Compar ativ e o ver vie w and
description of the M acedonian situa tion
CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR
SELEC TION OF CIVIL SOCIETY
OR GANIZ ATIONS IN CR OSS-SEC TOR BODIES

CRITERIA AND
PROCEDURES
FOR SELECTION
OF CIVIL SOCIETY
ORGANIZATIONS
IN CROSS-SECTOR
BODIES
Comparative
overview and
description of
the Macedonian
situation
October 2011

CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR SELECTION OF CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZA-
TIONS IN CROSS-SECTOR BODIES
Authors:
Emina Nuredinovska
Katerina Hadzi-Miceva Ewans
Translation:
Silvana Stojanova
Proofreaded:
Elena Georgievska
Designed, edited and printed by: Skenpoint, Skopje, 2011
Circulation: 500 copies
CIP – Каталогизација во публикација
Национална и универзитетска библиотека „Св. Климент Охридски“, Скопје
340.13:342.51 (035)
Criteria and procedures for selection of civil society organization in cross-sector bodies/[Emina Nuredi –
noska, Katerina Hadzi-Miceva Ewans]. – Skopje : OSCE, 2011.
– pp. ; charts ; 20 см
Библиографија: стр. 44-45
ISBN 978-608-4630-02-9
1. Хаџи-Мицева Еванс, Катерина [автор] а) Закони – Донесување – Граѓанска партиципација – Прирачници
COBISS.MK-ID 86122506
Supported by:
The content of this publication does not necessarily represent the view or the position of the
OSCE Mission to Skopje.

Table of Contents
I.INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5
II. DESIGNING MECHANISMS FOR CSO PARTICIPATION …………………………………………. 6
III. EX AMPLES OF SELECTION PROCEDURES FROM SELECTED
COUNTRIES IN EUROPE ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 11
BULGARIA: The Civic e-Governance Platform, BlueLink …………………………………………11
CROATIA: The Council for Civil Societ y Development and the National
Volunteering Board ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13
HUNGARY: Selection of CSOs in the National Civil Fund …………………………………………. 18
POLAND: Selection of members to the Council of Public Benefit Activit y …………. 21
SERBIA: Monitoring and Evaluation of the Povert y Reduction
Strateg y Serbia ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 22
SLOVENIA: Rules of Procedure for Selection of CSO representatives
developed by CNVOS ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 23
I V. CURRENT PR ACTICE OF SELECTION OF MACEDONIAN CSOs ………………… 26
Selection by the state administration bodies ……………………………………………………………. 26
Selection by the civil societ y organizations ………………………………………………………………. 29
V. CONCLUSIONS ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 36
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS ……………………………………………………………..
……………………. 38
VII. PROPOSED MODELS ……………………………………………………………..
……………………… 40
Annex 1: Matrix for administrative review and assessment
of the applications ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 46
BIBLIOGR APHY ……………………………………………………………..
………………………………………….. 48

– 5 –
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Involving citizens and their organizations in the processes of developing and imple –
menting policies and laws is highlighted as one of the important values of a democrat –
ic legislative process. Such involvement assumes the right of citizens and civil societ y
organizations (CSOs) to be informed about the upcoming legislative initiatives and
the opportunit y to provide their opinion on the draft documents, especially if they
affect them. It also provides the possibilit y for active involvement in working groups
and other bodies which make decisions about the policy environment and legal drafts
which affect the societ y. While the aspect of information and consultation tend to be
regulated in more detail in different laws and regulations, the active involvement in
cross-sector government bodies is not always guaranteed through legal documents.
And when there is openness for such involvement, often the question arises – how
to select the members of the public and especially the CSOs. This analysis will focus
on the aspect of selection – what criteria and procedures are being used in Europe
in order to identif y the current practices and recommend model(s) for consideration
among the Macedonian Government and CSOs.
The first part of the paper presents examples of procedures and criteria from Europe.
Examples include not only processes where organizations are involved in actual law
drafting or policy making, but also processes for selection of CSOs in government bod –
ies responsible for development of strategic policy for the sector or a specific area of
activit y in which organizations work (e.g., environment). The paper focuses on pro –
cesses that concern CSOs, but also mentions other organizations where relevant.
The second part of the paper provides an analysis of the current trends and proce –
dures for involving Macedonian CSOs in the work on cross-sector working groups or
government bodies. The examples of involving CSOs are divided in two main groups:
first, where selection is done by the governmental institutions, and second, where
representatives are selected by CSOs.
The third part of the paper proposes possible models for selection of CSO representa-
tives that can be used as guidelines for state institutions in the processes of establish –
ing of transparent procedure. They can be used by CSOs as a tool for advocacy and
lobbying for clear and transparent rules for involvement in working groups and other
bodies.
1 The following paper was commissioned by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)
Mission to Skopje. It was developed by Emina Nuredinoska (Macedonian Center for International Coopera-
tion – MCIC, Macedonia) and Katerina Hadzi-Miceva Evans (European Center for Not-for-Profit Law – ECNL,
Hungary), September 2011. Copyright © 2011 by the OSCE, MCIC, ECNL. All rights reserved.

– 6 –
II. DESIGNING MECHANISMS FOR CSO PARTICIPATION
The following section discusses the general considerations that should be considered
when planning a model for selection of CSOs in government bodies which have been
set up to serve a specific function. The following general considerations have been
identified: t ype and mandate of the body; purpose of involvement of the CSO; possibil –
it y for diverse groups to nominate; transparency and openness of the process; clarit y
of criteria which are predefined; use of web portals and databases.
In addition to these general issues, specific consideration should be given to issues
such as: who appoints the members, who selects the members, what are the timelines
and deadlines, is the process organized in one or two steps, should organizations be
required to register and what documents should they submit for this purpose, and
s i m i l a r.
1) Procedure for selection
i. General considerations of the process
CSOs take active part in different bodies. For example, they can take part in: (1) bod –
ies which have consultative or advisory role to the government, such as councils, (2)
bodies which monitor the implementation of a national strategy or legal act, or a fund –
ing program, (3) bodies which decide on distribution of funds, (4) management bod –
ies of within state bodies, such as national foundations or funds, (5) bodies which
make decision on certain issues, such as granting public benefit status, as well as in
(6) working groups which develop and monitor implementation of policies, strategies,
laws, regulations, guidelines etc. Therefore, when designing the mechanism, first
consideration should be given on the type and the mandate of body where CSOs will
participate.
The role of the CSOs in these bodies can be different. They can have a representa-
tive function, when they represent their own organization or a net work (either cross-
sectoral, nation-wide alliance, or network on particular issue – for example, network
of women’s rights organizations). CSOs can also have an experts’ role. In these cases,
while they may be selected because of the organizations or networks they represent,
the main factor and criteria will focus on particular expertise that CSOs or the indi –
viduals possess in a specific area which is a competence of the body. Therefore, when
deciding on which criteria or mechanism to adopt, second consideration should be
given to the purpose of the CSO involvement, type of input and role the participat –
ing individual or organization is expected to provide in the process.

– 7 –
The group of organizations that can potentially nominate representatives in the
government bodies, especially in a representative role can be large. Therefore, the
government and organizations which facilitate the process should make all attempts
necessary to allow for candidacies from wider group of organizations and treat
them equally based on clearly defined criteria to ensure credibilit y of the process.
In addition, the process should rely on methods which will help facilitate involvement
of groups with special needs and/or vulnerable groups, or under-represented groups
in societ y.
The European Commission reinforces this principle:
“[…] the challenge of ensuring an adequate and equitable treatment of participants in
consultation processes should not be underestimated. The Commission has underlined,
in particular, its intention to “reduce the risk of the policy-makers just listening to one
side of the argument or of particular groups getting privileged access[…]. This means
that the target groups of relevance for a particular consultation need to be identified
on the basis of clear criteria. Clear selection criteria are also necessary where access to
consultation is limited for practical reasons. This is especially the case for the participa-
tion of interested parties in advisory bodies or at hearings.”
1
Further, the baseline principle of all selection mechanisms is that the procedure
should be public, open and transparent. Such processes help build trust and coop –
eration among the state bodies and the CSOs. In line with this all interested parties
should be informed about the process and be clear about the steps in it and the specif –
ics of the selection mechanism. Various channels can be used to distribute informa –
tion about the process: media (printed, electronic), social networks, web portals of
ministries, government-CSO liaison offices, net working channels of the organizations.
The process should be based on clear, predefined criteria. Criteria should be de-
signed for the candidates and can also be designed for the organizations, if the or –
ganizational background is relevant. The process should make sure that the criteria
and the selection mechanisms employ balance , where relevant, between the repre-
sentatives of: different t ypes and sizes of organizations, wider constituencies, specific
target groups (people with disabilities, volunteers, women, veterans), gender and na-
t ion a l it y.
When shaping the process and the criteria it is also important to look at the state
of development of the sector . Specifically, the capacit y of the sector, its experience
and financial resources, to take part and constructively contribute to the process is
always a challenge so the selection mechanism should consider how to best address
that. Imposing burdensome selection procedures or high level criteria may deter,
what can be an inactive or disinterested sector.
In order to increase transparency and openness, governments and organization can
work together to develop an online database or web por t al(s) where they can post
information on the existing calls for nominations, rules and procedures, list of active
working bodies and representatives of the CSOs selected to take part in it, reports
from sessions and works on different bodies, possibilit y for online voting, and other
information that may facilitate the process of information sharing about the partici –
patory processes.

– 8 –
ii. Specific considerations
The examples from Europe show that the design of the process depends on who or-
ganizes the selection and who appoints the members (whether the government or
the CSOs), and how much discretion is required by the government to make a final
decision . In case of representative role of the CSOs, mechanisms leave it to the or –
ganizations to decide who will represent them. In case of experts’ role, the specific
government body may have an increased role in the decision process. In addition,
even when the government or government body make the final decision, they base it
on the results of the selection process. The following models have been identified in
the examples considered in this paper:
1. CSOs select their representatives based on a procedure prescribed in a law or
regulation, or criteria determined by the state body;
2. CSOs select their representatives based on own procedure;
3. The government body organizes the process and selects the CSOs (with or
without clear rules);
4. The state body cooperates with the CSOs in the procedure and selection pro –
cess.
Some mechanisms provide for ad-hoc cross-sector group to review the applications.
However, when planning for such groups one should consider the cost-effectiveness of
the process and the time limitations that may be imposed with it.
Further, the process could be organized in one, two or several steps . For example, or-
ganizations may be required to pre-register, as a first step, then nominate candidates,
as second and vote as a third. In Slovenia, organizations also have an in-between
step – presentation meeting, where nominated candidates are given the possibilit y
to agree on who of them should be selected by themselves. Only if they don’t agree,
voting takes place.
The process should provide enough and clear timeline and deadlines, for:
1. Pre-registration of organizations in case it is prescribed;
2. Nomination and voting;
3. Posting of the results (usually within a week from the end of the selection
process);
4. Deadlines for appeal on the decision;
5. Timeline and deadlines for the renewal of the members;
6. The term of representation.
The process should design mechanism for replacement of the candidate . To ensure
smooth transition and continuous operation some mechanisms provide for selection
of deputies parallel to selection of candidates.
Other issues which should be prescribed in the process include:
1. Voting (procedure, majorit y required, method, technology used, tie voting);
2. Who reviews the nominations, (a) CSOs, (b) government body, (c) separate

– 9 –
commission set up for this purpose;
3. Circumstances where conf lict of interest may arise and ways to prevent it;
4. Do candidates need to be suppor ted by more t han 1 organizat ion or net work;
5. The term and assignments for which they are selected;
6. Methods on reporting about the process,
7. Are there any rights or responsibilities assigned to the selected representa-
tives (e.g., right to reimbursement of expenses and by whom, obligation to
solicit input from the sector and report back on results from the body), etc.
To facilitate the process, the organizer could develop standardized forms for pre-
registration, application, biographies of candidates, declarations, descriptions of ac –
tivities and CSOs and nomination and voting.
2) Typical categories of criteria for the organization
The following categories of criteria are usually considered, in case state body or orga-
nization which facilitates the selection process requests prior registration of CSOs in
order to be eligible to nominate members. Not all of these criteria should be used to
determine the process; the following is an illustrative list which can guide the delib –
eration process on which criteria may be appropriate in the specific circumstances.
1. Type of organization – is the process open to the main forms of CSOs such as
associations and foundations or is it also open for other t ypes of broader civil
societ y representatives such as trade unions, employers associations etc.
2. Functional criteria – are there any requirements in the terms of the areas of
activities organizations should be involved in;
3. Geographical area of work – should the organizations be working on nation-
al, regional, local, international level;
4. Alliances – should the candidates represent one organization or representa-
tion of alliances is allowed; should organizations be part of a network or can
they act as stand-alone candidates;
5. Methods for communication with other organizations – should organiza-
tions have established method and channels of communication;
6. Time of operation – is there any time limit the organizations should exist
before they nominate candidates;
7. Independence from state bodies and other potential interferences;
8. Internal governance rules – should organizations have well established in –
ternal rules that govern the organization;
9. Principles and standards – should organizations have signed up to certain
principles and standards of work in a certain area
10 . Conf lict of interest and other restrictions – are candidates limited in that
they cannot be part of a political part y establishment, or be applicants for
funding (e.g., in case the body decides on distribution of funding), can can –

– 10 –
didates already serve on other governing bodies, or working groups, should
there be a limit in terms of the age (can minors take part in the body that
makes a particular decision).
In case the selected representatives have certain experts’ role in the body, then the
following criteria may also be considered:
1. The t ype of expertise required;
2. Should the person be employee of the organization, or is it allowed for organi –
zations to propose independent experts;
3. Areas of expertise required;
4. Years of expertise;
5. Specific skills (drafting documents, communication);
6. Previous involvement in similar projects, activities;
7. Previous collaboration with the respective state body or other actors, and/or
contributions on the topic.

– 11 –
III. EXAMPLES OF SELECTION PROCEDURES FROM SE –
LECTED COUNTRIES IN EUROPE
The following section provides list of illustrative examples procedures and criteria
for selection of CSO representatives in bodies on international and national level. A
short summary of the criteria, and where available the procedure is provided in order
to facilitate the thinking of the specific model that could be considered in the country.
2
BULGARIA: The Civic e-Governance Platform, BlueLink

The Civic e-Governance Platform is an Internet-based platform for election of repre –
sentatives of CSOs in working groups and committees at state institutions. It concerns
only environmental and sustainable development policies elaboration and implemen –
tation in Bulgaria. The Civic e-Governance Platform aims to facilitate (1) selection
of organizations through nomination of candidates and voting, and (2) information
sharing on the participation of the selected members in the working groups, thorough
their reports.
1) Procedure for selecting members
Preregistration of organizations
In order to take part in the process organizations have to register in the on-line sys –
tem. BlueLink developed a Procedure for Election of Environmental CSO Representa –
tives.
3 BlueLink maintains a list of organizations registered to vote and list of repre –
sentatives selected in different government bodies. A right to register for voting and
participate in the platform is granted to every organization, which is registered in
accordance with the Law on Non-for-Profit Legal Persons and works in areas such as:
environmental issues, nature protection, and sustainable development. In order to
register the organization must provide the following documents:
1. Court decision on registration or re-registration according the Law on Non-
for-Profit Legal Persons;
2. Certificate issued by the court that contains the latest information on the CSO
from the court registry (which must be resubmitted every 2 years);
3. A letter expressing the desire of the organization to participate in the selec –
tion process signed by the official representative of an authorized person or
organization;
4. A brief description of the organization on issues of conservation, environment
and sustainable development.
2 For further details and more updated information please refer to the referenced web sites.3 https://vote.bluelink.net/index.php , last accessed on September 15, 2011

– 12 –
Further details regarding the registration and the right to vote are regulated with the
internal rules.
The elections are coordinated by BlueLink and the procedure commences upon re-
quest of the state body or other organization.
Nomination
According to the Procedure, each organization registered to participate in the elec –
tions may nominate only 1 nominee for 1 position, based on prior cooperation with
the candidate. Nominations are sent to ECO via e-mail, fax or postal service during the
nomination period, which is 12 days from the announcement of the call.
The nomination let ter should contain:
1. the name of the candidate;
2. declaration of the organization which nominated him or her(format available
on the web site);
3. the nominee’s CV (in standard format available on the web site);
4. a motivation letter from the candidate (format available on the web site).
ECO must distribute the list of nominations within 5 days from the date when the call
for nominations closes.
Vot ing
Voting is conducted within the period of at least 10 working days, and registered or –
ganizations may vote by email, fax or postal mail during the voting period. They can
only vote for one candidate.
The candidate which will receive the majorit y of the votes will be selected as repre –
sentative. The candidate with the second largest number of votes is the first deput y,
and the candidate with the third largest number of votes is the second deput y. In case
candidates for one position have an equal number of votes, a runoff election is held.
Election results are announced through BlueLink’s distributes the results within 7
days after the voting deadline. Anyone may view the election documentation in the
ECO office three days after the voting deadline.
Rights and obligations
The Procedure lists specific rights and obligations for the selected representatives.
For example, the selected representative is entitled to receive adequate information
from the responsible institution, it can delegate some responsibilities to its deputies
and to resign from its position (but has to stay until a new person is selected). The
represent atives have the following obligations: (1) to present and to defend the posi –
tion of the CSO in the institutional body for which he or she was elected, (2) to partici –
pate in the meetings of the institutional body; (3) to disseminate information through
BlueLink Information Network about the progress and results of the institutional
body’s work; (4) to solicit the views of the CSO communit y regarding relevant issues
prior to the working meetings.

– 13 –
2) Criteria for selecting members
The following criteria are considered when selecting members: 1. The representatives should have at least 1 year of experience at an environ –
mental CSO;
2. This experience should be in the last 3 years;
3. The representative’s education and the experience should relate specifically
to the requirements of the institutional body, if applicable;
4. The candidate should provide the motivation letter demonstrating the nomi –
nee readiness to be a CSO representative.
The selected candidates represent the environmental communit y for a period of two
years and may not be elected to two or more institutional bodies concurrently. They
may resign or be recalled from the position with majorit y of votes or in case the body
for which it is selected ends its mandate.
CROATIA: The Council for Civil Society Development and the National
Volunteering Board
Croatia features several examples of selection of CSOs. First, the Code of Practice on
Consultation with the Interested Public in Procedures of Adopting Laws, Other Regula –
tions and Acts
4 stipulates that when members of expert working groups are appointed
from the ranks of the representatives of the interested public, account should be tak –
en of criteria such as: expertise, previous public contributions to the subject-matter
in question, and other qualifications relevant to the matters regulated by the law or
other regulation, or established by the act of the state administration body.
Second, the Government Office for NGOs maintains an online database of state bodies
where organizations have own representatives including the names of those repre –
sentatives in the body: https://www.uzuvrh.hr/drzavnatijela-savjeti-clanovi.aspx
A. Selection of CSO representatives in the Council for Development
of Civil Society 5
The Council for Civil Societ y Development is an advisory body to the Government of
the Republic of Croatia acting towards developing cooperation between the Govern –
ment with the civil societ y organizations in Croatia in the implementation of the Na-
tional Strategy for Creating an Enabling Environment for Civil Societ y Development;
the development of philanthropy, social capital, partnership relations and cross sec –
tor cooperation.
4 www.uzuvrh.hr , last accessed on September 19, 20115 The following section has been based on information from the Regulation of the Council for Develop-
ment of Civil Society, 2010 and the web site of the Government Office for Cooperation with NGOs in Croatia:
https://www.uzuvrh.hr/page.aspx?pageID=75 (the last accessed on September 15, 2011).

– 14 –
The Council is composed of 27 members, specifically:  12 representatives of associations and other organizations of civil societ y;
 12 representatives of state institutions;
 1 representative of trade unions;
 1 representative of employers association:
 1 representative of Foundation.
The subsectors for which associations and other organization of civil societ y may be
elected are:
(1) Promotion and protection of human rights;
(2) Protection of health and improvement of the qualit y of life;
(3) Disabled persons care;
(4) Child care;
(5) Protection of environment and sustainable development;
(6) Social welfare
(7) Youth activism;
(8) Democracy, Rule of Law and Education;
(9) Culture;
(10) Organizations involved in homeland and veteran care,
(11) Sports
(12) Technical Culture.
6
Council for Civil Society Development
1. Pr otec tion & prom otion of hum an rights
2. Heal th prot ection & im prov ement of
quali ty of life
3. Di sabl ed pers ons care
4. Ch ild care
5. En vironm ental prot ection & su stainabl e
dev elopm ent
6. So cial we lfar e
7. Yo uth
8. De mo crat izat ion & so cial dev elopm ent
9. Cu ltur e
10. Ho me land war-ve terans care
11. Sp orts
12. Te chni cal cult ure
12 elected
representati ves
of NGOsl le ec ct te ed d e en nt ta at ti iv ve es s N NG GO Os s
1. Un ion
2. Em ploy ers
A sso ciat ion
3. Fo undat ion
1 Tr ade Unions
1 Em ploy ers
1 Foundation s i io on ns se er rs si io on ns s
1 Mi nistry of Sc ience, Ed ucat ion and
Sp orts
2. Mi nist ry of Heal th and Social We lfar e
3. Mi nist ry of Cu ltur e
4. Mi nist ry of Fa mily, Wa r Ve terans and
In te rgenerat ional Solidari ty
5. Mi nist ry of Financ e
6. Mi nist ry of En vironm ental Pr otec tion,
Ph ysical Pl annin g and Construc tion
7. Mi nist ry of Fore ign Af fairs and Europ
e Integrat ion
8. Mi nist ry if Ad minist ra tion
9. Mi nist ry of Ec onom y, Labour and
En trepreneur ship
10. Office of Prim e Mi nist er of Croa tia
11. Governm ent Office for Huma n Ri gh
t 12. Governm ent Office for Cooperat ion
NGOs
12 appointees
from state
adm inistrativ e
bodies
Picture 1: Composition of the Council for Development of Civil Societ y 7
6 Decision for Establishment of the Council for Development of Civil Society, last amended November 20097 Presentation: Framework for Government –CSO cooperation in the Republic of Croatia, delivered by the Office
for Cooperation with NGOs in Croatia at the regional workshop on Effective Government-CSO Cooperation,
organized by ECNL in Budapest, June, 22-23, 2011

– 15 –
1) Appointment of members
The Government appoints the members and their deputies based on suggestion from
the: 1. Associations, for the 12 participants from the enlisted fields of activities;
2. Government office for NGOs, for representatives from the trade unions, em –
ployers association and foundations; and
3. Government bodies, for representatives from the ministries and different
government offices.
Members are appointed for three years.
2) Procedure for selection of the members from the civil society
The members of the Council are selected through a two steps system: (1) nomination
of members and (2) voting for members.
Nomination for members and their deputies:
The Government Office for NGOs announces on their internet page and other newslet –
ters the call for nominations of candidates, the criteria and deadlines. Any registered
CSO or network of CSOs can nominate a candidate and a deput y for the particular sub-
sector or area of activities in which they are active, and they can nominate only one
person. The candidacy process is open at least 15 days.
Nominations are sent to the Government’s Office for NGOs. The nominations should be
submitted on a standardized form and supported by the following documents:
1. letter of motivation of the candidate including information how the candidate
will keep its sub-sector informed about the activities in case of appointment
to the Council;
2. curriculum vitae of the candidate submitted on standardized form;
3. copy of last registration certificate of the organization or other organizations
that nominate the candidate (or any changes submitted to the register) or
notice from the register not older than 30 days;
4. confirmation on active involvement of the candidate (professionally or as vol –
unteer) in the fields of activities (in the association or other organization) for
which the person is nominated sub-sector for at least 3 years of continuous
involvement, signed by the legal representative of the CSO or other organiza-
tion of civil societ y.
An independent Commission selected by the current Council members, reviews the
nominations and checks the eligibilit y of the Candidate within 8 days from the end
of the deadline for nominations. The list of candidates with valid nominations is pub –
lished on the Internet and applicants have 8 days deadline to appeal in case their nom –
ination has been considered invalid.

– 16 –
Voting for members:
The voting procedure lasts 15 days. Every registered association or network has one
vote for the candidate and its deput y and they may vote only for the fields of activi-
ties in which they are active. Voting is completed on a standard form, which can be
downloaded from the internet page of the Government Office for NGOs and the form
should be sent via post the Government Office for NGOs. The form should be stamped,
signed by CSO representative. An independent Commission counts the votes and pre –
pares the list of elected candidates according to the sub-sectors within 8 days from
the deadline of submission of votes. The Government Office for NGOs then publishes
on its internet page two lists (1) list of candidates and deputies who have won the
biggest number of votes in the specific field and will be appointed as members of the
Council and (2) list of all other candidates and deputies with number of votes they
have received. The proposed list of candidates and deputies is submitted to the Gov –
ernment in order to appoint those members.
3) Criteria for selection of members from civil society:
Candidates must comply with the following criteria: 1. To be of a legal age;
2. Not to be member of political part y;
3. At least 3 years of working experience in the field of activities of the associa –
tions or other organizations of civil societ y which the person will represent.
B. Selection of members in the National Board on Volunteering
The National Board on Volunteering is an advisory and consultative body of the Gov –
ernment of Croatia which is responsible to implement measures for promotion and
protection of volunteering. The Board is composed of 19 members:
 1 representative of the Ministry of family, veterans affairs and intergenera-
tional solidarit y;
 1 from the Government Office for NGOs,
 1 representative of the Government Office of Human Rights,
 1 representative of the National Foundation for Civil Societ y,
 1 representative of the central government body responsible for education,
 1 representative of the Ministry of Health and Welfare,
 7 representatives of civil societ y organizations that organize volunteering,
 6 independent experts who are engaged in volunteering and civil societ y as
follows: three representatives based on the proposal of the CSOs and three
representatives based on the proposal of local and district (regional) govern –
ments.

– 17 –
The members are selected for period of 2 years with a right to be re-elected. The Deci-
sion on the Criteria and Procedure for Selection of Representatives in the National Board
on Volunteering (2007) further describes the process of the selection.
1) Appointment of members
The members are appointed by the Government based on recommendation of the Min –
i s t r y.
2) Procedure for selection of members of the Board from the civil society
The selection of representatives of civil societ y who represent organizers of volun –
teering is conducted through the Ministry of Family, Veterans and Intergenerational
Sol ida r it y. T he Mi n i s t r y w i l l i nv it e feder at ion s, coor d i nat ion a nd net work s of a ssoc ia –
tions whose members are organizing volunteers to nominate 1 candidate who meets
the criteria.
The applications should include:
1. An explanation of the reasons for nominating a candidate;
2. Candidate’s CV
3. Confirmation of the number of years of active work by civil societ y, certified
by a responsible person in the association.
The selection of representatives the proposal of civil societ y organizations from the
ranks of independent experts who are engaged in volunteerism and civil societ y, is
also conducted upon invitation of the Ministry issued to organizations and networks
that can nominate a candidate who meets the criteria. The application should include:
(1) an explanation with the reasons for nominating a candidate and (2) the candi –
date’s CV.
Nominations should be submitted within 15 days from the receipt of the call. A Com –
mission for selection of members in the Board is set up to review the nominations,
which recommends the persons who should be taking part in the Board. Based on
this recommendation the Ministry submits the list to the Government which appoints
the members.
3) Criteria for selection of representatives from civil society
The Decision lists the following criteria for members of the organizations which are
volunteer organizers :
1. The person must be of legal age (an adult citizen) of Croatia;
2. It is not an official political part y representative;

– 18 –
3. To continuously for at least 3 years be an active member of civil societ y orga-
nization that promotes and develops volunteering:
a) trough education of associations and volunteers;
b) by connecting, monitoring and supporting volunteers:
c) through intensive work on sensitizing the public and changing attitudes
about volunteering through promotional activities, humanitarian ac –
tions and other;
d) by encouraging the public (citizens) to activism, involvement and partici –
pation in voluntary activities;
e) by keeping record and database of volunteers and volunteer activities:
f ) trough cooperation with local governments to promote volunteering;
g) through cooperation with international volunteer organizations.
The following criteria are listed for the expert members recommended by the CSOs and
the regional/local government:
1. It is not an official political part y representative;
2. It is an independent expert who has been active in the field of volunteering
and civil societ y in a period of at least three (3) years, specifically:
a) a member of the academic communit y who is engaged in this area through
scientific research; or
b) an expert in the field of social services involved in the projects of civil
societ y organizations that promote volunteering; or
c) other areas in which the person has contributed to the promotion of vol –
unteerism and cooperation with CSOs.
HUNGARY: Selection of CSOs in the National Civil Fund
The National Civil Fund (NCF) in Hungary is a government fund which distributes
operational and project grants to support the work of CSOs. The principal governing
body of the NCF is the Council while the operative decision-making bodies are the
Colleges which are organized on regional and professional bases. The members of the
Council and the Colleges are elected for 3 years. Most of the members in the different
managing bodies are CSO representatives. They are elected by representatives of na –
tional and regional organizations on electoral meetings. The candidates who receive
most of the votes become members. One part of the members is elected on a geograph –
ical principle (i. e. they represent a geographic region), and another part represents a
particular field of activit y
.8
8 The government recently published a draft of the new Law on freedom of association and the operation and
the support of the CSOs for general consultation in the end of June and plans to adopt it in autumn. The draft
law regulates the civil sector comprehensively and introduces significant changes essentially affecting the
operation of the CSOs. A National Civil Fund will be replaced with a new fund, so-called “National Cooperation
Fund” in which the representation of the CSOs is planned to be significantly less. According to the current
draft law the Council would have only 9 members out of which 3 members would be elected through the
civil representation system, 3 members would be appointed by the competent committee of the Parliament

– 19 –
1) Selection of CSO representatives in the Council and the Colleges
The Council
The Council has 17 members out of which  12 members are elected by the CSOs through the civil representation system;
 2 members are elected by the competent committee of the Parliament; and
 3 members are elected by the minister responsible for running the fund (cur –
rently Ministry of Public Administration and Justice).
Through the civil representation system 5 members of the Council are elected by CSOs
with national scope of inf luence and from civil organizations in the area of:
1. health-conservation, illness prevention, recovery, health rehabilitation activ –
it y, social activit y, family-assistance, nursing of elderly people, rehabilitation
employment, assistance of the socially disadvantaged;
2. cultural activities, educational, pedagogical activities, activities concerning
Hungarian national and ethnical minorit y, activities related to Hungarians
outside Hungary;
3. nature protection, animal protection, environmental protection and cultural
heritage protection;
4. child and youth representation, protection, sport, leisure-time;
5. the protection of public order and safet y, voluntary fire-fighting, rescuing,
prevention of catastrophes, protection of human and constitutional rights,
consumer protection, improvement of Euro-Atlantic integration, services,
support and donations for the non-profit civil sector, other non-profit activi –
ties.
The rest of the CSO members of the Council are selected from the 7 regions of Hungary
also through the civil representation system.
The Colleges
The Colleges have at least 5 but not more than 11 members; the exact number depends
on the decision of the minister. One of the members is commissioned by the minister
at his discretion and the rest of the members are selected by the CSOs through the
civil representation system.
and 3 members would be invited by the minister at his discretion, on the basis of the strategic partnership
agreements concluded with CSOs. Each College would have also 9 members out of which 3 members would
be elected through the civil representation system, 3 members by the competent minister after liaising with
the strategic CSOs partner and 3 members by the minister at his discretion. According to the draft law the
members of the Colleges and the Council will be elected for 4 years.

– 20 –
2) The civil representation system – Procedure for selection in the Council
and the Colleges
Registration to be an elector
In order to become an elector the CSOs need to register at the Secretary of NCF. Those
CSOs are entitled to send electors which have either regional or national scope of in –
f luence. They need to submit their charter document, court certificate of the valid
data of the organization and a statement which includes the valid data, the name of
the elector representing the organization, the operational inf luence of the organiza-
tion (if regional which region, if national
9 the professional field of its activit y) and
the introduction of the scope of activit y. The Secretary issues a certificate of each
registration which meets the above requirements and notifies the registered CSOs of
the date and place of the electoral meeting. In case of deficient application the CSO is
called upon to submit the missing documents; in case the organization fails to comply
with this its application will be rejected. The rejected organizations may turn to the
minister with objection.
The application period should not be less than 30 days. Each organization which has
regional scope of inf luence may set up only one elector in the region which is affected
by its operation. Those CSOs which have national scope of inf luence may set up an
elector only on the national electoral meeting.
Voting procedure- the electoral meeting
The CSO members and the alternative members of the Council and Colleges are elect –
ed on national and regional electoral meetings. The minister publishes the place and
date of the electoral meetings in at least two national daily newspapers, the CSO press
and forums, and the website of the NCF.
The voting is organized in two stages. At first, the electorate votes on candidates
through an open vote procedure. Only those candidates who have received 10% of
the votes of the electors present in the open vote will be shortlisted for a second round
of voting. The electors can vote for as many candidates as the number of members
that need to be elected (for example, they can give vote for 5 candidates for the 5 slots
of national representatives in the Council). Candidates who have obtained majorit y of
the votes will be selected as members of the Council and the Colleges. In case of a tied
vote members are selected through the drawing of lots. The names of the members of
the Council and the Colleges are disclosed on NCF’s website.
3) Criteria for selection of members
The basic regulations of the organization and the civil representation system are
put down in Act L of 2003 on National Civil Fund Program and further specified in
160/2003 (X.7) governmental decree on the execution of the Act.
9 The influence of its operation expands to at least 7 counties.

– 21 –
The requirements for members are defined in the form of exclusive criteria, which
aim to prevent a conf lict of interest. Specifically, they highlight that the member of the
Council and the Colleges cannot be:1. a representative of the Parliament, member of the municipal council at local
government, member of the count y/metropolitan local assembly, mayor;
2. a close relative of the member of the Council or the College;
3. a person who is already member of one of the bodies of the NCF;
10
4. a person who was the executive officer of a CSO within 5 years prior to his/
her nomination which has terminated and s/he or his/her legal successor was
ordered by a final authorit y or court decision to pay its public debt within 2
years prior to its termination and it did not comply with the order, except for
that case if the executive officer was commissioned specifically for the sake
of settling the financial situation of the organization;
5. a person whose mandate was already withdrawn by the minister due to the
fact that he/she became unworthy for the position.
11
The members of the Council and the Colleges make a statement simultaneously with
their assignment that the above circumstances do not exist. If such circumstances
arise after the candidates are selected, then they are obliged to terminate such con –
f lict of interest within 30 days. Further, the members should submit a list of organiza-
tion with which they share a certain relation that may give a rise to a conf lict of inter –
est issue
12 and report it within 15 days if such list has changed. The lists are published
on the NCF website. This rules aims to strengthen prevention of conf lict of interest.
Namely, if a CSO from the list applies for a grant the head of the Council will appoint
another College, which does not have conf lict of interest to decide on the grant.
POLAND: Selection of members to the Council of Public Benefit Activity
The Council of Public Benefit Activit y was created by the Law on Public Benefit Activ –
it y and Volunteering in 2003 (amended in 2009 and 2010). The Council is an advisory
body to the minister responsible for social securit y matters. It has twent y members
– 10 representatives of CSOs and their unions, and other entities listed in the law and
ten of public authorities (5 of local governments and 5 of central administration bod –
ies). The Council is co-chaired by one representative of the authorities and one of the
CSOs included in the Council’s work.
10 This condition is not included in the new draft law.11 The new draft law introduces one more precondition: the member of the Council and the Colleges cannot be
member of the executive body or the official of a political party
12 If the member, the person participating in the decision or their close relative is 1) the founder of the
foundation, the member or the official of the managing body or the organization of the foundation, the
member of the managing or representing body of the association 2) in legal relationship for emlopyment with
the CSO or if any of the above conditions existed within the past 3 years prior to the inspected date.

– 22 –
1) Procedure for selection of members of the civil sector
The process is as follows: the Minister responsible for social securit y, announces in
two daily newspapers nationwide, and places on the websites of its office, information
on inviting organizations to nominate candidates for to serve as Council’s members.
The notice contains information on the call, content of the application and date and
place for submission of the application.
The application should contain the following information: 1. Description of the work and justification for participation of the CSO repre –
sentative in the Council, the CSO relationship and understanding of the work
of the council;
2. The candidate’s application, which states his qualifications to perform the
tasks which will be useful as member of the Council;
3. Statement of the candidate to consent to the candidacy;
4. Statement of no criminal convictions for intentional crimes;
5. Extract from the National Court Register, and other evidence of the nature
and scope of the CSO operations.
Each candidate must be supported by at least 20 CSOs. The Minister appoints the rep –
resentative from among the list of candidates nominated by the organizations.
2) Criteria and appointment
The application process is regulated by the Law and the Regulation of the work of
the Council.
13 All members of the Council are appointed by the Minister for a 3 year
period. In terms of CSO, the Minister must make a decision based on the list of nomi –
nations for candidates however there are no criteria based on which the Minister will
decide which organization to appoint.
SERBIA: Monitoring and Evaluation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy
Serbia
The work of the Civil Societ y Focal Points and Programme Management Unit of the
Government of Serbia Povert y Reduction Strategy are evaluated by the Monitoring
and Evaluation Team. Evaluation targets results of the focal points and the unit after
six (6) and twelve (12) months. The evaluation of achieved results shall contain rec –
ommendations on whether conditions have been fulfilled for the continuation of the
program.
14
13 Regulation Minister of Economy, Labor and Social Policy on the Public Benefit Works Council, of 4 August
2003, https://www.pozytek.gov.pl/Orzecznictwo,dotyczace,III,sektora,831.html, last accessed on September
15, 2011
14 This section has been developed based on information from the following web site: https://www.prsp.gov.

– 23 –
Criteria and Procedure
Eligible candidates can be all interested individuals with experience in the field of
monitoring and evaluation and in the implementation of povert y reduction pro-
grammes aiming at vulnerable groups, as well as the knowledge of civil societ y in
Serbia. The criteria are evaluated as follows.
Criteria Max.
points
1. Previous experience of the candidate in the field of monitoring and
evaluation 30
2. Previous experience in the realization of poverty reduction pro-
grammes 20
3. Research experience 30
4. Experience in work with vulnerable groups 20
5. Experience of working in the NGO sector 20
6. Recommendations of previous employers and/or partners 20
Overall 140
Applicants shall submit their CV, cover letter and two recommendations of previous
employers. Best ranked candidates are invited for an interview as a basis for the final
decision.
SLOVENIA: Rules of Procedure for Selection of CSO representatives de –
veloped by CNVOS
The Centre for Information Service, Co-operation and Development of NGOs (CNVOS)
runs a procedure for selection of civil societ y representatives in different government
bodies, which was first developed in 2002 and further enhanced in 2004. The aim of
the Rules of the Procedure for Selection of CSO Representatives is “to offer an uni –
fied procedure with clear rules, binding for all involved and according to principles of
openness, equal opportunities and transparency.”
15
CNVOS acts as the leader of the process that facilitates the selection of the representa-
tives and provides technical assistance. CNVOS acts upon request of a specific gov –
ernment body which needs to select representatives of the sector to take part in dif –
ferent cross sector bodies (e.g., commission, working body etc).
rs/engleski/aktuelno/kocd.jsp , last accessed on September 15, 201115 https://www.cnvos.si/article?path=/zagovornistvo/nvo_predstavniki, last accessed on September 15, 2011.
The description of the Slovenian case is based on submission by Tinja Divljak, from CNVOS for purposes of the
Global Forum on Civil Society Law, 2011, organized by the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL)

– 24 –
1) Procedure for selection
The process is led by a CNVOS employee authorized by the director, who together
with two other members forms a selection commission for the specific process. The
CSOs can also name a member of the commission, who can take part in examination of
received application and later in counting of votes.
Nominations
As a first step of the process, CNVOS issues a call for (1) nomination of the candidates
and (2) registration of CSOs who will vote in that procedure. The collection of appli –
cation must not be shorter than 15 days. After the deadline passes, the commission
develops a list of candidates and registered organizations who will vote. In case of
incomplete applications, candidates are given 3 days to complete the submission; in
case they fail to do so their application is not considered.
Presentation meeting
While this step of the process was not practiced frequently at the early days of the
procedure it showed to be efficient and therefore it became a regular part of it. Name –
ly, after the candidates are nominated the organizers calls a presentation meeting
where the candidates and the organizations that nominated them meet, and try to
reach an agreement as to who from them should be selected on the body. Only in case
they cannot make an agreement, the procedure of voting commences.
Vot ing
The commission adopts the decree about the list of candidates and voters and posts
it on the web site for 8 days, after which elections are called. Each recorded voter
receives one vote which can be submitted in person, by post, fax or e-mail. The open –
ing of the ballot box is conducted in public and all actors are invited. The selected
representative is selected within 3 days from the end of the elections. If the first two
candidates receive the same number of votes and there is just one place in a certain
body, a second round of voting follows.
Rights and Obligations
The regulation prescribes certain rights and obligations for the selected representa-
tives. Those include the right to coverage of per diem and travel costs. CSO representa-
tives should be transparent in their work; they have to reporting to the CSOs (CNVOS
receives report and send it to all interested organizations which participate in the
procedure, put the information in weekly information package and on the website);
the selected representatives have to take into account the CSOs proposals and sugges –
tions in the course of the activities in the bodies.

– 25 –
2) Criteria for selection of members
The government body that makes the request determines the criteria and further de –
tails of the procedure for the specific selection process. They submit them on pre –
scribed form which should include the following information: expected knowledge
of the representative and other criteria that the person should satisf y, description of
the activit y in which the person will be involved, conditions for the procedure to be
successful, t ype of voting etc.

– 26 –
I V. CURRENT PR ACTICE OF SELECTION OF MACEDO –
NIAN CSOs
Due to the fact that there is not a standardized mechanism for selection of
representatives from civil societ y organizations in the state administration
working bodies, as well as in other institutions in the system, the models
which are applied are different. Two dominant models, with specific traits,
can be identified (presented below):
 Direct selection made by the state administration bodies;
 Selection made by the organizations themselves.
Selection by the state administration bodies
(1) Commission for Organizations of Public Interest
The new Law on Associations and Foundations (“Official Gazette of Republic
of Macedonia” no. 52/10) introduces for the first time the status of organiza-
tions with public interest in Republic of Macedonia. The introduction of this
status foresees establishment of a structure for its consistent implementa-
tion. Namely, in accordance with Art. 79, the status of public interest is deter –
mined by the Government of the Republic of Macedonia, upon proposal from
the Commission for Organizations of Public Interest. The composition of the
Commission is determined with paragraph 3 from the same article.
The Commission is consisted of 11 members of whom 9 are representatives
of the state administration bodies and two are representatives from the civil
societ y sector. The mandate of the members is 4 years. In the same article, in
paragraph 4, it is defined that the manner and criteria for selection as well as
the manners for cessation of the activities are defined with a bylaw adopted
by the Minister of Justice.
The rulebook
16 was adopted in October 2010. During the preparation of this
overview, the selection of the representatives from the civil societ y sector
was ongoing.
The procedure is composed of the following steps:
1. The Secretariat General of the Government of the Republic of Macedonia,
through the Unit for Cooperation with the Non-Governmental Organizations is –
sues a public call in the newspapers for selection of members of organizations.
16 Official Gazette of Republic of Macedonia no. 141/2010, Rulebook on the manner and criteria for selection,
as well as reasons for cease of performing work of the President and members of the Commission of Organiza-
tions of Public Interest Status.

– 27 –
2. The organizations can propose their own candidates within eight days from
the issuance of the call.
3. The proposals are submitted in written form, alongside the following docu –
ments:
 CV of the candidate;
 motivational letter from the candidate;
 copy from the last certificate of registration of the organization (last
changes from the registration), or confirmation from the Register
less than 30 days old; and
 list of activities in the field of development of the civil societ y sector.
4. Within eight days, the Secretariat General of the Government of the Republic
of Macedonia prepares a report on the number of registered organizations
with proposed candidates that fulfill the conditions stipulated in the public
call. This report is published on the web site of the Unit for Cooperation with
the Non-Governmental Organizations.
5. The Unit submits a report on the number of registered organizations with
candidates who fulfill the conditions stipulated in the public call for competi –
tion to the Government of the Republic of Macedonia, for the purpose of form –
ing of the Commission.
6. The decision on the selected candidates is brought by the Government on the
basis of the information submitted in the Report.
Tw o criteria are foreseen with the Rulebook which are to be fulfilled by
the candidates:
1. expertise in the field of civil societ y sector, particularly in the field of legal
and fiscal regulations for citizens’ associations and foundations (number
of implemented projects as experts, publications, participation in working
groups); and
2. knowledge of national legislation related to some of the areas determined as
activities of public interest in Art. 74 in the Law on Associations and Founda –
tions.
The positive trait of this model is allowing all interested organizations and candidates
to apply as potential members of the Commission as the call itself is available in the
written media. However, certain improvements are required of the procedure and
criteria.
Namely, although the call refers to the organizations which are to propose their own
candidates, and at the same time accompanying documentation for confirmation of
the candidates’ experience is sought, the criteria lack clarit y regarding the basic re –
quests for organizations such as field of work, location, target groups, etc. The link
between the organizations and their proposed candidates is not sufficiently evident,
i.e. whether the proposed candidates from organizations should be their employees,
members or can these represent external associates.

– 28 –
During the election of the first composition of the Commission, the deadlines listed
in the Rulebook and referring to the procedure were not observed. The obligation of
the Unit for Cooperation with the Non-Governmental Organizations to issue the list
of applied candidates who fulfill the criteria no later than eight days was not fulfilled.
Namely, this obligation was not fulfilled 30 days after the end of the deadline for ap-
plication.
(2) National Council for Development of Volunteering
In September 2010 the Government of the Republic of Macedonia adopted the
Strategy for Promotion and Development of Volunteering with Action Plan
for the period of 2010-2015
17. The Strategy foresees establishment of the
National Council for Development of Volunteering (NCDV ) which should en –
able more efficient planning and implementation of objectives and measures.
NCDV is formed with decision from the Government of Republic of Macedonia
and should represent a multi-sector body which is consisted of nine members,
five of whom are members of the state administration bodies whereas four
representatives are from the civil societ y sector. The mandate of the mem –
bers is two years with possibility for re-election. The procedure and criteria
for selection are determined by the Secretariat General of the Government
and the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy. Members of the Council cannot
receive remuneration for their work.
Procedure: 1. The Secretariat General of the Government of the Republic of Macedonia is –
sues the public call in daily newspapers through the Unit for Cooperation
with the Non-Governmental Organizations.
2. The organizations can propose their own candidates within 8 days from the
issuance of the call.
3. The candidates applying to the call should submit:
 C V;
 Copy from the registration certificate of the organization in which
the candidate works/volunteers;
 Brief overview of the organization (mission, history, structure, im –
plemented activities for development and promotion of volunteer –
ing);
 Motivational letter of the candidate and brief description of the qual –
ifications and experience of the candidate and description of the way
he/she will contribute to the work of the Council.
4. The selection of the members is performed by the Ministry of Labour and
Social Policy.
17 Government of Republic of Macedonia, Strategy for Promotion and Development of Volunteering, 2010

– 29 –
5. The decision on the selected candidates is brought by the Government on the
basis of the information submitted in the Report.
Criteria:
1. To be engaged in the organization either as an employee or volunteer;
2. To be acquainted with the relevant issues and needs of the civil societ y sector
in the Republic of Macedonia, particularly the needs for development of the
volunteering;
3. At least two years of proven experience in project implementation and activi –
ties related to volunteering on national, local and/or international level;
4. Cooperation with the state institutions or units of local self-government or
participation in working groups in the process of preparation of laws, strate –
gies on national and local level which refer to the development of civil societ y
and volunteering;
5. Communicative and team-oriented,
6. With high integrit y, responsibilit y and accountabilit y.
Again in this case, the positive trait is the opportunities for all active entities in the
civil societ y sector as potential members to the NCDV. However, as in the previous
case, the final decision is still brought by a government body/Ministry on the basis
of predefined criteria and according to a procedure led by the state administration
bodies.
As opposed to the selection of members in the Commission for Organizations with
Status of Public Interest, in the process of selection of candidates for the NCDV, the
criteria are more transparent and therefore the opportunit y for a more realistic and
legitimate selection is higher. Namely, in this case, there is clear relation between the
organization and the person who is proposed as member to the NCDV. Also, the dura-
tion of experience is defined, as well as the specific fields of work and clearer refer –
ence to the geographic region. The similarit y with the first case is the fact that only
criteria for the candidate are determined and not for the organization which is pro –
posing him/her.
Selection by the civil society organizations
(1) Selection of a candidate through a CSO network/platform
One of the most applied models is the one in which the state administration
bodies, in need of representation and individuals from the civil societ y sector
in permanent or temporary working and advisory bodies, authorize the or –
ganized civil societ y to conduct the selection. In this case, the state adminis –
tration bodies identif y one network/platform to which they extent invitation

– 30 –
to nominate their own representatives, in line with its internal procedures.
Most commonly recognized organized form of civil societ y organizations is
the Civic Platform of Macedonia (CPM)
18. International organizations, such
as UNDP, for the needs of the governing boards in their projects, were the
first institutions in which the representatives from the civil societ y sector
were selected through the CPM. CPM delegated its own representatives for
the state institutions, for the working group for preparation of the Strategy
for Cooperation of the Government with the Civil Societ y Sector in 2006.
Working group for the Law on Associations and Foundations
In May 2007, the Ministry of Justice organized a working group for prepa-
ration of the new Law on Associations and Foundations. The working group
consisted of representatives from the state administration bodies, two do –
mestic experts, one international expert and two representatives from the
civil societ y organizations. It is interesting to note that during the formation
of this working group the Ministry of Justice extended one direct invitation to
one civil societ y organization for nomination of a representative whereas the
invitation for nomination of a candidate for the second representative from
the civil society sector was extended to the CPM. The Ministry of Justice did
not set its own criteria nor did it design a procedure for how the selection
process would be implemented. It was largely left to be decided by the CPM.
CPM rules for selection of representatives
1. Proposals for candidates
Notification for need of selection. According to the rules, the procedure commences with a
call for selection of participants, prepared by the Secretariat of the CPM after a previously
received request from a certain institution for nomination of CPM representative. The
call contains the following information: title of the working position, host institution and
number of positions for which selection is being made, description of the profile of the
position, manner of work, deadlines among which are deadlines and manner for submis-
sion of proposals, etc.
Right for proposal. The candidate for a representative may be self-nominated or nomi-
nated from another organization. When the candidate is nominated from another organi-
zation, he/she should previously be notified and have accepted the candidacy.
Form of proposal. The proposal for the candidacy contains name of the organization,
name of candidate and his/her replacement and short explanation of the motivation of
the candidate for his/her selection.
18 CPM was formed on March 16 th 2004 from thirty leading civil society organizations from different sectors
with dominant representation on national level. The Platform has clear organizational structure composed of
Council in which all member organizations are found and which is the highest body of CPM and Committee as
main governing body composed of 11 organizations. CPM has a Secretariat as administrative body.

– 31 –
2. Method of selectionList of candidates. The proposals are received by the Secretariat of the CPM which per –
forms check on the submitted proposals and determines the list of candidates (name of
organization, representative and his/her substitute.
Selection body. The selection of the representative is performed by the Committee of the
CPM.
Voting. The voting is performed on the session held by the Committee, or in written form
(e-mail, fax and mail). Provided due to technical reasons the voting cannot be performed
by e-mail, brief telephone communication may be realized however the organization
does have to vote in written/by fax. The voting is public.
Voting results. The candidate who receives the most votes from the members of the Committee
is nominated. If two or more candidates have the same number of votes, the voting is repeated
only for these candidates. Publishing. The Secretariat of CPM publishes the results from the voting with information
on the selected candidate, number of votes per candidate and the manner of implementa –
tion of the voting.
National Strategy for equality and non-discrimination

For the purposes of drafting the Strategy a Working Group was established
representing different line ministries, independent institutions and civil so –
ciet y. Three members of the civil societ y participated, two from the Alliance
“Macedonia without discrimination” and one from the Helsinki Committee.
The organizations were selected by the MLSP and the responsible persons
were nominated by the organizations itself.
Working group for Law on Prevention and Protection Against Discrimina –
tion
The Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs in the process of preparation of the
Law on Prevention and Protection Against Discrimination also included in
the working group two representatives from the civil societ y sector. In this
instance the invitation was extended to another (at that moment) non-formal
network of civil societ y organizations, i.e. the Alliance Macedonia without
Discrimination (MWD). The Ministry did not provide any particular criteria.
This enabled the members of the Coalition to set their own rules. The mem –
bers of the MWD decided with consensus to select two representatives who
represented a combination of an expert with large theoretical knowledge and
a practitioner with extended experience in the field of human rights and pro –
tection against discrimination.

– 32 –
National Council for European Integration (NCEI)
On November 19
th 2007 the Parliament of the Republic of Macedonia adopted a De –
cision for foundation of the National Council for European Integration. The Council
consists of 17
19 members with right to vote. However, an opportunit y to participate
in the work of the NCEI also had: the following: representatives of the chambers of
commerce, trade unions, religious organizations, Civic Platform of Macedonia and
scientific and professional workers in certain areas important for the process of the
negotiations
20.
Interesting for the National Council for European Integration is the fact that the Civic
Platform of Macedonia is specifically referred to in Art.5 from the Decision for forma-
tion of the NCEI. Thus, in accordance with this provision, NCEI has extended direct
invitation to CPM without proposal for specific procedure or criteria for selection of
the candidate.
CPM in the process of selection used the abovementioned rules but also extended
them with the following criteria:
1. experience and knowledge of the civil societ y in Macedonia;
2. knowledge of the work and operations of the European Union and its institu –
tions;
3. knowledge of the process of integration of Macedonia in the European Union.
Civil Society Joint Consultative Committee (JCC) between Republic of Mace –
donia and European Economic and Social Committee
The Civil Societ y Joint Consultative Committee (JCC) is a joint working body
of Republic of Macedonia (as a country with candidate status) and the Euro –
pean Economic and Social Committee (EESC). The JCC was established with a
political decision brought on the 4
th Council for Stabilization and Association
in July 2007.
JCC is consisted of two representatives, each from the associations of employ –
ers, trade unions and civil societ y organizations (associations and founda-
tions).
19 The members with right to vote are the following: 4 members from the position and opposition members
of Parliament. 3 representatives are nominated according to their office (members of Parliamentary commis –
sions). From other state institutions, members are the Deputy Prime Minister of the Government responsible
for European integration and one representative from the offices of the President of the country and Presi –
dent of the Government. Also, representatives are from Macedonian Academy for Science and Art, Association
of Unit of Local Self-Government and from Association of Journalists of Macedonia.
20 Parliament of Republic of Macedonia, Decision for foundation of the National Council for European Integra-
tion, November, 2007

– 33 –
The procedure for selection of the two representatives is the following:
1. The Unit for Cooperation with the Non-Governmental Organizations submits
a direct invitation to the CPM with request for selection of two representa-
tives;
2. CPM sends the call to its members but also to other relevant civil societ y or –
ganizations;
3. The organizations nominate their own candidate with sending an application
to the Secretariat of the CPM which contains:
 Letter from the civil societ y organization in which it nominates a
candidate to be a representative;
 Statement that the civil societ y organization will cover the costs for
participation of the nominated representative in the work of the JCC;
 Statement for acceptance of the candidacy from the nominated rep –
resentative;
 CV of the candidate;
 Copy from the current status of the civil societ y organization which
nominates the candidate, issued by the Central Register of Republic
of Macedonia;
 Profile of the civil societ y organization, which contains informa-
tion on: vision, mission and goals; main activities; short description
of completed projects and issued publications in the field related to
the call (social and civic dialogue); participation in working groups;
membership and participation in domestic and/or international net –
works; organization structure; levels of governance; number of fully
engaged persons; and, budget of the organization for 2007, 2008 and
2000;
 Proof for economic and financial working.
4. T he selec t ion is made by t he verif icat ion commission composed of CPM mem –
bers;
5. The applications which have passed the administrative check are evaluated
by the verification commission in accordance with the criteria for technical
evaluation. The two candidates with most votes are selected.
Civil societ y organizations which apply to the call should fulfil the following criteria:
1. Registered in accordance with the Law on Citizens’ Associations and Founda-
tions. Organizations of employers, trade unions and chambers of commerce
are not eligible;
2. Active on national level;
3. Active in the field of social and civic dialogue;
4. Members or participants in domestic and international networks;
5. Human and financial capacit y (costs for the participation in the work of JCC
are covered by the nominating organization).

– 34 –
The nominated candidates have to possess general expertise and expertise in social
and civic dialogue.In the period of 2007 – 2011 two selections of JCC members were realized. In
the first selection from November 2007, the rules of CPM were applied fully,
but invitation for nomination of own representatives was also extended to
other representatives and organizations which are not members to CPM.
In the second selection from November 2010 a change was made in formula-
tion of the criteria for organizations and candidates. At the same time, the
matrix for administrative check and evaluation of applications was prepared.
The criteria and procedure stated above are from the selection in 2010. The
matrix contains criteria for the organization related to: activities/work of the
organization, membership in working groups, membership in alliances, hu –
man and financial capacities. Also, criteria have been set for the candidates
on the level of education, for working experience, specific working experience
in the field of civic and social dialogue, published works in specific fields. The
total number of points is 100 of which 80 are maximum points for the organi –
zations and 20 points for the candidate
21.
It is worth mentioning the openness of CPM towards other organizations in
the selection for JCC. Namely, after the call was submitted by the Government
(through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Secretariat General) CPM shared
this information to large number of relevant civil societ y organizations. In
both selections one of the representatives originated from organization out –
side CPM.
One of the most common problems identified with all of the models above is the lack of interest
on the side of the CSOs to apply. For example, for selection of one representative for NCEI only
two candidates applied. The same situation was with the selection of representatives for JCC
where only two candidates applied for two positions. Even that in this analysis does not consid –
er other examples; the situation is widespread (the problem is identified also in the selection
for monitoring committees for IPA 4 component and IPA 1 component). Also it should be noted
that representatives in these bodies do not receive any financial support for their involvement
as well as their travel and accommodation costs are not covered. This may be considered as
one of the factors that discourages active involvement in all cases.
(2) Direct invitation to the organization/candidate for membership in the
working group/body
As the practice is found in other countries as well, the state administration
bodies often preserve the right to invite directly representatives of civil soci –
et y organizations in the working groups (mostly in the process of preparation
21 Detailed matrix for administrative check and evaluation of applications is in Annex 1: Matrix for administra-
tive review and assessment of the applications

– 35 –
of laws). This manner of inclusion most often is based on previous experience
in cooperation of the specific state administration bodies with organizations
and their representatives, as well as on the basis of the expertise and recogni-
tion of the organizations in a certain sector. For example, for the purposes of
drafting the Law on changes and amendments to the law for equal opportuni –
ties of women and man six members expert-level working group was estab –
lished that involved representatives of relevant institutions (Ombudsman),
line ministries (from Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, Ministry of educa –
tion and sciences, Ministry of justice) and civil societ y (representative from
Akcija zdruzenska and one national expert). The institutions/organisations
were selected by the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy and the responsible
persons were nominated by the institutions/organizations itself. Also, dur –
ing this period the amendments and changes to the Law on Donations and
Sponsorships in Public Activities were undertaken. Two representatives from
the civil societ y sector are part of the working group in the Ministry of Justice
with direct invitation. Both are representatives from organizations which
have been involved in the topics of charit y and philanthropy for years.
Besides the above mentioned case of the Ministry of Justice, wherein one of
the two representatives in the working group for preparation of the Law on
Associations and Foundations was directly invited by Ministry, a similar ex –
ample can be found in the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy in the process
of preparation of the Law on Volunteering .

– 36 –
V. CONCLUSIONS
The overview of mechanisms for selection of CSO representatives in the countries in
Europe and the analysis of the Macedonian practices show that there is no one stan –
dardized mechanism for inclusion of the CSOs in the working groups and other con –
sultative bodies.
CSOs take part in cross-sector government councils and advisory bodies, working
groups, monitoring bodies. Macedonian CSOs are included in cross-sector bodies
established by the state administration (NCEI, JCC, Commission for Organizations of
Public Interest, etc.) or in working groups for preparation of laws (Laws on Associa-
tions and Foundations, Law on Donations and Sponsorships in Public Activities, Law
on Volunteering, Law on Prevention and Protection Against Discrimination, Amend –
ments of the Law on Equal opportunities between woman and man etc.).
The following models have been identified on European level:
1. CSOs select their representatives based on procedure prescribed in a law or
regulation, or criteria determined by the state body;
2. CSOs select their representatives based on own procedure;
3. The government body organizes the process and selects the CSOs (with or
without clear rules);
4. The state body cooperates with the CSOs in the procedure and selection pro –
cess.
In Macedonia, there are two most common selection procedures: (1) when the institu –
tions select and (2) the selection is left to be made by the organizations themselves.
When the selection is made by the state bodies there are also two different approach –
es: (1) selection through a public call for competition with clear design of the process
determined by t he body (e.g., Croat ia, Serbia) or (2) by direc t nominat ion of represen –
tatives from the CSOs either based on process and criteria developed by CSOs in re –
sponse to government (Slovenia) or based on own procedures (Bulgaria). In the coun –
try, the first approach is most commonly applied for bodies with defined longer term
mandate, such as the Commission for Status of Organizations of Public Interest or the
National Council for Development of Volunteering. Cases of direct invitation to certain
person or organization are found when working groups for preparation of laws are
formed (Law on Associations and Foundations, Law on Donations and Sponsorships
in Public Activities, Law on Volunteering, Law on Prevention and Protection Against
Discrimination, etc.)
The opportunit y for the CSOs to determine their own representatives is a frequently
identified approach. In these cases the state bodies rely on the organized civil societ y,
i.e. to a certain coalition/network/platform. In the country the most common partner

– 37 –
is the Macedonian Civic Platform. With support from this platform the selection of
members to the NCEI, JCC, working group for Law on Associations and Foundations,
etc. was made. In these cases the procedure is implemented in accordance with the
rules determined by the network itself.
While in the examples in Europe there is tendency to make a distinction between cri-
teria for organizations and for candidates, in the country it is not always clear wheth –
er these refer to the organization or the candidate from the specific CSO. When refer –
ences for the organizations are required, the criteria mostly refer to the candidate.
Exception was made in the selection of the JCC members led by CPM where there is a
specific matrix for administrative review and evaluation of the applications. In this
matrix most points bring organizational qualities which are followed by candidates’
qualifications.
Also, relevant for the country is the small response from the CSOs to participate in
consultative bodies or working groups. The reasons could be different: lack of knowl –
edge, lack of capacities (human and financial), etc. Consequently, participation in
cross-sector bodies is dominant by bigger organisations and networks (which most
often have the resources needed to support such participation).

– 38 –
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
In countries where there is no established practice as to selection of CSOs in cross
sector bodies, it could be useful to prescribe one or two models which can serve as
guidance to the state and CSOs when determining how to best select and include CSOs
and the public in such bodies.
The requirement for transparency of the selection procedures, requires that all the
processes must be based on clearly prescribed criteria, the specifics should be de –
termined before the process commences and be made available and accessible to all
potentially interested groups.
In the process of determining the criteria and procedure, the goal of the working
group/body should be paramount as well as the clarit y of the need i.e. the clarit y of
the mandate of the representatives from the CSOs, specifically, the purpose of the CSO
involvement, t ype of input and role of the participating individual or organization.
This will determine the design of the criteria and the process. For example, if the
body has an advisory function, the criteria for representation of organizations should
dominate and organizations could make the selection themselves. In cases where an
expertise is sought, more clear criteria for candidates are needed. At the same time,
the right of a state institution to address a certain organization or person identified
in a specific sector should be accepted as possibilit y. However, in these cases as well,
it is recommended that the state institutions define their own rules and matrixes for
the purpose of evaluation of the decision they make and ensuring that the process is
transparent and inclusive.
Further, the process should allow for candidacies from wider group of organizations
and treat them equally based on clearly defined criteria to ensure credibilit y of the
process.
Relying on organized civil societ y in coalitions and networks (in sectoral or cross-
sectoral national alliances) is recommended especially in cases of selecting members
with representative functions. In these cases, the network selects candidates based
on own procedures. However, the process should not preclude other organizations or
networks to nominate candidates.
The ministries could also develop lists of CSOs interested to be informed and take
part in selection processes. CSOs can be asked to pre-register by submitting minimum
information relevant to the work of the ministry and operations of the CSO.
Where possible, to facilitate the selection process and also information sharing, gov –
ernment bodies and CSOs could work together to establish online databases on the
existing calls for nominations, rules and procedures, list of active working bodies and
representatives of the CSOs selected to take part in it, etc.

– 39 –
Regardless of the chosen model, it is recommended to select deputies of the candi-
dates in the same time when the member of the group is selected. In addition, where
representatives is needed, the emphasis should be given on the organization that
nominates, rather than the personal preferences.
As noted above, a guiding principle of all selection mechanisms is that the procedure
should be public, open and transparent in order to ensure there is trust among the
state bodies and the CSOs. Therefore the organizers of the selection process should
prescribe the process in advance and promote it via all forms of media, social net –
works and various channels together with the reports on the undertaken steps and
results.
Finally, specific consideration should be given to issues such as: who appoints the
members, who selects the members, what are the timelines and deadlines, is the pro –
cess organized in one or two steps, should organizations be required to register and
what documents should they submit for this purpose, what is the procedure for ap –
peal, and other issues.

– 40 –
VII. PROPOSED MODELS
The following models have been developed based on the information obtained from
the comparative overview and domestic analysis. They aim to facilitate and guide
Macedonian state institutions and CSOs in the processes of selection of members of
CSOs in different bodies. The proposed models do not exclude each other and aim to
serve as illustrative examples only of how the selection processes may be conducted.
Possible Selection Procedures
The following models provide guidance as to the possible procedure that could be un –
dertaken when selecting members in either cross-sector bodies which require repre –
sentation, or specific expertise. In cases where selection is conducted through public
announcements, differences could exist in relation to who decides on the nominations.
The model prov ides t wo opt ions for t hat . In addit ion, t he model also addresses issues
that should be considered when selection of members is done through networks.
A. Selection through public announcement
1. Public announcement (for the general issues it is announced by the by the
ministries, but it may also be announced by the Government Unit for Collabo –
ration with NGOs). It should be announced on the web-site of the Government
Unit and the responsible ministry or state administration body. In addition,
it could be published in the daily newspapers, CSO newsletters and distrib –
uted through other possible channels. CSOs should spread the information
via their networks.
2. Nomination : Each organization can nominate one candidate and a deput y.
The nomination could be submitted either by the organization which nom –
inates the candidate and its deput y, and/or by the candidates directly and
should be delivered to the institution issuing the call in written form (via
email or post) with all documents. The period for nomination should be clear –
ly stated in the public call and should last at least 15 working days.
3. Administrative review : The received applications should be administratively
and technically checked by the state institution that leads the process. This
should be done in the period of 8 working days. The state institution prepares
a report for the: number of organizations and candidates that applied; for the
valid and non-valid applications. The report is published on the web-site.

– 41 –
4. Decision-making :
Option 1 through public voting
This option is more applicable in case of selection of representatives in con –
sultative bodies such as councils, committees.
Step 1: Pre-registration.
22 Organizations need to register in order to vote,
with the responsible institution. There should be adequate timing given
for such registration (at least 15 working days). Depending on the type
of body for which selection is being made, the registration of CSOs may
be tailored based on their field of activit y and they could only be able to
submit nominations in that field (e.g., if voting is done for a body which
should have designated representatives from a selected fields such as
environment, democracy etc., as in the Croatian Council for Civil Societ y
Development). If there is no distinction as to the fields of activities that
CSOs should represent then there is no need for such activit y based vot –
ing (e.g., the Public Benefit Commission in Macedonia).
Step 2: voting. All valid applications are published on the web site of the
state institution that leads the process, with a call for (preregistered)
organizations to give their vote for one proposed candidate and its dep –
ut y in a designated period (e.g., 15 working days).
They can give their votes on a written form (via post or email) given by
the state institution that leads the process or via the internet if online
voting system is established.
Step 3: decision . There are t wo approaches how to decide on the winning
representatives. (1) The candidate/s and deput y with higher number of
votes is selected in the body. (2) The state institution can decide from
the list of candidates that have received the highest votes (e.g., from the
5 candidates with most votes).
Option 2 decision by the state institution
The state institution can decide based on the applications submitted by the
candidates. The institution should prepare a justification explaining the deci –
sion which is published on its web site. In order to ensure representation, if
needed, the state institution may require that the candidates show support
from a certain number of organizations for their nomination (e.g., they could
prescribe a minimum number of organizations that may support the nomina-
tion).
5. Appeal : In a designated period (e.g., 8 working days), days, candidates have
right for complain to the organizer of the process.
22 Supporting documents for organizational pre-registration could include: information on registration (copy
of decision on registration or re-registration according to the applicable CSO law); types of activities the or –
ganization is involved in relevant to the field of work of the ministry (e.g., extract from the statute); a letter
expressing the desire of the organization to participate in the selection process signed by the official repre-
sentative of an authorized person or organization.

– 42 –
B. Selection through networks
In cases of long term cooperation between the ministry or state agency with certain
networks, alliances or other umbrella organizations, selection may be done through
invitation of the network of organizations and other relevant organization in the
field to nominate candidates. In this case, it may be left to the organizations to select
the representative themselves. They can do that based on personal discussions or
through own developed procedures. However, even in such cases it is recommended
that there is publicly available information about the process so that other interested
organizations may join and apply. Specific guarantees that will ensure transparency
may include:
 The invitation to the network must be published on the web site of the
state institution in the same time when it is sent to the network.
 The network should to spread the information to other organizations ac –
tive in the field informing them about the possibilities to take part in the
process.
 The information about the selected candidates must be available on the
web site of the state institution, and their contact information should be
provided.
 A designated time should be given in case of appeal (e.g., 8 working days).
Possible Criteria
Deciding how to develop the criteria is the most important part of the process, be –
cause it will determine the pool of parties that can actually join the cross-sector body
and take part in this work. The process of developing criteria should consider the
competences of the body, the role the candidates will have and the input that they will
be required to provide.
A. Proposed criteria for selection of CSO candidates for consultative
bodies
The following model presupposes that the CSO representatives are selected for par –
ticipation in bodies which serve (1) in advisory function, with competences to develop
policies for the whole sector (e.g., funding for civil societ y) or (2) for one sub-sector
(e.g., women rights) or (3) for a particular issue (e.g., volunteering). In such cases, the
representativeness of the sector could be considered as more important than the ex –
pertise on a particular issue. If the cross-sector body specializes in a particular area
in may give emphasis to the issues relevant for its work when seeking organizational
representativeness (e.g., the body responsible for development for volunteering may
favour CSOs which manage volunteers or whose missions are to develop volunteer –

– 43 –
ing). In any case, all CSOs should have opportunit y to nominate candidates and apply
in accordance with the criteria. The procedure can be facilitated by the state institu-
tion, but it is recommended that the CSOs representatives selected own representa-
tives (e.g., as in Croatia). Another possibilit y is for the procedure to be led by CSOs
(e.g. as in Slovenia or Bulgaria).
1) Organizational criteria
 Type of organization : It is registered in accordance with the provisions of
the Law on Associations and Foundations;
 Activities/work : Minimum (2-3) years of work (if relevant to the work of
the body);
 Level of operation : To operate on national or regional or local level. Its
activities and actions are directed at the general public and the interests
of the communit y;
 Participation in similar bodies or working groups led by governments and
CSOs : to have history of active participation in working groups or events
(ex. working groups for preparation of national strategies/laws particu –
lar to the issue, international conferences and events, to have conducted
coordinative activities among CSOs, etc);
 Membership in net works : To be a member of platforms, networks, coali –
tions on national and international level or to have strong relationship
with other organizations (if relevant to the work of the body);
 Financial and human resources : To have sufficient number of members
or to have strong financial and management capacities (if relevant to the
work of the body).
Supporting documents for organizational criteria:
 Standard application provided (available on web site) by the state insti –
tution that leads the process;
 Copy of the registration or re-registration in the Central Registry of
Macedonia;
 Recommendations from (numb e r o f ) organizations; or candidacy sup –
ported by (numb e r o f ) organizations;
 Organizational profile that will contain: vision, mission and goals; main
activities; brief description of completed projects (related to the area of
interest of the announcement); list of publications related to the area; list
of participation in working groups; list of membership and participations
in domestic and international net works/coalitions; information for orga –
nizational structure and other information that may be relevant to the
work of the body.

– 44 –
2) Criteria for the candidates
 Experience: minimum of (numb e r) years of work experience or volunteer –
ing in civil societ y;
 Education: to have minimum high school education (if relevant to the work
of the body this or other related requirements may be prescribed);
 Expertise: to have prior expertise in civil society issues and understand –
ing of the civil societ y issues or issues in the particular area of work of
the body;
 Social capital: existing or prior experience as a member of relevant net –
works, platforms ;
 Communication skills, proven networking skills;
 Not an active member (to hold an office or high level position) of political
part y (if relevant to the work of the body).
Supporting documents for the candidates:
 CV of the candidate;
 Motivation letter;
 Plan how the person will solicit input from the interested parties and re –
port about the developments in the body and outcomes from the work;
 Written confirmation for active work (professional and volunteering) of
the candidate in the civil societ y for the last (numb e r o f ) years, signed by
the organization(s) which nominate the candidate or other organization/s
(for the past experience);
 Recommendations/references.

B. Proposed criteria for selection of CSO candidates in working
groups
The following model presupposes that the CSO representatives are selected for par –
ticipation in bodies which role is to draft policies and laws which may affect the whole
sector or particular area of work. In this model the expertise of the candidate is em –
phasized because the selected person will be required to provide exerts opinion and
contribution in the process. As in the previous model, each CSO should have opportu –
nity for to nominate candidates and apply. Most often, the procedure is lead by gov –
ernment bodies. CSO may selected the representatives themselves based on clearly
predetermined criteria of the state body or selected by the relevant state body.

– 45 –
1) Organizational criteria
Organizational criteria are relevant only if the state body requires pre-registration.
Those can include:  Type of organization: It is registered in accordance with the provisions of
the Law on Associations and Foundations;
 Level of operation: To operate on national or regional or local level. Its
activities and actions are directed at the general public and the interests
of the communit y;
 Membership in net works: To be a member of platforms, networks, coali –
tions on national and international level or to have strong relationship
with other organizations (if relevant to the work of the body).
2) Criteria for the candidates
 Experience: minimum of (numb e r o f ) years of working experience or vol –
unteering in civil societ y;
 Education: to have minimum high school education. University and post-
graduate diploma is advantage (if relevant to the work of the body);
 Expertise: to have expertise in civil societ y or some other specific area,
supported by minimum number of conducted projects as expert, number
of publications, previous participation in working groups, expertise in
drafting national legislation, comparative expertise, etc.
 Not an active member of political part y (if relevant to the work of the body).
Supporting documents for the candidates:
 CV of the candidate;
 Motivation letter;
 Plan how the person will solicit input from the interested parties and re –
port about the developments in the body and outcomes from the work;
 Written confirmation for active work (professional and volunteering) of
the candidate in the civil societ y for the last (numb e r o f ) years, signed
by the of the organization(s) which nominate the candidate or other
organization/s (for the past experience);
 Recommendations/references.

– 46 –
Annex 1:
Matrix for administrative review and assessment of the applications
Criteria Max. points
CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATION
Type of organization
Association/foundation 5
Alliance (network) 10
Activities/operation
Up to 3 years and up to 3 activities 5
From over 3 to 10 years and from 4 to 6 activities 10
From over 10 years and over 7 activities/projects 15
Membership in working groups and etc.
Membership in the Economic and social council of the Republic of
Macedonia or working groups of ESC 5
Membership in ECOSOC of UN 5
Membership in other working groups in relevant institutions 5
Membership in alliances (networks)
In 1 to 2 international networks 5
In over 3 international networks 10
Not a member of any international network 0
In 1 to 2 domestic networks 5
In over 3 domestic networks 10
Not a member of any domestic network 0
Human resources
From 1 to 2 permanently engaged staff 3
From 3 to 5 permanently engaged staff 7
Over 5 permanently engaged staff 10
Financial resources (average budget for 2007-2009 )
Under 5 million MKD 3
Over 5 and under 10 million MKD 7
Over 10 million MKD 10
Total points – organization 80

– 47 –
CANDIDATE
Education
Secondary or higher education degree 1
University degree 2
Master`s or doctorate degree 3
Working experience – general
To 3 years 2
From over 3 to 7 years 3
Over 7 years 5
Working experience – social and civic dialogue
To 3 years and to 3 activities 2
From over 3 to 10 years and from 4 to 6 activities 5
Over 10 years and over 7 activities/projects 7
Announced publications for social and civil dialogue 2
Level of English language knowledge 3
Understanding (А-1 point; В-2 points; С-3 points) 3
Speaking (А-1 point; В-2 points; С-3 points) 3
Writing (А-1 point; В-2 points; С-3 points) 3
Total points – candidate 20
TOTAL POINTS 100

– 48 –
BIBLIOGR APHY
Comparative over view
Communication: Simplif ying and improving the regulatory environment, COM(2002)
278, European Commission, 2002

Resolution on The Perspectives for Developing Civil Dialogue under the Treat y of Lis-
bon, P6_TA(2009)0007, European Parliament, 2009
The Treat y of Lisbon, signed 2007, European Union, in force as of 2009
Treat y on the Functioning of the European Union, European Union, 2008
Act no. XI of 1987 on Legislation, Hungary
Law on Public Benefit Activit y and Volunteering in 2003, Poland
Regulation on the Public Benefit Works Council, Minister of Economy, Labor and So –
cial Policy, August 2003
“Narodne novine”, br. 140/2009, Odluka Vlade Repubblike Hrvatske o osnivanju Sav –
jeta za razvoj civilnog drust va
The Centre for Information Service, Co-operation and Development of NGOs (CNVOS)
Rules of the Procedure for Selection of CSO Representatives
Savjet za razvoj civilnog drust va, Poslovnik savjeta za razvoj civilnog drust va, 2010
https://vote.bluelink.net/index.php
https://w w w.cnvos.si/article?path=/zagovornist vo/nvo_predstavniki
https://www.pozytek.gov.pl/Orzecznictwo,dotyczace,III,sektora,831.html
https://w w w.prsp.gov.rs/engleski/aktuelno/kocd.jsp
www.uzuvrh.hr

– 49 –
National over view
Влада на Република Македонија, Стратегија за промовирање и развој на
волонтерство, 2010 година.
Влада на Република Македонија, Барање за номинирање на двајца претставници
од граѓанскиот сектор во Заеднички консултативен комитет (ЗКК) на
европскиот социјален комитет (ЕЕСК), октомври 2010
Граѓанска платформа на Македонија, Правила за избор на претставници од
членките на ГПМ во меѓусекторски и меѓуинституционални тела, 2007
Слу жбен весник на Република Македонија бр. 141/2010, Правилник за начинот
и критериумите за избор, како и причините за прекин на работењето на
Претседателот и членовите на Комисијата на организации од јавен интерес
Собрание на Република Македонија, Одлука за основање на Национален совет
за евроинтеграции, 2007
www.nvosorabotka .gs .gov .mk , Оглас за избор на 2 члена во Комисијата за
организации со статус од јавен интерес од организации регистрирани согласно
Законот за здру женија и фондации, август, 2011
http : //www .mtsp .gov .mk , Оглас за избор на четворица претставници од
здру женија и фондации за у чество во работата на Националниот совет за развој
на влонтерството, февруари, 2011
www .nvosorabotka .gs .gov .mk , Повик за избор на претставници на здруженијата
на граѓани активни на полето на европските интеграции на Република
Македонија во ТАИБ комитетот на ИПА компонентата за помош при транзиција
и институционално зајакнување (ИПА компонента 1)