1. By Tsukhoe M. //Garoes and Beauty Jiji On Behalf of the Team as a chief conservancy governance tool: The Doro !Nawas Case “Constitution” -

2. Background  Located on Kunene region, NW of Khorixas  Doro-!Nawas was gazetted during Dec. 1999  Covers an area of 4,073 square kilometers  About 430 members are registered

3. Issues and challenges that existed  Intervention to amend the constitution started on the request by the conservancy.  Conflict started between members, calling MET to intervene. To mediate the process - thus assist in identifying potential solutions. Root causes / issues: Resource use or sharing Boundary Joint venture lodge Relationships

4. Outcomes of Conflict Management Process The process identify three key areas to be address to managed and monitor the conflict: 1.Financial accountability and monitoring 2.Gaps in constitution and constitutional awareness 3.Trainings and mentorship to built leadership and participation at committee and community level

5. Gaps in Constitution Few highlights:  Conservancy management structure (executive committee used, but not in existence)  Financial management (signatory powers to couple)  AGM (procedures not clearly stipulated)  Incompatibility of constitution with Law and regulations on same aspects

6. The Process of Constitution Amendment  Preparatory Meetings at MET and Conservancy Office  Awareness and Gap Identification in areas – 5 day  Synthesis of identified gaps  Constitution Formulation Process – 7days  Report production  Draft Report Feedback and clarification of proposals – 4 days  Draft constitution and LAC input  Presentation of Draft Constitution to CC by team with lawyer – 1 day

7. Process Continued  Finalization of constitution  Translation of constitution  Adoption of New Constitution by Members at EAGM  Finalise some of the Policies and Procedures  Training for staff and CC on use of constitution, policies and procedures.  Members education and awareness on new constitution and procedures.

8. Who was Involved? Team composed of the following:  Conservancy Committee and Constitution Amendment Subcommittee  Conservancy Members  TAs and RCs  MET  RISE  WWF  ICEMA  Line Ministries  Stakeholders

9. Products  Participatory Constitution Formulation User Guide  Reports on the processes  Revised Constitution  Draft Policies and Procedures  Implementation plan to support the constitution  Revised Conservancy Organogram

10. Decision Making Structures

11.  Membership 3 categories of membership Termination of membership Clear rights, decision making roles and responsibilities spelling out their powers  Conservancy Committee 17 persons:  7 executive committee members  6 area reps  3 interest groups  1 Traditional Authority rep. delegated and restricted powers  Traditional Authority’s Role Traditional leader Traditional authority

12. Internal Monitoring and Control by Conservancy Members

13. Financial Management  2 Bank Accounts – Operational and Investment  Signatories to be approved at GM and not blood related  Qualified bookkeeper to be employed  2 financial statements / year - 1 audited by independent auditors

14. Financial Management  Monthly income and expenditure report for members.  Policy, Procedures and guidelines developed  Benefit Distribution Plan to be approved at GM  All members and vulnerable groups including children and orphans to benefit

15. Meetings  Annual General Meeting  Half Annual General Meeting  2 General meetings  Conservancy Committee Meeting x 1/month  Executive Committee x 2 / month  Area meetings x at least 4 /year ( before every GM)

16. Conservancy Disciplinary Committee Composed of the following:  Tl as the chairperson  Incumbent conservancy chairperson  3 conservancy members elected at GM for 2 year term re- electable.  To hear and adjudicate matters and membership issues  Dispute Resolution

17. Lessons Learnt and Recommendations  Process can be costly – both in term of time and resources – long-term investment  Awareness building should be part of the constitutional drafting process – key foundation to usable constitution and hence empowerment  Area level consultations remains critical for inputs to the constitution drafting  Independent facilitation support is required – as committee sometimes may be intimidated by the process – e.g. constitutional committee “No short cuts to membership participation”

18. IT’S A NEW DAY and A NEW SEASON for Doro !Nawas Conservancy Thank You and God Bless You ll!!!