The event was organized by the Agency for Legislative Initiatives, Dzerkalo Tyzhnia  (Mirror Weekly), Internews and USAID Ukraine in order to identify the problems, which the government faces in the first phase of transition to monetization of subsidies, as well as to outline solutions that will enable monetization of subsidies at the consumer level to be implemented quickly and efficiently.

Yuriy Dzhygyr, Deputy Minister of Finance of Ukraine, emphasized the main strategic goal of the transition to monetization, which is energy efficiency – more economical use of energy resources. When applying the monetization tool, it is necessary to take into account the critical objectives to be achieved as a result of its implementation. So, the monetization system should protect vulnerable groups of the population, while it must have built-in tools to achieve fiscal discipline. At the same time, the system should be transparent, user-friendly, and it should be perceived by society as fair.

A two-stage transition to the subsidy monetization model was chosen: the first stage – monetization at the level of service providers. Firstly, direct payments were made with business entities, which facilitated the administration process; and secondly, subsidies cover already consumed resources, which already gives apparent savings in funds; thirdly, automatic financing of subsidies was introduced, which excludes manual interference in calculations with economic entities. These three elements during the 8 months of 2018 have already led to apparent savings in budget funds – 8.2 billion less than in the same period in 2017.

In the second phase, monetization of subsidies at the household level will be introduced.

Oleksiy Habatiuk, Deputy Head of the Energy Efficiency Department of NJSC Naftogaz Ukraine, emphasized that the subsidy monetization phase is an integral part of a large system of subsidies, which, in addition to monetization, involves identifying those to whom the subsidy is allocated, as well as a system for calculating subsidies that depend on technical parameters.

Oleksiy stressed that there is currently no link between the calculation of subsidies and their monetization. Monetization, which came into force on January 1, 2018, had no effect on the amount of resource consumption. Subsidiaries continue to consume substantially more resources than those who consume and pay energy on their own.

Every saved cubic meter of gas to the population is profitable, because NJSC “Naftogaz” buys gas on the market more expensive than it sells to the population. Gas of own extraction is not enough. Therefore, NJSC “Naftogaz” is interested in the population to consume economically, in particular, the subsidiaries, because the budget pays for them, which is formed from our taxes. Therefore, for us, this is a double benefit: less tax is spent, as well as less losses from gas supply at a low price.

Also, Oleksiy noted that according to the observations of NJSC Naftogaz Ukraine, since January 1, 2018, the situation has little changed: financing of expenditures from the state budget for subsidies continues, as before, with delays. You cannot say that only resources consumed by the population are financed, since there is no access to information on personalized consumption of resources by the population. And this is a significant corruption risk, since private gas companies supply gas to the population, which can manipulate the price of gas and thus receive grey funds that will fuel corruption in the country.

Valeriy Lyulin, Director of the Calculation Department, Kyivvodokanal, spoke about the difficulties Kyivvodokanal encountered during the implementation of the reform. First of all, due to software reassignment, there were no subsidies for consumers for several months, all calculations were subsequently redeemed.

Among possible risks Valeriy highlighted the danger of using money that would be received on personal accounts of consumers, for other needs. It is therefore important to synchronize the exchange of information about consumer indebtedness in order to prevent a situation where consumers accumulate payment arrears for certain services.

Valeriy noted that it is important to introduce mechanisms that would stimulate the saving of resources, in particular, encourage consumers to install meters. In Kiev, still 25% of apartments are not equipped with water meters. Yes, you can apply a subsidy for consumers who have already installed meters to encourage others to install and save resources.

Vitaliy Muzychenko, Director of State Social Assistance Department of the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine, noted that the system of subsidies in Ukraine has been in operation since 1995 and, during all the years of existence, it was the subject of discussion on its compliance with the requirements of the time. The system of subsidies became especially relevant after 2014, when the incomes of the population decreased significantly, and prices and tariffs greatly increased. It was the system of housing subsidies that made it possible to cope with this situation.

In 2014, the approach to the mechanism for assigning and accrual of subsidies was changed. These observations suggest that the established social norms are approaching the actual volumes of natural gas consumption. Also, on the basis of a thorough analysis, a conditional portrait of the recipient of housing subsidies was drawn up, as well as factors that allowed households to obtain fraudulent subsidies for which they were not entitled. Since May, more rigorous approaches to the allocation of subsidies have been introduced that aim at increasing the targeting of this type of social assistance. This creates the basis for the successful introduction of housing subsidies monetization.

An explanation that recipients of housing subsidies consume more resources than those who do not receive them is that their income does not allow them to implement energy-saving measures at their own expense. It is necessary to think about the mechanism of support for such groups of citizens, in particular, it can be done through the system of providing “warm loans”.

Svyatoslav Pavlyuk, Independent Expert on Energy Saving, said that if while subsidizing we aim to stimulate energy efficiency, then we must first look at what subsidies are being given. Currently, subsidies are allocated for 8 services: gas, heating, hot and cold water supply, drainage, electricity, garbage, housing maintenance. Among these services only gas, heat and electricity are directly related to energy efficiency. Household expenditures for the maintenance of adjoining areas, garbage disposal, drainage and even water supply are not so significant for the family budget, and the costs of administration of subsidies for these services are significant. Therefore, it is worth subsidizing only the payment of services that are most sensitive to the family budget – gas, heat and electricity.

Vitaliy Muzychenko, Director of State Social AssistanceDepartment of the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine, stressed that the conditions for the appointment of housing subsidies have now changed, the system becomes more targeted and provides more rigorous verification of potential recipients of subsidies, as well as social standards were adjusted. All these steps provide an opportunity to talk about the successful introduction of housing subsidies monetization at the level of service users.

Subsequent revisions require mechanisms to control the use of subsidized funds to consumers. Today it impossible to simultaneously introduce monetization of subsidies among all households that need it; a phased system of introduction of this mechanism should be introduced.

Yuriy Dzhygyr, Deputy Minister of Finance of Ukraine, noted that the second stage of monetization assumes that funds will be transferred to personal accounts of recipients of subsidies from which they will pay for utilities.

A key condition for the introduction of the second stage is filling the register of households, which need of assistance, as well as the possibility of a complete check of the property status of recipients of subsidies.

Also, Yuriy stressed that the set of measures that accompany the monetization of subsidies at the level of consumers, give an opportunity to hope for significant savings.

Svyatoslav Pavlyuk, Independent Expert on Energy Saving, stressed that speaking about energy saving, it is worth remembering that people do not save energy, they save money. Monetization makes the consumer to change his behavior and stimulates to energy saving. You need to tell people about medium-term plans of the state, so that people can have a strategy of their behavior. The mechanism of control and deprivation of subsidies for non-payment of accounts must be introduced.

According to Svyatoslav, the state should allow households to use subsidized money to upgrade their housing for the sake of better energy saving. Here the problem of the elderly people appears, who are not able to upgrade their housing on their own. It is also necessary to inform consumers that the subsidies will not be issued forever, and the amount of payments will be reduced. Therefore, it is critically important to invest in upgrading housing.

In addition, the problem of renting apartments with subsidies needs to be solved. And also the question of gas rate formation.

Olga Pishchulina, Expert on social support of the population of the Razumkov Center, drew attention to the fact that in Western countries, subsidies are received from 2 to 5% of citizens. In Ukraine today almost 50% of the population are considered disadvantaged ones.

Today, subsidies are not available to everybody who really needs it.Also, the subsidy system does not stimulate energy saving. Such a system is beneficial both for service providers and for consumers. Through the recipients of subsidies, the state finances monopolists of energy supply companies.

Olga pointed out that the new rules on provision subsidies have the element for assessing the property status of applicants for subsidies, which would allow more accurately identify the recipients of subsidies. However, creep-holes for wealthy applicants are still there.

The method of monetization of subsidies is not definitely positive, not all elements of the mechanism are well thought out. There is also a problem of liquidity of the treasury.

Oleksiy Khabatyuk, Deputy Head of Energy Efficiency Department of NJSC Naftogaz Ukraine, stressed that 100% of energy consumers receive subsidies, simply through various subsidy mechanisms. In the electricity market it is cross-subsidies, in the gas market it is the difference of the purchase and sale price of gas.

Today, there is a problem of guaranteeing the payment of debts by subsidiaries, since the system does not stimulate paying for services at all. Misuse of subsidized money should lead to severe punishment. The planning horizon must be clearly defined so that citizens can plan their own energy costs in advance. In addition, qualitative verification of the subsidiaries should be carried out. The reform should be aimed at ensuring that the subsidiary is no different from ordinary consumers.

Photos by Oleksandr Kovalenko

The event was organized be the Agency for Legislative Initiatives, weekly newspaper Dzerkalo Tyzhnia,  Internews, and USAID Ukraine.

The research “Returning home. De-occupation and reintegration of Donbas as viewed by the leading Ukrainian parties” is aimed to clarify the attitude of the main Ukrainian political parties to the armed conflict in Eastern Ukraine; their vision of future of the temporarily occupied territories of Donetsk and Lugansk regions, as well as of Crimea; how the restoration of sovereignty on these territories should take place; what is the further of the Minsk agreements; how the amnesty should be held on the temporarily occupied territories, and other important issues.

This presentation continues the discussion “Return of the occupied territories of the Donbas. The Ukrainian Plan”, which took place on October 31, 2017. The discussion was designed as a platform for exchanging views and an open discussion on the socio-political situation in the liberated and occupied territories of Donbas, on the issues of return and reintegration of the territories of Donetsk and Luhansk regions, management of the de-occupied territories, and development of a new economic model of Donbas.

Svitlana Matviienko, Chairwoman of the Board of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives, noted that the presented study aims to find out how leading Ukrainian political parties characterize the armed conflict in eastern Ukraine, what should be the further fate of the temporarily occupied territories of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions and other sensitive sensitive issues. Svitlana stressed that this large-scale study continues such studies of Dzerkalo Tyzhnia as “Bleeding. Why Ukrainians leave their country “and “Tree of Life “, which reveal the attitude of Ukrainians towards the key issues and processes that are taking place in our country.

Yuliia Mostova, editor-in-chief of the Dzerkalo Tyzhnia, thanked all partners who helped to conduct the research. Ms. Mostova focused on why this particular research topic has been chosen. First, she stressed, that according to a sociological survey, 67% of Ukrainian citizens consider the war in the East of Ukraine to be the most important problem. The cessation of the war and the achievement of peace are the greatest expectations of citizens for the future president, whose election is scheduled for March 2019. Secondly, in Ukraine there is still no general vision, a comprehensive program of resolving the conflict in the Donbass. However, it needs to be developed, because we are aware that there can be no military victory, and capitulation will bring even more problems than it is now. Thirdly, there is a fear that a solution to the Ukrainian issue may be made during the meeting between Trump and Putin in Helsinki on July 16, 2018, without the participation of Ukraine.

The form, in which the research is presented, where the answers of all political parties are filed on the A2 format, enables voters to objectively compare the positions of the leading political parties of Ukraine on various issues.

Ms. Mostova also noted that among the political parties represented in the study, there are no such leading political forces as “People’s Front”, “Motherland”, “For Life” and “Radical Party of Oleg Lyashko”. Without receiving a response from these political forces, one can assume the following: either they do not have an opinion on these issues, or they are not sure about the position of their voters on these issues, or they are waiting for the results of the meeting of Trump and Putin in Helsinki.

Serhiy Rakhmanin, first deputy editor-in-chief of the Dzerkalo Tyzhnia, stressed the importance of research for two main reasons. Firstly, Donbass is the number one issue that worries voters. Not corruption, but the establishment of peace. Secondly, the research is constructed in such a way that it requires a clear, unambiguous answer to the proposed questions. While most political parties avoid a direct answer to the question of establishing peace and ways of implementing it, the proposed study is forcing them to choose a specific response among the proposals and thus clearly define their position on these issues.

Which questions the leading Ukrainian political parties were asked? Which answers do they chose? And, most importantly, to which conclusions their chosen positions inspire, you can read in the research “Returning home. De-occupation and reintegration of Donbas as viewed by the leading Ukrainian parties” by Dzerkalo Tyzhnia.

The Seminar covered the issues of justice and politics, influence of modern technologies on political processes in Ukraine, political corruption and transparency, causes, dynamics, and transformation of conflicts in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, comprehension of the concept of “new normality”, political forecasting and the art of improvisation in politics.

USPS participants met in Odessa in order to rethink the ideas and principles on which the socio-political, economic, and cultural processes of the present are based; as well as to develop their own understanding of the defining trends of the present days.

Violent conflicts have their own dynamics and logic. They unfold in time and space accumulating vast human and material resources. They ruin social institutions and destroy social capital. At the same time, conflicts create new opportunities, give a push for transformations, and make people change. In the last 20 years, just a small number of violent conflicts were resolved. Majority of these conflicts are still in active phase or under the threat of escalation. Can humanity find ways to transform violent conflicts? Are we destined to repeat our history over and over again? – Igor Semyvolos, Executive Director, Centre of Middle East Studies, talked about these issues.

What is a state? Why do we need it? What are the main goals of the policy? What should be the state in the near future? Can we outline the main features of the future policy? The answers to these questions are closely related to how we understand justice and whether we believe that public institutions should implement the basic principles of justice. However, what is justice? At the very first attempt to answer the question of the nature of justice, we notice that it is very difficult to reach a common point in our responses. Is the lack of agreement on ideas about justice a disadvantage or advantage? Majority of modern political debates focus on the discussion about the nature of justice. The fact that we are compelled to conduct these discussions, as well as the fact that we have different ways of evaluating key political and social practices, contributes to raising the level of political life. The policy of the close future will involve the society in the discussion of “difficult topics”. This is a policy of common good, – Andrii Baumeister, PhD, Associate Professor at Theoretical and Practical Philosophy Department at Taras Shevchenko Kyiv National University, summed up.

How do human body and politics relate? Does the body influence politics? Where is the line between “seeming to be” and “being”? What is the body of a politician like? Are flirt, erotica and sex levers of political influence and power? Does this help or vice versa? Photo as a presentation and “consolidation” in history. Art and literature in the political process, – all this was discussed during the seminar with Svitlana Matviienko, Chairwoman of the Board of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives.

State mechanisms are outdated all over the world. The world has technologically overwhelmed all the traditional political systems of representative democracy. Now, any person on the planet has no need in parliaments, or in various kinds of deputies and other authorities – the bulky state structures, or the multimillion army of officials. Now it is possible to own a remote control of the State Service of the People in your smartphone. Everyone can personally represent and defend their interests without intermediaries. Of course, we still need management and managers in the public sector. However, the meaning of their work must radically change. Blokchain, cryptocurrency, electronic cadaster of land and property, big data are no longer a science fiction, but a reality. But if the civilized world can’t immediately abandon traditional state institutions because they still work efficiently and new services are introduced gradually, Ukrainians can do it today and radically, because our state service is absent, the ruling class is corrupt. After doing this, Ukraine can jump ahead of the entire planet – Sergiy Gaiday, Director of Strategical Planning of Social Engineering Agency “Gaiday.com”, discussed these issues.

Money in politics is a necessary component of any democratic process that allows political support, political participation, and active support for electoral competition. At the same time, political funding also presents a particular risk to any democratic and economic system, threatening to capture political decision-making processes with personal interests and episodes of endemic political corruption. What is at the crossroads of funding rules for political parties, public procurement procedures, and the declaration of assets and income of political and civil servants? What do the relevant authorities do to combat corruption in these areas and which mechanisms can be used to improve these efforts? – Marcin Walecki, D.phil, Head of the ODIHR Democratization Department, told USPS participants.

During policy planning and implementation, one of the most interesting resources is an image of the future, which it proposes. However, often political forecasts in Ukraine can be manipulative and overly subjective which negates their importance in good policy making. What are the methods of political forecasting and the spheres of its use? What are the main principles of short-term and long-term forecasting and opportunities for its implementation? – Mykhaylo Koltsov, PhD, Senior Lecturer of Philosophy and Religious Studies at the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, talked about the methods of political forecasting.

What are the interrelations between the nature of the political regime, the provision of public goods and the political activity of citizens? What characterizes the state-making process? How a “natural state” transforms into a “state of the common good”? What is the role of the citizens in this process? What is the trajectory of the evolution of political regimes after 1991, including in Ukraine? What can we learn from the experience of Paleolithic bombing? Why is the level of violence falling in the modern world? What is the tyrannical world? – Ivan Gomza, PhD, Docent of Politology Department at the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, Lecturer at the Kyiv School of Economics, discussed these issues.

Every day every one of us is an actor of the improvisation genre. Politics, business, love, childcare etc are all acting where we only have one choice to make: either we are being “played”, or we “play”. Improvisation is creation of an act during its performance. How to use improvisation in politics? How to talk to the audience? These questions were answered by Anatoliy Neyolov, Head of the “Black Square” Theatre.

On June 8, 2018, “The Guidelines for Conducting City Meetings in Town Hall Meeting Format” were presented in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

The event was organized by the Agency for Legislative Initiatives in co-operation with the Apparatus of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine within the framework of the USAID RADA Program: Responsible, Accountable, Democratic Assembly implemented by the East Europe Foundation.

The guidelines summarize the experience of assembling Town Hall Meeting in different regions on the various topics that the Agency for Legislative Initiatives has been conducting since 2010. The manual summarizes the best practices of planning, organizing and holding city meetings, as well as presenting materials that are examples of organizational and expert documents that were used during events organized by the Agency for Legislative Initiatives.

Oleksandr Zaslavskyi, Deputy Chairman of the Board of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives, thanked the Apparatus of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and briefly summarized the main features of the Town Hall Meeting.

The Town Hall Meeting format originates from the United States of America, where it is known since the 18th century. Later Town Hall Meeting spread around the world in various formats.

Why do we think it is necessary?

Today we observe rather low level of citizens’ trust in state institutions, including local self-government institutions. This distrust is mutual – the authorities also do not trust citizens. This is not an exclusively Ukrainian problem. There is a crisis of representative democracy throughout the world. In the past 20-30 years, this challenge has led to the spread of various practices of participatory democracy. This is something that allows you to create a certain discourse of complicity and co-responsibility, which, in return, builds trust in society. The Town Hall Meeting is just the tool that can provide effective public participation and confidence.

Within the framework of the USAID RADA Program, Agency for Legislative Initiatives has conducted 11 town halls, among which the most successful is the discussion of certain points of the draft bill “On the Rehabilitation of Victims of Political Repressions in Ukraine”. This law was adopted 2.5 years later after the discussion on the Town Hall Meeting.

For decision makers, the Town Hall Meeting is an opportunity to get an answer to their initiatives, at the same time, to involve citizens in the decision-making process. The biggest advantage of the Town Hall Meeting format is that it is not about problems but solutions.

Apart from that, last year Agency for Legislative Initiatives conducted a series of town halls in cooperation with the Ministry of Youth and Sport on different approaches to youth development policy. Due to these discussions, the bill on youth centers was developed and approved, and in Donetsk region, this has contributed to the formation of a network of youth centers.

Oleksandr Chernenko, MP, told about his experience of cooperation with the Agency for Legislative Initiatives in conducting Town Hall Meeting in Chernihiv, which was devoted to discussing various approaches of utilization solid household waste.

Among the participants of the Chernihiv meeting were Chernihiv citizens, representatives of local authorities, communal enterprises, non-government organizations, environmental organizations; i.e. all main stakeholders were represented – consumers, service providers and those who care about the environment. Within the framework of this event, we tried to find solutions to two problems: firstly, it is the search for an optimal way of utilization and recycling of waste; and secondly, effective ways of storing and transporting garbage. The discussion resulted in the number of adjustments to the environment bills, which, unfortunately, yet have not been adopted.

Oleksandr Chernenko stressed that the Town Hall Meeting provides legitimation to the discussed issues and shows that the future bill expresses the interests of the community.

Victoria Baklazhenko, Program Coordinator, Agency for Legislative Initiatives, while presenting the guidelines, briefly focused on the key features of the Town Hall Meeting format.

Town Hall Meeting is an informal public gathering of local residents of a certain area. It is a qualified, purposeful and effective discussion of any specific issues of public interest.

The Town Hall Meeting format includes:

• discussion on the basis of several prepared scenarios – various options for solving the issue with the simultaneous display of participants’ positions on the screens;
• the participants of the discussion are, first of all, citizens interested in solving a certain problem;
• experts, politicians, public figures take part in discussions on an equal grounds with ordinary citizens;
• the discussion is held simultaneously in small groups (from 10 to 12 people);
• at each table there is a facilitator and a note taker (the person who notes on the computer the thoughts expressed by the participants);
• participants consistently discuss all options (15-20 minutes per script);
• participants’ thoughts and positions can be viewed in real-time on screens;
• after the discussion, the participants vote for the best scenario.

An important part of the Town Hall Meeting is the communication support of the event, which includes an information campaign to gather main stakeholders by e- mails, publishing information on the website, social media, creating graphic materials, and spreading information among partners. After the end of the discussion, you can start an advocacy campaign on the decision voted during the Town Hall Meeting.

Agency for Legislative Initiatives has developed a special web application for the Town Hall Meeting. It is available at alithmapp.com, which can be downloaded from the Agency for Legislative Initiatives’ website parliament.org.ua. This web application allows you to display structured and informative messages in a shared chat and to simplify the process of generating a report after the event. In order to use the web application for the Town Hall Meeting, please contact us.

The event was organized by the Agency for Legislative Initiatives in co-operation with the The Center for Innovation Development and the Interns’ League under the Professional Fellows Program, administered by the American Councils for International Education with the support of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs of the United States Department of State.

Jacob Ventura has an extensive work experience at the Massachusetts Legislative Office (USA); he also provided legal assistance in reforming the ethical standards of the French judicial system. In addition, Mr. Ventura was a member of the rule-making teams of elected representatives both at the state level and at the federal level.

During the seminar, Jacob Ventura outlined the peculiarities of governance in the United States, key competences and principles for the functioning of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government; he also described in detail the legislative process in the United States: from the idea for a bill and until its final vote. In addition, he revealed the peculiarities of work and interaction of the government with the non-governmental organizations in the United States.

Someone will have an idea for a bill as a result of a public policy need or a need to update or repeal a current law already in existence. Often times members of the legislature and their staff (House or Senate) will have the idea. Other times, a constituent, a citizen of the district will have an idea based on a societal or individual need. NGOs, lobbyist, businesses, non-profits, health care, industry, education, transportation and other groups will have an idea for the bill and propose it to a member of the legislature.

Generally, NGOs, lobbyists, constituents and organizations will directly lobby their Representative or Senator. Often times, larger organizations will lobby many legislators to get the necessary support for or opposition to a bill. Depending on the issue, and in many cases, just as many people are for a bill as are against the same bill. In this case, a particular legislator must weigh the pros and cons to voting ‘yes’ or ‘no’ for the bill. Considerations include how their particular district feels about the bill and the prospects of re-election during the next cycle; special interest political funding; personal relationships with the particular parties lobbying; the merits of the bill and the likelihood of legislative success; influence from party leadership in the legislature.

1. File the bill. Once a legislator receives the idea for the bill, he or she will generally have their staff draft the language for the bill. Both members of the Senate and the House of Representatives may file bills in their respective chambers. The Executive (President or Governor) may also file a bill that can be sent directly to the legislature for consideration.
2. Committee Hearing. Many bills that are filed never make it to a hearing. In some states, every bill filed must have an opportunity to be assigned to a committee for pubic testimony. Bills are assigned to committees based on issue areas. Once a bill has been assigned to a committee, the committee leadership will schedule a hearing on the bill sometime during the legislative session. Hearing rules are determined by committee membership. Generally, experts and concerned parties will be allowed to testify to the committee on the bill at hand, either for the bill or against the bill. After a bill has been heard at a committee hearing and all testimony has been submitted, the Committee will often take a private poll of the members and leadership to determine the level of support for the bill.
3. Debates.
4. Conference. In the U.S. Congress, there are 435 members of the House of Representative apportioned by population throughout the states. There are 100 U.S. Senators in the upper chamber, each state getting equal representation in this body, 2 Senators per state. In State Legislatures, the number of House and Senate members may vary. Generally, simple majorities are required for bill approval however there are hundreds of procedures and rules in each body that could lift the requirements for particular actions.
5. Final Legislative Vote. Once a bill has finally passed both chambers for final approval after conference, the House and the Senate, it is sent to the Executive Branch.
6. Executive Approval / Veto. The President of the United States owns the right of legislative approval or a veto at the Federal Government level. In any of the state governments, the executive is the Governor. The Executive is prescribed a certain amount of time to sign a bill in to law. The President has 10 days to sign the bill in to law or veto. Many governors have line-item veto power which allows them to change only portions of the bill or budget. The President does not have line-item veto power. The President must sign the entire bill in to law, or veto it, sending it back to the Congress for reconsideration. The President can also refuse to sign a bill but still allow it to become law.
7. Legislative Override of Veto. Usually, if the Executive fails to sign a bill, the bill is automatically vetoed. If the legislature disagrees with the executive’s veto, both chambers must re-vote to override the veto (usually by a 2/3 majority in each chamber). This is a very tough task and high threshold at the federal government level and in many states.
8. Constitutional Challenges. Once a bill becomes a law, citizens, members of the legislature and even the executive may challenge the law on constitutional grounds. The third, and often times most important branch of the U.S. government, the Judicial branch will decide if the law is to remain valid and if people’s constitutional rights are violated.

Article 71 of the Charter of the newly formed United Nations first defined ‘non-governmental organization’ in 1945. An NGO can be any kind of organization so long as it is independent from government influence and it is not-for-profit. There are approximately 10 million NGO organizations world-wide. Global Journal. There are 1.5 million NGOs in the United States that employ approximately 11.4 million Americans. According to the CAAF World Giving Index, nearly 31.5 percent of people worldwide donated to a charity/NGO in 2015 and 24 percent volunteered for one. According to Walden University, 80 percent of citizens across the globe believe that NGOs make it easier to be involved in positive social change.

NGOs address a variety of issues including women’s rights, human rights, economic development, political rights, health care, environmental regulation, the battling of disease, and increasing the standards of living for the most vulnerable populations.

NGOs play a critical role in advocating for changes in law, policy, procedure and administrative rules. NGOs are effective in highlighting the stories of individuals they serve. This direct contact and evidence gives elected officials an important perspective that policy on paper often cannot. NGOs must determine the ability of its organization to be a successful advocate for its cause. NGOs must strategically ‘pick their battles’ to determine if a cause should become a legislative priority (considerations are timing, funding, will of Congress, current events, and likelihood at success).

On May 16, 2018 at the Committee meeting on State Building, Regional Policy and Local Self-Government the presentation of the Shadow Report “Civil Service and Public Administration Reform in Ukraine in 2017” was held.

The shadow report was presented by Tatiana Chernukha, Program Coordinator of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives. The study was prepared within the framework of the USAID RADA Program: Responsible, Accountable, Democratic Assembly implemented by the East Europe Foundation.

The report is includes the process assessment of key reforms implementation in the area of ​​public administration and public service of Ukraine, as defined by the new edition of the Law of Ukraine “On Civil Service”, adopted on December 10, 2015, which came into force on May 1, 2016, along with the relevant key policy documents of the Government on public administration reform, approved in 2017. The report studies the policy assessment in the field of civil service reform and public administration reform (PAR), including its compliance, retrospective progression and internal concurrence, integrity, planning, co-ordination and resource provision of implementation.

This report does not analyze the Verkhovna Rada and the President of Ukraine role in shaping the public policy and their coordination with the Cabinet of Ministers; local state administrations role and their coordination with central executive bodies; independent regulators role; local self-government role; budget process efficiency and reformation state of the public finance management system.

Tetiana Chernukha noted that the report prepared by the Agency for Legislative Initiatives is an alternative to the government report for 2016-2017 on the implementation of public administration and civil service reform of Ukraine.

The report presents a qualitative assessment of the reform implementation, based on the Public Administration Principles developed by SIGMA:

• Coordination of implementation of public administration reform;
• Formation and coordination of government policy and strategic planning of government activities;
• Development of civil service and personnel management;
• Accountability and institutional architecture of the central executive authorities system.

Problematic aspects of public administration reform implementation are:

• Weak political management;
• Uncertainty in resource provision and sustainability of PAR funding;
• Insufficient and uncoordinatedPAR communication;
• Low level of introduction of modern information and communication technologies in public administration system.

Among the problematic aspects of the formation, coordination of state policy and strategic planning, the following should be singled out:

• Low coherence and coordination of state policy at the political level;
• Low capacity to formulate state policy at the administrative level (at the civil service level);
• Inconsistency between the planning of government activities and the planning of budget expenditures.

The problems of civil service development and human resources management are:

• Low ability to manage civil service personnel management;
• Low professional level of organization and holding competitions for civil service positions;
• Inconsistency of the evaluating system of civil servants performance with the government goals and between different categories of civil service. Lack of connection between the assessment system and financial motivation;
• Lack of an effective system of civil servants professional development of all categories.

Among the problematic aspects of accountability and institutional architecture of the central executive authorities system, the following should be singled out:

• There is no clear distinction between political and administrative functions at the level of ministries;
• The subjects’ functions of the policy formation and implementation are not distinctly specified;
• The optimization and centralization of ministry functions were not held.

Summing up the presentation and discussion of the Shadow Report, Serhiy Vlasenko, Chair of the Committee on State Building, Regional Policy and Local Self-Government, noted that the Committee takes note of the information, taking into account the comments expressed by MPs during the discussion.

Party Innovations Hub is an initiative of International IDEA and Ukrainian school of political studies, Agency for Legislative Initiatives’ project.

Oleksandr Iakymenko, Program Coordinator for Ukraine, International IDEA, emphasized that the idea of  Party Innovation Hub has emerged as a response to global challenges: the crisis of representation, populism, and mistrust. Transparency and accountability of political parties, the development of effective communication with voters, dialogue between political parties and internal party dialogue are steps to overcome these challenges.

Oleksandr Zaslavskyi, Deputy Chairman of the Board, Agency for Legislative Initiatives, emphasized that the Party Innovations Hub is a logical continuation of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives, which is the formation of a qualitatively new level of political culture.

Yevhen Barshchevskyi, Research & Innovation Program Officer at National Democratic Institute, told the participants of the training about survey systems that allow to organize public consultations, quickly communicate with party centers, receive feedback, conduct quantitative and qualitative surveys of public opinion in real-time with the help of SMS or smartphone.

Iryna Fedoriv, Chief editor of CHESNO Movement’s website, told the participants of the training about the methodology, which CESNO Public Movement uses to conduct research on the activities of political parties; also Iryna presented the CHESNO Movement’s tools for assessing politicians and parties that are designed to help citizens make a rational and informed choice.

Yaroslav Yurchyshyn, Chief Executive Officer at Transparency International Ukraine, discussed the openness of political parties with the participants of the training. What is the attitude towards political parties in the world? Why openness and accountability are essential for political parties? What do representatives of key stakeholders expect from political parties?

Oleg Medvedev, political consultant, discussed with the participants of the training the ratings, organizational capacities of political parties, and probable political strategies.

Raoul Kramer, Thinker & Innovation Manager, Founding partner at Enabl.ist, told the participants of the training about the open source tools, their features and benefits. Why in the 21st century political parties need to go online? What is the fundamental difference between engagement and participation? How parties should engage voters in effective cooperation? How political parties from all over the world use digital instruments?

Michael Babyak, Former Director of Marketing Technology, Trump campaign, Partner of Dome Compass Inc., told participants of Party Innovation Hub about the Trump’s campaign. Why the Republican Party has invested in dgital? How to organize and conduct an extremely effective fundraising campaign? How to involve volunteers in your campaign? What is the positive impact of digital technology on the work of political parties?

Oleksandr Iakymenko, Program Coordinator for Ukraine at International IDEA presented the concept of rapid prototyping and explained the way this methodology can be used by political parties.

Participants of Party Innovation Hub tested the technique later on and discussed its benefits with Michael Babyak.

Sergiy Gaiday, Director for strategic planning, social engineering agency Gaiday.com, told participants of Party Innovation Hub about the the basis of effective communication and the real PR. What is populism? Why is it useful? What is the main task of the elite? Why do we need political parties? What is the most important communication channel in the modern world? Why Ukraine can be divided into “facebook world” and “TV world”? How to develop a discipline of thinking? Why is it important to be able to give clear definitions?

Oleksandr Bondarenko, Head of Special Projects at Digital Communications Agency PlusOne, told the participants of Party Innovation Hub about how many people in Ukraine use the Internet. What is a “Generation of Titles”? What are the most visited sites in Ukraine? How do the facebook posts rank? What are the rules of behavior for politicians in social media? How does email marketing work? What are the secrets of successful video on social media? What Ukrainian politicians are looking for on the Internet?

On April 18, 2018, the Shadow Report “Creation of Amalgamated Territorial Communities in Ukraine in 2015-2017” was presented at the Committee meeting of the State Building, Regional Policy and Local Government by the Agency for Legislative Initiatives.

The shadow report was presented by Tetiana Chernukha, Program Coordinator of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives. The study was prepared within the framework of the USAID Program RADA: Responsibility, Accountability, Democratic Assembly implemented by the Eastern Europe Foundation.

While presenting the research, Tetiana drew the attention to the problems connected with the legislative provision of the decentralization reform in Ukraine.

The first problem of legislative regulation of the process of amalgamation of territorial communities is the problem of formation of territorial communities around cities of oblast significance. The essence of this problem has a dual nature. On the one hand, the creation of a new territorial community with a center in a city of regional significance requires to run new elections for mayor and the city council, which in most cases contradicts the interests of the current members of the city councils and city mayors. The mechanism of solving this problem is quite simple and consists in the legislative recognition of territorial communities of cities of oblast significance capable a priori, and thus the way of the formation of amalgamated territorial communities opens by joining of neighboring rural populated areas the city territorial community. On the other hand, realizing the need for amalgamation with city communities, territorial communities of villages express legitimate concerns that in the case of joining they will not have their own budget at all, and local self-government bodies of the city community will not pay attention to their problems.

The second tangible problem that has already emerged in the process of creating of amalgamated territorial communities is the problem of ensuring the real capacity of the newly formed amalgamated communities.

In accordance with the Methodology for the formation of capable territorial communities, approved by the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine as of April 8, 2015, No. 214, the capable territorial community is territorial communities of villages (cities) which, as a result of a voluntary amalgamation, can independently or through appropriate local self-government bodies provide the proper level of services, in particular in the field of education, culture, health care, social protection, housing and communal services, taking into account human resources, financial support and infrastructure development of the relevant administrative and territorial units.

The key point here is the availability of relevant human resources, financial support and infrastructure development.

In fact, in the process of creating of amalgamated territorial communities, we deal with three types of capabilities.

• First, it is the potential or estimated capacity that communities need to have, defined in accordance with a long-term plan.
• Second, this is the capacity legally recognized by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine in accordance with Article 9 of the Law of Ukraine “On Voluntary Amalgamation of Territorial Communities”.
• Third, it is a real capacity that is determined already after the amalgamated territorial community has been formed and shows certain results of its activity

In practice, potential, legally recognized and real ability coincides, as a rule, only with amalgamated territorial communities formed around populated areas, which are district centers. Instead, the creation of rural amalgamated territorial communities around populated areas that did not have the status of administrative centers immediately raises the problem of high-quality personnel provision of local self-government bodies.

Another quite controversial point in determining the capacity of the amalgamated territorial communities is the provision of part four of Article 9 of the Law of Ukraine “On Voluntary Amalgamation of Territorial Communities”, according to which the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine may recognize an amalgamated territorial community as capable, on condition that it is formed in the manner prescribed by Section II of this Law, around the community determined by the prospective plan for the formation of community territories. In fact, the law recognizes the possibility of legal recognition of capable territorial communities with potential capacity of only half of the maximum possible. It is clear that this is done to avoid artificial interruption of the merger processes, but on the other hand this is the way to create potentially insolvent communities.

In this context we should mentioned one of the principles of the amalgamation of territorial communities, namely the principle of voluntariness. If we analyze the relevant laws, we can ensure that voluntariness as such exists only in one aspect – in the choice of the moment of amalgamation or joining. From the territorial point of view, voluntariness is limited by the principle of capacity. The capacity of the potential amalgamated territorial communities is determined administratively by the formation of a perspective plan of community territories in accordance with Article 11 of the Law of Ukraine “On Voluntary Amalgamation of Territorial Communities”. In addition, voluntariness is limited by the administrative and territorial criterion, in particular, that the amalgamation is possible only within the existing areas.

Despite the fact that the amalgamation of territorial communities is a conditionally voluntary process, often the factor of voluntarism impedes the reform. This is especially true for promising communities, which have 2 to 3 population areas that are equivalent in their capacities, which may be the administrative centers of the amalgamated communities. As a rule, the leadership of these communities believes that the administrative center should be located exactly in their populated area and categorically rejects the idea of establishing an administrative center in another place.

Another important factor in the formation of capable territorial communities is the delineation of the boundaries of their territories, which are determined with the following requirements:

• the territory of a capable territorial community should include the territory of the territorial communities that are part of it and be inseparable;
• capable territorial communities are located within the territory of one oblast and, if possible, one district. At the same time, the law allows amalgamation of adjacent communities that are located in different areas and do not allow to restrict their legal rights.

Most often, the voluntary amalgamation of communities during 2015-2017 was in line with the long-term plan. Such an amalgamation allowed communities to obtain a new legal status of the territorial community with the powers of cities of oblast significance and direct intergovernmental relations with the state budget.

Svitlana Matvienko, Chairwoman of the Board of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives, welcomed the participants of the XIII Program, emphasized that the main values ​​on which USPS is based are human rights, freedom of expression, tolerance and democracy.

Marten Ehnberg, Head of the Council of Europe’s Office in Ukraine, spoke about key values ​​of the Council of Europe and also focused on reforms and initiatives supported by the Council of Europe in Ukraine.

Katerina Ryabiko, Co-ordinator of the project “Strengthening the Dialogue between Civil Society and Key Public Authorities and Institutions in Ukraine in the Human Dimension”, OSCE/ODIHR, stressed that peace cannot be achieved without human rights protection.

What is the responsibility? Who should we be responsible to? What is an authentic life and how does it relate to responsibility? What is abstract thinking and who thinks in an abstract way? What is an absolute? What is judgment by taste? What is common sense and how to build judgments based on it? What does it mean to think independently? What is identity? How do political judgments form? Yevhen Bystrytsky, PhD, Head of the Department of Philosophy of Culture, Ethics and Aesthetics of the Institute of Philosophy of the NAS of Ukraine, member of the USPS Supervisory Board, talked about the basics of responsible judgments with the participants.

Are there objective laws for the development of society? What are the laws of democracy? What socioeconomic and political conditions are necessary for building an effective democracy? What is the role of the army in democracy? What is the role of civil society and the level of political culture of a voter in democracy? These and other questions were answered by Igor Smeshko, Ph.D., Head of the “Power and Honor” NGO, former Head of the Security Service of Ukraine (2003-2005), Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary.

The discussion was moderated by Zoryan Kis, Senior Program Officer, National Democratic Institute, USPS alumnus.

Ivanna Klympush-Tsyntsadze, Vice-Prime-Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration of Ukraine, talked frankly with the participants about her work in the parliament and government of Ukraine.

Healthcare reform, or rather reform of the system of financing of healthcare, has been the subject of fierce discussions in the recent months. The manipulations and rumors surrounding this reform, in particular, the National Health Service, have become a reflection of the resistance of those players who are the most disadvantaged by the change of status quo. But what will the reform really change? Will the new system, even after the change of government, hold? What are the biggest risks of the new system? Ulana Suprun, Minister of Healthcare of Ukraine, and Oleg Petrenko, Head of the National Health Service of Ukraine, USPS alumnus, discussed these topics with the participants.

What are public finances and what is their nature? What are the risks of financial abuse? Can budget expenditures be unprotected? What are the sources of financing a budget deficit? What is the subsistence minimum? What is the budget deficit monetization? What is the dynamics of active operations of the banking sector? These topics were raised by Victor Pynzenyk, PhD, Member of the Parliament of Ukraine, member of the Committee of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on Budget.

What are the demographic problems facing Ukraine today? What is depopulation? What is the average life expectancy of Ukrainians? What are the migration processes in Ukraine today? What professions are lacking in Ukraine? What are the components of external migration in the country? What motivates Ukrainians to migrate? Who do employers need? Which countries are the most attractive for labor migration of Ukrainians? What are the consequences of labor migration for Ukraine and how can we minimize risks? Ella Libanova, PhD, Director of the Institute of Demography and Social Studies, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, spoke about external migrations in Ukraine.

For four years now, Ukrainians are starting their day with the latest news on loss at the frontline. Millions of people have been forced to seek new homes. Hundreds of thousands are involved in the formation of a new Ukrainian army. Forecasts and even promises to end the conflict have been heard from many Ukrainian politicians on a number of occasions, but there is currently no single strategy to get out of the situation, and the Minsk negotiations leave many issues open. What are the ways to resolve the conflict? Are there any preconditions for an end? Participants discussed these issues with Oleksandr Lytvynenko, Deputy Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, and Olga Ayvazovska, Chairwoman of the Board, coordinator of election and political programs of the Civic Network OPORA, a representative of Ukraine in the political subgroup of the Tripartite Contact Group Donbass, USPS alumna.

In a constant search for simple answers to complex questions, we imitate reforms. We move on to European ideals, demanding ready-made recipes. However, we need to find 18these recipes ourselves. Professionalism, trust, consistency are something that can drive us into the future. How to unite not to destroy, but to create? How to stop simulating change? Yulia Mostova, the editor-in-chief of the newspaper Dzerkalo Tyzhnia, member of the USPS Supervisory Board, spoke about the reality of Ukrainian politics.

Why watch TV? What needs to be done to change the TV world for the better? Why are there so many news channels in Ukraine? Why communicate with the media? What are the benefits of radio compared to other media? How to provide funding for public broadcasting? Witnesses of what media revolutions have we become? Can public broadcasting change the media scenery of Ukraine? This discussion was held among Oleksandr Bogutsky, Director-president of the ICTV channel, board member of the investment and consulting group EastOne, USPS alumnus, Andriy Kulykov, Chairman of the Public Broadcasting NGO “Hromadske Radio”, and Yuriy Makarov, member of the Board on educational issues of public broadcaster “NSTU”.

The panel was moderated by Olga Sedova, Coordinator of National Programs of the Embassy of Sweden in Ukraine.

What are the objective laws and circumstances governing the world? What factors help us become a European country? What hinders the realization of the European choice of Ukraine? What strategies of survival are practiced by Ukrainians? What are the reasons for the immaturity of the revolutionary minority? What is the new ethics? What is the forecast regarding the future development of Ukraine? Oleksandr Paskhaver, PhD, President of the Center for Economic Development, Corresponding Member of the Academy of Technological Sciences of Ukraine, Honored Economist of Ukraine, spoke about modernization of Ukraine.

The panel was moderated by Katerina Venzhyk, Editor and Project Leader of Prostonomics, USPS alumna.

The annexation of Crimea marked the beginning of a break in the established system of global security. Having challenged international law, Russia has not received the proper resistance, and hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians are in a “gray zone” both in terms of law and security. At the fourth year of occupation, there are no definite strategies for reintegrating Crimea. How to make Crimea the key issue on the agenda again? How to turn the focus not to the territory, but to people? How to attract world attention to Crimea? Refat Chubarov, Member of the Parliament of Ukraine, Head of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people, talked about this with the participant.

The conversation was moderated by Aliim Aliyev, Program Director of Crimean House Kyiv.

How do we perceive the Other? What are the stereotypes and how do they affect our perceptions? Why not rely on the first impression? Why are stereotypes so persistent and pervasive? What is tolerance? How does hatred for otherness begin? What is hate speech? How can bias be overcome? Larry Olomofe, a former OSCE ODIHR’s adviser on combating racism and xenophobia, had an interactive discussion on these issues with the participants.

What are the values ​​and what role do they play in society? What is a communicative code of culture? Are values ​​stable and unchanged? What is identity? What is historical memory and how does it work? How does a tradition form? What ideological guidelines does wartime need? What are the value orientations of Ukrainian society in the past and today? Do we repeat our history? Natalia Yakovenko, Professor of History Department of the National University “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy”, spoke about value orientations of Ukrainian society in the historical perspective.

The discussion was moderated by Andriy Vyshnevsky, a lawyer, executive director of the Tomorrow’s Lawyer NGO, USPS alumnus.

On March 27, 2018, the round table “Implementation of the European Court of Human Rights decision in cases “Yuriy Mykolayovych Ivanov v. Ukraine” and “Burmych and others v. Ukraine”: Requirements for General Measures” was held by the Subcommittee on Implementation the Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights of the VRU Committee on Legal Policy and Justice, the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine and the Council of Europe Project “Supporting Ukraine in the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights”.

During the round table Svitlana Matviienko, Chairwoman of the Board of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives, presented the Shadow Report “Implementation of the European Court of Human Rights decision in cases “Yuriy Mykolayovych Ivanov v. Ukraine” and “Burmych and others v. Ukraine”, prepared by an expert of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives.

The problem of non-enforcement of national courts’ decisions was first recognized by the European Court in 2004 in the cases of “Zhovner v. Ukraine” and “Voytenko v. Ukraine”. Unfortunately, over the past five years, the Government of Ukraine has not taken effective measures to address this problem, which has led to a significant increase in the number of complaints to the European Court. As a result, the Court decided to apply the pilot decision in the case of “Yuriy Mykolayovych Ivanov v. Ukraine. In this case the Court points out to the existence of structural problems that are of a widespread and complex nature and require the implementation of comprehensive and complex legislative and administrative measures, involving various national authorities.
The European Court determined that the violation was a consequence of the practice incompatible with the provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ratified by Law № 475/97-VR dd. 17.07.1997), which is the systematic non-compliance of the respondent government with the national courts decisions for which the respondent government is liable and in connection with which the parties whose rights are violated do not have effective remedies.

On October 12, 2017, by the decision of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Burmych and Others v. Ukraine, the European Court handed 12.148 cases under the control of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. It also decided to transfer all such cases under consideration, as well as such future cases, to the Committee of Ministers for consideration in the framework of general measures to implement the pilot decision in the Ivanov case, including provisions for compensation for failure to comply or late execution of national court decisions and payment of a debt awarded by a court decision.Thus, public authorities should be called upon to introduce at national level a targeted mechanism to ensure that all actual and potential applicants with valid complaints under the Convention are compensated. In response to the Burmych case decision, a high-level meeting was held in Strasbourg on 17 November 2017 with the participation of the Ministry of Justice, the Presidential Administration and Parliament, which discussed the creation of an ad hoc compensation mechanism for all those mentioned in the applicants’ decision, which should take place in parallel with the efforts, aimed at reaching a long-term solution to the root causes of these problems.

Svitlana Matviienko, Chairwoman of the Board of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives, presenting the Shadow Report prepared by the expert of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives, noted that the source of the information for the Report was the annual report on the activity results of the Government Commissioner for European Court of Human Rights in 2017, responses to the Mr. Lishchyna’s query to Member of the Parliament Ruslan Sydorovych, information provided by the Ministry of Justice to the Ombudsman for Human Rights, the Ombudsman on Human Rights annual report on the state of observance and protection of human rights and freedoms in Ukraine in 2017 and information received from the applicants in the case of Burmych.

The first step is taking measures to enforce decisions of national courts passed in favor of the applicants in the case of Burmych and payments of compensations. The second step is taking measures to introduce an effective system of enforcement of decisions of national courts.

If we are talking about taking measures to implement the national courts decisions, it is worth emphasizing the mechanism revealed by our experts, which consists in working with the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine “On approval of the procedure for using the funds foreseen in the state budget for payments related to using decisions of foreign jurisdictional bodies adopted on the results of consideration of cases against Ukraine” №408 dd. 07.03.2017.

The CMU Resolution №408 can be improved as follows: first of all, a large-scale collection of information on the decisions to be executed and the state of their enforcement should be carried out. Amendments to the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 408 will allow to undertake expenditures for taking general measures. After that,  it will be possible to calculate the amount of indexation and compensation for long non-enforcement of court decisions. Then, the most important step is to provide adequate funding for these payments. It is at this stage that the coordinated work of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine is needed and the bringing up this issue not only within the professional lawyers circle, but also a massive informing of the public.

The second important point emphasized by the Shadow Report is to take measures to implement an effective system of enforcement of domestic courts.

In our opinion, the main disadvantages of the mechanism proposed by the Government are:

• repayment of debts with promissory notes is carried out with the consent of the payer, while there are no alternative mechanisms of debt repayment;
• absence of indexation for the period from the moment of the rendering of decision and until the issuance of promissory notes, as well as redress for the non-pecuniary damage;
• the repayment period is too long (it was noted by the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, p. 125 Burmych), in addition, it may be extended at any time by the Government decision, as well as the interest rate changed;
• the moment of the court decision enforcement is considered to be not the time of full payment of the bill, but the moment when the bill is issued to the recoverer.