ЦЕНТЪР ЗА СТРАТЕГИЧЕСКИ ИЗСЛЕДВАНИЯ В СИГУРНОСТТА И МЕЖДУНАРОДНИТЕ ОТНОШЕНИЯ
CENTER FOR STRATEGIC RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF SECURITY AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
СИГУРНОСТ
МЕЖДУНАРОДНИ ОТНОШЕНИЯ
“JUDICIARY AND TRANSPARENC–CHALLENGES IN THE NETWORK SOCIETY”
Speech by Matthias Höpfner,
Ambassador of the Federal Republic of Germany, on the occasion of the round table
at the George Marshall Centre Bulgaria, 1 December 2011
Professor Bobatinov, Professor Tanev, Mrs. Dimitrova, Mr. Yordanov, Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, students, alumni,
I’m delighted to have this opportunity to welcome you to today’s round table at the George Marshall Centre Bulgaria. The theme of this round table is “Judiciary and Transpar¬ency – Challenges in the Network Society”, which is a good choice. For it’s of great topicality, especially here in Bulgaria.
I find the list of today’s panellists and speakers impressive. I’m certain that you will find much food for thought at a high intellectual level.
Today I want to share some thoughts with you on the connection between an orderly justice system and the role of civil society in the modern network society. I would also like to high¬light the links with current political and social developments in Bulgaria.
In an active and networked civil society, a country’s so-called intelligentsia usually plays a strong role. It’s therefore a special honour for me to speak to you today, for there is no doubt that you belong to that intelligentsia.
Ladies and gentlemen,
You’re probably wondering why the German Ambassador in Sofia is so interested in the Bulgarian justice system, about a functioning civil society and the impact of networking with the aid of the new media in Bulgaria.
The answer is quite simple: This issue is of concrete relevance to our day to day work at the Embassy. You all know the European Union’s Cooperation and Verification Mechanism. The EU Commission publishes regular reports on progress made in the spheres of justice and home affairs within the frame¬work of this mechanism. The report’s conclusions have a tangible impact on certain decisions, for example on Bulgaria’s accession to the Schengen area. And they are key to the assessment of Bulgaria as a new EU member that had – at the time of accession in 2007 – not yet fully met the Kopenhagen membership criteria in the field of justice and home affairs. We are therefore observing very closely Bulgaria’s progress and shortcom¬ings in the spheres of justice and home affairs, and we are also following very closely the cau¬tious attempts in Bulgaria to create a critical civil society which will also monitor the justice system critically.
These developments are closely connected to the development of a modern network society. For a modern civil society depends on the new media to ensure communication, to organize itself and to exert effective influence on political and social processes. These possibilities didn’t even exist before the Internet and social net¬works such as Facebook and Twitter emerged.
We need a networked civil society to initiate public debate on shortcomings in the spheres of justice and home affairs and beyond. The warnings from Brussels and occasional critical remarks from EU ambassadors are not enough. Bulgarians can only bring about profound changes with the help of their own civil society structures. In turn, such a civil society needs the Internet and social networks such as Facebook and Twitter to reach or mobilize a broader public.
My central thesis today is:
In order to build a modern Bulgaria in the EU and in a globalized world, the development of an active and networked civil society as well as sustainable progress in reform efforts in the justice and home affairs spheres are interdependant and of paramount importance.
What was the situation in Bulgaria before the fall of the Communist regime?
Essentially, there was one single public sphere which was determined by the state. This public sphere steered debate within society and formed public opinion. Civil society engagement, to the extent that it existed, had to take place more in back rooms and be prepared in some secrecy. There was a public opinion reflected in the media; however, it was controlled centrally by the political leadership and shaped in the interest of the ruling Communist party.
Widespread surveillance of Bulgaria by the intelligence service did the rest. It was dangerous to oppose the Soviet power structures or to express one’s individuality or non conformity. There was relatively little social freedom.
As a result, the vast majority of the population – with the exception of some members of the party nomenclature – withdrew from public life and lived privately and quietly at home or in their dachas out in the country. To a large degree people restricted themselves to the private sphere and, wherever possible, avoided contact with the state. Against this background, a civil society couldn’t evolve.
What was the situation directly after the fall of the Communist regime?
The structures developed by the intelligence services continued to hin¬der the development of a strong civil society. Before 1989, as we know today, the intelligence services largely controlled trafficking in weapons, drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, gold and antiques.
It was obvious that such dubious circles would also seize any opportunities that came their way after the regime’s fall. Mafia and oligarch-like structures and organized crime were thus able to flourish in a kind of Wild West mentality. During this period, there were more than 150 contract murders which haven’t been solved to this very day. In those years, there was no networked civil society to vociferously draw attention to such problems.
What happened after that and what is the situation today?
I believe that even many years after the fall of the Communist regime, Bulgaria was and probably still is a low trust society.
Francis Fukuyama, the famous American political scientist who spoke of the end of history in the nineties, but was – of course – wrong about that, devised this concept. A low trust society is one in which the number of people any one individual trusts is very small. It is basically limited to the family and a few close friends and colleagues. In a low trust society, widespread mistrust in state structures prevails.
In a low trust society, there is little cooperation between people who don’t yet know each other well. Cooperation which is more oriented towards a common goal and does not rely so much on existing contacts remains the exception.
An analysis of the current public debate in Bulgaria shows that this situation still partially exists today. Even now, political communication still largely comes from the top. Naturally, there is a wide spectrum of opinions in Bulgaria today. However, the central opinion-makers in the print media and on television have close, often too close, contacts with the authorities and the relevant interest groups.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Nevertheless, I also see a number of positive, encouraging developments in Bulgaria. There is a growing number of NGOs in Bulgaria today which make use of the modern media and are networked with one another.
Although we don’t see very many grassroots movements in Bulgaria today, those that do exist are very capable of articulating their aims. That’s absolutely vital for a functioning civil soci¬ety. Indeed, the bottom up principle is its definitive characteristic. Its influence is growing.
That was also the conclusion contained in a very recent study carried out by the Sofia branch of the Open Society Institute. Incidentally, this institute is a good example of progress towards a networked civil society. Not least with the help of the new media, the institute is trying to promote the development of an open and transparent society in Bulgaria by championing effective reform of the justice system and calling for precise accountability on the part of the Government. One central element of its mandate is the fight against corruption.
However, it would of course be an exaggeration to say that Bulgaria today is a high trust soci¬ety. But that is precisely what defines a developed civil society. Bulgaria needs more time for that. What’s more, several factors would have to come together:
First of all, Bulgaria needs a constitutional environment which grants every individual the freedom to develop. Furthermore, it needs well educated citizens who also know about the rule of law. They have to be aware of their own rights and obligations, as well as of the state’s limits. And finally, Bulgaria needs a justice system which insists on the impartial enforcement of the law.
As for the constitution, I think Bulgaria is on the right track. Today we really can say that Bulgaria is, in principle, a state based on the rule of law which can be compared to Western European states.
The last Justice Minister, Ms Popova, whom I met frequently during the last two years, and whom I hold in high regard, advanced judicial reform with great commitment. However, the implementation of judicial reforms in day to day practice still leaves much to be desired, in particular the uniform application of the law and a reliable guarantee that no one stands above the law.
I wish the new Justice Minister the courage and resolve required to resolutely continue the course initiated by Ms Popova.
We have to be aware that the enforceability of laws is decisive. And I still see considerable shortcomings in Bulgaria in this respect. There are still, as it were, “untouchables” who have joined forces to form networks. These networks have achieved the very opposite of what is meant by a modern and transparent civil society.
They pose a serious threat to Bulgaria. The entire nation knows that there are certain notori¬ous criminals. However, their membership in one of the influential networks makes it possible for them to avoid being called to account. When they are charged, they are often acquitted or handed down short sentences which, to make matters worse, are then sus¬pended.
Who can blame these people for simply carrying on as before? Who, on the other hand, can blame ordinary Bulgarians if they cannot develop any trust in the state. They don’t feel part of a high trust society.
Ladies and gentlemen,
In addition to a functioning justice sector, I believe that the freedom and independence of the press is crucially important for the creation of a functioning civil society. It is essential that the media report impartially on debates which concern society as a whole.
The key disputed issues must be seen from both sides. The pros and contras must be explained and sufficient information has to be made available. Debates must be conducted as rationally as possible and not emotionally.
This is the only way to ensure that citizens can gain their own impression of the debate and form their own opinion without bias.
Here, too, I see shortcomings. All too often, the media in Bulgaria are still under the control of individual interest groups and are instrumentalized by them. The term “free media” still has to be put in quotation marks in many cases.
We all hope that the disputes among the various media moguls, which we read about in the newspapers every day, won’t lead to a further concentration of the press but, rather, to a greater diversity of opinion. As German Ambassador, I’m following very closely what hap¬pens to newspapers which used to belong to the German WAZ group.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Thanks to the Internet, there are now a growing number of ways to circumvent media monopolies. I believe that’s a momentous development. The networking of public opinion has now reached an unprecedented level.
Who would have thought that with the help of the Internet, with the help of blogs, with the help of recordings of local protests quickly uploaded to the Internet and with the help of cer¬tain social networks, it would be possible to remove entire regimes which had been in power for decades? The “Arabellion” this year wouldn’t have been possible without the new media.
The Internet makes it easier to communicate and disseminate information. That’s why we can read articles today which in earlier times would never have been published in regional or national newspapers. With the help of social networks, today anyone can express an opinion or publish them. Anyone who wants to be successful today has to have their own homepage. Through homepages, various social networks such as Facebook, Twitter or YouTube and other websites, it’s now possible for everyone to speak out unhindered and to be heard throughout the world.
Ladies and gentlemen,
As we all know, the Internet and the social networks also play a role in the development of new civil society structures in Bulgaria, a role which shouldn’t be underestimated. One exam¬ple of this is bluelink, but countless other organizations are active here. Despite all the reservations I’ve expressed so far, I see many positive developments towards a functioning civil society in Bulgaria.
There are signs of an encouraging new momentum towards civil society, which also encom¬passes a more self-confident examination of key issues relating to the country’s environ¬mental and energy future, even if all of this is still at an early stage.
I see Bulgaria’s civil society as a tree at the end of a severe winter. The branches are thin and bare. However, small buds are appearing which will flourish provided weather conditions are favourable.
I hope that the conditions for a strong and networked civil society will continue to improve, and I hope that no one uses the NGOs for other purposes. The trunk, and by that I mean the silent Bulgarian majority, should stand behind them.
Given the many positive signs, I feel cautiously optimistic. Bulgarian civil society is in its spring and has much potential for development.
It’s clear that this development will take time. A strong civil society cannot emerge overnight. However, we have to make sure that it finds fertile soil. We have to make sure that the exter¬nal conditions and the framework for this development are right.
Especially young, well-educated Bulgarians have an opportunity to bring about change. They are the first generation lucky enough not to grow up in a repressive environment. They can help shape the change and thus the future. They can fight the prejudices which are often found in Western Europe. It’s often said that the Balkans are different. It’s a stereotype prejudice that the attitude towards virtues such as transparency, honesty and good faith is different here. It’s said that it’s therefore impossible to control the criminal structures and networks here.
Well, whatever is true about this: it can change with the help of a vibrant civil society. Corruption, tricks and fraud aren’t so easy in a transparent world.
Young Bulgarians can become part of such a vibrant and functioning civil society. They can help ensure transparency and monitor adherence to the rule of law. This is essential if corrup¬tion is to be tackled successfully.
Ladies and gentlemen,
On that happy note I wish you every success with today’s conference, as well as interesting discussions.
Thank you very much for your attention..
ПРЕПОРЪЧВАМЕ
Десетилетието. В сянката на лидери, избори и войни
Gudrun Krämer: Demokratie im Islam
GCHQ. The uncensored story of Britain's Most Secret Intelligence Agency
Новое дворянство: Очерки истории ФСБ
Hein G. Kiessling, ISI und R&AW
Alexander Rahr, „Der kalte Freund – warum wir Russland brauchen: Die Insider-Analyse“
"Развилки новейшей истории России". Егор Гайдар, Анатолий Чубайс
Tom Koenigs, Machen wir Frieden oder haben wir Krieg?
"Was Muslime wirklich denken. Der Alltag, die Extremisten, die Wahrheit dazwischen"
"Weniger Demokratie wagen" , Laszlo Trankovits , Verlag der Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung
Kissinger H. On China. The Penguin Press, 2011. - 586 p.
2009 Всички права запазени. Последна актуализация