Source · Select Committees · International Development Committee
Recommendation 16
16
Paragraph: 65
Aid organisations should try to design programmes in cooperation with the local populations where the...
Conclusion
Aid organisations should try to design programmes in cooperation with the local populations where the programmes will be delivered. They should also take responsibility for ensuring that aid beneficiaries are fully informed of their rights and know what is and what is not acceptable behaviour by aid workers. They might disseminate this information themselves with cooperation from the local population, or work with local women’s rights organisations to share the information. Either way, it must be shared in a sensitive and context specific manner. Access to this information will empower women and help them to make informed decisions. The FCDO should prioritise organisations that demonstrate active engagement with local populations when it is tendering for aid delivery contracts.
Paragraph Reference:
65
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
A well-functioning Community-Based Complaints Mechanism (CBCM) can provide an avenue to survivors to seek justice and to improve accountability and support to survivors and victims at local and national level, including by linking survivors to support services. CBCMs are designed to be both culturally and gender-sensitive and to play a prevention function through training and awareness raising. The inter-agency CBCM model sits within broader country level structures in humanitarian contexts, including formal SEAH Networks and Coordinators. As the inter-agency CBCM guidance referred to in footnote 128 of the Committee’s report says, “independent review and referral of complaints is one of the most important functions of the CBCM.” The guidance also highlights the benefit to beneficiaries of having the option of reporting to an agency which does not itself employ the alleged perpetrator of the misconduct, reducing the fear of reprisal. CBCMs cannot decide if a ‘failure’ has occurred. They can offer a view on whether good practice has been followed and provide an individual with an avenue to an organisation whose remit includes making such judgements and so alternative routes to report the incident and any concerns about the handling of the case. Alternative routes or avenues that we have in mind include: the relevant National Human Rights Institution; legal service providers; a donor whose funding is involved in the project in question; a relevant oversight or ombuds body such as the Charity Commission if an NGO from England or Wales is involved; and relevant appeals bodies within the UN. We are also engaging with Dutch colleagues on a project which is looking in depth at the operation of community complaints systems in three countries. It will identify what it takes to build robust accountability systems that are survivor-centred, enable safe reporting, investigate thoroughly, and hold perpetrators to account. It will look at what works well and identify what needs to be improved.