Public position of the proposing entity:

– What was the public position of the proposing entity, and its relationship with the community?

KUD Transformator, as the leading organization in the project “Enakost spolov je zakon”, positioned itself as an educational and cultural advocacy group rather than a direct lobbying entity. Their core mission was to use theatre as a tool for social change. The organization emphasized grassroots engagement, working closely with students, educators, and professionals in the cultural and educational sectors. Through their partnerships, they established connections with relevant institutions, including universities, faculties, and human rights organizations, to create safe spaces for discussion and education on gender-related topics.

Their activities sought to empower individuals and encourage them to recognize and exercise their rights, especially within the framework of existing legislation. Transformator and its partners focused on mobilizing students, professors, social workers, cultural workers, and feminist activists, creating a network of engaged individuals who could drive change within their respective fields. However, the project did not explicitly frame itself as a political advocacy campaign but rather as an educational intervention with the potential for long-term social and legislative impact. Their relationship with the community was built around: – Theatre as a participatory method: using Legislative Theatre and Theatre of the Oppressed to inititate discussions on systemic gender discrimination. – Podcasts and digital resources: expanding their reach beyond live events to include broader, more accessible educational materials. – Collaboration with faculties and high schools: partnering with universities to incorporate gender-related educational content into their curricula. – Public discourse and policy engagement: formulating legislative proposals that could be sent to decision-makers.

Despite the efforts, the organization faced barriers in establishing stronger connections with the broader activist community. There were significant gaps in engagement from larger feminist and human rights organizations, which might have strengthened the initiative’s advocacy power. This fragmentation within civil society made it difficult to build a unified front for legislative change. Additionally, institutional resistance in Croatia posed challenges in obtaining formal agreements with educational institutions. The partner organizations, while aligned in their commitment to gender equality and legislative theatre, had varying roles and levels of influence: – POKAZ (Croatia) A feminist and activist organization engaged in theatre-based advocacy. Played a parallel role in implementing legislative theatre in Croatia. Faced institutional barriers, particularly in gaining formal acceptance in educational institutions. Similar to Transformator, they engaged students, educators, and cultural professionals, but with limited direct impact on legislation. Had more connections to grassroots activism in Croatia but lacked direct lobbying power. – Mirovni inštitut (Peace Institute, Slovenia) A well-established research and advocacy organization focused on human rights, gender equality, and social justice. Provided expertise in policy analysis and gender studies, supporting the educational aspects of the project. Their position in the community was more academic and policy-oriented, making them valuable allies in research-based advocacy. Their involvement strengthened the legitimacy of the project’s educational recommendations. – Other NGOs (Društvo SOS, Amnesty International, Radio MARŠ) Had varying degrees of involvement, primarily in supporting awareness campaigns. Društvo SOS (focused on supporting victims of GBV) engaged in disseminating knowledge on gender-based violence. Radio MARŠ provided media support, amplifying the project’s messages through podcasts and public discussions.

– What was its stance on the subject of the intervention?

The stance was progressive and feminist, advocating for zero tolerance for gender-based violence and structural changes in gender equality policies. They recognized existing legal frameworks but argued that implementation and enforcement were lacking. Instead of solely pushing for new laws, they focused on educating people on their rights and encouraging cultural shifts.

What is the connection to the decision makers? Which power the entity has?

KUD Transformator had limited direct access to decision-makers and operated primarily as an educational and cultural initiative rather than a lobbying force. Their approach focused on engaging students, educators, and cultural workers, with an emphasis on awareness and education over direct legislative influence. While they submitted 12 elaborated legislative proposals to 28 institutions and ministries, the response was minimal, with only a few acknowledgments, such as the Ministry of Labor stating that some proposals were already included in existing policies.
The Croatian partner organization, POKAZ, faced additional institutional resistance, particularly in securing agreements with educational institutions. Bureaucratic obstacles made it difficult to formalize collaborations, even when proposals aligned with existing legal frameworks. Decision-makers often remained distant, and lobbying efforts were not a primary focus of the initiative.
Despite these challenges, Transformator and its partners successfully engaged some government representatives, including Tatjana Bobnar, an advisor on human security, who received and reviewed their legislative proposals. However, without structured advocacy efforts or sustained political engagement, their influence remained limited. Their power lay in mobilizing communities, fostering public discourse, and equipping individuals with knowledge, but their ability to directly shape policy depended on building stronger alliances with established lobbying groups and advocacy organizations.

Target

Primary: Youth, students, and educators in educational institutions.
Secondary: Cultural workers, NGOs, feminist organizations, and decision-makers.
Tertiary: The general public, via media campaigns, podcasts, and public events.

Internal Allies

The partner organizations are the obvious internal allies, as they were actively involved in developing, implementing, and supporting the initiative. Their contributions went beyond external collaboration, as they worked alongside KUD Transformator toward the shared goal of using legislative theatre to address gender equality and gender-based violence. Each partner played a distinct but complementary role, contributing expertise, networks, and resources that were essential to the project’s execution.
POKAZ, based in Croatia, served as Transformator’s main implementing partner, adapting the legislative theatre methodology to the Croatian socio-political context. They worked directly with students and educators, organizing performances and discussions, but faced significant institutional barriers in securing formal agreements with schools and policymakers. Their struggle to establish official recognition for legislative theatre within educational settings highlighted broader bureaucratic and political resistance to feminist and gender-related initiatives in Croatia.
Mirovni inštitut in Slovenia provided policy research and academic support, reinforcing the project’s credibility. Their role was particularly important in analyzing existing legislative frameworks and positioning the initiative within broader gender equality efforts. By offering expert insights into policy gaps and enforcement issues, they strengthened the educational and legislative dimensions of the initiative.
Društvo SOS, Amnesty International, and Radio MARŠ supported the initiative by amplifying its reach through media and advocacy networks. While these organizations were not as deeply involved in legislative theatre performances, they helped disseminate key messages, promoted the podcasts, and contributed to broader awareness-building efforts.
These partners were integral to the initiative’s success, but the project faced challenges in fully integrating them into a coordinated, long-term strategy for legislative impact. While the partners effectively collaborated on education and awareness, a more structured approach to advocacy and lobbying could have further leveraged their networks and expertise to push for tangible legislative change.

External Allies

The external allies in this initiative played a crucial role in amplifying the impact of the project. The project aimed to foster partnerships with institutions, advocacy groups, and decision-makers to create sustainable educational and legislative changes in gender equality and the fight against gender-based violence. Academic institutions were identified as key allies, with partnerships established with universities and faculties in both Slovenia and Croatia. The project successfully integrated its educational materials into academic settings, although institutional resistance remained a challenge, particularly in Croatia, where formal agreements could not be secured beyond personal commitments from individual professors.
The project sought to connect with decision-makers through various channels, including outreach to government institutions, advocacy groups, and professional networks. Legislative proposals generated through the project were disseminated to relevant ministries and decision-makers, with responses indicating partial acknowledgment of their relevance. Notably, the Ministry of Labor, Family, Social Affairs, and Equal Opportunities acknowledged that many proposals were already integrated into the National Program for the Prevention of Domestic Violence and Violence Against Women (2024–2029). However, the lack of a detailed response outlining which proposals were adopted left an area for further inquiry and potential advocacy efforts.
Media engagement proved to be a significant challenge, with a low turnout for the press conference despite outreach to 50 media representatives. However, media coverage was eventually achieved through indirect means, with reports and articles appearing in various outlets after receiving project materials. The engagement of civil society organizations was another mixed outcome. While the project connected with feminist and human rights organizations, fragmentation within the sector limited the formation of strong alliances. Attempts to collaborate with other NGOs often encountered structural barriers, competition for funding, and differing strategic priorities. Despite these obstacles, the project was able to secure dissemination partnerships with several organizations and advocacy groups.
Overall, the initiative demonstrated that external allies are essential for scaling impact, yet engaging them requires strategic, long-term relationship-building. The project underscored the need for continued efforts to strengthen coalitions, improve trust-building with institutions, and refine advocacy strategies to ensure that legislative and educational reforms are not only proposed but also implemented effectively.