6th Milestones of a Global Campaign for Violence Prevention

‘Towards measurable violence prevention targets”

Mexico City, Mexico, 13-14 November 2013

Global consultation: Key Findings and Recommendations

The UN has for the past year and half facilitating discussions on the post-2015 development agenda. They are frankly amazing! The levels of engagement are unprecedented, both within and outside of the UN. With two more years to go before Member States will decide on the post-2015 Development Framework this is already the most consultative process ever. Over 1 million people from 194 countries have in some form – in person or virtually – participated. That might seem small compared to the world population but a fundamental difference with 2001 when the MDGS were derived from the Millennium Declaration by a small group of UN officials and experts in the basement of UN headquarters.

Another important feature of these discussions has been the scope. Not only are we talking about poverty, education and health – but - peace, justice, insecurity and governance are also squarely on the table.

My presentation focuses on this broadening debate: why is it important, what the contentious issues are and how the process is moving forward with regards to peace/stability/rule of law agenda.

Process A number of inter-governmental and high-level panel reports and consultative

processes have provided important inputs and recommendations.

The UN created at the end of 2011 the UN system Task Team on the post-2015 Development Agenda. There probably was never before such a strong and broad interest in one issue in the UN. The Task Team despite its diversity, more than 60 entities, produced in June 2012 a rather strong report for the Secretary-General with a clear vision. The report set the agenda to some degree, because it introduced a fourth dimension for the post-2015 development agenda related to peace and security. It stressed that the prevention and reduction of all forms of violence and abuse – and protection against their specific manifestations, including trafficking in human beings, torture, organized crime, the press-ganging of children, drug-related criminality, sexual abuse and labour exploitation – should be at the heart of any development agenda.

In mid 2012, the UNDG commenced the facilitation of a broad consultative process at the national and global level. The objectives of these consultations were to provide space for a diverse range of stakeholders and build trust and alliances. Thus far, the UN country teams have supported national consultations in 88 countries. Additional multi-stakeholder consultations took place in many developed countries. The members of the UNDG also conducted 11 Global Thematic Consultations in collaboration with governments, involving civil society, academics and private sector.

Process The Global Thematic Consultation on Conflict, Violence and Disaster in the

Post-2015 Development Agenda, which UNDP co-led together with PBSO, UNICEF and ISDR, highlighted that organized and interpersonal violence – including violence against women and children – negatively impact people’s lives and stifles social and economic development. Throughout these consultations, participants called for the post-2015 framework to be about people –their personal security and the right and ability to live their lives in peace.

Other consultations focused on geographical regions, led by the UN regional commissions; think tanks and academics, through the Sustainable Development Solutions Network, led by Prof. Jeff Sachs; and the private sector, led by the UN Global Compact. They also produced reports in which the issues of peace, personal security, rule of law and governance featured to varying degrees.

The UNDG produced an interim report in March 2013, to influence the report of the Secretary-General’s High-level panel, and a final report in September 2013. The reports contain many references to personal security and violence, including against women and children.

High-Level Panel Report Of Eminent Persons The report of the High-level Panel of eminent persons on the Post-2015

Development Agenda (co-chaired by the Presidents of Liberia and Indonesia and the Prime Minister of the UK), set up a high bar regarding issues of peace and governance. It put peace, justice and voice right at the center of development, as development outcomes as well as enablers. It also forcefully argued that these are fundamental and universal issues, not optional extras. Moreover, it provided language on goals and targets, including on violent deaths, justice and security institutions, political participation and corruption. The report recognized peace and effective, open and accountable institutions as one of five transformative shifts that need to take place in the post-2015 period. The report also stressed that peace is a cross-cutting issue.

Building on these consultations and reports, the Secretary-General issued his own report in July 2013. Perhaps a little less compelling and far-reaching that the High-level Panel Report. Nonetheless, it places peace and stability, human rights and effective governance based on the rule of law and transparent institutions at the heart of development as well as zero tolerance for violence against or exploitation of women and girls. It calls on Member States to adopt a universal post-2015 development agenda within a rights-based framework and cognizant of the nexus between peace and development.

.

Last but not the least, I would like to mention the The

My World Survey – a global consultation conducted through a virtual platform – it highlighted that violence and people’s security are in the minds of men and women around the world. “Protection against crime and violence” is selected as the 7th highest priority by the over 1,000.000.000 people that have participated so far. In some countries and regions, it receives considerably more attention.

In short: Development is not only about income poverty,

education and health – the freedom from want – but also about peace, dignity and justice – the freedom from fear. The widened concept of development or well-being is as valid in poor as in rich countries.

Discussions and negotiations among Member States

The Outcome Document of the High-level

Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly on the Millennium Development Goals, noted that the post-2015 development agenda should also promote peace and security, democratic governance, the rule of law, gender equality and human rights for all.

It is encouraging that in September during the MDG High-level event a number of countries spoke in favour of the inclusion of peace, rule of law and governance in the post-2015 – and many of them from the South.

What are the Contentious Issues?

The post-2015 development framework will be negotiated and decided by UN member states. The various consultations and advocacy efforts might have an influence, but the ultimate decisions are by Governments. The negotiations will not be easy. A couple of contentious issues have already risen and others are likely to emerge. Issues of sovereignty: will inclusion of these issues infringe on

sovereignty? Scope: how broad should the approach be? The power of words: Can they be framed so that all the UN member states

can agree? Universality: Are these issues universal or only valid for conflict-violent

affected countries? Enablers or outcomes: Will labeling them as enablers mean they will not

be included in the agenda as goals or targets? Goal or Target: Should they be included as a standalone goal or as targets

under other goals, or mainstreamed? Measurement: Is measurement feasible? Aids flows: Will aids flows shift as a result?

Sovereignty: Peace and personal security are politically sensitive

issues, pertaining to the sovereignty of nations as the monopoly of violence is engrained in the concept of the state. Yet, the authority of the state is not absolute and is regulated by national and international norms and laws, including those set by the UN and its charter.

The inclusion of peace, justice, and governance into the post-2015 development framework does not need to impose any additional constraints on sovereignty – Member States will always retain sovereignty over prioritization, policies and strategies. Finally, the goals and targets are not-binding and agreed through intergovernmental negotiations, rather than externally imposed.

Some Member States might accept the fact that

development and peace are linked, but argue that they be kept out of the post-2015 development framework. This argument seems to be based on the contention that causality runs in one direction – i.e. that violence has negative effects on and peace is a necessary condition for development, but that development does not contribute to peace and personal security.

Given the changing nature of conflicts and the scope of violence with its multidimensional drivers, this argument is increasingly more difficult to make. As a result, development frameworks, policies and programmes need to be conflict/violence -sensitive and can contribute to peace and violence reduction and prevention.

Linked but Separate?

The scope

Member States are likely to disagree on the scope of the post-2015 development agenda. The number of goals in the agenda should be limited – to say 10 or 12. Member States will have to decide which issues to include. Should any, many or all be included? Some are concerned about overreach, which might imply that the whole set of issues might be abandoned because there are too many. Such a danger exists, and hence one should focus on a limited set of targets that can be clearly measured.

The power of words

The final outcome document will contain agreed language – in English. Language is important. Peace means different things to different people. To some it means the absence of open-warfare; to others it means freedom from fear, or even the freedom from want. Finding terms that are common to all Member States will be a challenge. It is already clear that some concepts or words are problematic, including fragility, resilience, security, democratic governance, etc.

Universality Another contentious issue is whether issues of peace, personal

security – violence reduction and prevention – or even rule of law and are universal aspirations. As reflected in the Millennium Declaration, peace, personal security, justice, rule of law and governance are considered universal issues and are not only relevant for a small group of conflict-affected countries. In fact, only 10% of the 526,000 violent deaths that occur each year globally are directly related to armed conflict; the rest are largely homicides.

One related danger is that some issues are perceived as a ‘northern’ agenda. There is already convergence on the need for a single universal agenda, with one set of goals, not a menu of goals that include separate goals for conflict-affected countries. This convergence is partly a reaction to the split personality of the MDGs, with some goals perceived as being for developing countries and some aimed at developed countries. It is therefore important, that there are champions for this agenda from across the regions, but particularly from the developing countries.

Enablers or outcomes?

Introducing peace, violence reduction and prevention, rule of law and governance as enablers could allow Member States, in the end, to perhaps abandon them as goals or targets and only include them as enablers in the narrative. It is important to recognize (and advocate) them as both enablers and development outcomes.

Goal or Target?

There are various options for the inclusion of these issues, either as goals, targets or as indicators. One option would be for a broad and aspirational goals – which would include various targets. For example. the report of the High-level Panel on the post-2015 agenda proposed two specific goals:

○ Goal 10: Ensure good governance and effective institutions. ○ Goal 11: Ensure stable and peaceful societies.

Alternatively, targets on personal security, rule of law and

governance could be included under other goals. A target on reducing the number of violent deaths could be included other a health goal. One could even include some of these targets only as indicators although that would be less than ideal because it might not have the policy, programmatic and strategic impact.

Measurement

Uncertainty about the feasibility to measure peace, justice, personal security and governance could be a big stumbling block. Ultimately, UN Member States are unlikely to agree on a goal or target if there is no sense of how it will be measured. Dismissing adoption of a goal or target on peace, justice and violence reduction/prevention because it cannot be measured should be countered.

A lot of progress has been made in recent years on measuring difficult conceptual phenomena and various processes are underway to suggest specific indicators. For some areas, perception or experience surveys are important, at least to complement administrative data. For example, police reports on sexual violence are rather unreliable, without an assessment of trust in the police. Yet, some fear that perception surveys can be easily manipulated and that, if there is no capacity to deliver, perception surveys are premature. Huge opportunities are available now through the spread of information and communications technology, social media, etc.

Aid Flows

One of the most difficult issues will be whether inclusion of peace, rule of law, personal security will imply changes in the allocation of aid.

Another concern is the allocation of resources within countries. Some fear a focus on peace, personal security, and justice will lead to the securitization of development and a relocation of ODA away from traditional development areas. This has not been the case so far.

Many areas in the peace, personal security and justice areas already count towards ODA, including civilian peacebuilding, security sector reform, small arms control, and access to justice. Moreover, if traditional development goals, such as those related to education, health and poverty cannot be achieved because of violence and injustice, a focus on violence reduction and justice is warranted.

Way forward

The intergovernmental discussions on the post-2015 are currently concentrated in the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals. The OWG was mandated by the Rio+20 conference on sustainable development of June 2012. It is co-chaired by the Permanent Representatives of Hungary and Kenya. The Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals will discuss ‘conflict prevention, peacebuilding, rule of law and governance’ at its eight session in February 2014.

Issues Brief

Targets proposed: Peaceful societies Prevent and reduce by X% violent deaths and injuries per

100,000 by year Y. Eliminate all forms of violence against children, women and

other vulnerable groups by year Y. Enhance social cohesion and ensure adequate formal and

informal mechanisms are in place to peacefully address tensions and grievances by year Y.

Reduce by X% inequalities across social groups, amongst regions within countries and between women and men by year Y.

Reduce external drivers of violence and conflict, including illicit flows of arms, drugs, finance, natural resources and human trafficking by X% by year Y

Issues Brief Rule of Law Provide free and universal legal identity, including

universal birth registration, by year Y. Ensure independence of judiciary and increase the

accessibility and responsiveness of justice services by X% by year Y.

Improve capacity, professionalism and accountability of security institutions (including police) by X% by year Y.

Increase by X% the share of women and men, communities and businesses with secure rights to land, property and other assets by year Y.

Ensure equal right of women to own and inherit property, sign a contract, register a business and open a bank account, by the year Y.

Way forward:

Advocacy, Advocacy, Advocacy