minority languages inRomanian public schools is anotherimportant component of the relevantlegislation, recognised by the Law ofeducation, passed in 1995. The prob-lem regarding the use of Hungarianlanguage in public education hasbeen thoroughly debated over thepast years. The law on education andits amendments ensure the right toeducation in the mother tongue at alllevels of study and in all forms of

78


instruction.

"Art. 118. Persons belonging tonational minorities have the right tostudy and receive instruction in theirmother tongue, at all levels andforms of education with appropriaterequest, according to the presentlaw.

Art. 119. (1) Taking into account localneeds, groups, classes, sections orschool units with teaching in the lan-guages of national minorities may beestablished, at request and in accor-dance with the provisions of this law.

(2) Paragraph (1) of this article shallbe implemented without prejudice tothe learning of the official languageand the teaching in this language.

The necessity to approach in differ-ent ways problems of nationalminorities depending on the natureof specific issues they are faced withappeared with the adoption of theStrategy of the Romanian Cabinet forthe Improvement of the Situation ofRoma in 2001. The strategy repre-sents the first governmental initiativethat comprehensively addresses theproblems of the Roma minority, stip-ulating measures for ten differentdirections of action: community andpublic authority development, hous-ing, social security, health care, econ-omy, justice and public order, childprotection, education, culture andcults, communication and civic par-ticipation. Recently, the Strategy hasbeen completed and modified byCabinet Decision 515/19.04.2006.

Thus, as far as community and pub-lic administration developments areconcerned, the Strategy stipulates:"Local / county level organisation ofmixed working groups formed byelected representatives of the givencommunity, those of decentralisedstructures of the central administra-tion and non-profit organisations ofRoma and the Roma minority, in theevaluation of the more importantneeds of Roma communities and theapplication of support programmesfor the latter." Another listing in thesame chapter recommends "thedevelopment of collaborationbetween public administration andnon-profit organisations of Roma,based on partnerships; the inclusionof leaders of Roma communities inlocal level administrative decision-making processes that affect theRoma communities."

The Constitution and the electorallaw guarantee the representation ofminorities in the Chamber ofDeputies in the articles that grantone deputy seat to the organisationsof all national minorities officiallyrecognised if they obtain 5% of thetotal number of votes necessary for alower house representative nation-wide.

In June 2002 the Statute of thePolice Officer was passed and stipu-lates the inclusion of persons whospeak the language of the givenminority in the police forces of thesettlements in which at least 20% ofthe population belongs to a minoritycommunity.

79


The currently existing legal frame-work in Romania provides the gener-al pieces for the adoption of multicul-tural policies. This aspect is impor-tant not only concerning the facilita-tion of existent ethnic minorities' par-ticipation in public life, but also asregards pro-active measures con-nected to migration policy targetingcommunities in Romania that havebeen settling in this country over thepast years.

The Objectives of MulticulturalPolicies

Through this document, we proposeto identify means with the help ofwhich local authorities can identifypublic policies that will permit thebeneficial employment of the culturaldiversity of the municipality of Cluj-Napoca in supporting current devel-opment. This study is based on theassumption that the multicultural tra-dition of Cluj is a value that must becultivated in order to avoid theappearance of feelings of social isola-tion of certain cultural and / or ethnicgroups, as well as to transform cul-tural diversity into a factor of lastingdevelopment.

Cluj is constituted by a conglomerateof parallel cultural communities (eth-nic, linguistic, religious) among whichthere is little communication. A vari-ety of reasons (historical, political,among others) lead over time to thecurrent state of affairs, but which isincongruent with needs for localdevelopment of the city. In order tobe able to respond to the context ofcultural pluralism at local level, we

would like to identify a set of meas-ures that can effectively addressproblems of communication amongstcultural and ethnic groups in Cluj.

Measures specific for the multicultur-al model of diversity depend on theconcept of applied multiculturalism.Scholarly literature distinguishesamong three different notions ofmulticulturalism. The first conceptionis a demographic one, and accordingto which diversity is identified by thedescription of criteria that character-ize the social context relevant for theprocess of local level public policies.The second conception is of a politi-cal nature and refers to measuresand specific policies of local authori-ties that are meant to address specif-ic needs of diverse contexts. Thethird conception, and the most con-troversial one, is an ideological oneaccording to which cultural diversityis a social value in itself. As a result,there is a necessity to recognize indi-vidual and group rights as a prereq-uisite for the preservation of the cul-tures and traditions of various ethnicgroups.

Irrespective of the adopted concep-tion of diversity, multicultural meas-ures taken attempt to attain one orseveral of the below enlisted goals:

- The preservation of cultural identity- refers to rights specified by law thatensure the freedom of speech andthe manifestation of cultural and lin-guistic values for every citizen.

- The insurance of social justice -implies the guarantee for equality of

80


chances and everyone's right to betreated equally irrespective of race,ethnicity, culture, religion, language,gender and origin.

- The improvement of economic per-formance - the development andemployment of skills and talents ofeveryone irrespective of origin.

At the level of public policies, the pro-motion of multiculturalism and com-munication amongst various culturalcommunities means the elaboration,adoption and promotion of principlesspecific for the local context in anaim to support local development.We identify in this regard five maindomains in which local public author-ities have the possibility to adoptmeasures aimed to beneficiallyemploy the multicultural character ofCluj. These principles are the follow-ing:

1. The necessity to preserve tradi-tions and specificities of the differentcultures.

a. officially recognising of local cul-tures and that of minorities,

b. guaranteeing the access of per-sons/communities to their own cul-ture,

c. protecting and promoting culturalinstitutions.

2. The conservation of the languagesof all linguistic communities.

a. insuring an institutional frameworkthat aims to create and support edu-

cation in the mother tongue,

b. facilitating the use of mothertongues in relations with localauthorities,

c. insuring the access to informationin minority languages through thedevelopment and support of audio-visual programmes.

3. The facilitation of interculturalcommunication.

a. promoting the consumption of adiverse range of cultural services,

b. ensuring the pluralism of informa-tion services,

c. stimulating intercultural events inthe field of culture,

d. supporting participation in inter-cultural events.

4. The adoption of multicultural edu-cation.

a. elaborating and applying curriculafor multicultural education in the for-mal education system,

b. supporting intercultural informa-tion services provided by NGOs,

c. supporting the diversity of instruc-tion systems for adults.

5. The development of cultural serv-ices.

a. stimulating artistic creations in allcultural locations,

81


b. the creation of multicultural artisticworkshops.

The adoption of these principles inthe elaboration of local developmentpolicies contributes to the increase ofsocial inclusion of various culturesand minorities, who in turn facilitatethe beneficial employment of localresources for the promotion ofdurable development.

Main problems

Problems facing the Cluj communityfrom the perspective of inter-ethnicrelations can be divided into:

I. Institutional problems

As regards local public institutions

a) The lack of a multicultural visionas far as local authorities are con-cerned. Multiculturalism has not beenconsidered till recently an importantaspect for the development of thecommunity by local authorities.

b) The lack of specialists in thedomain within public authorities. Thisneed refers to specialists in problemsof multiculturalism in general, as wellas specialists for problems of specificcommunities. As far as this latteraspect is concerned, there is a defi-nite need for specialists regardingproblems affecting members of theRoma community.

c) Unsuitable communication of localauthorities with minorities, includingin problems of common interest. It isimportant to mention here the lack of

informative materials in the lan-guages of minorities/or internationallanguages for cooperation. Thesources of information that needdiversification are: the website, thenewspaper of the Mayoralty, theprinting of brochures with usefulinformation, summaries of pieces oflegislation specific for minorities, pinwalls for public information.

d) The lack of cooperation mecha-nisms among numerically smallminorities whose contributions to theenrichment of the life of the commu-nity would otherwise go unnoticed.

e) Low levels of institutional capacityin utilising existing resources activelyused in the non-profit sector for facil-itating dialogue. There are limits inunderstanding the mutual points ofview and constraints regarding spe-cific activities.

A) As regards relations amongminorities and between minoritiesand the majority

a) As formal relations among institu-tions

i. Relatively rare contacts betweenactive organisations of the differentminorities.

ii. Limited access to internal andexternal financial resources neces-sary for joint cultural initiatives.

b) Informal

i. The loss of interest in collaborationover time due to punctual, limited

82


actions.

II. Problems of mutual perceptionsthat exist both between majority andthe different minorities, as well asamong minorities themselves:

i. The fragmentation of the popula-tion on ethnic grounds;

ii. Lack of information regarding eachothers' values/traditions;

iii. The existence of stereotypes andprejudices regarding alternativegroups.

Recommendations

1. Assuming and defining a multicul-tural identity for the city and its pro-motion via all means of mass com-munication;

1.1. The periodical evaluation of thesituation by means of a sociologicalstudy* in order to assess the stateof interethnic relations in Cluj-Napoca and those domains thatrequire intervention.

1.2. The elaboration of a strategyof communication* and the adop-tion of a multicultural identity for thecity.

1.3. The launching of a campaignpromoting a multicultural mes-sage on all channels of communica-tion (the newspaper, the website ofthe Mayoralty, etc.).

2. The creation of a ConsultativeCouncil in the sphere of multicultural-

ism that would bring together leadingrepresentatives of the various ethnicgroups living in the city;

2.1. Identifying and co-optingrespectable, recognised and appreci-ated representatives of the Clujcommunity. The creation of aConsultative MulticulturalCouncil* of the Mayoralty, formedby these respectable representativesof ethnic groups living in the munici-pality. The role of this Council wouldbe to update and put into practicethe strategy of the Mayoralty promot-ing multiculturalism by formulatingproposals and recommendations andby approving decisions of the LocalCouncil in problems that fall withinthe competence of the ConsultativeMulticultural Council.

3. The encouragement and promo-tion of partnerships between publicand private institutions, non-profitorganisations in various fields ofactivity: education, culture, tourism.

3.1. The periodical initiation ofmulti-sectorial meetings (public insti-tutions, non-profit organisations, thebusiness community) for the har-monisation of efforts regarding theaccommodation of ethnoculturaldiversity.

3.2. The encouragement of part-nerships in the fields identified inthe SWOT analysis as being domainspreponderantly segmented on ethnicgrounds: culture, the associativemedium and education, by allocatinga certain score in the evaluationforms of projects financed by the

83


Local Council and which would pro-mote the respective initiatives.

3.3. The allocation of a budget thatwould encourage the co-financingof European projects promoting mul-ticulturalism and multicultural part-nerships in the domains identified aspriorities in the beneficial employ-ment of the municipality's multicul-tural assets.

4. The organisation of multiculturalevents

4.1. The editing of a representativepublication that would illustrate themulticultural potential of the city.

4.2. At the recommendation of theConsultative Council, the hosting ofevents with significant visibilityattended by educational and culturalinstitutions of cultures to be found inthe city (theatres, churches, culturalcentres, publishing houses, schools,media agencies, etc.).

4.3. The celebration of multicultural-ism, by identifying a day dedicatedto the multiculturalism of the city.

5. The city should rely on its multicul-tural potential in encouraging cultur-

al tourism

5.1. The preparation of materialspromoting the city and tourist eventsby the office for tourism proposed bythe strategy for the development oftourism that could strongly rely onthe city's multicultural wealth.

5.2. The improvement of monu-ments' visibility and that of histor-ical buildings by appropriately indi-cating their significance.

6. Raising awareness of the Romaproblem as a component of the mul-ticultural potential of the city

6.1. The hiring of a Roma expertaccording to the provisions of theStrategy of the Romanian Cabinet forthe Improvement of the Situation ofRoma.

6.2. The identification and promo-tion of Roma human and institu-tional resources in the municipality.

6.3. The creation of an institution ordepartments within existing institu-tions for the promotion of the above-mentioned assets (a museum forRoma, etc.).

84


Annex - Institutional localresources of multicultural-ism

The National Theatre and theRomanian State Opera. TheHungarian State Theatre from Cluj,the Hungarian State Opera is the old-est theatrical company in Hungarian,inaugurated in 1792. A majority ofperformances are interpreted intoRomanian.

The “Puck” Puppet theatre runsshows for children both in Romanian,as well as in Hungarian language.

Other public institutions of culture:the National Art Museum, theNational History Museum, TheEthnographic Museum ofTransylvania, „Lucian Blaga” CentralUniversity Library, the Cluj chapter ofthe Academy Library, „OctavianGoga” county library, theTransylvania State Philharmonic.

Babes-Bolyai University, the one thatadopted as its main direction ofdevelopment multiculturalism,enrolling students and employingfaculty with Romanian, Hungarian,German, even Roma ethnic back-ground.

Other institutions of higher education(the University of Fine Arts andDesign, „Gheorghe Dima” MusicAcademy, Cluj-Napoca technical uni-versity, the University of AgriculturalScience and Veterinary Medicine,„Iuliu Haţieganu” Medical andPharmacy School, the ProtestantTheological Institute Cluj, Sapientia

University).

Institutions of secondary educationwith the language of tuition inRomanian, Hungarian (BáthoryIstván theoretical high school,Apáczai Csere János theorectical highschool, Brassai Sámuel high school),as well as institutions of secondarywith multiple languages of tuition (forinstance: „George Coşbuc” nationalcollege – Romanian, as well asGerman language classes; „OnisiforGhibu“ theoretical high school –Romanian and Hungarian languageclasses).

Publishing houses, as well as literaryand cultural magazines – the exis-tence of publishing houses, that ofliterary and cultural magazines,newspapers both in Romanian (dailynewspapers, magazines, amongwhich Steaua, Tribuna Apostrof,Echinox), as well as in minority lan-guages (Hungarian) (among whichSzabadság, Krónika, Korunk, Helikon,Művelődés).

The regional studio in Cluj of thenational television station, TVR, withprogrammes in Romanian,Hungarian, as well as those of otherminorities.

Religious institutions and foun-dations with activities of socialand community interest – thepresence and functioning ofmultiple religious cults in Cluj-Napoca: Orthodox, GreekCatholic, Roman catholic,protestant, Neo-protestant.

85


Institutes of the Romanian Academyin Cluj: „George Bariţ“ HistoryInstitute, „Sextil Puşcariu“ Instituteof Linguistics and History ofLiterature, as well as the FolkloreArchive of the Romanian Academy.

Non-profit organisations, associa-tions, cultural centres: Association forInterethnic Dialogue (Asociaţia pen-tru Dialog Interetnic), Max WeberFoundation, SACRI, the Centre forthe Study of Interethnic Relations,(Centrul de Cercetare a RelaţiilorInteretnice), The „Ion Aluaş” Centrefor the Documentation ofMulticulturalism (Centrul de docu-mentare pentru multiculturalism „IonAluaş”), Civitas Foundation, TranzitFoundation, Transindex Foundation,PATRIR, Resource Centre for RomaCommunities (Centrul de Resursepentru Comunităţile deRomi),Ethnocultural DiversityResource Centre (Centrul de Resursepentru Diversitate Etnoculturală),etc.

Non-profit organisations of differentethnic minorities: KolozsvárAssociation (Kolozsvár Társaság),Transylvanian Museum Society(Erdélyi Múzeum Egyesület),Transylvanian Hungarian CulturalSociety (Erdélyi MagyarKözművelődési Egyesület),Transylvanian Hungarian technicalScientific Society (Erdélyi MagyarMűszaki Tudományos Társaság),Foundation for TransylvanianHungarian Civil Society (ErdélyiMagyar Civil SzervezetekértAlapitvány), “Heltai Gáspár” LibraryFoundation (Heltai Gáspár KönyvtáriAlapítvány), Hungarian StudentSociety from Cluj (Kolozsvári MagyarDiákszövetség), The DemocraticForum of Germans from Romania,Cluj chapter (Deutsche Forum), TheFederation of Jewish Communities inRomania, Cluj chapter, WasdassFoundation, Amare PhralaAssociation, Romano Suno RomaStudents’ Association, etc.