Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Albania Publishing Institution Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance (DCAF)

1. Guidelines for Intelligence Oversight for Parliamentary Committees in the Assembly of the Republic of Macedonia

Author:
Teodora Fuior, Magdalena Lembovska, Wouter de Ridder, and Julian Richards
Publication Date:
05-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance (DCAF)
Abstract:
Parliamentary oversight refers to the ongoing1 monitoring, review, evaluation and investigation of the activity of government and public agencies, including the implementation of policy, legislation and the expenditure of the state budget. Parliamentary oversight is one of the most important manifestations of the separations of powers in a democracy. Parliamentary oversight must extend to all areas of government, including intelligence and security services. Intelligence services work in secrecy and have the authority to make use of special powers that potentially are highly invasive of human rights. Communications interception and secret surveillance are only two of such powers. For these reasons, intelligence services are regarded by the public with suspicion and lack of confidence. Therefore, the need for legality, legitimacy and accountability is even higher for intelligence services than for other government agencies. As the lawmaker, parliament is responsible for enacting clear, accessible and comprehensive legislation establishing intelligence services, their organisation, special powers and limits. Parliamentary oversight activities review, evaluate and investigate how laws are implemented and how intelligence operations are in line with the constitution, national security policy and legislation. Parliament also approves the budget of intelligence services and can play a strong role in scrutinizing expenditure. Effective parliamentary oversight ensures a bridge between intelligence and the public and brings benefits to all: intelligence community, parliament itself and most importantly, the citizens.
Topic:
Security, Civil Society, Intelligence, Governance, and Military Affairs
Political Geography:
Geneva, Europe, Macedonia, and Albania

2. Private Security in Practice: Case Studies from Southeast Europe

Author:
Franziska Klopfer, Nelleke van Amstel, Ola Çami Arjan Dyrmishi, Rositsa Dzhekova, Donika Emini, Anton Kojouharev, Marko Milošević, Žarko Petrović, and Mentor Vrajolli
Publication Date:
01-2016
Content Type:
Case Study
Institution:
Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance (DCAF)
Abstract:
Why and how should private security be regulated? A group of researchers from Albania, Bulgaria, Kosovo, Serbia and Switzerland has been examining these questions as part of a multi-year project called the Private Security Research Collaboration Southeast Europe (“PSRC”) 1 . The interest of the state in interfering with the activities of private security companies is twofold: first, to ensure that basic pillars of the modern democratic state such as the protection of human rights and the democratic order are not threatened. Second, because the stability of the state and the happiness and prosperity of its citizens also depend on factors such as functioning security and economy. In order to better target its regulation of private security, it would therefore be important for the state to know how private security companies (PSCs) impact on a country’s human rights situation, the democratic order, a functioning security and (to a lesser extent) economy. For Private Security in Practice: Case studies from Southeast Europe the PSRC researchers assembled eight case studies that explore the impact that private security has on security, human rights and the democratic order in four Southeast European countries: Albania, Bulgaria, Kosovo and Serbia. Since regulation should not only limit the negative impact but also foster the positive contribution that private security can make, the authors specifically looked at how challenges posed by PSCs could be avoided and how opportunities can be seized.
Topic:
Security, Governance, Law Enforcement, and Weapons
Political Geography:
Geneva, Europe, Kosovo, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Albania

3. Assessing Democratic Oversight of the Armed Forces

Author:
Sander Huisman
Publication Date:
10-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance (DCAF)
Abstract:
There is no such thing as the model for democratic control of the armed forces. Perhaps more influential than constitutional arrangements; historical legacies and political cultures are setting conditions. However, a few essentials or principles of democratic oversight can be discerned. This paper aims to provide an overview of the efforts of different post-communist states in establishing democratic oversight over their armed forces. The comparative analysis is based on a study that the staff of the Centre for European Security Studies has conducted last year (Organising National Defences for NATO Membership - The Unexamined Dimension of Aspirants' Readiness for Entry) and the experiences gained from a three-year multi-national programme that CESS has started in 2001 (Democratic Control South East Europe: Parliaments and Parliamentary Staff Education Programme - DEMCON-SEE). This programme is running in seven countries: Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Macedonia, Romania, and Serbia-Montenegro.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Democratization, and Development
Political Geography:
Europe, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Serbia, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Albania, Croatia, and Montenegro