Civil society seeks repeat of ombudsman selection process

The Kosovo Women's Network, the Group for Jury and Political Studies, the Kosovo Institute for Justice and the Kypred Institute, through a media communiqué, have sought renewed the selective process for ombudsmans in accordance with the memorandum signed between the British Parliament and Embassy.

“We, the underestimated organisations, reiterate our attitude towards the selective process of ombudsman organised by the rating panel established by the parliamentary Commission for Human Rights. Since some of us have directly monitored such a process, we have noted serious problems in terms of transparency, respect for the principle of merit and legitimacy of implementing selective criteria”, this communiqué is said.

These organizations have also listed the problems with which this process has been associated.

A) The selective process for ombudsman is defined by law, and subject to the principles of transparency and merit of candidates competing. The assessment panel has made serious concessions in methodology applied to assess the candidates' credit. The education of a formal interview, with several very general questions, which do not take into account the professional past of candidates, and with a party evaluation insistence, has been the head of the interview with candidates organised by the rating panel. The latter has not even taken the opportunity to explain to civil society organisations what criteria a selective process has implemented, and how it is possible that a formal interview with questions that are entirely in the disrepute of the political judgment of the panel's MPs is the determining of the final list of elected.

The rating panel has shown a serious lack of transparency. He exempted civil society monitors from the part of the meeting where the candidates' score should be made, and therefore the transparency of assessment according to the criteria for each candidate was completely denied. Such an exception is unprecedented in assembly practice. Moreover, the appreciative panel continues to keep the candidate list and points accompanied by reasoning for each candidate. The panel refused to explain to the monitoring community why candidates were assessed in such a way, and what caused many excellent candidates not even to enter the list of the top three.

C) The assessment panel violated the Memorandum of Co-operation between the Kosovo Assembly and the British Embassy, which envisions that the assessment of the candidates for ombudsman be made based on the points British experts committed by the Embassy. Such overcoming of the Memorandum is sufficient judicial fact that makes it reasonable to repeat the process.

Therefore, we organisations require the parliamentary Commission for Human Rights to repeat the evaluation process for the Ombudsman candidates, and such a process to develop in accordance with the memorandum signed with the British Embassy. We also seek full transparency, accountability for the assessment made and full implementation of the merit principle in the selection process”, the communique concludes.