Joint statement of human rights CSOs on involvement in the consultation process with the Government of Ukraine on Ukraine’s path towards EU accession

Ukrainian civil society is a driving force behind Ukraine’s accession to the European Union and the country’s overall reform process. This has been repeatedly confirmed by European partners in Enlargement Reports and public statements. As a coalition of human rights organisations, we welcome the Government’s efforts to involve civil society in Ukraine’s EU accession process, in particular through the establishment of working groups on the relevant chapters of the negotiations. Nevertheless, we consider the current format of consultations to be formal, fragmented and ineffective. Since Cluster I “Fundamentals”, in which the human rights organisations that have signed this Joint Statement are involved, is the most important and determines the overall pace of Ukraine’s accession to the European Union, we propose improvements to the Government’s process of engaging civil society working in the field of human rights.

Assessment of the experience of Organisations participating in the Working Groups on Chapters 23 “Justice and Fundamental Rights” and 24 “Justice, Freedom and Security”

To ensure the effectiveness and inclusiveness of Ukraine’s accession to the European Union, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine established Working Groups on the relevant chapters of the EU-Ukraine Negotiating Framework by its Resolution of 27 August 2024. Although some of these Working Groups demonstrated better effectiveness, the Working Groups on Chapters 23 and 24 rather symbolised the formality of this consultation process. Based on the experience of participating in these Working Groups, we identify the following existing problems that need to be addressed to improve the consultation process between the Government of Ukraine and civil society:

• Formalities without real influence: The consultations were mostly formal and did not provide for any real influence of civil society on decision-making. The final decisions and documents did not reflect the content of the consultations and the recommendations made by the public, in particular regarding the need to take into account the war and its legal and humanitarian consequences when developing the Roadmaps. Some of the consultations consisted only of presentations of decisions that had already been made (in particular, the Roadmaps) rather than genuine discussions. Ultimately, there was insufficient communication and interaction between the Government and CSOs: the consultations were more like parallel monologues than substantive dialogue.
• Absence of transparency in consultations: Materials were distributed in fragments, the discussion process was not properly documented, and there was no public access to the agendas, results or consolidated tables of accepted/rejected proposals or amendments.
• Lack of systematic consultations: There was no schedule for consultations, which led to their inconsistency and irregularity. The number of consultations held on Chapter 23 was insufficient for an in-depth discussion of the existing problems. In addition, there was not enough time allocated for consultations.
• Misunderstanding of the purpose of consultations: The process did not reflect a clear understanding by the Government of the purpose of the consultations, as the Government consistently sought to speed them up, citing time constraints. At the same time, consultations are needed to agree on clear steps for further reforms, rather than to satisfy the formal requirements of European partners.
• Selective prioritisation of consultation topics: Issues of combating corruption and judicial reform, particularly within the Working Group on the Functioning of Democratic Institutions (FDI), received greater attention than human rights, despite the importance of the latter, given the situation in the country. 
• Fragmentation of CSO participation: The range of CSOs involved was not comprehensive. The academic community was not sufficiently represented. There was a lack of coordination that would have allowed for a unified voice. 

Our recommendations on organising consultations between the Government of Ukraine and human rights CSOs

• Adoption of consultation standards: In cooperation with the Ministry of Justice and other central executive authorities, develop and approve minimum standards for consultations, including format, timeframes, rules for participation and feedback mechanisms.
• Transparency of the process: Ensure timely access to all documents discussed in the Working Groups: draft roadmaps, accompanying documents, and subsequently, reports on the subject of consultations and minutes of meetings.
• Reporting and feedback: Provide consolidated tables showing how CSO proposals were considered, with markings “accepted / partially accepted / rejected”, and accompanying explanations.
• Creation of a consultation schedule: Establish a public consultation calendar synchronised with the stages of reform implementation according to the roadmaps and the stages of adoption of regulatory acts.
• Participation in rule-making: Involve CSOs not only at the discussion stage, but also in the development of regulatory documents, such as strategies, draft laws, and subordinate acts (through joint working groups with relevant central executive authorities).
• Strengthening regional voice: Involve local organisations and communities in consultations.
• Scaling up the state reform process: The Government should understand that the process of European integration is not only about bringing our standards closer to European ones, but also about improving the overall well-being of the country and its citizens. Therefore, we strongly recommend including a broader range of reforms in the European integration process, in particular those necessary to ensure the reintegration of Ukraine’s temporarily occupied territories, internally displaced persons, general issues related to the war, etc.

The organisations signing this Joint Statement believe that the full involvement of CSOs by the Government of Ukraine at the stage of European integration will lend legitimacy to the process of accession to the European Union and increase public confidence, as CSOs represent public opinion. In this way, Ukraine will ensure strong public support for European integration and prevent the development of Euroscepticism among various segments of the population, fatigue from European integration and a possible rollback of reforms, as seen in other existing EU member states. The full participation of CSOs in Ukraine’s European integration process is a guarantee of the country’s sustainable accession to the EU.

Signed by:

Human Rights Centre ZMINA 

LGBT Human Rights Centre Nash Svit

NGO Centre Social Action

NGO Digital Security Laboratory

Association of Women Lawyers of Ukraine YurFem

Centre for Policy Analysis Zmist

Fight For Right

Roma Women’s Fund Chirikli

Ukrainian Legal Advisory Group

Expert Group Sova

NGO Theatre of Change

FREERIGHTS