Training Resource Package: Guide to Integrating Gender in SSR Training- DCAF
Video: Gender in SSR-Stephen Jackson, Chief of Staff at the UN Office in Burundi
The Examples from the Ground are concrete illustrations of ways in which a gender perspective has been integrated in different security sector institutions around the world. They range from measures to counter human trafficking in Kosovo, to women’s organisations’ involvement with security institutions in Nepal, to female parliamentarians’ contribution to post-conflict reconstruction in Rwanda. These examples can help policymakers, trainers and educators better understand and demonstrate the linkages between gender and SSR.
The examples are organised around the following nine themes, for which a short introduction is provided:
• Police Reform and Gender
• Defence Reform and Gender
• Justice Reform and Gender
• Penal Reform and Gender
• Border Management and Gender
• Parliamentary Oversight of the Security Sector and Gender
• National Security Policy-Making and Gender
• Civil Society Oversight of the Security Sector and Gender
• SSR Assessment, Monitoring and Evaluation and Gender
For downloading individual examples and case studies in Integrating Gender into SSR Training on Kosovo, Liberia, Nicaragua, Sierra Leone, Timor-Leste, Hungary, South Africa, the United Kingdom, the Central African Republic, Indonesia, Peru, Somalia, Afghanistan, the Russian Federation, Tajikstan, Rwand, Brazil, Israel, Jamaica, Nepal, the United States, and the regions of West Africa and the Pacific, kindly follow the link.
When General Suharto resigned from his presidency in 1998, Indonesia was stuck in an economic and institutional crisis. Power had been centralized in Suharto’s hands for decades, sustained by a highly politicized army. Indonesia’s judiciary had lost its authority, and was also impaired by corruption. At the request of the government of Indonesia, the IMF provided support for economic revival and started focusing on the installation of a bankruptcy regime for corporate sector recovery from 2000 to 2004. The Netherlands supported this endeavour by funding technical assistance to strengthen the judiciary’s capacity for the bankruptcy laws’ implementation.
The IMF/Netherlands Program for Legal and Judicial Reforms created Commercial Courts to this end, but it soon became clear that they could not achieve their aim unless a transformation of the entire judicial system was undertaken: the crisis of the country’s institutions was running so deep that the Commercial Courts suffered from the same shortcomings as the rest of the judiciary. Furthermore, resistance to change among Indonesians complicated the endeavour. Firstly, the externally imposed intervention did not resonate well with key actors, who felt like they had no ownership of the process. Secondly, judicial corruption had become internalised as normal practice over the years, decreasing local actors’ willingness to address them.
The difficult dynamic surrounding the legal and judicial reform changed when a new Chair of the Supreme Court, a non-career judge who was more open to reform, was appointed to replace the retiring Chair. He was not opposed to structural change, which created a window of opportunity to address the deeper issues in the judiciary. The IMF/Netherlands Programme consequently shifted its attention from the Commercial Courts to the Supreme Court, working to restore the latter’s institutional capacity and efficiency.
When the People’s Consultative Assembly, Indonesia’s legislative branch, amended the Constitution to provide for a new Judicial Commission, the IMF/Netherlands Programme initiated a series of workshops and seminars on institutional development. This generated fruitful exchanges between the Supreme Court leadership, the IMF resident experts and NGOs, especially the Institute for Judicial Independence that belonged to the Indonesian Centre for the Study of Law and Policy. The latter started a substantive research process targeting the judiciary, supported by the Supreme Court leadership that granted the researchers access on all levels. These different actors now interacted regularly, complemented by workshops and study trips for the judiciary. The research process produced so-called ‘blueprints’, strategy papers that provided specific approaches to reform at different levels, widely perceived as a significant step to an overall planning model for the reconstruction of the Supreme Court and lower civil courts.
The triangular approach of involving state actors, donors and civil society helped to alter the dynamic of reform in Indonesia. Actors with a strong commitment to reform, such as the Indonesian Centre for the Study of Law and Policy, were given an important voice in the endeavour. As a result the process gained greater legitimacy because local actors complemented donors’ input.
Working with Local Expertise and a Network of Resources – The special relationship that emerged between state, donors and civil society allowed tackling legal and judicial reform on a broad-based footing, drawing strength from a group of committed reformists. The extensive use of local knowledge and expertise, through the inclusion of the Indonesian Centre for the Study of Law and Policy and other civil society organizations, contributed to a sense of genuine ownership of the process which helped to overcome some of the initial resistance to reform. It also motivated the press, the public, and a new generation of NGOs committed to reform, to keep pushing for change.
Identifying and Using Windows of Opportunity – The case shows that momentum for reform can arise suddenly, through small developments such as the arrival of a new person in a key position.Surrounding dynamics should therefore be evaluated carefully with a view to identifying potential entry points, even if they are not obvious at first sight.
Flexibility of Donor Programming and Funding – TheIMF and the Netherland’s had the flexibility to adapt their programme and shift their budget when a window of opportunity appeared, which was paramount to supporting and enhancing the local drive for reform when it occurred. It is fundamental to program success that they have the ability to respond flexibly to such developments.
The IMF/Netherlands Programme created a platform for exchange that helped overcome initial inertia to reform because it brought together different actors and gave a voice to locally rooted, committed reformists. The so-called ‘blueprints’ are a tangible project outcome and present a useful road map with potential to keep the reform momentum alive. Yet, they were not a panacea to repairing the country’s judicial system. Their implementation remains a challenge, in part due to some persisting opposition and in part due to a lack of capacity. At the operational level, judges are required to familiarise themselves with and put into practice these pathways to reform, while political leadership also needs to show willingness and commitment to empower judicial institutions.
At the same time, the triangulation can serve as a model for how reform efforts might be undertaken in other difficult environments, and the blueprints may be a useful planning format for institutional reform outside of Indonesia. Nevertheless, the case also shows that efforts beyond the development of a road map are necessary. The momentum generated through the triangulation process can only be sustained if translated into actual reforms, which remains a challenging task due to persisting opposition and a lack of institutional capacity.
Policy and Research Papers
Over the past two decades, in response to the underwhelming results of international development efforts across the Third World, arguments concerning the importance of local ownership have been gaining currency within the international development community. At its core, the discourse around ownership revolves around fundamental questions of agency: who decides, who controls, who implements, and who evaluates. The growing emphasis on local ownership, then, emerged as a critique of mainstream development practice and the broader cult of Western expertise which underpins it. As Joseph Stiglitz argued a decade ago, a vision of development in which all the answers and all the agency are seen to lie in the hands of foreigners is inherently problematic and ultimately self-defeating: ‘We have seen again and again that [local] ownership is essential for successful transformation: policies that are imposed from outside may be grudgingly accepted on a superficial basis, but will rarely be implemented as intended’. Since then, the principle of local ownership has been viewed increasingly as a precondition for effective development assistance, even if
the translation of the principle into actual practice remains an ongoing challenge.
This papers presents the widespread reform of state institutions Indonesia has been going through since 1998. It also addresses what drove the process, some challenges and lessons learnt.
Depuis 2010, le gouvernement indonésien s’est engagé dans une ambitieuse stratégie de « revitalisation » et de développement de son industrie de défense. Entre optimisme économique, opportunités et contraintes politiques, enjeux stratégiques et défis opérationnels, la montée en gamme de l’industrie de défense indonésienne pose de nombreuses questions. Au travers du développement de l’industrie de l’armement, c’est toute la complexité de l’ "émergence" d’un pays et des stratégies d’influence de ses leaders qui s’impose. Cette Note fournit une introduction à une problématique multiple, dont les moteurs et lignes de fuite s’avèreront déterminants pour non seulement le comportement de l’Indonésie dans le commerce mondial des armements, mais aussi la stabilité en Asie-Pacifique.
Corruption is hampering the delivery of justice globally. People perceive the judiciary as the second most corrupt public service, after the police. UNDP presents in this report, prepared in cooperation with U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre, a series of successful experiences from Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Indonesia, Kenya, Kosovo*, Nepal, Nigeria, Paraguay, Philippines, and Somalia, in promoting transparency and accountability within the judiciary.
Opening up judicial systems fosters integrity and increases public trust without impeding independence of the judiciary. The report advocates for judiciaries to open up to peer learning by engaging representatives of other countries in capacity assessments to improve judicial integrity. It also encourages judiciaries to consult end-users, associations of judges and use new technologies to foster transparency and accountability.
For full access to the report on A Transparent and Accountable Judiciary to Deliver Justice for All, kindly follow the link.
IDLO has produced a practitioner brief which is part of its series on "Navigating Complex Pathways to Justice: Engagement with Customary and Informal Justice Systems” to advance policy dialogue and distil lessons from programming and research but also to help strengthen customary and informal justice systems as an integral part of providing access to justice for all. This Practitioner Brief offers a set of concrete tools, recommendations and good practices to support engagement with customary and informal justice systems.
For full access to the practitioner brief, Engagement with Customary and Informal Justice Systems, kindly follow the link.
You can also have access to their policy and issue brief on the same topic, Engagement with Customary and Informal Justice Systems, by kindly following the link.
Over the past two decades, in response to the underwhelming results of international development efforts across the Third World, arguments concerning the importance of local ownership have been gaining currency within the international development community. This book dwells on the concept of local ownership and the challenges it faces in SSR practice in terms of implementation and donor-national stakeholder relations. Finally it adds a number of case studies that exemplify these issues.
As the primary agency for law enforcement, the police operates at close proximity to the public and exerts significant influence over the security of individuals and communities through its behaviours and performance. Therefore, ensuring accountability of both the individuals and institutions of the police is a fundamental condition for good governance of the security sector in democratic societies. The parliament, as the highest representative body in a democratic system, plays a significant role in maintaining police accountability.
The objective of the edited volume on “The Role of Parliament in Police Governance: Lessons Learned from Asia and Europe” is to put forward good practices and recommendations for improving police accountability, with an emphasis on the strengthening of the role of parliament in police governance. The comparative analysis includes insights and lessons learned from eight country case studies including Belgium, Germany, India, Indonesia, the Netherlands, Philippines, Thailand and the United Kingdom. The findings of the cases studies can be taken into account when analysing and considering options for improving the accountability of the police to parliament as well as strengthening independent oversight bodies and parliament-police liaison mechanisms. However, it must be emphasised that these good practices always need to be adapted to the exigencies of the local context.
The EU has emerged as a key worldwide player in security sector reform in the last few years, reflecting its twin role as the world’s largest source of development assistance and, ever increasingly, a major partner in international peacekeeping and police operations. In this comprehensive new study (February 2008), published in association with the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF), the authors:
• explain the origins of SSR as a concept and the EU’s embrace of it, culminating in the adoption of an overall EU framework for SSR in 2006 • show how SSR relates to the EU’s development, enlargement, justice and home affairs and other key policy concerns • look at the multiplicity of resources, financial and human, the EU brings to bear to support SSR around the globe • discuss the tensions between the Commission’s and Council’s concepts and engagement in SSR and the efforts being made to coordinate action • show how the EU works in partnership with other international players such as the OECD and NATO • provide a series of detailed case studies of EU support for SSR in action – in the Balkans, former Soviet Union, Congo, the Middle East and North Africa and Indonesia
This Almanac on Human Rights and Security Sector Oversight in Indonesia maps the current status of human rights observance by Indonesia’s security sector in terms of policies and practices. By benchmarking the status of human rights observance, the Almanac is a tool which can help prioritise ongoing security sector reform needs to ensure the improved provision of public security by Indonesia’s security sector actors.
From 1998 onwards, Indonesian civil society organisations (CSOs) have relentlessly mapped instances of human rights abuses by state agencies and lobbied their government and the international community for assistance in changing policies and practices and in prosecuting those accused of documented human rights abuses. In recent years, the Munir Case has, for many, been highly symbolic of the contentiousness of the interaction between state, society and the security sector. But, at the same time, many CSOs have systematically developed their capacity to monitor, research and analyse key issues, as well as to follow-up with recommendations to improve the provision of public security through lobbying, advocacy and awareness raising with multiple stakeholders.
Since 1998, Indonesia’s continued democratic development and emergence as a key economic actor in Asia has provided the back-drop to the debate on security sector reform in the post-Suharto era. In the general context of security sector reform, much attention has been focused on Defence Reform, with much more attention now being paid to the Police Reform agenda and Intelligence Reform on issues such as the ‘State Secrecy Bill’. The crux of these debates has been the need for increased transparency and accountability in terms of policy, practices and budgeting. The security sector has cooperated with various reform platforms, not least through democratic reform imperatives but also its corporate interests in the post-Suharto reform era.
To further inform the debate on transparency and accountability across Indonesia’s security sector, and to identify ongoing reform needs across defence, police and intelligence, this Almanac reflects a concise effort to map the intersection of public security provision and the practices of state agencies. By mapping key problem areas and sub-dividing the relevant security sector actors, agencies and thematic issues, the Almanac provides a benchmark of various agencies’ contributions to public security, while at the same time enabling the mapping out of solutions that can help resolve the critical issues identified. It is intended that this mapping process can be repeated in the future in order to map the extent to which human rights observance improves across the security sector.