1. Introduction
1. The Parliamentary Assembly, in its
Resolution 1213 (2000) on the honouring of obligations and commitments by “the
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, decided to launch the post-monitoring
dialogue with Macedonia.
Mr
Serhiy Holovaty (Ukraine, ALDE), at that time Chairperson of the
Monitoring Committee, paid a visit to Skopje on 2-5 November 2008,
following the presentation of the last memorandum
on post-monitoring dialogue by his predecessor, Mr Eduard Lintner,
in January 2008.
I was appointed
rapporteur on 24 June 2010, in accordance with the new rules governing
the preparation of post-monitoring dialogue reports since the adoption
of
Resolution 1710 (2010).
2. I carried out three fact-finding visits, from 26 to 28 September
2011, from 7 to 10 May 2012 and from 31 October to 2 November 2012.
My aim was to monitor the implementation of the previously adopted
resolution, collect updated information and identify the key areas
that ought to be addressed in the ongoing post-monitoring dialogue.
In September 2011, I decided to focus on the most recent developments,
namely the outcome of the parliamentary elections of 5 June 2011,
the situation of the media and the implementation of the Ohrid Framework
Agreement (OFA). During my second visit, in May 2012, I had further
meetings, in particular with the General Prosecutor. Discussions
concentrated on the impact of the 2012 interethnic events, the freedom
of the media, the fight against corruption, the situation of refugees
and asylum seekers, the lustration process and decentralisation.
I therefore had a number of meetings with local authorities and
non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in Ohrid, Struga, Vevcani
and Tetovo. I could meet neither the Prime Minister nor the President
of the Republic during my visits, which is unfortunate. I do hope
that this does not reflect a lack of interest in, or commitment
from the highest authorities to co-operation with the Parliamentary Assembly
with a view to honouring the obligations and commitments towards
the Council of Europe, which Macedonia joined in 1995.
3. This report reflects the findings of my visits, which have
not been made public so far by the Monitoring Committee. It is also
based on reports prepared by the Parliamentary Assembly, the Organization
for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the European Commission
(EC), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the Office
of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the
Council of Europe monitoring bodies and the analyses provided by
media and think tanks, in particular the International Crisis Group
(ICG), which published a comprehensive report on 11 August 2011.
It also takes account of the report
published by the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of
Europe, Nils Muižnieks, on 9 April 2013,
following
his visit to Macedonia in November 2012, addressing a number of
issues tackled in this report.
4. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Macedonian
delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly and its Secretariat for
the excellent organisation of my visits and the constructive atmosphere,
for facilitating our contacts with the authorities and for providing
useful and extensive comments on my preliminary draft report.
I would also like to thank Ambassador
Orav, Head of the Delegation of the European Union in Skopje, Mr
Robin Lidell, Head of the Political and Information Section of the
EU Delegation, Ambassador Ralf Breth, Head of the OSCE Mission,
as well as Mr Domenico Albonetti and Mr James De Witt, from the
OSCE Mission, Ms Deirdre Boyd, UNDP Head of Mission, United Kingdom
Ambassador Mr Christopher Yvon, and members of the international
community for the valuable information provided.
2. The Euro-Atlantic
integration process
2.1. The perspective
of integration into the European Union
5. Macedonia is seeking to become a member of the European
Union. It obtained candidate status in December 2005. The European
Union Council of Ministers adopted the Accession partnership in
February 2010. In its progress reports of 2009, 2010, 2011, and
again in 2012, the European Commission proposed to open accession
negotiations with the country.
6. In this context, the European Commission decided to launch
a “High Level Accession Dialogue”
(HLAD)
in March 2012, which should allow
a substantial exchange of views and regular technical consultations
in five key policy areas – freedom of expression, the rule of law,
public administration reform, electoral reform, and economic criteria.
This dialogue should focus on chapters 23 (Judiciary and fundamental
rights) and 24 (Justice, freedom and security) of future EU accession
negotiations and should encourage Macedonia to speed up the fulfilment
of its remaining commitments and obligations and avoid losing the
momentum of further progress in these key areas and deliver results.
Political-level meetings were held on 15 March 2012, 7 May 2012,
17 September 2012 and 9 April 2013. According to the European Commission,
there was good overall progress, which was assessed in the latest
EC Progress report.
7. While the dispute with Greece over the name issue persists
(see below), tensions recently arose with Bulgaria. The Bulgarian
Foreign Minister, Nikolay Mladenov, sent a letter to his Macedonian
counterpart, Nikola Poposki, at the end of November 2012, outlining
three steps that they proposed to undertake: 1) the signature of
an agreement on good neighbourly relations and co-operation; 2)
the building of the necessary infrastructure for enhanced co-operation
by establishing working groups to strengthen relations in key areas;
and 3) the creation of a high-level council in the form of annual
intergovernmental meetings. Despite the fact that Skopje had agreed
to these proposals, Bulgaria joined Greece and vetoed the opening
of the European Union accession negotiations.
The visit of
Bulgarian Prime Minister Borisov to Macedonia on 16 February 2013 was,
however, considered a “significant opportunity” to strengthen political
dialogue between the two countries and underline the importance
of concrete co-operation in the fields of infrastructure, institutions, communication,
trade and investment.
8. Regarding the Bulgarian proposal on the Agreement on good-neighbourly
relations and co-operation, the importance of the symmetry, mutual
respect and respect for all the national, cultural, linguistic and
other specifics was underlined in order to achieve good neighbourly
relations.
9. At its 11 December 2012 meeting, the EU General Affairs Council
proposed that “with a view to a possible decision of the European
Council to open accession negotiations with the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, the Council will examine, on the basis of
a report to be presented by the Commission in Spring 2013, implementation
of reforms in the context of the HLAD, as well as steps taken to
promote good neighbourly relations and to reach a negotiated and
mutually acceptable solution to the name issue under the auspices
of the UN”.
10. On 16 April 2013, the European Commission released its Spring
report on “Implementation of reforms within the framework of the
high level accession dialogue and promotion of good neighbourly
relations”, which provided additional information with a view to
the European Council meeting of June 2013, which should decide whether
or not accession negotiations should be opened. I note that special
emphasis was put on the full implementation of the “1st March agreement”
(see below).
11. The opening of the accession negotiations, a perspective which
is welcomed by all communities in Macedonia, would most certainly
provide further incentive to carry out the reforms. In the meantime,
I can only but encourage the Macedonian authorities and all stakeholders
involved in this process to pursue their efforts to reach an agreement
on the name issue, which would be a political achievement and would
speed up the integration process of Macedonia into the European
Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). I should
also add that the issues to be addressed when negotiating chapters
23 and 24 concern standards that are of primary importance for the
Council of Europe, as they deal with the judiciary, fundamental
rights, justice and fundamental freedoms. The Council of Europe
is ready to support the efforts of the Macedonian authorities to
comply with European standards in the field of democracy, human
rights and the rule of law, and the wide range of areas which are
of common interest to the European Commission and the Council of
Europe.
2.2. The name issue
12. The dialogue launched under the United Nations auspices
by its Envoy, Matthew Nimetz, has not yet been successful; the process
should not be slowed down by the current economic and political
crisis in Greece. On 17 November 2008, Macedonia brought a case
against Greece before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for
“a flagrant violation of its obligations under Article 11” of the
bilateral Interim Agreement.
On 5 December 2011, the
ICJ ruled that Greece had breached the interim agreement reached
by the United Nations in 1995, when it blocked Macedonia’s attempt
to join NATO in 2008.
13. Despite the decision of the ICJ, there has been no progress
on the Euro-Atlantic integration process. Macedonia was not invited
to join NATO at the last Summit in Chicago in May 2012 and the integration
process into the European Union is still blocked. The authorities
stress that United Nations Security Council Resolutions 817 (1993)
and 845 (1993), as well as the Interim Accord dated 1995, set the
framework for this process.
14. Discussions on the name issue were recently renewed, after
the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Macedonia, Mr Nikola Poposki,
and the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Greece, Mr Dimitris Avramapoulos,
met in New York in September 2012, where they were present for the
signing of a memorandum of understanding. The United Nations Envoy
tabled a new proposal in November (the content of which was however
not made public). In January 2013, two rounds of talks were held
between both parties. A new meeting was to follow in April 2013.
3. Results of the
early parliamentary elections of 5 June 2011 and post-election developments
3.1. Results and assessment
of the 5 June 2011 parliamentary elections
15. Early parliamentary elections were called after the
boycott of the parliament by the opposition in early 2011. The Social
Democratic Union of Macedonia (SDSM) had conditioned its return
to parliament on the adoption of constitutional amendments to change
the composition of the Judicial Council; the unblocking of the financial
accounts of A1 TV and other sanctioned media outlets (see below);
a new law on the equal distribution of State funds for media advertising;
government-opposition consensus for amendments to the Election Code; and
the formation of a parliamentary working group to update the voters
list. The Prime Minister, Mr Nikola Gruevski, accepted all but the
unfreezing of A1’s accounts, which, he said, was a judicial issue.
The negotiations
between the parties of the VMRO-DPNME coalition government and the
opposition, led by the SDSM, on the possibility of the latter returning
to the parliament failed. The parliament voted to dissolve itself on
15 April 2011 and called early elections for 5 June 2011.
16. A Parliamentary Assembly ad hoc committee observed the elections
and concluded that “the early parliamentary elections were competitive,
transparent and well-administered throughout the country, but certain
aspects such as the blurring of the line between State and party
require further attention”.
The ad hoc committee also noted
that “[on] election day, voters were able to freely express their
choice in a peaceful atmosphere, despite some irresponsible claims
of irregularities by political parties. The voting and counting process
was assessed as overwhelmingly positive, with no significant differences
between Macedonian and ethnic Albanian areas”.
17. The ad hoc committee identified the following issues:
- It regretted that the amendments
to the Electoral Code were adopted by the parliament by a small majority
on 5 April 2011, only two months before polling day, without obtaining
the opinion of the European Commission for Democracy through Law
(Venice Commission), and that the opposition parties boycotted the
vote.
- It pointed out that the accuracy of the electoral rolls
remains a recurrent problem identified since 1994.
- It emphasised that cases of intimidation and the exertion
of pressure continue to exist from one election to another and that,
even worse, threats were made, especially at the local level, that
civil servants who support the opposition would lose their jobs.
This is extremely worrying in a country where, according to various
estimates, unemployment affects more than 30% of the workforce.
- Cases of family voting were noted in 15% of the polling
stations visited.
18. The ad hoc Committee made the following recommendations –
and I followed their implementation in the course of the preparation
of my report:
“51. The ad hoc
committee is of the opinion that ‘the former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia’ should reinforce its co-operation with the Assembly's
Monitoring Committee in the context of the post-monitoring dialogue
in order to respond to the following concerns associated with the
elections:
– The need to strengthen the legal mechanisms for protecting
the status of public officials, especially at the local level, in
order to deal effectively with the fairly widespread cases of pressure
and threats made during election campaigns that individuals would
lose their jobs;
– The need to strengthen the legal mechanisms for protecting
the status of public officials, especially at the local level, in
order to deal effectively with the fairly widespread cases of pressure
and threats made during election campaigns that individuals would
lose their jobs;
– The need to ensure the actual implementation of the
legal provisions relating to the funding of the political parties’
election campaigns and the media, taking due account of the recommendations
of the GRECO [Group of States against corruption] report on ‘the
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’, published in March 2010;
– The need to promote a culture of dialogue between the
different political forces, independently of ethnic lines, in a
search for compromise in order to avoid the frequent boycotts of
parliamentary proceedings
52. The ad hoc committee calls on the authorities of ‘the
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’ to ask the Venice Commission
for an opinion on the Electoral Code, as revised on 5 April 2011,
and to request the Venice Commission’s assistance in order to strengthen
its internal legal and technical capabilities.
53. The ad hoc committee considers it necessary to prepare
and implement electoral assistance programmes, targeted at the problems
identified in this report.”
19. The results of the elections led to a more balanced
parliament, with a strengthened opposition, and a reduced majority
for the ruling coalition. The distribution of seats is the following:
Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation – Democratic Party
for Macedonian National Unity (VMRO-DPMNE) coalition: 56 (including
3 seats for the diaspora); the Social Democratic Union of Macedonia
(SDSM)-led coalition: 42; Democratic Union for Integration (DUI):15;
Democratic Party of Albanians (DPA): 8.
20. On 28 July 2011, the parliament elected the new government
led again by Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski with 70 votes in favour
and 47 against. The DUI managed to obtain five ministries (including
the defence and justice ministers) and two vice-prime minister positions
(including the vice-prime minister in charge of European affairs).
The platform of the VRMO-DPME and DUI coalition announced that it
would focus on five priorities: economic development; Euro-Atlantic
integration; corruption and organised crime; further implementation
of the Ohrid Framework Agreement and investment in education.
3.2. Post-electoral
events and developments
21. In the aftermath of the elections, Mr Martin Neskovski
died 40 minutes after midnight on 6 June 2011, after having been
brutally beaten in the central square of Skopje during celebrations
held to mark the election victory of Mr Gruevski's VMRO-DPMNE party
the previous day. According to media reports, the police denied their
involvement in the event for two days, after which they shared information
with the public, which later fuelled suspicions of a cover-up and
prompted demonstrations.
They confirmed the involvement
of a police officer in the young man’s death, and arrested and suspended
a 33-year old policeman, Mr Spasov. He was at the time a member
of the special Tigers police unit, tasked with ensuring security
in the square for the winning party's celebrations from 8 a.m. until
midnight on Polling Day. Later, several thousand young people poured onto
the streets of Skopje after news of the fatal beating spread through
the social network sites Twitter and Facebook.
22. The protesters demanded a full investigation into the case,
sought answers from the Minister of the Interior, Ms Gordana Jankulovska,
and also complained that the pro-government media had ignored both
the case and the subsequent protests.
The protesters have been regularly
demonstrating since then, including during my visit to Skopje in
September 2011, to request a full investigation, but also to demand
the revision of the law on the police to ensure stricter civil oversight
of police work and stricter rules for hiring new police officers.
Ms Jankulovska recognised that the interaction
between the police and the people should be improved and informed
me that training was being carried out in this respect. The trial
of Mr Spasov started on 2 November 2011. Mr Spasov was convicted
and sentenced to a 14-year prison term by the Skopje Criminal Court.
The members of the movement “Stop Police Brutality” and Mr Neskovski’s
family, however, accused the government of a biased investigation,
police impunity and intimidation.
23. The arrest of Mr Ljube Boskoski, leader of the opposition
political party “United for Macedonia” (UM), on 6 June 2011 (one
day after the parliamentary elections), in the presence of the media,
which could film the arrest, including the seizure of 100 000 euros
in cash and a gun from Mr Boskoski’s vehicle, raised some questions.
The Ministry of Internal Affairs had been investigating Mr Boskoski
for several months, including during the campaign period. According
to the UM, the arrest was motivated by the government’s desire to demonstrate
power and to take political revenge, as Mr Boskoski has been highly
critical of the government. Mr Boskoki’s conviction to seven years’
imprisonment for illegal financing of the election campaign
and misuse
of his position was upheld in May 2012 by the Court of Appeal, raising
however some concerns about selective justice. In the meantime,
Mr Boskoki has been prosecuted for assisting in the killings of
Marjan Tushevski and Kiril Janev in 2001, at a restaurant in Skopje.
4. Functioning of
democratic institutions
4.1. Preliminary remark
24. Politicisation of public life was often mentioned
to me during my visits, including by officials, though this cannot
be substantiated through official data. Party affiliation seems
to be a prerequisite to obtaining a job (even in the private sector)
or other benefits. This hampers the good functioning of the country,
leaving no alternative for those who fail to be affiliated to a
party, but to leave the country. In particular, well-educated young
people fuel the Balkan “brain drain” abroad. This, I believe, is
a very worrying trend in a country with 30% of its population living
in poverty and where the State employs 25% of the total number of
employed persons.
25. In this respect I would like to commend the efforts made by
various institutions to introduce merit-based recruitment systems
and mechanisms to evaluate the satisfaction of public service users.
I was in particular impressed by the efforts launched by the Minister
of Information Society and Administration to promote such a system
(which, he admitted, clashes with the equal representation principle,
see below), but also e-governance, assessment of the functioning
of the public administration, etc. However, it will take a lot of educational
effort and a change in mentality to ensure that these initiatives
are not undermined by a system driven by party affiliation.
4.2. Electoral code
26. The parliament adopted a new electoral code on 9 November
2012. The opposition, however, complained that this new version
did not incorporate all the recommendations made by the OSCE/ODIHR
and the Venice Commission, and announced that it would launch a
new bill to ensure that the remaining recommendations are incorporated
in the new electoral code. I had encouraged the Macedonian authorities
to seek again the opinion of the Venice Commission on the draft
revised electoral code, to ensure that issues such as the accuracy
of the voters list, the allocation of funds to the media during
electoral campaigns or the representation of minorities in parliament
are in compliance with Council of Europe standards.
27. I should recall that, in its October 2011 joint opinion on
the revised Electoral Code, as amended on 5 and 13 April 2011 by
the Macedonian Parliament, the Venice Commission, while recalling
that “altering the legal framework so close to an election is not
consistent with good electoral practice”, acknowledged that “the amended
Code is improved and provides a solid basis for democratic elections,
mainly in accordance with international standards”. However, the
issues of thresholds for campaign donations, publication of election results,
complaints and appeals procedures, and the system and arrangements
for out-of-country voting would need further consideration.
The Venice Commission
also underlined that “to ensure the integrity of the electoral process,
as well as to enhance public confidence, it is essential that the
Code be implemented in good faith and with a high level of political
maturity”.
28. Concerns were also raised about the accuracy of the voters
list and the inclusion of citizens living abroad. Some interlocutors
mentioned the figure of 1.8 million registered voters, whereas Macedonia
only has about 2 million inhabitants. I was informed that, in 2009,
the Ministry of Interior set up a working group to prepare and update
methodology for the electoral list. It concluded its work in December
2012 after inspecting the registered deaths for the period 1950-2011,
updating the registry of the unique identification number and checking
those persons who did not submit a request for the issuing of a
new biometric identity document.
Despite these efforts to update the registry
,
the accuracy of the voter lists was still raised as a problematic issue
by international observers during the March/April 2013 local elections.
The OSCE/ODIHR reiterated the “longstanding concerns among many
Election Observation Mission interlocutors regarding the accuracy
of voter lists”, which “increased on the first round election day
after a number of voters were not found on voter lists despite possessing
valid biometric identification documents”.
29. In November 2012, the Electoral Code was amended in order
to, according to the authorities, fulfil “the priority recommendations
in the Final Report of the monitoring mission of OSCE/ODIHR, as
well the priority activities assessed in the Roadmap of the Priority
Goals for 2012 adopted on the High-level Accession Dialogue”.
These changes aimed to develop mechanisms for
protection that would provide sufficient separation of the State
and party structures; ensuring the use of legal mechanisms for protection
against illegal financing of the election campaign, increasing transparency
of the accounts and activities of the bodies related, directly or
indirectly, to the political parties; or when already under their
control, ensuring a proactive and effective role for the bodies
competent for surveillance, investigation and establishment of the
regulation of political financing; ensuring transparency in publishing
the election results; and allowing additional regulations of the
complaint procedures.
The
opposition, however, challenged the Electoral Code as revised in November
2012, arguing that not all of the OSCE/Venice Commission recommendations
were integrated into the electoral code, and questioning the legitimacy
and fairness of the local elections planned for spring 2013. Following
my proposal, the Monitoring Committee decided, at its meeting on
13 November 2012, to request an opinion on the revised electoral
code, which is expected to be adopted at the June 2013 meeting of
the Venice Commission. At the same time, I note that the Law on
the Funding of Political Parties will have to be upgraded to comply
with the GRECO recommendations (see below), and the voters list
will have to be completed, even though the census foreseen in 2011
was not carried out and is not on the agenda in the coming months.
4.3. Functioning of
the parliament
30. During my fact-finding visits in 2011 and 2012, Mr
Trajko Veljanoski, Speaker of the Parliament, underlined the good
atmosphere in the parliament following the elections and expressed
his satisfaction that the parliament is functioning properly, he
stressed that the boycott by the parliamentary opposition in spring 2011
had not prevented the parliament from drafting and adopting legislation.
31. The Law on Parliament adopted in August 2009 and Parliamentary
Rules and Procedures approved in September 2010 to a large extent
guarantee the rights of the opposition, which can now table items
on the parliament's agenda. Two oversight hearings and 14 public
hearings with members of the government were organised in 2011.
In 2012, eight public debates, one public
discussion and one oversight debate were organised.
For
example, a hearing was organised in September 2011 on the issue
of freedom of the media at the request of the opposition.
32. Progress has also been observed in relation to the use of
the Albanian language in parliament: draft laws and all material
used in the parliamentary procedure are translated into Albanian.
Albanian can be used in oral procedure in committees and hearings.
The parliamentary television channel is interpreted into Albanian
and since July 2011, all officials elected or appointed by the parliament
may use Albanian when addressing the parliament and its bodies.
The representatives of the Democratic Party
of Albanians, however, deplored that, when chairing the plenary
sessions, deputy speakers could not address the parliament in Albanian.
33. The parliament has taken measures to strengthen its institutional
capacity, in particular through the establishment of the Parliamentary
Institute foreseen in the 2009 Law on the Parliament. However, in November
2012, the Parliamentary Institute was not yet operational and the
recruitment procedure was not completed. By March 2013, however,
the selection process and election of civil servants to managerial
posts in the Parliamentary Institute was reaching its final phase
and was to continue immediately after the local elections.
The
operational budget of the parliament increased by 40% in 2011, leading
to the creation of 30 permanent posts in the parliament and the
renovation of the building.
34. Members of the opposition I met complained about the domination
of the government over the parliament, the lack of parliamentary
debates, the adoption of many laws under urgent or shortened procedure, thus
reducing the legislature to a “voting machine”, and the rejection
of amendments proposed by the opposition. The parliament passed
for example 142 laws between 6 and 26 April 2011, with, I understand,
little or no time for debate. Moreover, the Constitutional Court
annulled provisions in nearly 25% of cases in 2009-2010 in which
laws were challenged, which was often due to drafting errors.
This
figure decreased to 15% in 2011
, which is a positive trend. During my second
visit, in May 2012, the opposition complained of the limited role
of parliamentary debate and had decided to freeze its participation
in the co-ordination meetings of the political groups.
35. I note that the Code of Ethics for parliamentarians remains
to be adopted. I was informed that a working group was established
to that end.
Considering
the highly politicised context in Macedonia, such a code would be
very useful, and could give rise to an exchange of best parliamentary
practices. The Parliamentary Assembly could also provide its expertise
on this issue if requested to do so by the Macedonian authorities.
36. During my three visits, I noted that the parliament was functioning
in a satisfactory way, despite the many tensions that arose among
political parties, including in the ruling coalition during the
discussion on the law on the defenders (see below). However, in
the end, the parliament proved to be a forum where discussions and negotiations
could be handled, and I commended the Speaker of the Parliament
for this situation.
37. The situation has, however, deteriorated in recent months:
during the discussions on the 2013 budget in December 2012, the
government sought the parliament’s approval to raise two fresh loans
from the World Bank (40 million euros) and Deutsche Bank (250 millions).
The opposition resisted, claiming that the government had already
raised the debt too high and was just aiming to boost spending and
foster support to the government ahead of the local elections of
March 2013, instead of cutting costs. The opposition blocked the
work of the parliament’s Committee on Financing and the Budget by
tabling over 1 200 amendments. To bypass them, the government filed
and voted the new draft at a plenary session on 24 December 2012,
a move considered as illegal by the opposition. According to media
reports, the SDMS members initially tried to block the door to the
main assembly hall to prevent the members of the ruling coalition
from entering. The security service was called to intervene as MPs
from the ruling parties entered the hall through a back door. The Speaker
was reported to have been evacuated. Journalists, who had refused
requests by the security officers for them to leave the hall until
normal working conditions were resumed, were removed from the parliament, provoking
an angry response from the media and journalists' associations.
The 2013 budget was then adopted
within minutes by the parliament in the absence of the opposition.
The Prime Minister denounced what he called an attempted “coup d’état”.
38. Outside the parliament, thousands of protesters gathered,
leading to clashes between protesters from the opposition and supporters
of the majority, injuring 18 people, including 11 police officers
and, according to media reports
, three opposition MPs. Since then,
the opposition has launched a series of protests, called for civil
disobedience and announced that it would boycott the parliament
and the March 2013 local elections.
39. The opposition announced on 9 January 2013 that it would take
part in the local elections, provided that three conditions are
met:
a) Three key ministerial posts should be changed (namely the
Minister of the Interior, the Minister of Justice and the Minister
of Finance);
b) General elections should be organised in March 2013, with
an increased international monitoring that should also review the
electoral roll;
c) A new head of the national broadcasting service, MRTV,
should be appointed to ensure impartial media coverage during the
elections.
40. I criticised this latest development and expressed
my concerns about both the forced eviction of parliamentarians and
journalists from the parliament as well as the subsequent boycott
launched by the opposition. I urge all political parties to pursue
dialogue, and contribute, in a constructive way, to the work of the
parliament. Neither the boycott of the parliamentary work nor the
adoption of legislation in the absence of the opposition is an appropriate
way to conduct parliamentary affairs or meet the expectations of
the citizens. I also expressed my worries that this atmosphere was
developing ahead of an electoral campaign, which should allow citizens
to elect their local representatives.
41. On 1 March 2013, a joint EU delegation to Skopje (Commissioner
Mr Štefan Füle, European Parliament Rapporteur, Mr Richard Howitt,
and former European Parliament President Mr Jerzy Buzek) mediated
an agreement with the two main political parties of Macedonia.
This agreement
included a number of proposals aimed
at solving the political crisis, and committed all parties to:
1) supporting the State's strategic priorities by means of
a cross-party Memorandum of Understanding (or a parliamentary resolution)
confirming support for the Euro-Atlantic integration agenda, and
a commitment to refrain from action undermining this goal;
2) resuming normal political life and ensuring that all parties
return to parliament and participate in the scheduled local elections;
3) supporting immediate key reform measures, notably to improve
the functioning of parliament, to convene an ad hoc Commission of
Inquiry to investigate the 24 December 2012 events;
4) launching electoral reform, after the local elections;
5) enhancing freedom of expression, for example, a resumption
of dialogue with journalists, led by the Association of Journalists,
and other confidence-building measures;
6) agreeing an election calendar relating to the registration
of the lists of candidates for the local elections;
7) meeting immediately after the local elections to discuss
the internal political situation, including the findings of the
Commission of Inquiry;
8) continuing the discussions, in good faith, on all options,
and without prejudice for defining the timing of the next parliamentary
elections, on the basis of the implementation of OSCE/ODIHR recommendations,
so that the results can be taken into account in the next European
Commission Progress Report.
42. I have taken note of the explanations provided both
by the ruling majority and the opposition concerning the “24 December
2012 events” in the comments they provided me with in April 2013.
I shall refrain at this stage from taking a position, but I will
emphasise that these events were quite serious; they must be carefully investigated
and learned from. I urge the authorities to speed up the launch
of the work of the Inquiry Commission, and ensure that it will be
able to work independently, and that the results of this investigation
will be debated in parliament. I also call on all political parties
to engage in a constructive dialogue to enable the parliament to
function properly and carry out the reforms expected by its citizens.
I also expect the “1st March agreement” to be fully implemented
by all parties.
5. Implementation
of the Ohrid Framework Agreement, 10 years later
5.1. The Ohrid Framework
Agreement
43. The Ohrid Framework Agreement (OFA), signed on 13
August 2001, stopped the fighting between the Albanian National
Liberation Army (NLA) and the State security forces and provided
for significant reforms to improve the rights of the ethnic Albanians,
some 25% of the two million inhabitants, while maintaining the State’s
unity. These included changes to key passages of the constitution,
including its preamble, to promote the concept of equal citizenship
over the preferential status formerly given to ethnic Macedonians;
provisions on language to regulate and expand the use of the Albanian
language, especially in communities that are at least 20% Albanian;
proportional representation in public administration and State institutions;
protection mechanisms for minorities in parliament and decentralisation.
It
also required the use of a qualified majority (so-called “Badinter
rule”), namely a double majority requiring: 1) a majority vote;
and 2) a majority vote from non-majority communities when the parliament
adopts laws that directly concern the rights of national communities
as specified in the 2007 Law on the Inter-Community Relations Committee.
44. The implementation of the OFA is supervised by the Secretariat
for the Implementation of the Ohrid Framework Agreement (SIOFA),
led by the DUI. I had two meetings with the Deputy Minister, Musa
Xhaferi, to discuss the State of progress and have his views on
the possibility of an overall assessment and benchmarking of the
OFA implementation. The Deputy Minister announced in November 2012
that the SIOFA had then produced a report on the implementation
status of all policies deriving from the Ohrid Framework. This document,
though not made public at that time, has been agreed by all ruling
parties and constitutes a first review of the progress made and
should provide useful analysis and recommendations to further implement the
OFA. The first phase of the OFA review was published on 11 April
2013.
45. One has to acknowledge that the OFA has provided peace in
the past ten years. That said, respect for and protection of minorities
and cultural rights could be enhanced. Equitable representation
is progressing and, according to the figures given by the Minister
of Justice and the Minister of Interior during my visit, 13% of
the staff in the judiciary and 22% in the police are from non-majority
communities. The government has also undertaken steps to foster
interethnic integration in the education system. Nonetheless, the
integration of ethnic communities remains limited and greater dialogue
is needed to foster trust, especially in the areas of culture and
language.
5.2. The OFA implementation
mechanisms
46. The Parliamentary Inter-Community
Relations Committee, established in 2002 by a constitutional amendment
and regulated by the Law on the Inter-Community Relations Committee
of 2007, comprises 19 members
appointed by the parliament and
should examine issues relating to inter-community relations, make
assessments and propose solutions which the parliament is obliged
to take into consideration and decide upon.
However, it seems that it has rarely met
since 2008, because of quorum difficulties.
I
hope that the new, more pluralistic parliament will find a way to
revive the work of this Committee and allow it to play its full role,
also by ensuring better co-ordination with the municipal-level interethnic
committees.
47. The Agency for Realisation of the
Rights of the Communities was set up in July 2008, in
accordance with the Law for the Promotion and Protection of the
Rights of the Communities who are less than 20% of the total population
of the country. The Agency, which started to work on 25 November
2009, is in charge of monitoring the implementation of the above-mentioned
Law and of enhancing the protection of those minorities which represent
less than 20% of the country’s population. Ms Babic-Petrovski, Manager
of the Agency, described the Agency as an independent, advisory
body with an educational role, while regretting its limited budget,
the lack of financial and human resources
and
insufficiently defined competences. The activities of the Agency include
the monitoring of the situation of small communities in the field
of employment, education, information and protection of cultural
heritage, the setting up of databases (on equitable representation,
employment of members of minority communities in public administration,
NGOs dealing with the protection of communities, school attendance
of children belonging to minority communities, etc.) and promoting
cultural programmes on the public broadcasting service (which has
dedicated its second programme to communities). Concerning the census
then in preparation, Ms Babic-Petrovski pointed out the lack of
information, the need to restore confidence between the authorities
and the local communities, and the need to better organise the census
with a view to obtaining relevant figures that could be used for
the 10 years to come.
48. The
Ombudsman monitors
the protection of people from discrimination and the respect for
equitable representation.
His
reports, also addressing the issue of equitable representation in
public institutions,
are submitted to the parliament.
Mr Ixhet Memeti considered that these reports have contributed in
particular to a better integration of people from minority communities.
While the implementation of the adequate and equitable representation
principle has improved, a large number of institutions, including
public enterprises, have not reached the compulsory level of adequate
and equitable representation, or do not apply it sufficiently, especially
at managerial level. The representation of small minorities still
remained an issue.
The Ombudsman concluded
that “ensuring a real balance between the number of employees and
the representation of the members of all communities may contribute
to building multi-ethnic loyalty and tolerance, and at the same
time it may represent a type of prevention due to the elimination
of discrimination on ethnic basis”.
49. At local level, Article 55 of the Law on Local Self-Government
makes provision for establishing
Commissions
for Inter-community Relations (CICRs) in municipalities
where at least 20% of the population belongs to a certain ethnic
community. CICRs are composed of an equal number of representatives
from each community in the municipality. By law, CICRs review issues
that refer to relations among the communities represented in the
municipality. They provide opinions on, and propose ways to resolve
problems that arise between communities. The municipal council is
obliged to review CICR opinions and proposals and take decisions.
Mr
Trajanovski, President of the Association of Units of Local Self-Government
(ZELS), stressed that 35 municipalities have established CICRs,
while only 20 of them were compelled to do so by law. A survey carried
out by the UNDP reveals, however, that the composition, the functioning
and the practice of CICRs may vary from one municipality to another.
In addition, the UNDP identified a lack of clarity, at national
and local level, over who is in charge of enforcing the law and
uncertainty over the consequences of violating the law and concluded
that “to date, research has identified that ‘the Badinter principle’
has not been applied in a majority of cases where it should have
been, for reasons ranging from the interpretation of what constitutes
a ‘cultural’ or ‘language’ issue to opposition to the use of the
regulation”.
5.3. The decentralisation
process
50. I also examined the state of progress of the decentralisation
process, as decentralisation was one of the main demands of the
Albanians in 2001. The OFA stipulates transfer of State competences
to municipalities in the areas of public services, urban and rural
planning, environmental protection, local economic development,
culture, local finances, education, social welfare and health care.
Key laws have been passed, including on local self-government (2002)
and territorial organisation (2004). A total of 123 municipal borders were
redrawn to consolidate municipalities, give them greater power and
achieve more balanced ethnic representation.
51. Under the current law, there are 84 municipalities and the
city of Skopje is a separate unit (with 10 municipalities). Two
important laws – on illegal buildings and on construction – are
in force since July 2011. These allow municipalities to manage local
land, though the central government retains significant responsibilities,
including management of agricultural land, forests and water resources,
which are important sources of revenue. The Equal Regional Development
Law (2007) obliges the government to commit 1% of gross domestic
product to regional development, provides the basis for regional
development and allows municipalities to group together to apply
for development funds, but it has not been implemented.
In September
2011, the President of the Association of Units of Local Self-Government
highlighted the need to receive more resources from the central
State, an increased share of VAT (from the current 3.5% to 6%),
an increased share of income tax (30% instead of the current 3%),
etc. He welcomed the adoption of the Law on Management of State-Owned
land that entered in force in July 2011 and emphasised that all
but six municipalities have entered into the second phase of the
decentralisation process. In the meeting I had with the Mayor of
Ohrid, who is from the opposition party SDSM, the issue of selective
allocation of funds to local authorities and limited self-government
was raised.
52. In October 2012, all but one of the 85 municipalities entered
the second phase of fiscal decentralisation; the share of VAT transferred
to municipalities increased to 4%.
53. On 18 October 2012, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities
of the Council of Europe adopted its recommendation
on
local democracy in “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”.
I note in particular that the Congress expressed concerns, among
others, about the risk of continuous central influence, ambiguity in
the law regarding competences, a still strong dependence on government
grants, little discretion with regard to local taxes, a comparatively
low proportion of own-source taxes in their revenues and limited
participation of women in local political life.
54. I very much encourage the Macedonian authorities to implement
fully the recommendations of the Congress and use the expertise
of the Council of Europe to strengthen local democracy and finalise
the decentralisation process, which will remain one of the main
pillars of the stability and democratisation of the country.
55. In the context of the political crisis, the local elections
had a political significance beyond their municipal scope. As pointed
out by the Congress and the OSCE, “the leader of the VMRO-DPMNE
coalition described the elections as a referendum on the country’s
future, while the SDSM chairperson argued that the results of the
elections would determine whether or not early parliamentary elections
should be held. In addition, the elections were widely viewed as
an important test in the context of the shared ambition of all mainstream political
parties to promote the country’s Euro-Atlantic integration”.
56. The local elections of 24 March and 7 April 2013 were seen
as “well administrated” by the international observers, including
the Congress and the OSCE. The observers noted however that “partisan
media coverage and a blurring of State and party activities did
not always provide a level playing field for candidates to contest the
elections. Interethnic tensions overshadowed the campaign. Election
day was calm, although some procedural irregularities were observed.”
The
observers also noted gaps in the Electoral Code, problems in the
functioning of the Rules of Procedures of the State Electoral Commission,
and issues related to the accuracy of voter lists.
57. The ruling parties won in almost 90% of the municipalities
(58 municipalities for the VRMO-DPME-led coalition, and 14 municipalities
for the DUI), while the SDSM-led coalition won in four municipalities
and the DPA in two municipalities. The Serbian Progressive Party
in Macedonia won in one municipality, and two independent candidates
won in the two remaining municipalities.
58. Two decisions of the Administrative Court, annulling the results
of the elections in the highly disputed municipality of Centar in
Skopje (which is hosting the Skopje 2014 project) and in Struga
(where a joint Albanian candidate defeated a joint Macedonian candidate)
based on the VRMO-DPME complaints, caused controversy. These decisions
caused the Head of the Macedonia’s Administrative Court, Isamedin
Limani, to resign. Re-voting took place on 21 April 2013 and saw
the victory of the opposition candidate Andrej Zernoski, who decided
to review the Skopje 2014 project.
5.4. Some considerations
about the implementation of the Ohrid Framework Agreement
59. Let me first emphasise once again that the 2001 OFA
helped to restore peace and stability to the country. It led to
the adoption of major constitutional and legislative reforms aiming
at reducing interethnic tensions and promoting mutual understanding
and tolerance. The measures adopted since 2001 dealt with decentralisation,
non-discrimination, equitable representation, use of languages spoken
by at least 20% of the population, and so forth. The ratification
of the Framework Convention on National Minorities
(ETS No. 157) in 1997 also contributed
to the protection of national minorities, as pointed out by the
Advisory Committee of the Convention and the Committee of Ministers
of the Council of Europe.
More
than a decade after the signing of the OFA, it might be useful to
share some thoughts after the visits I paid to Macedonia, where
I had the opportunity to meet a number of stakeholders.
60. The opposition Albanian party DPA considers that the OFA currently
offers no political and economic perspective for citizens. The DPA
negotiated and signed the OFA 12 years ago. However, it considers
that it has not improved the situation of Albanians, and has even
worked against advancement of their rights. Mr Aliu, DPA co-ordinator
in the parliament, deplored the limited use of the Albanian language
and the limited State budget allocated to Albanians who, according
to him, contribute more than 30% of the budget, while only 2% or
3% is returned for culture, education, health, or infrastructure
expenditure benefiting Albanians. Economic discrimination against
Albanians is also denounced by the newly formed party National Democratic
Revival (which has two members in the parliament), which calculated
that only 4% of public funds are allocated to projects for Albanians.
61. It also seems that some Albanian voices are exploring more
radical options, proposing to negotiate an Ohrid-II agreement.
62. As pointed out in paragraph 25 above, the principle of equitable
representation sometimes clashes with a merit-based recruitment
system. NGO representatives pointed out that minority members recruited
in public administration sometimes stay at home, as there is no
work for them to do, which leads to the frustration of people who
cannot go to work, as well as taxpayers. In addition, they mentioned
that recruitment is often politicised. The European Commission acknowledged,
in its 2011 Progress report, that “the overall number of civil servants
from the non-majority ethnic communities reached 30%” however “the
trend of recruiting employees from these communities on a
quantitative basis without regard
to the real needs of the institutions continued. … A large number
of newly recruited civil servants received salaries, even though
they were not assigned any tasks or responsibilities and representation
of the non-majority communities at senior level remains very low”.
This trend was confirmed in
2012; it was noted that “the trend of recruiting employees on a
quantitative basis without sufficient regard to the real needs of
the institutions continued. Most of the recruits have not reached
their designated institutions while already receiving remuneration
by SIOFA. The recruitment procedure for non-majority members is
not harmonised with the general recruitment procedures and remains vulnerable
to undue political influence”.
63. This situation generates a lot frustration, both in the Macedonian
and Albanian ethnic communities. As far as employment is concerned,
the reform of the public administration, launched by the Minister
of Information and Public Administration, aims at introducing a
merit-based system of recruitment of civil servants. From my discussions
with Deputy Prime Minister Xhaferi, I understood that this new approach
could conflict with the need to ensure the guarantee of positive
discrimination, stemming from the OFA; the Minister was particularly interested
in collecting examples of good practices developed in other European
countries confronted with the same challenges.
64. Other NGOs believe that the OFA should now be considered as
being an integral part of the constitution. Attention should therefore
be focused on the implementation of the OFA provisions which should
be handled by parliament and the public institutions.
65. In this context, I should mention the annulment of the census
that was
due to be carried out from 1 to 15 October 2011 and monitored by
the European Statistical Agency EUROSTAT. The government decided
to stop the process after the members of the State Census Committee
could not agree on whether citizens who had been living in other
countries for more than a year should be taken into account. Mr
Aliu had explained to me two weeks earlier that the DPA regretted
the lack of preparation for this process to make it valid and acceptable
for the Albanian side. Therefore, the DPA proposed changes in the
draft law on registration and suggested delaying registration in
order to have a political discussion in parliament.
66. During my second visit to Macedonia, I paid particular attention
to the impact of the recent interethnic incidents that had occurred
in many places since January 2012, with varying intensity. Unfortunately,
some of these incidents were serious: in Gostivar, an off-duty policeman
shot two ethnic Albanian youngsters, which sparked a number of demonstrations
and incidents throughout the country. He was given a life sentence,
while claiming he was acting in self-defence.
Near
Skopje, five local fishermen, including four young boys, were assassinated
in April 2012, on the eve of the Orthodox Easter, a criminal case
known as the “Monster case”. On 30 October 2012, after six months
of investigation, the organised crime prosecutor filed criminal
charges against the six men suspected of direct involvement in the
murders. The testimony of a protected witness seemed, however, to
be the main evidence in the case, as no murder weapon had been found
and two suspects were out of the country, believed to be hiding
in Kosovo.
* The trial started in November 2012.
The court accepted, on 20 December 2012, the defence lawyers' request
for more time to study the charges. The hearing of the first three
defendants, Agim Ismailovic, Fejzi Aziri and Rami Sejdi, started
on 9 January 2013. The three of them pleaded not guilty.
67. Several interlocutors emphasised that the events that occurred
in several municipalities were not interrelated and should be considered
as separate incidents; the murder of the five fishermen was not
seen by the authorities as ethnically motivated, but connected to
radical Islamism (as Macedonia is a partner of the NATO-led coalition
in Afghanistan
).
68. However, if one looks at the overall picture, this series
of events could be seen as a worrying trend. It seems that interethnic
tensions are fuelled by the frustration of both Macedonians and
ethnic Albanians about the unsatisfactory implementation of the
Ohrid Framework Agreement, high poverty and perhaps exacerbated by
the urban “Skopje 2014” project, putting a strong emphasis on Macedonian
national history.
69. The Deputy Prime Minister, who is in charge of the implementation
of the OFA, was rather critical of the institutional response to
these incidents (knowing that citizens do not trust the police or
the courts), and the assessment of the seriousness of the situation.
He noted that the demonstrators were now voicing religious motivation
– a rather new phenomenon in Macedonia.
70. I welcome the fact that thousands of people were allowed to
gather in Skopje on 17 March 2012 for a “March for Peace” to protest
against this interethnic violence. I remain, however, puzzled by
the many subsequent demonstrations, organised both by young Albanians
and Macedonians using social networks, to gather parallel protests,
which eventually led to sporadic ethnic and religious friction.
I believe that strong messages by political and religious leaders
are needed to stop this potential escalation of violent incidents.
A new political initiative to address the most pressing needs of
the population, in particular of young people, and foster social
cohesion, is needed.
71. Interethnic cohabitation remains fragile. I should mention,
as an example, the recent submission of a draft bill aiming to grant
social benefits for those who fought in the Macedonian army in 2001
(and their families), which was submitted after the Minister of
Defence (from the DUI party) paid tribute to the Albanian fighters
of 2001. The draft “law on the defenders” provoked a lot of debate,
shook the ruling coalition, and ended up in a parliamentary row.
The DUI had first considered supporting a vote of no confidence,
submitted by the opposition (and finally rejected), to provoke early
elections, but then decided to submit 15 000 amendments to this
law, while the VRMO-DPME did not consider withdrawing its draft
law.
72. Despite this tense situation, I urge Macedonian politicians
to refrain from further nationalistic rhetoric whenever interethnic
incidents – or incidents which might not be ethnically motivated
but involve people from both communities – occur. Such statements
could have a devastating effect on the overall coexistence of the two
communities. The relevant Macedonian institutions now have to carry
out investigations, on an efficient, non-discriminatory basis, to
ensure that these incidents are fully investigated and the perpetrators
prosecuted, and that justice is done. I also expect politicians
to take a more proactive stance and value the benefit brought so
far by the Ohrid Framework Agreement in maintaining peace. Mutual
understanding and confidence has, as yet, not been reached.
6. Rule of law
6.1. Reform of the judiciary:
latest developments
73. A number of reforms have been carried out to increase
the efficiency of the justice system. Progress has been made in
reducing the backlog of cases.
The total number
of pending cases in national courts at all levels decreased from
more than 675 000 in 2010 to less than 300 000 by the end of 2011.
From 1 July 2012 to 1 March 2013, 324 831 enforcement cases and
non-contentious cases were removed from the court system as a result
of a transfer of competences to professional bailiffs and notaries.
The Judicial Council adopted in February
2012 guidelines on the minimum number of cases that should be solved
monthly by judges in the principal courts, courts of appeal, Administrative
Court, High Administrative Court and the Supreme Court.
74. The courts at all levels have continued to publish judgments
on their websites (nearly 135 000 rulings were published by 2012),
which are an important tool in promoting transparency and access
to justice. Macedonia should introduce a merit-based recruitment
system in the judiciary. In 2012, it was required under law that
50% of all appointees should be graduates of the Academy for Judges
and Prosecutors (AJP). However, in 2011, the Judicial Council gave
preference to non-graduate applicants in the appointments of first instance
judges, thus not complying with its commitment to merit-based recruitments.
Since 2013, all judges elected to the principal courts have completed
studies at the Academy for Judges and Public Prosecutors. Furthermore,
from July 2013, the election of judges to the higher courts will
be subject to several specific qualifications and promotion will
be based entirely on merit.
Grounds for the dismissal of judges should
also be clear, precise and predictable.
75. Despite some progress, Macedonia will have to face further
reforms in the judiciary to increase its efficiency; there are currently
678 judges, a figure which is more than 50% higher than the European
average in relation to the size of the population. 80% to 85% of
the budget allocated to the court system (29 million euros in 2012,
or 0.4% of GDP) is spent on the salaries of judges and administrative
staff. The budget of the Public Prosecutor’s Office is around 5.3
million euros. The majority (83%) is spent on salaries, and leaving
scarce resources for equipment and facilities.
76. In 2010, Macedonia adopted a series of laws to implement a
number of measures, including new criteria on the election of judges,
a system for the career of judges, redefining the provisions for
disciplinary liability and assessment of incompetent performance
by judges. This will be done through implementation of objective and
measurable criteria, increasing the transparency in the work of
the courts, and implementation of new systems for assessment of
judges through objective qualitative and quantitative criteria.
77. However, substantial progress is needed to enhance the independence
of the judiciary: many interlocutors complained of, or suspected,
a selective justice system which disproportionally targeted the opposition
(see my previous remarks about the latest cases concerning the media,
and the politicians prosecuted, etc.). While it might be difficult
to substantiate such allegations, the point is that there is undoubtedly
a lot of mistrust by representatives of civil society in the justice
system. More efforts therefore should be put into setting up a merit-based
system of recruitment, the promotion and dismissal of judges and prosecutors
and to ensuring that the institutions guarantee the independence
and impartiality of the justice system in practice.
6.2. Combating corruption
78. In May 2012, I brought up the issue of corruption
with the authorities and the competent anti-corruption bodies. A
positive trend can be seen, as the country has moved up 40 places
in the Transparency International anti-corruption index over the
last five years
, which was confirmed in 2012.
Amendments were made to the legal
framework for anti-corruption policy in line with GRECO recommendations;
the adoption of a new Criminal Procedure Code should improve the
investigative procedures for complex organised crime and corruption cases;
an investigative team should work directly for the Public Prosecutor.
79. However, in its 2011 progress report, the European Commission
considered that corruption remains a serious concern. It pointed
out that the independence and impartiality of the State Commission
for the Prevention of Corruption remains fragile; stronger legal
and institutional protection of whistle-blowers was needed.
80. Referring to the 2010 State Statistical Office annual report,
Transparency Macedonia alleged that out of €1.5 billion worth of
public procurement projects inspected that year, some €500 million
worth were deemed “potentially corrupt” by the office, but no investigations
were launched or charges pressed.
A United Nations Office
on Drugs and Crime study indicated that the average bribe paid in
Macedonia is €470.
81. Measures introduced to combat low-level bribery and corruption
and raise the awareness of the general public are to be welcomed.
In addition, substantial reforms
in the prosecution system have been introduced and, to be successful,
the Public Prosecutor, the State Audit Office and the State Commission
for the Prevention of Corruption should not only be provided with
the necessary staff and funds, but also show a strong willingness
to address the issue of corruption.
82. In this context, particular attention should be paid to the
funding of political parties: while the 2004 Law on Financing of
Political Parties (as amended in July 2009) provides a legal framework,
Transparency International urged the authorities to strengthen existing
legal practice and implement the existing penalties, introduce harsher
punishment for non-compliance with the relevant legal measures related
to donors, implement the GRECO recommendation related to authorisation
of one leading institution responsible for the supervision of political
finances instead of the existing fragmented and inefficient system.
83. During its plenary meeting in March 2012, GRECO adopted a
compliance report on Macedonia related to the third evaluation round,
focusing on incrimination and transparency of party funding. I welcomed
the decision of the Macedonian authorities to authorise the publication
of this report in June 2012.
- GRECO concluded that five of
the seven recommendations made in the field of incrimination were implemented
satisfactorily and one was dealt with in a satisfactory manner after the revision of the Criminal
Code. It called on “the authorities of ‘the former Yugoslav Republic
of Macedonia’ to abolish the possibility given to the courts to
restore the seized bribe to the briber”.
- Concerning transparency of party funding, six recommendations
had been addressed to the Macedonian authorities. GRECO acknowledged
that the amendment to the Electoral Code of April 2011 had brought
some progress. However it raised a number of concerns related to
financial reporting, the involvement in practice of NGOs, including
think-tanks and research institutes established by political parties
(which are, de jure, no longer
authorised by law to campaign for political parties), the need to raise
the awareness of political parties about their obligations under
applicable political funding regulations.
- In addition, GRECO is concerned that the latest amendments
to the Law on the Financing of Political Parties that reduced the
reporting obligations of political parties, “will not result in
greater transparency on the regular financing of political parties,
quite the contrary” (paragraph 55) and the inadequate means of the
State Statistical Office to assume a leading role in the effective
supervision, investigation and enforcement of political financing
regulations (paragraph 56).
- GRECO concluded that Macedonia “has made tangible efforts
to comply with the recommendations issued in respect of Theme I
– Incriminations. Very limited steps have been taken to meet the
concerns raised in respect of Theme II – Transparency of Party Funding;
much more clearly needs to be done in this area”. GRECO concluded
that the current low level of compliance with the recommendations
is not “globally unsatisfactory” and invited the Head of the delegation
of “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” to submit additional
information regarding the implementation of recommendation vii (Theme
I – Incriminations) and recommendations i and iii-vi (Theme II –
Transparency of Party Funding) by 30 September 2013 at the latest.
84. The Law on Financing of Political Parties was further amended
in October 2011 (Law No. 148), November 2012 (Law No. 142) and February
2013 (Law No. 23), regulating the allocation of public funds to political
parties, the content and modalities for publication of a registry
of donations and financial reports, the delivery of donation reports
to the Public Revenue Office and the State Audit Office, measures
for suspending the payment of public funds to political parties
should they fail to comply with their obligation of submission or publication
of their annual reports on time, public funding allocated to the
setting up of intraparty research-analytical centres, and funding
of training for political parties on financial reports, etc. A rulebook
for political parties on the form, structure and manner of completing
the annual report was adopted by the Minister of Finance on 31 January
2013.
85. The Criminal Code was also amended in November 2012 (Law No.
142), providing additional measures to separate executive positions
from party positions during elections, further regulate financial
obligations during election time, set new deadlines for submitting
the final report on election campaigns (30 days after the completion
of the campaign); a signed memorandum of co-operation between the
State Election Commission, the State Audit Office and the State
Commission for the prevention of corruption to exchange information
on possible irregularities; measures regulating the partial or total
loss of compensation if political parties disregard the limitation
on expenditure or obligation to submit a financial report on election
campaigns, etc.
86. While I welcome the changes made in the Criminal Code, the
Law on Financing of Political Parties and the Law on the Prevention
of Conflicts of Interests, I am rather worried that the entry into
force of the new Law on Criminal Procedure (adopted in 2010) was
postponed to November 2012, and then to December 2013
– due to lack of budgetary and human resources
and equipment. This will further delay the implementation of the State
Programmes for the Prevention and Repression of Corruption and for
the Prevention and Reduction of Conflict of Interest and the Action
Plan 2011-2015, adopted by the State Commission for the Prevention
of Corruption, including the setting up of investigative centres
and a judicial police, foreseen by the new Law on Criminal Procedure.
87. I urge the Macedonian authorities to implement fully the GRECO
recommendations and thus reactivate the fight against corruption,
which is undermining the functioning of democratic institutions.
In the context of the high politicisation of public life, special
attention should be paid to the fight against corruption in public procurement,
which continues to be a serious problem
,
despite efforts by the authorities to combat it.
7. Human rights and
fundamental freedoms
7.1. Freedom of expression
and media
88. During my visits, I met a number of journalists from
various media, who mentioned the large number of media outlets in
Macedonia, the difficult working conditions of journalists, the
close association of media owners with politicians, the funding
of media and the share of government advertising in the media, defamation, self-censorship,
etc.
89. Media freedom and pluralism are a matter of concern. As pointed
out by the European Commission, the media continue to be subject
to interference from political and business interests. Intimidation
of journalists and selective enforcement of legislation against
media companies are increasing causes for concern. The enforcement
track record against illegal media concentrations is poor, hampered
in part by the lack of transparency of ownership.”
90. The State has a financial role and is therefore in a position
to influence the media, as advertising is a powerful incentive.
According to the Broadcasting Council’s analysis, the government
spent €17 million on advertising in 2008, and €12 million in 2009
for 658 hours of air time. Local observers say the government and ruling
party gave the contracts to “friendly” media. A1 TV, for example,
consistently had high viewer ratings, but Macedonian Telecom, of
which the government are minority shareholders, withdrew its advertisements
in early 2009.
91. We were also told that A1 TV owner, Mr Velija Ramkovski, once
a supporter of governing coalitions, got into trouble after his
relations with Mr Gruevski deteriorated in 2009. In November 2010,
at a politically sensitive time, police raided A1 as part of an
investigation into alleged tax fraud by 11 smaller commercial companies registered
at its address.
92. In its report on the observation of the 5 June 2011 elections,
the Assembly delegation recalled the chronology of the events:
“–
On 25 November 2010, representatives of the State Revenue Office,
accompanied by the police, raided the headquarters of the television
company A1 TV and three daily newspapers, Vreme, Spic and Koha e
Re, to investigate alleged cases of tax evasion by those media.
Following investigations, these companies’ bank accounts were frozen
under a court order.
– The opposition stated that these investigations were
politically motivated because the same media had apparently in the
recent past not been prosecuted for tax evasion because they had
praised the government.
– In December 2010, the main opposition party, the Social
Democratic Union of Macedonia (SDSM), organised a major demonstration
in Skopje calling for an end to the action against those media and
for the release of the people arrested in connection with the investigations,
including Velijia Ramkovski, a rich businessman and owner of the
television channel A1 TV.
– For the opposition, it was a case that involved freedom
of expression, while for the authorities it was a criminal matter.
– On 28 January 2011, the SDSM decided to leave the parliament,
boycott its proceedings and call for early elections. The other
opposition parties followed suit, including the Democratic Party
of Albanians (DPA), which had been boycotting the parliament since
2009.
– Negotiations between the parties of the VMRO-DPNME coalition
government and the opposition led by the SDSM on the possibility
of the latter returning to the parliament failed and on 15 April
2011 the parliament voted to dissolve itself and called early elections
for 5 June 2011.”
93. I would like to recall the facts that led to the
closure of four media outlets in 2011.
In
June 2011, the Tax Revenue Office demanded that A1 TV pay €9.5 million
in back taxes; on 12 July 2011, the authorities proceeded with a
forceful collection of debt, and, on 26 July 2011, after the Tax
Revenue Office declined the request to pay in instalments, a court
declared the company bankrupt and appointed a transitional owner.
94. The dailies Vreme, Spic and Koha
e Re, owned by the local Plus Production company registered
at the same address as A1 and part of the ongoing investigations,
were told to pay €1 million in back taxes, and stopped publishing
on 2 July 2011, due to lack of funds.
95. On 26 July 2011, a bankruptcy procedure against A1 TV was
opened in Skopje Basic Court 2 upon the initiative of the Public
Revenue Office. On 29 July 2011, the Agency for Electronic Communications
(AEC) issued a decision to revoke A1 TV’s licence, without waiting
for the decision of the Broadcasting Council. A1 TV stopped broadcasting
on 30 July 2011. Around 230 station employees were expected to lose
their jobs. The Association of Journalists (AJM) and the Union of
Journalists and Media Workers issued joint statements expressing
concern for the independence of the media.
96. On 24 August 2011, preparations for launching a bankruptcy
procedure against A2 TV were also initiated. However, on 26 August
2011, Mr Tomor Canoski, brother of businessman and MP, Mr Fijat
Canoski, gave funds to A2 TV to repay its debt to the Public Revenue
Office. The funds were given in the form of a short-term loan, which
had to be repaid within one year.
97. I had requested in September 2011 clarification on the closure
of the four above-mentioned media outlets. The officials and representatives
of the parliamentary majority we met emphasised that the closure
was motivated by allegations of tax evasion and could not be considered
as an infringement of the freedom of media. This was repeated to
me during my second visit.
98. On 14 March 2012, Mr Ramkovski was sentenced to 13 years’
imprisonment for tax evasion, criminal association, money laundering
and misuse of public office.
There is no doubt that tax evasion
needs to be targeted and prosecuted. However, the fact that only
opposition media have been affected leads to serious concerns and
raises the issue of selective justice and prosecution. State authorities
should be mindful in a democratic society of the effect such prosecutions
may have on media plurality.
99. The representatives of these four media deplored the financial
control and the pressure put on company managers and the threat
not to give commercial advertising that led to a reduction of revenue.
Mr Crvkovski, leader of the SDMS, also denounced the financial and
political pressure exerted against critically oriented media when
I met him.
100. The OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Ms Dunja
Mijatovic, raised different issues related to the ongoing deterioration
of media freedom, arguing that “closing critical media never leads
to political and economic stabilisation, but to stagnation and the
loss of trust in governments and politicians”.
She
paid a visit to Skopje on 27 October 2011, urging the authorities
to decriminalise defamation (165 cases are currently brought against
journalists), to create a self-regulatory body which would help
improve professional standards and prevent journalists from filing
defamation lawsuits against each other, to improve the implementation
of laws on media ownership to avoid illegal cross-ownership and
political influence in media outlets, as well as to create provisions
on the transparency of government advertising.
101. My meeting with the then President of the Broadcasting Council
in May 2012 was very informative: Mr Stefanoski deplored the fact
that the political atmosphere had drastically changed after the
elections. He regretted the amendments to the Law on Broadcasting
Activity adopted on 15 July 2011, whereby 9 out of 15 members of
the Council are now politically appointed. Therefore the Broadcasting
Council could no longer be considered as an independent body and,
he stressed, was no longer complying with Recommendation Rec(2000)23
of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.
He
stated that it is not possible to speak about freedom of media when
the government, which is the largest advertiser for media, tries
to control the media through financial sponsorship.
102. During my visit in November 2012, the new composition of the
Broadcasting Council was again mentioned to me as raising serious
doubt about the impartiality of its activities.
103. I was pleased to learn, however, that the Broadcasting Council
took some initiatives to clarify the ownership of the media, avoiding
conflict of interest and setting the date of 15 September 2012 to
comply with the law. The conflicting ownership of one national television
station and two national radio stations by parliamentarians was
subsequently cleared: one MP resigned from his political position,
one MP decided to sell his radio stations, while another MP modified
the ownership of his media.
104. The worrying situation in the media was also reflected in
the 2011 European Commission Progress Report on Macedonia: “The
media continue to be subject to interference from political and
business interests”. In addition, “intimidation of journalists and
selective enforcement of legislation against media companies are increasing
causes for concern”.
105. The Commission's remarks echo similar concerns raised in July
2011 by a number of media watchdogs such as Amnesty International,
the Vienna-based South East Europe Media Organization (SEEMO) and
the France-based group Reporters Without Borders.
106. Discussions had been initiated between the government and
journalists. A joint working group of officials and media professionals
was formed on 10 October 2011 and tasked with negotiating journalists'
demands, which included decriminalisation of libel, strengthening
the public broadcasting service and a more equal distribution of
government advertising money in the media.
However,
I learnt during my second visit that the negotiations between the
associations of journalists and the government were suspended. Speculation
of a drastic increase of libel fines as part of the new media law
raised further concerns. Journalists expressed their worries about
political pressure exerted on them, precarious working conditions
and self-censorship.
107. A memorandum of understanding was finally signed on 13 June
2012 between the government and the Association of Journalists (ZNM),
which identified five areas to be discussed, including the decriminalisation
of defamation and “insult”, the strengthening of public broadcasting,
the transparency of government advertising and improving journalists’
and editors’ respect for professional standards.
108. I was however informed that, on the same day, the Broadcasting
Council decided to withdraw the broadcasting licence of the A2 TV
station – the last remaining part of the media empire of Velija
Ramkovski – on the grounds that the station failed to include enough
news and educational content in its programmes to account for 5%
of its air time. The Workers’ Union of Journalists described this
explanation as “absurd”, as other broadcasters ignore the Broadcasting
Council’s rules “on a daily basis”.
109. More recently, the opposition party SDSM expressed its concerns
about the changes of the ownership and editors policy of TV ALFA,
and the closure of the pro-opposition weekly and daily magazine
FOKUS, caused
by sudden death of their owner Nikola Mladenov, which, according
to the SDSM, remains unexplained.
110. The Law on Civil Liability for Insult and Defamation was prepared,
in co-operation with the European Commission and with Council of
Europe experts, to improve the legislation and ensure that it complies
with the Council of Europe standards and case law of the European
Court of Human Rights. It was adopted on 12 November 2012 by the
parliament, which must be commended for this move. 325 pending criminal
charges for libel and defamation against journalists were closed
after the entry into force of the amendments to the Criminal Code
(Law No.142 of November 2012), leaving it to the plaintiff, within
a month after the termination of the criminal proceedings, to initiate
a civil procedure for insult or defamation, and seek compensation
for the damage.
The
bill also regulates Internet portals, websites and blogs.
111. This law introduces a maximum fine of €27 000 (ie €2 000 for
the author, €10 000 for the editor-in-chief, and €15 000 for the
owner of the media outlet) as a “compensation of intangible damage
caused by insult or defamation”.
While
this limitation is progress compared to the previous legislation,
the high financial sanction could be a deterrent to journalists
and media owners. According to some experts, these sanctions might
entail a risk of influence by company owners and chief editors on
the reporters’ work and jeopardise the environment of free journalistic
investigation and reporting. Article 8 of the law foresees, however,
that the author of a text will not be held responsible, if he/she
proves that he/she was ordered to write the text by the company
owner or in a case where the text was significantly altered by the
editor.
112. I welcome the steps taken by the authorities to ensure the
necessary training for the judiciary and journalists
and to translate and
publish over 40 key judgments of the European Court of Human Rights relating
to Article 10 on the websites of the Ministry of Justice and the
Academy for Judges and Public Prosecutors
to ensure that all judges are able to
apply the legislation, including the newly adopted Law on Civil
Liability for Insult and Defamation, and ensure freedom of expression
in conformity with European standards.
113. My overall impression, after my three visits, was that the
media sector remains weak: for the size of the country there is
a huge number of media outlets; the funding of the media remains
heavily dependent on public advertising, which amounts to 50% of
all advertising offered to the media – and raises suspicions about
political interference with the media; the professional standards
remain insufficient to enable independent, balanced and investigative
journalism; the work of the Broadcasting Council, in its new composition,
is being questioned as the independence of this body is not seen
as guaranteed by the legal provisions. In my view, public broadcasting
needs to be strengthened. The switch to digital television in 2013
will pose new challenges and most probably affect substantially
the media landscape.
7.2. The lustration
law
114. Macedonia is engaged in a lustration process, as
recommended by the Parliamentary Assembly.
A lustration law was adopted
in 2008. In March 2011, the ruling majority widened the time span
of the law beyond 1991, challenging, for the second time, the Constitutional
Court’s decision and broadening the range of professions subjected
to check-ups to include journalists, NGOs,
clergy and members of other professions.
In March 2012, this provision was declared unconstitutional by the
Constitutional Court, as it obliged people from a wide range of
professions to swear that they had not collaborated with the secret
police during the communist period and afterwards.
115. The Constitutional Court also shortened the time span of the
law that was previously applicable until 2019. The court ruled that
it may cover only the communist period from 1945 to 1991 and not
the period after the country gained independence from Yugoslavia
and became a democratic society.
116. The VMRO-DPMNE submitted a new draft lustration law in April
2012, while the coalition partner DUI made its support conditional
on the adoption of a law on rehabilitation of victims of past regimes.
In
the meantime, the composition of the Constitutional Court had been
changed, and three new members had been appointed by the government.
117. The Commission on the Verification of Facts (Lustration Commission)
had declared, in May 2012, over 30 people to be former informants.
However, 15 of them appealed to the Administrative Court in Skopje,
which later annulled the decisions of the Commission concerning
them.
118. To my surprise, in October 2012, the parliament adopted a
new version of the lustration law
quite similar
to the previous one, therefore disrespecting the previous decisions
of the Constitutional Court. This law was then, once again, challenged
in the Constitutional Court. At the request of the President of
the Constitutional Court, the Venice Commission adopted an amicus
curiae brief
on 14-15 December
2012 on the Law on determining a criterion for limiting the exercise
of public office, access to documents and publishing the co-operation
with the bodies of the State security of “the former Yugoslav Republic
of Macedonia”.
119. The Venice Commission specified that it only intended to provide
the Macedonian Constitutional Court with material in respect of
the compatibility of this law with the European Convention on Human
Rights, as well as elements from comparative constitutional law,
in order to inform its own consideration of the case. The final decision
regarding the binding interpretation of the Macedonian Constitution
and the limitations it puts on the Lustration Law would lie with
the Constitutional Court. The Venice Commission also deemed it necessary
to recall that “the interpretation of the Constitution by the Constitutional
Court is binding on all national institutions from the administrative,
judicial and legislative branches, which are obliged to respect
it and adhere to it”.
- As regards the time frame, the Venice
Commission noted that “introducing lustration measures a very long
time after the beginning of the democratisation process in a country
risks raising doubts as to their actual goals. Revenge should not
prevail over protecting democracy. It follows in the Commission’s
view that applying lustration measures more than 20 years after
the end of the totalitarian rule requires cogent reasons. The Commission
recalls nevertheless that every democratic State is free to require
a minimum amount of loyalty from its servants and may resort to
their actual or recent behaviour to relieve them from office or
refrain from hiring them”.
- As regards the period of the
past to be screened, the Venice Commission considered
that the time period to be screened would have to be limited, as
the purpose of lustration is to bar people with an anti-democratic
attitude from office: “While lustration laws may vary according
to the historical developments prevailing in the relevant State,
they must be inspired by the principles of rationality and proportionality basing
a decision on deprivation of office on a specific behaviour dating
back to – at least – 21 years ago and as much as 78 years ago, may
– if at all – only be justified on the basis of most serious forms
of offences, in particular massive and repeated violation of fundamental
rights, which would also give rise to substantial custodial sentence
under criminal law” (paragraph 24). The Venice Commission added that
“political, ideological and party reasons are normally present in
a functioning democracy and may not be used as grounds for lustration
measures, as stigmatisation and discrimination of political opponents
do not represent acceptable means of political struggle in a State
governed by the rule of law”, leaving it to the Macedonian Constitutional
Court to assess the legitimacy of the extension of the application
of the Lustration Law to acts committed after 17 November 1991.
- As regard the personal scope
of the application of the law, “the Venice Commission
notes that, consistent with the above principles, in a previous
decision the Macedonian Constitutional Court found that the State
could not go beyond persons employed in the State bodies and those
who are on a decision-making position by lustrating members of the
universities, religious communities, media, civic organizations
(NGOs): such an enlargement of the personal scope of the Law would
result ‘in the interference by the State’ in the work of the concerned
persons” (paragraph 41). Therefore “the application of lustration
measures to positions in private or semi-private organisations goes
beyond the aim of lustration, which is to exclude persons from exercising
governmental power if they cannot be trusted to exercise it in compliance
with democratic principles. The contested connection with the totalitarian
regime must be defined in a very precise manner”.
- The Venice Commission also raised concerns about the lustration
procedure, namely the absence of the person concerned from the procedure
before the Verification Commission, coupled with the publication of
this person’s name as a collaborator, which is at variance with
the right of defence, notably the right to equality of arms, and
the presumption of innocence” (paragraph 65), the lack of precise
provisions regarding the procedural aspects of the verification
process and the possible appeal about the exercise of the verification
powers of the Commission (paragraph 69); the publication of the
decision on the Verification Commission’s website before the relevant
court decision (as the decision of the Commission may be appealed
to court within eight days) (paragraph 73).
120. The Lustration Commission is in a difficult position, as the
two members appointed by the main opposition party (SDSM), Janakie
Vitanovski and Blagoja Geshoski, resigned on 18 December 2012. They deplored
that the Commission is headed by an “illegitimate President”
and accused the Commission of labelling
certain people as collaborators, based not only on insufficient
evidence, but by ignoring evidence that proved to the contrary.
The
Lustration Commission still has the necessary quorum to continue
its work however.
121. It is now up to the Macedonian Constitutional Court to deliver
its decision on the Lustration Law – and I expect all branches of
the Macedonian institutions to comply with it. I should stress that
challenging decisions of the Constitutional Court are a worrying
signal in terms of respect of the rule of law. I should also note
that a decision deriving from this controversial law is now being
challenged at the level of the European Court of Human Rights.
7.3. Torture and ill
treatment
122. In 2010, the European Committee for the Prevention
of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (CPT) visited Macedonia
and addressed a number of recommendations and requests for information
to the authorities in relation to the law-enforcement agencies,
prison establishments, psychiatric institutions and the Demir Kapija
special institutions for mentally disabled persons.
In January 2012, the Macedonian government
requested the publication of the report and submitted its comments
on the CPT’s observations,
which highlight the initiatives
undertaken to improve the system. I should like in particular to
mention a project on Reconstruction of Prisons and Educational-Correctional
Institutions, which is co-funded by the Council of Europe Development
Bank (46 million euros) and the Macedonian government (6 million
euros) and the preparation of a National Strategy on Development
of the Prison System with IPA funds, as well as a number of projects
funded by various States.
123. While some progress has been noted in the prison system, thanks
to continued training of prison staff and prison reconstruction,
a number of problems remain as prisons are
underfunded
and understaffed and suffer from poor management, poor material
conditions, limited health care provision, a lack of educational
and rehabilitation activities, in particular for juveniles, and
the lack of an independent inspection mechanism to address violations
and punish perpetrators.
124. I would urge the Macedonian authorities to continue their
efforts, and to comply with the remaining CPT recommendations. In
this context, I very much welcome the launch of a joint Council
of Europe/European Union programme on “Capacity building of the
law enforcement agencies for appropriate treatment of detained and sentenced
persons” in December 2012. I hope this programme will pave the way
for other co-operation programmes and reinvigorate the partnership
between Macedonia and the Council of Europe.
125. A landmark decision was also delivered by the European Court
of Human Rights, which condemned the CIA practice of renditions
and secret detentions. In the case
El-Masri
v. “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, the Court
concluded that there had been violations of Article 3 (prohibition
of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment), 5 (right to liberty
and security), 8 (right to respect for private and family life)
and 13 (right to an effective remedy). The applicant, a German national
of Lebanese origin, had complained that he had been arrested and
tortured in Skopje, because he was suspected of belonging to a terrorist
organisation, and that he was handed over to the CIA which then
kept him in a secret detention centre in Afghanistan. The Court
held that Macedonia had been responsible for his torture and ill-treatment
both in the country itself and after his transfer to the US authorities
in the context of an extra-judicial “rendition”. As pointed out
by the Parliamentary Assembly’s President, this decision vindicates
the findings of the Assembly’s reports on this subject-matter prepared
by former Assembly member Dick Marty (Switzerland, ALDE).
7.4. Fight against trafficking
in human beings
126. Macedonia ratified the Council of Europe Convention
on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (CETS No. 197)
on 27 May 2009. Macedonia remains
a source, destination and transit country for human sex trafficking
and forced labour. The report on the 1st evaluation round is currently
being prepared by the Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking
in Human Beings (GRETA) and should be considered later by the Committee
of the Parties.
127. Pending the publication of the first evaluation report, I
note that, according to the European Commission
,
moderate progress has been achieved in addressing trafficking in
human beings. The Centre for Victims of Human Trafficking accommodated
nine victims in 2011 and two other victims, who were foreign citizens,
were placed in the Foreigners’ Reception Center in Skopje. In 2011,
35 persons were charged on suspicion of trafficking, compared with
25 in 2010 and 12 persons were convicted and imprisoned in 2011 (there
were 11 in 2010).
A
comprehensive, multi-disciplinary and victim-oriented approach to
trafficking still needs to be developed, and proactive identification
of victims of trafficking needs to be improved.
7.5. The institution
of the Ombudsman
128. In its last progress report, the European Commission
noted that the recommendations of the Ombudsman’s Office continued
to be respected by the public bodies in the majority of cases (78%).
The least responsive bodies in this regard remained the second instance
government commissions, followed by the Ministry of Finance, the
Ministry of the Interior and local self-government units.
This is corroborated by the Congress of
Local and Regional Authorities, which regretted that consultations
with the Ombudsman’s office in the legislative procedure are still
not regular and have been very limited since the last elections,
while local authorities continue to be among the least responsive
authorities to the Ombudsman’s instructions and recommendations”.
The
majority of violations concerned consumer rights, property rights,
labour rights and prisons.
7.6. Combating discrimination
129. The 2010 Law on Prevention and protection against
discrimination legislation (anti-discrimination law) was enacted
in 2012. The Commission for the protection against discrimination
was set up.
130. The law does not, however, include a reference to sexual orientation,
which is a ground for discrimination and stigmatisation in the country,
and could fail to protect the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender (LGBT) people. The Commission for Protection from Discrimination
considered complaints from the LGBT community and had the Ministry
of Education agree to review textbooks and withdraw parts that have
negative LGBT stereotypes and prejudices.
131. A few days before my visit in October 2012, a young activist
had been attacked in Skopje, two individuals had violently attacked
the President of the human rights NGO “LGBT United Macedonia”, Alen
Shakiri, on the street, and the new LGBT centre had been attacked.
The
NGO deplored inflammatory articles relayed by the media, which linked
homosexuality to incest, paedophilia and polygamy, and was so shocked
by statements made by Spiro Ristovski, the Social Affairs Minister,
that they decided to sue for harassment
and discrimination. The Minister issued a disclaimer to the media.
7.7. Situation of refugees
and internally displaced persons
132. According to the UNHCR, Macedonia hosts nearly 1 600
refugees, mostly of Roma ethnicity, who left their homes as a result
of the 1999 conflict in Kosovo. The UNHCR gives priority to achieving
durable solutions for Kosovar refugees through voluntary return
and local integration, in accordance with the government's strategy.
257 persons were voluntarily repatriated to Kosovo and Serbia in
2011 and the number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) decreased
from 611 in 2010 to 474 in 2011
and 296 in February
2013.
Limited housing
is a major constraint and projects are currently being developed
to improve the housing possibilities.
133. The issue of missing persons and the durable accommodation
of 90 people who are still living in six collective centres was
addressed by the Commissioner for Human Rights during his last visit.
134. I was informed that most of the asylum seekers from Afghanistan,
Pakistan, Africa and the Middle East (who amounted to 400 persons
in 2010, a figure which was expected to increase) leave within weeks
of their arrival. The Minister of the Interior expressed her concern
about this rising number (from 180 in 2010 to 740 in 2011) and the
huge pressure that could harm the system of protection of asylum
seekers, who usually intend to reach west European countries.
135. Macedonia adopted amendments to the Law on Asylum and Temporary
Protection in 2012 (to comply with the European Union directives
), the authorities
prepared a “Strategy on Integration of Refugees” and a National
Action Plan to implement the Strategy during the period 2008-2015,
especially in the fields of housing, education, health protection,
employment and social protection. By February 2013, there were 16
recognised refugees and 587 people who were under subsidiary protection,
the majority of whom requested international protection after the
conflict in Kosovo in 1999. The refugees belonged mainly to the
Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian ethnic communities. An annual programme
for integration of refugees was launched by the Minister of Labour
and Social policy in 2011 to encourage refugees to take a proactive
role in their local integration. In October 2012, a health card
was given to 342 refugees (covering 588 refugees), giving them access
to the national system for health insurance.
136. I welcome the amendments made to the Law on Free Legal Assistance
and the Law on Health Insurance, which now includes asylum seekers,
and the adoption of an integration programme for 2012, ensuring
State funding for housing support to persons who are granted asylum.
However, I understood that a number of
issues related to the asylum procedure remain open, such as first
instance asylum decisions and the decision on determination of refugee
status, despite improvements and the delivery of identity documents to
asylum seekers.
137. The UNHCR representative I met in May 2012 confirmed that
national asylum practices ought to be improved, both with regard
to the Refugee Status Determination procedure and access to social
and economic rights compatible with international standards and
European Union accession requirements, ensuring that this process
takes place in a legal framework and avoids overexposure to vulnerability
and risks. The prevention of statelessness, including accession
to the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, remains
at the forefront of UNHCR activities in this country where nearly
1 200 people are at risk of statelessness.
7.8. The situation of
the Roma people
138. As regards the rights of Roma, Minister Mustafa (former
Mayor of Suto Orizari, the only Roma municipality in Europe) indicated
that there are 54 000 Roma according to the data available – 40
000 of which live in Suto Orizari. He explained the measures taken
by the Macedonian authorities, emphasising the need to improve the
living conditions of the Roma and access to education for Roma children.
However, Roma continue to face very difficult living conditions
and discrimination. Macedonia was, since July 2011, chairing the
Decade for Roma Inclusion. The Minister conceded that there was
no specific action targeting Roma IDPs (1 500 being registered as
refugees).
139. During my visits to Macedonia, I was informed of the action
undertaken to protect the rights of Roma. A number of initiatives
have been taken to support Roma, including the adoption of a strategy
on social inclusion of Roma 2012-2014 and the launch of a Roma health
mediator programme in 16 municipalities. Requests for the legalisation
of illegal houses were submitted to the municipalities and new Roma
information centres have been opened. In October 2011, the Macedonian
authorities, in co-operation with UNHCR, launched an initiative to
identify and register any persons not yet appearing in the registry
of births, which is now reaching its final stage. 459 Roma children
were included in a project on “inclusion of Roma children in pre-school”,
in co-operation with the Roma Education Fund and 18 units of local
self-government.
140. However, there is apparent discrimination against Roma in
the fields of employment, housing and health, etc. According to
a report published jointly by the European Union Agency for Fundamental
Rights (FRA) and the UNDP, only 15% of young Roma adults surveyed
have completed upper-secondary general or vocational education,
compared with more than 70% of the majority population living nearby;
on average, less than 30% of Roma surveyed were in paid employment.
141. Following his visit to Macedonia in November 2012, the Commissioner
for Human Rights, Nils Muižnieks, urged the Macedonian authorities
to promote the human rights of Roma, pointing to the disproportionate
number of Roma children who are placed in “special needs” schools
for the learning-disabled, which should only be necessary for those
with severe disabilities, Roma children should attend classes in mainstream
schools; the statelessness and lack of personal identification documents
that still affect many Roma, including children, preventing their
access to basic services.
142. Concerning the issue of nationality, I was provided with extensive
information on the Law on Nationality, amended in 2004, transitional
measures to find permanent solutions to the problems of individuals
who,
de jure and
de facto, had no nationality after
the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia, the efforts made by
the Ministry of the Interior, in co-operation with UNHCR, the Council
of Europe, the OSCE and NGOs during the transitional period (2004-2006)
to inform the public about the amended Law on Nationality. As a
result, by February 2013, 2 600 Roma people who had submitted a
request were able to obtain Macedonian nationality.
143. I would like to commend the Macedonian authorities for the
efforts they put into the registration, integration and increasing
access of the Roma to social rights. I would also like to strongly
encourage Macedonia to pursue these efforts and, through inclusive
policies, contribute to the initiatives launched by the Council
of Europe to combat discrimination against Roma, including Roma
children.
7.9. The issue of bogus
asylum seekers
144. In recent months, I was alerted by NGOs about the
situation of bogus asylum seekers, mostly Roma people seeking asylum
in European Union countries. There were allegations that possible
practices and proposals – which would not have been compatible with
Council of Europe and international legal instruments – could be
developed to deter these persons from abusing the visa liberalisation
regime, such as confiscation of their passports. While I did not
collect any evidence of such practices, the Minister of the Interior, Ms Jankuloska,
confirmed that the Penal Code had been amended, making the abuse
of the visa liberalisation regime a criminal offence. She confirmed
that measures were being taken to stop a trend that threatens the visa
liberalisation regime, including the checking of documentation to
verify the purpose of the travel and the intention to return to
their country, while Macedonia was working at the same on the improvement
of the living conditions of these people.
145. The prevention of bogus asylum seekers in Macedonia has been
addressed by the Macedonian authorities and the European Commission
in the framework of the implementation of the visa liberation regime. However,
I need to stress that this question must also be addressed in line
with human rights standards. I will here refer to the statement
by the former Commissioner for Human Rights, Thomas Hammarberg,
recalling that “the right of the individual to leave his or her
country is an established human right”, and underlining that “those who
moved and sought asylum within the European Union had done so on
their own initiative and because of a genuine experience of physical
and/or economic insecurity, and wanted to get away from injustices
and/or poverty and abject misery” and concluding that “seeking asylum
is a human right and those who have grounds for protection status
should be granted such status. Others will have to accept a negative
decision”.
146. Commissioner Muižnieks was also concerned about allegations
of ethnic profiling by the authorities, which reportedly prevents
many Roma from leaving the country under the visa-free travel regime
instituted three years ago. “Such measures may run counter to certain
international standards, such as freedom to leave one's country
and the right to seek asylum, and result in another layer of discrimination
against the Roma minority.”
147. Measures include controls at the border, the marking of passports
for those whose asylum requests were turned down, and criminal sanctions
for those who organised the travel of “bogus asylum seekers”, following the
reform of the Penal Code and the adoption of the amendments to Law
No. 135 on travel documents in October 2011.
Information
in the media referred to 6 500 Macedonians retained at the Serbian
border between April 2011 and October 2012.
Again, I urge
the Macedonian authorities to apply preventive and effective measures
in compliance with international standards, which should never deprive
people of their right to leave the country.
148. The number of asylum applications lodged by the citizens of
the country in the European Union decreased from 7 550 in 2010 to
5 545 in 2011. Since the entry into force of the above-mentioned
Law No. 135, by February 2013, a total of 1 370 people were returned
or deported and prohibited from travelling abroad, according to
official data.
149. However, long-term policies to improve social and economic
inclusion of the most vulnerable groups of the population most likely
to migrate remain underdeveloped and underfunded. Continuous training
on detection of forged documents was provided for staff of diplomatic
and consular missions.
8. Conclusions
150. My overall impression at this stage is that the country
is committed to progress on its way to fulfilling all the remaining
commitments and obligations and adopting the necessary legal framework.
Although the lack of involvement by the President and Prime Minister
in the preparation of this report does raise questions as to the strength
of that commitment. I have also noted that the country remains highly
divided, across both political and ethnic lines, and that the implementation
of laws remains problematic.
151. The polarisation and politicisation of society gives the ruling
party VROM-DPME a major responsibility to ensure that an inclusive
dialogue is developed with all segments of society and political
parties. A series of actions undertaken against the media, opposition
parties and NGOs is a matter of great concern for the opposition
and the representatives of the civil society, who perceive these
actions as selective and as a sign of radicalisation. Such moves
will not contribute to enhancing the social cohesion of a country
that remains highly divided, that still needs to overcome the consequences
of the 2001 events and find ways to foster a feeling of “living
together” taking into account the sensitivity of the different communities,
including
the smallest ones. In this respect, it is essential to carry out
a well-prepared census with an undisputed methodology, as the results
of this census will have a direct effect on all communities.
152. De-politicisation of public life will be a challenging issue,
which has to be seriously addressed by the authorities and endorsed
by all political parties in order to enhance the transparency and
efficiency of public institutions and boost the socio-economic development
of the country. In this respect, every support should be given to
the further development and application of merit-based recruitment,
which could offer real perspectives to the youth in Macedonia, a
country where a third of the population lives below the poverty
line.
153. We should not underestimate the significant improvements in
interethnic relations brought about by the Ohrid Framework Agreement.
The OFA therefore remains an essential element for democracy and
rule of law in the country, as pointed out by the European Commission.
I
believe that only the full implementation of the OFA in a fair,
transparent and inclusive manner can contribute to securing peaceful
coexistence and ensure the full participation of non-majority communities,
including the smallest ones, in public life, and their access to social
rights, in particular jobs. Continuous efforts, through dialogue
and confidence-building measures, are much needed to reach this
objective. The recent interethnic incidents are a sign of a situation
that remains fragile and that new political initiatives would be
welcome to enhance social cohesion.
154. Reliable statistics, evaluation and benchmarking of the implementation
of the Ohrid Framework Agreement are essential to make further progress.
I therefore commend the Macedonian Government for the stocktaking
report on the implementation status of policies deriving from the
Ohrid Framework Agreement, which should be publicly debated, analysed
and should inspire new policies.
155. In this polarised context, the issue of freedom of media is
crucial. The current trend is quite worrying and the authorities
should tackle this issue seriously, involving journalists in enhancing
the transparency of media ownership, ensuring the protection of
journalists, ensuring the independence of journalists and improving
their working conditions and professional standards. The decriminalisation
of defamation is a positive step towards enhancing the freedom of
the media.
156. I hope that the outcome of the June 2011 elections, that led
to a more equitable distribution of seats among the four main political
parties (VMRO-DPMNE, SDSM, DUI and DPA), will continue to provide momentum
to promote a constructive approach to policy drafting, to the elaboration
of laws in compliance with international standards and to the implementation
of legislation. All political parties have their share of responsibility
and the parliament should assert fully its role, including its oversight
responsibilities.
157. In this respect, I would urge the Macedonian authorities to
take a vigorous approach to tackle the grounds for discrimination
and segregation and consolidate inclusive policies that will boost
the development of the country and strengthen social cohesion.
158. Many reforms are still being conducted and further progress
is expected in the field of public administration and the judiciary,
the fight against corruption, the implementation of the rule of
law, freedom of expression, the implementation of the European Charter
of Local Self-Government (ETS No. 122), the situation of IDPs and
asylum seekers, etc.
159. The launch of the High Level Accession Dialogue with the European
Commission in March 2012 led to renewed co-operation with the Council
of Europe and helped Macedonia to speed up the fulfilment of its remaining
commitments and obligations towards the Council of Europe, as issues
of common interest will have to be addressed.
160. In this respect, I would strongly suggest to the Macedonian
authorities that they increase their co-operation with the Council
of Europe and take full advantage of their membership in the Organisation
to improve the rule of law, human rights and democracy, including
parliamentary governance. Such co-operation could at the same time
pave the way to meeting the European Union criteria contained in
chapters 23 and 24 of the accession negotiations (relating to fundamental
rights and justice). I trust that a renewed partnership with the
Council of Europe, in co-ordination with the European Union and
the OSCE, would benefit the overall reform process undertaken by
Macedonia. I therefore strongly encourage the Macedonian authorities
to make use of the expertise and exchange of good practice offered
by the Council of Europe in a multilateral forum. This leads me
to propose that the Council of Europe fully support the efforts
of the Macedonian authorities to fulfil their remaining commitments
and obligations, and consider opening a Council of Europe office,
in accordance with Committee of Ministers Resolution CM/Res(2010)5
on the status of Council of Europe Offices, in order to “promote
and support the policies and activities of national authorities,
as well as those of the Council of Europe bodies, related to membership
of the Council of Europe; provide advice, support and overall in
situ co-ordination with national authorities in planning, negotiation
and timely implementation of targeted Council of Europe co-operation
activities, including Joint Programmes with the European Union and
other donors; facilitate the identification of needs for capacity-building,
in co-operation with national authorities and co-ordinate activities
in the country with other international organisations and institutions
(EU, OSCE, UN), as well as other international and local partners
active in the country”.
161. In the meantime, I encourage the Macedonian authorities to
work closely with the Council of Europe monitoring mechanisms and
take due consideration of the recommendations drafted by the Commissioner
of Human Rights in 2013.
162. While I understand the disappointment expressed by the Macedonian
authorities after the European Council failed to agree on the opening
of the accession negotiations, as recommended by the European Commission,
I believe that continuing the domestic reform process can only but
contribute towards this objective. The support of the international
community and neighbouring countries is essential to facilitate
the democratisation process of Macedonia and pave the way for its
integration in the European Union and NATO, to which it aspires.