Note: This working document was prepared by Marian Zulean to guide the debate on "civil society for security reform" of 11 February 2009. The document was drawn up on the basis of opinions expressed within the project "freedom and security" or in the analysis of secondary sources. The opinions expressed in this document do not necessarily represent the views of the Balkan Trust for Democracy or its partners.

PROBLEM DEFINITION:

National security system of type funamentală represents the democratic condition for good governance and for guaranteeing the freedom and prosperity of the individual. Determination of national security institutions to work efficiently and responsibly while maintaining civil liberties is, however, an ambitious and challenging task. Although great strides have been made in transforming the security system, particularly through the conditionality, to meet the requirements for admission in NATO or the EU, the process of consolidating democracy and systemic transformation of the security institutions and to improve the mechanisms of democratic control seems stuck. Blocking the process of strategic planning, in accordance with the national security strategy of 2006, "freezing" the package of laws on national security in Parliament or the entry into force, on the door from the inside out, law No. 298/2008 concerning the retention of data generated or processed by providers of electronic communications services starnesc îngrijorari public. Both civil society and national security institutions advertise a number of legislative issues that prevent both optimise security institutions and improving the mechanisms of democratic civilian control. The main issues requiring a comprehensive approach of the transformation of the security system are:

1. Size: although democratic were passed laws permitting the democratic civil control, there are no guarantees that the rules and mechanisms of democratic civilian control are applied;
2. The moral dimension: lustration law Blocking, the absence of legal debate, guilt or condemnation of some security officers for violations of the fundamental human rights affect confidence in national security institutions and instituţiiile State, in general;
3. Size: effectiveness and efficiency of labour security institutions, duplication of tasks, the waste of resources, the obsolescent-what is preventing the fulfilment of the tasks of security institutions in the context of the new challenges of globalisation but rather lax to permit violations of human rights.

Background:

Freedom and security are two desiderata that social tensions and heated debates arise when designing their democracies national security policies. According to Hobbes, end up with a State citizen social contract: he cedes a portion of the rights in Exchange for the protection provided by the State. That's why the State has the obligation to maintain a security system (army, police, gendarmerie and information services) in order to comply with the contractual obligation toward citizens. There is concern that these institutions can trigger coups or may violate citizens ' rights and freedoms. Consequently, in the process of consolidation of democracy there has been a tendency to restrict the powers of the institutions through the establishment of militarized areas of civilian control mechanisms.

On the other hand, citizens ' rights and freedoms have been codified in international documents such as the Universal Declaration of human rights or the European Charter of human rights and contained in almost all Constitutions and national legislation. However, the decortication civil rights represent, rather, a challenge that needs to be done on a daily basis.

Romania has come in the last two decades a profound process of democratization, liberalization and institutional transformation. The process included institutionalizing mechanisms of democratic civilian control of national security institutions, but there is no guarantee of respect for human rights in the context of effective struggle against terrorism. Thus, determination of national security institutions to work efficiently and responsibly while expanding or maintaining civil liberties is an ambitious and challenging task.

On the other hand, if the process of integration into NATO and the EU has assumed a set of criteria for evaluating the reform focused rather on defence, security sector transformation took a pace less brisk, public opinion being interested in issues such as the unveiling of the hot lustraţia, Security or listening to cell phones. The set of laws for the Organization and functioning of services of information or emergency situations have been adopted under the pressure of the events of 1990-1991 and are today confessed. Attempts to improve the security legislation occurred in each legislature after 1997, laws proposed in 2004-2008 and is still in the Senate debate.

Today, globalization phenomena such as geopolitical bring extraordinary challenges for the system of national security (terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, organized crime networks) that require legislative flexibility to allow the national security institutions carrying out tasks without violating civil rights.  Technological development allows not only the miniaturization and niversalization interception by the intelligence services of the State, but also by private security firms or their use by terrorist groups. That's why public policies targeting the protection of rights and freedoms at the same time achieving national security requires a paradigm shift and re-thinking the national security system.

After 1989, the civil society was interested in important aspects, but, of the national security system reform, particularly of moral reform (lustraţia, condemnation of the security officers have committed crimes against humanity or wiretapping phones). In recent years he has appeared and interest for a comprehensive approach, for more nuanced and professional involvement in this area. Increasingly more NGOs have carried out projects in this area, we will tell you all but the main obstacles to reform, resulting from the projects coordinated by the Academy of Advocacy and ARUMUGAM. For a systematic approach will need to show what we understand by reforming the national security system. A study of the Geneva DCAF believes that the object of the self-referential "security system reform" is represented by three challenges:

(1) development of a clear institutional framework for achieving security, integrating development policies with those of security,

(2) management of all security institutions;

(3) construction of security agencies and institutions responsible for the professional and legitimate civil authorities.

Starting from this definition would impose today to talk about the second generation of reforms concentrated on SSR 2.0, integrated and comprehensive approach to reform, professionalization, both democratic political elite involved in democratic control and civil personnel, improving the mechanism of crisis management, realistic assessment of security risks, rewriting legislation and civil society participation as expert group (stakeholders) in the reform process.

OBSTACLES TO SECURITY SYSTEM REFORM:

Part of the problems defined by this study could be solved through the promotion of new legislation, however, the process started in 2005, with the promotion of a new National Security Strategy, has been blocked, although the captase attention of civil society and mass media. Here are the main shortcomings noted within civil society programmes:

1. Academy of Advocacy, along with Pro Democracy, journalists ' Society and the society of Romanian Timisoara organised in 2006 a public hearing at the Parliament Palace, analyzing proposals of national security laws, which resulted the following shortcomings:

• one of the recurring themes of many testimonies is related to the negative influence of "memory" of the former Security, generating fears that the legislation may grant diffuse powers of excessive nerestrucurate secrets;
• certain provisions of some of the principles contradict the National Security Strategy (2006), by limiting the possibility of democratic control, preserving the impression towards permanent status, with an extremely limited legal liability of information officer;
• parliamentary control is a mechanism for democratic control of insufficient intelligence;
• the need to establish precise skills for officers, especially on the issue of investigations is considering the production of evidence in legal proceedings;
• the overall activity of intelligence cannot be categorized as State secret in its entirety;
• full and exclusive financing services information from the State budget, removing the phrase "legal sources";
• provisions that permit supervision to be extended for six months, the right services to conduct economic and financial activities, the maintenance of military character with the right to bear weapons, excessive and the right classification officer to require any person support are considered unacceptable.

Both witnesses and experts have produced a series of proposals not taken into account any today and promoting legislation came into the grinder political struggle. In the 1996-2000 legislature were lodged in Parliament four bills, seven other projects between 2001-2004; none was adopted. The progress of the projects submitted in 2004-2008, according to the Chamber of Deputies website is: "submitted to the Senate: 25.04.2007". One of the explanations (more or less conspiracy) of blocking the process of reform of the system of security is that officers covered information services from politics and the media have created the "smokescreen" that allowed blocking reform process, being interested in preserving the status quo. So I think the participants of the debates and the Forum organized within the project "freedom and security" of the CADI or masters of specialisation security studies "University of Bucharest or" Dimitrie Cantemir "University. From our perspective the main obstacles in promoting such laws were related to: the way of the elaboration of the draft law, the "inflation" of risks and threats proposed (EC offered services more powers than the law on national security) and the removal of the President from the mechanisms of democratic control.

1. Within the project "freedom and security" of the Centre for analysis and institutional development in 2008 were identified the following obstacles and solutions for security reform:

• Although the regulatory framework provides mechanisms to ensure respect for human rights there is a wide range of human rights violations established by the ECHR, as well as the case of Rotaru v. Romania in 2000; The Ministry of Justice has proposed a set of regulations to prevent violations of DO in the work of information (Catalin Predoiu);
• (Law on national security) … is not obsolescent and incorporates principles and rules derived from changing strategic and political status of a given our country's accession to NATO and the EU. Delaying the adoption of new legislation in this area has prompted SRI to develop and own internal rules and restructuring, within the legal framework in force, to try to adapt to the need to meet the challenges of the present security risks and (George Maior); A complex form of co-operation between SRI and civil society, between producers and consumers of intelligence.
• Saba Nate proposes a participatory approach to civil socităţii and fetching or parsing services outsourcing, consultancy by the NGOs.
• General (r) Dale assumes that the year 2009 will be offered the opportunity of a decisive options in addressing the new security challenges, such as terrorism, by choosing between European-type approach to Justice and Home Affairs or American type pre war pre-emptively.
• Mireille R proposes the adoption of the concept of "human security" as a basis for security strategy.
• Ionuţ Divya and R Şimandan argues that complex security guarantees individual freedom and giving up some freedoms can bring societal vulnerabilities and proposes the diversification of mechanisms of democratic control of intelligence.
• Carmody summarized the experience of Dara Academy Advocacy and active involvement of civil society in the reform process of the security system.

CURRENT OPPORTUNITIES ON THE REFORM OF THE SECURITY SYSTEM

There is a window of opportunity for reform of the security system, from the perspective of civil society.

First, institutions and international organizations have put on the agenda the issue of reform of the Security (of the sector). Thus, the United Nations programme of UNDP called "Justice and Security Sector Reform", OECD programme "Security System and Governance, the European Commission through the concept of ESDP Support to Security Sector Reform," running programs and assistance on this matter.

Secondly, the election of November 2008 brought a parliamentary majority that can promote security reform, legislation, rules and practices of democratic civilian control. Civil society's mission is to provide education, expertise and advocacy for reform of the security system.

Thirdly, civil society grew and gained expertise and interest in the field. There is already a success of running this type of coalition in Bulgaria. Were printed collections of best practices, such as manual "public Supervision of the security sector", prepared by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Centre for the Democratic control of armed forces (DCAF) in Geneva showing the role that NGOs can play in the democratic supervision of the security sector. Apart from projects and studies listed above, MINA has developed a vision concerning constitutional reform and institutional transformation. Tools like the Coalition for a Clean Government can encourage this process.

Recommendation:

Propose the establishment of a CADI coalitions of non-governmental organizations interested in the subject, able to draw students to ensure expertise and keen to participate in the actions of advocacy for reform of the security system.

The main actions to be followed would be the following:

• The formation of a coalition of Security System reform, as or as part of the Coalition for Clean governance, through the elaboration of a declaration of intent;
• The development of studies and the organisation of debates, especially relating to the passage "tacit" of some laws, such as Law 298/2008 concerning the retention of data generated or processed by providers of electronic communications services;
• Debate for the perfecting of the "moral reform", related to the guilt/innocence of some security officers, informants or catalog as traitors by the Communist regime;
• The choice of the projects located in the Senate, and promoting advocacy actions for voting in the Parliament of the most urgent draft laws and with the greatest impact upon civil control mechanisms and the efficiency of labor security institutions (draft law on the professional status of the officers of the information meets this requirement).
• Elaboration of a draft organic law, namely the law on the organisation and operation of the national security system ", which would be organized on the basis of democratic and modern security system, would grant guarantees for civil democratic control mechanism, would clarify both the concepts of security and the relationship between the legislative institutions, would set up a dedicated" intelligence community "and would save resources.