Dialogue for the Sake of Dialogue, or...

- Shahla Khanum, you also took part in the meeting of the presidential aide Hikmet Hajiyev with the chairmen of NGOs. Were all the problems of NGOs discussed at the meeting? What questions were raised?

- Yes. On September 3, I also took part in a meeting of Hikmet Hajiyev with NGOs. This meeting was the 5th meeting of Hikmet Hajiyev with NGOs, that is, in the previous days, meetings were organized with NGOs working in various fields, and despite this, there were no restrictions, everyone could speak. At the meeting in which I took part, there were many speeches on the issues of registration, NGO activities, legislation restricting funding, project execution, financial deficit, difficulties in project implementation (including obtaining permits, intervention of local executive authorities, etc.) , accessibility of information (for research), border checks, travel bans, and an unfavorable environment for media organizations, donors and international organizations. In fact, any participant was free to voice any problem of concern to him, as far as he dared. The only limitation was the 3-minute time limit for each speaker. However, to compensate for this, presenters were provided with an email address to send additional information.

- What are your expectations from these meetings? Do you expect any positive changes?

- First of all, I will say that although I never had any special illusions, I have always been one of those people who believed in the power of a real dialogue with the government. That is, such a great delay in this dialogue, of course, was the government's choice, but despite this, I personally expect positive changes. In fact, these changes are inevitable, since the situation in the country has accumulated and worsened over the years due to some new conditions, which the government must resolve as soon as possible.

 One of them is the restoration of favorable conditions for NGOs and donors in the country; the time for this has already come and is even going away, since every day is working against us. Therefore, I think that the government has already realized this. This is how I assess the initiatives that have taken place during these last 10 days.

- Can foreign donors return to the country as a result of these meetings? Can any changes be made to the legislation on foreign donors and grants, as well as NGOs in this direction?

- The existing NGO legislation in Azerbaijan creates serious obstacles for the activities of NGOs and foreign donors. Since the end of 2013, amendments to the laws regulating civil society, in particular the NGO sector, including the Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan on Grants, the Law On Non-Governmental Organizations (Public Associations and Foundations), the Law On State Registration and State Register of Legal Entities, and the Code of Administrative Offenses, had a serious negative impact on the activities of the sector. As a result, since 2014, there has been a practice of limiting the activities of the NGO sector, which is the main driving force in the development of society, the presence of civil society organizations outside socio-economic processes...

This leads to many consequences, including religious radicalism. These complications lead to the severance of relations between the government and citizens for the long term, the exclusion of their participation in solving processes that directly affect the fate of citizens. Unfortunately, the 6-year period of stagnation in this area left civil society members on the sidelines of solving many problems, having a negative impact on the dialogue between the government and civil society.

But for the first time in the past 6 years, initiatives to conduct this dialogue have been consistently manifested. The adjustment of the position of NGOs is directly related to the return of donors to the country, because the financial situation of civil society will remain deplorable if donors do not return. This means that the two segments must be restored and must work together. Since the situation with NGOs and donors has deteriorated in parallel since the end of 2013, their activities should also be restored in parallel. Without this, changes will still remain on paper and will be regarded by the international community as a new unsuccessful and artificial attempt.

-Can the state and NGOs as a whole be partners? Is it normal that the state interferes in the work of NGOs and wants to regulate them under the guise of dialogue?

-This question is very opportune, as it reflects a bias towards NGOs in general. The prefix “non-” in the word NGO has always caused bewilderment, since the expression NGO has always been regarded as “anti”. And this confusion formed the basis of relations between society and all parties, oriented towards NGOs. This approach was very relevant even before 2014 and has not changed until today. In fact, the NGO sector was not created to counterbalance the state, on the contrary, rather to do what the state could not do for various reasons.

And the successful implementation of this work is possible only in partnership with all parties, mainly with the government. In other words, from high-level political issues - such as eradicating corruption, passing or amending the law - to violating the rights of individuals, or the problem of water shortages in a community - NGOs must work directly with the government to address all these issues.

However, in countries like Azerbaijan, working with the government is so negatively interpreted, used only in a bad context and plays the role of a stigma. And this is not unreasonable, since for many years the government has shown an intolerant position in relation to comments and criticism of NGOs (mainly in relation to human rights), has made serious attacks on independent critical NGOs and their functionaries. In contrast, the government rewarded NGOs that showed "loyalty" to it, making them completely "theirs". That is, the existing worldwide GONGO model (GONGO - pro-government NGOs) has acquired a special disgusting form in our country.

Therefore, everyone who knows the specifics of this country is skeptical about the partnership between the government and NGOs.

Despite this, I believe that everything depends only on political will - if the state has serious intentions to build constructive relations with NGOs, it will be able to do so, because NGOs are also tired of the pressure and difficulties that have had over the years.

 This dialogue, its sincerity and success depends on both sides, but at the initial stage it depends more on the government. If those who take a critical stand “are not punished,” and human rights and other cases begin to improve, then NGOs and society can gain serious trust in government.

This is also an ambiguous and very subtle point - in fact, the 2014 crisis was caused by the government's mistrust of a number of NGOs, the government began pressure (investigations, arrests, seizure of bank accounts, bans on leaving the country, border checks and other “protective measures”), as a result of which civil society has completely lost confidence in the government. There was a great chasm between government and civil society, and no major steps were subsequently taken to win that trust. For the first time in the last 6 years, there has been a revival around this topic, which, if the government wants to, can lead to trust, or maybe not. This is possible with a sincere desire.

- Meetings in this form have taken place before. For example, in 2013, following a dialogue between the government and civil society, NGOs were incapacitated, several chairmen of NGOs were arrested, foreign donors left the country, a criminal case was opened, and legislation in this area deteriorated further. The authorities are again holding meetings under the guise of dialogue. But the power is still the same, and there are no changes in management. Are you not afraid of a repetition of events after the dialogue in 2013?

- I have already said that I have no special illusions. You are right, these events took place in the past, and there is the potential for them to recur. There have been no systemic changes in the country, both at the local and national levels. On the contrary, for a number of reasons, there is serious tension in the political, economic and social spheres of the country. However, this time, I personally am more positive. It may be very naive, but in the current situation, I feel small positive signals. For example, the meeting I attended was planned for 1.5 hours, but took about 4 hours.

As far as I know, all other meetings were dragged out in the same way. No one was interrupted in their speech, nor were the meetings interrupted. They listened to everyone and invited NGOs to provide additional information. Moreover, in the same week of September, two more meetings took place, which generally resemble a primary signal of political will aimed at the acceptability of changes in the field of NGOs. To be precise, in the same week similar meetings with the chairman of the Human Rights Committee of the Milli Majlis of the Republic of Azerbaijan Zahid Oruj and deputy Erkin Gadirli on the situation with NGOs were organized on their own initiative.

These are the meetings in which I participated, and I am sure there are other meetings. At both meetings, the topic and the dynamics of the discussion were similar - each was given the floor, a general sincere attitude was created. That is, I do not consider it formal that there have been so many consecutive initiatives after 6 years; I think that if the meetings were formal, then they would not be so solid, but would be more superficial. That is, this time I am inclined to believe that there will be positive changes in the field of NGOs in whole or in part, and I hope that I am not mistaken.

- What are your suggestions? What steps should be taken for the normal functioning of NGOs and the revival of civil society in Azerbaijan? What should the authorities do to prove their sincerity in this endeavor?

-First of all, changes should be made to the legislation, removing the obstacle to registration, activities and funding of NGOs and donors. The laws should not only return to what they were before 2014, but even become simpler than then. Compliance with the law, which does not need proof, is that the correct and fastest way to ensure accountability and transparency is to make this legislation as simple as possible so that there are no bureaucratic obstacles to NGOs and donors.

Only then will the government be able to fully exercise the desired control, will have information about what is happening, without violating either the law or the rights of organizations. In the presence of such comfortable unhindered conditions, it will be possible to clearly identify those who, bypassing the direct road, will look for roundabouts. Thus, if any local or foreign organization has an intention contrary to the national interests of Azerbaijan, it will be easier to expose it.

This approach will create the basis for the formation of a safe environment in the country as a whole. That is, the government will not only be able to prove its sincerity by creating the most favorable conditions for registration, activities and funding of NGOs and donors, but will even have serious progress in all indicators. This will have the effect of a chain reaction - the government will be able to reduce its burden by finding a serious partner in NGOs, public control, awareness, strengthening in all areas and solving many problems of recent years, including the COVID-19 pandemic in Azerbaijan, will be able to use the potential of members of society and international organizations.

Currently, civil society is unable to use 10% of its existing potential, and the fact that it remains unchanged for 6 years means thousands of lost opportunities, a serious blow to the country's image.

Of course, if the government of Azerbaijan is able to achieve this success (read “if it wants to”), then serious mobilization of NGOs and work is required. Civil society processes to demonstrate a more professional position, strengthen their knowledge and skills, and develop transparency and accountability need to proceed in parallel and at an accelerated pace.

Finally, we must pay attention to the fact that these initiatives are taking place against the background of ongoing processes in the country and the region. First, at present, most countries, including Azerbaijan, are going through a crisis period due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and, according to forecasts, in the next 3 years the world will face the consequences of the pandemic. Moreover, given the unstable political situation in the region (in the country of the Eastern Partnership), the obligations and recommendations of Azerbaijan to the partnership of the Open Government and other international structures, as well as the sensitive period of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, for Azerbaijan to exit this difficult period with minimal losses, as and in democracies, we need sincere dialogue and cooperation between government and civil society.