PEER REVIEW EXPERIENCE

1
PEER REVIEW EXPERIENCE

• BOYKO MALINOV
• BULGARIA

2
GOAL

• TO ASSESS THE EXECUTION OF ALREADY AGREED
  OBLIGATIONS
• TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

3
TIMING

• AFTER WRAPPING OF THE NEGOTIATIONS
• AFTER THE IMPLEMENTATION GAINED SPEED
• BEFORE DEPARTURES FROM THE OBLIGATIONS HAVE DONE
  DAMAGE

4
INVOLVED PARTIES

• EU COMMISSION
• EXPERTS FROM THE MEMBER STATES
• HOST COUNTRYS LEGISLATIVE BODIES
• HOST COUNTRYS EXECUTIVE BODIES
• HOST COUNTRYS NGOs, OTHER CONCERNED

5
STEPS

• PREPARATION
• EXECUTION
• EVALUATION
• RECOMENDATIONS

6
PREPARATION

• EU DEFINES THE SUBJECT
• ACTIVITIES FOR EACH SUBJECT ARE AGREED UPON
• SCHEDULE OF THE REVIEW IS AGREED UPON
• WRITTEN EXCHANGE OF PRELIMINARY INFORMATION ON
  THE HOT ISSUES

7
EXECUTION

• ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATION OF THE CURRENT
  STATUS OF THE SUBJECT
• FIELD VISITS TO OBSERVE THE REAL WORLD
  IMPLEMENTATION
• DIFERENT OPINION DISCUSSION WITH NGOs

8
EVALUATION

• PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF THE EXPERTS
• RESPONSES AND CLARIFFICATIONS FROM THE HOSTING
  COUNTRY
• REPORT DRAFTING
• HOSTS COMMENTS
• FINAL REPORT FINDINGS AND RECOMENDATIONS

9
PEER REVIEW EXPERIENCE

• END