CENTER FOR POLICY STUDIES
INTERNATIONAL POLICY FELLOWSHIPS
NADOR UTCA 11, H-1051 BUDAPEST, HUNGARY (36 1) 327 3863, FAX (36 1) 327 3809
MENTOR CRITIQUE FORM
Your thoughtful and honest appraisal will be most helpful. We appreciate your input and will try to implement as many of your ideas as possible. Continue comments on the back if necessary.
Each Fellow works with one mentor who is Soros foundations network-affiliated (usually Open Society Institute and Central European University) and one or two ‘external’ mentor(s) who are experts in the field working outside the Soros foundations network. Mentors should: 1) Work with Fellows to devise a brief policy paper in their field(s) of expertise based on a lengthy research paper written over the course of the fellowship year, 2) Maintain contact with Fellows at least once every six weeks or so by telephone, fax or e-mail to discuss the development of projects, 3) If feasible, meet with Fellows at least once during the fellowship year to discuss the project, 4) Facilitate Fellows’ contact with other relevant experts and participation in appropriate meetings (IPF has discretionary funds to support Fellow attendance at relevant events), 5) Complete brief mid-term and final critique forms supplied by IPF to provide the program with feedback regarding the Fellow’s progress.
Your name, position Gordana Siljanovska-Davkova, Professor
Name of Fellow you have assisted Renata Treneska-Deskoska
1. What, in your opinion, have you and your Fellow/program/project gained from your cooperation thus far?
Closer relationship, opportunity to reconsider and reexamine the status and operation of Macedonian COnstitutional court, challenge to compare our experience to other experiences; mutual evaluation of this very important instrument of democracy; search for more adequate solutions; a lot of new questions and answers; intellectual competition; specialized knowledge (new facts and figures); scientific activism arising proposals for changes; mutual respect and stronger friendship.
2. Do certain areas of this Fellow’s work need improvement? Which areas?
Renata Treneska-Deskoska has dealt with all relevant areas, contacted relevant experts, participated in appropriate meetings, gathered necessary facts and figures, checked views, discussed with me before and after mid term critique form further steps findings and proposals.
3. In your opinion, does your Fellow’s project make a significant contribution to the field?
YES - NO
Very significant contribution to the field in which there is
no many researches and writings. She has arisen provocative, brave and
inspiring questions.
4. Would the project be important to other countries in the CEE/fSU region?
YES - NO
Yes, she was not focused only on Macedonian case study but all
the problems have been comparatively treated and regionally analyzed. That
is why many of the conditions relate to neighboring countries and a lot
of proposals are acceptable for some of them, knowing the similar background
and reality.
5. Could the proposed policy research make an impact on the policy environment in specific countries or regions? (Policy makers, experts and policy research community)
YES - NO
Yes, as an excellent policy research it could be very influential
in the neighboring countries and countries in the Central and Eastern Europe.
It is a worth reading, analyzing ad implementing policy research contribution.
6. Is the timetable for the project realistic?
YES - NO
Obviously, it has been. The results are here, we expect strategy
for implementation of the proposals.
7. Could the project benefit a large number of people?
YES - NO
Yes, not only scientific community, but also policy makers of different profiles and on different levels, and especially citizens as mostly interested in human rights protection.
8. Does the Fellow show evidence that he/she can think strategically about the relevant project and/or field?
YES - NO
Yes, the final report proves and shows that she is provocative, inspirating and creative thinker, researcher , teacher and strategist.
9. If the Fellow were to re-apply for continued OSI funding for follow-up work associated with the project, would you support continued funding?
YES - NO
With pleasure, especially in building strategy how to implement the proposals.
10. Are there other appropriate funders that may support the project?
YES - NO
Yes, USAID that works on judicial reform in the Republic of Macedonia,
European Agency for Reconstruction, Council of Europe, SECO Programm of
Swiss Embassy in Macedonia.
Recommendations for other potential senior contacts for this Fellow:
As a member of the Council of IACL (INternational Association
of Constitutional Law) I recommend her contacts with all its members among
whom she is one, as well with the members of Venice Commission. Prof. Julian
Rivers, Quiszeppe de Vregottini, Kristian Stark, Stephan Pierre Kopp, J.
Bogdanovskaia, as distinguished knowers of this subject are also welcome.
Being "Slovenian doctors" both of us, couldn't avoid knowledge and experience
of our Slovenian colleges: France Grad and Ciril Ribicic.
Additional Comments (Please comment on your Fellow’s work and all aspects of the IPF program using the back of this sheet):
It was worth working with Renata Treneska-Deskoska.