[afro-nets] Food for a gap in our thoughts

[Claudio Schuftan <claudio@hcmc.netnam.vn>]

Food for a gap in our thoughts
------------------------------

Human Rights Reader 72

THE POOR AND MARGINALIZED THEMSELVES WILL HAVE TO ULTIMATELY AD-
DRESS THE FACTORS THAT KEEP THEM DISEMPOWERED

1. For claim-holders to build their capacity is for people to
understand their rights, to claim them and to contribute to re-
alizing them. Claim-holders simply have to hold duty-bearers ac-
countable and, to do this, claim-holders themselves have to set
up systematic monitoring systems. Human rights (HR) monitoring
IS about assessing accountability. (Do not forget, here, that
international monitoring also is a cornerstone of accountability
analysis). Among other, monitoring by claim-holders has to look
into whether development processes are ethically acceptable and
of a minimum quality; are non-discriminatory and participatory;
are owned by beneficiaries and empower them in a way that re-
spects their dignity.

2. Capacity is the key factor determining how well rights are
claimed and how duties are fulfilled. In HR work, it is ulti-
mately the basic causes of HR violations (e.g., malnutrition and
preventable ill-health) that determine capacity levels and the
degree of control (power) that both claim-holders and duty-
bearers end up having.

3. Therefore, a given duty-bearer cannot be held accountable for
not fulfilling a duty if s/he lacks the conditions necessary to
do so. For someone to be held accountable, s/he must accept the
responsibility (SHOULD act), must have the authority to carry
out the duty (MAY act), and must have access and control over
the resources required (CAN act).

4. The identification of capacity gaps in failed human develop-
ment (or maldevelopment) is thus to become the starting focus of
development programming. Therefore, it is capacity gaps that
claim-holders need to assess and subsequently monitor. But be-
cause the Right to Development implies disparity reductions in
many aspects pertaining different basic causes, it demands ac-
tion to eliminate HR violations in many contexts and domains.

5. Key elements that are part of the capacity of duty-bearers
that we need to strengthen in the direction of HR are:

* responsibility/motivation/leadership;
* authority;
* control over resources (human, economic and organizational,
  including access to networks);
* capability to make informed decisions and learn from results;
  and
* communications capability.

6. It needs to be kept in mind here that helping-people-claim-
their-rights is different from helping-them-change-their-
behavior! The behavior-change model is essentially one-way in
nature (from duty-bearer to claim-holder).as in social market-
ing.

In HR work, we do not market pre-selected innovations or behav-
iors. HR work aims at increasing the connectivity-among and as-
sertiveness-of claim-holders to arrive at their own priorities
for change.

7.So, claim-holders are to change their behavior --yes. But in a
way that helps them to assert and claim their rights. Behavioral
change will then occur as a result of empowerment. Ergo, claim-
holders, not duty-bearers, are to set the development agenda.

8. Claim-holders and duty-bearers have to dialogue as equals to
find out why expected duties have not been carried out. Develop-
ing active communication channels therefore helps claim-holders
express themselves and helps duty-bearers to listen and respond.

9. We have to stop this attitude of 'we tell them how to behave
and how to use their scarce resources'. Such an approach is
clearly incompatible with a HR-based approach. HR is about com-
munication strategies based on dialogue and consensus rather
than about top-down message transmission.

10. In HR programming, the causality analysis will result in a
list of rights that are either being violated or are at risk of
being violated, together with the causes of these violations.
But the list risks to be too long. When shortening the list, we
will have to recognize difficult trade-offs that will have to be
made (at least initially) in the face of objective resources
constraints.

11. The reality is that it is necessary for us to set priorities
for addressing rights being violated. Focusing on priority prob-
lems will help reduce the analysis to a more limited set of
claim-duty relationships. For each right chosen, a list of
claim-holders and duty-bearers should be prepared. But note that
the final prioritization should be a result of negotiations and
consensus building, and not arrived at from the top. HR program-
ming is, therefore, about making strategic choices and arriving
at a set of priority actions required to accelerate the realiza-
tion of selected HR.

[Two important caveats:
a. Prioritizing does not preclude that HR have to progressively
be made more ambitious!

b. Strong and separate efforts will also have to be devoted to
developing the capacity of children and adolescents to claim
their own respective rights. It is unacceptable for children and
adolescents to be regarded as 'targets'].

12. All the above can guide us in actions at the community
level. But the biggest challenge in the HR approach to (develop-
ment) programming (HRAP) still remains sustaining community mo-
tivation and commitment. This invariably requires for the commu-
nity to perceive key needed changes and to discern which changes
they can realistically make happen. A step-by-step approach with
emphasis on actions controlled by the communities themselves --
as well as lobbying for those actions needed for which resources
are controlled by duty-bearers outside the community -- will
eventually pay-off.


Claudio Schuftan
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
mailto:claudio@hcmc.netnam.vn