What we’ve done: - A quick audit of existing protection coordination structure - Dissected the mandates to define “protection” and “protection of civilians” - Bilateral and group discussions with protection coordination “users” - Discussed division of labor…and accountabilities So, what is the ideal protection coordination structure that flows from this? Renovating Protection Coordination, Southern Sudan 2010
Quick audit: what we’ve done Spreadsheet of All protection staff in all states (UNHCR, UNMIS, UNICEF, NGOs); and All PWGs, CPWGs, etc in all states in past 9 months
Quick audit: what we’ve found: No Protection Working Groups in 5 of 10 states No protection officers (UNMIS or UNHCR) in 2 of 10 states 12 out of 34 UNMIS Protection positions are vacant So far, only 2 of 10 states record a regular CPWG
Dissecting the mandates, in order to define “Protection” and “Protection of Civilians”
Defining “Protection” Protection is all activities aimed at obtaining full respect for the rights of the individual in accordance with the letter and spirit of the relevant bodies of law, namely human rights law, international humanitarian law and refugee law. -- IASC definition
Defining “Protection of Civilians” ??? “Protection of Civilians” = “Protection” = IASC definition ???
“Protection of civilians in armed conflict and other situations of violence”, as one essential component of “Protection” Civilians in armed conflict: as defined by IHL (Art. 3/APII) Civilians in other situations of violence: situations that do not meet the requirements set by Art. 3/APII, which includes group violence between combatants and civilians, or amongst civilians, for tribal, political or religious reasons. Protection in the comprehensive sense: the IASC definition UNCT UNMIS
Combatants Additional rights and duties per IHL Civilians Protection as a Comprehensive Concept Protection is: “all activities aimed at obtaining full respect for the rights of the individual in accordance with the letter and spirit of the relevant bodies of law, namely human rights law, international humanitarian law and refugee law.” [IASC, from ICRC] and who are Non-Citizens and who are Refugees additional rights & duties under Int’l refugee law Mandate UNHCR And who are Stateless Rights/duties per Conventions Mandate UNHCR And who are in armed conflict/affected by armed conflict/…? Mandate: UNMIS (PoC/CivPol/Mi) ARMED CONFLICT context PEACE and who are IDPs Mandate: currently ? Mandate, if clusterized: generally UNHCR (Non-State) Mandates for Protection in South Sudan: Distinctions and Overlaps
Benefits of the new protection coordination structure
Connecting more effectively. - Field to center to field - Within the mission - Amongst protection partners And remaining connected.
- No co-leads, no co-chairs = direct accountability for communication - PWG reporting is autonomous from agency/mission reporting lines = eliminates roadblocks to quick communication - Center analyzes and feeds info back to field = Field sees benefits, and reports more. Connecting better: Field to center to field
- Inter-pillar and inter-unit: clarifying “protection of civilians” better defines boundaries and respective roles of mission pillars and the units within. - Humanitarian pillar: Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict, Child Protection - Political pillar: Civil Affairs, Human Rights and Rule of Law, - Military component: TCC and Civilian Police - Dedicated liaison cell for PoC in Armed Conflict and Other Situations of Violence provides a centerpoint for policy formation and incident response: - Brings together each UNMIS pillar/unit relevant to PoC into structured liaison for first time - Clearly designates lead role and accountability for PoC coordination to one UNMIS unit - Bi-monthly Steering Committee allows periodic guidance and oversight by each pillar head in Khartoum, but without delaying operational daily response. Connecting better: Within the mission
- Respective roles, mandates and accountabilities of partners are better defined - Liaison Cell provides mechanism to firewall political and military elements from routine Protection Cluster proceedings by humanitarians - Liaison Cell provides the bridge for humanitarians to connect with mission and its assets, in a more structured and principled way. Connecting better: Amongst protection partners
Goals and Benchmarks... clear and simple. Renovating Protection Coordination, Southern Sudan 2010
Goals. Our ideas, to be further refined by Cluster discussion…. Goal OneThe Protection Cluster, coordinating international protection efforts, and with clearly understood roles and accountabilities, is put into place throughout the entirety of southern Sudan. Goal ThreeThe protection community becomes more quick, and more effective, at responding to emerging conflict and to new displacements caused by conflict. Goal TwoProtection information throughout southern Sudan is systematically collected, analysed, and provided back to participants of the Protection Cluster, In order to better ascertain protection needs and the interventions that are required.
Goal OneTimeBenchmarks The Protection Cluster, coordinating international protection efforts throughout the entirety of southern Sudan is put into place. By end of Q4 - At least ¾ of all PWGs have met on a monthly basis since date of establishment. - At least ¾ of all Cluster and state PWG minutes have been provided back to all state PWGs. - At least ¾ of responding participants of PWGs express “generally satisfied” or “highly satisfied” with PWG in end-of-period survey. Goals...and Benchmarks. By end of Q2 - A Protection Strategy for Southern Sudan is drafted and endorsed by Protection Cluster agencies. - A Mission-Wide Protection of Civilians Strategy for UNMIS is drafted and endorsed by the SRSG. By end of Q1- Protection Cluster established in Juba; all subcluster and PWG chairs appointed. - Protection coordination skills workshop undertaken for all PWG and Subcluster chairs. - At least 1 PWG is in place in each State.
Goals...and Benchmarks. Goal Two: Protection information throughout southern Sudan is systematically - collected, - analysed, and - provided back to participants of the Protection Cluster, In order to better ascertain protection needs and the interventions that are required. By end of Q1: Complete a mapping exercise of all protection information systems and a proposal for common inter-agency system for collecting, recording and analysing protection events or incidents. By end of Q2: - Roll-out of new inter-agency system in four states. - Launch of IDP Profiling Exercise. By end of Q3: - Roll-out of new inter-agency system in additional four states. By end of Q4: - Roll-out of new inter-agency system in all ten states completed. - At least 50% of all reports are from incidents at least 100km outside of state capitals. - Completion of IDP Profiling Exercise; results provided to Cluster participants. Time Benchmark
Goal ThreeTimeBenchmarks The protection community becomes more quick, and more effective, at responding to emerging conflict and to new displacements caused by conflict. Goals...and Benchmarks. End of Q1First protection assessment by a Protection Cluster member of a new incident is undertaken on average within one week of first credible report. End of Q2On average, incident specific interventions are undertaken for at least 50% of incidents with relevant authorities within one month. End of Q4- On basis of findings of IDP profiling, protection cluster participants agree on priority operational protection issues for following year. - __% of population in the southern Sudan has access to legal information or legal aid.