Are you the publisher? Claim or contact us about this channel


Embed this content in your HTML

Search

Report adult content:

click to rate:

Account: (login)

More Channels


Channel Catalog


Channel Description:

ReliefWeb - Updates on Sierra Leone

older | 1 | .... | 338 | 339 | (Page 340) | 341 | 342 | .... | 344 | newer

    0 0

    Source: CARE, George Washington University, International Rescue Committee
    Country: Nepal, Sierra Leone, South Sudan

    This study, conducted as part of the What Works to Prevent Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) in Conflict and Humanitarian Crises programme funded by the UK government, explores how programmes and policies to prevent and respond to VAWG have been integrated and addressed within post-conflict state-building policy and programming; and how, in conflict-affected countries, VAWG is related to efforts to achieve peace and stability.

    It is hoped that the findings, conclusions and recommendations of this report will inform future conflict and post-conflict state-building and peace-building to ensure they are more effective at addressing violence against women and girls, and particularly forms of VAWG that act as barriers to peace and stability.


    0 0

    Source: UN High Commissioner for Refugees
    Country: Angola, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Kenya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Zimbabwe


    0 0

    Source: International Organization for Migration
    Country: Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo

    L’OIM travaille avec les autorités nationales, locales et des partenaires locaux, afin de mieux comprendre et connaître les mouvements migratoires à travers l’Afrique de l’Ouest et du Centre. Le suivi des flux de population (FMP) est une activité qui permet de quantifier et de qualifier les flux, les profils des migrants, les tendances et les routes migratoires sur un point d’entrée, de transit ou de sortie donné. En Guinée, 5 points de suivi ont été installés depuis avril 2017 dans les localités frontalières avec Mali et le Sénégal dont 3 sont actifs à ce jour. Il s’agit des localités de Kouremalé, Nafadji et Boundoufourdou où l’on observe les mouvements des voyageurs. La proportion des mineurs non accompagnés observés sur l’ensemble des points de suivi des flux est moins de 1%. La moyenne journalière du nombre d’individus observés au point de suivi des flux de Nafadji a augmenté de 11% par rapport à la période juin-juillet 2018.


    0 0

    Source: Global Partnership for Education
    Country: Bhutan, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Chad, Comoros, Côte d'Ivoire, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Madagascar, Sierra Leone, Somalia, World, Zimbabwe

    Washington D.C., September 18, 2018 --- The Global Partnership for Education (GPE) is putting new finance to work, improving education prospects for the world’s most disadvantaged children. Grant approvals by the GPE Board of Directors in the seven months since the successful Financing Conference in Senegal in February have reached almost US$300 million. At the conference, donors pledged US$2.3 billion for 2018 through 2020 and further commitments continue to be announced.

    “GPE is putting this new education financing to work so that all children can go to school and get a quality education,” said Julia Gillard, Board Chair, Global Partnership for Education. “We are turning the global momentum in support of education into concrete action, helping countries strengthen their education systems that will be the backbone of their future prosperity and stability.”

    The recent approval of US$55.7 million in new grants for Bhutan, Sierra Leone, Somalia and Zimbabwe follows a first set of grants of US$95.3 million approved in March for Cambodia, Cote d’Ivoire, The Gambia, Guinea Bissau and Madagascar and a second set in May providing more than US$45 million to Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Chad, Comoros and Somalia. Several of these low-income countries are in the midst of conflict or just emerging from difficult times and have a growing school-age population.

    In addition, the Board approved close to US$100 million in allocations to 11 countries from the GPE Multiplier, GPE’s new innovative financing instrument. This funding is set to leverage more than US$400 million in additional financing for these countries.

    “The GPE Multiplier has quickly gained traction and is successfully crowding in significantly more investment for education,” said Alice Albright, GPE’s Chief Executive Officer. “It demonstrates that developing countries and donor partners want creative and flexible mechanisms to address local education challenges. The new Multiplier is another example of how GPE continues to evolve to deliver impact and extend its role as a leading catalyst of progress toward the Sustainable Development Goal to educate all the world’s children by 2030.”

    The latest grants to Bhutan, Sierra Leone, Somalia and Zimbabwe build on progress from earlier GPE support for the implementation of national education plans. The countries have met the requirements for GPE funding, which include the development of quality plans, commitment to increase domestic financing for education and a strategy for improved data collection. GPE’s results-based funding model also means that 30 percent of the funding for Sierra Leone and Zimbabwe will only be disbursed once the countries have met agreed results to improve equity, efficiency and learning. This does not apply to Somalia, because of the country’s vulnerable circumstances, and for Bhutan, because of the small size of the grant.

    Bhutan will receive US$1.8 million to ensure more children aged 3-5 can get a quality early childhood education and improve parent engagement, particularly in rural and urban poor areas. In addition, more early childhood education centers will be established and teachers trained. The funding will also help develop a framework for national learning assessments to ensure that better data is available on student’s learning outcomes. Such data is the basis for decisions on policy, teaching practice and resource allocations. Save the Children serves as the GPE grant agent.

    Sierra Leone, a GPE partner since 2007, will receive US$17.2 million. The grant will focus on strengthening the country’s early learning program for children between 3 and 5 years and on improving reading, writing and math skills of children in grades 1 through 3. It will also strengthen school monitoring, improve data management and support a new learning assessment unit in the education ministry. To receive the results-based portion of the grant, Sierra Leone must increase pre-primary education in underserved areas, reduce the repetition rate in first grade and improve how learning is measured. UNICEF is the GPE grant agent in Sierra Leone.

    Somalia’s grant of US$17.9 million will help eliminate fees that keep the poorest children from attending school and enroll more children from marginalized groups. The grant will improve the quality of schooling through teacher training, textbook distribution and the development of new learning standards. It will also provide Somalia, a GPE partner since 2012, with essential resources to improve administrative capacity and education data monitoring and learning assessments. CARE is the grant agent for this funding. Somaliland already received US$7.7 million earlier this year and last year Puntland received a grant of US$5.6 million. This brings the total of GPE support for Somali children to over US$31 million.

    Zimbabwe, a GPE partner since 2013, will receive a grant of US$18.8 million, including US$10 million from the GPE Multiplier, which Zimbabwe has leveraged to raise an additional US$50.5 million from other donors. The funding will be used for a school grant program to improve around 1,000 schools in disadvantaged and rural areas. In addition, it will support a new learning curriculum and teacher training to improve learning outcomes and student retention. To receive the results-based portion of the grant, Zimbabwe must improve transition rates to lower secondary school in districts where many children drop out after primary school, ensure that more girls complete lower secondary school and improve math skills across the country. UNICEF serves as the grant agent.


    0 0

    Source: UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Mixed Migration Centre
    Country: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Togo

    2,184 refugees and migrants were interviewed by 4Mi in West Africa between 1 January and 31 July 2018, in Mali (Mopti, Gao and Timbuktu), Niger (Niamey and Agadez) and Burkina Faso (Dori and Bobo Dioulasso). 66% Respondents are from more than 18 countries in West and Central Africa.

    The average age of respondents is 29, ranging from a minimum age of 18 to a maximum of 64 years old.

    The majority of the refugees and migrants interviewed are single (64% of men and 69% of women). 33% of men and only 13% of women are married. There are significantly more divorced or widowed women (15% and 3% respectively) compared to men (3% and 0% respectively).

    Most respondents lived in an urban area prior to their departure (79% of women and 89% of men). Over half of the male respondents interviewed (55%) had lived in another village/city before migrating, while 54% of women had not lived anywhere other than home, illustrating that international migration is often preceded by internal migration from rural to urban areas.


    0 0

    Source: International Organization for Migration
    Country: Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo

    L’OIM travaille avec les autorités nationales, locales et des partenaires locaux, afin de mieux comprendre et connaître les mouvements migratoires à travers l’Afrique de l’Ouest et du Centre. Le suivi des flux de population (FMP) est une activité qui permet de quantifier et de qualifier les flux, les profils des migrants, les tendances et les routes migratoires sur un point d’entrée, de transit ou de sortie donné. En Guinée, 5 points de suivi ont été installés depuis avril 2017 dans les localités frontalières avec Mali et le Sénégal dont 3 sont actifs à ce jour. Il s’agit des localités de Kouremalé, Nafadji et Boundoufourdou où l’on observe les mouvements des voyageurs. La proportion des mineurs non accompagnés observés sur l’ensemble des points de suivi des flux est moins de 1%. La moyenne journalière du nombre d’individus observés au point de suivi des flux de Nafadji a augmenté de 11% par rapport à la période juin-juillet 2018.


    0 0

    Source: International Rescue Committee
    Country: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Colombia, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Lao People's Democratic Republic (the), Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Myanmar, Niger, Nigeria, occupied Palestinian territory, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, World, Yemen, Zimbabwe

    Our analysis shows that millions of ‘people caught in crisis’ - people living in conflict, and/or who are displaced within their own countries or across borders – are in fact being left behind. Failure to take action now means that the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will not be met, undermining the credibility of the international community and leaving millions to die unnecessarily.

    The report, SDG Progress: Fragility, Crisis and Leaving No One Behind, examines country-level progress against the SDGs and makes projections as to how much more effort will be needed to reach them by 2030. The findings come one year before the first heads of state level SDG Summit to track progress on the global goals will take place.

    Despite the 2015 commitment by governments to ‘leave no behind’ as part of the UN’s 2030 Agenda, unless significant progress is made in reaching the poorest and most marginalized people, including those refugees, internally displaced people, and people living in conflict zones, the SDGs will not be met.

    The report concludes by laying out five recommendations to ensure people in crisis and other marginalized groups are prioritized in SDG implementation. Recommendations include the establishment of a high-level panel of global leaders to catalyze international action over the next 12 months, and a formalized process for tracking progress at country-level.

    Behind all of these numbers is the harsh reality of disrupted lives. Families without hope or a home, children out of school, young people with no jobs and poor health, struggling to survive and living in conflict or in a new country that are often already grappling with its own poverty and lack of opportunities.

    Our analysis shows that progress is possible even in the most challenging situations. Without this action, the world will fail to meet the SDGs. But it’s not too late if we act now.


    0 0

    Source: UN High Commissioner for Refugees
    Country: Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo


    0 0

    Source: Famine Early Warning System Network
    Country: Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Sudan, Tajikistan, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, World, Yemen

    Heavy rainfall and flooding continues over Nigeria

    Africa Weather Hazards

    1. Heavy rainfall in previous weeks has resulted in overflowing of the Niger and Benue Rivers of Nigeria. Moderate to heavy rainfall is forecast to continue, maintaining high risks for flooding.

    2. Above-average rainfall during the past several weeks and water discharges from the Bagre Dam of Burkina Faso have resulted in overflowing of the White Volta River, flooding, and fatalities over northern Ghana. Additional moderate rainfall is expected over the region during the next week, maintaining elevated risks for flooding.

    3. Torrential rainfall is forecast along coastal areas of Kenya and northeastern Tanzania during the next outlook period.


    0 0

    Source: US Agency for International Development
    Country: Bangladesh, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, India, Mali, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Sudan, World

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    Project Summary

    States with high exposure to climate hazards face multi-faceted challenges, including physical and livelihood risks for the population that may force states to redirect scarce resources to adaptation or humanitarian response efforts and strain the capacity of states that, in many cases, are still solidifying democratic institutions and mechanisms for meeting public needs. Similarly, fragility can affect many aspects of a state’s capacity and legitimacy across its political, economic, social, and security spheres.

    When states face fragility and climate risks simultaneously, the risks and challenges are compounded. This study seeks to identify the locations where fragility and climate risks co-occur around the world. Since these places with compound fragility-climate risks may be more vulnerable to humanitarian emergencies or instability, understanding the distinct fragility and climate challenges they face could present opportunities and focal points for intervention.

    This study examines highly fragile states with high exposure to multiple climate hazards. The reason for this is straightforward: responding to high exposure to even a single hazard requires substantial resources, infrastructure, and mobilization, yet a country that has high exposure to multiple hazards requires such resources, infrastructure, and mobilization many times over to address each of these diverse hazards. For a highly fragile state—for instance Burma, which faces substantial risks from both slow-onset hazards like droughts and rapid-onset hazards like cyclones and coastal inundation—these diverse threats and required responses can exceed state capacity and social capital.

    This study has produced several novel analytical products. These include: a new composite measure of climate exposure allowing assessment of subnational exposure patterns worldwide; a new longitudinal fragility measure allowing assessment of state effectiveness and legitimacy in the political, security, economic, and social spheres of states worldwide; metrics on the number and proportion of people facing high and very high exposure in fragile states; metrics on the extent of territory facing very high exposure in fragile states; and maps showing the locations of overall climate exposure and individual hazard risks, overall fragility and sectoral risks, and the intersection of fragility and climate risks worldwide.


    0 0

    Source: African Union Mission in Somalia
    Country: Sierra Leone, Somalia

    Mogadishu, 28 September 2018 – The African Union’s deputy Special Representative for Somalia Mr. Simon Mulongo has underscored the important role Sierra Leone is playing, in support of peace operations in the African continent.

    Mr. Mulongo was speaking in his office today, at a meeting with the visiting Sierra Leonean Police Director of Peace and Support Operations, Assistant Inspector General of Police (AIGP) Gloria Tarawally.

    Ms. Tarawally and Chief Superintendent Harold AMC Hanaley – the Sierra Leonean Police Head of Peacekeeping, are visiting Somalia, to assess the level of support accorded to AMISOM, by the country.

    Currently, Sierra Leone has the largest police contingent in Somalia. Last April, the country deployed 160-police officers to Jubbaland State, to increase police interventions in newly recovered areas, in the Lower Juba region. The contingent also runs training and mentoring programmes for Jubbaland police officers.

    “Thank you on behalf of the Mission, for not only giving us a force but also one that is fully equipped. The Contingent from Sierra Leone is among those rated highly and has been instrumental in restoring law and order in Jubbaland, training and mentoring the regional police to ensure that they can keep law and order,” Mulongo said.

    He reiterated AMISOM’s successes in Somalia, that has enabled the restoration of statehood and significantly improved the security situation in the country.

    AIGP Tarawally committed to Sierra Leone’s continued support to peacekeeping initiatives by the African Union. “It is good for us, as Africans, to do what we are doing here in Somalia. Despite the many challenges, it will go down in history, that as Africans, we came here and helped solve a problem on the African continent,” she remarked.

    The delegation from Sierra Leone will meet various security actors and stakeholders during their visit. The West African country bears similarities with Somalia, as it also suffered a decade-long civil strife – between 1991 and 2002; until the intervention of regional governments, allied forces and the United Nations.


    0 0

    Source: International Federation of Red Cross And Red Crescent Societies
    Country: Guinea, Liberia, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone

    Description of the disaster

    From the time of the confirmation of the initial cases of the current West Africa Ebola outbreak in Guinea in March 2014, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, comprising National Red Cross Red Crescent Societies, the IFRC Secretariat and the International Committee of the Red Cross have been an essential part of the extensive global effort mobilized to stop the epidemic. National Societies in affected countries assumed a lead role, complementing their national health systems. Immediately the outbreak was confirmed, IFRC organized its resources to provide coordinated operational support National Societies.

    The unprecedented spread of the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) in West Africa has resulted in one of the most challenging public health disasters in recent times. The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement is part of the extensive global effort mobilized to contain the epidemic in solidarity with the affected countries and the international community.

    With more than 10,000 Red Cross volunteers trained in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, supported by the Red Cross Red Crescents network of 189 National Societies worldwide, the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement uniquely played a critical role in responding to the outbreak while fostering preparedness in at-risk countries. The management and supervision of the EVD operation shifted to Countries under the supervision and support of technical department at the Africa Region office after the exit of the Ebola Regional Coordination Unit. The overall EVD operation responsibility of the appeal was transferred to respective country Representative under the supervision of the Health Coordinator at Africa Region Office.

    The 10 Country European Union funded Beneficiary Communication and Social Mobilization project continued until October 2016. The responsibility of overseeing this project was transferred to the Africa Region Office after the exit of the Ebola Coordination Unit. The main objective of the project was to reduce the threat of an outbreak of Ebola and other prevalent epidemic threats and infectious diseases in the surrounding countries (of the mainly affected countries of Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea) by addressing at risk groups and risk-related behaviors among the population of the ten target countries.

    The aim was to strengthen prevention and control the spread of the most prevalent infectious diseases by increasing knowledge on the causes, symptoms and modes of transmission and promoting healthy behaviors as well as the early detection of infectious diseases. The Africa Region Office also maintained PMER capacity in Nairobi and Dakar to support updates on the Country level appeals and the Regional Beneficiary Communications project for West Africa. Activities in the 10 country EU Beneficiary Communications project were concluded in October 2016.As per the project agreement, final narrative reports from the National Societies implementing the project was received in January 2017. The financial reports for the Beneficiary communications project required additional review before being finalized. Furthermore, a consultant was recruited to finalize a synthesis document which is a compilation of various Ebola reports, evaluations and studies for reference purpose. Because of these reasons, a three-month no cost project extension was requested to ensure proper closure of P60018-MDR60002 that led to the new end-date is 31 March 2017.


    0 0

    Source: International Federation of Red Cross And Red Crescent Societies
    Country: Sierra Leone

    A. Situation analysis

    Description of the disaster

    In the early hours of 14th August, torrential rains caused parts of Mount Sugar Loaf, a range of hills surrounding Freetown, to slide into the Regent Village vicinity. This led to heavy loss of life and property at the epicentre and downstream at Juba, Lumley, Kaningo/Kamayama axis.

    According to the Public Health National Emergency centre, 413 bodies were conveyed to the central morgue between 14-15 August 2017. Of these, only six bodies were identified by family members. Upon request from the family members, two bodies were handed over to the families. The rest of the bodies were buried at Waterloo cemetery. The search and rescue continued and to date, the Office of the National Security (ONS) has confirmed to 502 deaths and 600 more classified 600 as missing.
    The event caused widespread destruction of habitats with at least 1,245 houses and over 300 houses destroyed and partially damaged respectively. According to ONS`s latest information, the mudslides rendered 11,816 people displaced of which over 7,000 are sheltered in temporary camps in Freetown.
    Response teams, led by the Sierra Leone Armed Forces and SLRCS volunteers, conducted evacuation, search & rescue, removed dead bodies and provided medical care to the injured. The role of the Red Cross has been well recognized in the media. Reuters, AFP, ABC, CNN, BBC (various), EFE, DPA, CTV (Canada) recognized the SLRCS as the first respondent with communities and government armed force units deployed to support the search and rescue efforts.

    The biggest damage was on the shelters; houses were demolished by the floods with most of them rendered without a salvage value, those that remained were either inhabitable or partially damaged. Moreover, the livelihoods of the affected people were completely disrupted. According to primary ONS assessments: 52% of the populations was living on small trade whereas 18% relied on physical labour skilled or non-skilled and 6 % were in in formal transport including motor cyclists with 7% formally salaried.
    The government established IDP camps in Freetown. Temporary shelters and other basic services such as water, sanitation, health was provided to the displaced families. Food was provided by WFP in a wet ration of three meals a day. During this period, Red cross is provided hygiene promotion and psychosocial support with ambulance referral service on daily basis to the camp population.

    The locations affected around Freetown of Juba, Regent, Matome, Bambaira Culvert, Kamayama, Jahkingdom Kaningo and Dwazark are densely populated settlements. The site of the mudslide on the hill at Regent is adjacent to a squatter settlement on a restricted and high-risk area. On the foot of the same hill a permanent stream was interfered with by the mudslide, the saturated and highly mobile debris flow carrying soft clay (mud), boulders altered the width of the river causing it to change its course and increasing its volume acerbating the effect in terms of scope of coverage and destruction. Indeed, an equal proportion of death and destruction was inflicted by the increased water volume and change of course of the natural water way. In most of the affected places were extended pockets of squatter settlements in unplanned, risky and undesignated settlement according to the government.

    Down the valley the populations that were flooded and destroyed comprised of poor population that already lived in a deplorable condition of housing, hygiene and sanitation in crowded informal settlements. Apart from the over 11,000 directly affected, over 20,000 more are in risk in the cross section of the affected villages Apparently, the human effects on the fragile and risky hilly, valley and drainage topography in competition for settlement is daring. The hills are deforested, and the water ways are squeezed with fragile banks and with multiple break points which make it susceptible to flood with the heavy rains and any other slight changes.

    Moreover, the poor living conditions of the populations high at risk, exposes them to other environmental hazards including disease outbreaks. The water sources especially their traditional wells are damaged and or contaminated and the sanitation situation is extremely wanting, open defecation and using rivers and flowing water bodies as disposal agents is a glaring disaster.

    Apart from emergency interventions of the current disaster, increasing the level of information and preparedness capacity of the affected communities is desirable for mitigation of apparent potential hazards.

    Unfortunately, many communities, which already pre-existing poor infrastructure and weak basic services were the most affected by mudslide and floods in the country’s capital city. All six communities were badly hit by the mudslide making scores of households homeless and destroying their means of livelihood. Water sources were contaminated posing the threat of water borne diseases. Gardens and agricultural fields were affected by the floods leaving crops, including vegetables and root crops damaged. The SLRCS and IFRC reached out and provided both relief and recovery support to the communities to restore their dignity and improve their livelihoods.


    0 0

    Source: Forced Migration Review, University of Oxford
    Country: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Belize, Central African Republic, China, Colombia, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Georgia, Honduras, Iraq, Kenya, Maldives, Mali, Myanmar, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Philippines, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Uganda, Ukraine, Vanuatu, World

    From the editors

    In her Foreword to this issue of FMR, the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Cecilia Jimenez-Damary, poses the question: Where do we go from here?

    In the 20 years since they were launched, the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement have been of assistance to many States responding to internal displacement, and have been incorporated into many national and regional policies and laws. However, the scale of internal displacement today remains vast, and the impact on those who are displaced is immense.

    In this issue, authors acknowledge the applications and successes of the Guiding Principles while reflecting on their limitations, the challenges to their implementation, their relevance to contemporary incidences and different drivers of internal displacement, future challenges that might have to be faced, and the potential application of new understandings and new approaches.

    We would like to thank Erin Mooney (UN Protection Capacity) and Kathrine Starup (Danish Refugee Council) for their assistance as advisors to the feature theme, and the following donors for their support of this issue: the Government of the Principality of Liechtenstein, ICRC, IDMC, IOM, Open Society Foundations, the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, UNHCR (Division of International Protection, Global Protection Cluster and IDP Section) and UNOCHA.

    See www.fmreview.org/GuidingPrinciples20 to access the magazine, its accompanying ‘digest’, our new Editors’ briefing (with an overview of content and links to articles) and all individual articles. A podcast of each article is also available.

    FMR 59 will be available in English, Arabic, Spanish and French. For printed copies, please email us at fmr@qeh.ox.ac.uk.

    Forthcoming issues (see www.fmreview.org/forthcoming)

    • FMR 60: Education (February 2019)

    • FMR 61: Ethics and responsibilities (June 2019) This issue will also pay tribute to the late Barbara Harrell-Bond. See back cover for more details.

    Follow us on Facebook or Twitter or sign up for email alerts at www.fmreview.org/request/alerts.

    Marion Couldrey and Jenny Peebles Editors, Forced Migration Review


    0 0

    Source: International Organization for Migration
    Country: Algeria, Bangladesh, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Côte d'Ivoire, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, India, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, occupied Palestinian territory, Pakistan, Philippines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Republic of Tanzania, World, Yemen, Zambia

    OVERVIEW

    MIGRANT BASELINE

    The 21th round of data collection took place in July and August 2018. During this round a revised version of the data collection methodology was used to capture additional information on the needs and challenges migrants are facing.

    DTM identified there to be at least 669,176 migrants in Libya. Migrants were identified in all baladiyas, within 554 communities and originated from more than 41 countries.

    As displayed in the maps on page 5-6, out of the total number of migrants identified, 630,907 individuals (94%) originate from 31 different African countries with 38,030 individuals (6%) from 9 Asian and Middle Eastern countries. The remaining 239 individuals were recorded with unknown/other country of origin.

    The top five nationalities identified were Nigerien, Egyptian, Chadian, Sudanese and Nigerian, together these nationalities account for up to 69% of Libya’s migrant population.

    Out of the 630,907 individuals from Africa, 438,294 (65%) originate from Sub-Saharan countries and 192,613 individuals (29%) from North African countries.

    60% of both African and Asian migrants were identified in Libya’s western mantikas, with the highest concentration in Tripoli and surrounding areas. Other identified migrants were split between East and South (21.5% and 18.5% respectively).

    However, the South hosts 20% of African migrants identified, while only few Asian and Middle-Eastern migrants were identified there (only 1% of Asian and Middle-Eastern migrants in Libya were identified in the South).


    0 0

    Source: UN High Commissioner for Refugees
    Country: Bangladesh, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, Ghana, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Montenegro, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Spain, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Turkey, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, World

    Statement by Volker Türk, Assistant High Commissioner for Protection
    By Volker Türk | 04 October 2018

    Mr Chairperson, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen,

    Thank you for the opportunity to introduce the protection segment of this year’s Executive Committee. It is, as always, informed by the Note on International Protection and the protection papers from the June 2018 Standing Committee.[1] As they aptly reveal, the fraught debates about refugees that we are witnessing in so many parts of the world today are manifested in growing protection concerns globally. I would like to share some thoughts about how we can create space for more empathic and humane dialogue by bringing the focus back to human dignity, which is at the core of protection.

    Developments and trends in the world of refugee protection over the past year reflect in many ways how paradoxical our world has become. On the one hand, we saw how all 193 United Nations Member States came together to develop the global compact on refugees [GCR] – an unprecedented success of multilateralism at a time when the debate about refugees at times has become heavily politicized and contentious. It represented what can be achieved when we choose to rise above short-term interests to find a common and constructive way forward. When we see refugees not only as our responsibility, but as part of the human family. We also welcomed how one country granted prima facie recognition to an influx of refugees from a neighbouring one. How the older generation in a rural community reached out to refugee newcomers. How refugee chefs brought new meaning to fusion cuisine. How a formerly stateless minority was granted citizenship and identity documents. How internally displaced women were able to regain their property and start a new life. And how ordinary people the world over welcomed and supported refugees with gestures of kindness and solidarity.

    On the other hand, we also witnessed the consequences of populist pressures and the shirking of responsibilities: for instance, when children banged their heads against the wall, in despair, as they were separated from parents or languished in detention. When young asylum-seekers committed suicide after being held and mistreated in processing centres with no prospects for a future. When family reunion was denied to a survivor of gang rape on the premise that it would encourage others to come. When losses of life at sea surged dramatically, as NGO rescue ships were grounded. When hundreds of thousands of men, women, girls, and boys were caught in crossfire, attacked, forcibly recruited, or raped. When civilians fled, but found themselves trapped at the border and denied entry. When refugees were rounded up overnight and deported to their country of origin. The litany of such incidents is unbearable, and yet it goes on. The issue is not a crisis of numbers, but the miscasting of refugees to foment fear and justify counterproductive measures that pay no heed to principles of protection.

    When such things happen, we know that something fundamental to basic human decency is being lost. People flee persecution and human rights abuses only to experience this further in their countries of asylum. They flee in hopes of finding safety, only to encounter indifference – where the silent majority appears to no longer care, or civil society is too constrained to speak up.

    We are facing a watershed moment where two sets of values have emerged in two distinct modes of discourse. It is difficult to reconcile how the positive developments of the past year have occurred alongside the seemingly endless volley of assaults on refugees. In different ways, they speak to what is at the heart of our protection work: respecting human dignity. They show what it means to place dignity at the centre of our action and what can happen when this fundamental quality of being human is denied. Dignity features prominently in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UDHR], whose 70th anniversary we celebrate later this year. In the spirit of the philosopher Michael Rosen’s invitation to consider what it means not only to have dignity, but to be treated with dignity,[2] I invite us to consider this question in the context of displacement and statelessness.

    Dignity demands that we treat one another with respect and an ethic of care. When I think about what this means, I am reminded of my student days when I used to cross the Sigmund Freud Park to reach the University of Vienna. In the park, there is a stone inscribed with a quote from Freud, stating, “The voice of reason is gentle.” The noise, chatter, shrillness, lack of civility, and harsh language around many issues today – be they refugees, women, migration, or climate change – serve only to distract, obfuscate, and denigrate the respect for dignity that must guide our actions. We need to make the space for the voice of reason to be heard – one that is not loud, crass, or short-lived, but rather gentle and organic, recalling our past in moving forward, reminding us of what it means to be treated with basic decency and respect.

    I see five areas where we can make such a conversation possible – for human dignity to re-enter the picture in our thinking and engagement:

    First, respect for dignity must be central to the progressive development and implementation of law and standards for refugee protection. Human dignity cannot be superseded by political or other interests. It cannot be parcelled out only to certain groups. It should not be written out of law. We need to focus on garnering the political will, not just from governments, but from societies as a whole, to commit to laws founded on respect for dignity and to implement them. We need to recognize that when we allow the denigration of just one person through the breach of these laws, we set the precedent for the denigration of us all.

    In the refugee context, this means preventing political and juridical attempts to narrow the concept of who is a refugee. The refugee definition set out in the 1951 Convention has been developed in regional instruments and through State practice and judicial interpretation over decades, and is based on the question of whether one can return to one’s country of origin. Being able to flee and be recognized as a refugee can be a matter of life and death. The drafters of the 1951 Convention envisioned that the definition would be full and inclusive, beyond the realm of politics, and firmly embedded in fundamental considerations of humanity. To do otherwise would have been a failure to recognize the dignity inherent in us all. We have seen, therefore, how the refugee concept has included individuals fleeing armed conflict, gang or domestic violence, serious harm by non-state actors, and persecution on account of gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation. I remember how much we welcomed the 1996 Kasinga decision on female genital mutilation,[3] for instance, which demonstrated the adaptability of the legal framework to evolving realities, based on respect for the dignity of women and girls.

    Unfortunately, the focus on preserving dignity tends to get lost in debates that cite security as the rationale for restrictive approaches to refugee protection. Governments of course need to ensure the security of their people. But this is entirely complementary with providing refuge to people fleeing persecution. An exclusive focus on security alone is detrimental. Refugees, by definition, are the victims, not the perpetrators, of violence and terror; they often have rejected extremism and been targeted as a result. It is disturbing, therefore, when arguments of security are used to justify denying security to those who need it most.

    The focus on dignity also can get lost within a discourse that treats international refugee law almost as a science, focusing on minutiae and parsing words, identities, and intentions. Over-complication and narrowing of the refugee definition have detracted from the essence of refugee law. It is time to return to the object and purpose of refugee protection as it was first conceived, which should frame our analysis and interventions. We are heartened to see that this message is beginning to take root. Within our operations and with States, we are working to create refugee status determination [RSD] systems that are adaptable to changing circumstances and large numbers, drawing upon an array of approaches, including simplified or accelerated procedures. This requires a deep knowledge of the profiles of asylum-seekers and country of origin information, to ensure that increased efficiency does not affect quality and fairness of decisions. We are working with States, such as Canada, Egypt, and South Africa, to help address RSD backlogs. Morocco, Thailand, and Trinidad are progressing in the creation of State procedures for RSD. And Malawi and Niger are developing the capacities of their institutions responsible for RSD. And as of last month, Turkey has taken over responsibility for RSD and registration from UNHCR.

    In the IDP context, law and policy development, as well as humanitarian action, need to be centred on respect for dignity. On the twentieth anniversary of the IDP Guiding Principles, we are bringing this into focus with a three-year strategy – the GP20 Plan of Action[4] – to advance the implementation of these Principles in selected countries around the world. Next year, we will pay tribute to advances in protection in Africa on the occasions of the fiftieth anniversary of the OAU/AU Refugee Convention and the tenth anniversary of the AU Convention on IDPs [the Kampala Convention]. Many initiatives are underway, including roundtables on mixed movements, livelihoods, education, and resettlement and complementary pathways. These will inform pledges made at the AU Extraordinary Summit on refugees, IDPs, and returnees, and will help to effect the legislative and policy changes needed to anchor core protection standards in different countries. Already, Niger is developing a draft law on internal displacement based upon consultations with displacement-affected communities around the country. South Sudan convened a High-Level Panel on National Legislation on Internal Displacement, bringing together Government officials, experts, the private sector, donors, development and humanitarian actors, and the AU, to discuss its draft law on internal displacement – one that emerged from a broad consultative process with IDPs themselves. Similar initiatives are also planned in the Central African Republic, Mali, and Somalia.

    Second, respect for dignity must be the antidote to dehumanization. In the global north and south, the dehumanization of refugees, migrants, IDPs, and stateless individuals has become a worrying trend – one which bears a certain irony, as dehumanization is often a precursor to persecution and flight in the first place. Dehumanization results from inappropriate language, misinformation, deterrence, arbitrary detention, separation of families and children, and ‘warehousing’. It prevents us from seeing the other as a human being with rights, needs, and dignity. It desensitizes and numbs our conscience. It enables easy slippage into mistreatment and policies of cruelty, as it prevents empathy and compassion from shaping the response.

    Identity issues are often at the heart of this dynamic. We know how much hatred and violence have their origins in reducing individuals and groups to one or two characteristics. This challenges the inherent dignity of all. It brings to mind the author Max Frisch’s observation that fixed images of the other reveal an absence of love.[5] Everyone is a human being, first and foremost – it is immaterial whether you are an asylum-seeker or a migrant – when you are at risk of drowning, you are a human being in need of rescue. That is what being ‘born free and equal in dignity and rights’ means.

    We need to confront and address xenophobia, racism, nativism, and bigotry, often driven by fear, anger, and anxieties within communities. We know well from history how the mistreatment of the foreigner paves the way for the mistreatment of the citizen. Populist politics tend to use this dangerous mix as a vehicle to deflect attention from what is at stake, and as a pretext for demolishing the institutions of liberal democracy, such as the judiciary, a free press, or free and fair elections.[6] These are harbingers of a dystopian future. They ultimately have a corrosive effect on everyone – on how we operate and what we are willing to accept.

    Countering the dangers that they engender requires that we engage with the individuals who harbour these sentiments – to deal with their fears and the emotions at their source. We need to address the causes of inequality that so often lead to a sense of victimization and a tendency to scapegoat those worse off than oneself. The refugee issue can be a catalyst for galvanizing society against the dynamics of dehumanization and for focusing attention where it truly belongs – on quests for autocratic power masked in the language of vitriol and blame. Our attention to these dynamics could go a long way towards focusing accountability on the perpetrators rather than vilifying the victims.

    Just as to deny one person’s dignity is ultimately to deny our own, the responsibility to ensure one person’s dignity is the responsibility of us all. In practice, the responsibility often falls to the few who are willing to engage. It is time to bring broader segments of civil society – and especially the silent majorities around the world who support taking in refugees[7] – towards a common purpose of re-instilling empathy through the recognition of oneself in the other. Our #WithRefugees Campaign has helped to galvanize this kind of support. It has recorded 31 million acts of solidarity for refugees, and almost two million people have signed onto a petition calling for all refugees to have access to school, a safe place to live, and the possibility to work.

    Through our new Age, Gender, Diversity [AGD] policy, we can make headway in this direction – bringing the experiences and views of individual refugees more visibly to the forefront of our planning, engagement, and communications. We are strengthening our accountability to the people we serve with better management, monitoring, and reporting based on sound evidence. This year, five operations have been selected for focused support in implementing this policy and testing its indicators. The AGD approach also has been integrated in the GCR, providing further impetus for UNHCR and partners to ensure inclusivity. While much remains to be done for people with disabilities, we made strong commitments at the Global Disability Summit in London, improved our data collection, and tested the Washington Group questions in several refugee settings. We are also improving our approaches to LGBTI refugees by creating safe spaces, identifying and safely registering individuals at risk, and training staff. We further continue engaging youth, particularly through the Global Youth Advisory Council, which was active in the consultations on the GCR; and through highlighting youth initiatives, such as Spark15 in Malta, promoting refugee integration.

    We also are facilitating the leadership of refugee women,[8] as in the Community Governance Process in two camps in Bangladesh; in the community-based tool for addressing women’s psychosocial needs in Colombia; and in the participation of women and girls in sports events in India as a part of the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence. However, the inclusion of protection considerations in designing and delivering assistance remains a challenge. Even with the majority of our operations providing support for survivors of sexual and gender-based violence [SGBV],[9] we still contend with inadequate lights, locks, and latrines in many camps around the world – fundamentals in camp design to prevent sexual violence. The risks could be mitigated, as we are trying to do through solar lighting in Northern Uganda, and the use of alternative fuel sources in Tanzania, Rwanda, Cameroon, Ghana, and Chad, so that women do not have to travel long distances in search of firewood. However, adequate funding is still a significant obstacle to their implementation. Our forthcoming SGBV policy will highlight the imperative of not only responding to SGBV, but also preventing it through targeted programming to address its root causes.

    Third, respect for dignity must be at the centre of the right to a nationality, which recognizes that individuals are not objects to be governed by the powerful, but are subjects of law, endowed with dignity and hence entitled to a legal identity. Yet statelessness persists, often unseen and unheard. Stateless people have told me how they feel invisible, as if they have fallen through the cracks and do not matter. This particularly struck me when I met Rohingya in their home villages a couple of years ago. They seemed to be in a near catatonic state, with little hope for more than a marginal existence. It is no wonder that statelessness can be linked to displacement and the lack of development for everyone.

    The right to a nationality was the powerful aspiration of Article 15 of the UDHR, and lately, we have seen a revival of this ambition. Sustainable Development Goal 16 provides a means to realize this right today, and our 10-year #IBelong Campaign to end statelessness has kept the attention on this goal. Since the launch of the Campaign, four States hosting large non-refugee stateless populations made progress in resolving these situations. Thailand, for example, is registering stateless persons, issuing birth certificates, and providing a pathway to naturalization for certain groups. In August, Malaysia announced it would expedite citizenship for qualified stateless individuals in the country. There have been twenty accessions to the Statelessness Conventions since the Campaign was launched, the most recent being Chile, Spain, and Haiti this year. Thirteen countries in the ECOWAS region developed national action plans to end statelessness as a part of their commitments in the Abidjan Declaration and Banjul Plan of Action. Six countries – Armenia, Cuba, Estonia, Iceland, Luxembourg, and Tajikistan – reformed their nationality laws to allow children, born on their territory and who would otherwise be stateless, to acquire that State’s nationality. Nine countries established or improved statelessness determination procedures, including Brazil, Ecuador, Bulgaria, and Montenegro. And Madagascar and Sierra Leone amended their nationality laws to allow mothers to confer nationality to their children on an equal basis as fathers.

    The campaign has also catalyzed initiatives aimed at respecting and restoring dignity through legal identity. Regional declarations to resolve statelessness have been adopted in the Americas, West Africa, the Great Lakes region, and the Middle East and North Africa. The Draft AU Protocol on the Right to Nationality and Eradication of Statelessness will be the first regional instrument of its kind. Civil society networks have sprung up in Southern Africa, the Asia Pacific, Central Asia, and the Middle East and North Africa, complementing those in Europe and the Americas, in the spirit of a whole-of-society approach to preventing and reducing statelessness, as we saw, for example in the launch this year of A Community-Based Practitioner’s Guide: Documenting Citizenship & Other Forms of Legal Identity.[10] These are grounds for hope as we approach the midpoint review of the campaign and the high-level event planned during next year’s Executive Committee meeting, where we look forward to announcements by States of how they will act to prevent and resolve statelessness on their territories.

    Fourth, respect for the dignity of all speaks to the necessity of multilateralism in an interdependent world – especially in transboundary matters, such as population movements across borders. Refugees bring to us parts of the world we may not often see, but upon which we may rely. Conflicts in faraway lands – often those rich in natural resources – have more to do with us than we would like to admit – with our growth and consumption – and they challenge us to examine our own actions or lack thereof. Refugees, in this sense, remind us of our comfort zones, our privilege, and the interdependence of phenomena: the flapping of wings in one continent setting off a tempest in another. It is our collective responsibility, therefore, to address root causes of displacement and help countries shoulder their responsibilities for hosting refugees – a contribution they are making to the greater public good, which must be honoured. This is the essence of responsibility-sharing.

    It is surprising, then, that some of the countries that have benefited the most from international cooperation are amongst those least willing to be part of international or regional frameworks on population movements, including refugees. This was exemplified not least in the vexed discussions around fixed resettlement quotas and mandatory relocation schemes in Europe. We also see how it has become fashionable in politics and some academic circles to play with the idea of containment, externalization, and literally shipping people out of sight, out of mind, and effectively out of rights – so that we do not see them anymore, so that we forget their humanity. Yet, in the process, we lose ours. This does not do justice to anyone.

    Unilateralism, isolationism, and pretending that these problems do not concern us are self-destructive and simply do not work. No country or community can deal with refugee situations on their own. Greater and more predictable international cooperation and support is a necessity. Although multilateralism seems to wax and wane these days, it is important to remember that it enhances, rather than diminishes, national sovereignty. Through cooperation on issues of common concern, we each become stronger. Rather than shifting problems onto one another by acting alone, we can solve them by acting together.

    It is significant in this context that the world now has the GCR. Some may think of it as an acceptable level of unhappiness, but let’s not lose sight of its enormous potential. Through an iterative, organic process with States and other stakeholders, we carved out a meaningful set of common undertakings that has the potential to make a real difference in the lives of refugees and their host communities. The GCR offers an approach for securing more predictable and sustained support for countries hosting refugees. Emanating from the international refugee protection regime, the GCR involves a wide range of actors in facilitating access to humanitarian and development support; providing mechanisms for regional and international solidarity that could be activated by host governments in times of emergency; promoting self-reliance of refugees; and reinvigorating the search for solutions. The GCR draws from lessons learned in the application of the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework [CRRF] set out in the New York Declaration and now applied in 15 countries. Already, we are seeing the benefits this approach can bring,[11] particularly with development-related investments in support of refugee responses and host communities now amounting to over USD 6.5 billion in addition to humanitarian funding. And regionally, for example, Costa Rica is applying its commitments under MIRPS[12] to refugees from Nicaragua, and IGAD[13] Member States committed to include refugees in national education plans by 2020.

    The GCR is not an end, but a beginning – of an evolution in governance that includes refugees and extends to host communities as ‘people of interest to UNHCR’. While we will continue playing our mandated role, we will mobilize others in this project, and the creation of the Division of Resilience and Solutions this year is helping to take us in this new direction. Let me highlight some of the areas that will require robust follow-up:

    To start with, we need to focus on building resilience to ensure that solutions are lasting and sustainable – be they return, resettlement, local integration, or interim local solutions until longer-term solutions can be found. Building resilience through education, livelihoods, and access to services, in particular, prepares refugees for solutions, and enables them to live in dignity and contribute to their communities wherever they are living. Facilitating economic and social inclusion has been recognized in a number of recent initiatives, such as the Sustainable Development Goals 2030, the GCR, ILO Recommendation 205,[14] and the ILO Guiding principles on the access of refugees and other forcibly displaced persons to the labour market.[15] It is incumbent upon us all to find practical ways to translate these initiatives into action, particularly through bolstering national systems to include refugees. Displaced people and their host communities often find themselves in situations where they are interdependent, and development for one population can benefit the development of the other. As humanitarian needs are not decreasing anytime soon, humanitarian funding cannot be compromised. At the same time, we need to complement immediate needs by ensuring longer-term support. This means considering displacement across the relevant government sectors, and recognizing that these new models require time to take root and have an impact.

    The world has made progress in supporting refugee education. For example, in Chad, 108 schools in 19 refugee camps have been declared official Chadian schools. Ethiopia has seen significant increases in refugee enrollment at all levels of education, and recent laws and policies in Turkey have enabled 610,000 Syrians to be enrolled in formal schooling, plus 20,000 in higher education. UNHCR has also initiated a Youth Education Programme in Kenya, Pakistan, Rwanda, and Uganda so far, with over 232,000 refugee youth, to increase their access to secondary and tertiary education. Scholarships and connected learning programmes have given some 14,000 refugee youth access to accredited tertiary education. More Syrian refugees have enrolled in universities in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq. And the Connected Learning in Crisis Consortium has facilitated digital programmes with onsite tuition for 7,000 refugees in 12 countries. Yet, with 4 million refugee children still out of school – half a million higher than 2017, and a disproportionate number being girls[16] – we need to redouble our efforts and continue driving home the importance of education to their protection, resilience, and futures.

    We are also aiming to facilitate greater economic inclusion by working with development agencies and the private sector to ensure that host countries are receiving additional investments and that markets are inclusive. Refugees bring with them skills and aptitudes that can benefit host countries when enabling policies are in place for them to pursue livelihoods. Recognizing this, the OECD and UNHCR released this year an action plan for employers, refugees, governments, and civil society to broaden employment opportunities for refugees.[17] The private sector in some host countries, such as Turkey, Mexico, and Costa Rica, is playing an essential role in employing refugees, bringing added value to the economy and filling labour gaps. Socio-economic vulnerability is further being addressed in Burkina Faso, Kenya, Tanzania, Pakistan, and Malaysia through the MADE51 programme; and in the Republic of Congo, Malawi, and Egypt through developing safe livelihood opportunities in local markets. The World Bank has created financing windows for countries hosting large populations of refugees, and UNCDF and SIDA are supporting financial service providers to serve refugees in Jordan and Uganda. The ILO is supporting Jordan to regulate and protect the work of refugees, and is conducting market analyses and developing economic sectors in 13 countries so far that can create jobs and add value to the local economy in host countries. UNDP likewise is supporting Turkey to respond to increased needs in local economies. The EU is relaxing import regulations and standards for some host countries to develop their export capacities, such as in the agricultural sector in northern Lebanon.[18] And refugees in Djibouti can now open bank accounts, enabling them to participate in the economic life of their communities.

    We further need to focus on resettlement and third country solutions, which are key to the successful implementation of the GCR. Through the three-year resettlement strategy envisaged in the GCR, we hope to address the widening gap between the number of refugees in need of resettlement and the places made available by countries around the world.[19] This is important both for ensuring that the refugees most at risk have a viable durable solution, and for building the confidence of major host countries in the international community’s commitment to help shoulder the responsibility for refugees. More States need to join the 35 countries so far offering resettlement, or increase their existing programmes, including through private sponsorship schemes. Countries also need to consider developing or facilitating access to complementary pathways for admission. This will require crafting approaches that involve new partners, systems, and models tailored to specific situations. These new approaches would not replace resettlement, but rather add to the pool of possible solutions on offer, as we need to preserve resettlement as a critical tool for protecting the most vulnerable.

    Equally, we further look forward to working with all of you on the implementation of the global compact for safe, orderly and regular migration – another feat of multilateralism borne out of the New York Declaration – which advances a common vision of how to make migration work for everyone, including from a sustainable development perspective. There are interlinkages between the two compacts that we will work out with partners operationally, especially in mixed situations of refugees and migrants, building on longstanding practices as well as recent experiences in the Central Mediterranean, which have underlined the necessity of predictable disembarkation schemes, responsibility-sharing arrangements, and sufficient rescue capacity. In a related vein, trafficking is on the rise and features as a prominent form of violence in conflict and displacement situations. UNHCR is committed to work with the international community to address this, including through establishing joint procedures with IOM, incorporating anti-trafficking interventions in the Global Protection Cluster, and building our own staff capacity to identity, assist, and protect the victims.

    Finally, we have a responsibility to secure the dignity and safety of future generations. We need to address the issues that lead to forced displacement and compound vulnerabilities of future generations. Foremost among these is armed conflict. In 2017, there were 55 situations of armed conflict,[20] most prominently in Syria, where 12 million people have been displaced, of whom one million were displaced this year alone. These situations are taking a heavy toll. Apart from the obvious impacts, there are less visible ones. Illiteracy in conflict-stricken countries, for example, is three times higher than the global rate, with girls at the greatest disadvantage.[21] Sadly, we see starvation used as a weapon of war. The majority of people who are chronically hungry – 489 million people – live in countries where there is conflict,[22] and more than half a million children in these situations could die from starvation this year.[23] Children are also at risk of recruitment, sexual violence, and harm from attacks on schools and hospitals. More than 10,000 children were killed or maimed in armed conflict last year, and 8,000 were used as combatants.[24]

    Factors fuelling conflict and violence therefore need to be addressed as a priority – whether they be the arms trade; extraction industries; acquisitions of land for mining, agriculture, timber, or water; severe inequality; authoritarianism; or environmental change and degradation. This also requires restoring rule of law founded on dignity, accountability, and justice. It means building social cohesion and peace through conflict mediation, minority protection, and rights-based approaches to development. It also calls for improving early warning systems, contingency planning, and emergency preparedness. To protect the dignity of those most affected by conflict, humanitarian, development, and peacebuilding actors need to act in concert and complement one another. In this regard, the UN is undergoing a series of institutional changes to ensure that as a whole, it is better able to support countries in realizing their goals for peace and development.

    Nowhere is the need for prevention so urgent and fundamental to the survival of humanity than in relation to climate change and environmental degradation – areas of concern for the planet as a whole, which increasingly interact with other drivers of displacement. Drought, exacerbated by climate change and failing government policies in different parts of the world, has fueled social tensions, leading to violent conflict and displacement. Access to and competition over water, has exacerbated communal tensions in Sudan’s Darfur and Afghanistan. Conflict, insecurity, and environmental degradation prevent people from planting crops or reaching markets, thus losing their livelihoods.[25] Sudden and slow onset natural hazards displace on average around 25.4 million people within their country each year.[26] The economic losses resulting from failures to address these issues could reach up to USD 2 trillion by 2050.[27]

    Our current systems of governance and sense of responsibility seem stuck in the short-term, looking for immediate solutions and instant gratification. Yet, we owe it to those coming after us to find a path out of these unsustainable systems. Displacement and migration related to climate change and natural hazards have finally been recognized within the climate debate – through the Nansen Initiative Protection Agenda and the Platform on Disaster Displacement, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, and the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction. The GCR also recognized the role of environmental degradation and disasters in displacement. Population movements associated with the adverse effects of climate change and disasters will accelerate unless the implementation of the Paris Agreement becomes a top priority.[28] As the Secretary-General said, when announcing plans for the 2019 Climate Summit, climate change is a defining issue of our time,[29] and this is a defining moment to act. We will need to consider how best to reduce the risks and what forms of protection displaced people may require – be they refugee status in certain cases or complementary forms of protection in others. Internally, UNHCR will also continue to ‘green’ its operations and address its carbon footprint, as we are doing, for instance, with solar power in Jordan’s Azraq refugee camp, which is the first camp to be powered by renewable energy.

    Mr Chair,

    In conclusion, what we are living through today is, we hope, an aberration – a temporary setback, if you like – but it cannot be the norm. The norm is, and will continue to be, the foundations on which the UN Charter was built – a rule-based international order, an ultimate belief in multilateralism, and the aspirations of the UDHR. Norms that preserve human dignity must prevail – for our survival and development. These are not just about words, but about human life. Based in law and rooted in respect for humanity, they provide a vanguard against chaos and anarchy, and a healthy check on unhealthy dynamics of power. Despite our daily despair, let us not forget the progress we have made and honour the many, often unsung achievements. Protection is often seen in the negative, as violations and abuses of rights dominate the narrative, but it must also be seen as a vision for the future. Preserving human dignity calls upon us to draw upon our diversity and richness to imagine larger freedoms that can be secured through vigilance and common action. It is in this spirit that we look forward to continued close cooperation with all of you in the months ahead.

    Thank you for your attention.

    [1] Available at: http://www.unhcr.org/72nd-meeting-of-the-standing-committee.

    [2] Rosen, M., Dignity: Its History and Meaning (Harvard University Press, 2018).

    [3] See In re Fauziya KASINGA, Applicant, U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals, 23 June 1996, available at:
    https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2014/07/25/3278.pdf.

    [4] See GPC, “GP20 Plan of Action”, 2018, available at:
    http://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/news/2018/gp20-plan-of-action.html.

    [5] Frisch, M., I’m not Stiller (Abelard-Schuman, 1958).

    [6] For an in-depth analysis of this phenomenon, see Mounk, Y., The People vs. Democracy: Why Our Freedom Is in Danger and How to Save It (Harvard University Press, 2018).

    [7] See for example, “A majority of Europeans favor taking in refugees, but most disapprove of EU’s handling of the issue”, available at:
    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/19/a-majority-of-europeans-favor-taking-in-refugees-but-most-disapprove-of-eus-handling-of-the-issue/?utm_source=NEWS&utm_medium=email&utm_content=2nd+section+1st+story+pew+research+center&utm_campaign=HQ_EN_therefugeebrief_staff_20180920.

    [8] In 2017, 53 per cent of 58 situations maintained or increased the participation of women in leadership structures. See UNHCR, 2017 Global Strategic Priorities: Progress Report, available at:
    http://www.unhcr.org/5b2b75e37.pdf.

    [9] 85 per cent of 104 operations (Ibid.).

    [10] Available at:
    https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/a-community-based-practitioners-guide-documenting-citizenship-and-other-forms-of-legal-identity-20180627.pdf.

    [11] See UNHCR, “From Commitment to Action: Highlights of Progress towards Comprehensive Refugee Responses since the adoption of the New York Declaration”, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/5b8d1ad34.

    [12] Comprehensive Regional Protection and Solutions Framework, available at: http://www.acnur.org/5b50db084.pdf.

    [13] Intergovernmental Authority on Development. See https://igad.int/

    [14] Available at:
    https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:R205.

    [15] Available at:
    http://ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@ed_protect/@protrav/@migrant/documents/genericdocument/wcms_536440.pdf

    [16] See UNHCR, Turn the Tide: Refugee Education in Crisis, 2018, available at:
    http://www.unhcr.org/5b852f8e4.pdf. In 2017, 63 per cent of 96 situations maintained or increased the enrolment rate of primary school-aged children. See UNHCR, note 3 above.

    [17] Engaging with Employers in the Hiring of Refugees: A 10-point multi-stakeholder action plan for employers, refugees, governments and civil society, 2018, available at:
    http://www.unhcr.org/protection/livelihoods/5adde9904/engaging-employers-hiring-refugees-10-point-multi-stakeholder-action-plan.html.

    [18] This was part of an ILO programme funded by Italy and the Netherlands and is being implemented by a national foundation.

    [19] UNHCR’s Projected Global Resettlement Needs 2019, available at:
    http://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/5b28a7df4/projected-global-resettlement-needs-2019.html, reports that the number of refugees who need a solution in third countries had grown to a projected 1.4 million in 2019, while the number of resettlement places globally decreased by half to 75,000 in 2017.

    [20] Geneva Academy, The War Report: Armed Conflicts in 2017, March 2018, available at:
    https://www.geneva-academy.ch/joomlatools-files/docman-files/The%20War%20Report%202017.pdf.

    [21] UNICEF, “3 in 10 Young People in Conflict or Disaster-Stricken Countries are Illiterate”, 31 January 2018, available at:
    https://www.unicef.org/eca/press-releases/3-10-young-people-conflict-or-disaster-stricken-countries-are-illiterate.

    [22] WFP, “World Food Programme applauds UN Security Council for tackling link between conflict and hunger”, 24 May 2018, available at:
    https://www.wfp.org/news/news-release/world-food-programme-applauds-un-security-council-tackling-link-between-conflict-a.

    [23] Save the Children, “Extreme hunger could kill 600,000 children in war zones this year”, 10 September 2018, available at: https://www.savethechildren.org.au/media/media-releases/extreme-hunger-could-kill-children-in-war-zone.

    [24] UN General Assembly, “Report of the Secretary-General: Children and Armed Conflict”, UN Doc. A/72/865–S/2018/465, available at: http://undocs.org/s/2018/465.

    [25] GPC, “Drought, Famine, Cholera and Displacement”, 2018, available at:
    http://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/en/areas-of-responsibility/drought-famine-cholera-and-displacement.html.

    [26] IDMC, Global Report on Internal Displacement 2016, available at:
    http://www.earlyrecovery.global/sites/default/files/global-rep_internal-displacement-idmc-2016_0_0.pdf.

    [27] UN Environment, “Smarter use of resources can add $2 trillion annually to global economy”, 16 March 2017, available at:
    https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/press-release/smarter-use-resources-can-add-2-trillion-annually-global-economy.

    [28] The World Bank, “Groundswell: Preparing for Internal Climate Migration”, 19 March 2018, available at:
    https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/infographic/2018/03/19/groundswell—-preparing-for-internal-climate-migration.

    [29] UN, Secretary-General's remarks on Climate Change [as delivered], 10 September 2018, available at:
    https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2018-09-10/secretary-generals-remarks-climate-change-delivered.


    0 0

    Source: Famine Early Warning System Network
    Country: Afghanistan, Algeria, Burkina Faso, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Sudan, Tajikistan, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, World

    Heavy rains reported in Kenya, while flooding risks continue across Nigeria

    Africa Weather Hazards

    1. Heavy rainfall in previous weeks has resulted in overflowing of the Niger and Benue Rivers of Nigeria. Moderate to heavy rainfall is forecast to continue, maintaining high risks for flooding.

    2. Above-average rainfall during the past several weeks and water discharges from the Bagre Dam of Burkina Faso have resulted in overflowing of the White Volta River, flooding, and fatalities over northern Ghana. Additional moderate rainfall is expected over the region during the next week, maintaining elevated risks for flooding.

    3. Torrential rainfall is forecast along coastal areas of Kenya and northeastern Tanzania during the next outlook period.


    0 0

    Source: UN High Commissioner for Refugees
    Country: Bangladesh, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, Ghana, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Montenegro, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Spain, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Turkey, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, World

    By Volker Türk | 04 October 2018

    Mr Chairperson, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen,

    Thank you for the opportunity to introduce the protection segment of this year’s Executive Committee. It is, as always, informed by the Note on International Protection and the protection papers from the June 2018 Standing Committee.[1] As they aptly reveal, the fraught debates about refugees that we are witnessing in so many parts of the world today are manifested in growing protection concerns globally. I would like to share some thoughts about how we can create space for more empathic and humane dialogue by bringing the focus back to human dignity, which is at the core of protection.

    Developments and trends in the world of refugee protection over the past year reflect in many ways how paradoxical our world has become. On the one hand, we saw how all 193 United Nations Member States came together to develop the global compact on refugees [GCR] – an unprecedented success of multilateralism at a time when the debate about refugees at times has become heavily politicized and contentious. It represented what can be achieved when we choose to rise above short-term interests to find a common and constructive way forward. When we see refugees not only as our responsibility, but as part of the human family. We also welcomed how one country granted prima facie recognition to an influx of refugees from a neighbouring one. How the older generation in a rural community reached out to refugee newcomers. How refugee chefs brought new meaning to fusion cuisine. How a formerly stateless minority was granted citizenship and identity documents. How internally displaced women were able to regain their property and start a new life. And how ordinary people the world over welcomed and supported refugees with gestures of kindness and solidarity.

    On the other hand, we also witnessed the consequences of populist pressures and the shirking of responsibilities: for instance, when children banged their heads against the wall, in despair, as they were separated from parents or languished in detention. When young asylum-seekers committed suicide after being held and mistreated in processing centres with no prospects for a future. When family reunion was denied to a survivor of gang rape on the premise that it would encourage others to come. When losses of life at sea surged dramatically, as NGO rescue ships were grounded. When hundreds of thousands of men, women, girls, and boys were caught in crossfire, attacked, forcibly recruited, or raped. When civilians fled, but found themselves trapped at the border and denied entry. When refugees were rounded up overnight and deported to their country of origin. The litany of such incidents is unbearable, and yet it goes on. The issue is not a crisis of numbers, but the miscasting of refugees to foment fear and justify counterproductive measures that pay no heed to principles of protection.

    When such things happen, we know that something fundamental to basic human decency is being lost. People flee persecution and human rights abuses only to experience this further in their countries of asylum. They flee in hopes of finding safety, only to encounter indifference – where the silent majority appears to no longer care, or civil society is too constrained to speak up.

    We are facing a watershed moment where two sets of values have emerged in two distinct modes of discourse. It is difficult to reconcile how the positive developments of the past year have occurred alongside the seemingly endless volley of assaults on refugees. In different ways, they speak to what is at the heart of our protection work: respecting human dignity. They show what it means to place dignity at the centre of our action and what can happen when this fundamental quality of being human is denied. Dignity features prominently in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UDHR], whose 70th anniversary we celebrate later this year. In the spirit of the philosopher Michael Rosen’s invitation to consider what it means not only to have dignity, but to be treated with dignity,[2] I invite us to consider this question in the context of displacement and statelessness.

    Dignity demands that we treat one another with respect and an ethic of care. When I think about what this means, I am reminded of my student days when I used to cross the Sigmund Freud Park to reach the University of Vienna. In the park, there is a stone inscribed with a quote from Freud, stating, “The voice of reason is gentle.” The noise, chatter, shrillness, lack of civility, and harsh language around many issues today – be they refugees, women, migration, or climate change – serve only to distract, obfuscate, and denigrate the respect for dignity that must guide our actions. We need to make the space for the voice of reason to be heard – one that is not loud, crass, or short-lived, but rather gentle and organic, recalling our past in moving forward, reminding us of what it means to be treated with basic decency and respect.

    I see five areas where we can make such a conversation possible – for human dignity to re-enter the picture in our thinking and engagement:

    First, respect for dignity must be central to the progressive development and implementation of law and standards for refugee protection. Human dignity cannot be superseded by political or other interests. It cannot be parcelled out only to certain groups. It should not be written out of law. We need to focus on garnering the political will, not just from governments, but from societies as a whole, to commit to laws founded on respect for dignity and to implement them. We need to recognize that when we allow the denigration of just one person through the breach of these laws, we set the precedent for the denigration of us all.

    In the refugee context, this means preventing political and juridical attempts to narrow the concept of who is a refugee. The refugee definition set out in the 1951 Convention has been developed in regional instruments and through State practice and judicial interpretation over decades, and is based on the question of whether one can return to one’s country of origin. Being able to flee and be recognized as a refugee can be a matter of life and death. The drafters of the 1951 Convention envisioned that the definition would be full and inclusive, beyond the realm of politics, and firmly embedded in fundamental considerations of humanity. To do otherwise would have been a failure to recognize the dignity inherent in us all. We have seen, therefore, how the refugee concept has included individuals fleeing armed conflict, gang or domestic violence, serious harm by non-state actors, and persecution on account of gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation. I remember how much we welcomed the 1996 Kasinga decision on female genital mutilation,[3] for instance, which demonstrated the adaptability of the legal framework to evolving realities, based on respect for the dignity of women and girls.

    Unfortunately, the focus on preserving dignity tends to get lost in debates that cite security as the rationale for restrictive approaches to refugee protection. Governments of course need to ensure the security of their people. But this is entirely complementary with providing refuge to people fleeing persecution. An exclusive focus on security alone is detrimental. Refugees, by definition, are the victims, not the perpetrators, of violence and terror; they often have rejected extremism and been targeted as a result. It is disturbing, therefore, when arguments of security are used to justify denying security to those who need it most.

    The focus on dignity also can get lost within a discourse that treats international refugee law almost as a science, focusing on minutiae and parsing words, identities, and intentions. Over-complication and narrowing of the refugee definition have detracted from the essence of refugee law. It is time to return to the object and purpose of refugee protection as it was first conceived, which should frame our analysis and interventions. We are heartened to see that this message is beginning to take root. Within our operations and with States, we are working to create refugee status determination [RSD] systems that are adaptable to changing circumstances and large numbers, drawing upon an array of approaches, including simplified or accelerated procedures. This requires a deep knowledge of the profiles of asylum-seekers and country of origin information, to ensure that increased efficiency does not affect quality and fairness of decisions. We are working with States, such as Canada, Egypt, and South Africa, to help address RSD backlogs. Morocco, Thailand, and Trinidad are progressing in the creation of State procedures for RSD. And Malawi and Niger are developing the capacities of their institutions responsible for RSD. And as of last month, Turkey has taken over responsibility for RSD and registration from UNHCR.

    In the IDP context, law and policy development, as well as humanitarian action, need to be centred on respect for dignity. On the twentieth anniversary of the IDP Guiding Principles, we are bringing this into focus with a three-year strategy – the GP20 Plan of Action[4] – to advance the implementation of these Principles in selected countries around the world. Next year, we will pay tribute to advances in protection in Africa on the occasions of the fiftieth anniversary of the OAU/AU Refugee Convention and the tenth anniversary of the AU Convention on IDPs [the Kampala Convention]. Many initiatives are underway, including roundtables on mixed movements, livelihoods, education, and resettlement and complementary pathways. These will inform pledges made at the AU Extraordinary Summit on refugees, IDPs, and returnees, and will help to effect the legislative and policy changes needed to anchor core protection standards in different countries. Already, Niger is developing a draft law on internal displacement based upon consultations with displacement-affected communities around the country. South Sudan convened a High-Level Panel on National Legislation on Internal Displacement, bringing together Government officials, experts, the private sector, donors, development and humanitarian actors, and the AU, to discuss its draft law on internal displacement – one that emerged from a broad consultative process with IDPs themselves. Similar initiatives are also planned in the Central African Republic, Mali, and Somalia.

    Second, respect for dignity must be the antidote to dehumanization. In the global north and south, the dehumanization of refugees, migrants, IDPs, and stateless individuals has become a worrying trend – one which bears a certain irony, as dehumanization is often a precursor to persecution and flight in the first place. Dehumanization results from inappropriate language, misinformation, deterrence, arbitrary detention, separation of families and children, and ‘warehousing’. It prevents us from seeing the other as a human being with rights, needs, and dignity. It desensitizes and numbs our conscience. It enables easy slippage into mistreatment and policies of cruelty, as it prevents empathy and compassion from shaping the response.

    Identity issues are often at the heart of this dynamic. We know how much hatred and violence have their origins in reducing individuals and groups to one or two characteristics. This challenges the inherent dignity of all. It brings to mind the author Max Frisch’s observation that fixed images of the other reveal an absence of love.[5] Everyone is a human being, first and foremost – it is immaterial whether you are an asylum-seeker or a migrant – when you are at risk of drowning, you are a human being in need of rescue. That is what being ‘born free and equal in dignity and rights’ means.

    We need to confront and address xenophobia, racism, nativism, and bigotry, often driven by fear, anger, and anxieties within communities. We know well from history how the mistreatment of the foreigner paves the way for the mistreatment of the citizen. Populist politics tend to use this dangerous mix as a vehicle to deflect attention from what is at stake, and as a pretext for demolishing the institutions of liberal democracy, such as the judiciary, a free press, or free and fair elections.[6] These are harbingers of a dystopian future. They ultimately have a corrosive effect on everyone – on how we operate and what we are willing to accept.

    Countering the dangers that they engender requires that we engage with the individuals who harbour these sentiments – to deal with their fears and the emotions at their source. We need to address the causes of inequality that so often lead to a sense of victimization and a tendency to scapegoat those worse off than oneself. The refugee issue can be a catalyst for galvanizing society against the dynamics of dehumanization and for focusing attention where it truly belongs – on quests for autocratic power masked in the language of vitriol and blame. Our attention to these dynamics could go a long way towards focusing accountability on the perpetrators rather than vilifying the victims.

    Just as to deny one person’s dignity is ultimately to deny our own, the responsibility to ensure one person’s dignity is the responsibility of us all. In practice, the responsibility often falls to the few who are willing to engage. It is time to bring broader segments of civil society – and especially the silent majorities around the world who support taking in refugees[7] – towards a common purpose of re-instilling empathy through the recognition of oneself in the other. Our #WithRefugees Campaign has helped to galvanize this kind of support. It has recorded 31 million acts of solidarity for refugees, and almost two million people have signed onto a petition calling for all refugees to have access to school, a safe place to live, and the possibility to work.

    Through our new Age, Gender, Diversity [AGD] policy, we can make headway in this direction – bringing the experiences and views of individual refugees more visibly to the forefront of our planning, engagement, and communications. We are strengthening our accountability to the people we serve with better management, monitoring, and reporting based on sound evidence. This year, five operations have been selected for focused support in implementing this policy and testing its indicators. The AGD approach also has been integrated in the GCR, providing further impetus for UNHCR and partners to ensure inclusivity. While much remains to be done for people with disabilities, we made strong commitments at the Global Disability Summit in London, improved our data collection, and tested the Washington Group questions in several refugee settings. We are also improving our approaches to LGBTI refugees by creating safe spaces, identifying and safely registering individuals at risk, and training staff. We further continue engaging youth, particularly through the Global Youth Advisory Council, which was active in the consultations on the GCR; and through highlighting youth initiatives, such as Spark15 in Malta, promoting refugee integration.

    We also are facilitating the leadership of refugee women,[8] as in the Community Governance Process in two camps in Bangladesh; in the community-based tool for addressing women’s psychosocial needs in Colombia; and in the participation of women and girls in sports events in India as a part of the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence. However, the inclusion of protection considerations in designing and delivering assistance remains a challenge. Even with the majority of our operations providing support for survivors of sexual and gender-based violence [SGBV],[9] we still contend with inadequate lights, locks, and latrines in many camps around the world – fundamentals in camp design to prevent sexual violence. The risks could be mitigated, as we are trying to do through solar lighting in Northern Uganda, and the use of alternative fuel sources in Tanzania, Rwanda, Cameroon, Ghana, and Chad, so that women do not have to travel long distances in search of firewood. However, adequate funding is still a significant obstacle to their implementation. Our forthcoming SGBV policy will highlight the imperative of not only responding to SGBV, but also preventing it through targeted programming to address its root causes.

    Third, respect for dignity must be at the centre of the right to a nationality, which recognizes that individuals are not objects to be governed by the powerful, but are subjects of law, endowed with dignity and hence entitled to a legal identity. Yet statelessness persists, often unseen and unheard. Stateless people have told me how they feel invisible, as if they have fallen through the cracks and do not matter. This particularly struck me when I met Rohingya in their home villages a couple of years ago. They seemed to be in a near catatonic state, with little hope for more than a marginal existence. It is no wonder that statelessness can be linked to displacement and the lack of development for everyone.

    The right to a nationality was the powerful aspiration of Article 15 of the UDHR, and lately, we have seen a revival of this ambition. Sustainable Development Goal 16 provides a means to realize this right today, and our 10-year #IBelong Campaign to end statelessness has kept the attention on this goal. Since the launch of the Campaign, four States hosting large non-refugee stateless populations made progress in resolving these situations. Thailand, for example, is registering stateless persons, issuing birth certificates, and providing a pathway to naturalization for certain groups. In August, Malaysia announced it would expedite citizenship for qualified stateless individuals in the country. There have been twenty accessions to the Statelessness Conventions since the Campaign was launched, the most recent being Chile, Spain, and Haiti this year. Thirteen countries in the ECOWAS region developed national action plans to end statelessness as a part of their commitments in the Abidjan Declaration and Banjul Plan of Action. Six countries – Armenia, Cuba, Estonia, Iceland, Luxembourg, and Tajikistan – reformed their nationality laws to allow children, born on their territory and who would otherwise be stateless, to acquire that State’s nationality. Nine countries established or improved statelessness determination procedures, including Brazil, Ecuador, Bulgaria, and Montenegro. And Madagascar and Sierra Leone amended their nationality laws to allow mothers to confer nationality to their children on an equal basis as fathers.

    The campaign has also catalyzed initiatives aimed at respecting and restoring dignity through legal identity. Regional declarations to resolve statelessness have been adopted in the Americas, West Africa, the Great Lakes region, and the Middle East and North Africa. The Draft AU Protocol on the Right to Nationality and Eradication of Statelessness will be the first regional instrument of its kind. Civil society networks have sprung up in Southern Africa, the Asia Pacific, Central Asia, and the Middle East and North Africa, complementing those in Europe and the Americas, in the spirit of a whole-of-society approach to preventing and reducing statelessness, as we saw, for example in the launch this year of A Community-Based Practitioner’s Guide: Documenting Citizenship & Other Forms of Legal Identity.[10] These are grounds for hope as we approach the midpoint review of the campaign and the high-level event planned during next year’s Executive Committee meeting, where we look forward to announcements by States of how they will act to prevent and resolve statelessness on their territories.

    Fourth, respect for the dignity of all speaks to the necessity of multilateralism in an interdependent world – especially in transboundary matters, such as population movements across borders. Refugees bring to us parts of the world we may not often see, but upon which we may rely. Conflicts in faraway lands – often those rich in natural resources – have more to do with us than we would like to admit – with our growth and consumption – and they challenge us to examine our own actions or lack thereof. Refugees, in this sense, remind us of our comfort zones, our privilege, and the interdependence of phenomena: the flapping of wings in one continent setting off a tempest in another. It is our collective responsibility, therefore, to address root causes of displacement and help countries shoulder their responsibilities for hosting refugees – a contribution they are making to the greater public good, which must be honoured. This is the essence of responsibility-sharing.

    It is surprising, then, that some of the countries that have benefited the most from international cooperation are amongst those least willing to be part of international or regional frameworks on population movements, including refugees. This was exemplified not least in the vexed discussions around fixed resettlement quotas and mandatory relocation schemes in Europe. We also see how it has become fashionable in politics and some academic circles to play with the idea of containment, externalization, and literally shipping people out of sight, out of mind, and effectively out of rights – so that we do not see them anymore, so that we forget their humanity. Yet, in the process, we lose ours. This does not do justice to anyone.

    Unilateralism, isolationism, and pretending that these problems do not concern us are self-destructive and simply do not work. No country or community can deal with refugee situations on their own. Greater and more predictable international cooperation and support is a necessity. Although multilateralism seems to wax and wane these days, it is important to remember that it enhances, rather than diminishes, national sovereignty. Through cooperation on issues of common concern, we each become stronger. Rather than shifting problems onto one another by acting alone, we can solve them by acting together.

    It is significant in this context that the world now has the GCR. Some may think of it as an acceptable level of unhappiness, but let’s not lose sight of its enormous potential. Through an iterative, organic process with States and other stakeholders, we carved out a meaningful set of common undertakings that has the potential to make a real difference in the lives of refugees and their host communities. The GCR offers an approach for securing more predictable and sustained support for countries hosting refugees. Emanating from the international refugee protection regime, the GCR involves a wide range of actors in facilitating access to humanitarian and development support; providing mechanisms for regional and international solidarity that could be activated by host governments in times of emergency; promoting self-reliance of refugees; and reinvigorating the search for solutions. The GCR draws from lessons learned in the application of the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework [CRRF] set out in the New York Declaration and now applied in 15 countries. Already, we are seeing the benefits this approach can bring,[11] particularly with development-related investments in support of refugee responses and host communities now amounting to over USD 6.5 billion in addition to humanitarian funding. And regionally, for example, Costa Rica is applying its commitments under MIRPS[12] to refugees from Nicaragua, and IGAD[13] Member States committed to include refugees in national education plans by 2020.

    The GCR is not an end, but a beginning – of an evolution in governance that includes refugees and extends to host communities as ‘people of interest to UNHCR’. While we will continue playing our mandated role, we will mobilize others in this project, and the creation of the Division of Resilience and Solutions this year is helping to take us in this new direction. Let me highlight some of the areas that will require robust follow-up:

    To start with, we need to focus on building resilience to ensure that solutions are lasting and sustainable – be they return, resettlement, local integration, or interim local solutions until longer-term solutions can be found. Building resilience through education, livelihoods, and access to services, in particular, prepares refugees for solutions, and enables them to live in dignity and contribute to their communities wherever they are living. Facilitating economic and social inclusion has been recognized in a number of recent initiatives, such as the Sustainable Development Goals 2030, the GCR, ILO Recommendation 205,[14] and the ILO Guiding principles on the access of refugees and other forcibly displaced persons to the labour market.[15] It is incumbent upon us all to find practical ways to translate these initiatives into action, particularly through bolstering national systems to include refugees. Displaced people and their host communities often find themselves in situations where they are interdependent, and development for one population can benefit the development of the other. As humanitarian needs are not decreasing anytime soon, humanitarian funding cannot be compromised. At the same time, we need to complement immediate needs by ensuring longer-term support. This means considering displacement across the relevant government sectors, and recognizing that these new models require time to take root and have an impact.

    The world has made progress in supporting refugee education. For example, in Chad, 108 schools in 19 refugee camps have been declared official Chadian schools. Ethiopia has seen significant increases in refugee enrollment at all levels of education, and recent laws and policies in Turkey have enabled 610,000 Syrians to be enrolled in formal schooling, plus 20,000 in higher education. UNHCR has also initiated a Youth Education Programme in Kenya, Pakistan, Rwanda, and Uganda so far, with over 232,000 refugee youth, to increase their access to secondary and tertiary education. Scholarships and connected learning programmes have given some 14,000 refugee youth access to accredited tertiary education. More Syrian refugees have enrolled in universities in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq. And the Connected Learning in Crisis Consortium has facilitated digital programmes with onsite tuition for 7,000 refugees in 12 countries. Yet, with 4 million refugee children still out of school – half a million higher than 2017, and a disproportionate number being girls[16] – we need to redouble our efforts and continue driving home the importance of education to their protection, resilience, and futures.

    We are also aiming to facilitate greater economic inclusion by working with development agencies and the private sector to ensure that host countries are receiving additional investments and that markets are inclusive. Refugees bring with them skills and aptitudes that can benefit host countries when enabling policies are in place for them to pursue livelihoods. Recognizing this, the OECD and UNHCR released this year an action plan for employers, refugees, governments, and civil society to broaden employment opportunities for refugees.[17] The private sector in some host countries, such as Turkey, Mexico, and Costa Rica, is playing an essential role in employing refugees, bringing added value to the economy and filling labour gaps. Socio-economic vulnerability is further being addressed in Burkina Faso, Kenya, Tanzania, Pakistan, and Malaysia through the MADE51 programme; and in the Republic of Congo, Malawi, and Egypt through developing safe livelihood opportunities in local markets. The World Bank has created financing windows for countries hosting large populations of refugees, and UNCDF and SIDA are supporting financial service providers to serve refugees in Jordan and Uganda. The ILO is supporting Jordan to regulate and protect the work of refugees, and is conducting market analyses and developing economic sectors in 13 countries so far that can create jobs and add value to the local economy in host countries. UNDP likewise is supporting Turkey to respond to increased needs in local economies. The EU is relaxing import regulations and standards for some host countries to develop their export capacities, such as in the agricultural sector in northern Lebanon.[18] And refugees in Djibouti can now open bank accounts, enabling them to participate in the economic life of their communities.

    We further need to focus on resettlement and third country solutions, which are key to the successful implementation of the GCR. Through the three-year resettlement strategy envisaged in the GCR, we hope to address the widening gap between the number of refugees in need of resettlement and the places made available by countries around the world.[19] This is important both for ensuring that the refugees most at risk have a viable durable solution, and for building the confidence of major host countries in the international community’s commitment to help shoulder the responsibility for refugees. More States need to join the 35 countries so far offering resettlement, or increase their existing programmes, including through private sponsorship schemes. Countries also need to consider developing or facilitating access to complementary pathways for admission. This will require crafting approaches that involve new partners, systems, and models tailored to specific situations. These new approaches would not replace resettlement, but rather add to the pool of possible solutions on offer, as we need to preserve resettlement as a critical tool for protecting the most vulnerable.

    Equally, we further look forward to working with all of you on the implementation of the global compact for safe, orderly and regular migration – another feat of multilateralism borne out of the New York Declaration – which advances a common vision of how to make migration work for everyone, including from a sustainable development perspective. There are interlinkages between the two compacts that we will work out with partners operationally, especially in mixed situations of refugees and migrants, building on longstanding practices as well as recent experiences in the Central Mediterranean, which have underlined the necessity of predictable disembarkation schemes, responsibility-sharing arrangements, and sufficient rescue capacity. In a related vein, trafficking is on the rise and features as a prominent form of violence in conflict and displacement situations. UNHCR is committed to work with the international community to address this, including through establishing joint procedures with IOM, incorporating anti-trafficking interventions in the Global Protection Cluster, and building our own staff capacity to identity, assist, and protect the victims.

    Finally, we have a responsibility to secure the dignity and safety of future generations. We need to address the issues that lead to forced displacement and compound vulnerabilities of future generations. Foremost among these is armed conflict. In 2017, there were 55 situations of armed conflict,[20] most prominently in Syria, where 12 million people have been displaced, of whom one million were displaced this year alone. These situations are taking a heavy toll. Apart from the obvious impacts, there are less visible ones. Illiteracy in conflict-stricken countries, for example, is three times higher than the global rate, with girls at the greatest disadvantage.[21] Sadly, we see starvation used as a weapon of war. The majority of people who are chronically hungry – 489 million people – live in countries where there is conflict,[22] and more than half a million children in these situations could die from starvation this year.[23] Children are also at risk of recruitment, sexual violence, and harm from attacks on schools and hospitals. More than 10,000 children were killed or maimed in armed conflict last year, and 8,000 were used as combatants.[24]

    Factors fuelling conflict and violence therefore need to be addressed as a priority – whether they be the arms trade; extraction industries; acquisitions of land for mining, agriculture, timber, or water; severe inequality; authoritarianism; or environmental change and degradation. This also requires restoring rule of law founded on dignity, accountability, and justice. It means building social cohesion and peace through conflict mediation, minority protection, and rights-based approaches to development. It also calls for improving early warning systems, contingency planning, and emergency preparedness. To protect the dignity of those most affected by conflict, humanitarian, development, and peacebuilding actors need to act in concert and complement one another. In this regard, the UN is undergoing a series of institutional changes to ensure that as a whole, it is better able to support countries in realizing their goals for peace and development.

    Nowhere is the need for prevention so urgent and fundamental to the survival of humanity than in relation to climate change and environmental degradation – areas of concern for the planet as a whole, which increasingly interact with other drivers of displacement. Drought, exacerbated by climate change and failing government policies in different parts of the world, has fueled social tensions, leading to violent conflict and displacement. Access to and competition over water, has exacerbated communal tensions in Sudan’s Darfur and Afghanistan. Conflict, insecurity, and environmental degradation prevent people from planting crops or reaching markets, thus losing their livelihoods.[25] Sudden and slow onset natural hazards displace on average around 25.4 million people within their country each year.[26] The economic losses resulting from failures to address these issues could reach up to USD 2 trillion by 2050.[27]

    Our current systems of governance and sense of responsibility seem stuck in the short-term, looking for immediate solutions and instant gratification. Yet, we owe it to those coming after us to find a path out of these unsustainable systems. Displacement and migration related to climate change and natural hazards have finally been recognized within the climate debate – through the Nansen Initiative Protection Agenda and the Platform on Disaster Displacement, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, and the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction. The GCR also recognized the role of environmental degradation and disasters in displacement. Population movements associated with the adverse effects of climate change and disasters will accelerate unless the implementation of the Paris Agreement becomes a top priority.[28] As the Secretary-General said, when announcing plans for the 2019 Climate Summit, climate change is a defining issue of our time,[29] and this is a defining moment to act. We will need to consider how best to reduce the risks and what forms of protection displaced people may require – be they refugee status in certain cases or complementary forms of protection in others. Internally, UNHCR will also continue to ‘green’ its operations and address its carbon footprint, as we are doing, for instance, with solar power in Jordan’s Azraq refugee camp, which is the first camp to be powered by renewable energy.

    Mr Chair,

    In conclusion, what we are living through today is, we hope, an aberration – a temporary setback, if you like – but it cannot be the norm. The norm is, and will continue to be, the foundations on which the UN Charter was built – a rule-based international order, an ultimate belief in multilateralism, and the aspirations of the UDHR. Norms that preserve human dignity must prevail – for our survival and development. These are not just about words, but about human life. Based in law and rooted in respect for humanity, they provide a vanguard against chaos and anarchy, and a healthy check on unhealthy dynamics of power. Despite our daily despair, let us not forget the progress we have made and honour the many, often unsung achievements. Protection is often seen in the negative, as violations and abuses of rights dominate the narrative, but it must also be seen as a vision for the future. Preserving human dignity calls upon us to draw upon our diversity and richness to imagine larger freedoms that can be secured through vigilance and common action. It is in this spirit that we look forward to continued close cooperation with all of you in the months ahead.

    Thank you for your attention.

    [1] Available at: http://www.unhcr.org/72nd-meeting-of-the-standing-committee.

    [2] Rosen, M., Dignity: Its History and Meaning (Harvard University Press, 2018).

    [3] See In re Fauziya KASINGA, Applicant, U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals, 23 June 1996, available at:
    https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2014/07/25/3278.pdf.

    [4] See GPC, “GP20 Plan of Action”, 2018, available at:
    http://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/news/2018/gp20-plan-of-action.html.

    [5] Frisch, M., I’m not Stiller (Abelard-Schuman, 1958).

    [6] For an in-depth analysis of this phenomenon, see Mounk, Y., The People vs. Democracy: Why Our Freedom Is in Danger and How to Save It (Harvard University Press, 2018).

    [7] See for example, “A majority of Europeans favor taking in refugees, but most disapprove of EU’s handling of the issue”, available at:
    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/19/a-majority-of-europeans-favor-taking-in-refugees-but-most-disapprove-of-eus-handling-of-the-issue/?utm_source=NEWS&utm_medium=email&utm_content=2nd+section+1st+story+pew+research+center&utm_campaign=HQ_EN_therefugeebrief_staff_20180920.

    [8] In 2017, 53 per cent of 58 situations maintained or increased the participation of women in leadership structures. See UNHCR, 2017 Global Strategic Priorities: Progress Report, available at:
    http://www.unhcr.org/5b2b75e37.pdf.

    [9] 85 per cent of 104 operations (Ibid.).

    [10] Available at:
    https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/a-community-based-practitioners-guide-documenting-citizenship-and-other-forms-of-legal-identity-20180627.pdf.

    [11] See UNHCR, “From Commitment to Action: Highlights of Progress towards Comprehensive Refugee Responses since the adoption of the New York Declaration”, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/5b8d1ad34.

    [12] Comprehensive Regional Protection and Solutions Framework, available at: http://www.acnur.org/5b50db084.pdf.

    [13] Intergovernmental Authority on Development. See https://igad.int/

    [14] Available at:
    https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:R205.

    [15] Available at:
    http://ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@ed_protect/@protrav/@migrant/documents/genericdocument/wcms_536440.pdf

    [16] See UNHCR, Turn the Tide: Refugee Education in Crisis, 2018, available at:
    http://www.unhcr.org/5b852f8e4.pdf. In 2017, 63 per cent of 96 situations maintained or increased the enrolment rate of primary school-aged children. See UNHCR, note 3 above.

    [17] Engaging with Employers in the Hiring of Refugees: A 10-point multi-stakeholder action plan for employers, refugees, governments and civil society, 2018, available at:
    http://www.unhcr.org/protection/livelihoods/5adde9904/engaging-employers-hiring-refugees-10-point-multi-stakeholder-action-plan.html.

    [18] This was part of an ILO programme funded by Italy and the Netherlands and is being implemented by a national foundation.

    [19] UNHCR’s Projected Global Resettlement Needs 2019, available at:
    http://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/5b28a7df4/projected-global-resettlement-needs-2019.html, reports that the number of refugees who need a solution in third countries had grown to a projected 1.4 million in 2019, while the number of resettlement places globally decreased by half to 75,000 in 2017.

    [20] Geneva Academy, The War Report: Armed Conflicts in 2017, March 2018, available at:
    https://www.geneva-academy.ch/joomlatools-files/docman-files/The%20War%20Report%202017.pdf.

    [21] UNICEF, “3 in 10 Young People in Conflict or Disaster-Stricken Countries are Illiterate”, 31 January 2018, available at:
    https://www.unicef.org/eca/press-releases/3-10-young-people-conflict-or-disaster-stricken-countries-are-illiterate.

    [22] WFP, “World Food Programme applauds UN Security Council for tackling link between conflict and hunger”, 24 May 2018, available at:
    https://www.wfp.org/news/news-release/world-food-programme-applauds-un-security-council-tackling-link-between-conflict-a.

    [23] Save the Children, “Extreme hunger could kill 600,000 children in war zones this year”, 10 September 2018, available at: https://www.savethechildren.org.au/media/media-releases/extreme-hunger-could-kill-children-in-war-zone.

    [24] UN General Assembly, “Report of the Secretary-General: Children and Armed Conflict”, UN Doc. A/72/865–S/2018/465, available at: http://undocs.org/s/2018/465.

    [25] GPC, “Drought, Famine, Cholera and Displacement”, 2018, available at:
    http://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/en/areas-of-responsibility/drought-famine-cholera-and-displacement.html.

    [26] IDMC, Global Report on Internal Displacement 2016, available at:
    http://www.earlyrecovery.global/sites/default/files/global-rep_internal-displacement-idmc-2016_0_0.pdf.

    [27] UN Environment, “Smarter use of resources can add $2 trillion annually to global economy”, 16 March 2017, available at:
    https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/press-release/smarter-use-resources-can-add-2-trillion-annually-global-economy.

    [28] The World Bank, “Groundswell: Preparing for Internal Climate Migration”, 19 March 2018, available at:
    https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/infographic/2018/03/19/groundswell—-preparing-for-internal-climate-migration.

    [29] UN, Secretary-General's remarks on Climate Change [as delivered], 10 September 2018, available at:
    https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2018-09-10/secretary-generals-remarks-climate-change-delivered.


    0 0

    Source: Government of Japan, UN Development Programme
    Country: Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea, Japan, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, United Republic of Tanzania, World

    TICAD's Role in Advancing Africa's Development

    Conflict dynamics have increased the vulnerability of the population, damaged agriculture, fisheries and livelihoods, and affected freedom of movement, trade and local governance.

    Since TICAD VI in 2016, Africa has been on the move.

    After hitting a cyclical low point in 2016, African economies are recovering and prospects are bright; six of the twelve fastest growing economies in the world are in Africa. Life expectancy, education and decent incomes are on the rise. Safety, rule of law, participation and human rights have increased, and, in the past two years, social unrest has dropped far faster in Africa than the global average.

    Such results have been achieved thanks in part to TICAD’s longstanding commitment to humancentered development on the continent.

    TICAD also has a vital role in the coming years, and recognizes that maximum progress will be made by:

    • Taking an integrated approach to the African Union’s Agenda 2063 and the 2030 Agenda, which are closely related.

    • Understanding the growing role that business has in facilitating development in Africa, especially in fair trade and investments, technology transfer, decent jobs, and entrepreneurship.

    • Building on the successes of TICAD VI and the pillars it identified, including structural economic transformation, resilient health systems, and social stability.

    • Responding strategically to other relevant agreements such as the Sendai Framework and the Paris Agreement.


    0 0

    Source: Government of Japan, UN Development Programme
    Country: Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea, Japan, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, United Republic of Tanzania, World

    La dynamique des conflits a aggravé la vulnérabilité des populations, causé des dégâts à l’agriculture, aux pêcheries et aux moyens de subsistance pastoraux et porté atteinte à la liberté de circulation, aux échanges commerciaux et à la gouvernance locale.

    Rôle de la TICAD au service du développement de l’Afrique

    Depuis la tenue de la TICAD VI en 2016, l’Afrique n’a eu de cesse d’avancer dans la bonne direction.

    Après avoir touché un creux cyclique en 2016, les économies africaines se relèvent et les perspectives offertes par le continent sont à nouveau prometteuses. Six des douze économies qui peuvent aujourd’hui s’enorgueillir de disposer de la croissance la plus rapide du monde se trouvent en Afrique. L’indicateur composite qui reflète les trois dimensions du développement humain, à savoir l’espérance de vie, le niveau d’éducation et l’accès aux ressources indispensables pour vivre décemment est en hausse. La sécurité, la primauté du droit, la participation et les droits de l’homme ont été renforcés. Au cours des deux dernières années, les troubles sociaux ont diminué beaucoup plus rapidement en Afrique que dans le reste du monde.

    Ces résultats ont été rendus possibles en partie grâce à l’engagement de longue date de la TICAD en faveur du développement axé sur les peuples à l’échelle du continent.

    La TICAD a également un rôle essentiel à jouer dans les années à venir et reconnaît que des avancées notables pourront être réalisées en tenant compte des aspects suivants :

    • Adopter une approche intégrée de l’Agenda 2063 de l’Union africaine et du Programme 2030, qui sont étroitement liés.

    • Comprendre le rôle croissant des entreprises dans la facilitation du développement en Afrique, notamment en ce qui concerne le commerce équitable et les investissements, le transfert de technologie, les emplois décents et l’esprit d’entreprise.

    • Tirer parti des succès de la TICAD VI et des domaines prioritaires qu’elle a mis en avant, notamment la transformation économique structurelle, la promotion de systèmes de santé résilients et l’appel en faveur de la stabilité sociale.

    • Satisfaire de manière stratégique aux impératifs d’autres accords pertinents tels que le Cadre de Sendai et l’Accord de Paris.


older | 1 | .... | 338 | 339 | (Page 340) | 341 | 342 | .... | 344 | newer