All Rights for All Children Mapping and Analysis of Advocacy Initiatives Pursued by the Civil Society Coalitions and Plan Country Offices in Asia
PLAN ASIA REGIONAL PROGRAMME SUPPORTING CIVIL SOCIETY FOR CONSISTENT AND SUSTAINABLE REDUCTION OF POVERTY THROUGH THE REALISATION OF CHILDREN’S RIGHTS IN ASIA 2011-2015
PLAN ASIA REGIONAL OFFICE, JUNE 2014
For more information, please contact: Raša Sekulović (Mr.) Regional Adviser, Child Rights and Protection
Plan Asia Regional Office 14th Floor, 253 Asoke Building Sukhumvit 21, Klongtoey Nua Wattana, Bangkok 10110, THAILAND rasa.sekulovic@plan-international.org asia.ro@plan-international.org www.plan-international.org
Overall concept and supervision: Raša Sekulovic, Regional Adviser, Child Rights and Protection Report compiled by: Shashike Gamage, Civil Society Regional Programme Coordinator Acknowledgments: Many thanks to all the representatives from the civil society coalitions and Plan Country Offices in the 11 countries who have provided information for this analysis. Nasima Akhter (NGCAF, Bangladesh), Meas Samnang (NGOCRC, Cambodia), Sunil Hakaju Shrestha (CZOPP, Nepal), Habiba Salman (CRM, Pakistan), Azaz Ud Din (CRM, Pakistan), Florence Pasos (PNC, Philippines), Chathuri Jayasooriyya (CRAN, Sri Lanka), Nguyen Hanh Shinec (VAPCR, Vietnam), Nguyen Thi Lan (VAPCR, Vietnam), Syed Matlubar Rashid (Plan Bangladesh), Ty Sovannary (Plan Cambodia), Liu Xiaochen (Plan China), Guan Zhen (Plan China), Hussain Ali Sina (Plan Pakistan), Amrullah Amrullah (Plan Indonesia), Madhuwanti Tuladhar (Plan Nepal), Eric Lazarte (Plan Philippines), Airah Cadiogan (Plan Philippines), Tissa Rajaguru (Plan Sri Lanka), Shyamali Gnanasena (Plan Sri Lanka), Sudthida Keophaithool (Plan Thailand), Fatima Soares (Plan Timor-Leste), Nguyen Thi An (Plan Vietnam) and Nguyen Thi Van Trang (Plan Vietnam). Cover photo: The cover photo features advocacy activities carried out by National Girl Child Advocacy Forum in Bangladesh, Child Rights Movement in Pakistan and the Philippines NGO Coalition. June 2014
-2-
ACRONYMS ASEAN
Association of South East Asian Nations
BCCRC
Bangladesh Coalition for the Convention on the Rights of the Child
CBO
Community Based Organisation
COs
(Plan) Country Offices
CR
Child Rights
CRAN
Child Rights Advocacy Network (Sri Lanka)
CRC
Convention on the Rights of the Child
CRM
Child Rights Movement (Pakistan)
CRPD
Convention on the Rights of the Persons with Disabilities
CSO
Civil Society Organisation
CZOPP
Children as Zones of Peace and Protection (Nepal)
INGO
International Non-Governmental Organisation
MACR
Minimum Age for Criminal Responsibility
NGCAF
National Girl Child Advocacy Forum (Bangladesh)
NGO
Non-Governmental Organisation
NGOCRC
NGO Committee on the Rights of the Child (Cambodia)
OP
Optional Protocol
Plan ARO
Plan Asia Regional Office
PNC
Philippines NGO Coalition
SAIEVAC
South Asia Initiative to End Violence against Children
UN
United Nations
UNCRC
United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child
UPR
Universal Periodic Review
VAPCR
Vietnam Association for the Protection of Children’s Rights
-3-
CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................................
06
1. INTRODUCTION - UNDERSTANDING OF ADVOCACY................................................................ 08 1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4. 1.5.
Growth of advocacy work led by civil society coalitions in Asia........................................ Advocacy as defined by civil society coalitions............................................................... Definition and evolution of advocacy work within Plan................................................... Advancing advocacy work in Asia - efforts taken by Plan Asia Regional Office............... Summary. ........................................................................................................................
08 08 09 09 10
2. BACKGROUND, OBJECTIVES, METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS OF THE ANALYSIS........... 11 2.1. Background to the Analysis............................................................................................... 2.2. Overall goal and objectives...............................................................................................
11 11
3. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS........................................................................................................ 12 3.1. Diversity in defining advocacy focus and targets........................................................
12
3.1.1. How advocacy focus and targets are defined by CSO coalitions................................ 12 3.1.2. How advocacy focus and targets are defined by Plan Country Offices...................... 12 3.1.3. Plan’s global definition as a basis for analysis............................................................... 13 3.2. CSOs involvement in global and regional level advocacy............................................... 13 3.2.1. Engagement in global mechanisms..............................................................................
13
A) Monitoring and periodic alternative reporting under the UNCRC...................................... B) Following up on CRC Concluding Observations and recommendations............................. C) Advocacy for the ratification of UNCRC OP3..................................................................... D) CSOs’ involvement in the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process................................. E) Summary.............................................................................................................................
13 14 14 15 15
3.2.2. Engagement in regional advocacy mechanisms/initiatives.......................................... 16 A) Absence of human rights mechanisms at Asia Regional Level........................................... 16 B) Developments within ASEAN and SAARC............................................................................. 16 C) Increased space for civil society within ASEAN and SAARC mechanisms............................. 17 3.3. Thematic clusters of advocacy work aiming to influence changes in legislation, policies, resource allocation, institutions or practices....................................... 18 3.3.1. Thematic Cluster 1 - Advocacy actions aiming to effect changes in child Protection...... 18 A) Generic laws and policies related to child protection............................................................ 19 B) Prohibition of employing children as domestic workers....................................................... 20 C) Actions aiming for prohibition of corporal punishment..........................................................20 D) Actions aiming for improved juvenile justice laws................................................................. 21 E) Advocacy actions aiming to combat trafficking in of children................................................ 22 -4-
F) Actions aiming to strengthen various components of national child protection system...... 23 G) Ratification of international human rights treaties........................................................... 25 3.3.2. Thematic Cluster 2 - Advocacy actions focusing on the rights of the most excluded and marginalised groups of children...................................... 25 3.3.3. Thematic Cluster 3 - Advocacy actions focusing on increased resource allocations for children’s rights implementation.....................................
27
3.3.4. Thematic Cluster 4 - Advocacy actions aiming to revise children’s minimum ages in national legislations....................................................................
28
3.3.5. Thematic Cluster 5 - Advocacy actions focusing on birth registration........................... 28 3.3.6. Thematic Cluster 6 - Advocacy actions aiming changes in structures, institutions and practices in general..................................................... 29 3.3.7. Thematic Cluster 7 - Ad hoc advocacy initiatives........................................................... 30 A) Manipulation of children into violent political activities...................................................... 30 B) Ad hoc advocacy initiatives in Pakistan................................................................................ 30 4. ANALYSIS OF CONTRIBUTING FACTORS, GAPS, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES............ 31 4.1. Synthesis of advocacy engagements.................................................................................. 4.2. Contributing factors for advocacy achievements............................................................... 4.3. Identified gaps................................................................................................................... 4.4. Challenges for effective advocacy...................................................................................... 4.5. Opportunities......................................................................................................................
31 32 34 34 36
5. ANNEXES Annex 1 - Methodology and limitations.................................................................................... 38 Annex 2 - Overarching recommendations of the UN VAC Study.............................................. 39 Annex 3 - Survey questionnaire................................................................................................. 39
-5-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Why this exercise? Plan ARO initiated this exercise in January 2014 with the aim of mapping and analysing different advocacy initiatives pursued by CSO coalitions with Plan’s support, or independently, in the countries in which Plan is operating in Asia. The Analysis was conceptualised so to identify achievements, challenges and lessons learned by analysing the advocacy work that is both currently ongoing and undertaken during the last 5 years. The Analysis is conducted within the Plan Asia Regional Programme Supporting Civil Society for Consistent and Sustainable Reduction of Poverty through the Realisation of Children’s Rights in Asia. Given the central role that CSO coalitions play in national level advocacy and the increasing shift of the Regional Programme focus towards joint advocacy, this analysis was initiated to further explore existing synergies and potential points of convergence among the CSO coalitions involved. Overall, the Exercise has analysed advocacy initiatives transpiring in 11 countries across Asia. CSO coalitions and Plan COs from Bangladesh, Cambodia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Vietnam shared inputs into the Analysis while only Plan Country Offices (COs) in China, Indonesia, Thailand and Timor-Leste contributed with required information.
How was information collected and analysed Plan ARO coordinated the analysis process and received inputs from the CSO coalitions and Plan COs in the 11 countries. In order to collect required information, a questionnaire was developed in consultation with the CSO coalition representatives. The questionnaire aimed to capture information on 9 key elements in relation to advocacy work. In order to ensure the quality and accuracy of the information shared, it was proposed that the questionnaire should be completed by the advocacy focal points of the CSO coalitions and Plan COs. Apart from the information obtained through the questionnaire, additional details were obtained through follow-up email exchanges with the selected CSO and Plan country focal points. A considerable amount of evidence was also gathered by examining the presentations and information shared by CSO representatives and Plan staff in numerous regional gatherings and training events that Plan had organised since 2010.
Key findings The findings revealed a significant body of advocacy achievements accomplished by CSO coalitions despite many internal and external challenges. The findings also indicated numerous gaps in the existing work, as well as many opportunities that remain to be further explored. Outlined below are the key findings emerging from the Analysis. • Coalitions do not have a documented definition for advocacy and there are notable differences in the way how advocacy is perceived. However, there is a reasonable uniformity in the expected outcomes of advocacy work as all of them aimed at instigating positive changes for the effective fulfilment of children’s rights. • Almost all coalitions, except China and Thailand, are engaged in monitoring and reporting under the UNCRC framework and utilise CRC Concluding Observations as a basis for their advocacy work. • More than 5 CSO coalitions are involved in reporting under the CRC Optional Protocols and UPR. Similarly, 5 coalitions continue advocating the respective governments to ratify CRC OP3. -6-
• CSO coalitions are increasingly collaborating on advocating on child rights issues through the existing bodies and mechanisms established within SAARC and ASEAN. • Actions aiming to bring about positive changes related to child protection have received predominant focus in most of the advocacy work pursued both by CSOs and Plan. These included actions aiming to: a. b. c. d. e. f.
instigate positive changes in generic laws and policies related to child protection; prohibit the employment of children as domestic workers; prohibit corporal punishment; improve juvenile justice laws; combat trafficking in children and Strengthen various components of national child protection systems.
• Issues faced by most excluded and marginalised groups of children have received a considerable focus as evidenced in the advocacy engagements of CSO coalitions and Plan. • A considerable amount of advocacy achievements have also been accomplished through actions to promote children’s meaningful participation, birth registration, child rights budgeting and harmonising national legislations defining arrange of minimum ages for a variety of children’s social interactions with international human rights standards. • Both CSOs and Plan have carried out many supporting activities in order to inform their advocacy work. These include but are not limited to: conducting researches; drafting position papers; conducting child rights awareness raising activities; organising campaigns, public rallies and celebrating specific days of significance to children’s rights.
-7-
1. INTRODUCTION – UNDERSTANDING ADVOCACY 1.1. Increase of advocacy work led by civil society coalitions in Asia The last decade has witnessed an inspiring growth of civil society activism on children’s rights across Asia. Civil society actors have amplified their efforts in size and significance on advocating for children’s rights by harmonising their actions around national level coalitions. Plan has been cooperating with Civil Society Coalitions (CSO coalitions) in Asia with the aim of strengthening and sustaining joint efforts towards the realisation of children’s rights. Founded in practical grassroots initiatives, the scope of CSO coalitions’ engagement sometimes spreads across local, national and international arenas. This way, the CSO coalitions have established important alliances for effective advocacy in order to bring about lasting positive changes in children’s lives across the Region 1.
Photo 1 – “Bata Muna” Campaign - A child rights campaign initiated by Save the Children in the Philippines and adopted by the Philippines NGO Coalition as part of their advocacy work
1.2.
Advocacy as defined by civil society coalitions
How CSO coalitions conceptualise “advocacy” vary across the Region. While some coalitions have an advocacy plan, the majority does not. Also, there are no documented definitions that are commonly agreed by the coalitions. As outlined below, the term “advocacy” broadly refers to numerous activities done by CSOs which are designed to influence those in the positions of power over the issue on which the change is sought. Advocacy actions carried out by CSO coalitions • Conducting research and analyses to support advocating for different issues. • Producing reports and publications on identified issues in support of expected changes. 1
Analysis of Enablers Contributing to the Stability and Sustainability of Child Rights Based CSO Coalitions in Asia – Report by Plan ARO, October 2013
-8-
• • • • • • • • • •
Awareness raising activities for children, families and communities on children’s rights. Training and capacity building activities for the duty bearers to fulfil their responsibilities. Influencing those in positions of power over the issue for changes in legislation and policy. Actions around negotiations, lobbying, protests and campaigns on identified issues. Campaigning for increased budgetary allocations for the implementation of children’s rights. Campaigns (both online and otherwise) designed to mobilise public pressure. Engagement in periodic alternative CRC reporting process. Following up on Concluding Observations issued by the CRC Committee. Working with media to raise public awareness on identified CR issues. Building alliances and strategic partnerships for joint advocacy.
1.3. Definition and evolution of advocacy work within Plan Advocacy became an important and integral part of Plan‘s work in 2003 when Plan‘s International Board adopted a human rights based approach to development, Child Centred Community Development (CCCD). This in turn has prompted a major development of Plan’s advocacy work as an integrated activity both in the Asia region and globally 2. Parallel to these developments, Plan’s definition of advocacy has also evolved to illustrate the complete range of Plan’s advocacy engagements within rights based programming. Evolution of advocacy definition within Plan • In 2003 Plan’s Global Advocacy Strategy defined advocacy as “a concerted course of action, using information strategically to change legal frameworks, policies or behaviours of decision makers to improve the lives of disadvantaged children”. • In 2009 Plan drew up a transitional definition which defined advocacy as “a strategic process designed to influence those with power and/or responsibility in order to promote, protect and fulfil the rights of children by acting in collaboration with children and their communities to bring about social justice and protect the rights of children”. • In 2013 Plan’s Global Advocacy Strategic Framework defined advocacy as “acting with, or on behalf of, children, youth and their communities, use information strategically to devise and implement systematic and targeted sets of actions to influence changes in policies, resource allocation, legislation, institutions and/or practices that will respect, protect and fulfil children’s rights”. Over the last decade Plan has developed advocacy capacities, processes and initiatives. As a result, advocacy is being conducted across the global organisation and at all levels from the Programme Unit where Plan works with duty bearers, children and local authorities, to working with primary duty bearers at the national level and through to the influencing of regional and international institutions and forums to advance and strengthen child rights and development cooperation3. 1.4. Advancing advocacy work in Asia - Efforts taken by Plan Asia Regional Office (ARO) Plan ARO has taken various progressive steps to strengthen the advocacy work carried out by Plan within the Region. Some of the major actions taken to this end include:
2 3
Making Change Happen: Plan Asia Advocacy Manual, December 2011 Making Change Happen: Plan Asia Advocacy Manual, December 2011
-9-
• the commissioning of a regional advocacy assessment in January 2010 as an initial step towards the establishment of a comprehensive regional advocacy strategy for the Organisation; • conducting the regional advocacy training and workshop in November 2011 to take stock of the existing achievements and to increase understanding and knowledge of various aspects among the staff, components and methodologies related to advocacy and • production of the Regional Advocacy Manual “Making Change Happen” for providing practical guidance on developing and implementing an advocacy strategy. 1.5. Summary Over the last decade, there have been numerous developments in conceptualising “advocacy” both within CSO coalitions and Plan. Efforts have been taken to develop the staff capacities to reinforce advocacy actions by conducting trainings, assessments and development of advocacy manuals. Despite the lack of a jointly agreed and standardised definition of advocacy among CSO coalitions across the Region, a significant amount of work has been undertaken to bring about changes in policies, legislation, practices and attitudes. These in turn have contributed to instigating positive changes for the realisation of children’s rights in the respective countries across the Region.
- 10 -
2. BACKGROUND, OBJECTIVES, METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS OF THE ANALYSIS 2.1. Background to the Analysis In 2011, Plan ARO launched a regional programme to support CSO coalitions in 9 Asian countries4 with the aim of strengthening their capacities and networking opportunities to invigorate different ongoing efforts around children’s rights. As the core component of this Programme, Plan ARO established interactions with national child rights based CSO coalitions in the 9 countries in which Plan COs have already had a history of good collaboration. During the first three years, the Programme has undertaken numerous capacity building initiatives, research and production of practical tools to assist CSO coalitions and Plan COs to further strengthen their ongoing actions around children’s rights. The Programme has also created a regional platform for CSO coalitions to share their experiences and get organised around regional level advocacy on common issues identified. Given the central role that CSO coalitions play in the national level advocacy, an increased importance has been recognised in further mapping and analysing their ongoing advocacy thematic threads and initiatives in Asia. Furthermore, the increasing shift of the Programme focus towards joint advocacy resulted in carrying out this analysis to explore existing synergies and potential points of convergence among the CSO coalitions involved. The Analysis is a direct outcome of the discussions on advocacy initiatives pursued by CSO coalitions that took place in the Annual CSO coalitions’ Gathering held in November 2013 in Bangkok, Thailand. 2.2. Overall goal and objectives Overall, this exercise aims to map and analyse different advocacy initiatives pursued by CSO coalitions with Plan’s support in 11 countries 5 in which Plan is operating in Asia. The Analysis is expected to identify achievements, challenges and lessons learned by analysing the advocacy work that is ongoing and undertaken during the last 5 years. The specific objectives of the Analysis include: • • • • •
creating an evidence based body of information on successful advocacy initiatives that have resulted in policy, practice and attitude changes, including a collection of case studies; contributing towards increased effectiveness of advocacy actions and processes based on good practices identified; exploring processes by which coalitions design, implement and monitor their advocacy work by analysing the advocacy initiatives conducted over the past 5 years; identifying key factors that have contributed to the coalitions’ advocacy achievements and how the coalitions have overcome different challenges; further exploring opportunities for joint regional advocacy actions based on synergies and common thematic advocacy threads identified and
2.3. Methodology and limitations (see Annex 1)
4 5
Bangladesh, Cambodia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor-Leste and Vietnam Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor-Leste and Vietnam
- 11 -
3. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS 3.1. Diversity in defining advocacy focus and targets
3.1.1. How advocacy focus and targets are defined by CSO coalitions As indicated in the introductory chapter, there are notable differences in the way how advocacy is defined by the CSO coalitions. This is even more so as there are no documented definitions of advocacy among the coalitions. Despite the differences in how advocacy work is defined, there seems to be a reasonable consistency in the expected outcome of advocacy work among the coalitions. Broadly speaking, all advocacy actions of the coalitions intend to contribute to the realisation of children’s rights within the UNCRC framework. This is evident from how the coalitions define their advocacy thematic focus and targets as indicated below:
How advocacy focus and targets are defined by some coalitions NGOCRC, Cambodia: Advocacy thematic focus and targets are defined in line with the Coalition’s mandate and mission statement identified by the members, children, youth and relevant stakeholders during the development of the Coalition’s Strategic Plan. The Coalition has also developed an advocacy plan which covers the advocacy thematic focus and targets. CZOPP, Nepal: As CZOPP is the national level child rights coalition in Nepal, the advocacy thematic focus mainly targets the realisation of all rights for all children by integrating them into the Constitution, laws, policies and national programmes. CRM, Pakistan: Influencing the establishment and enforcement of policies and legislations related to children’s rights are the primary focus of CRM’s advocacy work. Apart from these pre-planned engagements, CRM also advocates on different incidents of child rights violations in an ad hoc manner as an when these are reported. PNC, Philippines: As a key component of their advocacy engagements, PNC monitors the Government’s actions on CRC Concluding Observations. Additionally, member organisations raise identified issues through emails or in the General Assembly. Involving the relevant thematic clusters of the Coalition, the Advocacy Working Group analyses these issues based on which further advocacy actions are determined. VAPCR, Vietnam: Through advocacy VAPCR aims to influence the Government to adopt necessary decisions about resource investments for children’s rights. Similarly, VAPCR mobilises communities and agencies to take part in implementing, developing and contributing to the policies to protect and promote children’s rights.
3.1.2. How advocacy focus and targets are defined by Plan Country Offices Guided by a common programme framework, Plan COs in Asia follows a similar approach for defining advocacy focus and targets. In most cases, different advocacy actions are defined based on the child rights situation analysis that is carried out when developing Country Strategic Plans. Advocacy work is mostly integrated into the programme response which is designed to reflect the child rights situation analysis. Recommendations provided by different human rights treaty bodies, particularly the Committee on the Rights of the Child, also inform different advocacy agendas pursued by Plan COs. However, not all Plan COs in the Asia Region have articulated their advocacy work within a separate strategic framework.
- 12 -
Plan’s global advocacy campaigns - Universal Birth Registration, Learn Without Fear and Because I am a Girl - have helped, and continue to improve, policy and legislation, and have given Plan the reputation of an effective advocacy organisation. Through these efforts, Plan has been able to address numerous root causes and structural issues underpinning those issues affecting millions of children across the world.
3.1.3. Plan’s global definition as a basis for analysis As there is no commonly agreed documented definition for advocacy among the CSO coalitions, Plan’s global definition on advocacy is used in this document as a point of reference for the analysis. Therefore, this exercise analyses how CSO coalitions and Plan COs are engaging in advocacy work with or on behalf of children and their communities to influence changes in policies, resource allocations, legislations, institutions or practices that will respect, protect and fulfil children’s rights. 3.2. CSOs involvement in global and regional level advocacy
3.2.1. Engagement in global mechanisms A) Monitoring and periodic alternative reporting under the UNCRC Being child rights based entities, a key objective for all CSO coalitions covered by this Analysis is to monitor the implementation of the UNCRC in their respective countries. This is the most salient aspect of the coalitions’ advocacy engagements within a global mechanism through which the governments are held accountable to fulfil their obligations under the UNCRC. The process has triggered many developments at the national level including: • • • •
harmonisation incorporation of human rights principles into national legislations; development of national agendas and action plans for children; restructuring of budgetary allocations to increase investments for children; development of child sensitive justice systems etc.
Photo 2 - a discussion on child rights organised by NAGCF in Bangladesh
- 13 -
Findings indicate that all CSO coalitions and Plan COs except China and Thailand have been involved in the monitoring process at varying degrees and have submitted at least one alternative report during the 5 year reporting cycle. The findings also revealed that CSO coalitions in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines and Sri Lanka are engaged in monitoring and alternative reporting under the UNCRC Optional Protocols. Findings indicate that CSOs have undertaken numerous actions to increase the quality of their contribution to the CRC monitoring and periodic alternative reporting process by: • • • • •
developing members’ capacities; establishing data collection methodologies; increasing the quality of children’s involvement in the process; producing child friendly materials to facilitate children’s involvement; developing monitoring indicators and • establishing linkages with specialist bodies such as Child Rights Connect (formerly known as NGO Group for the CRC) and Plan Geneva Office.
These actions have not only enhanced the quality of the coalitions’ contribution to the monitoring process but also the CRC Committee’s effectiveness in monitoring the States’ actions to respect, protect and fulfil children’s rights. The quality of information submitted by CSO coalitions to the CRC Committee demonstrates positive outcomes of the coalitions’ efforts in this important process. CSO coalitions and Plan COs in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines and Sri Lanka have successfully involved children in the periodic alternative reporting processes as evidenced from the inputs shared by these countries.
B) Following up on CRC Concluding Observations and recommendations The qualitative and evidence based information shared by the CSO coalitions in their alternative reports have very much contributed to the adoption of Concluding Observations that are specific to the country contexts and the respective governments’ obligations. CSO coalitions’ engagement within UPR process has added even greater impetus to reinforcing ongoing advocacy efforts based on the child rights specific recommendations issued to the countries. The findings of this analysis indicated that CSOs and Plan COs in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Vietnam have been actively engaged in numerous advocacy actions based on the CRC Concluding Observations and or UPR recommendations. As a starting point to following-up on specific recommendations, most CSOs have disseminated the Concluding Observations and recommendations among all relevant stakeholders, including with children.
C) Advocacy for the ratification of UNCRC OP3/Communications Procedure The 3rd Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child is of exceptional significance to the Asia Region. This is mainly due to the lack of regional human rights mechanisms to which issues related to child rights violations can be presented when national mechanisms fail to activate appropriate remedies. Thailand is the only country in the Asia region that has ratified this treaty. Since the adoption of OP3 by the UN General Assembly in December 2011, CSO coalitions and Plan COs in Asia have been active in campaigning with their governments for the ratification of the OP3. The findings of this analysis revealed numerous actions undertaken by CSOs and Plan COs in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Indonesia, Nepal and the Philippines to influence their respective governments to ratify the Treaty. These actions include: - 14 -
• lobbying with parliamentarians; • sending open letters to the relevant authorities; • organising consultations, discussions and awareness raising activities with different stakeholders and other similar activities. However, the governments have still not clearly demonstrated their support in favour of the Protocol and the coalitions continue their advocacy actions to influence the respective governments.
D) CSOs’ involvement in the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process During the last few years, UPR has emerged as a unique process further stimulating the human rights monitoring processes nationally and internationally. With the aim of reinforcing their ongoing actions to influence governments to implement children’s rights obligations, CSO coalitions and Plan COs in Cambodia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Timor-Leste have engaged in the UPR process when the respective countries were scheduled for review under the UPR.
Child friendly version of the UPR recommendations produced by CRM, Pakistan
CSOs and Plan COs have taken measures to develop staff and partner capacities to effectively engage in this important process. CRM has also published UPR recommendations in child friendly formats to make them accessible to children in a meaningful manner.
E) Summary As indicated in the table below, more than half of the CSO coalitions involved in this analysis are engaged in different global mechanisms and initiatives related to advocacy. COUNTRY Bangladesh Cambodia China Indonesia
CRC alt. reporting √ √ χ √
CRC OPs alt. reporting √ √ χ χ
Engaged in UPR reporting χ √ χ χ
- 15 -
Follow-up on Con. Obs. √ √ χ √
Advocate for OP3 ratification √ √ χ √
COUNTRY Nepal Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Thailand Timor-Leste Vietnam TOTAL
CRC alt. reporting √ √ √ √ χ √ √ 09
CRC OPs alt. reporting √ √ √ √ χ χ χ 06
Engaged in UPR reporting √ √ √ √ χ √ χ 06
Follow-up on Con. Obs. √ √ √ √ χ χ √ 08
Advocate for OP3 ratification √ χ √ χ N/A χ χ 05
Involvement in the overall monitoring process of the UNCRC is the most commonly pursued global advocacy mechanism for all CSO coalitions, with the exception of China and Thailand. It is also worth noting that 6 coalitions are engaged in reporting under the UNCRC OPs while 5 are engaged in advocating the respective governments for the ratification of the CRC OP3. Despite it being a relatively new mechanism, 6 coalitions are engaged in the UPR process.
3.2.2. Engagement in regional advocacy mechanisms/initiatives A) Absence of Human Rights Mechanisms at Asia regional Level The degree of civil society engagement on child rights at national level has been increasing steadily during the last few years. However, this activism has not transpired at the same pace at the regional level despite the commonality of various child rights violations prevalent across the Region. Issues such as child labour, child marriage, child trafficking, corporal punishment and many other discriminatory and harmful practices transcend the national territories. Civil society efforts to join forces and collaborate on these issues have remained sporadic and scattered. The situation is largely attributable to the lack of strong human rights instruments and mechanisms at the regional level. The presence of a regional human rights mechanism is of critical importance to Asia to assist national governments with the realisation of international human rights obligations more effectively. Most importantly, such mechanisms could help creating a platform to address issues that are commonly prevalent across the Region and also to collaborate on cross-border issues such as child trafficking.
B) Developments within SAARC and ASEAN The regional mechanisms within ASEAN and SAARC have introduced a certain number of treaties and declarations aiming to promote children’s rights. Some of these include: • SAARC Convention on Regional Arrangements for the Promotion of Child Welfare in South Asia (2002); • The SAARC Social Charter (2004); • Beijing Declaration on Commitments for Children in the East Asia and Pacific Region (2001); • Declaration on the Commitments for Children in ASEAN (2001); • ASEAN Declaration Against Trafficking in Persons, Particularly Women and Children (2004) and • ASEAN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women and Children (2013). Despite the fact that nearly two decades have passed since the introduction of several instruments, progress made by the governments to implement the commitments and recommendations has been comparatively slow. Nevertheless, some progressive developments are evident with the introduction of new institutional frameworks within ASEAN and SAARC for promoting and protecting of children’s rights. - 16 -
C) Increased space for civil society within ASEAN and SAARC Following almost a decade of advocacy efforts by different actors, South Asia Initiative to End Violence against Children (SAIEVAC) was successfully integrated into SAARC as its first ever Apex Body for Children in 2011. Within SAIEVAC platform, a significant space is created and increasingly conquered by civil society protagonists involved in different aspects of preventing and responding to violence against children and constituted under the National Action and Coordinating Groups (NACGs), led by CSOs.
Photo 3 - signing of an MoU between SAIEVAC and the Government of Nepal
NACGs are composed of CSOs, children’s and young people’s groups, UN agencies, multi-lateral and bilateral agencies, and NGOs. Their vision is that all children in every South Asian country enjoy their right to protection from all forms of violence in all settings. NACGs strive to work together with SAIEVAC, children and young people, the South Asia Coordinating group on Action against Violence against Children (SACG) and other governmental and non-governmental stakeholders to end all forms of violence against children in every South Asian country. The development of a separate advocacy strategy within SAIEVAC is ongoing and it is expected that this will bring in greater impetus to joint regional level advocacy on children’s rights within the SAIEVAC framework. In South East Asia, ASEAN Commission for the Protection of Rights of Women and Children (ACWC) has served as a platform of information sharing and education for ASEAN member States and representatives on the unique needs and rights of women and children since its establishment in 2010. The Commission’s establishment is testament to the growing interest of ASEAN to better engage local communities and domestic populations by working in partnership and learning from the experiences and expertise of local and international NGOs. While the ACWC capacity is still overpowered by other ASEAN priorities, the Commission’s establishment is an important first step in prioritising children in the ASEAN framework 6. In 2009, ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) was established as a consultative body of ASEAN with the aim of promoting and protecting human rights across Southeast
6
ASEAN at a Glance, December 2013 – Plan Asia Regional Office
- 17 -
Asia. The Commission operates through consultation and consensus and holds biannual meetings for this purpose. These developments have seen increased advocacy efforts from ASEAN civil society coalitions through ASEAN People’s Forum. The CSO coalitions from ASEAN countries have been lobbying for a more comprehensive ASEAN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women and Children. 3.3. Thematic clusters of advocacy work aiming to influence changes in legislations, policies,
resource allocations, institutions or practices
The analysis of inputs shared by the CSOs and Plan revealed a considerable number of advocacy threads pursued under different thematic clusters. Actions aiming to bring about positive changes related to child protection have received predominant focus in most of the advocacy work pursued both by CSOs and Plan. Additional areas of thematic focus identified for advocacy work include: • • • •
actions to promote children’s meaningful participation; birth registration; child rights budgeting and harmonising national legislations on children’s minimum ages with the international human rights law.
Equally, both CSOs and Plan have carried out a large number of supporting activities in order to inform their advocacy work. These include but are not limited to: • conducting research; • child rights awareness raising activities; • organising campaigns, public rallies and celebrating specific days of significance to children’s rights.
3.3.1. Thematic Cluster 1 - Advocacy actions focusing on Child Protection The incidence of violence against children in the Asia region is extremely diverse, so that many critical issues demand the immediate attention and intervention by the relevant authorities. These problems are becoming even more complex with newly emerging issues in the face of rapid economic developments and social and cultural transformations taking place across the Region. Since it was introduced in 2005, the United Nation’s Secretary General’s Study on Violence Against Children has had a significant influence on both CSOs and Plan in shaping their advocacy work around child protection. The 12 overarching recommendations of this study (see Annex 2) have influenced governments, CSOs and other development actors to take actions towards both preventing and responding to violations of children’s right to freedom from violence. The findings reveal how CSOs and Plan have influenced the respective governments to take measures to respect, protect and fulfil children’s right to protection. The Analysis identified a considerable number of achievements by CSOs and Plan that have resulted in child-friendly legislation and policies related to numerous child protection issues. Legal and policy advocacy has received greater interest among the CSOs as it is deemed to be the most effective and sustainable way of addressing the issues of concern. The interventions pursued range from: • proposing and introducing new pieces of legislation and policies; • revising gaps in existing pieces of laws and policies; • enforcement of the existing laws and policies which are meant to respect, protect and promote children’s rights. - 18 -
To bring the desired changes in policies and legislations about, CSOs have conducted a range of activities to mobilise support to the identified issues. These include: • • • • •
collecting information and conducting research on the specific issues; establishing relationships with people and groups who have authority over the issues; conducting awareness raising activities; organising campaigns to harness support from relevant groups and authorities and lobbying the legislators.
Photo 4 - the Philippines NGO coalition celebrating the World Day Against Child Labour in 2013
A) Generic laws and policies related to child protection The analysis identified the following advocacy actions pursued by CSO coalitions, which aimed to introduce changes in the general child protection laws. • NGOCRC has influenced the Cambodian National Council for Children (CNCC) to address gaps in the existing child protection law. As a result, CNCC has integrated the demands in its Strategic Plan for 2013 and the Government has affirmed the adoption of the child protection legal framework as stated in the National Strategic Development Plan for 2014-2018. • Plan and CSO partners in Cambodia have jointly advocated the relevant authorities to develop and enforce minimum standards for safeguarding children in State institutions. • CZOPP has been able to influence the Constituent Assembly to include a number of children’s rights in Nepal’s draft Constitution. As a result, 7 recommendations out of the 11 submitted by CZOPP have been included in the draft Constitution. • CZOPP has also conducted analysis of gaps in the existing child protection laws in an effort to
advocate relevant authorities to harmonise those with the international human rights law. To this end, CZOPP has completed a comprehensive reviewing of child protection laws in Nepal.
• Plan Pakistan and CSO partners have jointly advocated for the establishment of a child protection authority in Sindh Province. As a result, the Sindh Child Protection Authority Act has been passed in 2011. The establishment of the Authority is underway.
- 19 -
• Plan and CSO partners have jointly influenced the Vietnamese Children’s Bureau to amend the Law on Child Protection, Care and Education to address the existing gaps related to children’s legal age for numerous social interactions, children’s participation, child labour and to establish a Child Rights Ombudsman Office. It is hoped that a comprehensive Children’s Act will be introduced and enforced in October, 2015. Children’s rights guaranteed in the Constitution in-the-making - Nepal CZOPP has successfully advocated the Constituent Assembly (the Assembly) to include children’s rights in the new constitution that is being drafted in Nepal. Starting the process, CZOPP formed a “Policy Advocacy Working Group (WG)” to lobby and influence the Assembly. Through regular and systematic lobbying, the WG managed to form a children’s caucus within the Assembly. To reinforce their influence and engagement in the Assembly, CZOPP also formed a Parliamentary Forum for Child Rights (PFCR). By facilitating PFCR meetings, CZOPP sensitized the Forum on children’s rights issues. This, in turn, helped engaging the political party leaders to influence the inclusion of children’s rights in the Constitution. CZOPP also prepared and published expert submissions and flyers highlighting numerous child rights violations and CZOPP’s recommendations to address them by guaranteeing them through the Constitution. Following a comprehensive process, CZOPP was able to include 7 out of its 11 recommendations in the draft Constitution.
B) Prohibition of employing children as domestic workers Child labour is another widespread child protection issue in the Region, manifesting in under-age employment or hazardous labour. Many children who work do so in order to help their families to survive and as a consequence cannot attend school. As such, child labour is also a cause of poverty, since it deprives children of education and opportunities to acquire skills and in some cases also results in physical disabilities or death that further limits earning potential 7. A specific manifestation of child labour is the employment of children as domestic workers. CSO coalitions in Cambodia and Pakistan have advocated for the prohibition of employing children as domestic workers by proposing new legislation. • NGOCRC has advocated the Ministry of Labour to develop necessary regulations to protect children from being employed as child labourers in Cambodia. As a result, the Government has recognised NGOCRC as a member of the National Subcommittee on Child Labour which has provided the Coalition with strategic advantage for advocating on the issue. • CRM has advocated the relevant authorities to impose complete legal prohibition of employing children as domestic workers that is prevalent across Pakistan. By signing online petitions, sending post-cards and official notifications to relevant authorities, CRM has demonstrated public disapproval and protest on the issue. In 2013, the Chief Justice declared child labour illegal which, however, remains to be materialised as a piece of legislation.
C) Actions aiming at prohibition of corporal punishment Corporal punishment is one of the most prevalent child protection issues across the Asia region. Regardless of the international human rights law imperatives, none of the countries that have been 7
Safe and Sound, Growing up with Protection - Plan Asia Regional Sub Strategy on Child Protection in Development, 2013
- 20 -
covered in this analysis has imposed complete legal prohibition of corporal punishment. During the last few years, Plan has invested significantly to address the issue of corporal punishment within the educational settings as one of the key goals of its Global Campaign “Learn Without Fear”. As a result, almost all Plan offices that are part of this analysis have taken an active role in implementing actions that are contributing to the elimination of corporal punishment. These include steps to prevent, respond and reduce actions, attitudes and traditions underpinning the issue of corporal punishment. Also, the development of regional level initiatives focusing on the broader framework of violence against children has reinforced advocacy on the issue of corporal punishment. This in turn has prompted CSOs to shift their focus to influence the governments to deliver on recommendations that have already been made. However, both CSOs and Plan in the Philippines have jointly pursued advocacy work at national level focusing on corporal punishment as follows: • Advocacy actions are being pursued for the enactment of national anti-corporal punishment bill prohibiting all forms of corporal punishment in all settings. • Department of Education has introduced a child protection policy following advocacy on the issue of corporal punishment. • Following successful advocacy, four local ordinances prohibiting corporal punishment in all settings have been passed by the Provincial Council. • To inform ongoing advocacy work related to corporal punishment, baseline studies have been conducted to identify the prevalence of the issue in selected areas. Cawayan, the first municipality to prohibit corporal punishment in all settings - the Philippines The Municipality of Cawayan in Masbate Province became the first in the Philippines to enact a Child and Youth Welfare Code containing sections prohibiting corporal punishment as a form of disciplining children. The Ordinance was drafted by the Cawayan Community Based Advocacy and Monitoring Group (CBAMG) with the support of the project partners” Philippines Legislators Committee on Population and Development Fund” (PLCPD) and “Sentro Ng Alternatibong Lingap Panligal” (SALIGAN). A local Policy Champion stated that “there is a need to fully implement this Ordinance because corporal punishment harms children”. While this entails changing the prevailing culture that permits adults to physically punish children in the name of discipline, he believes that “there is no better time to start than now.” The next steps for the CBAMG include increasing the community support for the Ordinance, while awaiting its approval by the Provincial Council. The CBAMG also participated in the drafting of the Ordinance’s Implementing Rules and Regulations.
D) Actions aiming at improved juvenile justice laws United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules) and United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (The Riyadh Guidelines) provide a comprehensive legal framework on how children’s rights must be upheld in the administration of juvenile justice. Nevertheless, the issue of children in conflict with law has become an increasing concern for Asian countries, and significant reform initiatives are underway in most countries. The analysis identified advocacy work carried out by NGOCRC, CZOPP and CRM to address the gaps and loopholes in the existing juvenile justice laws in the respective countries. • NGOCRC has successfully advocated the Constitutional Council in Cambodia to make it mandatory for the court personnel to consider “the principle of the best interest of the child” in juvenile justice cases. - 21 -
• NGOCRC has influenced the Ministry of Justice in Cambodia to introduce a new comprehensive juvenile justice law. Specifically, the demands included separating children in detention from adult inmates; providing education to children in detention and to increase the number of specialised judges and lawyers for juvenile justice. Following continuous lobbying, the Ministry involved NGOCRC members in drafting the law which has received approval from the Council of Jurists. The Law is now pending enactment by the Council of Ministers and the National Assembly. • Plan and CSO partners have jointly influenced the relevant government authorities to improve different components of the juvenile justice system in Nepal. Specifically, the achievements include the development of a database to record the juvenile delinquency cases and introduction of child friendly procedures to the police training curriculum. • Plan and CSO partners in Pakistan have jointly advocated the Sindh Provincial Government to address the gaps in the rules applicable to children’s correctional institutions. As a result, a regulatory framework outlining the rules for correctional institutions has been enacted. “Best interest of child” guaranteed in juvenile justice cases - Cambodia The principle of the “Best interest of the child” was frequently compromised in juvenile justice cases in Cambodia during the court hearings. Due to the existence of the Law on Aggravating Circumstances on Felony, children were sentenced for longer periods even for minor offences. Information collected from children who were arrested, accused and detained in the prisons throughout the Country revealed significant violations of children’s rights within the juvenile justice process. To advocate on this issue, NGOCRC assigned a legal group to draft a petition which was endorsed by the Coalition members. Other like-minded organisations who are not members of the Coalition also signed the petition. The petition was then sent to the King of Cambodia, the Prime Minister, the presidents of the National Assembly and the Senate members of the National Assembly. Simultaneously, NGOCRC also organised press conferences to raise public awareness on the issue. As a result of these efforts, the King passed the petition to the Constitutional Council to take remedial actions. The Constitutional Council issued the decision which made it mandatory to observe children’s rights and the “Best interest of the child” principle in juvenile justice cases.
E) Advocacy actions aiming to combat trafficking in children Trafficking in of children is another widespread child protection issue in the Asia Region. It is estimated that more than 12000 Nepalese children, mainly girls, are trafficked for commercial sexual exploitation within the Country or to brothels in India and other countries every year. In East Asia and the Pacific, most trafficking is for child commercial sexual exploitation, although some children are also recruited for agricultural and industrial work 8. In collaboration with CSO and government partners in the SAARC Region, Plan ARO has been implementing a multi-country programme “Missing Child Alert” including Bangladesh, India and Nepal to combat cross border child trafficking. The Programme strives to set up a system that ensures rapid and appropriate multi-country responses when cases of in-country and cross border child trafficking occur.
8
Safe and Sound, Growing up with Protection - Plan Asia Regional Sub Strategy on Child Protection in Development, 2013
- 22 -
Additionally, the Analysis has identified national level advocacy actions aiming to combat the issue of trafficking in children carried out by Plan and CSO partners in Nepal and the Philippines. • Plan and CSO partners in Nepal have jointly influenced the Ministry of Women, Children and Social Welfare to endorse the National Plan of Action Against Trafficking in Persons. Having made this initial achievement, the advocacy focus is now shifted towards influencing the authorities to implement the Plan of Action. • Plan has successfully advocated for the effective implementation of the Anti-trafficking in Persons Act in the Philippines. The efforts have resulted in Government mobilising adequate funds, introducing local ordinances and creating awareness among the general public for the effective implementation of the Act. Advocacy actions to combat trafficking in of children – the Philippines In the Philippines, the implementation of the Anti-trafficking in Persons Act has been delayed due to a number of reasons. These included inadequate budgetary allocations, delays in introducing local ordinances for enforcement of the Act and the lack of awareness about the Act among the overall population. Plan Philippines advocated the relevant authorities to address the identified issues by launching a series of actions including orientating local leaders on the Act and how to formulate local ordinances; organising community campaigns against child trafficking and strengthening of village, municipal and provincial level structures against trafficking in children. As a result of these concerted efforts, Plan Philippines was able to: • • • •
receive budgetary allocations from the local government for the operation and management of established crisis centres and help desks; form functional inter-agency committees against trafficking at the provincial, municipal and village level; provide aftercare services to rescued trafficked victims and survivors and have local laws and ordinances enacted in support of the Act.
These developments eventually helped lowering the incidence of trafficking in children and removing the Philippines from the tier 2 watch list. The overall advocacy process reaffirmed the importance of developing comprehensive advocacy plans on the identified issue as it helped to guide all relevant activities focusing on the expected outcomes.
F) Actions aiming to strengthen various components of national child protection systems The findings revealed a number of advocacy efforts pursued by CSOs and Plan aiming to strengthen various components of national child protection systems. Most of the Plan COs have integrated similar actions into their country child protection programme strategies. Actions pursued in common include: • • • • •
strengthening juvenile justice law; establishment of child friendly law enforcement mechanisms; strengthening community based child protection mechanisms; establishing and or strengthening of national child helplines and replication of successful models at the national level.
Actions undertaken by four countries on these directions are outlined below:
- 23 -
• Plan and CSO partners have jointly advocated the Cambodian government to develop a clear reporting and intervention mechanism to respond to violence, sexual exploitation and rape of children. Based on the evidence gathered through consultations, relevant authorities are being influenced to introduce the desired changes to the law and related practices of the overall system. • The Indonesian State Minister for Women Empowerment and Child Protection expressed approval for developing community-based child protection mechanisms following a successful model implemented by Plan in Indonesia. • Plan Sri Lanka has successfully influenced the relevant government authorities to replicate the child friendly police stations model in different parts of the Country. Plan initiated a model in a few areas based on the effectiveness of which the authorities were lobbied to replicate the model.
Photo 5 - “child friendly police desks” an advocacy initiative of Plan Sri Lanka
• Plan in Vietnam has collaborated with the Children’s Bureau to establish toll free child helplines in the Country. It is hoped that children in need of special protection, including children living in remote areas, become aware of and will have increased access to the child helplines. “Child Friendly Police Desks” - Sri Lanka The Government of Sri Lanka adopted directives to establish a separate directorate to the Sri Lankan Police Department to handle complaints related to children and women as these entailed various sensitivities. Nevertheless, there were inherent weaknesses on how the regulations were implemented. The established desks were stationed within the same police premises and did not create a friendly environment for children and women to report their issues. Also, the existing staff was deployed to these desks without any training. To address these gaps in the implementation of this regulation, Plan Sri Lanka launched a programme to establish child friendly children and women’s police desks. As part of this programme, the children and women’s desks were separated from the rest of the police station. Friendly and comfortable environments were created within the Children’s and Women’s Units. Police staff was trained on how to handle the cases with sensitivity. Additionally, the systems used for recording cases were improved as part of the programme. The activities helped brining in positive results in the selected areas where - 24 -
the programme was implemented. Based on these achievements, Plan lobbied relevant government authorities to replicate this good practice model using positive results gained as an evidence base. This was positively taken up by the relevant authorities who helped establishing child friendly police desks in many parts of the Country.
G) Ratification of international human rights treaties The analysis identified a successful advocacy initiative led by CRM influencing the Pakistani Government to ratify the UNCRC Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. One of the most prominent features of this advocacy process has been the post card campaign, a tactic that has been frequently adopted by CRM. In order to exert pressure on the Ministry to ratify the OP, CRM printed 10,000 postcards, signed and sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As a result of these actions that continued for more than a year, the Government of Pakistan ratified the Optional Protocol on the 6th of June 2011.
3.3.2. Thematic Cluster 2 - Advocacy actions focusing on the rights of the most excluded and marginalised groups of children Discrimination based on gender, social classes, caste, religion, disability and other similar circumstances remains a daily reality for many children in Asia. These in turn have prevented the effective participation of children and their families in society thereby preventing them from realising their rights as prescribed in almost all the major human rights treaties and declarations. Children living on the street, children with disabilities, children without citizenship, children belonging to ethnic minorities and indigenous groups and children affected by bonded labour are a few groups of children who are cut off from the mainstream services and systems due to the barriers imposed on them by the society. CSOs and Plan have taken numerous efforts to lift these barriers and shift power dynamics, so that the most excluded and marginalised groups can be integrated into mainstream social, economic and political processes. The Analysis identified the following advocacy efforts in this direction:
Photo 6 - CZOPP members meet with the Government stakeholders to discuss the progress on efforts to promote schools as zones of peace
• Upon a long and joint process of advocacy work by CSOs, Plan and affected communities in Nepal, the Government declared Nepal as a Kamalari 9 free State. These efforts have also resulted in rescuing more than 2700 girls from the servitude and have them reunited with their families. 9
A practice in certain areas in Nepal which forces children (especially girls) from impoverished population to work as bonded child labourers
- 25 -
• Joint advocacy actions pursued by Plan and CZOPP have resulted in guaranteeing the rights of the most marginalised groups in the draft Constitution in Nepal. Specifically, the rights of the children with disabilities and the children of Dalit 10 communities have been protected as a result. • Advocacy led by CSOs, Plan and other INGOs in Nepal has resulted in the Nepalese Government ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Persons with Disabilities. This has been a major achievement to initiate actions to end multiple forms of discrimination faced by children with disabilities. • Plan and CSOs have jointly advocated the relevant authorities in Nepal to introduce and enforce a code of conduct and national directives to regulate the entertainment industry and ensure girls’ protection from sexual and economic exploitation. During this process, Plan has extended support to Sramik Mahila Uddar Samuha (SRAMAUSA), a civil society group formed by former and existing girls and young women who have been working in cabin restaurants and dance bars in Eastern Nepal. • PNC’s advocacy efforts have enabled the adoption of measures for eliminating child labour in sugarcane plantations in the Philippines. As a result, a code of conduct and a policy framework to regulate the employment of children in the plantations have been introduced. • In partnership with local NGOs, Plan Thailand has supported families and children in Chiang Rai to participate in a state-sponsored DNA testing project with the aim of addressing the issue of statelessness faced by many children in this area. The Project aimed to prove genetic ties between parents, who were given Thai citizenship after their children were born, and their children, who weren’t registered at birth. Nearly 1000 children have been supported through this initiative. • Plan Vietnam has advocated the government authorities to introduce and enforce a national policy to admit and support Village Birth Midwives in the mountain areas. These areas are home to the majority of ethnic minority groups and record a high incidence of maternal deaths due to the lack of proper health facilities. As a result of Plan’s advocacy efforts, a national policy has been introduced and made effective in May 2013. Government declares Nepal a Kamalari free State The bonded child labour system known as Kamalari is extensively practiced in some parts of Nepal. This practice forces children belonging to an indigenous group to engage in a life subjected to exploitative labour starting when they are only 6 years old. This not only denies their access to any kind of formal education, but also exposes them to serious forms of abuses. Plan Nepal has taken a lead role in advocating the abolishing of Kamalari practice by strengthening the Free Kamalari Development Forum (FKDF). Plan has supported the FKDF to take various initiatives against the Kamalari practice. Some of these actions include: • identifying affected girls and supporting them to return to their families; • conducting awareness raising activities to educate parents to stop sending their daughters for servitude; • lobbying the Government to provide support for the education and vocational training of the rescued girls and • collaborating with the Joint Struggle Committee to carryout numerous campaigns at the district 10
A practice in some South Asian countries which ostracises people belonging to one of the lowest castes known as “Dalits” meaning “untouchables”
- 26 -
and national level demanding their rights. Following a long process of advocacy, the Government of Nepal affirmed to provide support to a 10 points agreement with the Joint Struggle Committee against the Kamalari practice. The continuous demands of the Joint Struggle Committee and FKDF finally resulted in the Government declaring Nepal as a Kamalari free State. The advocacy work has also resulted in the Government allocating 1.7 million US dollars to support the education of the rescued girls.
3.3.3. Thematic Cluster 3 - Advocacy actions focusing on increased resource allocations for children’s rights implementation Children’s issues receive less attention and are given low priority in the State budgets. However, if the governments need to realise children’s rights in a progressive manner as prescribed in the UNCRC, adequate resources need to be allocated regularly and on an annual basis. To inform their advocacy actions on this aspect, several CSO coalitions across Asia have taken measures to analyse the respective State budgets and train their members on how to carry out the process: • CZOPP has completed a comprehensive analysis of the national budget to identify specific allocations made by the Government for children’s rights implementation in Nepal. Based on the evidence generated from the Analysis, CZOPP will continue to influence the Government for increased budgetary allocations. • By launching the report of their child centric budget analysis, CRM demanded the Government of Pakistan to increase annual budgetary allocations made for Children. Through ongoing advocacy work, CRM has shared their concerns over poor budgetary allocations for children’s education, health and social welfare in Pakistan. In order to address this situation, CRM demanded the Government to take progressive measures by implementing a number of specific recommendations. • CRAN has conducted a comprehensive analysis of the national budget of Sri Lanka in order to create a solid evidence base for their advocacy work demanding increased budgetary allocations for children. Based on the findings of the Analysis, CRAN has called the Government to make children’s allocations visible in the national budget in the short term until allocations for children are presented in a separate budget in the medium to long term. Analysis of the National Budget to advocate for increased allocations for children’s rights implementation - Sri Lanka The Child Rights Advocacy Network (CRAN) has advocated the relevant ministries of Sri Lanka for increased allocations for the implementation of children’s rights in the Country. During the process, a group of researchers from CRAN analysed the budget estimates from 2007 to 2011 to understand the extent to which the Government has allocated budget for children’s right and to identify the existing gaps. Also, it aimed at acquiring capacity and evidence to advocate for increased resource allocations for the fulfilment of children’s rights. Following a comprehensive process, CRAN has published and presented the analysis report to the relevant authorities influencing them to take measures to address the identified gaps. After 2 years of advocacy, the Government is now taking actions to form the first Children’s Caucus in Sri Lanka, with the support of interested parliamentarians. CRAN’s main focus in the initial phase is to make children more visible in the national budget by presenting disaggregated data on the expenditure.
- 27 -
3.3.4. Thematic Cluster 4 - Advocacy actions aiming to harmonise children’s minimum age for numerous social interactions with international human rights standards Despite the fact that UNCRC is the most universally ratified treaty across the world, there are significant inconsistencies on how different countries have aligned their national legislations with its standards. Comparison of national legislations in the countries under this analysis reveals major divergences from the international human rights standards on how the minimum legal age is defined for numerous social interactions. Few of these areas demand serious attention. These include: • • • • • •
minimum age for criminal responsibility; age of majority; age of compulsory education; age of consent; minimum age for employment and recruitment to armed forces.
Increasing efforts have been made by the child rights civil society across Asia to advocate for harmonising these definitions in line with the standards proposed in the international human rights law. The Analysis identified two advocacy actions successfully pursued by CSO coalitions in Vietnam and the Philippines: • VAPCR has launched a campaign with support from Plan Vietnam demanding the Government to increase the “legal age” for children up to 18 years. Vietnam is one of the three countries in Asia that defines the age of majority under 18 years. According to the local laws age of majority is defined at 16 years. The advocacy work is ongoing and it is hoped that the changes to the existing laws will be introduced in the near future. • PNC has successfully advocated against the Government’s decision to decrease the Country’s Minimum Age for Criminal Responsibility (MACR) from 15 to 13 years. PNC issued a position paper on MACR and full implementation of the Juvenile Justice Law and mobilised other CSOs, networks and alliances to join the cause. These efforts pushed the Philippines Government to withdraw the decision of lowering the MACR.
3.3.5. Thematic Cluster 5 - Advocacy actions focusing on birth registration It is estimated that nearly 230 million children under the age of 5 in the world are deprived from accessing different basic services as they have not been registered at birth. This not only increases their vulnerability to abuse and exploitation, but also deprives them from receiving education which leaves them with bleak future prospects. In Asia, a considerable number of child births still remain unregistered. Out of the unregistered births globally, South Asia makes up the largest ratio of 47% and 63% of all unregistered births in the Region 11. Plan in partnership with CSOs and the governments have undertaken a significant amount of work to ensure children’s right to birth registration. The broad range of work encompasses awareness raising and capacity building to advocating the governments to introduce necessary legal, policy and institutional frameworks. The Analysis identified some of these achievements as follows: • Plan in Indonesia has influenced the Government to strengthen the birth registration systems by establishing decentralised birth registration services in 7 sub districts within 2 larger districts. These efforts have also helped developing procedures and mechanisms for the birth registration of children living on the streets of Jakarta. Abolition of birth registration fees in the city of Makassar is 11 11
Safe and Sound, Growing up with Protection - Plan Asia Regional Sub Strategy on Child Protection in Development, 2013
- 28 -
another achievement resulting from this process. Advocacy work continues to influence the relevant authorities to establish mechanisms to register the births of all children living on the streets across the Country. • Plan Philippines’ advocacy efforts have resulted in developing a national bill aiming to improve the civil registration and vital statistic system. The Bill includes provisions for free registration of births and increasing access to the service through mobile registration facilities. As a result of this process, The Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao, the region with the lowest birth registration rates, enacted the Free Birth Registration Act in June 2013. • Plan has advocated the Government of Sri Lanka to establish and expand an efficient birth registration system across the Country. This has resulted in increasing the efficiency and accessibility of this service significantly, as the entire systems is networked through computer databases.
3.3.6. Thematic Cluster 6 - Advocacy actions aiming at changes in structures, institutions and practices in general Any progressive policy or legislation would not achieve their ultimate objectives without an effective institutional framework and resources to implement it. Similarly, the development of the skills, knowledge and attitudes of the people who implement related tasks is critical for achieving the intended outcomes and impact. With the aim of achieving similar outcomes, CSOs and Plan across the Region have engaged in a number of advocacy initiatives: • BCCRC has advocated the Bangladeshi Government to establish a Children’s Ombudsman Office to tackle the child rights violations in the Country. A recently passed Act included provisions to establish child rights committees at the district and sub district levels to monitor child rights violations. BCCRC continues to lobby the Government to establish an Ombudsman Office. • BCCRC has also advocated the Government to establish a separate department for children’s rights under the Ministry of Women’s and Children’s Affairs as the existing Ministry is predominantly focused on the women’s issues. The Government has indicated an initial positive response to the BCCRC’s demand. • By showcasing different good practice models and continuous lobbying, NGOCRC has lobbied the Government authorities to involve children meaningfully in governance processes. As a result, local authorities have started involving children in Commune Development Planning. The National Government has started involving children when developing laws, policies and national plans of action. These efforts have also resulted in the Government adopting National Guidelines on Children’s Participation. • CZOPP has advocated the Government of Nepal to institutionalise the “Child Rights Officer” positions at the national level. The Government has agreed to support these positions when the initial support from the INGOs terminate. • In the Philippines, the “Bata Muna” campaign launched by the PNC has been successful in raising community awareness to elect politicians who demonstrate commitment to respect, protect and promote children’s rights. PNC educates the public on numerous criteria that they need to look for before casting their vote to a candidate. PNC aims to develop a follow-up mechanism to monitor how the elected politicians fulfil the respective obligations. • CRM has initiated advocating the Government to establish a National Commission to oversee the implementation of children’s rights in Pakistan. - 29 -
3.3.7. Thematic Cluster 7 - Ad hoc advocacy initiatives Apart from the above specific thematic clusters, the findings also revealed a number of ad hoc advocacy threads that CSOs and Plan COs are engaged in across the Region. These actions have largely been triggered by and based upon specific child rights violations.
A) Manipulation of children into violent political activities Manipulation of children in violent political activities is a prevalent issue in some of the South Asian countries including Nepal and Bangladesh. During the election times or when there is a political unrest, rampant use of children in violent political activities is a common occurrence in both countries. Numerous political groups manipulate children to carry sticks, chant slogans, engage in clashes and throw explosives at opposition groups and other similar forms of violent behaviours. These groups also use children to walk in the front line of different rallies, thereby using them as a human shield against potential attacks. Both CSO coalitions in Bangladesh and Nepal have called the relevant authorities and political parties to take measures to stop using children in violent political activities considering the gross child rights violations resulting from such involvement: • BCCRC has produced IEC materials to raise awareness on the harmful effects of involving children in violent political activities. The Coalition has called the authorities to safeguard children from this practice by taking necessary actions. • CZOPP has organised awareness raising campaigns, issued press releases, participated in TV discussions and submitted letters to the heads of different political parties as measures to advocate on this issue. These actions have resulted in developing a Code of Conduct outlining measures to be taken to safeguard children during political activities. All political parties and the Election Commission have agreed to uphold the Code of Conduct. • CZOPP has influenced the Government of Nepal to adopt the national framework of Children and Schools as Zones of Peace (a framework that aims to safeguard school children and schools from violence). As a result, the Government has announced the directives to implement the Framework.
B) Ad hoc advocacy initiatives in Pakistan CRM has engaged in a number of ad hoc advocacy initiatives related to the violations of children’s rights as and when they were reported. Some of these engagements include: • influencing relevant authorities to ban a TV commercial which promoted child labour; • celebrating the Malala Day during which children from all the provinces presented a resolution on “Girls Right to Education” to their respective provincial education ministers. As a result, the ministers promised to support girls’ education in the respective provinces; • influencing the Chief Minister of the Province of Punjab to take actions to stop hazardous school children transportation systems in the Province and • advocating the Ministry of Human Rights and Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to take actions against the TV programme which gave away abandoned babies as gifts.
- 30 -
4. ANALYSIS OF CONTRIBUTING FACTORS, GAPS, CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES 4.1. Synthesis of advocacy engagements As manifested in the findings of this analysis, CSO coalitions and Plan COs have been able to bring about positive results in policy, legislation, institutions, attitudes and behaviours through their advocacy work. The analysis of these engagements reveals that they have been able to advocate on multifaceted, complex and wide ranging child rights violations across the Region. Although the issues faced by children are interconnected in nature, the analysis attempted to identify specific threads of child rights violations that are pursued through the advocacy work of CSOs and Plan COs. These engagements were categorised under 18 areas although some areas, such as UNCRC monitoring and reporting, do not necessarily constitute as advocacy initiatives per se.
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
TOTAL
Vietnam
Timor Leste
Thailand
Sri Lanka
Philippines
Pakistan
Nepal
Indonesia
Child labour Child marriage Child trafficking Children with disabilities Prohibition of corporal punishment Juvenile Justice Child protection related legislation Child friendly police Child rights budgeting Harmful involvement of children in political activities Birth registration Age of children in local legislation Harmful practices against children Initiatives for the most excluded and marginalised children National action plans on children OP3 ratification UNCRC monitoring and reporting Involved in UPR reporting and monitoring of recommendations
China
1 2 3 4 5
Pursued by
Cambodia
Advocacy threads Bangladesh
#
4 1 3 2 8 4 8 2 3 3 10 2 2 5 3 5 9 6
As indicated in the above table, the most commonly pursued advocacy actions include: • • • •
actions related to increasing birth registration pursued by 10 countries; UNCRC monitoring and alternative reporting is the key aspect of the advocacy work for 9 countries; advocacy aiming to eliminate corporal punishment of children is pursued by 8 and advocacy aiming to effect positive changes in child protection laws is a focus for 8 countries. - 31 -
Additionally, out of the 11 countries analysed, 5 countries are engaged in advocacy work focusing on most excluded and marginalised groups of children. Also, it is worth noting that respectively 4 countries are involved in child labour and juvenile justice related issues. Other key child protection issues prevalent in the Region such as child trafficking and harmful involvement of children in political activities have become common advocacy themes for 3 countries. The findings indicate that most of the advocacy work is focusing on combating issues related to violence against children. It is also worth noting that most of such efforts are also focusing on effecting positive changes in national policies and laws. The findings reflect how both CSO coalitions and Plan COs have identified policy and legislative advocacy as the most appropriate avenue to address the vast number of child protection issues affecting children across the Region. The findings illustrate CSO coalitions in Cambodia, Nepal, Pakistan and the Philippines having a high engagement in advocacy work. The inputs shared by these coalitions reveal a considerable number of advocacy achievements made by the respective coalitions during the past five years. 4.2. Contributing factors for advocacy achievements Analysis of information shared by CSOs and Plan COs indicate a number of factors that have contributed to their advocacy achievements. These range from how the advocacy targets are identified to how the planned activities were executed until the advocacy objectives are realised. Most of their achievements have been possible when CSOs have been careful and consistent in following the key principles that determine the success of advocacy work. These are observed in the following aspects and as reflected in the case studies shared in the previous chapter: 1. Strength of the coalition and different working arrangements have provided significant advantage for CSOs’ advocacy achievements. The Analysis identified that NGOCRC, CZOPP and PNC have established thematic working groups to support and lead their advocacy work. These groups are comprised of members having relevant expertise and knowledge in specific thematic areas. Some common responsibilities of these working groups entail: • identifying issues to be advocated for or analyse issues presented by the members; • organising discussions on the identified issues; • identifying the necessary operational strategy to tackle the identified issues in consultation with the thematic groups; • drafting position papers; • putting together the advocacy plans for identified issues; • organising specific activities as per the advocacy plan and • training members on advocacy skills. 2. Selection of the most appropriate issues for their advocacy work based on a careful analysis of child rights violations in the country is one of the contributing factors for the CSOs’ advocacy achievements as indicated in their inputs. Aligning the advocacy thematic areas with their organisational mandates and strengths have provided greater thrust for CSOs’ advocacy engagements. 3. Most of the successful advocacy efforts indicate a strong research component which shows how CSOs have taken steps to compile strong and compelling evidence to advocate on the identified issues. This has also helped them to determine the advocacy targets, power, policy and other important elements. NGOCRC’s advocacy work to effect changes in Cambodia’s juvenile justice law provides an illustrative example in this regard. - 32 -
4. By strengthening strategic partnerships and ties with identified allies, CSOs have been able to harness wider support for their advocacy work. These include lawyers’ associations, media groups, local NGOs, parliamentarians, members of national assemblies, human rights commissions, youth associations; INGOs and so on. Mentioned below are two specific examples: • Partnership with the Human Rights Commission helped the BCCRC to access key government officials who are generally inaccessible otherwise. • Collaborations with other human rights based coalitions and alliances in Pakistan helped CRM to garner wider support for advocated issues and exert greater pressure on the targeted authorities. 5. Engaging the most influential people and groups in support of the cause has been another key factor for coalitions’ advocacy achievements. CZOPP’s engagement of a parliamentary group to incorporate child rights in the draft Constitution and NGOCRC submitting a petition to the King of Cambodia requesting for law reforms are two examples on how CSOs engaged influential groups and people. 6. Strong linkages with children’s groups and extensive experiences of working with children have enabled CSOs and Plan to integrate children’s perspectives and involve them meaningfully in different advocacy actions. The “Bata Muna” campaign led by PNC for electing child friendly politicians is one example in which children have played a meaningful role. 7. Multiple levels and dimensions of advocacy engagements is another contributing factor for advocacy achievements. The CSOs engagements encompass the grassroots, sub districts, district and provincial to national, regional and international arenas. This has placed them in a strategic and vital position to advocate on the identified issues with greater evidence and ensuring the involvement of the affected groups and or their perspectives. This has added greater legitimacy and leverage to the success of the advocacy efforts. A number of initiatives point out how the affected communities/groups were mobilised to advocate on their own issues such as the advocacy support of Plan Nepal to FKDF to advocate on the Kamalari practice. Conversely, CSOs and Plan have advocated on behalf of the affected groups as in the case of advocacy efforts to retain MACR in the Philippines. 8. Implementing a variety of activities focusing on achieving the advocacy objectives has also contributed to the advocacy achievements. These range from producing IEC materials, drafting position papers, publishing research reports, conducting TV/radio conferences, consulting relevant stakeholders, organising protests and campaigns to lobbying the people with power over the issue. 9. Experimenting new models in an identified area and scaling them up through the government support has been a common strategy followed by many coalitions and Plan COs. Scaling up of CBCPMs model in Indonesia and child friendly police stations concept in Sri Lanka illustrate how similar actions have been successful. 10. CSOs and Plan have produced a vast body of knowledge through research reports, alternative reports, case studies, position papers and publications that are produced as part of their advocacy work. Although there is a lack of process documentation related to specific advocacy initiatives, the existing knowledge base provides a repertoire of practical knowledge into specific advocacy work carried out by CSOs across Asia.
- 33 -
4.3. Identified gaps Despite the significant achievements made, the Analysis also identified a number of gaps in CSO coalitions’ advocacy work. These gaps also present opportunities for coalitions to optimise their advocacy work at different levels. 1. Absence of an overall advocacy strategy for the coalition is a common gap identified by the Analysis. Although the coalitions have been generally adept in planning and executing specific advocacy initiatives, hardly any measures have been taken to articulate them within a strategic framework. This was also evident from the absence of an accepted definition for advocacy for most of the coalitions. 2. General lack of engagement and action on widespread child rights issues is another noticeable gap in the advocacy work of the CSOs covered by the Analysis. For example, child labour is one of the most prevalent child protection issues in many countries across the Region. However, the analysis identified only four coalitions advocating on this issue. Similarly, advocacy on the issue of child marriage is pursued only by BCCRC when this is a serious issue in a number of other countries, particularly in South Asia. Furthermore, only 2 CSO coalitions have made some efforts to advocate on issues faced by children with disabilities. Much the same is applicable to the issue of harmful practices based on tradition, culture, religion and superstition as only CSO coalitions in 2 countries pursue efforts to counteract similar issues. 3. Lack of transnational collaborations on common child rights issues also emerge as a major gap in CSO coalitions’ advocacy engagements. The issue of trafficking in children is common across the Region and often times transcend national boundaries. However, the findings of this analysis did not reveal any cross country advocacy initiatives to combat this issue, apart from the Plan Regional project “Missing Child Alert”. Common child rights issues such as child labour, child marriage and problems faced by children with disabilities create significant opportunities for CSO coalitions to take collaborative actions which, however, remain unexploited by the CSO coalitions covered by this analysis. 4. Efforts taken to document and share knowledge and lessons learned are sporadic and fragmented although the coalitions have gained substantial knowledge and experience by advocating on numerous child rights violations within complex social and political settings. 5. Lack of comprehensive monitoring mechanisms to measure the effectiveness of advocacy work is another emerging gap of CSO coalitions’ advocacy work. The information shared by CSOs did not present the methods used to measure different outputs, outcomes and impact. Also, the Analysis did not identify any impact level changes resulting from the advocacy achievements. 4.4. Challenges to effective advocacy The Analysis identified a number of challenges to advocacy work that are characteristic to most of the CSO coalitions covered by the Analysis. Findings also revealed challenges that are specific to one or few countries. However, CSO coalitions have been able to improvise different measures to overcome them although these have sometimes impeded the progression of numerous advocacy initiatives. 1. Multi-faceted nature of child rights violations in the countries in Asia poses the most significant challenge to almost all CSO coalitions in their advocacy work. Tackling of these issues requires carefully crafted plans, a diverse set of skills and longer term actions due to the complex root causes underpinning those issues. - 34 -
2. The lack of strong and consistent regional human rights bodies and mechanisms significantly affects sustainable development and regional progress in meeting obligations under the CRC. Efforts are reduced to individual countries or sub-regions at best, which contributes to uneven level of achievements and slow advancement and compliance in realising children’s rights and improving situation of particularly vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. 3. Sustainability of the coalitions is another challenge that is commonly faced by most of the CSO coalitions. As indicated in the below table, CSO coalitions’ development vary significantly across the Region. Different enabling factors have contributed to the progress and achievements made by some CSO coalitions. However, a number of others have faced numerous operational and institutional barriers pushing the focus for any advocacy efforts to lower rungs of their priorities in the face of problems related to their existence. #
Name of the coalition
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
PNC - Philippines NGOCRC – Cambodia CZOPP - Nepal VAPCR – Vietnam CRM - Pakistan CRAN - Sri Lanka CRC coalition - Timor-Leste CR Coalition – Thailand BCCRC - Bangladesh
Established in 1993 1994 2003 2006 2008 2009 2011 2012 2012
Years of existence 21 20 11 8 6 5 3 2 2
Some of the CSO coalitions have been established in an ad hoc manner, rather than resulting from an organic development based on a thorough child rights situation analysis. Furthermore, the CSO coalitions mainly operate at national levels and there are very few regional CSO platforms in the making, which leaves any consolidated actions towards the regional associations for collaboration unaddressed. 4. Increased exposure to risks in advocacy work is another challenge identified by a number of coalitions. Opportunities for a constructive dialogue on human rights issues have significantly reduced or non-existent in a few countries. In such situations, CSOs run the risk of being labelled as “non patriotic” according to their attitude and relationship to a particular government’s approach or performance. The Philippines is the only country which has indicated as having a healthy and supportive political environment for civil society advocacy. Although the coalitions assess safety and security related risks in their advocacy work, there is no comprehensive and consistent mechanism to mitigate advocacy related risks. Some additional risks identified by the CSOs include: the members’ safety during political unrests, identifying CSOs with political groups, being targeted as single organisations and so on. These situations have compelled CSOs to suspend their advocacy actions until the situation returns to normal. 5. The absence of stable political environments impact negatively on CSOs’ advocacy efforts in a few countries. The frequent changes of the governments result in changes of key officials who are the key targets of the coalitions’ advocacy work. This eventually impedes any progressive action as the process has to be restarted with the successors.
- 35 -
6. The existence of many child rights organisations and /coalitions and the lack of convergence over common child rights issues and the unhealthy competition among these entities have been identified as challenges for effective advocacy by some CSO coalitions. 4.5. Opportunities The existing strengths and gaps in CSO coalitions’ advocacy work also present a range of opportunities. CSO coalitions could optimise their engagement on child rights advocacy by making the most of these opportunities that are outlined below. 1. Common issues and potential collaborations: one of the opportunities that re-emerge from this exercise and is to be further explored is a significant space for CSO coalitions to join forces and collaborate on advocating on issues that are common across the Region. These collaborations could range from bi-lateral to regional level depending on the prevalence of the issue. The inputs shared by the coalitions indicated strong interest for joint advocacy on child rights issues within SAARC and ASEAN human rights mechanisms. Mentioned below is a complete list of potential advocacy threads suggested by the CSO coalitions: Common advocacy threads for collaboration as suggested by CSO coalitions ASEAN Specific • • • •
Establishing mechanisms within ASEAN for meaningful participation of children Demanding ASEAN processes to be more transparent Establishment of national human rights institutions among ASEAN nations Repealing discriminatory national laws and regulations
SAARC Specific • Cross boarder trafficking in of children and amendment of SAARC Convention on Child Trafficking • Protecting children in SAARC nations from harmful practices based on culture, traditions, religion and superstitions • Ending child marriage in SAARC countries General • • • • •
Strengthening national child protection systems Advocacy for a regional mechanism to eliminate child labour Eliminating corporal punishment from all settings Ratification of UNCRC OP3 Advocating for increased resource allocations in national budgets for child rights implementation
2. Developments within SAARC and ASEAN: developments within these regional mechanisms promise greater opportunities for promoting children’s rights within SAARC and ASEAN countries. CSOs can play a vital and strategic role to contribute towards increased accountability of these regional bodies and mechanisms responsible for effective implementation of child protection frameworks and treaties. Coalitions can jointly advocate these mechanisms to exert pressure on national governments to deliver on the commitments as expressed in the regional treaties and legal frameworks. These efforts will have greater prospects of ensuring sustainability and ownership of the child protection services and create lasting positive changes in the lives of all children in the Region.
- 36 -
3. Existing civil society networks at regional level: already established regional CSO coalitions such as Child Rights Asia (CRC Asia) present increased opportunities for CSO coalitions to synergise their advocacy work and reinforce their effectiveness both at national and regional levels. CSO coalitions covered in this analysis from Cambodia, Philippines and Vietnam are members of this regional CSO network and have greater opportunities to collaborate on issues common to the ASEAN Region. 4. Strategic position and strong linkages: due to the strategic position they hold, CSO coalitions are well placed to address child rights issues. Additionally, they have established important and strategic linkages with national, regional and international level bodies which could exert pressure on the respective governments in favour of an identified cause. Most importantly, CSO coalitions have direct links to the communities, children as well as district and provincial government bodies. This enables them to generate much needed evidence to support different advocacy agendas. 5. Complex issues and diverse skills: responding to the complex set of issues affecting children in Asia is no easy task for one organisation. The diverse nature of the problems calls for a wide range of knowledge, skills and efforts which are best answered through a coalition. The coalitions generally have a membership with different knowledge, experiences and skills related to working on numerous child rights issues. These can be best harnessed and put into greater use through joint advocacy initiatives pursued within one coalition. The resulting positive changes in policies thereby contribute to effective and sustainable realisation of rights for all children affected by such issues. 6. Benefiting by sharing and exchanging knowledge and experience: nature of different child protections issues in Asia is such that tackling those issues requires greater knowledge, skills and expertise due to the social, cultural, historical, religious and other similar underpinnings that have cemented those issues over the years. CSOs advocacy achievements in these areas undoubtedly create an invaluable body of knowledge which could help other countries experiencing similar issues and circumstances.
- 37 -
ANNEXES ANNEX 1 – METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS Methodology Plan ARO led the analysis process and received inputs from the CSO coalitions and Plan COs in the 11 countries. In order to collect information for the Analysis, a questionnaire was developed in consultation with the CSO coalition representatives. The questionnaire aimed to capture information on 9 key elements related to advocacy work. These include: • • • • • • • • •
Advocacy work carried out (Ongoing and during the last five years); Developing advocacy skills (What actions are being taken by CSOs and Plan?); What methodology is followed for developing the advocacy strategies; Challenges faced in advocacy work; Advocacy achievements and contributing factors; Networking and alliance building for advocacy; Engagement with the government; Taking part in global/regional advocacy initiatives; Monitoring and evaluation of advocacy work.
In order to ensure the quality and accuracy of the information shared, it was proposed that the questionnaire be completed by the advocacy focal points of the CSO coalitions and Plan COs. Apart from the information obtained through the questionnaire, additional details were obtained through follow-up email exchanges with the selected country focal points. A considerable amount of evidence was also gathered by examining the presentations and information shared by CSOs and Plan staff in numerous regional gatherings and training events that have been conducted since 2010. Limitations
1. The findings presented in this report are primarily based on a desk analysis of the information shared
through questionnaires without any evaluation involving field visits. Therefore, the outcomes of this analysis will need to be treated as preliminary findings, rather than a set of recommendations. However, the findings could very well provide a sound basis for a subsequent in-depth analysis in the area of advocacy work pursued by CSO coalitions and Plan in Asia.
2. The Exercise has presented and analysed only the advocacy work carried out by CSO coalitions which have been involved in the Plan Asia Civil Society Regional Programme. Therefore, the broad range of advocacy actions pursued by other CSOs has not been captured in the Analysis.
3. It is also important to note the different levels of CSO coalitions’ development that were covered in this analysis. The length of their existence had clear implications on the levels of their engagement in advocacy work. While in some countries a national level CSO coalition was non-existent, the others had taken recent measures to establish one. All in all, this has limited the inputs received from national level CSO coalitions only to 6 countries out of the 9 countries which are part of Plan Asia Civil Society Regional Programme.
4. Much the same situation is evident from Plan COs due to the varying levels of their engagement in advocacy work with national CSO coalitions. While some COs had established vibrant advocacy partnerships with national CSO coalitions others treaded advocacy paths with caution and care due to the challenges in the operating environment. Therefore, not all Plan COs were able to share substantial inputs into this analysis. - 38 -
5. Information on how children have been involved in advocacy work was not specifically sought through the questionnaire. Therefore, this aspect has not been elaborated in detail and remains to be considered for more comprehensive research.
6. It must also be mentioned that out of the 14 countries in which Plan is operating in Asia, only 11 Plan COs took part in this analysis.
ANNEX 2 – UN VAC STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS 12 overarching recommendations of the United Nations Study on Violence Against Children are as follows States must take measures to: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.
Strengthen national and local commitment and action; Prohibit all violence against children; Prioritise prevention; Promote non-violent values and awareness-raising; Enhance the capacity of all who work with and for children; Provide recovery and social reintegration services; Ensure participation of children; Create accessible and child-friendly reporting systems and services; Ensure accountability and end impunity; Address the gender dimension of violence against children; Develop and implement systematic national data collection and research and Strengthen international commitment.
The full report of the Study is downloadable from http://www.unviolencestudy.org/ ANNEX 3 – QUESTIONNAIRE This survey questionnaire is used to gather information for the Mapping and Analysis of Advocacy Initiatives Pursued by the Civil Society Coalitions and Plan Country Offices in Asia. We would appreciate your cooperation in filling it out. Kindly share detailed responses to each question. Your responses to this questionnaire will serve as the primary source of information for this analysis. After completing the mapping and analysis, we will share draft report for your validation. We appreciate your time spent on responding to this questionnaire! 1. Advocacy work carried out # Question 1.1 How do you define advocacy? Is there a common definition that the coalition has agreed upon? 1.2 How do you define your advocacy thematic focus and targets? 1.3 Please list the current advocacy initiatives carried out by your CSO coalition/member organisations initiated over the past 5 years. 1.4 Please list any ongoing advocacy initiatives carried out by your CSO coalition/ member organisations. 2. Advocacy achievements - Contributing factors 2.1 What are your advocacy achievements (initiatives that have resulted in policy, law, practice or attitude changes)? Please - 39 -
Response
2.2 2.3 2.4
2.5 3. 3.1 3.2 3.3 4. 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 5. 5.1 5.2 5.3 6. 6.1 6.2 6.3 7. 7.1
describe. What were the key enablers that contributed to your advocacy achievements? What actions of your coalition/ member organisation made those contributing factors possible? Please describe. What are the resources/ materials you have produced to support your advocacy work (research reports, publications, posters, banners, video clips, slogans, etc.) Please annex these resources/materials when submitting your response. How do you document your advocacy initiatives, progress made and targets achieved (please enclose any progress reports and similar relevant documents). Challenges in advocacy work What are the key challenges you have faced in your advocacy work so far? Please describe Please describe any actions you have taken to overcome those challenges and their success. Have you discontinued any of your advocacy work due to any challenges? If so, please describe Developing your advocacy strategies Does your coalition/member organisation have an advocacy strategy (A written document with defined issues, targets and indicators)? How do you identify the problems/ issues for advocacy? How do you define operational strategies to tackle the identified issues? How do you define your advocacy approach, style and tone? How do you develop an evidence base/access evidence to support and justify your advocacy? Developing advocacy skills What are the core skills crucial for effective advocacy as recognised and agreed by your coalition/ member organisations? How do you develop your members’/staff’ s skills for advocacy and do you have a specific capacity building framework? Please describe How do you integrate practice based lessons learned into your ongoing capacity building? Please describe. Networking and alliance building for advocacy Please list the key individuals, forums, groups, organisations, associations, unions etc. that you liaise/partner with for your advocacy work. How did the alliances described in 6.1 contribute to the achievements in your advocacy work? How did you engage them (described in 6.1) and get them to support your advocacy work? Engagement with the government At what levels do you engage with the government in your - 40 -
7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 8. 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 9. 9.1 9.2
advocacy work? (provincial, national) What departments/ ministries/ authorities do you mainly engage with in your advocacy? What strategic approach have you adopted to make your engagement with the government more effective? (is it collaborative, critical, etc) Please describe. How do you implement your advocacy strategies when/if the political situation is unstable? How do you assess and mitigate risks to ensure participants’ safety and security? Global/regional initiatives What are the global level advocacy movements that you have taken part in? Please describe Have you taken part in any regional/cross-border level advocacy initiatives? What are the benefits that you have received by taking part in the global/regional advocacy initiatives? Are there any identified problems that you wish to pursue as a regional/sub-regional level advocacy issue? Please propose and elaborate. Monitoring and evaluation How do you monitor and evaluate your advocacy work? Please describe the process followed What are some of the lessons learned from your advocacy work that you would like to share with other CSO coalitions/organisations?
1. As it applies to your coalition/organisation, please describe any additional details related to the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats envisaged in advocacy work. 2. Please list down the documents, resources and materials of your advocacy work that are shared with the completed questionnaire.
- 41 -