1 / 16

CIVIL SOCIETY ENGAGEMENT IN UNCAC

CIVIL SOCIETY ENGAGEMENT IN UNCAC . Strengthening the Capacity of Civil Society Organizations in Africa to Combat Corruption and Contribute to the UNCAC Review Process (UNODC, GLOU 68) INDEPENDENT EVALUATION PRESENTATION By Ms. FATIHA SEROUR, INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR 28 AUGUST 2013.

verdi
Télécharger la présentation

CIVIL SOCIETY ENGAGEMENT IN UNCAC

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CIVIL SOCIETY ENGAGEMENT INUNCAC Strengthening the Capacity of Civil Society Organizations in Africa to Combat Corruption and Contribute to the UNCAC Review Process (UNODC, GLOU 68) INDEPENDENT EVALUATION PRESENTATION By Ms. FATIHA SEROUR, INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR 28 AUGUST 2013

  2. OUTLINE Why Civil Society Engagement in UNCAC? -Introduction How was this carried out? - Process With What? Funding & support What results were achieved? Evaluation 5. Way forward: Conclusions & Recommendations

  3. Why Civil Society Engagement in UNCAC? Premise: “Corruption undermines democracy and the rule of law, leads to violations of human rights..” (K. Annan), and that: UNODC regards Civil Society engagement as an integral part of the fight against corruption  The fight against corruption is a collective responsibility involving Member States as leaders & other stakeholders incl. Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) (art. 13 of UNCAC) role & responsibility that needed support

  4. How was this carried out? - Process 2005: UNCAC came into force  CSOs’ meaningful engagement needed strengthening through capacity development various initiatives, eg.: Strengthening the Capacity of Civil Society Organizations in Africa to Combat Corruption and Contribute to the UNCAC Review Process (part of GLOU 68: Looking Beyond: Towards a Strategic Engagement with Civil Society on Anti-Corruption, and Drugs and Crime Prevention” aims to “strengthen UNODC partnerships with CSOs”.

  5. How was this carried out? - Process • 3 specific objectives for the anti-corruption module: • Increased CSO knowledge of UNCAC & its Review Mechanism & ability to contribute meaningfully • Increased dialogue bet. CSOs & their gvt focal points to discuss contributions to the process & build CSOs’ capacity for replicating the training in their country; • CSOs gaining skills & resources to work closely with the private sector in the UNCAC review mechanism … this includes a small grants programme for CSOs to engage directly with the private sector.

  6. How was this carried out? - Process 4 Trainings (2 in Africa and 2 in Laxenburg, conducted between 2011 and 2013); 1 day workshop in Brasilia Over 140 CSOs (from Africa and selected countries in other regions) were trained to date. Training materials (printed and audio-visual) produced Other training replicated. 10 grants to CSOs to engage with the private sector.

  7. With What? Funding & support • Total Funding 2010 to date: US$ 1,709,743 ( UK-DfID; Austria-ADA; Australia-AusAid) • ADA contributed 60 per cent of the above total to support activities in Africa according to its strategic focus and mandate. • Additional Contributions: Switzerland (US$ 21,837) and Norway (US$ 70,605).

  8. What results were achieved? Evaluation Objectives & Methodology Objectives: “ To measure the results achieved so far by bringing CSOs up to speed with UNCAC & its review mechanism & how it has facilitated engagement between CSOs & the respective governments on the prevention & fight against corruption’ Focus:relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact Methodology: desk review, formal/informal meetings & semi-structured interviews (strategic & operational issues) with various stakeholders (national & international level).

  9. What results were achieved? Key Findings • SWOT: • Main strengths (a) creation of a dialogue platform for exchange &engagement between gvts, CSOs & other stakeholders; (b) UNODC team (competence, commitment & hard work). • Main weaknesses: absence of (a) wider stakeholder target group; (b) clear partnership agreement between UNODC & TI (MoU). • Context: Respondents raised concerns about the perception of civil society engagement in CND & related meetings (in Vienna/HQ): “closed; “almost discouraging”. • But: positive interaction at 2nd IRG meeting (May 2013).

  10. What results were achieved? Key Findings • Relevance: • Strengthened CSOs’ voice in the fight against corruption • Facilitated CSOs’ meaningful engagement in the review process (when invited) • CSOs’ ability to use UNCAC knowledge to guide relevant stakeholders & secure other CSOs’ commitment in the fight against corruption But: need training that is relevant to national context & includes other skills

  11. What results were achieved? Key Findings • Effectiveness: Direct Compelling Effect credited by CSOs to the training: Many CSOs • Have been invited to take part in the review mechanism (eg. Cambodia, Tunisia, Ghana, Kenya..) • Have strengthened their voice/increased their convening power (demonstrated that the fight against corruption is legal)  leadership & influence anti-corruption activities. • Experienced positive interaction with State Parties (break barriers & build confidence). • Creation of entry point  dialogue, multiplier effect.

  12. What results were achieved? Key Findings • Impact & Strategic Linkages: CSOs’ UNCAC knowledge  IEC/Advocacy  draw citizens’ attention to UNCAC provisions anti-corruption fight is legal & there is witness protection: • Relevance: breaking the silence & complacency. • Appropriateness: CSOs’ advocacy widens the anti-corruption stakeholder base. • Effectiveness: witness protection addresses fears & breaks the silence around corruption. • Effect/impact: feeling of protection (almost) compels one to take action ripple effect: others join the fight against corruption.

  13. What results were achieved? Key Findings • Potential medium/long-term impact: (interconnectedness: governance, HR, peace & security) • People’s empowerment to exercise their rights • Potential reduction in cases of human rights violation (whistleblowing, witness protection) (some success stories for quotation) • Private Sector Component: 10 grants, 5 reviewed, results: mostly assessment of SMEs to find entry points to sensitize them about UNCAC & their potential contribution. One project: multi-pronged but results yet to demonstrate effectiveness.

  14. What results were achieved? Key Findings • Partnership & project management: • UNODC/TI & UNCAC Coalition: Project benefits from this excellent partnership  need clear framework (MoU) delineating roles & responsibilities (inc. for resource mobilisation). • Project Management: UNODC (CST & CEB) form an efficient & committed team that need further support (financial & human resources)

  15. Way Forward:Conclusions & Recommendations • Conclusion: all 3 objectives (strengthening the voice of CSOs, creating a dialogue platform, capacity development to work with the private sector) have been achieved  knowledge transfer, advocacy & awareness creation CSO’s increased convening power & widened their stakeholder base. • Recommendations: Extend project for 3-5 years strategic phase • Multi-stakeholder target group • Training of trainers (ToT) – regional focus & with local partners • Include other capacity development skills. • Create a knowledge management base.

  16. Way Forward This is an excellent project that is needed within and beyond Africa and should therefore be extended & should incorporate other regions. THANK YOU

More Related