Capitalisation study of the EIDHR Programme in Angola

Transcrição

The European’s Union Lot No.7 Programme
Capitalisation Study of EIDHR Projects
p r o g r a m m e i n An g o l a
FWC Contract n° 2009/223075/ 12009
BENF 2009– lot nr 7- Governance and Home Affairs
EuropeAid/127054/C/SER/Multi
Capitalisation study of the
EIDHR Programme in Angola
23 March 2010
Project financed by
European Union
SOFRECO Governance – 20 Consortium and Conor Foley, Team
Leader (contracted by the International Human Rights Network);
Bert Fret (contracted by SOFRECO) and Clément Lorvao
(contracted by S.I.C.I. Dominus)
Ca p it al i s at i o n St u d y o f E ID HR Pr o j e c t s pr o gr a m m e i n A n g o l a
“This report has been prepared with the financial
assistance of the European Commission. The views
expressed herein are those of the consultants and
therefore in no way reflect the official opinion of the
Commission“
Capitali sati on Study of EID HR Pr oj ects pr ogr amme in A ngola, 23 M ar ch 2010
Table of contents
LISTA DAS ABBREVIAÇÕES USADAS. ................................................................4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................5
1. METHODOLOGY USED..................................................................................................................... 8
1.1 Meetings and visits ........................................................................................................................... 8
2. OVERVIEW OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN ANGOLA .............................................. 8
3. OVERVIEW OF EIDHR PROJECTS AND STRATEGY ................................................................ 10
3.1 Thematic typology.......................................................................................................................... 10
3.2 Typology of activities ..................................................................................................................... 16
3.3 Typology of implementing partners................................................................................................. 18
4. ROLE OF THE EC............................................................................................................................. 19
4.1 Complementarities between instruments (EIDHR, EDF and NSA/LA) ............................................ 19
4.2 NSA/LA Programme ...................................................................................................................... 20
4.3 9°FED............................................................................................................................................ 20
4.4 Request for Proposals ..................................................................................................................... 21
5. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................... 23
ANNEXES............................................................................................................................................... 28
ANNEX 1. Programa de avaliação implementado entre os 14/02 e o 13/03/2010. .................................. 28
ANNEX 2. Documentos consultados: ................................................................................................... 30
ANNEX 3. Projectos visitados ou contactados:..................................................................................... 32
ANNEX 4. Lista das pessoas entrevistadas durante a missão................................................................. 33
ANNEX 5. Table of problems encountered and adjustments.................................................................. 36
ANNEX 6. Synthetic Table of Verifications/Findings........................................................................... 37
ANNEX 7. Table of practical recommendations and future interventions............................................... 39
ANNEX 8. Human rights typology and terminology ............................................................................. 40
ANNEX 9. Relatório de visita a Lunda Norte........................................................................................ 42
ANNEX 10. Specific Terms of Reference............................................................................................. 46
ANNEX 11. CVs for Team Leader and Team Members........................................................................ 54
C ap i t al i sat i o n S t u d y of E ID H R Pr o j ect s pr o gr am me i n A n go l a
I
23 Mar ch 2010
Lista das abbreviações usadas.
ADCPI
ADRA
AI
AJUDECA
ASASP
ASCA
Acção para o Desenvolvimento, Pesquisa e Cooperação Internacional
Associação para o Desenvolvimento Rural e Ambiente
Amnesty International.
Associação Juvenil para o Desenvolvimento Comunitário
Associação Angolana Salvadora dos Povos
Associação para o Sorriso da Criança
CCDH
CEAST
CISAD
COIEPA
CTH
Conselho de Coordenação de Direitos Humanos
Conferência Episcopal de Angola e São Tomé
Círculo de Solidariedade e Apoio ao Desenvolvimento das Comunidades
Comité Inter-Ecclesial para a Paz em Angola
Consórcio de Terras da Huíla
DW
Development Workshop
EDF
EIDHR
EUD
European Development Fund
European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights
European Union Delegation
LARDEF
Liga de Apoio à Integração dos Deficientes
MPLA
Movimento Popular da Libertação de Angola
NCC
NGO
NIZA
NSA/LA
National Counselling Centre
Non-governmental organization
Stichting Nederlands Instituut voor Zuidelijk Afrika
Non State Actors / Local Authorities in Development
OAA
OHCHR
Ordem dos Advogados de Angola
UN Office for the High Commissioner of Human Rights
PAANE
Programa de Apoio aos Actores Não Estatais
PPM
Pão para o Mundo (Brot für die Welt)
PROVIDA Programa para a vida
SFCG
Search for Common Ground
UPR
UN
UTCH
Universal Periodic Review
United Nations
Unidade Técnica de Coordenação das Ajudas Humanitárias
VIS
Voluntariato Internazionale per lo Sviluppo
I
23 Mar ch 2010
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The EU is the largest single donor supporting human rights and civil society in Angola today. This support is seen
by these actors as invaluable to their continued existence and to opening up the space in which civil society can
operate. The scale-down of the activities of humanitarian organizations in Angola and the departure of the UN
Office for the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has led to a consequent reduction of financial
support and strategic coordination of many human rights and democracy-related activities.
This has placed
increasing expectations on the EU Delegation and civil society clearly looks to it not just as a donor, but as a
‘champion of human rights and democracy’. (see section 2 of this report for more details)
The EU Delegation needs to communicate more effectively with civil society about its role, purpose and mandate
and provide strong diplomatic and moral support to civil society actors in general and human rights defenders in
particular. The EU Delegation should also take more steps to publicize the existence of the EIDHR fund and the
application process. Supported projects should be encouraged to do more to highlight the support that they are
receiving. The EU should continue to coordinate the EIDHR funding process with other donors and with other EU
budget lines. The EU should also continue to explore how to develop a basket fund for funding human rights
activity in priority thematic areas or for certain types of activity. (see sections 2 and 3)
The study team believes that the thematic areas identified in the call for proposals were relevant, although this was
not always fully reflected in the project activities that were actually funded. While the reasons for this varied
according to different projects, the existing typology is rather confusing and the study team proposes that a new
thematic categorization be introduced following the structure laid out in international human rights law. This
should then be cross-referenced with the EU’s priorities for Angola and the EIDHR’s global strategic priorities.
One advantage in using this typology is that there are a variety of international mechanisms that monitor Angola’s
record in the areas identified which can be used as a basis for developing strategic interventions and advocacy in
specific areas and for greater coordination between national and international monitoring bodies. (see section 3.1)
The thematic areas have been discussed among some donors at the Thematic Working Group on Democracy and
Human Rights and the study team believes that such strategic planning can help to maximize their impact. It
suggests that ways should also be found to consult on these priorities with a wider range of actors in Angolan civil
society. (see section 3.1)
The study team believes that the right to political participation and freedom of expression was a relevant priority
area during the period 2003 – 2009 – due to the central importance of the legislative elections for the development
of Angolan society - and it was adequately supported by EIDHR. The team believes that the cumulative effect of all
of the election monitoring, civic education and conflict resolution projects probably had a positive impact on the
conduct of the 2008 elections. Freedom of expression is likely to remain a relevant priority in the short to medium
term –due to the restrictions on the development of a pluralistic media in Angola. Economic, social and cultural
rights (including housing land and property rights) was also a relevant priority thematic area during the period and
is likely to remain one in the foreseeable future. The importance of this issue was stressed in numerous interviews
and there is an obvious link between monitoring economic, social and cultural rights and the issues of governance,
transparency and community consultation on budget-setting priorities. (see section 3.1)
Although some land rights projects have been supported, the general area of monitoring economic, social and
cultural rights has not been supported sufficiently. Gender has also not been adequately integrated as a crosscutting issue. Non-discrimination and protection of vulnerable groups is relevant and should be included as a
separate priority theme and a cross-cutting issue. Access to justice should also be integrated as a cross-cutting
theme or issue. (see section 3.1)
The EIDHR should continue to support particular thematic promotional campaigns in priority thematic areas, but
aim to reduce the number of general human rights promotional campaigns it supports and not support them unless
they can realistically demonstrate a tangible impact. Global experience of implementing human rights projects in
post-conflict situations, or where there are concerns about governance, the rule of law, transparency and political
I
23 Mar ch 2010
participation, suggests that raising awareness about particular laws (such as a new land law) or particular social
issues (such as HIV, violence against women or discrimination against disabled people) can be effective. However,
the direct impact of small-scale human rights promotional activities, implemented in isolation from other strategies
is likely to be minimal. Projects which promote universal human rights in general but fail to deal directly with
specific violations in a particular society may even have a negative impact by increasing cynicism about the rights
themselves. (see section 3.2)
The team believes that projects aimed at targeted vulnerable groups can have a measurable impact. Legal
assistance has been shown to have a potentially very significant impact in situations similar to those which
currently exist in Angola. The EIDHR should consider how to support more access to justice projects, to increase
legal aid services to people outside Luanda and strategic litigation in priority areas. The team believes that smallscale monitoring of prisons or training of police and prison staff by human rights groups does not appear to have
had much of an impact in Angola. Such projects are usually better implemented as technical cooperation projects
with governments although civil society groups can play a supporting and monitoring role. Human rights groups
should carry out independent monitoring of conditions in places of detention and intervene on behalf of people who
claim to have suffered violations. The team was also not convinced that the production of community bulletins and
training community groups on journalistic skills had any significant impact on the issue of freedom of expression in
Angola.(see section 3.2)
The EIDHR application process is almost universally regarded as very bureaucratic, difficult and time-consuming
and this discourages applications by many smaller national NGOs. This probably narrows the range of
organizations who apply for financial support. Most funding through the EIDHR has been to international NGOs,
which is likely to be more expensive than funding national or local NGOs and, therefore, less cost-effective. (see
section 3.3 and 4)
At the same time there appears to be insufficient ‘hands-on’ management of funded projects. More administrative
support needs to be given both to the management of the fund itself and to help NGOs with reporting requirements.
Although the EIDHR’s projects are comparatively small in financial terms, the activities involved are often
complex and politically sensitive. Angolan NGOs also need to receive more training and support on issues such as
formulating project proposals. The current lack of monitoring of supported projects by the EU Delegation makes it
very difficult to assess how effectively projects are being managed. The team believe that more staffing resources
are needed to manage the fund and that the EU Delegation needs to continue to explore ways of carrying out more
monitoring missions to the field. (see section 4)
The team believes that, in some respects, the criteria for project approval may need to be more strictly enforced.
Some of the logical frameworks of the projects funded during the period made completely unrealistic claims about
their potential impacts. The one legal assistance project that was supported failed to indicate how many cases it
intended to take – either to court or through mediation. The lack of such clear indicators will make subsequent
evaluation difficult and, in turn, makes it difficult to assess the overall effectiveness of the EIDHR. (see section 3.2
and 4)
Many projects also failed to show, in their proposals and reports, how the impact of their actions would be
sustainable. However, this reflects the fact that the protection and promotion of human rights is an ongoing activity
which requires constant monitoring and interventions. The weight given to sustainability criteria in evaluations of
proposals should reflect this and more points may need to be allotted to the impact of activities than the financial
strength of the organization submitting the proposal. This could probably be done without a change to the call for
proposals and may already be reflected in the way that projects are currently being scored in applications. Since
the study team was unable to analyze evaluation tables showing the scores against which projects had been
approved or not approved, for reasons of confidentiality, it cannot draw any firm conclusions on this point. (see
section 3.2 and 4)
The percentage of final funds disbursed for supported projects is relatively low, which could indicate a
comparatively high failure by supported projects to submit adequate financial and technical reports. The quality of
the activities that the study team observed was also extremely variable, which largely reflected the capacity and
management strength of the project implementers. One recurring problem seemed to be when a Luanda-based or
international NGO partnered with a local organization in the provinces and then failed either to properly supervise
or support their activities. Projects that were funded and implemented by the same organization appeared to deliver
better quality actions, particularly when they were based in the province in which they were acting. The
I
23 Mar ch 2010
publications that the evaluation team saw were of variable quality and most groups had failed to evaluate how
attendees at the various workshops and seminars that they had organized rated them. There also appears to have
been very few attempts to measure the quality of the promotional materials produced. (see section 3.3 and 4)
However, it is clear that many project proposals have been rejected during the application process due to simple
administrative errors, like a failure to attach a Concept Note, which are easily correctable. The study team believes
that the EU needs to take into account the context in which the EIDHR is being implemented in Angola – a recent
post-conflict society in which civil society is still very weak. It recommends that the EIDHR should introduce a
two week period of ‘tolerance’ to allow applicants to correct administrative mistakes. (see section 4)
The EIDHR should be more closely integrated with the Programme of Non State Actors (PAANE) and the
Programme of Non State Actors and Local Authorities (NSA/LA). PAANE should establish regional antennae in
certain provinces in the east and north of Angola to proactively reinforce the activities of local civil society actors
in relation to human rights and democracy. More effort should be made to publicize the existence of these budget
lines and the activities supported under them. EIDHR projects should be categorized according to the provinces in
which they are being implemented, the type of activity that they are undertaking and the type of organization
implementing them (national/ international NGO, Church group, national platform or network). Currently the fund
is being used to support projects which are disproportionately located in the more accessible provinces, rather than
the ones where there are more serious concerns about human rights violations. It is also largely supporting
international NGOs, rather than local organizations, regional networks and national platforms. (see section 3.3 and
4)
The EIDHR has funded a fairly narrow range of ‘promotional’ activities, whose impact and benefits are very
difficult to measure. It has given far less support to direct interventions in defence of human rights or to research
and monitoring on Angola’s human rights record. These should be priority areas of work, but the current call for
proposals fails to target funding towards them. The EU should consider how to adapt the call for proposals to
provide more focused support for research monitoring and legal advocacy. This could be done by inserting a fixed
proportion of funds that each applicant would need to spend on them into the call for proposals – although such a
change would need to be made at a headquarters level within the EU. It could also be done by allocating certain
proportions of funds towards certain thematic areas although this would need to be accompanied by a modification
of the CRIS database in Brussels.(see section 4)
The study team also recommends that the EU in Angola should consider the establishment of small-scale
monitoring, research and advocacy projects (less than 10,000 Euros) in particular target themes or provinces. More
training should also be provided on human rights monitoring, including a guide to using international mechanisms
and training on human rights research and advocacy. This could be financed by funds drawn from the 3 per cent
allocated to ‘support measures’ which include activities in the field of communication, capacity building,
consultation and meetings with local civil society organizations.(see section 4)
I
23 Mar ch 2010
1. METHODOLOGY USED
This is the report of a Capitalization study carried out by a three person team of consultants on behalf of
Governance~20 Consortium. 1 Its objective is to provide the European Union Delegation in Angola with an
overview of past and ongoing EIDHR activities and to provide recommendations for the formulation of future
strategy. The report is based on a 23 day in-country mission carried out from 16 February to 13 March 2010,
together with an analysis of EU policy documents and project documents, and other relevant background material.2
The EIDHR has funded over 40 projects between 2003 and 2010, although the team was only provided with a
sample of 28 projects and the statistical information here is based on this project sample. The team received a
briefing and debriefing at the EU Delegation in Luanda at the start and end of the mission and was able to conduct
a full analysis of the applications, narrative reports and logical framework analyses of the 28 projects selected. The
team was unable to analyze evaluation tables showing the scores against which projects had been approved or not
approved, for reasons of confidentiality. Most other information relied upon was gathered through interviews in the
field and two workshops.
1.1 Meetings and visits
The team spent the first week in the capital Luanda and then split into two in order to visited six provinces of
Angola: Kwanza Sul, Benguela, Huambo, Bié, Moxico and Lunda Norte. 3 The first four of these provinces contain
a comparatively large number of supported projects, while the other two are remote and difficult to access Together
they provide a representative cross-sample of Angola’s different provinces. It was decided not to go ahead with a
visit to Cabinda, due to the security situation and concern not to endanger local actors.
The team carried out over 100 interviews with people from around 50 organizations, of which 16 had implemented
EIDHR supported projects.4 Meetings were also held with civil society actors and experts, local officials and other
donors. The interviews were intended to obtain specific information about EIDHR projects and also to gain a
better understanding about the context of human rights in Angola and perceptions of the EU’s work – particularly
outside Luanda. The team interviewed people whose projects have been supported by the EIDHR and some who
have made applications which have not been supported. 5 The team also talked to activists who have refused to
make applications for support, on principle, due to their disagreement with what they perceive as the attitude of the
EU towards the current human rights situation in Angola.
Two workshops were held, one in Huambo on Friday 5 March and one in Luanda on Wednesday 10 March. The
first involved a group of 8 representatives of grass-roots community organizations who had worked alongside
EIDHR supported projects followed by a presentation and question and answer session at an NGO coordination
forum that was attended by 23 people representing 16 NGOs. The workshop in Luanda was attended by 7 people,
4 from local NGOs, 2 from international NGOs and 1 from the PAANE project.
2. OVERVIEW OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN ANGOLA
Angola has an estimated 16,526,000 inhabitants, with a population density of 13.2 persons per square kilometer. It
is divided administratively into 18 provinces, 164 municipalities and 547 communes. Cabinda province is separated
from the rest of the country by the Congo River estuary and part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Angola
won its independence from Portugal in 1975 and this was followed by a 27 year civil war, which ended in 2002.
Legislative elections were held in 2008, which were won overwhelmingly by the MPLA.
1
see Annex IX for biographical details. Quality assurance input on the assignment was provided by the International Human
Rights Network as Assignment Manager and the Governance 20 management team.
2
see Annex II
3
see Annex I
4
see Annexes III and IV
5
In one case the team was told by an NGO – AJPD – that funding had been refused because of the administrative obstacles
that the Angolan government had erected to prevent it from registering itself. The EIDHR application has subsequently been
modified to take account of this problem, but the NGO was never informed of this modification.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
Angola has ratified a number of international human rights treaties including: the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the
Elimination of Discrimination Against Women and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Angola is also a
party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the
Child. Angola has not ratified the International Convention Against All Forms of Racial Discrimination; the
Convention against Torture; the Genocide Convention; the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers; the
Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and its Additional Protocols aiming to Prevent, Suppress and
Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children; the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Civil
and Political Rights on the abolition of the death penalty; and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities and its Optional Protocol. Angola is also not a party to the International Criminal Court.
In its report to the UN Human Rights Council, under the Universal Periodic Review mechanism, Angola states that
it is currently ‘in the process of adding’ the above treaties to those that it has ratified and adapting its laws, through
a Justice Reform Commission, to ensure they are in line with international human rights law. UN monitoring
bodies and human rights organizations have made a number of proposals for changes in laws and practices to
ensure full compliance. 6
In 2008 the Angolan government suspended negotiations on a Memorandum of Understanding with the UN Office
for the High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR). Other international humanitarian agencies are also
winding down their activities, which has exacerbated the problems of obtaining comprehensive, accurate and up to
date information about the human rights situation. Most information, up until now, has come from international
advocacy groups rather than Angolan national organizations. The study team’s visit coincided with a discussion of
Angola’s human rights record at the UN Human Rights Council under the Universal Periodic Review mechanism.
The team met with the Angolan NGO delegation that had gone to Geneva to lobby the UN during the process. The
team was impressed with this initiative, which had both raised awareness about Angola’s human rights record and
strengthened the capacity of national NGOs to carry out human rights monitoring and use international
mechanisms.
One of the standard questions which the team asked was for an assessment of the most important human rights
issues in that particular area. The aim was to get an unprompted list of thematic issues, which could be referenced
against the themes in a human rights typology (see below). The team also explored some of the thematic issues in a
more directive way during the interviews, particularly those that were most frequently cited by respondents as a
priority.
Two sets of issues arose very clearly. The first concerned the post-election situation, covering governance and
transparency at the local and national level, the space in which Angolan civil society can operate and concerns
about freedom of expression and media pluralism. The second concerned a variety of specific government social
and economic policies, encompassing housing, land and property (HLP) rights, education, health care, access to
water and social inclusion. Other issues that were raised included: children’s rights, gender, rights of disabled
people, and concerns about arbitrary arrest and torture, prison conditions and access to justice.
One of the underlying themes in many discussions was the lasting impact of colonial rule and then a prolonged
civil war on Angolan society. Although a return to conflict seems unlikely, it has been a fear up until quite
recently. Authoritarian rule has also made people wary about voicing concerns about particular government
policies or practices. The overwhelming political dominance of the MPLA and the uncritical attitude of the staterun media, together with a lack of media pluralism, low levels of education and astonishingly high social exclusion
and inequality have created a challenging environment within which civil society actors have to work.
Many civil society actors in Angola tend to define human rights in relation to individual injustices committed
within society – such as violence against women or discrimination against particular vulnerable groups – without
identifying the key obligations that the Angolan state has to respect, protect, and fulfill the rights of everyone living
within its jurisdiction.7 The study team believes that this has led to an overemphasis on ‘promotional’ campaigns
whose impact is often limited and indirect. However, some interviewees pointed out how difficult it is even to
6
see Angola’s review by the UN Human Rights Council under the Universal Periodic Review mechanism, February 2010. UN
Docs A/HRC/WG.6/7/AGO/3 6 November 2009; A/HRC/WG.6/7/AGO/2, 11 November 2009; A/HRC/WG.6/7/AGO/1,
December 2009
7
See Annex VIII for more details
I
23 Mar ch 2010
promote human rights and democracy in the current political climate. They argued for constructive engagement
with the Angolan government and said that social attitudes could only change gradually so it was sometimes
necessary to work on issues indirectly to open up more space. The eastern provinces, pose particular challenges. 8
They are still very closed to the outside and characterized by a culture of political intolerance and repression;
social, ethnic and tribal tensions; conflicts over land rights; and a violation of many fundamental rights.
Interventions in this context must, be cautious and incremental and this may justify a more general ‘promotional’
approach.
Some interviewees questioned the EU’s own commitment to human rights in Angola, arguing that the funds
devoted to human rights are a tiny a proportion of its overall budget assistance and that this commitment sometimes
seemed to be trumped by other political issues and commercial considerations. Most, however, recognize that the
EU is the largest single donor supporting human rights and civil society actors and that this support is seen as
invaluable to their continued existence and to opening up the space in which civil society can operate.
The scale-down of the activities of humanitarian organizations in Angola has led to a consequent reduction of
financial support for many human rights and democracy-related activities. The departure of OHCHR has also
removed a body with an important strategic monitoring and advocacy function. This has placed increasing
expectations on the EU Delegation and civil society clearly looks to it not just as a donor, but as a ‘champion of
human rights and democracy’ in Angola. Human rights and good governance are recognised as important
objectives of EU development policy and this is reflected in the partnership agreement to which Angola is a party.9
The study team believes that the EU does have an important role to play in providing diplomatic and moral support
to civil society in general and human rights defenders in particular.
3. OVERVIEW OF EIDHR PROJECTS AND STRATEGY
The EIDHR has funded over 40 projects in Angola between 2003 and 2010, although the study team was only
provided with a sample of 28 of these. Three organizations, from this sample, have been funded twice and some of
the projects have been implemented by more than one organization. Not all of the implementing organizations are
still present in Angola (because some international organizations have left the country and some national
organizations have ceased to exist) and in some cases the experiences of implementation have varied considerably
within the same organization working in different provinces.
3.1 Thematic typology
According to the current call for proposals, the following thematic areas are the most recent priorities for EIDHR in
Angola in 2009:
1. Promotion of the democratic process. The 2008 Legislative elections will be followed by Presidential and
Autarchic elections;
2. Within this electoral context, it is crucial to continue to support the promotion of fundamental freedoms: freedom
of association, expression, assembly, etc.
3. Support to the national reconciliation process and prevention and resolution of conflicts;
4. Procedures regarding Human Rights Defenders and the importance of monitoring the human rights situation in
Angola;
5. Promotion of economic and social rights: this perspective seems to be essential within the Angolan context
where the problem of wealth distribution is of prime importance, including the defence of right to housing, access
to natural resources, etc.
6. Promotion (of the rights) of vulnerable groups and victims of discrimination, with a special focus on gender,
children, youth and people with disabilities and/or HIV/AIDS.
These priority areas were developed out of the EU’s most recent Country Strategy Plan for Angola and are likely to
change from year to year – as this strategy evolves. They have been discussed among some donors at the Thematic
Working Group on Democracy and Human Rights and the purpose of such planning should be to maximize their
8
See Annex IX for a report from Lunda Norte
see: Republic of Angola – European Community, Country Strategy Paper and National Indicative Programme for the period
2008 – 2013.
9
I
23 Mar ch 2010
impact and ensure that they contribute in the most effective way possible to wider strategic goals. The study team
believes that these thematic areas were relevant, but this was not always fully reflected in the project activities that
were actually funded. While the reasons for this varied according to different projects, the team found the
categorization provided in the project summary document given by the EU Delegation rather confusing. This
typology, which lists all the projects supported by the instrument since 2003, categorizes the projects according to
the following thematic areas:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
land rights,
media,
gender issues,
electoral process/civic education/domestic observation,
prevention and resolution of conflicts,
social, economic and cultural rights/rights of vulnerable groups
human rights defenders
promotion of access to justice
This is not the usual way in which thematic issues are categorized under international human rights law.10 For
example, economic, social and cultural rights are quite different to the rights of vulnerable groups. Conflict
resolution is not a distinct human rights ‘category’ as such and potentially encompasses issues ranging from land
rights, to political and ethnic disputes to violence against women and vulnerable groups, to conflict within the
family. Human rights defenders are also not a category under international law, although it is a thematic issue to
which the international community is paying increasing attention and to which the EU has expressly committed
support.11 The original categorization also did not always fit with the project activities – either from their narrative
reports and proposals or as described to the team in interviews. Clearly many themes within the various categories
overlap. However, if EIDHR is to be used as a ‘strategic tool’ then it needs to be based on a common
understanding of what each thematic area means and what the various projects are trying to accomplish as a whole
as well as individually.
A basic typology using common criteria under international human rights law (for example, the articles of the
UDHR, ICCPR and ICECSR) would group the 28 projects that the EIDHR has supported on the following basis.
In some cases a project covers more than one issue.
Right to participate in democratic elections and public life: 13 organizations (CEAST, ASCA, NCC, ASASP,
ADRA, ADPCI, Angola 2000, ASCA, Search for Common Ground, DW/NIZA, AJUDECA, Mãos Livres)
Freedom of expression: 5 organizations (SFCG, DW, VIS, CCDH, CISAD)
Peace and reconciliation 5 organizations (AJUDECA, COIEPA, PPM, SFCG)
Access to justice: 1 organization (Mãos Livres)
Prison conditions/protection against torture 2 organizations (OAA, Amnesty International)
Housing, land and property (HLP) rights: 3 organizations (PROVIDA, CTH, Rede Terra)
Social, economic and cultural rights: 0 organizations
Non-discrimination/protection of rights of vulnerable groups 6 organizations
a) Women’s rights: 3 (AMEH, AJUDECA, ASASP, PPM)
b) Children’s rights 1 (Omunga)
c) Disabled people’s rights: 1 (LARDEF)
One advantage in following the typology provided by international human rights law is that there are a variety of
international mechanisms that can be used to monitor Angola’s record in the areas identified. These include the
country reports of human rights treaty mechanisms such as the UN Human Rights Committee, the Committee on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Committee on the Rights of the Child, as well as non-treaty mechanisms
such the reports of UN Special Rapporteurs and thematic Working Groups. These can be used as a basis for
developing strategic interventions and advocacy in specific areas and for greater coordination between national and
international monitoring bodies. This should improve the quality of the international reports and strengthen the
research, investigative and advocacy capacity of national NGOs.
Table 1 shows the same typology broken down by province
10
11
see Annex VIII for more discussion.
see European Union, Ensuring protection – European Union Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders, December 2008
I
23 Mar ch 2010
Table 1. Regional presence of EIDHR projects in Angola (2003-2009) by typology and province.
10
9
8
Peace and reconciliation
7
6
Non-discrimination/protection of
rights of vulnerable groups
5
Housing, land and property
rights
4
Prison conditions/protection
against torture
3
Access to justice
2
Freedom of expression and
association
1
Right to participate in democratic
elections
Namibe
Kubango
Lunda S
Uige
Bengo
Kunene
Cabinda
Bi•
Moxico
Zaire
Lunda N
Malanje
Kwanza S
Benguela
Kwanza N
Huila
Huambo
Luanda
0
The above table shows that the largest number of supported projects, from the sample given, have been in Luanda,
Huila, Huambo and Benguela. These are also areas of the largest number of people, but are not necessarily the
places of greatest concern from a human rights perspective. This regional imbalance probably reflects the
challenges facing the EU in managing the process of applications and monitoring supported projects, given the
restrictions on travelling outside Luanda. It also may show the difficulties that smaller NGOs have in making
applications. These issues are addressed further in the fourth section of this report.
The thematic areas are all relevant to the current political, economic and social context of Angola. However, with
the exception of the HLP projects, there has been no EIDHR support to monitoring of social and economic rights,
which the study team believes should be a priority. There has also been virtually no support to access to justice
projects. Some organizations operate referral services to legal organizations but this does not appear to be standard
practice in all organizations. The only access to justice projects which has been supported has been implemented,
through Mãos Livres, but the only lawyers working for this project are based in Luanda.12 Since the effective
realization of all of the thematic rights listed requires access to justice in cases of violations, this issue should be a
cross-cutting theme.
Gender should also be a cross-cutting concern, but the study team believes it is not sufficiently integrated into the
work of many of the supported projects. The vast majority of representatives of projects being implemented by
EIDHR that the team spoke to were male and most only raised the issue of women’s rights when prompted.
Although the team was assured that many of the projects did have components that promoted women’s rights, this
was often through general promotional campaigns, whose effect is described below. Issues such as discrimination
and violence against women were often treated as problems of inter-personal relations, rather than being located
within the context of state obligations to protect women’s rights.
Democracy, elections and freedom of expression
The above typology shows that the largest number of projects from the sample supported were in the thematic area
of the right to participate in democratic elections. Just under 2.5 million Euros was spent on this area between 2003
and 2009 (see table 2), followed by just over 1.8 million Euros on ‘peace and reconciliation’ work. In practice,
12
Representatives of Mãos Livres told the team that they did not even have enough money to travel to Cabinda, which is
clearly a priority area from a human rights perspective.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
there was a considerable overlap between these two areas, which together accounted for the vast majority of
contracted funds.
Table 2. Grants awarded to EIDHR projects in Angola (2003-2009) by typology. *
.*
Contracted funds in •
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
Social, economic and
cultural rights
Access to justice
Housing, land and
property rights
Prison
conditions/protection
Nondiscrimination/protection
Freedom of expression
and association
Peace and reconciliation
0
Right to participate in
democratic elections
500000
* Some projects have/had activities in several categories of human rights (e.g. SFCG developed activities in the area of
freedom of expression and the right to elections) in thee cases the budgets have been included twice.
The study team is satisfied that this was a relevant priority to support. As the EU has observed ‘Genuine elections
are an essential basis for sustainable development and a functioning democracy. The European Union believes that
actions supporting the right to participate in genuine elections can make a major contribution to peace, security and
conflict prevention.’13 The legislative elections of September 2008 were a landmark for the development of
Angolan society. Interviewees repeatedly stressed the widespread fears that had existed prior to them – given the
previous experiences in 1992. Many of the conflict resolution projects were implemented in this context, which is
why the two thematic areas so closely overlap.
Some argue that the fact that this election passed off peacefully and without significant irregularities is an advance.
Many interviewees said that the overall impact of the intervention by civil society groups – through civic education
campaigns, electoral observation platforms and conflict resolution projects – had been positive. However, it is
difficult to evaluate the specific impact of the EIDHR’s projects in this area for a number of reasons. First of all,
the outcome may have simply reflected the dominance of the MPLA whose overwhelming victory removed some
of the tensions that could have arisen in a closely fought campaign. Indeed many have questioned whether the
conditions in the country actually allowed for a free and fair election. The MPLA dominated all of the media, was
far better financed than the other parties, made full use of its extensive network of patronage and clientelism and
intimidated its political opponents.14 Secondly, the EIDHR was only one of several donors funding such projects
and so it is difficult to separate out their impact from those of others. It should also be noted that most of the
EIDHR’s funded projects had ended before the election itself took place (see electoral projects chronogram in table
4) which would lessen their impact.
13
See EU election observation missions, http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/humanrights/election_observation_missions/index_en.htm
14
Human Rights Watch, Democracy or monopoly, Angola’s reluctant return to elections, February 2009
I
23 Mar ch 2010
Table 3. Chronogram of projects with activities supporting the electoral process.
Eleições legislativas
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
SFCG – 36 meses
ADPCI – 12 meses
ADRA – 12 meses
ASCA I – 14 meses
Mãos Livres – 19 meses
Angola 2000 – 15 meses
ASASP – 18 meses
NIZA – 32 meses
CEAST – 15 meses
NCC – 12 meses
ASCA II – 15 meses
In many rural areas people knew very little about the electoral process when the elections were first announced and
the vast size of the country – and remoteness of many of these places – justified as widespread a campaign of civic
education as possible. However, international experience of peace and reconciliation projects in post-conflict zones
is mixed and there is some skepticism about the impact of projects which rely almost exclusively on training
community activists in a particular technique of conflict resolution.
In as much as the aim of these projects was to ensure that the elections passed off peacefully they can be judged a
success, but the study team did not find any other evidence that they had a significant impact on reducing conflicts
during the time that they were implemented and was not provided with any specific examples of their effectiveness
during interviews. In a workshop in Huambo a number of interviewees stated that the training they had received in
conflict resolution had helped to stimulate the formation of a forum for electoral monitoring. However, this is best
categorized as an indirect impact of the project, since it seems to have been the arrival of an external organization
rather than the specific activity it conducted that sparked the local initiative.
The study team also believes that the election-related education and awareness-raising campaigns often suffered
from a lack of coordination between different actors and some of the EIDHR projects appear to have failed to work
sufficiently closely with the national platform for elections and the provincial election networks. For example, not
all national groups used the standard monitoring methodology and material for civic education and electoral
observers. The best projects appeared to be those being implemented in provinces with strong civil societies,
where they were able to draw on the enthusiasm and experience of local activists. The study team believes that the
two ASCA projects in Huambo helped to play a useful coordinating role with good grass-roots civil society
organizations and their activities complemented similar initiatives by Mãos Livres and SFCG. This could be
considered a good practice for future reference.
However, other election projects, such as NCC and CEAST, and the peace and reconciliation project implemented
by COIEPA seemed to have been less effective and – although the team was not able to examine all of their
activities in detail – it does have some general concerns about the approach adopted by these projects. Activities
seem to have been spread too thinly across too many provinces and municipalities, which meant that their
interventions often lacked sufficient technical assistance and follow-up in the field. Funds were often not passed
onto implementing partners, which severely constrained – and in some cases led to the suspension of – their
I
23 Mar ch 2010
activities, as well as generating accusations of a lack of transparency. Budget administration was often
concentrated in Luanda and provincial partners were treated simply as service-deliverers.
In some cases the EIDHR implementing partner had no permanent presence in the province and paid local groups
to organize one-off events. This applied to both Luanda-based national organizations and to international NGOs
and meant that there was little follow-up, that the team could discover, so any benefits were unsustainable. The
team was sometimes unable to find any trace of projects that had been implemented in a particular area only a year
or two previously. By contrast ASCA appears to have been a much better targeted EIDHR project in which the
funds were directly managed in the province by a group who knew their own area well, were centrally involved in
the electoral networks and platforms and targeted their activities in a smaller number of municipalities. In some
areas, such as Kwanza Sul, the electoral networks and platforms that had been formed before the election moved
from monitoring its conduct to engaging local state authorities on the issues of governance, transparency and
community consultation – particularly budget-setting priorities. However, in other cases there appears to have been
no such follow-up strategy. One major EIDHR supported project, implemented by Development Workshop and
NIZA, in six provinces, seems to have been quite late in starting its activities and then changed its focus entirely
from civic education and the elections, to general awareness about women’s rights.
Economic, social and cultural rights – including land rights
There is an obvious link between monitoring economic, social and cultural rights and the issues of governance,
transparency and community consultation on budget-setting priorities. However, the EIDHR has not been used to
support any groups working on this issue despite its clear relevance to the overall human rights context.
Monitoring economic, social and cultural rights is still a relatively new activity in international human rights law,
but there are an increasing number of General Comments of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights, the reports of UN Special Rapporteurs and thematic Working Groups to draw on. These promote an
inclusive vision of development in line with international treaty law applicable in Angola, the UN Millennium
Development Goals and the EU’s own development policy. Angolan human rights NGOs should be encouraged to
develop more systematic monitoring of social exclusion and injustices, abuses of power, political clientelism and
trickle-down economics from a human rights perspective.15 This will probably require some training and support
by the EU who should use the opportunity to promote more ‘south-south’ linkages by, for example, drawing on the
experience and expertise of Brazilian and South African human rights NGOs.
The most pressing current issue within the broad economic, social and cultural rights framework, concerns housing,
land and property (HLP) rights. The issue of land rights was discussed with the team in a variety of contexts, from
forced evictions in Luanda and Benguela, to concern about neighbourhood disputes linked to the lack of a
proper cadastral record and title documents in many rural areas, combined with non-recognition of customary land
rights. The EIDHR has already supported three projects working on land rights, which have had various levels of
success. In some cases their activities have been limited to awareness-raising about the new land law in general
terms. However, the publication, by Rede Terra, of an annotated version of the law for local officials, which
provides a simplified interpretation of its main provisions and their links to other relevant laws, is a potentially
extremely relevant initiative.
The issue of HLP rights in Angola requires a multi-faceted approach, combining local, national and international
action. This should include sensitizing people about their rights within existing law, lobbying for improvements to
the law and providing practical support for those whose rights are violated. It should also include monitoring
forced evictions, mediating disputes, and research on the issue. Rede Terra has developed a number of good
practices, which could be used as a reference. The EIDHR is providing some support to Rede Terra, which helps
to link existing land rights group into local and national networks, but it is not providing support to groups which
campaign for the right to adequate housing and against forced evictions (as defined by the UN Committee on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights General Comments No. 4 and 7) or support for projects working on the issue
in the context of cultural rights.16
15
see, A Rights-Based Approach towards Budget Analysis, International Institute for Education, 1999
UN Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 4, The right to adequate housing (Art.11 (1)),
Sixth session, 13/12/91; and General Comment 7, The right to adequate housing (Art.11.1): forced evictions, 16th Session,
20/05/97.
16
I
23 Mar ch 2010
Non-discrimination and protection of vulnerable groups
The study team was very impressed with the Omunga project on children’s rights in Benguela and the LARDEF
project on the rights of disabled people in Benguela and Huambo. These projects were able to provide direct
support to their targeted beneficiaries and their sensitization and awareness-raising campaigns do seem to have
helped change public attitudes at least in a small way. One example was a municipality putting a ramp on the steps
of its building the day after a workshop on disability rights. Indeed the lobbying campaign by disability
organizations which resulted in changes to Angola’s Constitution could be used as a model for successful
advocacy. The methodology described to us for discussing human rights issues with children was also based on
international best practice, emphasizing dialogue and critical enquiry rather than more traditional and outdated
teaching techniques.
3.2 Typology of activities
The three largest types of activities that EIDHR has supported are training, the organization of seminars and
workshops and the dissemination of information (see table 5 and 6). This is followed by lobbying and monitoring,
although both appeared to be carried out at a fairly general level. The next activity is listed as providing legal
assistance – although the only project from the sample that directly provided people with representation in front of
court and tribunals was Mãos Livres. The next two activities are listed as radio broadcasts and organizing other
types of events. This is followed by electoral observation and finally research and academic studies.
Table 4. Typology of EIDHR Project activities in Angola 2003-2009
90,00%
Capacita¨‹o/forma¨‹o
80,00%
Semin‡rios/ Conferencias/
Debates/ Troca de experi ncias
70,00%
Difus‹o de material informativo
60,00%
Lobbying / Concerta¨‹o sector
publico
Monitoriamento dos DH
50,00%
Acompanhamento jur’dico
40,00%
Emiss›es de r‡dio
30,00%
20,00%
10,00%
Outros eventos e anima¨›es
Observa¨‹o eleitoral
Estudos / Pesquisas
0,00%
The EIDHR’s supported activities seem to have prioritized general human rights awareness – often referred to as
‘promotional activities’- over more systematic monitoring, research and direct interventions to defend human rights
– through access to justice projects. A reluctance to identify the obligations of the Angolan state under
international human rights law has led to an emphasis on resolving conflicts between individuals. The study team
believes that it would be more relevant to invest in increasing the capacity of national NGOs to more effectively
monitor, research and intervene directly to ensure that the Angolan government respects and protects human rights
and fulfils its human rights obligations to people living within its jurisdiction.17 This will require more training to
Angolan NGOs on human rights monitoring, including a guide to using international mechanisms and training on
human rights research and advocacy. It could also be supported by small grants (up to 10,000 Euros) to targeted
projects which can be made outside the call for proposals. It will probably also involve more hands-on support
from the EIDHR project managers which could have staffing and resource implications.
17
The team believe that some of the research publications produced by AJPD could be regarded as examples of good practice
in this regard.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
Table 5. Representation of EIDHR activities in Angola 2003-2009
Capacita¨‹o/forma¨‹o
Semin‡rios/ Conferencias/
Debates/ Troca de experi ncias
5,1%
4,6%
2,8%
Difus‹o de material informativo
22,3%
5,1%
Lobbying / Concerta¨‹o sector
publico
6,5%
Monitoriamento dos DH
Acompanhamento jur’dico
7,3%
21,3%
9,4%
Emiss›es de r‡dio
Outros eventos e anima¨›es
15,6%
Observa¨‹o eleitoral
Estudos / Pesquisas
Human rights education and human rights promotion are valuable activities. People cannot assert their rights if
they are not aware of them and a general promotional campaign may be a useful way of sensitizing the authorities
to prepare them for approaches on a specific issue. However, promoting human rights in general without also
ensuring that the state is held to account where it fails to respect, protect and fulfill its human rights obligations in
particular cases is not likely to be an effective strategy, even on it own terms, as it merely highlights the gap
between the theoretical rights that people are supposed to enjoy and their actual situation. Promotional campaigns
which are not linked to specific strategies to advance other rights could lead to people becoming cynical about the
rights themselves. This will steadily reduce their impact and make any benefits that do arise – for example, the
sensitization of a particular group of people on a particular issue – increasingly unsustainable.
Angola has only recently emerged from decades of war. Interviewees frequently stressed that civil society is weak
and that there are growing concerns about the lack of state accountability. Many pointed to restrictions on freedom
of expression and association, and a lack of media pluralism as a thematic priority. Angolan NGOs organize
through networks and conferences of civil society groups are an important way of exchanging ideas, providing
mutual support and disseminating information. Given the weakness of the independent media, particularly outside
Luanda, workshops and seminars play a vital role in assisting civil society and supporting political pluralism and
democracy and a rights-based approach to development. In Huambo the study team attended a meeting of civil
society organizations who are planning the fourth national civil society conference and it was clear from the
enthusiasm of the participants that this process is valued by those working to help Angola’s transition to sustainable
democracy.
Equally, however, the transition of Angolan society means that strategies that were appropriate only a few years
ago may need to be reconsidered for the future. The country has now been at peace for longer than at any time
since independence. It is also experiencing an unprecedented level of economic growth, which is changing society
and bringing new issues to the fore. Civil society is also changing. Many international donor and aid agencies are
down-sizing or pulling out of the country. The challenges facing many national NGOs include transforming
themselves from service delivery in a humanitarian context towards how to develop long-term strategic and
sustainable interventions – in human rights as well as other issues.
While the organization of seminars and workshops and the production of publications and other materials is useful
in some circumstances, the overall impact of such activities may be becoming increasingly limited. Such activities
are intended to promote human rights messages in general – including values such as tolerance, pluralism, respect
for the rights of others, peaceful resolution of conflicts, etc. However, they also give groups the opportunity to
I
23 Mar ch 2010
promote their own particular philosophies. The evaluation team found this to be a particular concern with the VIS
project, in which a general human rights promotional campaign had been given quite strong religious undertones.
The Church is one of the strongest components of Angolan civil society. In some provinces, such as Moxico and
Lundas Norte, church-based organizations are practically the only civil society groups that exist. Faith-based
organizations also have good outreach networks, which make them appropriate bodies for information
dissemination and awareness campaigns and they have a long tradition of working at a grass-roots level on social
justice issues through bodies such the Commissions for Justice and Peace. Many faith-based organizations played
a particularly important role in distributing humanitarian relief during the war and doing rehabilitation work
afterwards. They were well-supported by international donors in the past and are experienced both in making grant
applications and financial management and accounting. However, religious organizations often view human rights
from the perspective of inter-personal behaviour rather than within the context of state obligations. It is the state’s
responsibility, for example, to protect women and children from domestic violence and to counter the persecution
of people accused of ‘witch-craft’. Civil society groups should not substitute their promotion and education
campaigns for this role. Some faith-based organizations are also producing material which appeared close to
proselytizing.
The study team also has concerns about some of the other advocacy, training and sensitization work that it
encountered. The team was unable, in the time available, to interview representatives of the Order of Angolan
Lawyers who had implemented a prison inspection project in Benguela, but find it unlikely that the activities that
they described in their project proposals could have had any real impact on prison conditions simply because the
projects were too small-scale and implemented in isolation from any other systemic reforms. The team also did not
meet with Amnesty International’s Angola Section, whose project involved training members of the Angolan
police and prison service. However, international experience shows that prison inspections must be conducted
regularly and over time to have any sustainable impact on conditions and if training is intended to change the
behaviour of police and prison officers then it is best implemented by specialist police and prison trainers rather
than by human rights organizations. While training members of the police, prison service or security forces can be
a useful entry-point, human rights groups are more suited to independent monitoring and intervening on behalf of
people who claim to have suffered violations of their rights.
Similarly, although the team was impressed by the enthusiasm and commitment of the Development Workshop
staff, involved in the Vozes de Paz/Ondaka project in Bié and Huambo it is questionable how much of a sustainable
impact such a small-scale magazine can have on the issue of freedom of expression in Angola. The Bulletin was
not produced in a format that would appeal to most ordinary Angolans and did not carry out any investigative
reporting or exposures of official malpractice. While it may have been of interest to civil society activists, it
neither sought to gain a mass readership, by producing more popular articles, nor to challenge the boundaries of
freedom of expression in Angola. The project being implemented by the BBC Trust with Radio Ecclesia seemed a
far more effective way of enhancing freedom of expression as were some of the projects described to the evaluation
team by the Open Society Institute.
3.3 Typology of implementing partners
It can be seen from the table below that international NGOs were the biggest recipients of EIDHR’s financial
support. Many local NGOs only received support by partnering with international NGOs and very little support
was given to networks (organized on a geographical or thematic basis) and national thematic platforms. Funding
international NGOs is likely to be more expensive than funding national or local NGOs, which raises a costefficiency concern. The study team also believes that local NGOs, networks and platforms are likely to have a
great impact on the human rights situation in Angola.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
Table 7. Typology of EIDHR implementing partners in Angola 2003-2009
Redes geograficas e sectorais
50%
40%
ONG locais e entidades de
comunidad
30%
Plataformas
20%
10%
0%
ONG e entidades interm•dias,
n’vel nacional
Igrejas
Organiza¨›es Internacionais
Projectos
Orämentos
A major concern that the study team heard about the EIDHR was that the call for proposals was seen as
inaccessible for local NGOs due to what almost everyone regarded as the complicated and administratively
bureaucratic nature of the application form. It was felt that this favoured groups who had previous experience in
filling out these forms and that such administrative capacity was not necessarily a reflection on other aspects of
their potential to implement effective, efficient, sustainable and relevant projects which had a real impact on human
rights and democracy in Angola. The EIDHR call for proposals may, therefore, be artificially strengthening the
influence of some civil society groups at the expense of others.
As discussed above some of the EIDHR supported projects seem to have spread themselves too thinly across too
many provinces and municipalities and this was a particular problem when national or international NGOs
partnered with local NGOs whom they then failed to properly support or supervise. The call for proposals states
that the objective of the program is to assist local civil society in the creation of more cohesion in its work on
human rights, but it can be seen from the table below, that far less financial support is given to local networks
(organized geographically or thematically) and national platforms than to international NGOs.
This issue is closely related to the management of the EIDHR fund by the EU Delegation, which is discussed
further below. The call for proposals and the EIDHR itself need to be more closely integrated with the EU’s other
two financial instruments: the support for Non-State Actors and the European Development Fund, with the EIDHR
being used to add strategic value to the other two funds from the specific perspective of strengthening democracy
and supporting human rights. The following section provides an overview of the way in which the three funds are
currently being managed by the EU and suggests how the three could be more closely aligned in the future.
4. ROLE OF THE EC
4.1 Complementarities between instruments (EIDHR, EDF and NSA/LA)
In order to implement directly or indirectly human rights and democracy strategies in Angola the EU has currently
three financing instruments. i) the EIDHR that aims at “Strengthening the role of civil society in promoting human
rights and democratic reform, in supporting the peaceful conciliation of group interests and consolidating political
participation and representation”. ii) the Programme for Non State Actors/ Local Authorities in Development
(NSA/LA) which aims at strengthening civil society and local authorities as a pre-condition for a more equitable,
open and democratic society. iii) The European Development Fund that has several programs outside of the good
governance programme area, in education and strengthening of Non State Actors (NSA).
I
23 Mar ch 2010
4.2 NSA/LA Programme
In the last years the objective of the NSA/LA program (€ 2,2 millions) was to have the largest possible impact in
the strengthening of civil society and in the coordination with other activities financed by the European
Commission in the country, namely the EIDHR and the Non-State Actors Support Programme (PAANE) of the 9th
EDF. This instrument has three main components; i) support to development actions to be implemented by NSA or
Local authorities, ii) support to EU actions and increasing of public awareness on development related issues, iii)
encourage synergies and facilitate a structured dialogue on development themes between civil society networks and
associations of local authorities from Angola and the EU.
To achieve this, the program has encouraged a concentration of efforts on improving local government through
reinforcing the capacity of the Councils for Auscultation and Social Cooperation (CASC) that function as a ‘forum’
for the dialogue among civil society and local authorities. Special attention is being given to the design and
coordination of local policies and to the creation of an environment of peace and social justice.
On paper it is necessary and indisputable that the NSA/LA Program complements the EIDHR program. The
NSA/LA builds bridges between the local authorities and civil society organizations creating spaces for
consultation and leading the NSA to participate in the local public debate. However, in practice the relationship
does not appear to be so complimentary. Except for the biggest national and international organizations (ADRA,
DW, VIS) based in Luanda, very few implementing organizations or contractors of EIDHR projects know or
benefit from the grants made available by the NSA/LA Programme. This situation is due to restricted
announcements circulating mainly via internet when the majority of local partners have very limited access to this
sort of communications (Lundas, Bié, Moxico, etc.). Eventually, there might also be some retention of information
by certain actors to whom an excessive decentralization of projects is not perceived as convenient.
4.3 9°FED
The Cotonou Agreement defines the important role of Non State Actors. The 9th EDF considered the support to
NSA´s through the EC Support Programme for Non-State Actors (PAANE) which has a budget of 3 million Euros.
This programme will most likely be extended as a thematic programme of the 10th EDF with the purpose of
increasing dialogue and cooperation among national authorities and civil society to promote a democratic process
and a more equitable economical growth.
The existence of the support program to NSA´s has been crucial to the identification of human rights NSA´s at the
regional level and more specifically to the execution of projects supported by EIDHR. The Support programme for
NSA´s allows the reinforcement of civil society still very fragile with little experience in the management of
projects co-financed by international donors.
The several trainings given by PAANNE on project management, the assistance given to the processes of state
decentralization, communication and institutional strengthening, as well as the international exchanges and
sporadic support to staging several events (Conferences and civil society forums, the UPR process in Geneva, etc.)
are indispensable for the formation of an Angolan civil society which is competent and structured at regional and
national level.
However, the EIDHR is the only EU mechanism that offers NSA´s the means and conditions to develop middle
term actions and initiatives capable of influencing the public policies of political decision-makers (state,
economical, traditional or religious) and of proposing a credible alternative expertise in the defense of Human
Rights.
We should underline some limitations in the execution of PAANE that may have inhibited its capacity to
complement EIDHR. It is PAANE´s role to prioritize the engagement (namely to execute its micro-projects) with
those less well known and more fragile NSA´s, defenders of Human Rights, based in locations that donors usually
overlook (Cuando-Cubango, Namibe, Uige, Cabinda, Moxico, Lunda Sul and Luanda Norte). The program has all
the mechanisms and means necessary to identify and provide structure to those local civil society associations that
have little experience or have never worked with international donors. Therefore, the identification and the
strengthening of this kind of organization should be facilitated. But the request for proposals of both PAANE and
EIDHR constitute an important obstacle to those NSA´s that in many cases propose Human Rights defense
practices that are interesting but that do not have the know-how or sufficient experience in the elaboration of
proposals (PADOC registry, contracting forms, etc.). PAANE should provide more prolonged and tailored support
I
23 Mar ch 2010
in this area.
It is also necessary to highlight the difficulties that NSA´s have in differentiating clearly between the different
budget lines granted by the EC. Some local contractor associations, partners or beneficiaries from EIDHR or
NSA/LA projects ignore, after many years of implementation, that the funds and activities from which they benefit
are made available by the European Union (ex: SFCG, COIEPA, CEAST, etc.). This situation contributes to the
lack of visibility of national or regional NSA´s on the EC global strategy of support to the civil society and defense
of human rights. The promotion of a communications plan at regional level will allow the different grants
mechanisms to be more appreciated and to give more visibility to the activities as well as emphasizing the fact that
the EU is actually the biggest donor in the Human Rights sector in Angola. An improvement in the understanding
of the intervention strategy of the EU in Angola by the NSA/LA will support further improvements in the project
proposals and better complement the projects financed by the three grant mechanisms (PAANE, EIDHR, NSA/LA)
4.4 Request for Proposals
The use of the tender process as a main mechanism to support defense of human rights activities might seem
inadequate, especially in respect to the long term promotion of a sector strategy. Activism in the human rights area
implies the promotion of specific actions, a long term effort and a capacity of civil society organizations to respond.
The focus on short and medium term projects as implemented by the EU restricts the activities of NGO´s.
Table 8. Reasons for rejection during the first stage of selection of projects of EIDHR – 2005-2009 Tender
N‹o foi apresentada uma vers‹o
electr—nica
3%
Declara¨‹o do requerente ausente
ou n‹o assinada
3%
Per’odo de execu¨‹o n‹o eleg’vel
3%
O orämento n‹o foi expressado
correctamente
Aus ncia de quadro l—gico ou quadro
l—gico incorrecto
3%
5%
N‹o foi utilizado o formul‡rio de
pedido de subven¨‹o adequado
5%
Inscri¨‹o legal ao Minist•rio da
Justiä Š Convite 2005
5%
L’ngua da proposta n‹o eleg’vel
6%
Faltaram as declara¨›es de parceria
6%
N‹o foi apresentado o ultimo relat—rio
financeiro de actividade
8%
20%
Contribui¨‹o solicitada n‹o eleg’vel
33%
N‹o foi apresentada a Concept Note
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
It is also important to highlight that many of the NGOs whose projects were rejected as well as beneficiaries of the
instrument complain about the complexity of EU´s procedures for submitting proposals. However it is important to
see this analysis in context, table 8 clearly demonstrates that the majority of the errors can be avoided (76%) by the
I
23 Mar ch 2010
applicants; absence of concept note, submission of proposals in an ineligible language, signatures of partnership
declarations, missing electronic versions of proposals, etc. Only 24% of proposals were rejected due to reasons
directly related to lack of competency of the applicant authority; i) non existence of the last financial report of
activities – many NGOs do not have this sort of document. ii) Incorrect logical framework. iii) Budgeting and form
filling errors – lack of competency in terms of project design. iv) lack of electronic version of the proposals as
some of the associations have limited access to IT assets.
Table 9. Percentage of approved proposals in every stage of the selection process of EIDHR annual call for
proposals – 2006/2009.
,4
71
,5%
69
%
,5% ,5%
53 53
%
50
%
50
,7% ,7%
35 35
,4
30
,3%
35
%
,5%
23
,7% ,7%
21 21
2006
,8% ,8%
17 17
2007
Etapa 1 - Verifica¨‹o administrativa
Etapa 3 - Avalia¨‹o da proposta completa
,6%
17
2008
2009
Etapa 2 - Avalia¨‹o da Concept Note
Etapa 4 - Verifica¨‹o final da elegibilidade
Table 9 shows that the administrative verification (Stage 1 of the selection process) has not always been the biggest
reason for the rejection of applications. In the call for proposals of 2006 and 2007 respectively, 39% and 21, 5% of
the proposals were excluded during the second stage of the selection process (evaluation of the Concept Note). We
can then deduce that the determining selection factor is not the administrative part but the pertinence and
methodology of the technical proposal. However, this tendency has been changing in the last years, the substantial
increase in the number of proposals received by DUE (2008 – 28, 2009 – 34 see table 10) has encouraged the
evaluation committee to be stricter in the first stage of the evaluation process. In the last two calls for proposals
(2008 and 2009) 46, 5% and 50% of the proposals were rejected in the administrative verification stage. The
inaptitude of the NSAs applicants to submit a proposal administratively acceptable reveals huge deficiencies in
terms of project management. However, in the actual post-conflict context the Angolan civil society remains very
frail (especially in the most remote regions) and it is up to the donor to adapt their procedures to the national
reality. A better technical support as well as a higher flexibility during selection process would contribute to an
increase in the participation of applicants, as well as to improve the visibility of the EU.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
Table 10: Number of proposals received in the framework of the call for proposals of EIDHR (2005-2009) and
respective amounts granted.
40
1000000
900000
35
34
800000
30
28
700000
25
600000
23
20
21
500000
400000
15
14
300000
10
200000
5
100000
0
0
2005
2006
2007
Numero de propostas recebidas
2008
2009
Montante disponibilizado (•)
5. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A list of findings and recommendations is provided below and in the annexes to this report. However, three broad
conclusions should be highlighted from within them.
First of all, the EU is the largest single donor supporting human rights and civil society in Angola today. This
support is seen by these actors as invaluable to their continued existence and to opening up the space in which civil
society can operate. The scale-down of the activities of humanitarian organizations in Angola and the departure of
OHCHR has led to a consequent reduction of financial support and strategic coordination of many human rights
and democracy-related activities. This has placed increasing expectations on the EU Delegation and civil society
clearly looks to it not just as a donor, but as a ‘champion of human rights and democracy’.
Secondly, the EIDHR has been used to fund a fairly narrow range of ‘promotional’ activities, whose impact and
benefits are very difficult to measure. It has given far less support to direct interventions in defence of human
rights or to research on and monitoring of Angola’s human rights record. These should be priority areas of work,
but the current call for proposals fails to target funding towards them. The EU should consider how to adapt the
call for proposals to provide more focused support for research monitoring and legal advocacy.
A prioritization should be introduced within the call for proposals to ensure that certain percentages of funds are
given to support certain thematic areas and activities. This should be accompanied by a modification of the CRIS
database in Brussels. The aim should be to provide more focused support for research monitoring and legal
advocacy. This will also require changes at the Brussels level. The EU should continue to coordinate the EIDHR
funding process with other donors and with other EU budget lines. It should also continue to explore how to
develop a basket fund for funding human rights activity in priority thematic areas or for certain types of activity.
The EU should establish some small-scale monitoring, research and advocacy projects (less than 10,000 Euros) in
particular target themes or provinces. These could be used as pilot models whose approach could be replicated on a
larger scale. Angolan NGOs may need greater training and support on how to use international monitoring,
reporting and advocacy mechanisms and on monitoring economic, social and cultural rights.
Thirdly, the EIDHR application process is almost universally regarded as very bureaucratic, difficult and timeconsuming and this discourages applications by many smaller national NGOs and significantly narrows the range
I
23 Mar ch 2010
of organizations who apply for financial support. At the same time there appears to be insufficient ‘hands-on’
management support and monitoring to funded projects. The EU Delegation needs to address these administrative
problems simultaneously, which will clearly have an impact on the staffing support required to administer the fund.
More administrative support needs to be given both to the management of the fund itself and to funded NGOs to
help them with reporting requirements.
The EIDHR should be more closely integrated with PAANE, which
should establish regional antennae in certain provinces in the east and north of Angola to proactively reinforce the
activities of local civil society actors in relation to human rights and democracy. The EIDHR should also introduce
a two week period of ‘tolerance’ to allow applicants to correct administrative mistakes.
Findings
Global:
• EIDHR is the largest single donor supporting human rights and civil society actors in Angola today. This
support is seen by them as invaluable to their continued existence and to opening up the space in which
civil society can operate.
• The scale-down of the activities of humanitarian organizations in Angola and the departure of the UN
Office for the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has led to a consequent reduction of
financial support and strategic coordination of many human rights and democracy-related activities. This
has placed increasing expectations on the EU Delegation and civil society clearly looks to it not just as a
donor, but as a ‘champion of human rights and democracy’.
• Although some projects that the study team visited prominently highlighted the support that they were
receiving from the EU, the practice was varied.
• The proportion of contracted fees for the EIDHR budget line for the period 2003 – 2009 that was actually
paid out is quite low, which may indicate a failure by many organizations who received support failed to
submit adequate financial and technical reports.
• The EIDHR application process is almost universally regarded as very bureaucratic, difficult and timeconsuming and this discourages applications by many smaller national NGOs. This significantly narrows
the range of organizations who apply for financial support. At the same time there appears to be
insufficient ‘hands-on’ management support and monitoring to funded projects.
• The EU needs to address the two administrative problems listed above simultaneously, which will clearly
have an impact on the staffing support required to administer the EIDHR.
• The EU has funded a fairly narrow range of ‘promotional’ activities through the EIDHR, whose impact and
benefits are very difficult to measure. It has given far less support to direct interventions in defence of
human rights or to research and monitoring on Angola’s human rights record. These should be priority
areas of work, but the current call for proposals fails to target funding towards them.
• Angolan NGOs may need greater training and support on how to use international monitoring, reporting
and advocacy mechanisms and on monitoring economic, social and cultural rights.
Relevance
• The thematic areas identified in the call for proposals were found to be relevant, but this was not always
fully reflected in the project activities that were actually funded. The thematic categorization is not the one
usually used under international law
• The study team believes that the right to political participation and freedom of expression was a relevant
priority area during the period 2003 – 2009 and it was adequately supported by the EIDHR. Freedom of
expression is likely to remain a relevant priority in the short to medium term.
• The study team believes that research, monitoring and advocacy on economic, social and cultural rights
(including housing land and property rights) was also a relevant priority thematic area during the period
2003 – 2009 and is likely to remain one in the short to medium term. Although some land rights projects
have been supported, in this area, the general area of monitoring economic, social and cultural rights has
not been supported sufficiently.
• Gender has not been adequately integrated as a cross-cutting issue.
• The study team believes that the issue of non-discrimination and protection of vulnerable groups is a
relevant thematic priority.
• Access to justice has also not been integrated as a cross-cutting theme although some organizations do
operate a referral system to legal aid projects in specific cases of violations of human rights.
• There does not appear to have been any significant consultation with Angolan civil society about what
these thematic priority areas should be.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
•
•
Not all of the activities supported seemed directly relevant to the thematic area identified.
The overall balance of funding does not appear to be being used in accordance with the overall objective of
strengthening the cohesion of civil society groups working on human rights.
Quality
• The quality of the activities that the evaluation team observed was extremely variable, which largely
reflected the capacity and management strength of the project implementers. One recurring problem was
when a Luanda-based or an international NGO partnered with a local organization based in the provinces
and then failed to either properly supervise or support their activities. Projects that were funded and
implemented by the same organization appeared to deliver better quality activities, particularly when they
were based in the province in which they were implementing their activities.
• By far the largest group of activities involved the promotion of human rights but there appear to have been
very few attempts to measure the quality of the promotional materials produced. The publications that the
evaluation team saw were of variable quality and most groups had failed to evaluate how attendees at the
various workshops and seminars rated them.
• The one legal assistance project that was supported failed to indicate how many cases it intended to take to
court or solve through mediation. Some of the logical frameworks made completely unrealistic claims
about the projected impacts of their projects, which will make subsequent evaluation difficult
Efficiency and cost-effectiveness
• The difficulties of assessing the impact of human rights projects makes it difficult to assess their efficiency
and cost-effectiveness. Clearly, increasing the impact of projects, without increasing expenditure on them,
will make them more effective and efficient.
• A total of €7 007 872,45 were contracted for the EIDHR between 2003 and 2009 of which €5 129 577,67
was paid out by the EU Delegation to fund activities by supported projects. This represents 73.19 per cent
of the total, which is a low figure (although some projects are still open for 2009) which indicates that the
EU Delegation did not disburse the final grant allocation. This could indicate that the funds were
exceptionally well-managed and did not need all of their budget allocation, but it seems more likely to be
due to a failure by many organizations that received support to submit adequate financial and technical
reports.
• Most funding through the EIDHR has been to international NGOs, which is likely to be more expensive
than funding national or local NGOs. The EIDHR application process appears particularly difficult for the
latter group to navigate. The study team’s main concern relating to efficiency is that the current lack of
monitoring of supported projects by the EU Delegation makes it very difficult to assess how well or badly
projects are being managed. The team believe that more staffing resources are needed to manage the fund
and that the EU Delegation needs to continue to explore ways of carrying out more monitoring missions to
the field.
Impact
• The cumulative effect of all of the election monitoring, civic education and conflict resolution projects
probably had a positive impact on the conduct of the 2008 elections.
• Raising awareness about particular laws (such as a new land law) or particular social issues (such as HIV,
violence against women or discrimination against disabled people) can be effective.
• The direct impact of small-scale human rights promotional activities that are implemented in isolation from
other strategies is virtually impossible to evaluate, but likely to be minimal. Projects which promote
universal human rights in general but fail to deal directly with specific violations in a particular society
may even have a negative impact by increasing cynicism about the rights themselves.
• Projects aimed at targeted vulnerable groups can also have a measurable impact.
• Direct legal assistance has been shown to have a potentially very significant impact in situations where the
rule of law is weak and the authorities often act in an unaccountable manner.
• Small-scale monitoring of prisons or training of police and prison staff by human rights groups is not likely
to have much impact.
• The production of community bulletins and training community groups on journalistic skills is also likely
to have minimal impact.
Sustainability
I
23 Mar ch 2010
•
The protection and promotion of human rights is an ongoing activity that requires constant monitoring and
interventions. The weight given to sustainability criteria in project evaluations should reflect this. Since
the team was unable to see the actual scoring of project proposals, it is unable to state whether or not this is
currently being done.
Practical recommendations and future interventions
1. The EU Delegation needs to communicate more effectively with civil society about its role, purpose and
mandate and provide strong diplomatic and moral support to civil society actors in general and human
rights defenders in particular.
2. The EU Delegation should also take more steps to publicize the existence of the EIDHR fund and the
application process.
3. Supported projects should be encouraged to do more to highlight and publicize the support that they are
receiving.
4. The EU Delegation should maintain and increase the EIDHR fund and consider how it can be used more
strategically. A prioritization should be introduced within the call for proposals to ensure that certain
percentages of funds are given to support certain thematic areas and certain types of activity. This should
be accompanied by a modification of the CRIS database in Brussels.
5. The EU should adapt the EIDHR call for proposals to provide more focused support for research
monitoring and legal advocacy. This will require changes at the Brussels level.
6. The EIDHR should be more closely integrated with PAANE, which should establish regional antennae in
certain provinces in the east and north of Angola to proactively reinforce the activities of local civil society
actors in relation to human rights and democracy.
7. The EU should categorize thematic areas according to standard definitions of human rights law. It should
prioritize support for research, monitoring and advocacy in a small number of thematic areas.
8. The EU should consult civil society on what these thematic areas should be.
9. While civil society should be consulted on these themes, the study team believes that they should include
the right to political participation and freedom of expression as one area and economic, social and cultural
rights (including land rights) as another. Access to justice should be a cross-cutting theme. Support for
non-discrimination/rights of vulnerable groups should also be prioritized as a separate category and a crosscutting theme.
10. Projects should be categorized according to the provinces in which they are being implemented, the type of
activity that they are undertaking and the type of organization implementing them (national/ international
NGO, Church group, national platform or network).
11. The EU should establish some small-scale monitoring, research and advocacy projects (less than 10,000
Euros) in particular target themes or provinces. These could be used as pilot models whose approach could
be replicated on a larger scale
12. Greater resources need to be devoted to administrative support and management of EIDHR projects by the
EU Delegation. Although the projects are comparatively small in financial terms, the activities involved
are often complex and politically sensitive.
13. More training and support should be provided to Angolan NGOs on issues such as formulating project
proposals and reporting on activities.
14. More training should also be provided on human rights monitoring, including guides to using international
mechanisms and training on human rights research and advocacy.
15. More administrative support needs to be given both to the management of the fund itself and to funded
NGOs to help them with reporting requirements.
16. The EU should introduce a two week period of ‘tolerance’ to allow applicants to correct administrative
mistakes in their applications.
17. The EU should continue to coordinate the EIDHR funding process with other donors and with other EU
budget lines. It should also continue to explore how to develop a basket fund for funding human rights
activity in priority thematic areas or for certain types of activity.
18. The EU should continue to support particular thematic promotional campaigns in priority thematic areas
through the EIDHR, but the number of general human rights promotional campaigns should be reduced and
such projects should not be supported unless they can realistically demonstrate a tangible impact.
19. The EU should not be used to support small-scale prison inspections or security force training by human
rights groups through the EIDHR unless these are done in conjunction with other relevant activities. Such
projects are usually better implemented as technical cooperation projects with governments although civil
I
23 Mar ch 2010
society groups can play a supporting a monitoring role. Human rights groups should be supported to carry
out independent monitoring of conditions in places of detention and intervening on behalf of people who
claim to have suffered violations of their rights.
20. The EIDHR should be used to support more access to justice projects and, in particular, to increase legal
aid services to people outside Luanda and strategic litigation in priority areas.
21. The call for proposals needs to be revised at both the country level and globally, to give greater weight
towards monitoring, research and advocacy as these are the activities that are likely to have the most
sustainable impact on Angolan society.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
ANNEXES
ANNEX 1. Programa de avaliação implementado entre os 14/02 e o 13/03/2010.
1. Encontros e visitas realizadas:
Data
15/2
16/2
17/2
18/2
19/2
20/2
21/2
22/2
23/2
24/2
25/2
26/2
Actividade
Equipa C18:
Primeiro contacto com a DUE
Equipa B19:
Chegada
Equipa A20:
Briefing com a DUE, início do estudo
Equipa A:
Encontros com vários actores em Luanda
(ADRA, DW, PAANE, ACC, Omunga)
Equipa A:
Encontros com vários actores em Luanda
(AJUDECA, SOS Habitat, Embaixada
Holandesa)
Equipa A:
Visita de terreno com SOS Habitat.
Encontro com Carlos Figueiredo, consultor.
Descanso
Equipa A:
Encontros com actores em Luanda (Trocaire,
Open Society, DW) e com a ACC da Huíla.
Equipa A:
Encontros com actores em Luanda (Mãos
Livres, Cooperação Espanhola, Padres
Salesianos de Dom Bosco/VIS, BBC Trust...)
Equipa B:
Viagem Luanda - Sumbe.
Encontros com actores no Sumbe (ASBC,
AMC).
Equipa C:
Contactos telefónicos com Rede Terra, AJPD,
CFCG, para marcar encontros + tentativa
falhada de viagem à província de Moxico.
Equipa B:
Encontros com actores no Sumbe (COIEPA,
Rede Eleitoral, AMC...)
Viagem Sumbe - Benguela
Equipa C:
Viagem para Luena, Moxico.
Encontros com actores na Luena
Equipa B:
Objectivo
Obtenção de documentação adicional à
enviada por e-mail
Planificação do trabalho para o estudo
Aprovação do plano de trabalho
Análise da sua actuação e do contexto
Encontros com vitimas de demolições
em 2 bairros.
Análise do contexto
18
Consultor Junior 2 – Bert Fret
19
Consultores Senior 1 e Junior 3 – Conor Foley + Clément Lorvão
20
Consultor Senior 1, Juniores 2 e 3 – Conor Foley + Bert Fret + Clément Lorvão.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
Encontro com actores em Benguela (ML, IECA,
CEAR, UTCH,...)
27/2
Equipa C:
Encontros com actores em Luena
Equipa B:
Encontro com actores em Benguela e no Lobito
(Omunga, LARDEF,...)
28/2
Equipa C:
Encontros com actores em Luena, e
viagem de regresso a Luanda
Equipa B:
Encontros com actores em Benguela
(Solcicampo, Rede Eleitoral)
Redacção do relatório
1/3
2/3
3/3
4/3
5/3
Consolidação e analise dos encontros em
Benguela, Lobito e Sumbe.
Equipa C:
Encontro com Guilherme Santos e Rosário
Advirta, Descanso
Equipa B:
Viagem Benguela - Huambo
Preparação das entrevistas no Huambo
Equipa C:
Viagem para Cuango, Lunda Norte, com
paragem na Xá-muteba.
Equipa B:
Encontros com actores no Huambo (ML, CAAPI
2, INACAD, Rede Eleitoral, ASCA).
Equipa C:
Encontros com autoridades e actores no Cuango.
Equipa B:
Encontros com actores no Huambo (LARDEF,
DW, FAE).
Redacção do relatório
Equipa C:
Encontros com actores no Luremo e no Cafunfo
Equipa B:
Viagem Huambo - Kuito - Huambo
Encontros com actores no Kuito (UTCAH,
CARE, Angola 2000).
Equipa C:
Viagem de regresso a Luanda com paragem na
Xá-Muteba.
Equipa B:
Workshop no Huambo com os membros do
Fórum da Sociedade civil no Huambo (CEMAC,
ADRA, DW, FAE, APDS, ASCA, OISC,...).
Relatório
Consolidação e analise dos primeiros
encontros no Huambo.
Consolidação e analise dos encontros no
Kuito e Huambo + Workshop.
Equipa C:
Encontros em Luanda: Rede Terra e SFCG.
Preparação do workshop e dos convites
I
23 Mar ch 2010
6/3
7/3
8/3
9/3
10/3
11/3
12/3
13/3
Equipa B:
Viagem Huambo - Luanda
Equipa C:
Relatório
Equipa A:
Junção da informação recolhida pelas duas
equipas. Relatório.
Equipa A:
Trabalho na equipa, preparação do relatório e do
Workshop.
Equipa A:
Análise dos processos chumbados na DUE e do
desempenho financeiro dos projecto com a
secção contratos e finanças na DUE.
Preparação relatório
Encontros em Luanda (AJPD)
Encontro de ponto de situação na DUE.
Equipa A:
Workshop de restituição às pessoas de recurso
externo e aos entrevistados
Equipa A:
Últimos encontros em Luanda, e preparação do
relatório
Equipa A:
Encontro de debriefing com a DUE-Luanda
Equipa B:
Viagem de regresso
Consolidação das análises feitas.
Consolidação das análises feitas,
elaboração de recomendações
Consolidação das análises feitas,
elaboração de recomendações
Validação da análise.
Redacção
Validação da análise.
Equipa C:
Finalização do relatório
Viagem de regresso dia 14/03
2. Províncias visitadas:
Luanda: cidade e alguns bairros novos (os 3 consultores juntos)
Kwanza-Sul, Benguela, Huambo, Bié (Conor e Clement, pela estrada);
Moxico (Bert, de avião), Lunda Norte (Bert, parte oueste só, pela estrada)
ANNEX 2. Documentos consultados:
- O processo de transição para o multipartidarismo em Angola, Nuno Vidal e Justino Pinto de Andrade, 2006,
- Sociedade Civil e Política em Angola, Enquadramento regional e internacional, Nuno Vidal e Justino Pinto de
Andrade, 2008.
- Southern Africa: Civil Society, Politics and Donor Strategies, Nuno Vidal and Patrick Chabal, 2009.
- Tony Hodges, Angola: From Afro-Stalinism to Petrodiamond Capitalism, James Curry &
Indiana University Press, 2001
- Jenny Clover, ‘Land Reform in Angola: Establishing the Ground Rules’, in Chris Huggins and Jenny Clover
(eds), From the Ground Up: Land Rights, Conflict and Peace in Sub-Saharan Africa, African Centre for
Technology Studies and the African Security Analysis Programme of the Institute for Security Studies, June 2005
- Paul Robson (ed), What To Do When the Fighting Stops, Challenges for Post-conflict Reconstruction in Angola,
Development Workshop Occasional Paper No. 7, 2006.
- Inge Amundsen and Cesaltina Abreu, Civil Society in Angola: Inroads, Space and Accountability, CHR
Michelson, Institute, 2006,
- Fernando Pacheco, ‘Rural Communities in Huambo’, in Communities and Reconstruction in Angola,
Development Workshop Occasional Paper no. 1, 2001
I
23 Mar ch 2010
- Frederic Deve, Lessons Learning in Policy Assistance, Case Study Angola, ‘Support to a Decentralised Land
Management Programme, FAO, February 2007.
- Allan Cain, ‘Urban Poverty and Civic Development in Post-war Angola’, in Preparing for Peace Workshop on
Future Swedish and Norwegian Development Cooperation with Angola, Chr. Michelsen Institute Report, April
2002.
- Documento para Estratégia o Pais e Programa Indicativo Nacional para o Período 2009 - 2013.
- Country Level Evaluation Angola, 8th 2009, ECO Consult, AGEG, APRI, Euronet, IRAM, NCG.
- Mapping das organizações da sociedade civil angolana – 12a Missão de curto prazo, Outubro -Novembro 2009
- UN Food and Agricultural Organisation, ‘Charting Angola’s Future’, FAO newsroom, 23 April 2002.
- Angola: Country economic memorandum, Oil, broad-based growth, and equity, the World Bank, June 2006
- Development Workshop, Terra Firma, Urban Land Reform in Post-war Angola, Occasional Paper No. 5, 2005.
- Sociedade civil Angolana: veículo democrático de participaçao pública, II Conferencia Angolana sociedade civil
2008/2009
- Relatórios das 3 conferências Angolanas da sociedade civil (2007 and 2008).
- Human Rights Watch, ‘They Pushed Down the Houses’, Forced Evictions and Insecure Land Tenure for Luanda’s
Urban Poor, HRW Index No.: A1907, 15 May 2007.
- Human Rights Watch, Still Not Fully Protected: Rights to Freedom of Expression and Information under
Angola’s New Press Law, HRW, 16 November 2006.
- Human Rights Watch, Angola: New OPEC Member Should Tackle Corruption Not Critics, 15 December 2006
- Human Rights Watch, Democracy or monopoly, Angola’s reluctant return to elections, February 2009
- Amnesty International Public Statement – Angola Amnesty urges member states to participate in the Universal
Periodic Review of Angola, 29 January 2010.
- Amnesty International, Angola: Lives in Ruins, Forced Evictions Continue, AI Index: AFR 12/001/2007, 15
January 2007.
- Amnesty International, Suggestions of questions and recommendations to be addressed to the Angolan
government for the Universal Periodic Review.
- Miloon Kothari, ‘Human Rights Expert Expresses Serious Concern about Persistent Practice of Forced Evictions
in Angola, UN Office at Geneva’, News and media, 30 March 2006,
- Leitura de documentação sobre 12 financiamentos realizados pelo IEDDH em Angola.
- Leitura de relatórios finais sobre 11 financiamentos no âmbito do IEDDH, recebidos na DUE-Luanda no 15/2/10
- Consulta de 26 Quadros Lógicos de projectos financiados pelo IEDDH.
- Consulta dos dossiers das propostas chumbadas/recusadas.
- Convite publico à apresentação de propostas da linha orçamental 21.03.01 versão 2008 – Programa para actores
não estatais e autoridades locais do desenvolvimento.
- Convite publico à apresentação de propostas do PAANE do 3 Abril 2009 – referencia:
07/PAANE.9.ACP.ANG.019.
- Convite publico à apresentação de propostas da linha orçamental 19.04.01 versão 2009 – IEDDH.
-UN Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 4, The right to adequate housing
(Art.11 (1)), Sixth session, 13/12/91;
-UN Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights General Comment 7, The right to adequate housing
(Art.11.1): forced evictions, 16th Session, 20/05/97.
UN Human Rights Council for Angola’s Universal Periodic Review
- National report submitted in accordance with paragraph 15 (a) of the annex to Human Rights
Council resolution 5/1* Angola, UN Doc A/HRC/WG.6/7/AGO/1, December 2009
- Compilation prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, in accordance with paragraph
15(b) of the annex to human rights council resolution 5/1, Angola, UN Doc A/HRC/WG.6/7/AGO/2, 11 November
2009
- Summary prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, in accordance with paragraph 15
(c) of the annex to human rights council resolution 5/1, Angola, summary of 11 stakeholder submissions, UN Doc
A/HRC/WG.6/7/AGO/3 6 November 2009
I
23 Mar ch 2010
ANNEX 3. Projectos visitados ou contactados:
- Lei de Terras anotada (EIDHR/2008/164-577).
- Enhancing the capacity of Media and Civil Society to contribute sustainable peace in Angola (DDH/2005/112398).
- Vozes da Paz – Ondaka (DDH/2007/143-466).
- Projecto de apoio à promoção de igualdade de participação e representação política entre homens e mulheres em
XA-Muteba e Cuango – Lunda norte (EIDHR/2008/164-550).
- Construtores da Democracia (DDH-2006-110014).
- Contribuir para o fortalecimento do processo de democratização (DDH-2006-110035).
- DDH/2006/131-975 – NCC.
- Projecto de apoio aos processos eleitorais democráticos (DDH/2006/110-016).
- Educação cívica e observação eleitoral (DDH/2006/131-716).
- National civic and electoral education programme in Angola (DDH/2006/131-752).
- The church and construction of Peace in Angola (DDH/2003/055990).
- Projecto de apoio à prevenção, transformação e resolução de conflitos (DDH/2006/131-991).
- Iniciativa para a promoção da paz, reconciliação e edificação comunitária nas províncias de Benguela e do Bié
(EIDHR/2008/168-418).
- ELEVAR (DDH/2007/144-254).
- Promoção de uma cultura dos direitos humanos para uma cidadania activa e participativa (EIDHR/2008/164-574).
- Juventude e cidadania (EIDHR/2008/164-584).
- Projecto de defesa e difusão dos direitos humanos, cidadania e o exercício de voto (DDH/2006/109-972).
I
23 Mar ch 2010
ANNEX 4. Lista das pessoas entrevistadas durante a missão.
a) Luanda (34).
- Paula Cristina Fernandes, Responsável dept. sociedade civil da Delegação da União Europeia –Luanda.
- Filipa Corte Real, DUE
- Áurea Machado Pereira, DUE
- Aléxia Gamito, Directora do CDPA.
- Sergio Calundungo, Secretario Executivo, ADRA.
- Maria Concetta Tirzi, Coordenadora da assistência técnica do programa PAANE 9°FED.
- Pe. Jacinto Pio Wacussungo, ACC (Lubango).
- José Patrocínio, Omunga, (Lobito),
- Belisario dos Santos, Director do programa, DW.
- Euníce Inácio, ex-coordenadora do projecto PECE-II da DW.
- Manuel Pembele Mfulutoma, Coordenador da AJUDECA, (Cazenga)
- Rafael Morais, Membro da Direcção Executiva da SOS-Habitat.
- André Augusto, Presidente da mesa da AG da SOS Habitat.
- Manuel Pinto, Membro da Direcção Executiva da SOS Habitat.
- Alberto Sivi, Auxiliar de contabilidade da SOS Habitat.
- Machteld Cattrysse, Responsável do Programa de Direitos Humanos, Embaixada Holandesa.
- Agostinho João, Membro da Comissão de moradores do bairro Banga Wé (projecto Nova Vida).
- Francisca, membro da comissão de moradores do bairro Iraque (projecto Jardim do Eden).
- Carlos Figueiredo, consultor da JMJ Internacional.
- Mary Theresa Mc Bride, Programa Governação e DH, Trocaire.
- Rosário Advirta, Christian Aid.
- Allan Cain, Director, DW.
- Cecília Cassapi Gregório, ACC.
- Elias Isaac, Angola Program Manager, Open Society.
- Josep Puig, Coordenador Geral Cooperção Espanhola AECDI.
- Delfina Kapamba, Programa Governaça AECDI.
- Xavier Gabrera, AECDI.
- Salvador Freire, Secretário Executivo, Mãos Livres.
- Guilherme Firmino, Mãos Livros.
- Pe. Martin Lasarte, Salesianos de Dom Bosco.
- Søren Johannsen, Director, BBC Trust.
- André Mussema Jornalista e Chefe de Producção, BBC Trust.
- Guilherme Santos, ADRA e Centro de Estudos p/o Desenvolvimento.
- Bernardo de Castro, Secretario executivo da Rede Terra.
- Luis Jimbo, SFCG, Search for Common Ground.
- Antonio Ventura, Presidente AJPD
- Lucia Silveira, AJPD
- Mariana Soma, ADRA-Huila, coordenadora do CTH
b) Moxico (13)
- Pe. Jojo Katchappilly, responsável dos Salesianos de Dom Bosco em Luena.
- Ir. Gaston Fontaine, ecónomo dos Salesianos de Dom Bosco.
- Júlio Henrique, projecto «Juventude, Democracia e DH», Salesianos Dom Bosco.
- Neusa dos Santos e Oseias Ngola, colaboradores do projecto «Juventude, Democracia e DH»
- Felix de Jesus Cala, Delegado provincial das finanças.
- José Baptista Xiaia, coordenador adjunto da Comissão Justiça e Paz.
- Eduardo Satangwa, colaborador da Comissão Justiça e Paz.
- Domingos Fernando Cayeye, director artistico do «Núcleo de Artes Kissonde».
- Dom Jesus Tirso Blanco, bispo de Luena.
- Fernando Rodirigues Sayihemba, pastor, secretário da IEIA.
- Lucianos, vice secretário, e Dinis Kaley Samajane, missionário da IEIA.
- Francisco Direito Tchipango, secretário geral provincial do SINPROF.
- Nicola Calesso, enfermeiro do projecto de saúde do VIS em Luena.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
c) Lunda Norte (14)
- Augusto Chipuia Mwatchissengue, chefe da reparticção de educação municipal e coordinador da AJUDECA na
Xá-Muteba;
- Sergio Lufungula Kajiji, activista da ADDIGAL, associação de garimpeiros.
- Manuel Landu, director do Centro de Saúde de Cuango e coordenador municipal e provincial da AJUDECA no
Cuango e na Lunda Norte respectivamente, secretário da plataforma dos DH,
- Luís Martins da Sousa, coord. adj. da Assoc. das Coop. Agro Pec do Cuango (ACOAP-Cuango),
- Domingos Kabongo Mufuangeno, administrador municipal do Cuango.
- Dona Angélica, administradora municipal adjunta do Cuango,
- Regedor de Kisweia, com seu secretário Daniel Domingos Rocha, o seu adjunto Kitamba Ngunza, e com o soba
Kitamba Kipungo,
- Susana Felix, presidente da LIMA no Cuango.
- Ndongo Zinha, secretária da OMRS no Cuango.
- João Paca, substituto do administrador comunal de Luremo.
- João Manuel Kutuza e Ernesto António Kingengu, catequistas e activistas no Luremo.
- Américo Daniel, catequista e activista no Cafunfu.
- Pe. António Macoco Muiamba, pároco da parocchia São Francisco Xavier no Cafunfu.
d) Kwanza Sul (7)
- Roberto Katakisa, Director Executivo, ASBC, beneficiário dos projectos COIEPA e CEAST.
- Arnaldo José, Presidente da Rede Eleitoral, APN e EISA.
- Sr. Lubongo, Secretario administrativo da Rede Eleitoral.
- António Salas, Responsável COIEPA no Sumbe.
- Ernesto Cassinda, Director do Fórum Terra, AMC.
- Roc Umbar, Coordenador das actividades, AMC.
- Dona Inácia, Directora executiva, UCF.
e) Benguela (14)
- Martindo Xisengue, Coordenador de Programas, Mãos Livres.
- Sérgio Paralegris, assistente executivo, Mãos Livres.
- Sr. Ferreira, assistente, Mãos Livres e membro da IECA.
- Pablo Lopez Dean, Delegado Angola, Fundação CEAR, Habitafrica.
- Melo Costa, Coordenador UTCAH.
- Pastor Supuleta, ponto focal provincial do PAANE - membro do CACS, IECA.
- Pastora Ilda Valeria, Coordenadora das actividades do PAANE, IECA.
- Leonardo Eugénio Pinto, Director Executivo da SOLCICAMPO, coordenador da Rede Eleitoral e beneficiário
do projecto SFCG.
- José António Martins Patrocínio, Coordenador Geral, Omunga.
- Manuela Costa, Coordenadora do projecto IEDDH, Omunga.
- Marcial Songa, administrador, Omunga.
- João Manuel, Coordenador da Informação, Omunga.
- Abílio Xavier, Coordenador Geral, LARDEF.
f) Huambo (14)
- Francisco Rufino, Coordenador de Programas, Mãos Livres.
- Gonçalves Segunda, Director executivo, CAAPI 2, beneficiário dos projectos ASCA, SFCG e Mãos Livres.
- Abelo Arão, Director do INACAD e coordenador da Rede Eleitoral.
- Sr. Santa Rosa, Director executivo da ASCA.
- Luís Quintas, Coordenador, LARDEF.
- Pacheco Iliga, Coordenador, DW.
- Daniel Martins, editor e coordenador da ONDAKA, DW.
- Julião Paulo Kapiñgala, Director executivo, FAE, beneficiário dos projectos SFCG, ASCA, Mãos Livres e do
PAANE.
- Mathilde Olga, Administradora, FAE.
- Adolosi Mango, Director executivo, APDS, beneficiário dos projectos ASCA, SFCG e Mãos Livres.
- José Camilo Cuanda, Director executivo, OISC/SFA, beneficiário dos projectos ASCA, SFCG e Mãos Livres.
- Henriques Sangure Chingui, Coordenador, FAE, beneficiário dos projectos ASCA, SFCG e Mãos Livres.
- Silvino Sahungulo, Director executivo, CEMACA, beneficiário dos projectos Mãos Livres e SFCG.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
Associações do Fórum da sociedade civil que participaram ao Workshop da sexta-feira dia 5 de Março, nas
instalações da LARDEF Huambo (15): CEMACA, ASCA, APDS, ANDA, AJAPA, DW-Huambo, INACAD,
ADRA-Huambo, ADESPOV, LARDEF, Okutiuka, OISC/SFA, FAE, Projecto Elisa.
g) Bié (4)
- Paulo Sérgio, Director provincial, CARE.
- Félix Jenga, Coordenador, UTCAH.
- Tiago Lopes, Assistente, UTCAH.
- Joel Chivinda, Coordenador provincial do projecto PPM, Angola 2000.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
ANNEX 5. Table of problems encountered and adjustments
Problems encountered
1. Visiting some provinces was problematic
due to security situation and logistical
challenges
Adjustments
1. It was decided not to visit Cabinda so as
not to endanger local civil society actors.
The visit to Moxico went ahead despite
transport difficulties
2. Erratic phone network coverage in some
provinces made it difficult to set up
interviews in advance.
2. Many interviews were arranged face-toface and sometimes carried out on the
spot.
3. Permission to view the evaluation tables
showing the scores against which certain
projects had been approved or not
approved, was not granted by the EU
Delegation for reasons of confidentiality.
3. The consultants were able to obtain
sufficient information about the projects
that were and were not supported through
interviews and analysis of project
proposals and reports
4. The team was only supplied with
information on 28 out of the 40 projects
that the EIDHR had supported between
2003 and 2009
4. The team based its analysis of the
instrument on the 28 projects rather than
the full number.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
ANNEX 6. Synthetic Table of Verifications/Findings
Global:
• EIDHR is the largest single donor supporting human rights and civil society actors in Angola today. This
support is seen by them as invaluable to their continued existence and to opening up the space in which
civil society can operate.
• The scale-down of the activities of humanitarian organizations in Angola and the departure of the UN
Office for the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has led to a consequent reduction of
financial support and strategic coordination of many human rights and democracy-related activities. This
has placed increasing expectations on the EU Delegation and civil society clearly looks to it not just as a
donor, but as a ‘champion of human rights and democracy’.
• Although some projects that the study team visited prominently highlighted the support that they were
receiving from the EU, the practice was varied.
• The proportion of contracted fees for the EIDHR budget line for the period 2003 – 2009 that was actually
paid out is quite low, which may indicate a failure by many organizations who received support failed to
submit adequate financial and technical reports.
• The EIDHR application process is almost universally regarded as very bureaucratic, difficult and timeconsuming and this discourages applications by many smaller national NGOs. This significantly narrows
the range of organizations who apply for financial support. At the same time there appears to be
insufficient ‘hands-on’ management support and monitoring to funded projects.
• The EU needs to address the two administrative problems listed above simultaneously, which will clearly
have an impact on the staffing support required to administer the EIDHR.
• The EU has funded a fairly narrow range of ‘promotional’ activities through the EIDHR, whose impact and
benefits are very difficult to measure. It has given far less support to direct interventions in defence of
human rights or to research and monitoring on Angola’s human rights record. These should be priority
areas of work, but the current call for proposals fails to target funding towards them.
• Angolan NGOs may need greater training and support on how to use international monitoring, reporting
and advocacy mechanisms and on monitoring economic, social and cultural rights.
Relevance
• The thematic areas identified in the call for proposals were found to be relevant, but this was not always
fully reflected in the project activities that were actually funded. The thematic categorization is not the one
usually used under international law
• The study team believes that the right to political participation and freedom of expression was a relevant
priority area during the period 2003 – 2009 and it was adequately supported by the EIDHR. Freedom of
expression is likely to remain a relevant priority in the short to medium term.
• The study team believes that research, monitoring and advocacy on economic, social and cultural rights
(including housing land and property rights) was also a relevant priority thematic area during the period
2003 – 2009 and is likely to remain one in the short to medium term. Although some land rights projects
have been supported, in this area, the general area of monitoring economic, social and cultural rights has
not been supported sufficiently.
• Gender has not been adequately integrated as a cross-cutting issue.
• The study team believes that the issue of non-discrimination and protection of vulnerable groups is a
relevant thematic priority.
• Access to justice has also not been integrated as a cross-cutting theme although some organizations do
operate a referral system to legal aid projects in specific cases of violations of human rights.
• There does not appear to have been any significant consultation with Angolan civil society about what
these thematic priority areas should be.
• Not all of the activities supported seemed directly relevant to the thematic area identified.
• The overall balance of funding does not appear to be being used in accordance with the overall objective of
strengthening the cohesion of civil society groups working on human rights.
Quality
• The quality of the activities that the evaluation team observed was extremely variable, which largely
reflected the capacity and management strength of the project implementers. One recurring problem was
when a Luanda-based or an international NGO partnered with a local organization based in the provinces
I
23 Mar ch 2010
•
•
and then failed to either properly supervise or support their activities. Projects that were funded and
implemented by the same organization appeared to deliver better quality activities, particularly when they
were based in the province in which they were implementing their activities.
By far the largest group of activities involved the promotion of human rights but there appear to have been
very few attempts to measure the quality of the promotional materials produced. The publications that the
evaluation team saw were of variable quality and most groups had failed to evaluate how attendees at the
various workshops and seminars rated them.
The one legal assistance project that was supported failed to indicate how many cases it intended to take to
court or solve through mediationSome of the logical frameworks made completely unrealistic claims about
the projected impacts of their projects, which will make subsequent evaluation difficult
Efficiency and cost-effectiveness
• The difficulties of assessing the impact of human rights projects makes it difficult to assess their efficiency
and cost-effectiveness. Clearly, increasing the impact of projects, without increasing expenditure on them,
will make them more effective and efficient.
• A total of 7 007 872,45 € were contracted for the EIDHR between 2003 and 2009 of which 5 129 577,67 €
was paid out by the EU Delegation to fund activities by supported projects. This represents 73.19 per cent
of the total, which is a low figure (although some projects are still open for 2009) which indicates that the
EU Delegation did not disburse the final grant allocation. This could indicate that the funds were
exceptionally well-managed and did not need all of their budget allocation, but it seems more likely to be
due to a failure by many organizations that received support to submit adequate financial and technical
reports.
• Most funding through the EIDHR has been to international NGOs, which is likely to be more expensive
than funding national or local NGOs. The EIDHR application process appears particularly difficult for the
latter group to navigate.The study team’s main concern relating to efficiency is that the current lack of
monitoring of supported projects by the EU Delegation makes it very difficult to assess how well or badly
projects are being managed. The team believe that more staffing resources are needed to manage the fund
and that the EU Delegation needs to continue to explore ways of carrying out more monitoring missions to
the field.
Impact
• The cumulative effect of all of the election monitoring, civic education and conflict resolution projects
probably had a positive impact on the conduct of the 2008 elections.
• Raising awareness about particular laws (such as a new land law) or particular social issues (such as HIV,
violence against women or discrimination against disabled people) can be effective
• The direct impact of small-scale human rights promotional activities that are implemented in isolation from
other strategies is virtually impossible to evaluate, but likely to be minimal. Projects which promote
universal human rights in general but fail to deal directly with specific violations in a particular society
may even have a negative impact by increasing cynicism about the rights themselves.
• Projects aimed at targeted vulnerable groups can also have a measurable impact.
• Direct legal assistance has been shown to have a potentially very significant impact in situations where the
rule of law is weak and the authorities often act in an unaccountable manner
• Small-scale monitoring of prisons or training of police and prison staff by human rights groups is not likely
to have much impact
• The production of community bulletins and training community groups on journalistic skills is also likely
to have minimal impact.
Sustainability
• The protection and promotion of human rights is an ongoing activity that requires constant monitoring and
interventions. The weight given to sustainability criteria in project evaluations should reflect this. Since
the team was unable to see the actual scoring of project proposals, it is unable to state whether or not this is
currently being done.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
ANNEX 7. Table of practical recommendations and future interventions
22. The EU Delegation needs to communicate more effectively with civil society about its role, purpose and
mandate and provide strong diplomatic and moral support to civil society actors in general and human
rights defenders in particular.
23. The EU Delegation should also take more steps to publicize the existence of the EIDHR fund and the
application process.
24. Supported projects should be encouraged to do more to highlight and publicize the support that they are
receiving.
25. The EU Delegation should maintain and increase the EIDHR fund and consider how it can be used more
strategically. A prioritization should be introduced within the call for proposals to ensure that certain
percentages of funds are given to support certain thematic areas and certain types of activity. This should
be accompanied by a modification of the CRIS database in Brussels.
26. The EU should adapt the EIDHR call for proposals to provide more focused support for research
monitoring and legal advocacy. This will require changes at the Brussels level.
27. The EIDHR should be more closely integrated with PAANE, which should establish regional antennae in
certain provinces in the east and north of Angola to proactively reinforce the activities of local civil society
actors in relation to human rights and democracy.
28. The EU should categorize thematic areas according to standard definitions of human rights law. It should
prioritize support for research, monitoring and advocacy in a small number of thematic areas.
29. The EU should consult civil society on what these thematic areas should be.
30. While civil society should be consulted on these themes, the study team believes that they should include
the right to political participation and freedom of expression as one area and economic, social and cultural
rights (including land rights) as another. Access to justice should be a cross-cutting theme. Support for
non-discrimination/rights of vulnerable groups should also be prioritized as a separate category and a crosscutting theme.
31. Projects should be categorized according to the provinces in which they are being implemented, the type of
activity that they are undertaking and the type of organization implementing them (national/ international
NGO, Church group, national platform or network).
32. The EU should establish some small-scale monitoring, research and advocacy projects (less than 10,000
Euros) in particular target themes or provinces. These could be used as pilot models whose approach could
be replicated on a larger scale
33. Greater resources need to be devoted to administrative support and management of EIDHR projects by the
EU Delegation. Although the projects are comparatively small in financial terms, the activities involved
are often complex and politically sensitive.
34. More training and support should be provided to Angolan NGOs on issues such as formulating project
proposals and reporting on activities.
35. More training should also be provided on human rights monitoring, including guides to using international
mechanisms and training on human rights research and advocacy.
36. More administrative support needs to be given both to the management of the fund itself and to funded
NGOs to help them with reporting requirements.
37. The EU should introduce a two week period of ‘tolerance’ to allow applicants to correct administrative
mistakes in their applications
I
23 Mar ch 2010
38. The EU should continue to coordinate the EIDHR funding process with other donors and with other EU
budget lines. It should also continue to explore how to develop a basket fund for funding human rights
activity in priority thematic areas or for certain types of activity.
39. The EU should continue to support particular thematic promotional campaigns in priority thematic areas
through the EIDHR, but the number of general human rights promotional campaigns should be reduced and
such projects should not be supported unless they can realistically demonstrate a tangible impact.
40. The EU should not be used to support small-scale prison inspections or security force training by human
rights groups through the EIDHR unless these are done in conjunction with other relevant activities. Such
projects are usually better implemented as technical cooperation projects with governments although civil
society groups can play a supporting a monitoring role. Human rights groups should be supported to carry
out independent monitoring of conditions in places of detention and intervening on behalf of people who
claim to have suffered violations of their rights.
41. The EIDHR should be used to support more access to justice projects and, in particular, to increase legal
aid services to people outside Luanda and strategic litigation in priority areas.
42. The call for proposals needs to be revised at both the country level and globally, to give greater weight
towards monitoring, research and advocacy as these are the activities that are likely to have the most
sustainable impact on Angolan society.
ANNEX 8. Human rights typology and terminology
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) 1948 contains 30 articles which have subsequently been
elaborated in a number of international treaties. It first eight articles proclaim that everyone has the right to
freedom, equality and dignity, non-discrimination, life, liberty and security of person. They also include the right
not to be tortured or held in slavery, the right to recognition as a person before the law and the right to an effective
remedy when these rights have been violated. These are the most basic rights that all human beings should enjoy at
all times. Articles 9 – 21 of the UDHR are sometimes referred to as civil and political rights, while articles 22 – 28
are described as social, economic and cultural rights. This categorization is now regarded as rather dated, since
many rights cannot be so easily divided. However, it provides a basic thematic typology for categorizing the
projects that EIDHR is supporting in Angola.
These rights include:
Non-discrimination (Articles 2 and 7)
Right to life (Article 4)
Freedom from torture (Article 5)
Access to justice and fair trial rights (Articles 8 – 11)
The right to privacy, family and home (Article 12)
Freedom of movement, right to Asylum and right to right nationality (Articles 13 - 15)
Right to marriage based on mutual consent (Article 16)
Right to property (Article 17)
Freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 18)
Freedom of expression and association (Articles 19 and 20)
Right to participate in democratic elections and public life (Article 21)
Right to social assistance (Article 22)
Right to work (Article 23)
Right to leisure (Article 24)
Right to an adequate standard of living, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social
services (Article 25)
Right to education (Article 26)
Right to participate in cultural life (Article 27)
These rights have been elaborated in greater detail in a variety of international treaties as well as in ‘soft-law’
instruments, such as bodies of principles and the recommendations of international monitoring bodies. Taken
I
23 Mar ch 2010
together these provide a comprehensive set of standards against which a particular State’s record can be measured
in relation to a particular right.
Some of the above rights overlap. For example, land and housing rights are covered both by the right to property
(Article 17) and the right to an adequate standard of living (Article 25). A UN Special Rapporteur on the right to
housing, land and property restitution has drawn up a specific body of principles on this issue, which deals
particularly with the issues of forced evictions and the plight of people who have been living for long periods of
time on land to which they do not have official documentation. A variety of specialist instruments exist in relation
to particular vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly, prisoners, people with disabilities and people with
HIV/AIDS. The Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination
Against Women and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination are intended to
focus on these particular areas, supplementing the basic rights to non-discrimination and equal treatment under the
law which underlie all human rights law.
International human rights law often refers to a state’s ‘obligation’ to ‘respect, protect and fulfill’ the rights
contained within a particular convention or treaty. Simply put, the obligation to respect requires the state not to do
anything that would actively interfere with the realization of a right (eg banning trade unions, imprisoning political
dissidents or carrying out illegal forced evictions). The obligation to protect requires the state to ensure that
individual’s rights are not violated by private non-state actors, such as corporations, landlords or private security
companies (eg refusing to enforce labour laws, allowing discriminatory hiring practices, illegal expropriations of
land). The obligation to fulfill requires the State to take positive steps to ensure the realization of the right in
question, which may include enacting and enforcing laws, consulting the community about budget priorities,
increasing administrative transparency. The last of these issues is particularly important in the sphere of economic,
social and cultural rights, but will also be relevant to a whole host of issues from the quality of the justice system to
the rights of children or people with disabilities.
These obligations exist in all societies and the concepts of ‘core minimum obligations’ and ‘progressive realization
to the maximum of available resources’ are used to take into account the problems facing different countries given
their different levels of economic development and their particular social and cultural backgrounds. Human rights
organizations will adopt different strategies in different countries and donors need to ensure that they are
sufficiently flexible to support activities which are appropriate to the particular country context.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
ANNEX 9. Relatório de visita a Lunda Norte.
Por: Bert Fret, consultor
Datas: do 1 ao 4 de Março de 2010.
Objectivo da visita:
- conhecer de mais perto os dois projectos financiados à AJUDECA e apreciar a sua actuação e resultados;
- conhecer e compreender melhor a complexidade do contexto nas zonas diamantéferas da província, no âmbito do
estudo sobre a efectividade do IEDHH.
Percurso seguido:
Dia 1: por via terrestre, no carro da AJUDECA, (adquirido no quadro do projecto EIDHR/2008/164-550) em um
dia de Luanda até Cuango, com paragem e entrevista na Xá-Muteba,
Dia 2: encontros e entrevistas no Cuango, sede do município;
Dia 3: encontros e entrevistas na comuna do Luremo e no sector de Cafunfu;
Dia 4: regresso, por via terrestre, de Cuango até Luanda. Chegada às 19.30 h.
O consultor agradeçe a hospitalidade oferecida na casa do Sr. Manuel Landu, coordenador da AJUDECA no
Cuango. (Não há pensões nem hóteis no Cuango).
De igual maneira, agradece à direcção da AJUDECA a facilitação no sentido de se obter a autorização da DEFA
local para poder entrar na província por via terrestre, vindo de Malanje.
Constatações:
1. A província de Lunda norte é regida por leis especiais, devido ao seu estatuto de reserva estatal, de acesso
restrito. Segundo uma fonte estas leis (Lei ou Decreto 16/17 ?) seriam entretanto revogados, mas na prática a
gestão fechada, hyper-controlada e não transparente da província parece continuar em vigor.
2. Há muito pouco investimento nesta província. Ela é secundária em termos de investimento em estradas, escolas
primárias, secundárias e superiores, infra-estruturas de saúde. A actividade empresarial se limita somente na
extracção de diamantes, não deixando alguma contraparte tangível na província. Não há quase outra actividade
económica de alguma importância.
3. A organização economica e social da exploração diamantífera conduz a um empobrecimento de uma maioria da
população.
3.1. As grandes companhias diamantíferas, dentro das grandes concessões que lhes são cedidas, impedem toda
actividade agricola, reduzindo deste modo de maneira importante o acesso à terra para muitas famílias camponesas
locais. Esta relativa escassez de terra, conduz as famílias das etnías locais (donos da terra) a exigir pagamentos
elevados (em dinheiro ou em parte das colheitas) aos não natos (mukakwiza, provenientes, os que vieram) (que são
normalmente de uma outra etnía) para parcelas de tamanho relativamente reduzido. (Contradição étnica forte, à
qual se sobrepõe uma rivalidade partidária).
Há casos em que as companhias até destruíram lavras, com pouco ou nenhum aviso previo.
3.2. As áreas onde os garimpeiros exercem as suas actividades são todas areas illegais. Não há zonas «livres» para
o garimpo. Muitas vezes, as áreas onde trabalham os garimpeiros são ocupadas logo que a segurança mineira
venha a detectar os garimpeiros a actuarem. Garimpeiros que se aventuram nas concessões das companhias
diamantíferas são caçados por militares (FAA) e companhias de segurança privadas. Muitas vezes são abatidas
por tiros.
Segundo uma fonte, militares das FAA estão instalados em acampamentos na mata à volta das
concessões diamantíferas. Eles matam garimpeiros (não é muito claro se dentro ou fora das concessões) e violam e
matam21 mulheres que encontram sozinhas. Por isto as mulheres vão sempre em grupos à lavras, nunca sozinhas
(informação não cruzada, ainda por confirmar).
A SDM, Sociedade de Desenvolvimento Mineira, terminou o seu contrato com a ENDIAMA em Dezembro de
2009, e fará a entrega das instalações em 30 de Março de 2010, onde a ENDIAMA poderá conceder a outra
exploradora. Segundo fontes não fidedignas a empresa escolhida seria a Sulafricana «The Bird». Durante este
21
Falou-se ainda em mutilações nas mamas das vítimas.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
intervalo, a área está controlada pelas FAAs que contratam mão-de-obra local para o garimpo e consequentemente,
regista-se número elevado de violação dos DH.
3.3. Os garimpeiros são em geral pobres e descapitalizados. Normalmente, e por cultura ou habito, trabalham em
associação com, e por conta de, um patrocinador, que lhes fornece instrumentos de trabalho e uma ração alimentar
para uma semana. Geralmente os acordos prevêm uma divisão igual do rendimento do trabalho em diamantes
brutos, entre o patrocinador (metade) e o grupo de garimpeiros (metade). Normalmente surgem no entanto
conflitos no momento da divisão do resultado financeiro (cada parte querendo burlar a outra?), resultando numa
divisão muito mais vantajosa para o patrocinador.
O valor recebido pelos garimpeiros é raramente guardado ou investido. Na cultura local (tipo far-west, de
«fronteira»), muito é gasto em bebida e em prostitutas. Depois do ciclo completo, o garimpeiro procura de novo
um patrocinador...
3.4. Esta cultura local faz com que a prática de «sexo comercial» (um tipo de prostituição individual e não
organizado) é generalizada, também por meninas muito jovens, o que conduz à uma elevada taxa de gravidezes
precoces, assim como à um alto grau de infecção com o VIH/SIDA. Neste quadro geral de desagregação social e
da vida familiar, o padrão geral da convivência é mais da concubina temporária, que de casais permanentes. Isto
acompanhado de um importante grau de conflito ente os parceiros, e de violência doméstica. Segundo uma fonte,
a taxa de infecção com VIH na maternidade chega a ser de 54% (informação não cruzada, ainda por confirmar)22.
3.5. A presença de muitos contuários (balções de compra de diamante, da ASCORP e de outras empresas) indica
que a Endiama, e atrás desta o governo central, contam com o garimpo como uma fonte importante de produção de
diamantes. Por isto o garimpo não é prohibido, mas ele é organizado de tal maneira que os patrocinadores, que
são subordinados aos generais que gerem o garimpo, e que por sua vez prestam contas à Endiama, são obrigados a
explorar o mais que possível os garimpeiros. Estes últimos, a maioria da população na zona, sendo fragmentados e
desorganizados, são assim mantidos numa situação de pobreza e miséria social.
4. Reina na zona visitada um clima de intolerância política activa. Outros partidos políticos que o maioritário não
são bem tolerados. Em certas localidades lhes é impedido (com violência) de abrir representações ou de ostentar a
sua bandeira. A actividade destes partidos da oposição é fortemente dificultada. Para ter acesso a emprego no
estado (o principal empregador), é exigido ser membro do partido no poder. A tensão entre as differentes etnías
(ver sob. 3.1.) é nitidamente sobreposta pela tensão entre partidos políticos. As etnías «donos da terra» (no
Cuango são os Kakadi23, Mussuku e Bangala) são fieis seguidores do partido no poder. Os «provenientes»
(mukakwiza, os que vieram) são em geral Tchokwé, têm difficuldade no acesso à terra para cultivo (custo de acesso
muito elevado, específicamente para eles ?), não têm acesso a emprego no estado ou no sector moderno, são mais
pobres, e são mais inclinados para simpatía com os partidos de oposição Unita e PRS. Confrontos violentes que
ocorrem de vez em quando, e que parecem ser guerras intertribais locais, são portanto de facto lutas desesperadas
pelo acesso à terra, à possibilidades de emprego fora da agricultura e do garimpo, e por melhores condições socioeconomicas gerais.
Reflexões sobre possíveis incursões nesta realidade complexa, procurando oportunidades para melhorar as
condições de vida da maioria.
1. Uma primeira pista é de promover um desenvolvimento economico fora do garimpo, oferecendo alternativas
viáveis aos jovens de todos os grupos étnicos. Isto quer dizer concretamente desenvolver intervenções nos
domínios de:
- desenvolvimento agrícola. Fazer parceria com o IDA provincial para que haja uma EDA no Cuango. Capacitar
associações de produtores existentes de modo que possam vender bonbom junto, negociando um melhor preço, e
aproveitando assim das oportunidades de mercado abertas pelas recentes obras de melhoria nas estradas que ligam
o Cuango a Luanda, e que trazem mais comerçantes para a área. Deste modo poderão nascer verdadeiras
22
Durante a nossa estadia no Cuango, um novo bar, propriedade de um general, começou a funcionar ao lado da nossa casa. A
sua música extramemente alta, das tardes até à meia noitre, e até às 6 da madrugada nos fins de semana, está causando forte
perturbação à população local.
23
Pronunciado: K’khadi
I
23 Mar ch 2010
cooperativas, pela prática de venda em comúm. Explorar outras oportunidades através estudos participativas com
os productores. Não promover lavras colectivas, não subordinar-se à UNACA.
- formação profissional de jovens (rapazes e meninas) em profissões e habilidades que lhes abrem possibilidades de
emprego fora do garimpo (canalização, mecânica de viaturas e motas, soldadura, serralharia, carpintaria e
marcenaria, electricidade de baixa tensão, comercio de retalho, ...), mas incluindo a vertente das habilidades de
criação e gestão de pequenas empresas de auto-emprego (legislação vigente em termos de autorizações e impostos,
matemática simples e cálculo de custos, planos de negócio, como negociar créditos com os bancos, etc).
2. Uma outra pista é a da defesa concreta dos interesses dos garimpeiros. Parece improvável que os garimpeiros
venham por sí só a organizar-se em organizações de índole sindical. Um empurrão de fora, aos garimpeiros abertos
à ideia e com uma visão mais ampla, parece portanto necessário. Isto é já em sí um processo delicado e frágil, que
necessita de tempo, para que seja gradualmente apropriada pelos interessados. No mesmo tempo, poderia haver
uma organização/gabinete/balcão de aconselhamento que dá apoio concreto em termos de:
- modelos de contratos escritos entre garimpeiros e patrocinadores,
- registo de contratos para ter uma base objectiva para posterior referência,
- mediação em caso de conflito entre garimpeiros e patrocinadores,
- assistência jurídica
- negociação de acordos globais com os patrocinadores, sobre os termos dos contratos e as condições de trabalho.
- negociações globais com as empresas diamantíferas, em relação à determinação de áreas livres para o garimpo
artisanal.
3. Intervir de todo modo no domínio da violência contra a mulher e crianças. Pela via (suave) da sensibilização,
certo, mas também pela via (mais dura) de balcões de aconselhamento e assistência jurídica (em collaboração com
o Minfamu, a OMA, a LIMA, a OMRS, ...), levando os infractores mais violentes à polícia, à cadeia e ao tribunal.
Sensibilização sem castigos exemplares é um exercício irrelevante.
4. Promover junto das administrações municipais e comunais (aproveitando a actual boa conjuntura de aceitação da
AJUDECA) o lançamento (por estes) de CACS, Conselhos de Auscultação e de Coordinação Social), agora
previstos na lei sobre os municípios (Lei nr ../..). Ajudar a administração no lançamento e na gestão deste novo
órgão de diálogo entre governantes e governados. Ajudar os outros actores a participarem activamente: sobas,
líderes comunitários, associações locais, partidos políticos, líderes religiosos, comerciantes locais, etc.
A
AJUDECA pode por isto procurar apoio concreto junto da DW, que tem ampla experiência neste domínio. Em
geral, é importante promover e reforçar qualquer elemento de participação e de diálogo que possa aparecer ao nível
local. Isto levará a governação local a ser mais responsivo às apreensões do povo.
5. Ver se, com as mudanças no quadro governativo (província e município), não seria possível organisar a
reabertura os postos de assistência legal do primeiro projecto. Estes podem ter um outro nome, o importante é a
sua actuação).
6. Seria importante fazer (ou organizar) um estudo aprofundado das contradições étnicas/partidárias que causam
profundas divisões na sociedade local.
Estudá-las nas suas diferentes dimensões: cultural-antropológica
(identidade étnica-cultural), socio-económica (oportunidades e constrangimentos económicos: agricultura,
emprego, etc, política-partidária (sobreposições de rivalidades étnicas com políticas), histórica (antiga e recente), e
documentar estas contradições com maior objectividade possível (pontos de visto de ambos lados analisados
profundamente). Utilizar este estudo para fundamentar outras intervenções no futuro, já com melhor conhecimento
das realidades complexas.
Reflexões sobre a actuação da AJUDECA.
- No quadro actual da sua actuação, AJUDECA arrisca de dar mais atenção à actividades de importância indirecta,
como os centros de formação de informática, em detrimento dos aspectos essenciais, que são estes ligados às
injustiças estruturais na sociedade local. A aceitação da AJUDECA pelas autoridades locais parece por uma
grande parte causada por estes centros de formação de informática. Estes servem para promover o acesso a
informação, sobretudo para facilitar as mulheres e jovens locais a deter uma profissão e permitir os estudantes ter
maior leque de conhecimentos e que possa permiti-los a participar de uma maneira consciente na vida pública e
politica do país.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
Na estratégia de actuação da AJUDECA prevê-se a retomada do processo de «aconselhamento comunitário», (que
é assistência judicial), no Cuango e Luremo. Está função será exercida pelos activistas e plataformas que no final
de Março vão receber um treinamento orientado a este apecto. Poderá contudo não ser totalmente equivalente ao
trabalho de verdadeiros aconselhadores paralegais.
- Os computadores dos centros de formação são apropriados para tal?
Os computadores são novos, petium III, antiga marca, que pela experiência obtida no projecto educação cívica da
PNUD no Soyo, os Petium IV novos modelos não são viáveis para este tipo de formação sobre tudo as salas que
não são bem adaptadas. Por Outro lado já completaram um ano, mas em termos da funcionalidade tem vida por
mais de 2 anos, excepto problemas com a energia.
- A AJUDECA parece capaz de, e confirmou estar disposto a actuar possivelmente como antena local no quadro
do IEDDH ou do projecto PAANE 2, na zona ouest da província de Lunda Norte, mas com o devido apoio em
formação, acompanhamento e financeiro. Com tarefas de (1) capacitação processual de grupos locais que estão
neste momento em fase nascente (incluindo apoio na definição dos seus objectivos e sua planificação estratégica),
(2) assistência aos mesmos na identificação e formulação de projectos (pedidos de financiamento bem
argumentados e motivados), (3) monitoria da implementação destes projectos após financiamento, (4) monitoría da
situação dos DH na zona.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
ANNEX 10. Specific Terms of Reference
LOT No. 7
Request for services N. 2009/223075/12009
Capitalisation Study of EIDHR Projects programme in Angola
1.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1.1
Country Profile
Angola's 27 year civil war ended in April 2002 with the Luena peace accord. The conditions which led to
the failure of two previous peace agreements have changed and a return to conflict seems unlikely.
The Disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) process has progressed well in some areas
(DD) and slowly in others (R).
Angola has taken steps towards democratisation since the end of the war. Space for debate has improved
within parliament, civil society forums and independent media, particularly in Luanda. The main
challenge for the Government is to consolidate democracy. This goal must be achieved in harmony with
the reconstruction of the country. Legislative elections took place in September 2008 and the MPLA is
the dominant party within the National Assembly with 80% of representation. It is still to be seen when
Presidential Elections will take place since a revision process of the Constitution is currently underway
and the President of the Republic has declared that the presidential elections would only take place after
the end of this process. The turnout is still to be seen.
Angola's human rights record shows recent improvements and continuing challenges.
A reinforced system of justice must ensure the full promotion and control of civil and political rights,
namely the freedom of movement, expression and association and also the social economic and cultural
rights.
The few international reports on human rights claim that the situation needs to improve.
In 2007, Angola was elected a member of the UN Human Rights Council and engaged in cooperating
with the UN Office for Human Rights. In 2008, however, the authorities suspended negotiations on the
Memorandum of Understanding which would attribute a mandate of full exercise to the High
Commissioner's Office for Human Rights in Luanda. As a consequence, the office was closed in 2008.
In fact, lack of information makes it difficult to monitor the human rights situation in certain remote areas
like the Lundas, Moxico and Kuando Kubango. Most of the information comes from reports by
international civil society organisations specialising in advocacy but without national representation.
Some key points: Laws on land and Media – some reforms but some still some pending situations
The new Law on Land establishes the concession of land to citizens for a period of 60 years. Citizens do
not have however the right to the under soil of the land that is property of the State. It recognises the legal
personality of the rural communities which permits them to hire a lawyer when their rights are not being
I
23 Mar ch 2010
respected. However, there are still quite a few unanswered answers regarding this law and the rights of
the citizens that benefit from it.
As freedom of expression is concerned, new media legislation was approved by the National Assembly in
2006 giving private capital access to radio and TV broadcasting. However, the implementation of this law
is subordinate to the adoption of pertinent regulations or decrees, in particular for the procedure to grant
television and radio broadcasting licenses.
The country has been actively pursuing institutional reform during the last couple of years, especially
decentralisation, public administration and justice. These are all entry points for Human rights
organisations to be able to influence the process.
1.2
Programme Summary
The European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) 24 has entered into force on 1
January 2007 replacing the European Initiative for Democracy and Human rights. Aimed at third
countries and benefiting from a budget of 1, 104 million Euros for the 2007-2013 period, the EIDHR is
the concrete expression of the EU’s intention to integrate the promotion of democracy and human rights
into all of its external policies. Its main objective is “to contribute to the development and consolidation
of democracy and the rule of law, and of respect for all human rights and fundamental freedoms”. The EU
has adopted this approach not only in order to convey, in the international relations, the values that inspire
it at internal level but also to support the objectives it has set itself: sustainable development, particularly
in the millennium objectives and the resolution of conflicts. One of the Instruments key assets is its
autonomy, as the instruments can grant aid where there are no development cooperation links and more
crucially still can intervene without the agreement of the governments of third countries, Its mains
beneficiaries are civil society organisations, but the EIDHR also supports intergovernmental
organizations that contribute to the implementation of the international mechanisms for the protection of
human rights.
The instrument is implemented through:
- Strategy Papers, which define the Community’s political priorities; the current Strategy Paper covers the
period 2007-2010. Its adoption is under the responsibility of DG Relex.
- Annual Action Programmes, which translate the political priorities in concrete actions. Its adoption is
under the responsibility of DG Europe Aid.
The current Strategy Paper identifies 5 distinct objectives for the period from 2007-2010:
1) Enhancing respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in countries and regions where they are
most at risk;
2) Strengthening the role of civil society in promoting human rights and democratic reform, in supporting
the peaceful conciliation of group interests and in consolidating political participation and representation;
3) Supporting action on human rights and democracy issues in areas covered by EU guidelines, including
on human rights dialogues, on human rights defenders, on the death penalty, on torture and on children
and armed conflict;
4) Supporting and strengthening the international and regional framework for the protection of human
rights, justice, the rule of law and the promotion of democracy.
24
Regulation (EC) No 1889/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006
(reg_1889_2006_jo_l386_en.pdf).
I
23 Mar ch 2010
5) Building confidence in and enhancing the reliability and transparency of democratic electoral processes
in particular through election observation.
The new Strategy Paper will cover the period 2011-2013.
Angola is a target country of the European initiative for Democracy and Human Rights (IEDDH) and the
European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) since 2003 and therefore beneficiated
of several projects and a total amount of 5.504.519,56€ (4.669.959,22€ under IEDDH and 834.560,34€
under the EIDHR – data relating to 07/09/09).
Under the framework of micro, macro and target projects, this instrument is essential in the cooperation
strategy between the EC and Angola, due to its form (budget line managed by the European Commission)
and its objectives. It appears as one of the few tools, within the current Angolan context, to intervene in
the EU's priority areas, that are still perceived as sensitive by the national authorities.
Several projects were financed through this thematic instrument in areas such as national reconciliation,
prevention and resolution of conflicts (with particular attention to land issues in rural and urban areas),
civic and electoral education/ electoral domestic observation (since 2006 for the preparation of the
electoral process of September 2008), the support to the Human Rights Defenders, freedom of press
(support to community newspapers and radios), economic and social rights, etc.
The variety of thematic areas has allowed to support the democratic process, the fundamental rights and
liberties from a political and civilian approach, the rights of vulnerable groups and the Human Rights
Defenders. This instrument adjusted well, throughout the years, to the new challenges permitting at the
same time the appearance and/or consolidation of the role of Non Sate Actors (NSA).
An evaluation within a logic of capitalization and valorisation of "good practices", as mentioned in the
Country evaluation that was done recently, seems to be useful at this time not only because of the Country
strategy for Angola, but also to evaluate the added value and difficulties of this instruments in a postconflict context. The aim of this study is to bring out the strong points and weaknesses of the Human
Rights situation in Angola and it will permit to guide future interventions.
2.
DESCRIPTION OF THE ASSIGNMENT
These terms of reference relate to the capitalization study of the programme.
2.1
Global Objective
The overall objective of this study is to provide the European Commission Delegation in Angola with a
better overview of the past and ongoing EIDDH/EIDHR activities and to provide recommendations for
the formulation of the future strategy according to the current political, economic and social context in
Angola.
2.2
Specific objectives
-To assess the efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability and anticipated impact of the supported actions and
the prospects for the sustainability of the benefits (By making a typology of the projects).
-Give an overview of IEDHH/EIDHR programme/projects analysing quality and relevance of the
projects, covering to what extent the EIDHR is a strategic tool in the field of democracy and human
I
23 Mar ch 2010
rights. To provide practical recommendations for the follow up actions and lessons learned and
recommendations for the future EIDHR strategy in Angola.
- Analyse the complementarity between the EIDHR and NSA+LA instruments and the EDF strategy.
-Examine the project's strategy for and level of success in incorporation of cross-cutting issues, in
particular gender equality.
- Analyse the adaptability of the instrument (Call for proposals) to the local context and actors
- Quick assessment of the human rights situation and priorities for the EU policy (taking into account its
priorities and means)
- Analyse the quality, the capability and the role of the EC Delegation in the managing process including
recommendations in terms of M&E.
-Recommendations should be realistic, operational and as pragmatic as possible, taking account of the
circumstances currently prevailing in the context of the projects.
2.3
Expected results
The mission will deliver, without being limited to:
A verification of the relevance of the programme and individual projects in addressing the existing and
anticipated institutional, political, economic, social or other problems.
An appraisal of the projects’ efficiency and effectiveness, especially with regards to sustainability and
cost-effectiveness of the project results.
Recommendations for any required changes / modification to project scope in order to support effective
implementation and the delivery of a sustainable benefit stream.
Recommendations for any required changes or additions to future Calls for Proposals and to the selection,
implementations and monitoring and evaluation of future programmes/projects.
An evaluation of the anticipated impact of the programme and projects with the design of a typology.
Recommendations and Lessons learned from the programme and projects in order for the EC Delegation
to develop a new Strategy for the future EIDHR projects within the country's new political, economic and
social context.
2.4
Requested Services and Methodology
The missions will use the following methods to carry out its work in close cooperation with the EC
Delegation in Angola and the partner NGOs:
Desk research: Including the collection of all the relevant documentation.
Visit to NSA offices (programme office and field offices, if relevant): Interact with project staff and
collect required information.
Field visits: Visits to project sites and the relevant stakeholders and also other donors present in the
country.
Briefing and debriefing to the EC Delegation in the beginning and end of the country mission
The contractor must present a methodology with the proposal. This Methodology shall be based on a
sampling/mapping by typology of projects (themes); typology of actors; it must include a choice of
I
23 Mar ch 2010
provinces to visit (and the reason of this choice) and by typology of amounts (big and small projects).
Some workshops (in the provinces and in the capital) with the beneficiaries and relevant partners have to
be organised in order to discuss and disseminate the results and recommendations.
3.
EXPERT’S PROFILE
Team Leader: Senior Expert
Qualifications and skills
- Education up to postgraduate level in a subject relevant to the assignment, such as development,
political science, sociology, law, or anthropology.
General professional experience
- At least 10 years experience in international development, including knowledge and experience of
human rights, conflict transformation, and capacity building of civil society.
Specific professional experience
- Experience with EC procedures, PCM, cost benefit and impact analysis from at least 2 different
missions/assignments.
- Experience in project review and evaluation from at least 2 different missions/assignments.
- Knowledge of post-conflict context
Language skills
- Excellent written and spoken Portuguese and English or French.
Team Member: Junior Expert
- University Degree in a subject relevant to the assignment, such as development, political science,
sociology, law, or anthropology.
- At least 3 years experience in international development, including knowledge and experience of human
rights, conflict transformation, and capacity building of civil society.
- Demonstrated knowledge and experience of human rights, conflict transformation, and civil society
issues in Angola or a PALOP country.
- Experience in project review and evaluation.
Language skills
Team member: Junior Expert
- University Degree in a subject relevant to the assignment, such as development, political science,
sociology, law, or anthropology.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
- At least 3 years experience in international development, including knowledge and experience of human
rights, conflict transformation, and capacity building of civil society.
- Demonstrated knowledge and experience of human rights, conflict transformation, and civil society
issues in Angola or a PALOP country.
- Experience in project review and evaluation.
Language skills
4.
LOCATION AND DURATION
Expected start date : February 2010
Foreseen finishing period: June 2010
Total duration of assignment: 6 months
Location(s) of assignment: The mission will be carried out in Angola, including several of the provinces
where projects are being implemented.
The mission will consist of the following three phases:
Timetable and Description of Activities
Phase I : Desk Phase
- Review of key documentation
- Planning of field visits
- Travel from and to country of origin (if
based abroad)
Phase II : Field Phase
- Briefing and debriefing at EC Delegation
in Luanda
- Meetings with partner NGOs
- Field visits to project sites
- Collection and compilation of data and
information
- Workshops
Phase III : Synthesis Phase
- Preparation and submission of draft final
report
- Compilation of final report
Total number of working days
Working Days
Expert
Expert
Category I Category
II
Expert
Category III
2
2
2
2
23
23
23
25
25
3
30
The Evaluation Missions will be guided during the preparatory stage by EC policy documents as well as
documents related to the programme and projects. The experts may use data/information collection tools
including planned surveys, questionnaires, field observations, administrative records, interviews and
management report as per their discretion.
The field phase will require the mission to travel to several of the provinces where projects are being
implemented. The contractor must include in the budget at least 16000 Euros for local travel.
I
23 Mar ch 2010
5.
REPORTING
The Team should do a briefing and debriefing to the EC Delegation in Luanda. During the briefing it shall
submit an Aide memoire and a calendar of the mission in Angola (short document)
Two weeks after the debriefing to the EC Delegation in Luanda, the evaluation Team shall submit a draft
report in Portuguese, for approval by the EC Delegation that will make comments. The Contracting
authority will have 3 weeks to comment this draft report. The new version of the report to be written by
the Consultants will adopt the commentaries made and it will be considered as the final version of the
report after approval of the Contracting authority.
The report shall be drafted in the following way:
Identification of the project, date and authors
Index
Executive summary – not more than 3 pages where the main points of analysis, verification/findings
(relevance, impact, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability), the main recommendations, lessons
learned, and the main conclusion
Main text – not more than 20 pages (not including annexes), that shall include the objectives, amplitude,
coverage, criteria and methodology; and connections with other information or reports
Verification and recommendations – for each verification the correspondent recommendations shall be
made
Conclusion
Annexes
The following annexes should be included:
Evaluation Team
Terms of Reference
Glossary and Acronyms
List of people contacted during the mission
List of documents used
Evaluation programme executed
Table of problems encountered and adjustments
Synthetic table of verifications/findings
Table of practical recommendations and future interventions (axes/methodology)
Any finding that can damage transparency and the good name of the institutions involved, or any other
aspect that is considered of particular cultural or political sensitivity, shall be presented as a
complementary document separated from the main report, with the classification of confidential.
All reports must be drafted in high quality Portuguese and English. They will be submitted electronically
to the EC Delegation in Luanda. In addition, 10 hard copies of the final report will be transmitted by
express mail service to the EC Delegation in Luanda.
All reports shall clearly indicate the reference number of the contract and carry the following disclaimer:
“This report has been prepared with the financial assistance of the European Commission. The views
expressed herein are those of the consultants and therefore in no way reflect the official opinion of the
Commission”.
6.
ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION
Important Remarks
I
23 Mar ch 2010
During contacts with partner NGOs, Angolan Authorities, or any other organization, the experts will
clearly identify themselves as independent consultants and not as official representatives of the European
Commission.
Prior to the commencement of the mission, the experts should obtain adequate visas for Angola, as
required.
All transportation to the project sites will be paid by the experts. Consultants shall have to rent cars during
their stay in Angola (in Luanda and in the provinces selected for the mission). A budget for local travel
must be included in the proposal.
Please note that Luanda has a shortage of hotels, therefore reservations should be well planned and done
in advance.
ANNEX
EIDDH / EIDHR Projects in Angola financed since 2003
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FOR REFERENCE
Programme documents (available at EC Delegation Luanda):
- Call for Proposals Guidelines
Project documents (available at EC Delegation Luanda):
- Description of Activities, Budget, Logframe
- Interim and mission reports
EC Guidelines for Project Evaluation
http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/evaluation/methodology/guidelines/gbb_det_en.htm
Toolkit on Mainstreaming Gender Equality in EC Development Cooperation
http://www.cc.cec/EUROPEAID/ThematicNetworks/qsg/Networks/newGender/toolkit_2006/index.htm
I
23 Mar ch 2010

Capitalisation study of the EIDHR Programme in Angola

Transcrição

Documentos relacionados

Implications of dos Santos` declared intention to resign

MAGAZINE OF THE EMBASSY OF ANGOLA 2013

magazine of embassy of angola 2015 n. 17

select select select select select select select select select select

zreport - Luanda - Zenki Real Estate

Minimum Wage Report

A Lie for a Lie: MPLA Media Control in Ondjaki`s Luandan Novels

angola 2013 - Quality Media Press

2014-07-28 - Eid-ul-Fitr Poster (Take 2)

Accounting And Administration Course: Corporate Fi

prismapor n 41i