sustainability

The main focus of the project in Côte d’Ivoire was to put in place five departmental committees and one national committee for the monitoring of democracy and good governance. By strengthening the capacity of the members of these committees, the project promoted voluntary involvement in the management of communes and the exercise of civic control. By relying on the country’s policy of decentralization, the project helped local populations develop an interest in governing local affairs through learning about their roles as citizens. This was done through cooperation and engaging in dialogue with locally elected leaders. With this project the grantee integrated strategic priorities of the national decentralization policy into local governance. It also managed to take into account the context of the Ivorian crisis, which was characterized by a weakness of democracy and poor governance. It was therefore a kind of post-crisis pilot project on raising awareness and approaches to training in democratic education and good governance. The project could have applied a more nuanced approach in relation to the different groups that were part of the target population, particularly women and young people and provided more local support.

The aim of the project was to increase victims’ access to international justice through the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, following an amendment of the court’s rules of procedure to improve the victims’ access to legal representation. The project focused on upgrading the technical and legal advocacy skills of justice system professionals for the promotion and protection of human rights and improving their understanding of international human rights standards. It also focused on raising awareness of the 100 Rules of Brasilia Regulations, and the Inter-American Human Rights System. This was the first initiative in the region aimed specifically at training Inter-American Defenders. The beneficiary groups acknowledged that they have gained a better understanding of the Inter-American Human Rights system at the regional and national level and that their capacity to litigate before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, an increasingly specialized and complex process, had qualitatively improved.

The project general objective was to support the development of good governance in Myanmar through civic education and building advocacy skills of civil society. Activities included civic education trainings and township level meetings to support good governance; organization of core leader meetings; training in how to write policy papers to strengthen policy advocacy; and the creation of a website for civil society to exchange experience and knowledge. All quantifiable targets were reached or surpassed, and the participants interviewed spoke highly of the training. The project implementation team overcame significant bureaucratic and logistical obstacles, as well as difficult operating conditions. The project appears to have had a great deal of positive 'knock-on effects’. Although the training program attracted a large number of participants, participation was dictated by informal networks and affinities. The township-level forum did not succeed in soliciting initiatives and brainstorming on regional/local issues. Likewise, the policy papers exhibited significant weaknesses in particular a lack of readers. The website was also not used as an effective tool for knowledge and information sharing by any of the participants interviewed.

The project aimed to improve environmental conditions in Viet Nam. The grantee worked with the Vietnam Institute of Human Rights (VIHR) of the Ho Chi Minh National Academy of Politics and Public Administration (HCMPA) to prepare a curriculum for high-level government officials designed to provide a better understanding of the benefits of civil society participation in environmental policy. The grantee also worked with the Center of Environmental Training and Communications (CETAC) of the Vietnam Environmental Administration (VEA) to train journalists in the use of independent research methods and sources of investigation. In addition, the project supported the capacity building of local NGOs in the areas of strategic planning, financial management, and communications, in order to help them address key donor expectations.

The project general objective was to support the development of good governance in Myanmar through civic education and building advocacy skills of civil society. Activities included civic education trainings and township level meetings to support good governance; organization of core leader meetings; training in how to write policy papers to strengthen policy advocacy; and the creation of a website for civil society to exchange experience and knowledge. All quantifiable targets were reached or surpassed, and the participants interviewed spoke highly of the training. The project implementation team overcame significant bureaucratic and logistical obstacles, as well as difficult operating conditions. The project appears to have had a great deal of positive 'knock-on effects’. Although the training program attracted a large number of participants, participation was dictated by informal networks and affinities. The township-level forum did not succeed in soliciting initiatives and brainstorming on regional/local issues. Likewise, the policy papers exhibited significant weaknesses in particular a lack of readers. The website was also not used as an effective tool for knowledge and information sharing by any of the participants interviewed.

The project sought to strengthen the capacities of civil society to play an active role in shaping public policy and drafting laws. Its intended outcome was for civil society to become an active, informed and key partner in public policy and law making, so as to be able to react instantly on key public policy areas. The grantee capitalized on the government’s willingness for a more engaged and constructive civil society in policy development as well as the need for civil society organizations to have more information.  There was a substantial level of interest and participation in the project from both sides. The project’s strategy was sound as it built on the work already done by both CSOs and government offices. The project increased both the demand for and supply of public consultations.  

The project’s principal objectives were to enhance civic participation among Himalayan tribes and empower marginalized groups (women, people with disabilities and nomads); and to engage with governance issues and democratic dialogue. To this end, the project aimed to build a supportive environment for enhanced democratic participation through supporting state and non-state actors. The project consisted of 10 core components creating a continuum of involvement from awareness of rights to access to those rights, supported by the training and mobilization of relevant support actors and those who could make the rights a reality. The project design was logical and very much tuned to the needs of the beneficiaries and other stakeholders in this challenging region. There were no delays in project delivery, since it had been designed with the seasonal obstacles relevant to the target region in mind.

The Electoral Justice Principles for Trust in the Electoral Process project sought to raise the integrity standard of the electoral processes in Africa by addressing the relations between the key electoral justice institutions and their relevance and accessibility to the electorate. Its main objectives were to: produce a set of electoral justice principles drafted by a group of chief justices and senior electoral and political leaders from Africa and other continents; and support the implementation of these principles in two African countries. Its intended outcomes were to increase trust in electoral justice authorities; reduce violence related to electoral dispute settlements, and to have political parties, candidates and civil society organizations (CSOs) in the pilot implementation country able to claim, advocate and defend rights for public integrity consultations. The project undertook minimal consultations with the large and dynamic electoral assistance sector and missed opportunities to tap its experience, explore collaboration and develop synergies with other efforts, such as the Global Commission on Elections, Democracy and Security that promote the integrity of elections. The norms themselves were not disseminated as planned so awareness of them is extremely limited and they were not endorsed by any international organization as anticipated. Most of those interviewed felt the principles needed wider consultations and did not have the weight required to make significant changes. The project was not Africa-specific and African involvement was limited primarily to the launch in Ghana and the APEJ-SL. The principles and guidelines were global in scope, and were not tailored to Sierra Leone for the pilot. It also focused on general electoral integrity issues and lacked a clear focus on electoral justice and how specifically this could be achieved through the creation of a steering committee.

The Electoral Justice Principles for Trust in the Electoral Process project sought to raise the integrity standard of the electoral processes in Africa by addressing the relations between the key electoral justice institutions and their relevance and accessibility to the electorate. Its main objectives were to: produce a set of electoral justice principles drafted by a group of chief justices and senior electoral and political leaders from Africa and other continents; and support the implementation of these principles in two African countries. Its intended outcomes were to increase trust in electoral justice authorities; reduce violence related to electoral dispute settlements, and to have political parties, candidates and civil society organizations (CSOs) in the pilot implementation country able to claim, advocate and defend rights for public integrity consultations. The project undertook minimal consultations with the large and dynamic electoral assistance sector and missed opportunities to tap its experience, explore collaboration and develop synergies with other efforts, such as the Global Commission on Elections, Democracy and Security that promote the integrity of elections. The norms themselves were not disseminated as planned so awareness of them is extremely limited and they were not endorsed by any international organization as anticipated. Most of those interviewed felt the principles needed wider consultations and did not have the weight required to make significant changes. The project was not Africa-specific and African involvement was limited primarily to the launch in Ghana and the APEJ-SL. The principles and guidelines were global in scope, and were not tailored to Sierra Leone for the pilot. It also focused on general electoral integrity issues and lacked a clear focus on electoral justice and how specifically this could be achieved through the creation of a steering committee.

The project was timed to coincide with UN processes related to follow-up of the outcome document of the Third UN Conference on the Least Developed Countries (LDC-III) in Brussels in 2001, known as the Brussels Programme of Action (BPoA) and preparations for the Fourth UN Conference on the LDCs (LDC-IV) held in Istanbul in May 2011. The project aimed to build the capacity of civil society organizations in Least Developed Countries to mobilize and consolidate their energy, expertise and commitment to achieving quality inputs to the Comprehensive Review Summit in 2010, and strengthening democratic decision making in international development processes. It had three intended outcomes: Enhanced capacity of CSOs and CBOs; Increased awareness and coverage of LDC issues; Progress and setbacks on MDGs and BPoA reviewed. The project aimed to undertake activities in 20 countries: 13 in Africa, 2 in South Asia, 2 in South-East Asia and 3 in Pacific Island Countries (PICs). However planned activities changed throughout the project.