1. Consideration by MOP & Follow-up Andriy Andrusevych, RACSE Training segment: 17-18 Agenda item: 5.1-5.3

2. 5.1. Consideration by MOP Competence Experience

3. Общая процедура/Overall process Заключение Комитета/Findings of the Committee Прямое действие Комитета по отношению к Стороне/Direct action by the Committee towards a party Рекомендации ССК/ Recommendations by MOP Действие ССК/ Action by MOP Сообщение/Communication

4. MOP’s competence a) Provide advice and facilitate assistance to individual Parties regarding the implementation of the Convention; b) Make recommendations to the Party concerned; c) Request the Party concerned to submit a strategy, including a time schedule, and to report on the implementation of this strategy; d) In cases of communications from the public, make recommendations to the Party concerned on specific measures to address the matter raised by the member of the public; e) Issue declarations of non-compliance; f) Issue cautions; g) Suspend the special rights and privileges accorded to the Party concerned under the Convention; h) Take such other non-confrontational, non-judicial and consultative measures as may be appropriate.

5. 2 nd MOP (2005) and 3 rd MOP (2008) Almaty 2005  Kazakhstan  Ukraine  Turkmenistan No consideration of findings Issue-based titles First experience

6. Compliance Case Circle 1 2 3 4 Committee MOP Committee MOP

7. 2 nd MOP (2005) and 3 rd MOP (2008) Riga 2008  Kazakhstan  Ukraine  Turkmenistan  Albania  Armenia  Lithuania  Belgium  Denmark  Hungary  Romania  EC

8. 2 nd MOP (2005) and 3 rd MOP (2008) No more powers to ACCC Five new members  3 from NGO support  EECCA (3), Central Europe (2), “West EU” (4) Ukraine and Turkmenistan strongly opposed  Ukrainian NGOs present at MOP of “implementing plans funded from abroad” a question is open as to practical impact, which may be too early assess now but the process can commence the committee itself raises no doubts by civil society as to being unbiased, objective, open

9. 5.2 Working with the Government Opening a case initiates a process which must be accompanied by continuing efforts on national level Approaching other fora/processes No implementation without NGOs Keep putting pressure

10. 5.3. Follow-up within Aarhus Process 1 2 3 4 Committee MOP Committee MOP

11. 5.3. Follow-up within Aarhus Process Albania  Decision III/6a – June 208  Reporting: Nov 2008 Nov 2009 Nov 2010

12. 5.3. Follow-up within Aarhus Process Albania  Reminder to Government – Oct 2008  Second reminder – Feb 2009  1 st Interim report by Gov’t – Feb 2009  Committee’s reaction – May 2009  Reminder to Gov’t – Nov 2009  Request for delay – Dec 2009  2 nd Report by Gov’t – Jan 2010