original

Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post2015 Development Agenda
Annexes
December 2013
2
Contents
ANNEX I – Outcome Statement ............................................................................................................... 5
ANNEX II – Proposed Targets and Indicators .......................................................................................... 7
ANNEX III - Agenda ................................................................................................................................ 12
ANNEX IV – Participants List .................................................................................................................. 15
ANNEX V – Participant Bios ................................................................................................................... 19
ANNEX VI - Concept Note ...................................................................................................................... 30
ANNEX VII – High Level Opening Session Speeches .............................................................................. 36
Opening Remarks: Mr. Jan Eliasson, the Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations ............ 36
Keynote Address: Ms. Helen Clark, the Administrator of UNDP ....................................................... 38
Panel: From MDGs to Post-2015: Rule of Law and Development .................................................... 42
Ms. Amina Mohammed, the Secretary‐General's Special Adviser on Post‐2015 Development
Planning ......................................................................................................................................... 42
Ms. Irene Khan, the Director-General of the International Development Law Organization ....... 43
Panel: Integrating the Rule of Law in the Post-2015 Development Agenda ..................................... 46
H.E. Dr. Christian Friis Bach, Minister of Development Cooperation, Denmark ........................... 46
H.E. Sidiki Kaba, Minister of Justice, Senegal ................................................................................ 48
H.E. Cevdet Yılmaz, Minister of Development, Turkey ................................................................. 50
Mr. Roberto Dondisch, Director General for Global Affairs, Secretary of Foreign Affairs ............ 52
Annex VIII –Presentations ..................................................................................................................... 53
Deval Desai, Research Associate, School of Oriental and African Studies ........................................ 53
Luigi De Martino, Coordinator, the Geneva Declaration Secretariat ................................................ 56
Dr. Mark Orkin, University of the Witwatersrand ............................................................................. 58
Mr. Gilbert Tendai Mungate, Sub-Chief Domboshava area, Mashonaland and Shorai Chitongo, Ray
of Hope, Zimbabwe ........................................................................................................................... 59
ANNEX IX - Background Paper: Overview on the Rule of Law and Sustainable Development for the
Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Agenda .......................................... 61
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 61
Introduction....................................................................................................................................... 63
What Is the Rule of Law? ................................................................................................................... 64
The Relationship between the Rule of Law and Development ......................................................... 67
The Evolution of Rule of Law Reform ................................................................................................ 74
Rule of Law Programming and Evidence for Development Effectiveness ........................................ 76
Current Trends in Rule of Law Programming .................................................................................... 78
International Policy Commitments to the Rule of Law ..................................................................... 81
Targets and Indicators ....................................................................................................................... 84
2
3
Lessons from the MDGs .................................................................................................................... 88
Concluding Thoughts and Possible Approaches................................................................................ 90
ANNEX X – Background Paper on Justice for the Global dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post-2015
Development Agenda ............................................................................................................................ 93
Introduction....................................................................................................................................... 93
Justice and Development: Relationship and Evidence ...................................................................... 94
Justice: The Missing Element ............................................................................................................ 96
Integrating Four Key Justice Principles into the Post-2015 Agenda.................................................. 96
Principle One: Access to legal identity .......................................................................................... 97
Principle Two: Participation in services and poverty reduction .................................................... 98
Principle Three: Access to fair and effective justice institutions................................................... 99
Principle Four: Legal Information, Assistance and Legal Aid ....................................................... 100
Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 101
ANNEX XI – Background Paper: Insecurity and violence in the post-2015 development agenda ...... 105
Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 105
The Impact of Armed Violence and Insecurity on Development .................................................... 105
Armed Violence and Development Goals ....................................................................................... 107
Armed Violence and the post-2015 Agenda: Goals, Targets and Indicators .................................. 108
Building International Consensus on Armed Violence and Development ...................................... 111
ANNEX XII – Background Paper: The linkages between rule of law and development: an empirical
intimation ............................................................................................................................................ 119
Overview.......................................................................................................................................... 119
The World Justice Project’s index of Rule of Law ............................................................................ 119
The UNDP’s Human Development Index (HDI) ............................................................................... 120
The broad correlation between HDI and the RoL ........................................................................... 120
Assessing the linkages of RoL components to HDI: a puzzling discovery? ...................................... 121
A comprehensive “map” of linkages: among RoL components (and indicators), and to HDI......... 122
Further insights from the map of linkages: the heightened effect of Transparency on HDI .......... 123
The measurement foundations of the components of RoL ............................................................ 124
Conclusion: a critical enabling role.................................................................................................. 124
ANNEX XIII – Notes from the Working Group Discussions .................................................................. 129
Accountability, Legal identity and access to public services (Group 1)....................................... 129
Legal Empowerment and Legal Aid (Group 2)............................................................................. 131
Access to Justice (Group 3).......................................................................................................... 132
Social and Economic rights (including and, property and environmental and natural resource
management) (Group 4) .............................................................................................................. 135
3
4
Gender Justice (Group 5) ............................................................................................................. 137
Security and Justice Institutions (Group 6) ................................................................................. 140
Armed Violence Reduction (Group 7) ......................................................................................... 141
Annex XIV - Summary of the E-Consultation on Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Agenda
............................................................................................................................................................. 143
Annex XV – Submissions to the Dialogue ............................................................................................ 158
Asian Consortium For Human Rights-Based Access to Justice (HRBA2J-Asia) ................................ 158
Earth Law Center - Integrating Human Rights and Earth Rights for Sustainability: “Nature’s Rule of
Law” ................................................................................................................................................. 162
Annex XVI - Additional Resources ....................................................................................................... 164
4
5
ANNEX I – Outcome Statement
We, the participants of the Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post‐2015 Development Agenda,
call for the global development framework following the MDGs in 2015 to be ambitious,
transformative, redistributive and human rights‐based.
We note that the MDGs did not adequately take into account inequalities, governance, rule of law
and human rights, peace and personal security and that the new development agenda must
recognize that these issues are intrinsic to development. Likewise while the MDGs enabled increased
access to public services, the new development agenda should go beyond and also focus on
enhancing the quality of those services.
We recommend that as Member States begin their deliberations on the goals for the next
development agenda, that they consider how elements of the rule of law can be incorporated to
establish safe, peaceful, just and equitable societies. We also encourage Member States to consider
the importance of the rule of law at the global, international and transnational levels.
We recommend that the rule of law be considered at the goal level as well as integrated as targets
within other goals. Different dimensions of the justice and violence reduction should be part of other
development goals including those related to poverty reduction, women’s equality and
empowerment, health and education.
A primary focus of our deliberations has been the critical nature of access to justice and violence
reduction to improving the lives of the poor and of marginalized groups and to ensure that no one is
left behind. We collectively explored justice from a people’s perspective and concluded that
enhancing accessibility (in terms of cost, proximity and context), independence, impartiality,
transparency, enforceability and respect for human rights and due process are central to achieving
fair and just outcomes. We also affirmed that violence and a culture of impunity has a negative
impact on development.
We noted the importance of recognizing the roles that different actors play in contributing towards
the justice goals and targets, including civil society and independent national institutions. We also
recommend that the next development agenda is flexible enough so that it is responsive to local
contexts, including being able to capture the important role played at the community level by actors
such as traditional justice leaders and community based paralegals.
We reflected on the need for clarity, simplification and the development of non‐discriminatory laws
which embrace diversity within our societies. However, the existence of legal frameworks by itself is
not sufficient; laws need to be implemented and enforced.
We urge states to ensure that both the demand and supply side of access to justice be considered
and take into account the following areas in the formulation of the next development agenda:
 Ensure accountability and transparency of public services including justice and security
institutions (access to information and access to redress).
 Establish free and universal legal identity.
 Ensure accessible, independent, impartial, transparent and enforceable justice institutions
that respect human rights and due process.
 Enable legal awareness, aid and agency to participate in legal processes.
 Prevent and eliminate/reduce violence against women and girls (as well as eliminate violence
against children).
 Reduce violent deaths and promote safe societies.
5
6
We considered a range of issues related to measurement and caution Member States that
metrics developed should be able to measure not just quantity but quality of rule of law
outcomes and need to be selected carefully to avoid unintended consequences.
We encourage Member States to consider the options for the development of indicators,
including baskets of indicators, and recommended disaggregating indicators as far as possible as
well as including a range of indicators to capture the perspective of end users (e.g. perception
indicators). We noted that in order to have a robust framework for measuring progress against
goals and targets related to rule of law, a significant investment must be made in developing
national statistical and data capacity.
6
7
ANNEX II – Proposed Targets and Indicators
Below is a list of potential targets and indicators discussed in the working groups. Some consideration was
given within the groups on how indicators should be developed, what criteria should be applied, which sources
of data are relevant. The below list of proposed targets and indicators will be further refined to develop a
concrete proposal on relevant targets and indicators for the post-2015 development framework, taking into
consideration questions of trade-offs, factoring in the possibility of unintentional consequences and perverse
incentives, and prioritizing the indicators which would best reflect the experiences of people in realizing the
rule of law in the context of sustainable development.
Accountability
of
Public
Services
Possible Formulation of
Targets
Possible Indicators/Data Sources
Ensure all people can
effectively participate in
decision-making
and
monitor service delivery
in formal and informal
public institutions at all
levels
 Existence of polices and legal frameworks requiring public participation
in decision-making and service delivery
 Right to information (existence of right to information legislation, #
claims, # rejected requests for information, proportion of requests
completed in given time)
 Public awareness and education/literacy and accessible laws
 Oversight mechanisms involving stakeholders (% participation, # claims,
inclusion of marginalized groups)
 Enabling environment for civil society index
 Participation in political processes, e.g. elections
 Grievance redress is available and functioning (existence of grievance
redress mechanisms e.g. administrative courts, # of cases handled, etc.)
 Existence of legal framework for universal birth registration for all
children under 5
 % children registered
 Legal framework recognizing fair, transparent process for obtaining ID
 Percentage of people who possess legal ID
 Number of requests for ID rejected
 Number of people denied access to services due to lack of ID (to avoid
perverse incentives)
Provide all people with
free
legal
identity
documentation, such as
birth registration cards
(or reduce the number
of people without secure
legal identity)
Capacity,
professionalism
and
accountability of public
sector
 Level of trust and confidence surveys
 Corruption (experience & perception)
o Number of prosecutions
 Equity and accountability of access to services
o Monitoring and redress mechanisms
o Disaggregated data by groups, gender, etc.
 Percentage of trained public services (initial and continuing training)
 Merit-based selection & advancement / Impartial and clear placement
exams
 Internal performance evaluation
 Sanctioning systems
 Percentage of budget dedicated to institutions
 Oversight mechanisms (internal and external – civil society, parliament,
etc.)
 Legal redress for complaints dealing with public services
 Processes for pursuing grievances with basic services must be simple,
accessible, impartial, independent, open and accountable, independent,
efficient and respect due process
 Public awareness of redress mechanisms – public outreach
 Performance and evaluation (initial and continuous training)
 Disciplinary systems
7
8
Access
Justice

Ensure accessible,
well-resourced,
impartial,
independent and
accountable
justice systems

Ensuring access to
a
plurality
of
justice
services
looking at both
supply
and
demand side
to

Accessible
(geographical;
cost;
sociocultural/multicultural;
etc.),
Independent
justice
systems
that respect due
process
rights/human
rights
(also
efficiency/
expeditiousness,
equality,
transparency)

Improve
the
capacity,
professionalism,
and accountability,
of
law
enforcement and
justice
institutions.

Ensure access to
security
and
justice institutions
that
are
professional,
accountable and
show integrity

Ensure
justice
systems
are
accessible
to
women

Ensure that justice
systems
are
accessible
to
ethnic groups

Ensure
that
rulings take on
gender and ethnic
perspectives
 Decrease by percentage the number of people who fail to report a
grievance or case, for the following reasons: financial reasons; lack of
confidence and trust in justice mechanism; lack of access to justice
mechanism because of geography, gender, language, efficiency; lack of
knowledge of options or processes (surveys
 Legal infrastructure that is diverse, inclusive and gender-sensitive
(Increase participation in shaping justice options)
Indicators could examine:
 Likelihood to report a grievance
 Number of people going through justice processes
 Inclusion of views into the legal system
 Improving attitudes
 Increased knowledge
 Participatory systems
 Range and coverage of justice institutions
 Costs
 Budgets
 Disaggregated data
 Use of ICTs – e.g. possibility to access courts/resolve disputes through
the internet
 Percentage of people who want representation who are represented
 Do (i) laws, (ii) policies, and (iii) practices guarantee equal treatment of
various segments of the population? (Freedom House - Freedom in the
World)
 Judicial independence score (Source: WEF-GCR /Bertelsmann
Transformation Index (BTI))
 Average length of time spent in pre-sentence detention
 Suspension or arbitrary application of the rule of law and widespread
violation of human rights score (Source: Fund for Peace)
 Ability of poor people to appeal judicial decisions in serious offense
cases (Source: piloted by Vera Institute of Justice)
 Separation of powers (Source: Legatum Foundation’s Legatum
Prosperity Index
 Percentage of cases decided with a time-frame of x months* (danger of
perverse incentives)
 Population perception indicator – w.r.t. accessibility experience,
attitude (disaggregated)
 Population perception indicator w.r.t. equal treatment/access –
experience, attitude (disaggregated)
 Population perception indicator of judicial impartiality (experience,
attitude)
 Population perception indicator of judicial promptness within a
reasonable time (experience, attitude)
 Population perception indicator of judicial enforcement (experience,
attitude) – users or all
 Outcome variance on a claim/dispute regarding sides from diverse
income levels
 Do you have confidence in the judicial system and the courts? (Source:
Gallup world poll)
 Administrative indicator, e.g. number of public defenders/paralegals
 Administrative data on enforcement*
 Fees, grants
 Expert assessment of statutory provisions regarding judicial
appointments
 Expert assessment of whether enforcement is provided
 Expert assessment of quality of due process according to schedule
 Criminal and Civil justice scores (including effectiveness, timeliness,
impartiality, corruption, due process and rights of the accused) (Source:
World Justice Project)
 Protocols on gender and ethnic perspective review on judicial rulings
 Proximity to courts, Geographical access
 # of cases submitted per 100000
8
9

















Violence
Reduction
Reduction of violent
deaths (deaths from
aggression, direct deaths
due to armed conflict,
deaths
from
legal
intervention)
Reduction and
prevention of violence
against women, children
and vulnerable groups
Prevent and eliminate all
forms of violence against
women and girls




# of judges per 100000
# public defense lawyers per 100000
% of total detainees in per sentence detention
% of people with family related problems who report to formal justice
systems
Average length of time spend pretrial detention
Average length of time pre-sentencing detention
Perception of CSO’s about government responsiveness to suggestions
for improvement of the legal system.
% of defendants represented by legal counsel (Private/ public)
% of people who paid a bribe to security/justice official in the past 12
month
% of justice/security officials reporting undue influence in discharge of
duties
% of victims of violent crime who reported victimization
% of cases being resolved within one year (in the first instance).
% of people who manifest trust in the justice system (a) general
perception, b) users perception, c) women perception)
Percentage of women who are able to achieve a remedy as
complainants (in criminal and civil matters) disaggregated by geographic
location, economic status, etc.
Percentage of ethnic minorities who are able to achieve a remedy as
complainants (in criminal and civil matters) disaggregated by geographic
location, economic status, etc.
Percentage of court days dedicated to matters relating to violence
against women
Legal aid and assistance is available to women complainants of sexual
violence and family law applicants at all stages, including alternative
dispute resolution
Reduce by X% the number of violent deaths per 100,000 (intentional
homicide rate, direct deaths from armed conflict, legal interventions)
Firearm deaths per 100,000 ( not including suicides, accidents)
Reduce the number of victims of violent death who are children
Reduce the number of victims of violent death who are women
 Reduce by % the number of women who declare to have been
subjected to physical or sexual violence over the last 12 months
(through victimization survey)
 Percentage of population who accept capital punishment for children
 Reduce the number of children recruited into armed forces, non-state
armed forces, illegal armed groups such as criminal gangs
 Percentage of women who experienced physical or sexual violence in
the past 12 months (UN Women)
 Percentage of women who seek a remedy for violence perpetrated
against them (human rights-based) – disaggregated by economic status,
ethnicity, indigenous, age, disability, sexual orientation, marital status
 Existence of fully funded operationalized National and local plans of
action on the elimination of violence against women (BP4A)
 Proportion of budgets allocated to plans of action on violence against
women
 Percentage of women who report feeling safe at all times in public
spaces and at home
 Percentage of women who report confidence in legal systems to
achieve rights based remedies
 Percentage of people who think a woman can refuse to have sex with
her husband under any circumstances, disaggregated by sex
 Percentage of law enforcement officials (judges, police, prosecutors)
who are women
 Existence of autonomous women’s rights movements able to operate
freely in country
 Percentage of public officials who undertake human rights and gender
9
10




Enhance the capacity of
community based nonviolent conflict
resolution mechanisms
(formal and informal)
Stem the international
risk factors of violence
Gender
Equality
Laws,
policies
and
practices
are
nondiscriminatory
and
promote
substantive
equality









Prevent child / early
marriage
Increased access and
control
over
land,
resources, energy for
women and men.
Workers are paid a living
wage
Labour rights protection
extended to all workers
Promote participation in
decision making at all
levels





equality capacity development with civil society
Number of weapons available in community (both state and non-state)
Percentage of national budgets spent on military
Comparison of military budget to gender budgeting
Assessing human right compliance of judicial outcomes
Reduce the international illicit flow of arms and ammunition
Reduce the international illicit flow of drugs and related financial
operations
Women have equal inheritance, property rights
Family laws including, divorce, custody, property exist and apply equally
to men and women
Existence of legislated right for women to decide the timing, spacing of
children.
All legislation is subjected to gender audit prior to enactment
Laws and practices that contravene CEDAW and other IHR are deemed
repugnant
Percentage of women’s rights organisations / movements involved in
drafting (and empowering women to participate) in consultative
processes for legislation
Public information on sexual and reproductive rights and health is
accessible and promoted
Existence of laws prohibiting marriage before the age of 18 (in line with
CRC)
Percentage of women aged 18-25 who were married (de jure or de
facto) before 18
Average age of mother at birth of first children
Percentage of women and men who have protected and/or
documented rights to use and control land.
Percentage of land that is appropriated by governments or corporations
 Legislated minimum wage is set at a rate sufficient to support dignified
life for 4 people (using living wage metrics)
 Percentage of unpaid care work that is performed by women and men
 Percentage of workers (by sex) earning less than minimum wage
 Percentage of minimum wage compared to average wage
 Percentage of women who have access to fully funded maternity leave
of at least 18 weeks
 Percentage of workers who are covered by national labour codes –
including 8 hour day, Occupational Health & Safety, nursing rights,
 Inclusion of domestic workers, informal sector in national labour codes
 Percentage of people, by sex, able to access unemployment, pension,
superannuation and insurance benefits
 Percentage of workers, by sex, who are members of trade unions or
able to bargain collectively
 Percentage of women who have a say in decisions over house-hold
spending
 Percentage of people who think important decisions in the household
should be made by both men and women
 Percentage of women’s rights representatives in multi stakeholder
development governance bodies
 Proportion of women in national parliaments (existence of Temporary
Special Measures)
 Proportion of women in local governments
 Proportion of women in regional and international governance bodies
 Proportion of women trade union leaders
 Proportion of women who are members of civil society organisations
 Proportion of media professionals who are women
10
11
Create new GLOBAL
GOVERNANCE systems
and institutions that are
democratic, accountable
to people and promote
equitable
and
sustainable development
(transparent,
participatory,
nondiscrimination,
CBDR
rule making procedures)
Private
sector
accountability
is
enforced




Percentage of disputes brought from developing countries
Percentage of disputes where complainants are women
Trade agreements have human rights as central objectives and primacy
UPR / TB reporting




Percentage of tax paid on profit
Subsidies
Bribery and corruption
Transfer pricing
Tax havens

11
12
ANNEX III - Agenda
GLOBAL DIALOGUE ON RULE OF LAW AND POST-2015 DEVELOPMENT AGENDA
HIGH-LEVEL OPENING SESSION
9-11 am, Thursday, 26 September
NEW YORK
8:30 – 9:00
Registration & coffee
9:00 – 9:05
Welcome
Olav Kjørven, Director of the Bureau for Development Policy, UNDP
9:05 – 9:15
Opening Remarks
Jan Eliasson, Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations
9:15 – 9:30
Keynote Address
Helen Clark, Administrator, United Nations Development Programme
9:30 –10:05
From MDGs to Post-2015: Rule of Law and Development
Chair: Olav Kjørven, Director of the Bureau for Development Policy, UNDP
Panel:


10:05 –11:00
Ms. Amina J. Mohammed, ASG, Secretary-General's Special Adviser on Post-.
2015 Development Planning
Irene Khan, Director General, International Development Law Organization
Integrating the Rule of Law in the Post-2015 Development Agenda
Chair: Jordan Ryan, Director of the Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery, UNDP
Panel:




H.E. Dr. José Antonio Meade Kuribreña, Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Mexico
H.E. Dr. Christian Friis Bach, Minister of Development Cooperation, Denmark
H.E. Sidiki Kaba, Minister of Justice, Senegal
H.E. Cevdet Yılmaz, Minister of Development, Turkey
12
13
THURSDAY, 26 SEPTEMBER 2013
12:00 – 1:00
LUNCH [CLOSED TO REGISTERED PARTICIPANTS UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED]
1:00 – 1:45
Reflections on Incorporating Rule of Law in the Post-2015 Development Agenda
 Deval Desai, School of Oriental and African Studies
 Luigi De Martino, Coordinator, Geneva Declaration Secretariat
 Dr. Mark Orkin, University of the Witwatersrand
1:45 – 3:30
Group Discussion I: Measuring Rule of Law and Linkages to Development
Participants will break into groups to discuss the following themes:
 Group 1 - Accountability, Legal identity and access to public services
 Group 2 – Legal Empowerment and Legal Aid
 Group 3 – Access to Justice
 Group 4 – Social and Economic rights (including and, property and
environmental and natural resource management)
 Group 5 – Gender Justice
 Group 6 – Security and Justice Institutions
 Group 7 – Armed Violence Reduction
Each group focuses on:
• Define the parameters of the debate – i.e. in the context of [insert topic] what is
the linkage to development (30 mins)
• What would we like to measure that would ensure universality of global
development goals while also allowing for context specificity (30 mins)
• What are the main challenges in developing a monitoring framework (e.g. data
gaps, comparability across countries?) What are some ways they can be
addressed? (45 mins)
3:30 – 3:45
BREAK
3:45 – 5:45
Group Discussion II: Review of Targets on Rule of Law, Justice and Security
Within the same groups, participants will discuss the following questions:
 What are the ongoing discussions/proposals for targets? What are the relevant
targets from the high level panel report to the topic? What are the other
relevant targets that have been proposed by civil society or expert groups? (30
mins)
 What are some of the strengths and gaps of existing proposals? What are some
of the issues that are not adequately represented? Are priority issues identified
in Session I reflected within the proposed targets? (30 mins)
 What targets would the group recommend for inclusion within the next
development framework? (60 mins)
5:45
CLOSE OF DAY 1
6:30 – 8:30
RECEPTION: Justice and the Post-2015 Development Goals
Open Society Foundations
[BY INVITATION ONLY]
FRIDAY, 27 SEPTEMBER 2013
9:00 – 10:00
The Role of Traditional Justice Systems in Sustainable Human Development
Mr. Gilbert Tendai Mungate, Headman from Domboshava, Zimbabwe
13
14
Ms. Shorai Chitango, Ray of Hope, Zimbabwe
[OPEN SESSION]
10:00 – 12:00
Group Discussion III: Review of Indicators on Rule of Law, Justice and Security
In the same groups, discuss the following:
 Identify proposed indicators for the target being discussed and discuss the
strengths and weaknesses of the proposed indicators
 Recommend any additional indicators
12:00-1:30
Plenary: Present back in plenary
Present summary of discussions in Plenary
1:30 – 2:15
LUNCH
2:15- 3:15
Plenary: Present back in plenary (Continued)
Present summary of discussions in Plenary
3:15 – 4:00
Plenary: Next Steps on Post-2015 and Rule of Law
In the same groups, discuss the following:
 Recommendations for next steps in including Rule of Law, Justice and Security in
the Post-2015 Development Agenda
4:00 – 4:15
BREAK
4:15 – 5:15
Plenary Discussion and Closing: Outcome Statement of the Global Dialogue
 Magdy Martínez-Solimán, Deputy Director, Bureau of Development Policy
 Marta Ruedas, Deputy Director, Bureau of Crisis Prevention and Recovery
[OPEN SESSION]
14
15
ANNEX IV – Participants List
Name
Title
Organization
Africa
Ms. Ana Celeste
Januario
Natonal Director for Human
Rights
2
Mr. Uyapo Ndadi
Executive Director
Ministry of Justice and
Human Rights
Botswana Network on
Ethics, Law and
HIV/AIDS (BONELA)
3
Mr. Desalegn Mengistie
Director of Justice System Reform
Programme Office
4
Ms. Gertrude Angote
Executive Director
5
Ms. Jane Nyokabi Gitau
Grassroots Woman Leader
6
Mr. Clifford Msiska
Director
7
Dr. Gaspar Moniquela
Head of Directorate for the
Administration of Justice
Ministry of Justice
Mozambique
Rwanda
Sierra Leone
1
Ministry of Justice
Kituo cha
Sheria, Centre for
Legal Empowerment
Groots
Paralegal Advisory
Service Institute
8
Ms. Mutesi Florence
Executive Director
Organized for
Governance &
Sustainable
Development
9
Mr. Simeon Koroma
Director
Timap for Justice
10
Mr. Vasu Gounden
Executive Director
11
Dr. Mark Orkin
Researcher, visiting professor in
Public Management
12
Ms. Nomboniso
Maqubela
Interim Director
13
Mr. Donald Deya
Chief Executive Officer
14
15
Mr. Byenkya Tito
Kugonza
Ms. Valentine
Namakula
Chief Executive Officer
Executive Director
16
Ms. Makanatsa
Makonese
Executive Secretary
17
Ms. Shorai Chitango
Grassroots Woman Leader
18
Mr. Gilbert Tendai
Mungate
Arab States
Local Headman
19
Ms. Diala Khamra
Founding Member/ Treasurer
20
Ms. Samira Zaitoon
Board Member
21
Mr. Wael Lafi
Chief Prosecutor, Head of Policy
& Planning Unit
African Centre for the
Constructive
Resolution of Disputes
University of
Witwatersrand
The National Alliance
for the Development
of Community Advice
Offices
Pan African Lawyers
Union
East Africa Law
Society
Centre for Justice
Studies
SADC Lawyers
Association
Ray of Hope Zimbabwe
Headman from
Domboshava
Justice Center for
Legal Aid
Arab Women's Legal
Network
High Court
Country
Angola
Botswana
Ethiopia
Email
celestejanuario5@yaho
o.com
[email protected]
m
[email protected]
[email protected]
Kenya
Kenya
Malawi
[email protected]
[email protected]
mj.serv.assessoria@gm
ail.com
[email protected]
smkoroma@googlemail
.com
[email protected]
South Africa
South Africa
South Africa
Tanzania
Tanzania
Uganda
Zimbabwe/
Southern
Africa
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe
Jordan
Jordan
Occupied
Palestinian
Territories
[email protected]
;
[email protected]
g.za
ddeya@lawyersofafrica
.org
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
theresamakwara@yaho
o.com
[email protected]
samira.zaitoon@yahoo.
com
[email protected]
15
16
22
Judge Ahmed Ouerfelli
Presidential Advisor on Legal
Affairs
Presidency of the
Republic of Tunisia
Tunisia
ahmed.ouerfelli1@gma
il.com
Asia and Pacific
Afghanistan
Independent Human
Rights Commission
BRAC (Bangladesh
Rural Advancement
Committee)
Community Legal
Education Center
Wuhan University
School of Law
Fiji Women's Rights
Movement (FWRM)
Commonwealth
Human Rights
Initiative
Indonesian Legal
Resource Center
Supreme Court of
Nepal
Afghanistan
[email protected]
m
Bangladesh
faustina.pereira@gmail
.com
23
Dr. Sima Samar
Chairperson
24
Ms. Faustina Pereira
Director,
Human Rights and Legal Aid
Services
25
Mr. Virak Yeng
Executive Director
26
Mr. Zhang Wanhong
Associate Professor
27
Ms. Virisila Buadromo
Executive Director
28
Ms. Maja Daruwala
Director
29
Mr. Uli Sihombing
Executive Director
30
Justice Kalyan Shrestha
Judge
31
Mr. Marlon Manuel
National Coordinator
Alternative Law
Groups
Philippines
32
Ms. Starjoan D.
Villanueva
Executive Director
Alternate Forum for
Research
Philippines
South Korea
Cambodia
China
Fiji
India
Indonesia
Nepal
33
Mr. Pillkyu Hwang
Chairperson
Asian Consortium for
Human Rights based
Access to Justice
34
Ms. Kate Lappin
Regional Coordinator
Asian Women for Law
and Development
Asia Pacific/
Australia
Socialist Party
Albania
Ministry of Justice of
the Republic of
Armenia
Armenia
[email protected]
vanhorn.zhang@gmail.
com
[email protected]
maja.daruwala@gmail.
com
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
m
[email protected]
[email protected]
m
[email protected]
Europe and Central Asia
Member of Parliament (Former
Minister of Justice)
First Category Specialist,
Department of Legal Support to
the System
35
Mr. Fatmir Xhafa
36
Ms. Lusine Iskandaryan
37
Ms. Sabina Cerbu
Deputy Minister of Justice
Ministry of Justice
Moldova
38
Ms. Nadejda
Hriptievschi
Researcher
Legal Resources
Centre
Moldova
39
Mr. Ruslan Davletov
Director a.i. Research Center
Supreme Court of the
Republic of Uzbekistan
Uzbekistan
[email protected]
m
lusine.iskandaryan@ya
hoo.com
[email protected]
ov.md
[email protected]
m
[email protected]
Latin America and the Caribbean
40
Ms. Luciana Bercovich
Coordinator
41
Mr. Ignacio Cano
Senior Lecturer
42
Mr. Hernando Gómez
Buendía
Researcher
Asociación Civil por la
Igualdad y la Justicia
(ACIJ)
Universidade Estadual
do Rio de Janeiro
Lead author of the
HDR of Colombia and
the Central American
HDR
[email protected]
Argentina
Brazil
[email protected]
om
[email protected]
Colombia
16
17
43
Mr. Adam Baird
Researcher
44
Mr. Manolo Morales
Executive Director
45
46
47
Ms. María del Carmen
Alanis Figueroa
Mr. Alejandro Gonzalez
Duran
Mr. Jose Antonio Mejia
Guerra
Justice
Legal Advisor
Researcher
University for Peace
Corporación de
Gestión y Derecho
Ambiental (ECOLEX)
Electoral Court of the
Federal Judiciary
Electoral Court of the
Federal Judiciary
National Institute of
Statistics and
Geography
Costa Rica
[email protected]
Ecuador
[email protected]
Mexico
Mexico
Mexico
[email protected].
mx
alejandro.gonzalez@te.
gob.mx
jose.antonio.mejia@ine
gi.org.mx
International Organizations and Academia
48
Ms. Britta Madsen
Project Manager, Rule of Law
Training Program
Center for International Peace
Operations (ZIF)
[email protected]
49
Mr. Luigi De Martino
Coordinator
Geneva Declaration
luigi.demartino@genevadeclara
tion.org
Deputy Director of Programs,
Community Resilience, Land and
Housing
Huairou Commission
[email protected]
50
Ms. Katia Araujo
51
Mr. Nicholas Robinson
Fellow of IUCN Academy
52
Ms. Mareike
Schomerus
Researcher, Director
International Union for
Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
Justice and Security Research
Programme, London School of
Economics
[email protected]
Chief Technical Adviser, Conflict
and Fragility Team, Technical
Advisory Services
Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Denmark
[email protected]
53
Ms. Nina Berg
54
Ms. Abigail Moy
Programme Coordinator
Namati
[email protected]
55
Ms. Julia Kercher
Human Rights Officer
Office of the High
Commissioner for Human
Rights (OHCHR)
[email protected]
56
Mr. Peter Chapman
Program Officer
Open Society Justice Initiative
peter.chapman@opensocietyfo
undations.org
Mr. Zaza Namoradze
Director
Ms. Sanne Lowenhardt
First Secretary
59
Ms. Chelsea Payne
Rule of Law Officer
Open Society Justice Initiative
Permanent Mission of the
Netherlands to the UN
Rule of Law Unit from the UN
Executive Office of the
Secretary-General
60
Mr. Thomas Wheeler
Conflict and Security Advisor
Saferworld
[email protected]
61
Mr. Craig Fagan
Senior Policy Coordinator
Transparency International
[email protected]
62
Mr. Kerry Neal
Child Protection Specialist
United Nations Children’s
Fund (UNICEF)
[email protected]
63
Mr. Stéphane Jean
Justice Operations Coordinator,
Criminal Law and Judicial
Advisory Service. Office of Rule of
Law and Security Institutions
United Nations Department of
Peace Keeping Operations
[email protected]
64
Mr. Gautam Babbar
Strategic Planning Unit, Public
Affairs and Policy Support
United Nations Office on
Drugs and Crime (UNODC)
[email protected]
57
58
zaza.namoradze@opensocietyfo
undations.org
[email protected]
[email protected]
17
18
Branch,
Division for Policy Analysis and
Public Affairs
Deputy Director of the Division
for Policy Analysis
United Nations Office on
Drugs and Crime (UNODC)
School of Law, SOAS,
University of London
65
Ms. Gillian Murray
[email protected]
66
Mr. Deval Desai
Research Associate
67
Ms. Christina
Biebesheimer
Chief Counsel of the Justice
Reform Practice Group, Legal
Vice-Presidency
The World Bank
[email protected]
68
Mr. Nicolas Menzies
Justice Reform Specialist
The World Bank
[email protected]
69
Mr. Alejandro Ponce
Chief Researcher Officer
World Justice Project
[email protected]
[email protected]
UNDP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Alejandro Alvarez
Aparna Basnyat
Martin Borgeaud
Eveline Debruijn
Iman El Hussien
Shaima Hussein
Shelley Inglis
Amaly Kowlessar
Jenny Kotz Bjerlestam
Norul Rashid
Christi Sletten
Sheelagh Stewart
Lucy Turner
Valentijn Wortelboer
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
18
19
ANNEX V – Participant Bios
Ms. Katia Araujo
Katia Araujo is the Deputy Director of Programs with a specific focus on Community Resilience, Land and
Housing. Ms. Araujo provides leadership in the realization of the organization’s mission through strategic
planning with member organizations for the development of programs based on strategies and advocacy
actions responding to women's identified priorities. She focuses on the strategic planning and enhancement of
grassroots women’s alliance building, leadership, and skills transfer across the regions. Ms. Araujo joined the
Huairou Commission and GROOTS International in 2008 as Coordinator for Latin America in order to expand
and enhance the organizing and network building of grassroots women's groups and NGO partners working in
the context of security of tenure, livelihoods and resilience. As the Global Coordinator of the Land and Housing
Campaign from 2010 to 2012, she has built on the regionally based platforms in Africa (WLLA) and in Latin
America and Asia to develop the global strategy Women, Land and Development (WDL) to form a multistakeholder platform and to promote policy innovation and operational accountability.
Prior to coming to Huairou, Ms. Araujo conducted field research, analysis and evaluation on specific women's
issues for various NGOs, including the International Rescue Committee, African Services Committee, and the
Greater New York Chamber of Commerce. She also coordinated fundraising activities to POMPA in partnership
with Institute Steve Biko, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, a youth leadership development project, to train Afro-Brazilian
youth for public service and social entrepreneurship. Ms. Araujo holds an M.A. in International Affairs with
concentration on Governance and Human Rights from The New School University and a B.A. in African Studies
with a minor in Political Science from Hunter College in New York.
Mr. Gautam Babbar
Gautam Babbar is part of the Strategic Planning Unit in the Public Affairs and Policy Support Branch of the
Division for Policy Analysis and Public Affairs at the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).
Mr. Adam Baird
Adam Baird from the UK is a specialist in violence prevention and has worked substantially with gangs,
masculinities and processes of youth inclusion in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). He has authored a
number of academic articles on urban violence prevention and gender. He advises as an ‘Associate Expert to
the UNDP in the area of Crisis Prevention and Recovery’ for whom he has designed a youth violence prevention
project in Belize and written a report on Citizen Security and youth inclusion in the Caribbean. He has also
worked as a consultant for the Red Cross and ICRC in LAC. He has worked substantially in Colombia and is
contributing editor to the recent book Paz Paso a Paso: Una mirada desde los Estudios de Paz a los Conflictos
Colombianos (2013).
Ms. Luciana Bercovich
Luciana Bercovich is the Coordinator of the Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia (ACIJ) in Argentina.
Ms. Nina Berg
Nina Berg is the Chief Technical Adviser in the Conflict and Fragility Team, Technical Advisory Services at the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Denmark.
Ms. Christina Biebesheimer
Christine Biebesheimer is Chief Counsel of the Justice Reform Practice Group in the Legal Vice-Presidency of the
World Bank. Prior to joining the Bank she was Principal Specialist in Modernization of the State in the InterAmerican Development Bank and an associate with the law firm of Milbank ,Tweed, Hadley and McCLoy. She
received her BA from the University of Iowa, studied at the Universidade Classica de Lisboa, and received her
J.D. from Harvard Law School.
Ms. Virisila Buadromo
Virisila Buadromo is the Executive Director of the Fiji Women's Rights Movement (FWRM) in Fiji.
Dr. Hernando Gómez Buendía
Dr. Hernando Gómez Buendía holds advanced degrees in Sociology, Economics, Philosophy, and Law. Director
and General Editor of Razón Pública, lead author of several UNDP Human Development reports, author of 38
19
20
books and of many academic articles, former Secretary General of Colombia´s Liberal Party, and award-winner
journalist, he has worked extensively on conflict resolution and crime prevention in Latin America.
Mr. Ignacio Cano
Ignacio Cano is the Senior Lecturer at the Universidade Estadual do Rio de Janeiro in Brazil.
Ms. Sabina Cerbu
Ms. Sabina Cerbu is the Deputy Minister of Justice at the Ministry of Justice in Moldova.
Mr. Peter Chapman
Peter Chapman is a program officer working on access to justice and legal empowerment issues with the Open
Society Justice Initiative. Prior to joining the Justice Initiative, Chapman worked on governance and justice
reform in East Asia and Africa with the World Bank’s Justice for the Poor program. He previously worked with
The Carter Center in Monrovia, Liberia and the Public International Law & Policy Group in Washington DC and
Kampala, Uganda. He has published on justice reform and legal empowerment for a variety of audiences.
Chapman holds a JD from the Washington College of Law, American University, an MA in International Affairs
from the School of International Service, American University, and a BA in Political Science and Peace Studies
from Colgate University.
Ms. Shorai Chitango
Shorai Chitongo (Zimbabwe) is a founder of Ray of Hope and a national leader of the GROOTS Zimbabwe
Home-Based Care Alliance—a multi community network linking grassroots women leaders together, fighting to
empower and protect their communities in Zimbabwe. The Zimbabwe Home-Based Care Alliance has 857
caregivers from three districts across Zimbabwe. Its membership and activities include home visits, community
and climate resilient farming, and savings and credit groups. Shorai began caregiving in 2005, when she
initiated Ray of Hope as a support group for women survivors of domestic violence and in the process
discovered that 75% of the women survivors in Ray of Hope openly disclosed their HIV positive status. She has
since represented caregivers from Huairou Commission global networks at the International Conference “HIV
Care & Support: A Roadmap to Universal Access by 2015” and the AWID Forum.
Ms. Maja Daruwala
Maja Daruwala has been working to advocate for rights and social justice for over 20 years. A barrister by
training, Ms. Daruwala been the Director since 1996, of Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, an
international NGO mandated to ensure the practical realization of human rights across the Commonwealth.
She is actively engaged in numerous human rights initiatives and concentrates on issues relating to civil
liberties including police reform, prison reform, right to information, discrimination, women's rights, freedom
of expression, and human rights advocacy capacity building.
Born in India, Ms. Daruwala has lived and worked in England, Singapore and Sri Lanka. Back in India, she has
practiced for a short while in the Supreme Court but then left to work full-time at the Ford Foundation as a
programme officer for South Asia. Her interests lie particularly in the area of systemic reforms. She has focused
her energies on issues of accountability and participation, which she believes are essential underpinnings for
good governance and the realisation of human rights.
Ms. Daruwala sits on several charitable boards, including the Open Society Justice Initiative, the International
Women’s Health Coalition, both based in New York: Oxfam GB OXFORD: & Civicus; World Alliance for Citizens
Participation, based in Johannesburg. Ms. Daruwala believes the only way to be optimistic about the future is
to invent it!
Mr. Ruslan Davletov
Ruslan Davletov is the Director a.i. Research Center of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
Mr. Luigi De Martino
Luigi De Martino is the coordinator of the Secretariat of the Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and
Development, a diplomatic initiative launched by Switzerland and UNDP in 2006 and signed today by 112
states. The Geneva Declaration aims at reducing in a measurable way the global burden of armed violence by
2015 (and beyond). He has worked for more than ten years as researcher, trainer and consultant on conflict,
violence and development issues. Before that, he worked for the Swiss Agency for Development and
20
21
Cooperation (SDC) and for the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.
He holds a Master in Anthropology and a B.A. in Political Sciences.
Mr. Deval Desai
Deval Desai is a Research Associate at the School of Oriental and African Studies. He has worked for several
years on rule of law and grievance redress, in particular in fragile states and in the context of extractives
projects. He has done so for various institutions, including the World Bank - where he helped establish a global
program on conflict and justice - and for a DfID research centre at the University of Manchester (where he is
also an Honorary Research Fellow). He currently advises UNDP on the rule of law in relation to the post-2015
Agenda. He has published on these issues in a range of academic and policy fora. He holds an MA from Oxford,
an LLM from Harvard, and is a member of the Bar of England and Wales.
Mr. Donald Deya
Donald Deya is the Chief Executive Officer of the Pan African Lawyers Union.
Mr. Craig Fagan
Craig Fagan is the Senior Policy Coordinator at Transparency International. He joined TI from the Poverty Group
of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) where he worked as Policy Research Analyst advising
countries on issues such as civil society engagement, monitoring and evaluation and Millenium Development
Goal-based initiatives. He has an undergraduate degree in International Studies/Spanish from the University of
Richmond (Virginia) and a master’s in International Affairs/Development Economics from SAIS-Johns Hopkins
University (Washington, DC).
Justice María del Carmen Alanis Figueroa
Justice María del Carmen Alanis Figueroa is a Justice of the Federal Electoral Court of Mexico (TEPJF) since
2006. She is the only woman who has served as President of the highest electoral jurisdictional body of the
country (2007-2011). With 26 years of experience both domestically and abroad, Justice Alanis is an expert in
access to justice and democratic elections. Prior to becoming an Electoral Justice in Mexico she held different
offices at the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), as Executive Secretary, Substitute Electoral Counselor and
Executive Manager of Civic Education and Electoral Training. Previously she was head of the Training
Department and the Documentation Center in the Federal Electoral Court. Justice Alanis´ jurisprudential work
stands out for fostering access to justice for vulnerable groups, introducing a gender perspective, as well as for
conducting constitutional control and conventional oversight for effectively guaranteeing fundamental rights.
She has done extensive work on fighting ethnic and gender discrimination in Mexico and abroad.
Since 2010 is Mexico´s representative to the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice
Commission), areas of work include Rule of Law, democratic constitutionalism and fundamental rights. At the
Venice Commission she chairs the Latin America Subcommittee. She has been the founding President of the
America’s Electoral Jurisprudence Group, formed by head justices of the Electoral Courts of Latin America and
the Caribbean and the Department of Electoral Cooperation and Observation of the Organization of American
States (OAS). She had also co-chaired the Inter-American Union of Electoral Bodies (UNIORE). Alanis is a
registered consultant on electoral matters for the UN, and has consulted the OAS on access to justice and
democratic governance.
Justice Alanis holds a PhD in Law and a Bachelor of Laws both from UNAM as well as a Master’s Degree in
Comparative Government (MSc) from LSE. She has been a professor at the Law School of the National
Autonomous University of Mexico, and has lectured at numerous universities in Mexico, Europe and Latin
America. She was awarded 2012 Woman of the Year in Mexico.
Ms. Angote Nyausi Gertrude
Angote Nyausi Gertrude is a lawyer, currently an Executive Director, at Kituo cha Sheria (Centre for Legal
Empowerment), the oldest legal aid providing Non-Governmental Organization in Kenya. Its mission is to
empower the poor and marginalized people towards access to justice. She is a social transformation advocate
and has been in the forefront in litigating, agitating and advocating towards the vision of access to justice for
all. Ms. Gertrude is currently a Council Member of the Law Society of Kenya, and an LLM Student at the
University of Nairobi. She is a trained trial advocacy teacher from the University of Washington, and has
previously engaged as faculty member in trainings held at the Kenya School of Law.
21
22
Ms. Jane Nyokabi Gitau
Jane Nyokabi Gitau has completed her tertiary and O level standard of eduction. She is currently a coffee and
dairy farmer and practices organic farming, horticulture and subsistence crops and other environmental
activities. She has been trained as a secretary as well as caregiver and community health worker. She has also
undergone several trainings on social sciences and community paralegalism. She has previously worked for ten
years as a shorthand typist in the civil service.
Ms. Gitau has been working as a volunteer social worker organizing for diverse community development
initiatives and working on women empowerment and a human rights activist especially people affected and
infected by HIV/AIDS; widows and orphans in accessing legal justice working with the most vulnerable on
initiatives that affect their livelihoods. She also works with a community-based organization called Gatundu
Mwirutiri (volunteer) Women Initiative which is a member of Groots Kenya network of grassroots
organizations. Ms. Gitau has participated in training on leadership supported by Groots Kenya and she also has
played a role in co-implementing Groots Kenya activities and running their programs in the community.
Mr. Alejandro Gonzalez Duran
Alejandro Gonzalez-Duran is a legal adviser at the Electoral Court of the Federal Judiciary. He has 15 years of
experience in democratic governance, access to justice, political campaigns, communications and strategy
development in Latin America and the United States.
In Mexico´s public sector, Alejandro has served at the three federal electoral institutions: IFE, FEPADE and
TEPJF. Since April 2012 he joined Justice´s Maria del Carmen Alanis office, at the Federal Electoral Court
(TEPJF), where he had worked previously as an advisor of the Presidency (2009-2010). In between, he was the
Head of the Crime Policy & Development Division of the Specialized Prosecutors Office for Electoral Offenses
(FEPADE) of the General Prosecutors Office (PGR). At the beginning of his professional career he worked at IFE
as an advisor to the Executive Director of the Training and Civic Education Division (1997-1998). Also in Mexico
he has been a consultant on Access to Justice and Democratic Governance at Consultiva, and at his own
consulting company: Analitica, Gobernabilidad & Desarrollo. Mr. Gonzalez-Duran holds a J.D. from ITAM in
Mexico and a Master in Public Administration from Columbia University.
Mr. Vasu Gounden
Vasu Gounden is the Founder and Executive Director of the African Centre for the Constructive Resolution of
Disputes (ACCORD). He is a lawyer and a mediator, trainer and researcher in the field of conflict management.
He holds a Masters Degree in Law from Georgetown University, which he obtained on a Fulbright Scholarship in
1990. He is an experienced Conflict Management Trainer, having been an active trainer in the field since 1990.
Mr. Gounden has been involved in preparing conflicting parties across Africa for negotiations, including rebel
groups in Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). He has provided mediation support to the
facilitators of the Burundi Peace Process, which included former President Nelson Mandela, President Jacob
Zuma and Minister Charles Ngcakula, and has served as an advisor on strategy to former President Masire on
the InterCongolese Dialogue Peace Process. Mr. Gounden has been involved in the recent Madagascar
mediation, assisting the parties in their negotiation strategy development. He also serves on the Boards of
several Institutions across the world involved in conflict management. He has addressed the United Nations
Security Council on matters relating to conflict management and has been elected by the World Economic
Forum as one of their Global Leaders for Tomorrow (GLT).
Ms. Nadejda Hriptievschi
Nadejda Hriptievschi is a lawyer, researcher and co-founder of Legal Resources Centre from Moldova. In this
capacity she is engaged in research and advocacy for improving the justice sector and implementation of
international human rights treaties in Moldova. She taught human rights at the State University of Moldova in
2010-2012. She served as consultant on legal aid, judiciary, criminal justice and human rights for different
national and international organizations. Since 2010 she is engaged in advocacy related to the adoption and
implementation of the Law on Ensuring Equality in Moldova.
Mr. Pillkyu Hwang
Pillkyu Hwang is a lawyer in Gonggam Human Rights Law Foundation specialized in international human rights,
migration, refugees, business and human rights, and access to justice in general. He has been the Human Rights
Committee coordinator of the Korean Bar Association (KBA) for 7 years. He earned his PhD at Seoul National
University, and was a visiting academic at the Centre on Migration, Policy and Society, Oxford University and a
22
23
visiting fellow at the Human Rights Program, Harvard Law School. For last 2 years, he has played a leading role,
as the chair, in the Asia Pacific Refugee Rights Network and the Asian Consortium for Human Rights Based
Access to Justice.
In relation to legal aid/access to justice, He was an expert panel for the Roundtable on Legal Aid Reform of the
Presidential Commission on Judicial Reform in 2006 and for the annual NGO consultations of Korea Legal Aid
Corporation. He was a facilitator/ moderator/ presenter for KBA East Asia pro bono session, LAWASIA human
rights session, and IPBA(Inter-Pacific Bar Association) Asia pro bono session.
Ms. Lusine Iskandaryan
Lusine Iskandaryan is the First Category Specialist at the Department of Legal Support to the System at the
Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Armenia.
Ms. Ana Celeste Januario
Ana Celeste Januario is the National Director in Ministry of Justice and Human Rights - Director of Human
Rigths Department in Angola. She is a lawyer and a human rights defender. She was previously the Chief of
Human Rights Department in Angola for the Secretary of State for Human Rights from 2008-2010. She worked
with the UN Human Right Office in Angola from 2005 – 2008. She is a Member of the Angola Commission of
Human Right Report from 2008- 2013. She was the Technical Coordinator of Visit of High Commissioner of
Human Rights in Angola in May 2013. She is the Coordinator of joint project UNDP - GOA/MJDH.
Mr. Stéphane Jean
Stephane Jean is the Justice Operations Coordinator of the Criminal Law and Judicial Advisory Service in the
Office of Rule of Law and Security Institutions at the United Nations Department of Peace Keeping Operations.
Ms. Julia Kercher
Julia Kercher works as a Human Rights Officer at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
(OHCHR) where she currently coordinates the Office's support on integrating human rights into global
development frameworks such as the Post-2015 Development Agenda and provides advice on integrating
human rights into development policies and programmes to national partners and field presences. Prior to this,
Julia worked for UNDP's Bureau for Development Policy supporting colleagues and partners at country and
headquarters level in mainstreaming human rights in development policies and programmes, and before that
for NGOs such as Transparency International and CARE International. She has degrees in law and in
development studies.
Ms. Diala Khamra
Diala Khamra is the Founding Member and Treasurer of the Justice Center for Legal Aid in Jordan.
Mr. Simeon Koroma
Simeon Koroma is the Director of Timap for Justice in Sierra Leone
Mr. Byenkya Tito Kugonza
Mr. Byenkya Tito Kugonza is presently serving as the Chief Executive Officer of the East Africa Law Society
(EALS), which is the umbrella regional organization of the Legal Profession and 6 Bar Associations in East Africa.
(Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and Buriundi). The EALS serves as a common platform for the profession to
articulate issues of common interest to the legal profession at regional level, as well as for the advancement of
the rule of law, good governance and human rights within an integrated East African Community.
Mr. Kugonza holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Law, a Post Graduate Diploma in Legal Practice, and is currently
pursuing a Masters in Development Studies. He has also served as the Executive Director of the Uganda Law
Society in Kampala, Uganda; as well as the Regional Deputy Director of the Strengthening Access to Justice
Programme in East Africa, a regional project of the Canadian Bar Association that aimed to develop a
community of multi-stakeholder expertise in the provision of justice through capacity building, networking and
experience sharing’.
Mr. Wael Lafi
Mr Wael Lafi received his first bachelor degree in Law and Police Sciences from the Police Academy of the Arab
Republic of Egypt in 1999. In 2011, he attended the University of Pittsburgh to earn his Master of law LL.M, in
23
24
international and comparative law. He was previously part of the Palestinian civil police and later became a
prosecutor at the Ramallah Prosecution Office then the Chief Prosecutor heading the offices of Ramallah,
Bethlehem and Jericho. Mr. Wael Lafi is currently the head of the Policy & Planning Unit at the Palestinian
Attorney General’s Office AGO, where he is responsible for undertaking strategic planning, coordinating with
donors and implementing projects.
Ms. Kate Lappin
Kate Lappin is the Regional Coordinator for the Asian Women for Law and Development in Asia Pacific.
Ms. Sanne Lowenhardt
Ms. Sanne Lowenhardt is currently the First Secretary of the Netherlands Permanent Representation on
Humanitarian Affairs, UNICEF, Rule of Law and Peacebuilding.
She was previously the Senior Policy Advisor Europe Department and the Country Desk Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech
Republic, Greece, Slovakia, focal point Rule of Law issues in Europe. She was also the Second Secretary of the
Political Section of the Royal Netherlands Embassy in Moscow in charge of Human Rights, Humanitarian Affairs,
Asylum and Migration issues. She has experience as the Policy Advisor Humanitarian Aid Division as the focal
point for Asia, relations with Red Cross / Red Crescent movement.
Ms. Lowenhardt has a double Master of Laws (LLM), International and European Law and Dutch Legal Studies
from the University of Amsterdam.
Ms. Britta Madsen
Britta Madsen is currently the Project Coordinator, Rule of Law Training Program for UN Judicial Affairs
Officers, Center for International Peace Operations (ZIF), Germany. She was previously the Senior Expert on
human rights and social development in the External Monitoring System of the EU’s Development Cooperation
in Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Caucasus. She also has experience with the European Union Police
Mission in Afghanistan (EUPOL), as a Mentor for Gender and Human Rights at the Afghan Ministry of Interior
and as the Co-Chair of the Institutional Reform Working Group on Accountability and Police Oversight. She was
also the Project Coordinator for the establishment of the Office of Police Ombudsman at the Afghanistan
Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC). Ms. Madsen also has experience working with the United
Nations, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in Nepal, with the International Office for
Human Rights – Action on Colombia (OIDHACO), Brussels, Belgium, and with the Peace Brigades International
(PBI), Colombia.
Ms. Makanatsa Makonese
Ms. Makanatsa Makonese is the Executive Secretary/Chief Executive Officer of the Southern African
Development Community (SADC) Lawyers Association, a representative organization of law societies, bar
associations and individual lawyers and advocates in the 15 countries of the SADC region. Ms. Makonese is a
human rights lawyer with international law experience having worked in and implemented human rights and
law programmes in a number of countries with a focus on the SADC region. She holds a Bachelor of Laws
(Honours) Degree, a Master’s Degree in Women’s Law and is currently studying for a Doctoral Degree in
Women’s Law with a focus on women’s land rights in Zimbabwe. She has held positions of responsibility and
leadership on initiatives focusing on human rights, the rule of law, democracy and governance, law reform and
the development of the legal profession including as a member of the International Institute of Law Association
Chief Executives (IILACE). Her most recent publications (2013) focus on the legal framework that governed the
2013 Zimbabwean harmonised elections, the role of the African Court on Human and People’s Rights in
resolving the SADC Tribunal conundrum and women’s land rights under the new Zimbabwean constitution.
Mr. Marlon Manuel
Mr. Marlon Manuel is the National Coordinator with the Alternative Law Groups in the Philippines.
Ms. Nomboniso Maqubela
Ms. Nomboniso Nangu Maqubela is the current Director of the National Alliance for the Development of
Community Advice Offices (Nadcao) in South Africa, a position she has occupied since July 2011. Ms. Maqubela
provided technical support as an independent consultant to the Steering Committee and the National
Coordinator of Nadcao between 2006-2011, before assuming the role of Interim Director in July 2011. She
previously served on the Board of the South African Weather Service for six years and is currently a member of
Council of the University of Fort Hare and chairs the Audit Committee of Council. She has over 15 years of
24
25
experience in development facilitation and organizational development. She has particular expertise in working
with civil society organisations, community-led tourism enterprises, provincial and local government
departments and their agencies.
Mr. Jose Antonio Mejia Guerra
Mr. Jose Antonio Mejia Guerra is currently a researcher at the National Statistical and Geography Institute of
Mexico (INEGI by its Spanish acronym). Where he previously served as Vicepresident of the Governing Board
from 2008 to 2012. He has nearly 20 years of professional experience in the area of capacity building of
statistical agencies with a focus in Latin America and the Caribbean. Before being appointed to INEGI´s first
Governing Board he worked at the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) in Washington D.C. for 13 years. At
IDB he served as Coordinator of the Program for the Improvement of the Surveys and the Measurement of
Living Conditions (MECOVI by its Spanish acronym) from 2001 to 2008. Mr. Mejia holds a masters degree in
Public Policy (1995) from Georgetown University and a Masters degree in Economics (2002) from The George
Washington University.
Mr. Desalegn Mengistie
Mr. Desalegn Mengistie is a Justice System Reform Programme Office Director at the Ministry of Justice in the
Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Prior to his current position, Mr. Mengistie worked as the Criminal
and Civil Matters Team Leader and Legal Research and Drafting Senior Expert. He has received awards for the
successful accomplishment of a 5 year public sector capacity building program (PSCAP) in Dire Dawa
Administration in Ethiopia. Mr. Mengistie is has a background in project planning, implementation, monitoring
and evaluation. He is a PHD Candidate at the University of Amsterdam’s Institute of Law. Mr. Mengistie holds
LLB and LLM in International Law with a concentration in Public International Law from Ethiopian Civil Service
College.
Mr. Nicolas Menzies
Mr. Nicholas Menzies is a Senior Counsel, Justice Reform in the Legal Vice Presidency of the World Bank. He
works on institutional reform of the formal justice sector and on mainstreaming justice into development
programming with the Justice for the Poor program - with particular interests in impact evaluation, indicators
and gender. Prior to the World Bank, he worked at the intersection of plural legal systems as a land and natural
resources lawyer for indigenous communities in Australia, on legal empowerment and access to justice issues
in Cambodia, and in providing policy advice to the Papua New Guinean cabinet. Mr. Menzies has an LL.B. and a
B.A. from the University of Sydney and a Master of Public Policy degree from the Hertie School of Governance,
Berlin.
Dr. Gaspar Moniquela
Mr. Gaspar Pedro Moniquela a native of Xai Xai in the Province of Gaza, Mozambique. He is the Head of the
Directorate for Administration of Justice in the Ministry of Justice in Mozambique. In this function he
coordinates, among other things, the efforts of the entire justice sector to implement an integrated Strategic
Plan agreed upon by the Ministry of Justice, the Attorney General’s Office, the Supreme Court and the
Administrative Tribunal. He has a degree in Social Science and has over 20 years of experience in Strategic
Planning. Since 2009 he is also managing a number donor funded projects in support of Access to Justice in
Mozambique, including one with UNDP.
Mr. Manolo Morales
Manolo Morales is the Executive Director of Corporación de Gestión y Derecho Ambiental (ECOLEX) in Ecuador.
Ms. Abigail Moy
Abigail Moy is the Programme Coordinator at Namati.
Mr. Clifford Msiska
Clifford Msiska is the Director of the Paralegal Advisory Service Institute in Malawi.
Headman Gilbert Tendai Mungate
Gilbert Tendai Mungate was born in Domboshava area, Goromonzi Zimbabwe and was educated in Highfield,
Harare. He acquired qualifications in Standard Six and became a teacher at Hatcliffe Primary School, Harare for
a period of one year. After his teaching career he went back to his rural home in Domboshava where he
became Village Head in Mungate Village. He served as a Village Head for several years and was later promoted
25
26
as an Assessor for Chief Chinhamora, a post he served for forty six years. As an Assessor he assisted in the
litigation of cases that include domestic violence, inheritance and disinheritance issues, customary marriage
problems, incest and many other issues that are solved at community level.
Due to his hard work and loyalty Gilbert Tendai Mungate was promoted to a Sub-Chief/Headman, a position he
has served with utmost excellence. He has presided over cases that include the violation rights of women, the
rights of children, rights of children with disabilities and many cases that affect women in general. At the
highlight of his carrier, Headman Mungate has dealt with issues to do with women, property and land rights
and has worked closely with Zimbabwe Parents of Handicapped Children Association. He has also initiated
mobile birth certificate registration centres in his area to assist women and children. He takes care of widows,
orphans and other vulnerable in the society and compared to other Headmen, he has got a greater
understanding of women’s rights and the rights of persons with disabilities. He is currently the Patron of
Zimbabwe parents of Handicapped Children Association Chinhamora Group in Domboshava.
Ms. Gillian Murray
Gillian Murray holds a B.Sc. degree from the University of Glasgow and a M.Sc. degree from the School of
Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London. She has also pursued post-graduate studies in
international development issues at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada, and through the Open University
Business School.
Since joining the United Nations in 1991, Ms. Murray has worked in various capacities in the drugs and crime
programme. She has experience in, inter alia, the technical assistance programme in both the field and
Headquarters, resource mobilization and partnership building with other UN organizations, the donor
community and the private sector. In her most recent position she was Chief of the Conference Support
Section, Organized Crime and Illicit Trafficking Branch, Division for Treaty Affairs, and she also acted as UNODC
Senior Focal Point for Cybercrime. Before joining the United Nations, Ms. Murray worked for the Canadian
Government, the European Patent Office and the private sector.
Currently, Ms. Murray is Deputy Director of the Division for Policy Analysis, and Chief of the Public Affairs and
Policy Support Branch.
Ms. Florence Mutesi
Florence Mutesi is currently the Executive Director of Organised for Governance & Sustainable Development,
an organization that empowers the public through enhancing Citizen Participation and good governance
principles—done through Research, M&E, Advocacy and skills development. Ms. Mutesi is also an Associate
and Advisor of Influence Africa, based in South Africa. She served as the Director of Governance Practice and
Policy Research and as the Director of Global Governance Research at the Rwanda Governance Board in
Rwanda, where she strategized, coordinated and carried out research projects. Ms. Mutesi worked with Civil
Society Organizations like the International Budget Partnership and Population Reference Bureau based in the
USA as well as The Ne Times Publications based in Rwanda, as the Head of the Regional Bureau. She founded
and Co-founded Rwanda Humanist Association, Gasabo Women Handcraft Association, respectively. Ms.
Mutesi has a Masters in Public Policy from the National University of Singapore (NUS) and has education
background in other areas like Political Science and Rule of Law.
Ms. Valentine Namakula
Valentine Mulindwa Namakula is a Rule of Law/Governance practitioner with over 10 years’ experience in the
analysis, planning, design and management of Rule of Law reform programmes in the East and Central African
Region. Valentine has post graduate qualifications in law and sociology, was a Hubert Humphrey Fellow with
the University of Minnesota and a Resident Scholar with the Vera Institute of Justice in New York, USA.
Valentine is presently Executive Director of the Centre for Justice Studies and Innovations (CJSI) –an
organization that promotes rule of law as an avenue through which justice and other services are delivered to
all people in Uganda, particularly the poor and marginalized groups. The Centre’s Justice System Improvement
Approach works through research, demonstrations and advocacy
Mr. Zaza Namoradze
Zaza Namoradze is the Director of the Open Society Justice Initiative.
26
27
Mr. Uyapo Ndadi
Uyapo Ndadi is the Executive Director of the Botswana Network on Ethics, Law and HIV/AIDS (BONELA) in
Botswana.
Mr. Kerry Neal
Kerry L. Neal is UNICEF’s Child Protection Specialist, Justice for Children. Mr. Neal is a lawyer by training, and
has spent many years working in the field of juvenile justice / justice for children, as well as in other areas of
child protection, most notably the prevention of sexual exploitation and trafficking. His career has included
work with both IGOs and government, in locations as diverse as the Balkans, Haiti, Iran, Burundi and
Kazakhstan. As well as his professional legal qualifications, he has a Masters in Law and Human Rights, and a
Bachelor’s degree in Social Policy and Public Administration.
Dr. Mark Orkin
Mark Orkin is a Visiting Professor in the School of Public and Development Management at the University of
the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, and an Associate Fellow of the Department of Social Policy and
Intervention at Oxford. Previously in South Africa he was Head of Statistics South Africa, CEO of the statutory
Human Sciences Research Council, Director-General of the civil service college, Professor of Research
Methodology in the Management Faculty at Wits, and founder-director of an anti-apartheid social research
NGO. His recent research includes “Democratic governance and accountable institutions”, forthcoming in
Wonhyuk Lim (ed.) One World Goals: Post-2015 Development Agenda (Seoul: Korea Development Institute,
2013).
Judge Ahmed Ouerfelli
Ahmed Ouerfelli is the Legal Adviser of the President of the Republic of Tunisia since 15 March 2011. Since
2000 to 14 March 2011 he was appointed as researcher judge in the Center of Legal and Judicial Research –
CEJJ- (2000-2006) where he was promoted to become President of Working Group (2006– March 2011). He
was previously Judge in the Court of First Instance of Ariana (1995-1997), then in the Tunis Court of Appeals
(the First President’s Section). He is the author of 8 books on tax law, arbitration law (international and
domestic) and on commercial companies’ law.
Ms. Chelsea Payne
Chelsea Payne is a Rule of Law Officer in the Rule of Law Unit in the Executive Office of the Secretary-General,
United Nations. She previously worked as the Country Representative of The Carter Center in Liberia where
she led a program on access to justice. She previously worked in the Ministry of Justice in Liberia, and in the
Serious Crimes Unit in Timor Leste, and clerked in the Supreme Court of New Zealand. Chelsea has a Masters in
Law and in African Studies from the University of Oxford where she studied on a Rhodes Scholarship.
Ms. Faustina Pereira
Faustina Pereira is the Director of the Human Rights and Legal Aid Services at BRAC in Bangladesh.
Dr. Alejandro Ponce
Alejandro Ponce is the Chief Research Officer of the World Justice Project. He joined the WJP as Senior
Economist and is one of the original designers and a lead author of the WJP Rule of Law Index. Earlier in his
career, he worked as a researcher at Yale University and as an economist at the World Bank and the Mexican
Banking and Securities Commission. Dr. Ponce has conducted research and published in the areas of behavioral
economics, financial inclusion, justice indicators, and the rule of law. He holds a B.A. in Economics from ITAM in
Mexico, and a M.A. and Ph.D. in Economics from Stanford University.
Mr. Nicholas Robinson
Nicholas Robinson is a Fellow of International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Academy.
Dr. Sima Samar
Dr. Sima Samar is the Chairperson of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission. She was born in
Jaghori, Ghazni, Afghanistan. She received a medical degree from Kabul University. She was in Pakistan for 17
years where she became a leader for educating Afghan women and girls and founded The Shuhada
Organization, which now operates 55 schools for girls and boys in Afghanistan and 3 schools for Afghan
refugees in Quetta, Pakistan.
27
28
From December 22, 2001 until June 22, 2002, Dr. Sima Samar served as the Deputy Chair and Minister of
Women’s Affairs for the Interim Administration of Afghanistan. Dr. Samar was one of only two women cabinet
ministers in the Interim Administration of Afghanistan’s government. During this Administration, Dr. Samar
established the first-ever Afghanistan Ministry of Women’s Affairs. She has also served as the United Nations
special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Sudan from August 2005 till June 2009.
Dr. Samar is currently the Chairwoman of the Independent Afghanistan Human Rights Commission. In this
position, she oversees the conduct of human rights education programs across Afghanistan, the
implementation of a nationwide women’s rights education program, and monitoring and investigation of
human rights abuses across the country. Dr. Samar convened the Commission, which is the first Human Rights
Commission in Afghanistan’s history. Under her leadership, the AIHRC has published numerous research
reports on Civilian Casualties, citizen’s access to justice, violation against women, child Labor, situation of
Economic and Social Rights in Afghanistan. The AIHRC has recently held a national inquiry on Rape and Honor
killings in Afghanistan and produces annual reports on the situation of Human Rights in Afghanistan as well.
She has been recognized for her leadership and courage by dozens of human rights and women’s rights
organizations globally, and continues her work in Afghanistan. Numerous international human rights and
women’s rights organizations have recognized Dr. Samar for her leadership
Dr. Mareike Schomerus
Mareike Schomerus is the Research Director at the Justice and Security Research Programme at the London
School of Economics.
Justice Kalyan Shrestha
Justice Kalyan Shrestha is a Justice in the Supreme Court of Nepal.He was previously Chief Judge of the
Appellate Court of Jumla as well as a Judge in various Appellate Courts and Zonal Courts. He was also a Under
Secretary at the Ministry of Law and Justice. Justice Shrestha is also currently the Convener of the Strategic
Plan of the Judicial Reform Implementation Team of the Supreme Court; the Convener of the High Level Task
Force on Criminal Law Reform of the Government of Nepal; the Executive Vice President of SAARC LAW; the
President of the Executive Committee of SAARC LAW Nepal; the Convener of the Review Task Force of the draft
on Penal Code, Penal Procedure Code and Sentencing Policy of Nepal; a Member of the Advisory Committee of
the ‘Bayaan’ Publication of Simorgh, Karachi, Pakistan; Chair of the Advisory Committee on the Journal of
National Judicial Academy, Nepal.
He was previously the Coordinator of the Publication Committee of Fifty Years of the Supreme Court of Nepal
(Golden Jubilee Memorial Publication); Executive Director of the National Judicial Academy of Nepal; Convener
of the Asia and Pacific Advisory Forum on Judicial Education on Equality Issues, New Delhi; Co-author of the
Constitutional Law of Nepal (1997), the Constitution of Nepal and its Analysis (1996) and Draftsperson in the
drafting process of "The Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1990.
Mr. Uli Sihombing
Uli Sihmbing is the Executive Director of the Indonesian Legal Resource Center (ILRC) which is a NGO focusing
on access to justice issues in Indonesia is based in Jakarta. Publications : an article on Assessing the
performance of court-appointed lawyers in the Indonesian legal aid according to the international standard, in
Legal Aid Book (International Experiences and Promising Practices For Legal Aid Providers) Edited by Paul
Dalton and Hatla Thele (the Danish Institute For Human Rights) 2010. Thesis on Reforming the Indonesian
Criminal Legal Aid According To International Standards, Legal Studies Department Central European University
2008. He is also a visiting lecturer at Swiss German University in Tangerang Indonesia.
Ms. Starjoan D. Villanueva
Starjoan D. Villanueva is a peace worker; researcher, trainer and facilitator with 17 years of extensive
knowledge and experience in peace and development work in Mindanao, Southern Philippines. She specializes
in policy research, monitoring and evaluation. She wrote a book on conflict-sensitive monitoring and evaluation
framework (GoP-UN ACT for Peace Programme, 2009), and case studies on agrofuel expansion in Mindanao
(Cord Aid, 2012), and cross-border illicit trade (International Alert, 2013). She is currently an alternate CSO
representative of the Philippine Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (PH-EITI), and a member of the EUCatalyst Project Think Tank, a global inter-disciplinary network of scientists, community development experts
and activists on climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction (CCA-DRR).
28
29
She holds a master’s degree in Public Administration major in Development Administration from the Mindanao
State University (MSU) in General Santos City, and a bachelor’s degree in Inland Fisheries from the University of
the Philippines in Iloilo City. She is currently the Executive Director of the Alternate Forum for Research in
Mindanao (AFRIM), Inc. based in Davao City, Southern Philippines.
Mr. Zhang Wanhong
Zhang Wanhong is an Associate Professor at the Wuhan University School of Law in China.
Mr. Thomas Wheeler
Thomas Wheeler is a Conflict and Security Advisor on Saferworld's Policy Programme where he focuses on the
role of rising powers in conflict-affected states, as well as the intersection between aid and conflict and the
post-2015 Millennium Development Goals discussions. He previously worked on Saferworld's China
Programme, which examined China's role in international arms transfers, China-Africa relations and Chinese
economic cooperation with conflict-affected states. This included co-ordinating a project examining how
China's economic relations with South Sudan could be more conflict sensitive and open to engagement with
civil society. Prior to this he worked on Saferworld's Africa Programme, focusing on conflict analysis in Kenya as
well as civil society participation in security issues in South Sudan. His research background is in African security
and conflict issues with a focus on the Horn of Africa region. Thomas holds an MA in Conflict, Security and
Development from the Department of War Studies, King's College London.
Mr. Fatmir Xhafa
Fatmir Xhafa is a Member of Parliament and Former Minister of Justice in Albania.
Mr. Virak Yeng
Virak Yeng is the Executive Director of the Community Legal Education Center in Cambodia.
Ms. Samira Zaitoon
Ms.Samira Zaitoon is the head of a private law office as a sharia and civil practitioner. From 1990 – 2005,
Zaitoon worked as lawyer and legal consultant at well known legal firm, she is a board member and head of
women committee of the Jordanian Bar Association, a board member of Arab Women’s Legal Network (AWLN),
head of the family reconciliation commission of the family protection departments, board member in Arab
Women Lawyer Forum, member of Jordan forum of business and profession. She is an active participant in
regional and international conferences and activities in relation to regard all human rights issues.
29
30
ANNEX VI - Concept Note
Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Agenda
26-27 September 2013
New York
Introduction
The rule of law describes a complex set of social, political
and economic realities that govern human behavior in
1
many different places, levels and ways. It is thus part of
the deep structure of all societies, at local, national and
international levels. At the same time, it reflects some
shared normative notion that human dignity and justice
matter, and thus has global political, social and economic
2
resonance.
United Nations definitions of the rule of law
 According to the UN Secretary-General, the rule
of law refers to “a principle of governance in
which all persons, institutions and entities,
public and private, including the State itself, are
accountable to laws that are publicly
promulgated,
equally
enforced
and
independently adjudicated, and which are
consistent with international human rights
norms and standards.” (S/2004/616)
Recognizing the importance of the rule of law in
development processes, the UN Secretary General
clearly articulated a definition of rule of law in 2004
which is grounded on international human rights norms
and standards. Additionally, the experience of the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) has highlighted
 In the Declaration of the 2012 High Level
links between the rule of law and development.
Meeting on the Rule of Law, the UN General
Although it was not addressed explicitly in any of the
Assembly recognized that “all persons,
MDGs, country experience has suggested the
institutions and entities, public and private,
importance of the law to achieving such development
including the State itself, are accountable to
goals. Establishing legal frameworks, ensuring
enforcement of rules and procedures, and reducing
just, fair and equitable laws and are entitled
corruption have enabled effective delivery of health,
without any discrimination to equal protection
education and other social services, while the absence of
of the law.”
these elements has been cited as a factor in countries’
failure to meet targets. Legitimate laws and credible
enforcement mechanisms have contributed to expanding opportunities – including for women and
disadvantaged groups - to participate in economic and political life.
As well-functioning justice institutions and a government bound by the rule of law are critical to building peace
and consolidating development gains, development agencies and practitioners have increasingly supported
reforms aimed at improving justice institutions and the rule of law at large. Such reform processes can draw on
international commitments on promoting and protecting the rule of law while ensuring that they are evidencebased, specific to national and local realities and contexts, and grounded on the lessons from past development
experience on strengthening the rule of law and promoting access to justice. They also need to take into
consideration some of the key (but not the only) functions of rule of law that link it to sustainable human
3
development , i.e. the rule of law as:
 A facilitator of equity, inclusion and social justice
 An enabler of sustainable economic growth and poverty reduction
 A means to prevent and mitigate violent crime and conflict and as an enabler of peace and security
 A vehicle to strengthen accountability and checks in power
1
See UNDP Issue Brief on Rule of Law - http://www.worldwewant2015.org/file/341332/download/371036
This has been further affirmed through international agreements such as the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (1948) to the
Declaration of the High Level Meeting on the Rule of Law (2012).
3
“The approach that Mahbub ul Haq pioneered through the series of Human Development Reports which began in 1990 is that between,
on the one hand, the difficult problem of assessing the richness of human lives, including the freedoms that human beings have reason to
value, and on the other, the much easier exercise of keeping track of incomes and other external resources that persons—or nations—
happen to have. Gross domestic product (GDP) is much easier to see and measure than the quality of human life that people have. But
human well-being and freedom, and their connection with fairness and justice in the world, cannot be reduced simply to the measurement
of GDP and its growth rate, as many people are tempted to do.” (Amartya Sen, UNDP Human Development Report 2013).
2
30
31

A mechanism to support sustainable environment and natural resource management.
The Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Framework
The issue of Rule of Law has or will feature in all the important discussions underway as part of the process of
defining the post-2015 development agenda.

The Open Working Group of the General Assembly, officially consisting of 30 seats (shared between
multiple Member States), the OWG has begun the process of deliberating on a number of thematic
issues as part of the process of defining a set of sustainable development goals (SDGs) as a follow up
4
to Rio+20. The eighth session of the Open Working Group in February 2014 will include discussions on
“conflict prevention, post-conflict peace building and the promotion of durable peace, rule of law and
governance.”

The establishment of the 27 member High-level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda to
5
advise the UN Secretary General on the global development framework to follow from the MDGs. The
6
High-level Panel was established in July 2012 and the final report was released in May 2013. The
report recognized that responsive institutions promoting rule of law and access to justice are
necessary for transformative shifts enabling development and to “build peace and effective, open and
accountable institutions for all”. It also noted that institutions that are able to uphold the rule of law
and deliver access to justice are necessary not only as drivers of development but have intrinsic value
in themselves. Specifically, Goal 10 – Ensure good governance and effective institutions and Goal 11 –
Ensure stable and peaceful societies include targets in relation to access to justice and rule of law:
o
o
Goal 10 includes targets such as - a) Provide free and universal legal identity, such as birth
registrations, b) Ensure that people enjoy freedom of speech, association, peaceful protest
and access to independent media and information, c) Increase public participation in political
processes and civic engagement at all levels, d) Guarantee the public’s right to information
and access to government data, and e) Reduce bribery and corruption and ensure officials
can be held accountable.
Goal 11 includes targets such as - a) Reduce violent deaths per 100,000 by x and eliminate all
forms of violence against children, b) Ensure justice institutions are accessible, independent,
well-resourced and respect due-process rights, c) Stem the external stressors that lead to
conflict, including those related to organised crime, d) Enhance the capacity, professionalism
and accountability of the security forces, police and judiciary accountable.
In addition to Goal 10 and Goal 11, a number of justice and security related targets have been
mainstreamed across several goals including:
o Goal 1: End Poverty – Target 1b - Increase by x% the share of women and men, communities,
and businesses with secure rights to land, property, and other assets
o Goal 2: Empower Girls and Women and Achieve Gender Equality – Target 2a - Prevent and
eliminate all forms of violence against girls and women; Target 2c - Ensure equal right of
women to own and inherit property, sign a contract, register a business and open a bank
account

The United Nations Development Group national, regional and global consultations on post-2015
and development, including national consultations in over 60 countries and eleven global thematic
4
Recalling the Millennium Declaration and its articulation of global principles of human rights, democracy and good governance as
underpinning the concept of development, UN Member States reaffirmed their commitment to sustainable and equitable human
development at the Rio+20 conference: “We acknowledge that democracy, good governance and the rule of law, at the national and
international levels, as well as an enabling environment, are essential for sustainable development, including sustained and inclusive
economic growth, social development, environmental protection and the eradication of poverty and hunger.” See
http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?menu=1549
5
In addition to the High Level Panel, the UN Secretary General also established the UN Task Team on the Post-2015 Development Agenda
to provide analytical inputs to the process as well as appointed a Special Advisor to the Secretary General on Post-2015 Development
Planning.
6
The report can be accessed at http://www.post2015hlp.org/the-report/
31
32
consolations. Specific thematic consultations where rule of law issues were prominent included the
7
governance and conflict/fragility consultations held in early 2013.
o In Panama, participants urged world leaders to include in the Post-2015 development
framework a standalone goal to reduce violence, and promote freedom from fear and
sustainable peace (calls were also made to include goals around the elimination of all forms
of violence against women and girls; and the protection of children and youth from violence).
(February 2013)
o In Johannesburg, a diverse group of participants (from grassroots activists to civil society
groups to MPs), underscored the need for the post-2015 development framework to
emphasize accountable, inclusive and transparent institutions to administer justice fairly, to
guarantee democratic participation, protect personal security and empower people to
participate with governing institutions and claim their rights. (March 2013)
In addition to these processes, civil society groups have been advocating and establishing clear positions on the
inclusion of the rule of law in the post-2015 development agenda:
 The Open Society Justice Institute and Namati have proposed including justice as part of the new
8
development framework (either as a separate goal or integrated into other goals).
 SaferWorld has outlined a possible justice target - “end impunity and ensure access to justice for all
9
social groups.”
 Transparency International has proposed a target on rule of law – “ensure that the rule of law is
respected, implemented and upheld by institutions that are well-resourced, independent, honest,
professional and competent.”
 In response to the High Level Panel Report, Amnesty International has suggested strengthening the
human rights dimension of the development goal including recommending addressing issues such as
gender discrimination in the justice system, accountability of security forces, police and the judiciary,
10
and enabling victims of human rights violations to have access to an effective remedy.
These processes have highlighted the multifaceted understanding of rule of law and justice and have indicated
that, in the particular context of the post-2015 development agenda, it can be understood as:
 An outcome of development, or a legal and political order with a set of values, a state of human
security, and an outcome of justice.
 An enabling condition for development, structuring social order and security, within the framework of
which other development activities might be effective. For example, security and violence reduction as
necessary enabling environment for development.

A process through which other development outcomes are achieved, it might determine how decisions
are made, rules are adopted and enforced, and grievances and disputes are resolved. Such processes
are crucial parts of the framework for the equitable delivery of education, health, jobs, and other
aspects of development. For example, it can be understood as a means for the enforcement of rights
and obligations and as establishing accountability mechanisms to strengthen governance systems and
to foster peaceful societies.
Objectives and Outputs of the Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Agenda
Drawing together the different strands of discussions that have included rule of law (including the global
thematic consultations on Conflict and Fragility and on Governance), and building on the conversations that
have already taken place, this dialogue aims to bring together practitioners, thinkers and policy makers,
primarily from the Global South, to further affirm the centrality of rule of law in the post-2015 development
7
Additionally, an expert meeting on a monitoring and accountability framework on conflict, violence and disaster and post-2015 was held
in June 2013 which will include discussions around rule of law. UNODC also held a technical consultation to identify a rule of law
monitoring framework in June 2013.
8
Measurable targets proposed include - the number of persons who can access reliable, affordable legal information should they need it;
reduce the number of individuals who lack a basic legal identity document; increase the land mass for which communities have secure
ownership rights; measure the proportion of women who have confidence in formal law courts or traditional systems for resolving legal
disputes.See Factsheets on “Justice 2015: Justice Plays a Fundamental Role in Ending Poverty” and “Justice 2015: Incorporating Justice in
the post-2015 Development Framework” - http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/projects/justice-and-development
9
Includes recommendations on indicators relating to capacity, perception, and the ‘objective situation’. It also warns against establishing
perverse incentives. See Issue Brief “Addressing Conflict and Violence in Post-2015: AVision of Goals, Targets and Indicators” http://www.saferworld.org.uk/what/post-2015
10
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/human-rights-must-play-stronger-role-post-2015-development-agenda-2013-06-05
32
33
agenda. In particular, this consultation will focus on two themes which have increasingly gained momentum for
inclusion in the post-2015 development agenda, namely:
 Justice: Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment
 Security: Violence Reduction
The Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Agenda will be held on the 26-27
11
September 2013 in New York.
Overall Objective:


To assess the evidence-base on the linkages between the rule of law in the post-2015 agenda – from
the perspectives of access to justice and from a security/violence reduction perspective.
On that basis, to identify strategies to incorporate the rule of law to the post-2015 development
agenda
Specific Objectives:
a) Discuss the merits and limitations, at the national and international level, of including the rule of law
in the post-2015 development discussions, based on the evidence and experience to date (with a
specific focus on access to justice and violence reduction/security)
b) Consider options for incorporating the rule of law into the post-2015 agenda (as a goal, an enabling
goal and/or a cross cutting targets/indicators), particularly within the areas of access to justice and
violence reduction/security.
c) Articulate potential priority areas that could be considered as targets/indicators as well as gaps in
knowledge and data
d) Identify potential next steps and ways forward at national, regional and global levels to position the
rule of law in the post-2015 discussions
Outputs:
A final outcome document will draw together the findings and conclusions of the dialogue and contribute to
ongoing discussions on the post-2015 development agenda and the sustainable development goals. This
outcome document will elaborate on the priorities around rule of law and development particularly in the
areas of access to justice and violence reduction/security.
The findings and outputs of this dialogue will feed into ongoing discussions on post-2015 including through:
 Feedback of the outcomes of the discussion by participating experts into their national and regional
processes and dialogues on the post-2015 development agenda;
 Provision of the findings and outputs to interested Member States, high-level policy makers and
United Nations entities involved in formulating the post-2015 development agenda; and
 Formulation of additional areas for knowledge development, dialogue and research to be taken
forward by expert participants or other interested organizations within their own institutional remits.
Participants:
As one of the aims of the Global Dialogue is to develop momentum around the inclusion of the rule of law in
the global development goals, approximately 60 participants including technical experts and practitioners,
academics, activists and policy makers as well as Member States - primarily drawn from the Global South will
be invited to take part in the discussions. Participants will include:
 Civil society practitioners – e.g., from organizations promoting access to justice, legal aid, legal
awareness, legal empowerment and legal aspects of other development programs, including
paralegals
 Government experts – e.g., technical staff from ministries of justice and interior; public registration
departments, land registration offices, or national statistics offices; national legal aid authorities;
legislative bodies, etc.
 Bar associations, lawyers and judges
11
The dates have been selected to leverage on multiple events taking place in NY during the week of 22nd September including the UN
General Assembly Special Event to follow up efforts made towards the achieving the MDGs (25 September), Global Legal Empowerment
Network Guidance Committee meeting (24 September), Global Legal Empowerment Initiative Development Partners meeting (25
September), Global Legal Empowerment Initiative International Advisory Council Meeting (26 September).
33
34






Traditional justice leaders
Law enforcement and corrections officials
Academics and think tanks (engaged in thinking about rule of law and the post-2015 agenda)
Representatives from regional networks and organizations (including development banks engaged on
rule of law and access to justice)
Other actors working in the field
Representatives from Member States
Methodology:
In preparation for the two day Global Dialogue, background papers and a global e-discussion will be supported
to offer a wide range of stakeholders the opportunity to contribute to the discussion on rule of law and the
post-2015 development agenda:

Background Papers - Background documents will be prepared and shared outlining some of the
linkages between the rule of law and development, as well as some thoughts on the nature of the
evidence base for such linkages. In addition to an overview paper, specific background papers will be
prepared on justice and security.

Global Electronic Consultation - A global electronic consultation will be held on the World We Want
2015 site to prepare for the Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Agenda
th
th
(See Annex I). The discussion will be held from the 9 of July until the 9 of August and will a) explore
the linkages between the rule of law and sustainable human development, encouraging participants to
consider how issues of justice and security are related to development and b) consider how specific
aspects of rule of law can be included in the post-2015 development agenda, including in terms of
measuring rule of law, justice and security (i.e. proposing concrete targets and indicators and
identifying the availability of data).
The Global Dialogue in September will be organized as follows:
Day 1 - 26 September 2013 – Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Agenda
Morning Session: High Level Panel - Launch of the Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post-2015
Development Agenda
 To highlight why rule of law including justice (access to justice and legal empowerment) and security
(violence reduction) need to be considered when developing the framework for the post-2015
development goals
Afternoon Session: Linkages between the Rule of Law and Development
 To discuss the relationship between rule of law and development and to identify why and how far rule
of law should be part of the post-2015 development agenda.
 To review the key themes and evidence-base linking rule of law and development in the areas of: a)
social justice, equity and inclusion; b) poverty reduction and economic growth; c) security and violence
reduction; d) accountability and checks in power; e) environment and natural resource management.
Day 2 – 27 September 2013 - Parallel Sessions on Justice (Access to Justice and Legal Empowerment) and
Security (Violence Reduction)
Morning Session: Measuring Justice and Security within the Post-2015 Development Framework
 To review proposals on targets and indicators on justice and security and identify possible strengths
and weakness of the proposals including highlighting the challenges and the possibilities in developing
a monitoring framework on justice and security
 To identify specific targets and indicators (as well as knowledge/data gaps) that could measure the
contributions of justice and security related targets and indicators towards overall development
Afternoon Session: Next Steps – Recommendations on Justice and Security within the post-2015 development
Agenda
34
35


To discuss how the contributions from the Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post-2015
Development Agenda can feed into the process of formulating the next global development goals
To discuss whether and to what extent rule of law issues can be part of the global and national
development agendas including identifying concrete possibilities for strengthening how to measure
rule of law and its contributions to national development processes
Venue and Date:
The meeting will be held on the 26-27 September 2013 in New York.
35
36
ANNEX VII – High Level Opening Session Speeches
Opening Remarks: Mr. Jan Eliasson, the Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations
REMARKS AT OPENING OF HIGH-LEVEL SESSION OF THE GLOBAL DIALOGUE ON RULE OF LAW AND POST-2015
DEVELOPMENT AGENDA, New York, 26 September 2013
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,
I am honoured to be here to open this high-level session of the global dialogue on the rule of law and the post2015 agenda.
I thank the organizers for their vision in convening this gathering. And I thank all of you for coming here with
energy, inspiration and ideas.
I could learn a great deal from you, I’m sure. What I hope to share today is an understanding of why the rule of
law is so critical to the work of the United Nations.
In the year 2000, world leaders agreed on an historic 15-year blueprint to address poverty: the Millennium
Development Goals. We are now closing in on the last stretch in our campaign to achieve them. And we are
shaping a vision for development that will guide our efforts beyond 2015.
Today, we have new ways of consulting on the future we want that never could have been imagined at the
dawn of the Millennium. Then, the process was steered by government officials and development experts.
Along the way, we held many meetings with civil society groups – but today we can go directly to the people,
canvas their views, collate that information and respond to their needs. This opens an extraordinary window
for global, grass-roots ownership of our agreed goals.
This is critical because our development agenda centres on people. When we listen to them, we can succeed.
At the same time, the doors of the United Nations are open as never before. As we listen closely to the world’s
citizens, we also benefit enormously from those of you who have dedicated yourselves to addressing the issues
that matter most.
The rule of law is one of these issues.
The Secretary-General has made this a priority because he understands that when you pay attention to
delivering justice, you gain results across the international agenda.
The rule of law is not just an abstract concept. It is an infant who gets a birth certificate to count in national
statistics. A police service that earns public trust. A court system that cannot be bought. An election where all
votes are equal. The rule of law helps women, indigenous people and persons with disabilities to reclaim their
rights. The rule of law enables countries to settle their disputes in a courtroom instead of on a battlefield. The
rule of law preserves human progress and allows us to go further in our pursuit of what is right and just.
I understand how important this is from personal experience. When I was growing up in Sweden, we did not
have the economy we do today. My father used to say that public trust was the key to progress. I always took
this to heart. Sweden as a country made gaining public trust a priority – with great success on many fronts. And
in my own career as a diplomat, I have always achieved the greatest results with an emphasis on the same
spirit of trust that underpins the rule of law.
The rule of law helps foster inclusive growth. It reduces violence. And it promotes equality and human rights.
Where we establish the rule of law, people have a greater interest in their common future. One study showed
land value in rural parts of Brazil, Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand increased when farmers got title
deeds. Knowing they had legal ownership, these individuals were willing to invest more.
36
37
Where we establish the rule of law, businesses can operate in an environment with transparency, predictability
and accountability. At the same time, the rule of law prompts businesses to support the broader public good,
for example by sustainably managing natural resources.
Where we establish the rule of law, we fight corruption which causes businesses and investors to flee. The
Global Corruption Barometer found that people think the police and judiciary are among the top five
institutions most affected by corruption. We must address this through focusing on the rule of law.
Where we establish the rule of law, we can foster a just and fair society. The poor have better access to health,
education and other social services that enable them to lift themselves out of poverty. To give just one
example, in Ecuador, women who received legal aid services were 20 percent more likely to obtain child
support than women who did not. The case is simple. People need institutional support and information to
protect their rights. This will drive development and solidify peace.
The 2011 World Development Report highlighted the connection between security, justice and employment. It
found that when you strengthen national institutions and improve governance, you can fix the economic,
political and security problems that trap fragile states in cycles of violence.
The rule of law ensures that our work for peace and security is lasting. When the United Nations fielded an allfemale formed police unit to our mission in Liberia, we found more and more Liberian women signing up to join
the police service. They had gone from being victims to being survivors to becoming proud agents of change.
This is the rule of law in action. This is sustainable peace. This is true progress.
We do concentrate on re-establishing – or sometimes just establishing – the rule of law in conflict-torn
countries. But the vast majority of our activities in support of the rule of law are carried out in countries that
already have peace.
There is a growing international consensus that these efforts have enormous value.
One year ago, United Nations Member States representing 193 different legal cultures and traditions came
together with the same idea: that the rule of law and development are mutually reinforcing. The Declaration
adopted at their high-level meeting affirmed that this interrelationship should be considered in the post-2015
development agenda.
The Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons shared this view. The rule of law is fundamental
to many of the goals identified in their report. The Secretary-General’s own report, “A Life of Dignity for All,”
calls for building peace and effective governance based on the rule of law and sound institutions.
Our future development agenda should be ambitious and inspirational. It should have sustainable development
at its core – with eradicating poverty as its priority. Delivering the rule of law through strong institutions is
paramount to development.
A woman in Indonesia who was helped by UNDP explained that a life of dignity means justice is done. She said,
“When we have our own homes... when our children can have an adequate education, and when we can live
safely and peacefully [with] enough food and drink each day, then we will have justice.”
I count on you to keep this woman and the millions of others like her in mind as you hold dynamic discussions
over the next two days.
Thank you.
37
38
Keynote Address: Ms. Helen Clark, the Administrator of UNDP
Opening Speech for Helen Clark, UNDP Administrator and Chair of the UNDG, on the occasion of the
Rule of Law and Post-2015 Global Dialogue, United Nations, New York, 26 September 2013
I welcome you all to this Global Dialogue on the Rule of Law and the post-2015 Development Agenda.
I wish to express my appreciation to the speakers this morning and to the participants who have traveled far to
engage in this important dialogue. I particularly thank Secretary José Antonio Meade Kuribreña of Mexico,
Minister Christian Friis Bach of Denmark, Minister Me Sidiki Kaba of Senegal, and Minister Yilmaz of Turkey for
joining us to co-host this meeting, and for their work to advance the understanding of the role of rule of law in
development.
It is a year since the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Rule of Law at the National and
International Levels. The Declaration from that meeting recognized that application of the rule of law is critical
for reducing poverty, preventing conflict, building peace, and advancing sustainable development. It expressed
the conviction of member states that this interrelationship should be considered in deliberations on the post2015 international development agenda.
Yesterday, at the UN Special Event on the MDGs - all member states agreed on an outcome document calling
for “a single framework and set of goals which includes the promotion of peace and security, democratic
governance, the rule of law, gender equality and human rights for all.”
The emerging vision for rule of law post-2015
This Global Dialogue takes place as member states, development practitioners, and concerned citizens around
the world are considering what the future development agenda might look like. UNDP and the wider UN
development system have been facilitating public consultations on post-2015. Through the internet and social
media, and by convening global, regional, and national meetings, we have been able to bring a wide range of
voices to the conversation.
From these voices, we have heard how highly people value “honest and responsive government”. The rule of
law is fundamental to having such governance.
Earlier this year, the report of the Secretary-General’s High-level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda,
“A New Global Partnership”, called for a “fundamental shift” in development thinking to ensure that “peace
and good governance are core elements of well-being, and not an optional extra".
This thinking is taken further in the UN Secretary-General’s report to the General Assembly on MDG Progress
and the Post-2015 Agenda, in which he calls for "transformative actions" to eradicate poverty and ensure
sustainable development. The report lists peace and governance as part of the emerging vision for the next
agenda, noting that they represent “outcomes as well as enablers of development". It notes that achieving this
will require the action of all countries to "build peace and effective governance based on the rule of law and
sound institutions."
In my comments today, I will reflect further on the role of the rule of law as an outcome of and an enabler of
development. I will cite examples of UNDP’s work on the rule of law and how insights from that could inform
the next global development agenda. I will conclude with key points for your consideration as you take forward
this discussion over the next two days.
Rule of Law and Development
UNDP works around the world to strengthen justice systems, support security sector reforms, enable legal
empowerment of the poor, and strengthen good governance based on the rule of law. We promote access to
justice, support communities to improve citizen security, confront discrimination and inequality, and work to
reduce poverty.
Wherever they exist, conflict, armed violence, and injustice are major obstacles to development. The 2011
World Development Report of the World Bank on conflict, security, and development notes now critical reestablishing the rule of law is for recovery from conflict and violence, and for preventing its recurrence.
Participants at a Post-2015 Thematic Consultation on Conflict and Fragility earlier this year concluded that
38
39
violence is devastating for national governance systems, and erodes the social contract between the state and
its people.
Where the rule of law is not firmly established, poverty, suffering, and marginalization are exacerbated. The
poorest and most vulnerable need to be able to secure their rights, access legal protection, and participate in
decision-making affecting their communities. More can be done to ensure that they benefit from legal and
justice practices which expand their opportunities and choices. The 2011-2012 report, “Progress of the World’s
Women: In Pursuit of Justice”, illustrates how good law and justice systems make a real difference to the lives
of women. The rule of law is a key driver of inclusive, equitable, and sustainable development, and empowers
people to seek and obtain justice.
Yet, there can be many barriers to accessing justice, especially where there are high levels of poverty,
marginalization and insecurity. Laws and justice institutions - formal and informal – may be biased or
discriminatory. Justice and security systems may be ineffective, slow, and untrustworthy. People may lack
knowledge about their rights. Often legal assistance is out of reach, leaving people with little recourse to formal
mechanisms for protection and empowerment. There may be a culture of impunity for criminal acts. Other
injustices and abuses in the family, or through deprivation and labour exploitation, may go unaddressed.
Making connections post-2015
Recognizing that development progress is assisted by the rule of law, many states are already working to
strengthen legal protections and their justice and security institutions. UNDP and the broader UN system are
firmly committed to supporting this work.
In places where violence has jeopardized development, UNDP supports Member States’ efforts to increase
citizen security.
For example,
• In Timor Leste, UNDP has supported a decade-long process to establish new justice and security institutions.
With these important measures to uphold the rule of law in place, Timor-Leste’s development has been
underpinned.
• In Guatemala, UNDP has focused on citizen security. Three consecutive years of decline in murder rates in
Guatemala show beyond doubt that it is possible to reduce armed violence.
The Secretary-General’s High-level Panel on Post-2015 has recommended inclusion of a specific target in the
renewed development agenda on reducing the number of violent deaths worldwide. The Panel also highlighted
the need for justice systems to be accessible, independent, and well-resourced, and to promote a culture of
respect for due process and citizen’s rights.
UNDP has done a great deal to support the building of more responsive and effective justice institutions,
including by advancing knowledge of laws and rights within societies. Our aim is to see gaps between the
justice needs of communities and the justice dispensed by authorities eliminated. Last year, the SecretaryGeneral designated UNDP and DPKO jointly as the UN global focal point for supporting the rebuilding of police,
justice, and corrections institutions in crisis and post conflict countries.
In all its work to build better justice systems, UNDP keeps a focus on ensuring that poor and marginalized
groups can seek remedies for their claims and peacefully settle their disputes – across criminal, family,
administrative and economic matters. Our work targets women, people affected by conflict and violence,
indigenous people, people with disabilities, and others who may be marginalised.
Some examples of efforts underway include:
In India, UNDP works with the Ministry of Justice on “fast track courts” for rape cases. The aim is to make court
processes more women friendly – although I would note that women the world over are often further
victimized by the conduct of rape cases against those who raped them. More than 7,000 paralegals in India
have been trained to assist marginalized women, including those who head households, women from minority
groups, and women living in urban slums.
In Indonesia, UNDP has supported the formulation of a national access to justice strategy, which has resulted in
increased citizen awareness of rights and new government services, such as legal aid, to improve the quality of
justice.
39
40
In Pakistan, we have supported the recently inaugurated mobile courts to bring justice services closer to the
people in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and prevent a rule of law vacuum from continuing to undermine
peace and development there.
UNDP observes that development outcomes are not sustainable unless they generate trust across all social
groups. That’s why we work with countries to increase public confidence in the rule of law by improving the
integrity and transparency of justice and security systems. In Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Guinea-Bissau, South Sudan, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, and many others, we support the recruitment and
training of justice and police officials. In Bangladesh, for example, more trust in the police is being built through
UNDP-supported community policing forums, training, and improvements to services for victims. In Armenia,
Algeria, India, Turkey, Uzbekistan, and elsewhere, we have promoted e-judiciary initiatives to enable people to
access information about their cases, and improve judicial accountability. All this work aligns with the target
proposed by the High Level Panel to enhance the capacity, professionalism, and accountability of security
forces, police, and judiciary.
Gender-based inequality, exclusion, discrimination, and abuse are interrelated challenges which severely
compromise development. Many women in our world are denied the right to participate in social and
economic life on an equal basis with men. Laws based on equality and justice are needed to help women
secure their rights and have them upheld. The High Level Panel has recommended that women are guaranteed
equal rights to own and inherit property, sign a contract, register a business, and open a bank account.
Gender-based violence and, in particular, violence against women and children continue to be a global
challenge, a fundamental rights violation, and a pernicious means by which inequality between men and
women is perpetuated. Countries which have often experienced war and conflict have often seen the social
and economic fabric of their communities destroyed and levels of brutal acts of rape and sexual abuse soar. In
such countries, UNDP works on securing women’s access to justice to bring perpetrators to account.
Three out of ten women in our world report having experienced physical and/or sexual violence by an intimate
partner at some point in their lifetime. Worldwide, up to fifty per cent of sexual assaults are committed against
young women and girls under the age of sixteen. Gender inequality and violence hamper countries’ efforts to
reduce poverty; health care, judicial, and social services must meet survivors’ needs, and perpetrators must be
punished.
Let me address one more issue which is important for establishing the rule of law: that of legal identity of
persons. Poor and marginalized groups, including those displaced in humanitarian emergencies, are the most
likely to lack access to basic forms of identification. They are therefore less likely to have their rights respected,
receive basic services, or be able to open a bank account or register a business.
In this regard, UNICEF is undertaking a global campaign to support countries to strengthen birth registration
systems and ensure the issuance of free birth certificates for every child. UNDP’s complementary efforts have
included supporting 9,000 school age children in the Dominican Republic to obtain birth certificates, and raising
community awareness of the rights and entitlements which flow from securing legal identity. The High-level
Panel recommended that states provide free and universal legal identity, so that citizens can access and enjoy a
range benefits to which that entitles them.
From Global Dialogue to Renewed Agenda
Since the Millennium Declaration of 2000, understanding of the relationship between the rule of law and
development has come a long way, raising the prospect of a renewed global development agenda post-2015
incorporating elements related to the rule of law.
During this Global Dialogue on that agenda, you may wish to consider the High-Level Panel Report’s
suggestions on how to reflect the rule of law. Their proposals include:
 targeting a reduction in the number of violent deaths worldwide;
 targeting decreased violence against women and children;
 increasing the proportion of justice institutions which are accessible, independent, and wellresourced; and
 providing all people with a free legal identity, to help them claim their rights, settle disputes, and
register businesses.
40
41
Gathered here today are leading practitioners and experts on the rule of law from around the world. As a
group, you are well placed to consider how universal goals relating to the rule of law can be advanced and
measured in specific countries and contexts. As you explore targets and indicators, consider also how progress
can be tracked across all social groups and in the poorest and most insecure places in the world. Specific
research gaps and capacity development needs also.
I hope that the outcomes of this Dialogue can be of assistance in advancing the rule of law within countries and
as a priority for the post-2015 agenda.
41
42
Panel: From MDGs to Post-2015: Rule of Law and Development
Ms. Amina Mohammed, the Secretary‐General's Special Adviser on Post‐2015 Development
Planning
Talking Points for the Panel on “From MDGs to Post-2015: Rule of Law and Development”

Highlight that well-functioning justice institutions and a government bound by the rule of law are
critical to building peace and consolidating development gains.

Acknowledge that the rule of law has significant impact on development and functions as:
o A facilitator of equity, inclusion and social justice
o An enabler of sustainable economic growth and poverty reduction
o A means to prevent and mitigate violent crime and conflict as an enabler of peace and
security
o A vehicle to strengthen accountability and checks in power
o A mechanism to support sustainable environment and natural resource management

Recognize that rule of law and justice, in the particular context of the post-2015 development agenda,
can be understood as
o A key outcome of development
o And enabling condition for development
o A process through which other development outcomes are achieved

Issues related to the rule of law have or will feature in all important discussions underway as part of
the process defining the post-2015 development agenda.

The September report of the Secretary General specifically highlighted the need to build peace and
effective governance based on the rule of law and sound institutions in the transformative and
mutually reinforcing actions that will be required to advance the United Nations development agenda
beyond 2015.

Emphasize that lasting peace and sustainable development cannot be fully realized without respect for
human rights and the rule of law. Legal empowerment, access to justice and an independent judiciary
and universal legal identification are critical for gaining access to public services.

Going forward, highlight that Rule of Law will be discussed by the Open Working Group on the SDGs at
its eighth session in February 2014. This will be an opportunity to ensure its proper inclusion in the
Post-2015 development agenda.
42
43
Ms. Irene Khan, the Director-General of the International Development Law Organization
Statement of the International Development Law Organization
September 26, 2013
New York
Check against delivery
I am very pleased to be invited to participate in this event, as IDLO is the only inter-governmental organization
exclusively devoted to furthering the rule of law. We value greatly our partnership with the UN and UNDP.
We work in some of the poorest and dangerous parts of the world, and the lesson we have learnt is that you
cannot fight poverty, you cannot promote sustainable development without the rule of law. Whether
preserving peace or protecting the planet, eradicating poverty or encouraging economic opportunity, we
require good laws and regulations that are fairly administered by transparent and accountable institutions, and
that produce fair outcomes - for this generation and the next. If people are to feel safe, their lives must be safe,
their rights must be safe and their livelihoods must be assured.
If we define poverty not in terms of US dollars but in terms of the lived experience of poor people, we will find
that it is about deprivation and discrimination, exclusion and insecurity, it is about powerlessness and lack of
voice. To address any of those problems, we need the rule of law.
That is why I am so pleased to see such strong support for the rule of law in the post-2015 development
discussions. Of course there are many issues still to be resolved, choices to be made, much discussion and
negotiations ahead of us: about stand-alone goals, cross cutting issues, metrics for measurement; strategies for
financing. Leaving those discussions to those who know them best here in New York, let me focus on four
points from IDLO's experience on the ground on how to make the rule of law work for development.
Point 1: Let's make sure it is rule of law, not rule by law.
Laws do not by themselves provide justice. Laws can be a barrier to economic opportunity, for instance when
they stop people in rural areas from moving to cities to find jobs. Or laws can be an enabler of small enterprise,
for instance when they provide alternate forms of dispute resolution. Laws can facilitate participation or
restrict it.
The poor need the rule of law to ensure fair access to natural resources and basic services. For instance, good
public health laws can enhance access to health services. People may need to get a license to run a small
business or to protect land tenure. One of IDLO's most successful programs has been about helping people
living with HIV use legal services to access health care in a range of countries from Papua New Guinea to Egypt.
Water is the source of life, but millions of people do not get clean drinking water. I have been to Kibera, the
world's largest slum, in Nairobi, and I have seen water pipes run through the slum to supply clean water to the
richer neighbourhoods surrounding Kibera - but the people of Kibera themselves have no access to that water.
Laws can regulate this. One of IDLO's projects looked at how a better regulatory structure could help women
living in the slums of Delhi to access clean water.
The poor need the rule of law to fight discrimination. The law can prohibit discrimination and promote equality.
But let us not forget that the law itself can be discriminatory, for instance when it prevents women from having
the same rights as men to hold land or property, to marry or divorce.
Legal identity is often key to accessing services and resources. Yet in many places there are no rules on birth
registration or residence permits or even citizenship. In Myanmar, IDLO is working with UNHCR on a project
looking at issues of statelessness and citizenship, because when people are stateless they are deprived of many
rights.
The poor need the rule of law to protect them from violence, to access justice when they are victims of
violence. Insecurity is a driver of poverty - in many different ways. The poorest countries are also the most
conflict prone - no post-conflict country has achieved a single MDG. Poor neighborhoods are also the ones that
have the highest crime rates and least likely to be policed well. Instead of protecting poor people, the police
often treat them as criminals. Being poor can expose you to more insecurity, from gender-based violence to
43
44
gang violence to police brutality and harsh sentencing. Ask the poor and they will tell you why they fear the
law, rather than seek its protection.
That is why it is important to stress that what we are talking about is the equal protection of the law, respect
for human rights, equity and fairness. It is important to understand that we are talking about the rule of law,
and not rule by law.
Point 2: for the rule of law to work, institutions must be accountable, responsive and locally owned.
Impunity or selective enforcement of the law is a driver of inequality. When the wealthy and well-connected
both make the law and choose to evade the law, they undermine development. When tax fraud is ignored but
slum evictions are rigorously enforced, the poor and the powerless find that not only is the law not in their
favor, but it is often harshly and selectively applied against them.
Corruption and bribery distort access not only to essential services and resources but also often to justice itself.
Willy Mutunga, the Chief of Justice of Kenya, who has embarked on an extensive reform of the judiciary in
Kenya, once said to me that this is a common adage in his country: "Why hire a lawyer when you can buy a
judge?"
Transparency is the best antidote to corruption and mismanagement. The challenge is to ensure that the
institutions are effective, transparent and accountable, especially those that are meant to protect citizens from
abuse and violence, such as the police and the courts. If people do not have confidence in the rule of law, then
development efforts will be jeopardized.
We have been engaged in Afghanistan for the past decade, working with the judiciary, the Attorney General's
office, the Ministry of Justice, the bar association and legal aid providers to build the institutions of justice. This
is not easy to do in post-conflict societies, where the political framework is weak and security overall is fragile.
Technology can help, for instance in Kyrgyzstan we are working to computerize the case management system,
so that there can be proper record-keeping and people can see justice being done.
But technology and training only go so far. What matters at the end of the day is the end-user focus of
institutions, i.e. the focus on those who are accessing institutions. In other words, are people able to access
justice? If they cannot access justice, they won't be able to protect their assets or themselves.
It is about making institutions relevant for those who are meant to use them. In Afghanistan IDLO has been
working to establish gender prosecution units in the Attorney General's office that are able to help fight gender
violence. But that in itself is not enough. We have had to focus also on supporting local NGOs to provide legal
aid and counselling, shelter, training and jobs to rehabilitate the women. Justice, like development, has to be
holistic to be truly effective.
Justice has to be affordable and accessible. That is why most poor people in the world turn to informal justice
systems. Yet those systems have not received as much attention or assistance as they need. This is not to turn a
blind eye to the fact that many informal and customary systems of justice have flaws: especially when it comes
to women, they are often biased. But many people do use them because they are familiar, easy to access and
inexpensive, and because formal justice systems do not always deliver justice, are also flawed, remote and out
of the reach of many ordinary people. Development theory and practice have shown time and again that locally
owned solutions produce the best outcomes. When it comes to justice, we need to look at locally owned
informal systems. But because we are talking about the rule of law - about justice and accountability - it will be
important to engage with these systems to make them accessible and fair for everyone, especially women.
Point 3: for institutions to work, people must be empowered.
Like other actors in the rule of law sector, IDLO is largely in the business of legal and constitutional reform,
institution-building, judicial capacity development. But we also work with civil society, especially legal
communities. And it has been our experience that institutions work best when there is an empowered citizenry
to hold them to account. As in the case of economics, so too in the case of justice. Supply - the institutions respond best when there is demand from people. Top-down efforts to reform institutions, train judges and
police and improve the capacity of justice institutions are important, but by themselves they can be subverted
to serve the interests of the powerful.
44
45
Good laws, fairly administered, can transform societies - but what else has to happen to make institutions work
for people? People must be empowered to claim their rights and engage with institutions that set and
administer the laws - a bottom-up effort to arm those who are marginalized and discriminated with knowledge,
so that they effectively engage official institutions.
Experience shows that legal empowerment approaches, including such activities as legal education, legal aid
services, paralegals, and rights awareness, can be important enablers of equitable development outcomes. We
have worked in this area for many years, our research shows clearly that there is a correlation between legal
empowerment, good governance and positive development outcomes.
Such ‘legal empowerment approaches’ share a core concept: using the law to enable less advantaged groups to
access justice and realize basic rights.
Legal empowerment is not only about litigation - it is about the different ways in which the poor, marginalized,
the discriminated can claim their rights It is deeply concerned with good governance.
Point 4: Measure the quality of justice, not the efficiency of institutions.
Measurement has become the mantra of development, the most important legacy of the MDGs. How
important is it to advancing the rule of law? What should we measure and how should we measure it?
There are over 100 systems of measurement, including some highly sophisticated ones, sponsored by
multilateral actors such as the World Bank or non-governmental initiatives such as The World Justice Project.
But if we look more closely at them, we will find that there are enormous challenges. There are technical
difficulties. Data is patchy, difficult to collect and even more difficult to compare. Legal cultures vary
enormously across countries. All these difficulties are multiplied a thousand-fold in countries torn by conflict
and insecurity, or struggling to establish democratic and legal institutions.
There are also political difficulties. Measuring justice means opening the governance system to external
scrutiny, it means involving civil society, it means taking a close look at issues of accountability and power: not
easy for any society but particularly sensitive in post-conflict states with fragile institutions.
We usually tend to measure the performance of institutions in terms of efficiency of services. We measure
transparency and accountability: are institutions operating transparently and with integrity, and are they
accountable to rules and standards of conduct? We measure capacity: do institutions have the human and
material resources necessary to perform their functions, and the administrative and management capacity, to
deploy these resources effectively? Most judicial systems track the volume of cases passing through the
system; the speed of decision making and the kinds of decisions courts make.
What we don't measure is who uses the justice system, what impact court decisions have on their lives. How
easy is it for women, the poor, disenfranchised, discriminated against, underprivileged, and marginalized to
access justice? When they do get a hearing, do they also receive a fair outcome? Do these decisions mean they
now have access to water or health care? Does it mean they cannot be evicted from their homes? That is a
measure of justice, but it is also an enabler of development. When the rule of law works, development is not
far behind.
To conclude: I hope the post-2015 agenda will go beyond law and rules and will look at principles and values,
that it will look at fair process but also at fair outcomes, that it will demand both the accountability of states
and the empowerment of citizens. The rule of law is about effective institutions, empowered citizens and
equitable and inclusive development. It is about creating a culture of justice.
The International Development Law Organization (IDLO) enables governments and empowers people to reform
laws and strengthen institutions to promote peace, justice, sustainable development and economic opportunity.
45
46
Panel: Integrating the Rule of Law in the Post-2015 Development Agenda
H.E. Dr. Christian Friis Bach, Minister of Development Cooperation, Denmark
Ladies and gentlemen, excellencies. This time last year, the UN held its first High-level meeting exclusively
devoted to the rule of Law. The Declaration from the High-level on the rule of law meeting affirms the
interrelationship between the rule of law and the three main pillars of the United Nations: Peace & Security,
Development and Human Rights.
International consensus is emerging on the importance of rule of law. It is reflected in the Report of the Highlevel Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda. And it is reflected in the MGD Outcome Document adopted
yesterday. The outcome document calls for a coherent approach to the post-2015 development agenda,
including the promotion of peace and security, democratic governance, the rule of law, gender equality and
human rights for all. This is a landmark document.
Rule of law is a comprehensive concept. It is strongly interlinked with obligations of States to respect and
promote international human rights. States must provide legal protection for all without discrimination.
Transparency and equality before the law are key in this regard.
Rule of law is the foundation on which prosperous societies are built. It means adhering to fundamental human
rights as a basis for the social contract between citizens and the state. Nothing better underpins that social
contract. Nothing better builds public trust. Nothing better than efficient, incorrupt and reliable public
institutions.
Denmark applies a human rights-based approach to development. We use human rights as core values in our
partnerships and use the principles of non-discrimination, participation, transparency and accountability in all
phases of our development cooperation.
The Danish strategy for development cooperation recognises the importance of ensuring that women, children
and vulnerable groups have unhindered and equal access to justice, decision making, resources and
opportunities.
Rule of law is engrained in the human rights-based approach to development. It is a powerful means to address
inequality and redistribution of economic, social and political influence and opportunities. And it is a
precondition for creating a level playing field and for preventing and addressing conflict.
I would like today to highlight two areas, where the integration of rule of law is of paramount importance
The first example is the case of gender equality and rights of women and girls. Without good governance and
institutions that guarantee the rule of law, women and girls – and others who are discriminated against. It is
well-known that the most equal countries are also the most prosperous. Rule of law based societies are more
resilient to gender inequality and discrimination. Rule of law ensures that women and girls have unhindered
and equal access to justice, decision making, resources and opportunities.
Not only do societies develop faster, they also develop better, if women achieve full and equal political
participation and have equal rights to inheritance and ownership as well as access to justice.
The 2012 World Bank report on Gender Equality and Development highlighted that productivity will be raised if
women’s skills and talents are used more fully. If women farmers were to have the same access as men to
fertilizers and other inputs, maize inputs would increase by almost 17% in Malawi and Ghana. In addition,
elimination of barriers that discriminate against women in certain sectors or occupations could increase labour
productivity by as much as 25% in some countries.
My second example is the case of peace and stability. It is estimated that by 2015, about 50 % of the extremely
poor will live in conflict-affected and fragile states. If we want to eradicate extreme poverty in a generation, we
need to address the particular challenges of fragile and conflict-affected states. People in these countries
46
47
experience the greatest hardship in the form of deprivation of basic human rights, lack of security and
widespread poverty.
Establishing or re-establishing rule of law and justice is a crucial element of increasing security and
strengthening the respect for human rights and in building the capacity of the state.
Denmark supports the New Deal for engagement in fragile and conflict-affected states. The intention is to
enhance the capacity of the state to deliver public services to its peoples, including security, stronger human
rights and sustainable economic development.
Recently, Somalia obtained strong support to its New Deal Compact that builds exactly on the peace and statebuilding goals. The compact is a social contract between the government and its people and between the
government of Somalia and the international community. It recognizes that security and justice go hand in
hand, and that rule-of-law and judicial reform is critical to respond to people’s need for justice and protection.
It promotes accountable and accessible institutions that provide stability and security, but also schools and
clinics. This is essential in building the trust of the Somali citizens – all in accordance with Rule of Law.
Many more cases could be made to illustrate the importance of rule of law. On economic growth, on
management of natural resources such as water, on access to justice and public services such as education for
girls and on peace and state building in fragile states.
Denmark believes that there is a need to further elaborate how rule of law and human rights can create an
enabling environment to meet global challenges of sustainable development.
This meeting as well as the High Level Panel report, the UNSG report and the outcome document from the
MDG Special Event form a strong basis for this discussion on how to integrate rule of law and human rights into
a post-2015 development agenda.
Ladies and gentlemen, Excellencies. We look forward to the work ahead.
47
48
H.E. Sidiki Kaba, Minister of Justice, Senegal
ALLOCUTION - DE S. E. M. SIDIKI KABA, GARDE DES SCEAUX, Ministre de LA JUSTICE
A L’OCCASION DU DEBAT DE HAUT NIVEAU SUR LE THEME : « L’ETAT DE DROIT ET L’AGENDA POST
2015 », New York, le 26 Septembre 2013
Monsieur le Secrétaire général adjoint,
Madame l’Administrateur du Programme des Nations unies pour le Développement (PNUD)
Mesdames et messieurs les Ministres,
Excellences,
Mesdames et messieurs
Permettez-moi avant tout de dire ma satisfaction de prendre part à cette importante rencontre sur le thème de
« l’état de droit et le programme de développement post 2015» dont l’examen nous permettra, sans nul doute,
de prendre la pleine mesure de l’interaction entre développement et primauté du droit.
Je voudrais également féliciter le Programme des Nations unies pour le Développement pour la judicieuse
initiative d’organiser cette discussion de haut niveau sur une question d’une grande actualité.
Ce débat est d’autant plus opportun qu’il se tient à un moment crucial coïncidant avec l’approche de
l’échéance des Objectifs du Millénaire pour le Développement (OMD) et les réflexions sur le programme de
développement pour l’après 2015.
Le lancement en 2000 des Objectifs du Millénaire pour le Développement avait suscité un grand enthousiasme
et espoir à travers le monde. Certes depuis lors des progrès indéniables ont été réalisés dans l’atteinte de ces
objectifs, cependant, il a été unanimement reconnu que tous les OMD n’ont pas été atteints, que la pauvreté
continue de sévir dans le monde, que beaucoup de populations n’ont toujours pas accès à la santé, à
l’éducation etc.
Ainsi, les expériences et leçons tirées de la mise en œuvre des OMD doivent servir dans le cadre des réflexions
pour le déploiement d’un nouveau programme de développement.
Sous cet angle, il est nécessaire de mettre en place une approche holistique à même de prendre en compte
tous les aspects d’un bon processus de développement. Parmi ceux-là, figurent en bonne place la promotion
des principes de l’état de droit, de la démocratie, de la bonne gouvernance, des droits de l’homme, la lutte
contre la corruption, la concussion etc.
Les liens entre état de droit et développement sont établis depuis fort longtemps. Les deux concepts sont
fortement interdépendants et se renforcent mutuellement.
L’une des preuves éloquentes de cette corrélation est, sans nul doute, la situation préoccupante que
traversent certains pays, dans lesquels l’absence de l’état de droit, l’instabilité politique et l’insécurité
hypothèquent tous les efforts consentis pour asseoir les bases d’un développement durable.
En vérité, dans les situations de corruption, d’absence de démocratie et de non-respect de la primauté du droit,
des droits de l’homme, il s’avère difficile de créer les conditions favorables à l’instauration d’une bonne
gouvernance économique et politique susceptible d’enrayer les germes du sous-développement qui peut
souvent engendrer une instabilité politique et sociale dont les conséquences peuvent être dramatiques.
De même, la promotion de l’état de droit aux niveaux national et international est indispensable à une
croissance économique durable et inclusive, au développement durable, à l’élimination de la pauvreté et de la
faim et à la pleine réalisation de tous les droits de l’homme et de toutes les libertés fondamentales qui
renforcent à leur tour l’État de droit.
Ainsi, en perspective du programme de développement post 2015, la problématique de la promotion de l’état
de droit aux niveaux national et international, qui est au cœur de la mission de l’Organisation des Nations Unies
doit, assurément, mobiliser tous nos efforts si nous voulons réaliser le noble objectif d’un monde de paix, de
justice et prospérité où la dignité humaine est dument préservée.
48
49
Du respect de la primauté du droit, dépend fondamentalement l’émergence de la démocratie, la consolidation
de la bonne gouvernance et l’éclosion des droits de l’homme, qui, en plus d’être des impératifs se renforçant
les uns les autres, constituent également des exigences pour toutes les sociétés du monde.
En conséquence, un programme de développement pertinent à l’échelle mondiale devrait nécessairement
inclure des aspects aussi fondamentaux que la primauté du droit et la sécurité. De ce point de vue, nous osons
espérer que le Plan de développement pour l’après 2015 réservera une place de choix aux questions à liées
l’état de droit, à la paix, à la prévention et à la résolution pacifique des conflits.
A cet égard, nous encourageons les Nations Unies à continuer à appuyer les efforts des pays membres pour la
promotion de l’état de droit au niveau interne.
Cet appui, par le biais notamment d’un renforcement des capacités des Etats, en particulier, les pays en
développement, a le mérite de leur faciliter une mise en œuvre réelle des principes de l’état de droit en vue de
favoriser l’émergence des conditions à une paix durable, indispensable au développement économique et
social.
Ainsi, le Plan d’action, à l’échelle mondiale, que les Nations unies envisagent de mettre en place, contribuera
sans nul doute à favoriser une synergie et une interaction entre les différents acteurs de la communauté
internationale, en vue de la promotion et de l’instauration effective de l’état de droit aux niveaux national et
international. Toutefois, un tel Plan d’action devrait, pour être efficace, se montrer harmonieux, inclusif,
cohérent et prendre en compte les préoccupations de tous les Etats membres et parties prenantes. Il devrait
également prendre en considération le cas particulier des pays en situation conflit ou d’après conflit.
En effet, en période de conflit ou d’après conflit, la consolidation et l’application des principes de l’état de droit
est une tâche essentielle et nécessaire à la reprise d’une paix durable et à un retour des activités économiques
et sociales normales.
De ce fait, les pays en conflit ou qui en sortent, sont en général dans un état de dénuement total aussi bien au
niveau des institutions que des ressources vitales. Cet état de fait annihile souvent leurs efforts pour restaurer
l’état de droit.
La fourniture de l’aide et de l’assistance internationales à ces pays pour remettre sur pied les administrations et
les systèmes judiciaires nationaux, entre autres, s’avèrent donc indispensables.
Pour conclure, je voudrais, réaffirmer l’engagement du Sénégal à œuvrer en faveur du renforcement de l’état
de droit, à la réussite des OMD. Nous avons bon espoir que les réflexions en cours déboucheront, pour l’après
2015, sur un programme de développement pertinent qui sortira enfin le monde de la pauvreté.
Je vous remercie de votre aimable attention.
49
50
H.E. Cevdet Yılmaz, Minister of Development, Turkey
SPEECH BY H.E. CEVDET YILMAZ, MINISTER OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY, AT THE
GLOBAL DIALOGUE ON RULE OF LAW AND THE POST-2015 AGENDA, 26 SEPTEMBER 2013
Excellencies,
Distinguished guests,
We gathered today on the occasion of a very important event with the objective of exchanging views on the
integration of Rule of Law to the Post-2015 Development Agenda.
I would like to express my sincere thanks to my distinguished colleagues, to distinguished participants
representing public sector, NGOs, universities and international organizations, to distinguished professionals
from legal and law enforcement sectors, and to the United Nations Development Programme for the
organization of this event.
It is a great privilege for me to co-host this Global Dialogue focusing on developing strategies to incorporate the
rule of law to the post-2015 development agenda and on that basis, on discussing how this integration can be
done at the technical level.
The United Nations Millennium Declaration, which was adopted in 2000, makes several references to the
concept of the rule of law. However, it is not easy to determine universal measurable indicators for the rule of
law. Therefore, the Millennium Development Goals derived from the Millennium Declaration refers to the rule
of law and justice indirectly. In this regard, I believe that the rule of law should set the basis for the new
globally-agreed development goals.
There are several definitions of the rule of law. We can briefly describe it as the supremacy of formerly agreed
principles in settlement of disputes, over persons or bodies. It is the dominance of a virtue: virtue of Justice.
We should take the “thick” definition of the Rule of Law concept instead of its “thin” definition as it is a
comprehensive approach beyond improvement of technical infrastructure in the justice services sector. It
includes the principles of democracy; equity; social inclusion; and accountability. It is also beyond national
borders and it incorporates the recognition of internationally agreed norms and standards.
Rule of Law is also a core element for the economic and social development of nations and for the well-being of
human-beings. Thus, all development policies should be consistent with this essential principle of Justice.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We all know that designing development policies is not as easy as it sounds. Development is a multi-layer
complex issue, and taking the Rule of Law into account at all levels will facilitate the job of decision makers.
The maintenance of peace should be dealt with at the base level. Today, fragile and conflict-affected countries
have extreme difficulties on achieving the MDGs. In this regard, equity and social inclusion are key elements. In
addition, effective law enforcement systems against violence are necessary to sustain a peaceful environment.
Turkey is in a region where fragility and conflicts continue, in this respect Turkey is closer to feel the sufferings
caused by political instability. Today in Syria and in Egypt the most fundamental human right, the right to life is
not secure. Turkey welcomed over 400 thousand people from Syria which seek shelter, and we accepted them
as our guests.
On behalf of Turkish Government, I’d like to express that, as a country which has deeply rooted historical,
cultural, social ties with Middle Eastern and North African countries, we support the establishment of lasting
peace and stability in the geography that we share, and needless to say, throughout the world.
If we seek for peace throughout the world, the humanitarian approach should take place at the center of both
development and development cooperation policies. At this point, besides countries, international
organizations have responsibilities to fulfill their duties in the name of peacekeeping.
Democracy and good governance are other basic requirements for achieving sustainable growth and inclusive
development. The inclusiveness of development depends on governance at national level through the medium
50
51
of representatives. Therefore, adoption of free elections and participatory decision making processes in which
all parts of a society are included have crucial importance.
Social development and economic development are two main pillars that take place on top of the layers of
peace and democracy.
Social development, at its core, means empowerment of individuals, without granting any privilege to anyone.
This empowerment starts with meeting the basic needs of people, such as food, water, hygiene; and reaches to
creating an environment in which all individuals can express themselves freely. In a population, levels of access
to education, health and decent jobs are the concrete indicators of the level of rule of law. These capabilities
are the rights of people instead of privileges.
In this context, I also would like to highlight the importance of two issues. First one is the engagement of
women and young people in all aspects of life. Inclusion of women in education, work life and decision making
processes are measured by the relevant indicators regarding the MDGs, and this can be enriched by fostering
the indicators that are much more relevant to young people. Second one is “equal access to information”. The
internet provides us an excellent opportunity. Usage of information and communication technologies in
education is an option to be considered for fair access to education.
Distinguished participants,
In recent years, the world faced a major financial crisis that affected both developed countries and the
developing. Both on global and national scales, the way out from the global crisis is in ensuring political and
economic stability and confidence, which are directly related to the application of the principles of rule of law.
Support of free market systems and minimum and regulatory intervention of states in economy are key factors
for achieving sustainable economic development. In this regard, promotion of competitiveness and fair trade
will result in stronger and more inclusive economies. This aim requires offering equal opportunities to people
and providing fair distribution of income. Poor people and vulnerable groups should also benefit from the
economic growth of a country.
Excellencies,
We have an excellent tool that can be used in promoting the integration of the Rule of Law with development:
global partnerships. In development cooperation, “tied aids” are discouraged as they are to the disadvantage
of beneficiary countries. However, if there is going to be a condition on development cooperation, I believe, it
should be the degree of adoption of the Rule of Law in the beneficiary countries. The Research of Burnside and
Dollar shows that the correlation between aid and development is only significant, where good governance
exists in the beneficiary countries. In this context, global partnerships are great opportunities for the
promotion of the Rule of Law on a global scale.
Distinguished guests,
The vision of an understanding that justice and development are complementary to each other, resulted in
becoming the 16th largest economy for Turkey. On behalf of the Government of Turkey, I would like to
underline that we have overcome many issues regarding the rule of law in the last 10 years. We continue an
open-ended reform process that is also relevant to the accession negotiations with the EU. On the other hand,
we are determined to continue the reform process even if the EU negotiation process slows down in future.
Our primary aim for now is reforming the Constitution by participation and approval of our citizens.
It is important to keep in mind that both at national and international levels, all parties –including legislative,
executive and juridical powers, civil society and international organizations, have responsibilities for the
adoption and implementation of the rule of law for a better future for all.
Thank you.
51
52
Mr. Roberto Dondisch, Director General for Global Affairs, Secretary of Foreign Affairs
(On behalf of H.E. José Antonio Meade Kuribreña, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs of Mexico)
52
53
Annex VIII –Presentations
Deval Desai, Research Associate, School of Oriental and African Studies
The presentation aimed to briefly and informally discuss some of the research from the background paper.
Four main points: 1) Framing ROL, 2) ROL and trade-offs, 3) ROL and evidence/data, 4)ROL and indicators
1. Framing the rule of law
ROL is complex. UN has adopted a clear definition, which has a great deal of political weight behind it. Irene
Khan and Minister Yilmaz showed us the complexity of ROL in practice. We saw ROL talked about as a set of
principles such as accountability; institutions such as the police; outcomes such as improved fairness. We heard
ROL talked about as an outcome of development in itself; as an enabling condition for the very idea of
development to happen (Rep. of Mexico referred to it as “necessary but not sufficient condition”); and as a
process by which other development can happen – like the role of law in getting access to basic services. It’s
also important to note the fundamental importance of tempering our definitions with the lived experiences of
people: we might want to build access to courts but we have to confront the deep suspicion in which they
might be held by much of the population and the ways in which they might value institutions that go beyond
the formal state such as customary law.
Three points about this:
1) While this adds complexity, it also reflects the importance of ROL: it is so discussed because it reflects the
deep importance to human existence and flourishing of rules, laws and norms. It is a concept that resonates
across borders and boundaries while reflecting a diverse set of perspectives rooted in societies’ culture, history,
politics, institutions and conceptions of justice.
2) The importance of context. If the rule of law is deeply rooted in society it is important to consider it in the
real world – how it exists in the eyes of end-users
3) To take a very broad view of ROL, at least to begin with, so as not to let importance facets drop out of view.
Drawing from all of the above, we might start by saying that in the context of the post‐2015 agenda, the rule of
law is (1) a system of rules and norms that is a feature of social and political life; (2) a social and political reality
that exists according to different values; and (3) a process and outcome that operates at multiple levels and
cuts across sectors of development.
To avoid getting too broad, and to avoid discussions over the next few days getting bogged down in cycles of
definitional back-and-forth, I might suggest one way of framing the discussion.
As post—2015 focuses on development outcomes, we thought it made sense to think about ROL in terms of its
development functions. We must bear in mind the linkages between this system of rules and norms, and
development outcomes. ROL cuts across development; at the same time the intrinsic value of ROL to
development is/can be part of this. So if we’re translating, say, HLP goals into targets and indicators, we might
use these functions to develop a clear story of how the goals, targets and indicators link to development
change.
Functions we outline, as a start to the discussion, are
 Enabling economic development,
 Citizenship and social and economic justice.
 Preventing, mitigating and deterring conflict, crime and violence
 Strengthening accountability and checks on power, and reducing corruption
 Enhancing the fair allocation of services
 Protecting the environment and natural resources
2. ROL and choices
This notion of ROL stresses the importance of local context: ROL as social and political reality for particular
people in their times and places.
53
54
What does that mean?
Local context might mean taking informal justice systems seriously. Or it might mean deciding to do the
opposite in contexts where those institutions marginalize and exploit.
Context might mean taking law seriously as a tool to enable local service delivery and redistribution. But it
might also mean using law to support private property rights.
Point is context brings into focus the trade-offs and tensions inherent in the rule of law, or the ways in which
rules govern society. Unlike a facet of development defined by a series of individual‐level outcomes, like
maternal or child health, the rule of law is a social and political reality that varies significantly by context.
And what that means is the exercise of discussing indicators is not a technical statement but a strongly political
process around those trade-offs. We should keep in mind that our discussions are a story of “the world we
want”
3. ROL and evidence
Even though it’s a highly political process, we don’t always get the clearest guidance from the evidence base.
Chains of cause and effect are unclear despite decades of ROL reform work. On economic development, for
example, there is still some dispute over whether property rights spur growth or vice versa. On social and
economic justice, it seems that ROL interventions such as rights awareness may struggle on their own and
often need to go hand in hand with community mobilization.
In part this is because there is lots of different types of evidence, from quantitative studies to qualitative
surveys to legal cases to anecdotes from projects. Again, we take this as a positive: the range of disciplines ROL
cuts across suggests just how broad its value is.
And as a result, different types of evidence tell us different things about different facets of ROL: legal cases
might tell us about the evolution of rules in legal institutions; quantitative data might tell us about their impact
on quantifiable goods like income; qualitative data might give us a sense of lived experiences of those rules,
and so on.
It’s important that we remember that the choice of data isn’t just a question of the most effective way to
measure. The sorts of data we collect say as much about our views on ROL as our choice of targets and
indicators. Excluding qualitative data excludes some dimensions of ROL, as would excluding types of
quantitative data.
Whatever our disciplinary backgrounds, it might be helpful to consider ourselves mixed methods people over
the next few days.

Worth noting the idea that data collection and better grounds for analysis might also be
an outcome of post-2015
4. ROL and indicators
Realistic and measurable, while aspirational (HLP)
Specifically for ROL, we have seen three main issues emerge from our history of ROL work and work with
indicators, including MDGs – people-centered problem-solving; realism; and context:


Re people-centered problem-solving, in order to know people’s needs and problems,
policy makers and donors need to commit to building, articulating and listening to the
voices of the poor and of national‐level policy makers.
Re realism, change is not linear and time horizons are long. Define clear and measurable
concepts, rooted in the evidence for particular pathways between the rule of law and
development.
54
55

Re context, they should engage with the contextual basis of change and avoid simply
transplanting models from elsewhere. Importance of negotiating the national and local
political context
 On the other hand, may want to retain some sense of aspiration and not slide
into what is easy to measure
Putting these ideas into practice, these might be some of our challenges for the next two days.

The range of measurement approaches have varying conceptions and methodologies,
ranging from measures of institutional performance and compliance with international
norms, to surveys of user experience and perception, to broad indices and “baskets” of
indicators that aim to aggregate various concepts.

Each of these approaches carries particular trade‐offs, including between specificity and
breadth of context; universal application and context specificity; sensitivity of
measurement and comprehensiveness; as well as in regards to considerations like cost,
reliability, and measurement.

This implies we should take seriously the experience from the MDGs, the G7+ process and
others about national-level indicator development, which our colleagues from Albania and
elsewhere might be able to tell us more about. Think about where it might be helpful, and
how the international community might support it.

The design of targets and indicators should also consider the particular incentives they
create and the risk of unintended consequences of focusing on a particular concept or
indicator.
Within this context, we offer three frames for goals – not mutually exclusive - that might help guide our
discussions. These were developed pre-HLP, but we think it still helps us thing about the operation of goals
such as the HLPs and how we translate them:

Define a common rule of law goal with a flexible basket of indicators that can be tailored to country
contexts.
 A rule of law goal would signal the importance of the rule of law as an outcome of development on par
with other outcomes such as poverty reduction and health, though it would require consensus on a
particular function of the rule of law for development.

Adopt the rule of law as a high level “enabling” goal, which would commit countries to make national‐
level policy changes that enable progress on other development goals. This approach recognizes that the
rule of law is not just an end in itself, but that it also enables a broader range of development outcomes.
 The enabling goal would focus on a specific element or function of the rule of law that, according
to empirical evidence, facilitates other aspects of the new development framework.
 These would entail concrete, measurable commitments to adopt national‐level legal or policy
changes.
 These commitments would focus on a national rule of law system as a distinct object of policy
change.
 But they would also be designed to enable achievement of goals in other sectors.
 For example, to fulfill an enabling goal related to expanding access to information, countries
might commit to such policy changes within ROL institutions as adopting freedom of information
laws, improving performance of law enforcement, or expanding access to paralegal services.
 These targets would also be designed to enable progress on other goals such as healthcare
delivery.

Incorporate the rule of law across development goals, through rule of law-specific targets and indicators
in support of other goals. This approach highlights the importance of the rule of law across development,
without defining it as a desirable end in itself.
This is where our research stopped; but what’s interesting and also worth mentioning is one of UNODC’s
framings – a parallel process alongside post-2015 that enables shadow reporting, technical cooperation
amongst development agencies, and so on.
55
56
Luigi De Martino, Coordinator, the Geneva Declaration Secretariat
More Armed Violence, Less Development
September 26, 2013
WHAT IS ARMED VIOLENCE?
“Armed violence is the intentional use of force (actual or threatened) with arms or explosives, against a person,
group, community, or state, that undermines people-centered security and sustainable development”
Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development
AN INTEGRATED APPROACH TO LETHAL VIOLENCE
Direct conflict deaths: death as a result of armed conflicts, political violence, and terrorism – 55,000 deaths per
year (10.4%)
Unintentional homicides: deaths as a result of ‘accidental’ killings – 54,000 deaths per year (10.2%)
Intentional homicides: deaths as a result of inter-personal violence, gang violence, economically motivated
crime – 396,000 deaths per year (75.3%)
Victims of legal interventions: violent deaths of civilians by law enforcement and state security forces during
legal interventions – 21,000 deaths per year (4.1%)
AN ESTIMATED 526,000 PEOPLE DIE VIOLENTLY EVERY YEAR ...
90% OF THE VICTIMS DIE IN ‘NON CONFLICT’ SETTINGS
COUNTRIES WITH AVERAGE ANNUAL VIOLENT DEATH RATES OF MORE THAN 30 PER 100,000 POPULATION
2004–09
 El Salvador
 Iraq
 Jamaica
 Honduras
 Colombia
 Venezula
 Guatemala
 South Africa
 Sri Lanka
 Lesotho
 Central African Republic
 Sudan
 Belize
 Democratic Republic of Congo
Femicide: a specific form of violence
Male Victims of Violence – 330,000
Female Victims of Violence – 66,000
ARMED VIOLENCE IMPOSES A HEAVY BURDEN ON SOCIETIES (Source: OECD 2011)



Human Cost – 526,000 lives are lost as the direct result of armed violence each year
Higher Law and Order Expenditure – Developing countries spend 10-15% of their GDP on law
enforcement (compared to 5% in developed countries).
Economic Damage – Conflict reduces GDP by around 2% per year. The average cost of a civil war is
approximately USD 65 billion. The global cost of homicidal violence is USD 95-160 billion each year.
56
57

Slower MDG Acheivement – Many conflicts occur in fragile states. Few low-income fragile or conflictaffected countries are likely to acheve the MDGs. High violence areas in middle-income countries
often have pockets of exclusion from basic services like health, safety, and education.
LEVELS OF LETHAL VIOLENCE AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT (1986-2009)




Low Human Development Countries (24 Countries) – 3 – Very High Homicide Rates; 12 – High
Homicide Rates; 9 – Low Homicide Rates
Middle Human Development Countries (75 Countries) – 11– Very High Homicide Rates; 21 – High
Homicide Rates; 43 – Low Homicide Rates
High Human Development Countries (45 Countries) – 4– Very High Homicide Rates; 15 – High
Homicide Rates; 26– Low Homicide Rates
Very High Human Development Countries (38 Countries) –1 – High Homicide Rates; 37– Low Homicide
Rates
How Violence Disrupts Development - The gap in poverty is widening between countries affected by violence
and others; Weak rule of law is associated with higher levels of violence
KEY MESSAGES


Armed violence is a development disabler; it is complex, messy, dangerous, and difficult to deal with
Something can be done. The post-2015 development agenda represents an opportunity for
highlighting the issue of violence reduction as a global priority.
57
58
Dr. Mark Orkin, University of the Witwatersrand
Dr. Mark Orkin, presented on his background paper which was an empirical exploration of the manner and
extent to which the rule of law (RoL) predicts development, focussing on using two well‐established indexes.
RoL is conceived by the World Justice Project (WJP) to have eight components, of which four may be taken as
core to RoL (limited government powers, regulatory performance, civil justice, and criminal justice), and four
may be taken as cognate, in that they are equally well regarded as aspects of good governance (absence of
corruption, order and security, fundamental rights and open government). Development is measured by the
UNDP’s Human Development Index, which compounds measures of education, life expectancy and gross
national income.
The overall finding of the statistical exploration is that the components of rule of law, differentiated as above
but operating in conjunction, powerfully predict development. The particular findings are fourfold:
a)
Of the core components of RoL, limited government powers and regulatory performance are the most
proximate in relation to development;
b) The respective relationships are subtle. Regulatory powers does not have a direct effect on HDI, but
rather via the cognate component of absence of corruption. And limited government powers is
unexpectedly found to have an negative direct correlation with HDI, but its overall impact on HDI is
nevertheless positive because it has a larger indirect positive effect on HDI via the cognate RoL
components of fundamental rights and transparency;
c)
The other two core components of RoL appear to function more as corollaries: civil justice is
supported by regulatory performance; and criminal justice is supported by absence of corruption, and
in turn supports order and security. The latter may thus be viewed as an additional outcome of RoL.
d) The measurable indicators for each component are prioritised in the context of these linkages to
development. Their overall number may be reduced without diminishing the force of the model.
58
59
Mr. Gilbert Tendai Mungate, Sub-Chief Domboshava area, Mashonaland and Shorai Chitongo, Ray
of Hope, Zimbabwe
The Role of Traditional Justice Systems in Sustainable Human Development – with findings from the
Huairou Commission Study, “Our Justice, Our Leadership: Grassroots Women's Community Justice
Guide”
“Traditional leaders and traditional structures remain influential among a large majority of the population in
Zimbabwe, in both urban and rural areas. Traditional structures are the oldest in Africa—they are precolonial
and indigenous to us. To us they are not informal. Traditional leaders wield influence and command much
respect in their communities. Despite undeniable evidence that shows the linkages between peace, justice and
development traditional leaders' potential to actively participate in rule of law and justice activities and
projects to eliminate violence, end asset stripping, land grabbing and disinheritance, however, remains
untapped and our contribution unrecognized........We confront violence in all its forms including rape (we do
this with police)and those cultural norms, beliefs, and practices that increase violence within a community
including land and property right issues (we do this with grassroots women). Traditional leaders are also able
to enforce customary and constitutional laws in traditional courts. In addition to this, we have wide reach in
their communities through various traditional fora. Such opportunities can be used to inform community
members of the need for peace and development as a contribution to the post«2015 development agenda."
Mr. Gilbert
What are informal systems?
 Informality describes a wide variety of justice systems and dispute mechanisms at the community
level—both traditional and grassroots. (Lacks descriptive power)
 These “informal” justice systems may be indigenous and have existed since pre-colonial times
(customary systems) or they may be the dominant way communities access justice (customary and
grassroots systems).
Justice Issues in Domboshava area, Mashonaland, Zimbabwe:
 Asset stripping: land grabbing, disinheritance of property, cattle stealing
 Violence
 Corruption
 Slash and burn agriculture—illegal
The traditional system of Domboshava area, Mashonaland, Zimbabwe
1Chief 7 sub-chiefs(—2 new women sub-chiefs) Village Heads
Oversee: 350 households or 17,500 people
Jurisdiction: community level
Domboshava Justice System: Statuatory --- Traditional Leaders, Grassroots Womens Groups, Community
Participation, Partnership and Gender Equality are essential for sustainable development
 Traditional leaders partner with: grassroots women’s organizations, police unit, and statutory courts
and government agencies.
Ray of Hope—A case study from Mutasa, Zimbabwe
Beat Drums, Not Wives” Community has stopped domestic violence in one life time with the support of
traditional leaders
 Traditional leaders supported a process to make shifts in inheritance practices so that women gain
equally
 Grassroots women empowered traditional leaders to rule with gender justice on issues of asset
stripping, land grabbing and domestic violence
Where did grassroots women go to seek justice?
600 women went to Grassroots Mechanisms (women's organizations, watchdogs and paralegals)
Little less than 600 went to Traditional leaders
Just over 100 went to Statutory Court Systems
59
60
Rank order of where grassroots women found satisfaction
(*calculated by number of times mentioned in the top 2 of the 12 groups)
1. Traditional leaders
2. Grassroots mechanisms & traditional leaders
3. Grassroots mechanisms
4. Grassroots mechanisms & statutory
5. Statutory
28% of cases were reported to be resolved—so where are grassroots women finding justice? Where they
received a satisfactory outcome?
Grassroots Involvement
# of satisfactory results – 93 (57%)
appearance in top 2 rank of 12 groups – 16 (64%)
Without Grassroots Involvement
# of satisfactory results – 69 (43%)
appearance in top 2 rank of 12 groups – 9 (36%)
2:1 times more likely for grassroots women to have found satisfaction with the outcome of their land dispute
when they used a grassroots mechanism or a grassroots mechanism combined with either traditional leader or
statutory mechanism.
Recommendations
1. Governments and development practitioners need to provide grassroots women community
practitioners with enabling environments, i.e. (1) technical support; (2) space to convene regular
meetings; and (3) partnerships with diverse stakeholders.
2. Governments and development practitioners need to affirm using a gender and context specific lens
in discussions around women and justice at community levels
3. Post 2015 could learn from the Zimbabwean example of constitutional development if it is serious
about closing the gaps remaining in MDG 1 and 3 (poverty eradication and gender equality and
women’s empowerment) and working towards ensuring access to justice for the poor.
Implementing Partners of the Study
1. Action for Women and Awakening in Rural Environment (AWARE)—Uganda
2. Grassroots Sisterhood Foundation (GSF)—Ghana
3. GROOTS Kenya—Kenya
4. KATUBA Women’s Association—Zambia
5. Maasai Women Development Organisation (MWEDO)— Tanzania
6. Ntankah Village Women Common Initiative Group—Cameroon
7. Ntengwe for Community Devlopment—Zimbabwe
8. Ray of Hope Zimbabwe—Zimbabwe
9. Seke Rural Home-based Care and Hospice--Zimbabwe
10. Slum Women’s Initiative for Development (SWID)—Uganda
11. Uganda Community Based Association for Women and Children’s Welfare (UCOBAC)—Uganda
12. Zimbabwean Parents of Handicapped Children (ZPHCA)— Zimbabwe
60
61
ANNEX IX - Background Paper: Overview on the Rule of Law and
Sustainable Development for the Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and
the Post-2015 Development Agenda
Louis-Alexandre Berg and Deval Desai12
Draft, August 2013
Executive Summary
This paper lays out a framework for discussions on the role of the rule of law in the post-2015 agenda. It
summarizes the evidence base for the relationship between the rule of law and development, highlights
lessons from rule of law development programming and the experience of the MDGs, and points to options for
how the rule of law might be incorporated into the post-2015 development agenda.
The paper emphasizes three themes. First, it recognizes the general commitment among policymakers to the
importance of the rule of law to development. The deliberations to flesh out the post-2015 agenda provide a
unique opportunity to translate this commitment to the rule of law into action. Second, it highlights the
importance of context and specificity. The rule of law is a concept that resonates across borders and
boundaries while reflecting a diverse set of perspectives rooted in societies’ culture, history, politics,
institutions and conceptions of justice. Third, it describes the multi-faceted, cross-disciplinary, and sometimes
contested nature of the evidence base, and emphasizes the importance of understanding the particular
pathways between the rule of law and development. Efforts to define commitments, targets and indicators
should clarify the particular pathways they are trying to promote while building on and strengthening the
existing evidence base.
The starting point for incorporating the rule of law into the post-2015 agenda should be an understanding of
the nature of the rule of law and its relationship to development. We take an inclusive view of the rule of law,
which incorporates a diversity of perspectives while recognizing international norms. The rule of law is a system
of rules and norms, a set of institutions, and an outcome of development, and a feature of the processes that
cut across sectors to enable development to advance. At the same time, specific functions of the rule of law
and its relationship to development are increasingly recognized. Drawing on a wide range of empirical
literature and practical experience, the paper lays out core development functions of the rule of law, including:






Enabling economic development,
Citizenship and social and economic justice.
Preventing, mitigating and deterring conflict, crime and violence
Strengthening accountability and checks on power, and reducing corruption
Enhancing the fair allocation of services
Protecting the environment and natural resources
Understanding these relationships, the specific pathways between the rule of law and development that each
implies, and the evidence base for each, is essential to crafting effective goals and targets. Development policy
should also consider the trade-offs and tensions among these various functions.
The post-2015 agenda should also take into consideration the history of rule of law development efforts as well
as the experience of the MDGs. While development actors have sought to promote the rule of law for at least
five decades, evidence of impact has been mixed. Several critiques have arisen to point out specific limitations
12
Georgetown and Harvard Law School respectively. Correspondence welcome at [email protected]. and
[email protected]. This overview represents a more detailed version of the findings of the Policy Brief for policy makers shaping
the Post-2015 development agenda, available at http://issuu.com/undp/docs/issue_brief_-_rule_of_law_and_the_post-2015_develo. It is
intended to complement the Policy Brief, providing a more detailed basis for discussions and consultations on the rule of law and
development in the context of the development of the post-2015 development goals. We are grateful to Shelley Inglis, Aparna Basnyat,
Rosie Wagner, and the paper’s internal and external peer reviewers for their assistance, comments and guidance.
61
62
and suggest alternative approaches. First, programs have tended to presume linear trajectories of change.
Second, they have not incorporated sufficiently long time horizons. Third, they have tended to transplant
models or goals from elsewhere without considering the contextual basis of change. Fourth, they have not
sufficiently supported in-country political coalitions to underpin the development of the rule of law.
In response to these concerns, development actors have moved toward evidence-based “problem-solving
approaches”. These approaches focus on the problems experienced by “end-users” of rule of law systems, and
examine rule of law challenges that cut across development sectors and outcomes. Building on these advances
in the rule of law field, we suggest that retaining some flexibility in defining goals, targets and indicators to
reflect the unique challenges of particular societies within broadly understood conceptions of the rule of law.
As a basis for goals and indicators for the rule of law in the post-2015 agenda, the paper reviews prior and
ongoing efforts to measure the rule of law. A crucial step in setting targets is defining clear and measurable
concepts, rooted in the evidence for particular pathways between the rule of law and development. The range
of measurement approaches have emphasized varying conceptions and methodologies, ranging from measures
of institutional performance and compliance with international norms, to surveys of user experience and
perception, to broad indices and “baskets” of indicators that aim to aggregate various concepts. Given the
multi-dimensional nature of the rule of law, each of these approaches carries particular trade-offs, including
between specificity and breadth of context; universal application and context specificity; sensitivity of
measurement and comprehensiveness; as well as in regards to considerations like cost, reliability, and
measurement. The design of targets and indicators should also consider the particular incentives they create
and the risk of unintended consequences of focusing on a particular concept or indicator.
With these lessons in mind, the post-2015 agenda provides a unique opportunity to build upon global political
commitments to the rule of law. The wide range of commitments - reflected in international policy documents,
conventions and resolutions of multilateral and regional organizations around the world - displays both the
broad resonance across countries of the importance of the rule of law to development and the varied
conceptions of and approaches to measuring countries’ adherence to the rule of law. The experience of the
MDG process also highlighted the importance of the rule of law, as several country reports emphasized the
importance of elements of the rule of law to achieving objectives. During the post-2015 process, civil society
actors have advocated for rule of law goals and indicators, and recent consultations have emphasized its
importance on issues ranging from personal security to governance.
Three general approaches to incorporating the rule of law into the post-2015 development agenda could be
considered. These approaches are not mutually exclusive and could be adopted in concert:

Define a common rule of law goal with a flexible basket of indicators that can be tailored to country
contexts. A rule of law goal would signal the importance of the rule of law as an outcome of
development on par with other outcomes such as poverty reduction and health, though it would
require consensus on a particular function of the rule of law for development.

Adopt the rule of law as a high level “enabling” goal, which would commit countries to make
national-level policy changes that enable progress on other development goals. This approach
recognizes that the rule of law is not just an end in itself, but that it also enables a broader range of
development outcomes.

Incorporate the rule of law across development goals, through rule of law specific targets and
indicators in support of other goals. This approach highlights the importance of the rule of law across
development, without defining it as a desirable end in itself.
62
63
Introduction
This paper lays out a framework for discussions about the rule of law in the post-2015 agenda. It is structured
around three themes. The first is the increasing recognition among policymakers of the importance of the rule
of law to development. This is particularly true in the context of the post-2015 world. The rule of law has
shaped development processes through the operation of laws, regulation and enforcement; enabled conditions
and capacities necessary to development outcomes; and remained a core development end in itself. Although
it was not addressed explicitly as part of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the importance of the
rule of law to achieving the Goals is mentioned across several MDG country reports. UN Member States have
recently renewed their commitment to the strengthening the rule of law as a basis for development, notably in
the 2012 UN General Assembly High Level Meeting on the Rule of Law and the Rio +20 Conference.
Commitments to the rule of law and protection of rights also emerged from the recent Panama and
13
Johannesburg consultations on personal security and democratic governance in the post-2015 agenda; and
14
global civil society actors have called for rule of law goals and/or indicators. The forthcoming deliberations to
flesh out the post-2015 agenda provide a unique opportunity to translate this commitment to the rule of law
into action.
The second theme is the importance of context and specificity. The concept of the rule of law resonates across
borders and boundaries, and societies have developed shared understandings of the value of the rule of law to
development. At the same time, developing and developed countries have adopted a diverse set of
perspectives and approaches to the rule of law that reflect their culture, history, politics, institutions and
conceptions of justice. It is understood both as an outcome and a feature of development processes, a broad
principle as well as a set of institutions, and it is laden with varying social and political values. The balance
between universality of goals and specificity to context should be reflected in approaches to promoting the rule
of law through the post-2015 agenda.
The third theme is the multi-faceted nature of the evidence base. The evidence base cuts across disciplines –
from law to economics to anthropology – revealing the cross-cutting importance of the rule of law to a wide
range of development outcomes. The rule of law has been linked to broad economic growth, to social justice,
to enhancing safety and security, to public and private accountability, and to enhancing the fair allocation of
services by governments. Each of these linkages is based on a particular set of causal pathways that point to
varying policy options for promoting the rule of law as a basis for development. The evidence base for some of
these relationships is also contested, in part due to the multi-faceted nature of the evidence, the varied
disciplines in which it is rooted, and paucity of reliable data on core elements of the rule of law. Emphasizing
the lessons from practical experiences alongside empirical research, we aim to present the most robust
evidence available, pointing out areas in which the evidence is strong, and others where further analysis and
better data are needed.
As a basis for discussions about how the rule of law might be incorporated into the post-2015 development
framework, this overview scans the literature on law and development; justice reform and rule of law
promotion; as well as economic, political science and anthropology literature on the linkages between the rule
of law and development, drawing out themes and possible directions. While we refer to relevant allied fields,
such as security sector reform, transitional justice, human rights, and sustainable development, we do not
claim to treat them comprehensively. Furthermore, we focus on national, rather than international “rule of
15
law” (such as the operation of treaty bodies), although we engage with links where appropriate.
Based on this literature, we find an emerging body of evidence that points to specific linkages between the rule
of law and development that can provide a foundation for incorporating the rule of law into the post-2015
development framework. We highlight the range of principles, concepts and commitments that comprise the
rule of law, along with the variety of pathways that link the rule of law to development. Efforts to define
commitments, targets and indicators should sort through this range of pathways while building on and
strengthening the existing evidence base. We do not recommend any particular concept or target in this
overview, nor do we develop one single narrative. Rather, we aim to clarify the range of different options and
13
http://www.worldwewant2015.org/conflict and http://www.worldwewant2015.org/governance
http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/pub/policy_brief._looking_beyond_2015_a_role_for_governance and
http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/projects/justice-and-development
15
As indicated in the Secretary General’s recent report on the rule of law: A/66/749 at para 35 et seq
14
63
64
approaches. We also emphasize the importance of embedding targets and indicators deeply in local contexts,
and prioritizing national and local perspectives through a problem-solving approach.
We are mindful in drafting this overview of the need for humility and care, and we do so based on lessons
learned from the MDG process. As the UN Task Team on the post-2015 agenda states: “Several of the goals and
targets related to the global partnership for development were defined rather imprecisely, thereby weakening
accountability for the promised international support for the implementation of the MDG framework. Many of
16
the commitments made by the international community have remained unfulfilled.” Our approach is to avoid
prescriptivism and rather to try and frame current discussions and offer some guidance on potential ways
forward after 2015.
This overview thus aims to help structure discussions by (1) clarifying the relationship between the rule of law
and development; (2) summarizing the lessons of rule of law development efforts and the experience of the
MDGs; and (3) pointing to options for how the rule of law might be incorporated into the post-2015
development agenda.
What Is the Rule of Law?
At its core, the rule of law is a means of ordering society – including the state-citizen relationship. It includes
systems of rules and regulations, the norms that infuse them, and the means of adjudicating and enforcing
them. While older policy conceptions of the rule of law in development emphasized security and property
rights, a broader understanding opens up space for new thinking about the rule of law in the context of the
post-2015 agenda.
The substance of values, rules and their application vary deeply across cultures and contexts, and evolve in
response to political and social forces including development and globalization. Some of the elements that
infuse the concept include:

Concepts from political philosophy with a multiplicity of definitions including: a system of rules
(sometimes “rule by law”); norms such as equality before the law; just process, just outcomes; and
equal access.

International human rights norms. The rule of law can be infused with human rights norms; for the
U.N. and many development agencies, the rule of law is inherently consistent with international
human rights standards.

Complex relationship with “justice”: “justice” is often used in relation to the rule of law. Within the
same philosophical tradition of the “rule of law” as discussed in this overview (i.e. one dominated by
philosophy from the Global North), it has been taken – from all sides of the political spectrum - to
17
mean the norms that infuse a rule of law system; the outcome of the way in which society, economy
The rule of law varies deeply across cultures and contexts
“So actually looking at the [state] court, they only focus on the nature of your complaint and care less
to know what transpired in the past. So in short, the court does not satisfy the both parties when cases
are resolved by them. But for our traditional people they look at the nature of the case and also dig out
the past to know what happened, and based upon that they peacefully resolved the matter. And at the
climax the both parties leave with smile.” - Male adult in Nimba, Liberia.
Source: Deborah Isser, Steven Lubkemann and Saah N’Tow (2009), “Looking for Justice: Liberian
Experiences with and Perceptions of Local Justice Options,” Peaceworks No. 63, United States Institute
of Peace.
16
UN System Task Team on the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda, 2012. “Realizing the Future We Want for All: Report to the SecretaryGeneral”, at 7.
17
Aristotle (2012), Nichomachean Ethics (trans. Bartlett, R. and Collins, S.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press ; Rawls, J. (1999), A Theory
of Justice (revised edn.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
64
65
18
19
and/or a political system is ordered; and/or a series of institutions that maintain the “rule of law”.
At the same time, in enforcing particular norms of justice in a given society, the rule of law determines
varying forms of recognition among groups and individuals, public participation, individual and group
20
agency, human and physical security, and the distribution of resources and public services.

Geographical and cultural variance in definitions. A variety of institutions and normative commitments
are relevant. For example, while kastom or customary law are important in parts of Melanesia; in
Saudi Arabia, “[t]he legal system rejects qanun [‘code’ or ‘statute’] entirely, refusing to codify even its
basic civil laws. It uses the term ‘nizam’, or regulation, for the limited number of man-made laws it
21
does have.”
Deductively, the rule of law is of fundamental importance to development outcomes: the rule of law expresses
and enables a society’s conception of social and economic justice, and more specifically attitudes to extreme
poverty and deprivation. It frames wealth, resource and power (re)distribution.
Yet no rule is without substance. Many writers on the rule of law distinguish between “thin” (i.e. concerned
22
with the form of law and equal application), and “thick” (i.e. fair or just substantive content) rule of law.
23
However, all conceptions express some form of allocation of goods or social values. Principles of legal
certainty, for example, might prioritize the existing distribution of land over redistribution efforts, or might
24
impact community usufruct rights.
As a result, how ROL is defined is a highly political choice, as the different values and norms it espouses result in
different interpretations of what is and is not the legitimate exercise of power by public and private actors.
Thus, unlike a facet of development defined by a series of individual-level outcomes, like maternal or child
health, the rule of law is a multi-dimensional social and political reality that varies significantly by context.
The complexity of ROL means policy understandings of the rule of law are also varied. Depending on the actor
or institution, the rule of law has been viewed as:

An outcome of development. For instance, the World Bank writes that “‘a lack of access to justice is
25
itself a central dimension of poverty.” In this sense, it is a normatively described legal and political
26
order, a state of human security, and an outcome of justice. It is also an enabling condition for
development, for instance in establishing the basic social order and security required for other
development activities to proceed. It is also a process through which other development outcomes
are achieved, that determines which decisions are made, rules are adopted and enforced, and
27
grievances and disputes are resolved.
18
Rousseau, J-J. (ed. Gourevitch, V.) (1997), The Social Contract and other later political writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
Posner, E. (2002), Law and Social Norms. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; Posner, R. (1983), The Economics of Justice. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press; Sen, A. 2009. The Idea of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; Sandel, M (1998), Liberalism and
the Limits of Justice. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press; Dworkin, R. (1986), Law’s Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press;
Nozick, R. (1974), Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.
19
Montesquieu, C. (2011), The Spirit of Laws (trans. Nugent, T.). New York: Cosimo
20
See, for example, Fraser, N. (1995), “From Redistribution to Recognition? Dilemmas of Justice in a ‘Post-Socialist’ Age”, 212 (July-August)
New Left Review I 68.
21
Vogel, F.E., 2000. “The Rule of Law in Saudi Arabia,” in Cotran, E., and Yamani, M. (eds.) The Rule of Law in the Middle East and the
Islamic World: Human Rights and the Judicial Process. London and New York: I.B. Tauris and Co., at 129.
22
See, for a summary, Trebilcock, M.J. and Daniels, R.J., 2008. Rule of law reform and development: charting the fragile path of progress.
Northampton: Edward Elgar.
23
Kennedy, D. 1991. “The Stakes of Law, or Hale and Foucault!” 15 Legal Studies Forum 327.
24
World Bank (2010), Wan Lis, Fulap Stori: Leasing on Epi Island, Vanuatu. Washington, D.C.: World Bank
25
World Bank (2012), New Directions in Justice Reform, http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/09/06/000386194_20120906024506/Rendered/PDF/706400REPL
ACEM0Justice0Reform0Final.pdf, at 1.
26
Sen, A., 2000. ‘What is the Role of Legal and Judicial Reform in the Development Process?’ In: World Bank Legal Review Vol 2.
Washington, D.C.: World Bank
27
Santos, A., 2006. ‘The World Bank’s use of the ‘Rule of Law’ promise in economic development’. In: D.M. Trubek and A. Santos, eds.,
2006. The new law and economic development: a critical appraisal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
65
66

Principle of governance, or political order, regulating and framing the use of public and private power.
The UN Secretary General (UNSG) defines it as a “principle of governance in which all persons,
institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are
publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with
international human rights norms and standards. It requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to
the principles of supremacy of law, equality before the law, accountability to the law, fairness in the
application of the law, separation of powers, participation in decision- making, legal certainty,
28
avoidance of arbitrariness and procedural and legal transparency.” UNDP incorporates a similar view
of rule of law and access to justice in its Democratic Governance pillar. In this context, the rule of law
contributes to sustainable human development as a system of regulation and justice. It governs the
use of power through the fair and equal upholding of rules and laws; it also focuses on the ability of
the poor and marginalized to seek redress of grievances and vindication of rights and claims through a
29
system of legal and social institutions.

A set of institutions. While the UNSG articulates a definition of ROL as a principle, Arbour mentions a
prevailing institutional view of the rule of law and development: it concerns state bodies that deal
with security, law and order and the resolution of disputes - the police, ministries of justice, prisons,
31
courts, prosecutors, etc. Others take a somewhat broader institutional view: the task of
development is to get right the state and non-state institutions and rules that regulate economic and
32
social activity. Clark adopts a principled institutionalist view, beginning with the principles
underpinning UNDP’s approach then shifting focus down to the national institutions which express or
impede these principles, discussing the judiciary, the police, security forces, and parliaments

International norms and standards: states have committed to international norms and standards,
including to the principles of the rule of law itself (see section on international commitments below).
During the 2012 UN General Assembly High Level Meeting on the Rule of Law, Member States
recognized that “there are common features founded on international norms and standards which are
33
reflected in a broad diversity of national experiences in the area of the rule of law.”
30
28
S/2004/616 at para 6.
See, e.g., http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/ourwork/democraticgovernance/focus_areas/focus_justice_law.html,
http://www.undp.org/content/dam/aplaws/publication/en/publications/democratic-governance/dg-publications-for-website/access-tojustice-practice-note/Justice_PN_En.pdf and http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/corporate/results/english/ResultsRuleOfLaw_9-25-12_E.pdf
30
Louise Arbour, “The Rule of Law”, New York Times, September 26, 2012, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/opinion/UN-generalassembly-on-the-rule-of-law.html; Louise Arbour, Statement to the High-level meeting of the 67th Session of the General Assembly on the
Rule of Law, 24 September 2012, at http://unrol.org/files/Statement_President_CEO-and-ICG.pdf
31
North, D., (1990) Institutions, Institutional Change and Performance. Cambridge University Press; North, D., Wallis, J. and Weingast, B.
(2009) Violence and Social Orders: A Conceptual Framework for Interpreting Recorded Human History. Cambridge University Press.
32
Helen Clark, ‘Rule of Law and Development: Times of Challenge and Opportunity’, Inaugural Distinguished Visitor Programme Speech,
College of Law, Qatar University, 6 December 2012, at
http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/speeches/2012/12/06/helen-clark-rule-of-law-and-development-times-ofchallenge-and-opportunity-/; Helen Clark, Speech at the High-level meeting of the 67th Session of the General Assembly on the Rule of Law,
24 September 2012, at http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/speeches/2012/09/24/helen-clark-67th-session-of-theun-general-assembly/; Helen Clark, “Development in Practice: Rule of Law, Transitional Justice, and Human Rights”, 2013 Hands Lecture, 1
May 2013, at http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/speeches/2013/05/01/helen-clark-2013-hands-lecture/ .
33
A/RES/67/1 at para 9 et seq
29
66
67
International commitments to the rule of law as a basis for development
“The advancement of the rule of law at the national and international levels is essential for sustained
and inclusive economic growth, sustainable development, the eradication of poverty and hunger and
the full realization of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to development,
all of which in turn reinforce the rule of law” - Declaration of the High-Level Meeting of the General
Assembly on the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels, 2012
“Democracy, good governance and the rule of law, at the national and international levels, as well as
an enabling environment, are essential for sustainable development, including sustained and inclusive
economic growth, social development, environmental protection and the eradication of poverty and
hunger.” - The Rio +20 Conference on Sustainable Development Outcome Document, 2012
The rule of law remains a multi-faceted concept. Drawing from all of the above, we can say that in the context
“The
rulepost-2015
of law isagenda,
not a mere
adornment
development;
it is aand
vitalnorms
source
of isprogress.
creates
of the
the rule
of law isto(1)
a system of rules
that
a featureIt of
social an
and
political life; in
(2)which
a social
reality
that exists
according
different
values;
and (3)can
a process
and–
environment
theand
fullpolitical
spectrum
of human
creativity
canto
flourish,
and
prosperity
be built.”
outcome that operates at multiple levels and cuts across sectors of development. Many have highlighted the
UN Commission on Legal
34 Empowerment of the Poor Final Report, 2008.
plethora of definitions. We treat it as an “essentially-contested concept”: that is, incapable of being pinned
35
down in the abstract.
As a result, we suggest that our understanding of the rule of law with respect to the post-2015 agenda be
rooted in the functions and roles it plays in relation to development, as well as the lessons learned from the
history and evolution of rule of law reform. We address each of these in the following sections.
The Relationship between the Rule of Law and Development
The literature presents varying views and evidence of the development functions performed by the rule of law,
or the pathways through which the rule of law contributes to development. As UNDP Administrator Helen
Clarke has stated, the focus of development actors has been “ less on sources of the law” and “more on why
36
the rule of law is essential for achieving inclusive and sustainable development.” In this section we draw on
policy understandings of these pathways – from UNDP and elsewhere – and outline the varying strands of
theory, empirical evidence and lessons from experience that underpin them. We discuss what rule of law is in
relation to economic and social development and growth, rather than as an independent principle. We note
that ideas about this relationship have evolved and changed over time; several are still contested while
evidence for others is increasingly robust.
Enabling economic development, through a range of factors such as the protection of individual property rights;
37
guaranteeing fair and credible contract enforcement; setting and enforcing labour laws; facilitating market
34
Notably Tamanaha, B.Z., 2004. On the rule of law: history, politics, theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gallie W. B., 1956. ‘Essentially contested concepts’. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 56, pp. 167-98.; Waldron, J., 2008. ‘The
concept and the rule of law’. Georgia Law Review, 43(1), pp.1-61.
36
Helen Clark, ‘Rule of Law and Development: Times of Challenge and Opportunity’, Inaugural Distinguished Visitor Programme Speech,
College of Law, Qatar University, 6 December 2012, at
http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/speeches/2012/12/06/helen-clark-rule-of-law-and-development-times-ofchallenge-and-opportunity-/;
37
See Haggard, S. and Tiede, L. (2011), “The Rule of Law and Economic Growth: Where are We?”, 39 World Development 673 for an
overview of the literature.
35
67
68
creation and access, including for the poor and marginalized
39
rights or their legal capability to enter into contracts).
38
(for example, protecting women’s inheritance

In general, policy on the rule of law affects the rules of the game that allow people to transact. There
is strong evidence of a correlation between robust property rights protection and long-run economic
41
growth. On the other hand, it is not clear if property rights protection is an outcome of growth
42
rather than its cause. Moreover, while property rights are important, enforcement is a critical
43
variable that is often overlooked. Debates also cluster around the content of the regulation, the level
44
of enforcement and its effects on pro-poor growth. As regards labor laws, their frame the
relationship between labor and economic development. Finally, the impact of the role of market
45
creation and access has convincingly been asserted, but the evidence base is limited.

There is considerable evidence for the relationship between rule of law and economic development.
But elements of this relationship need to be further researched. It is not clear, for instance, exactly
why and how much the rule of law influences economic growth. For example, some countries and
sectors have grown as a result of an industrial policy of favorable treatment for certain companies,
46
while others have benefited from equal treatment under the law. In addition, while liberal
understandings of property rights, contract enforcement and so on have tended to be associated with
growth, they have significant distributional effects. In some cases, efforts to strengthen the rule of law
can be inequitable if they focus on lowering transaction costs for elites rather than facilitating
47
redistributive action or broader access to opportunities.
40
Citizenship and social and economic justice. The elements of the rule of law related to identity, legal
recognition, enabling participation and agency, and the allocation and enforcement of claims and rights –
including economic and social claims and rights – have been linked to equitable growth, equitable delivery of
public services, and the possibility of more effective redistribution.

Sen sees the rule of law as beginning with the capabilities of individuals and communities to
participate in defining what is just. Development interventions have sought to build these capabilities
– or a citizen’s agency and voice – across sectors. This cuts across all levels of a legal system, for
example from high-level rules (such as constitutions) that can facilitate recognition and participation,
to national and local administrative law regulating the delivery of basic services, to customary law
governing the allocation of natural resource rights.
38
See, for example, “business rights” in Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor (2008). Making the Law Work For Everyone:
Volume 1. New York: UNDP.
39
Mary Hallward-Driemeyer and Tazeen Hasan (2012). Empowering Women: Legal Rights and Economic Opportunities in Africa.
Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
40
North 1990; World Bank Justice Annex to Governance and Anti-Corruption Update (2012)
41
See for example, Knack and Keefer 1995, Scully 1988, Acemoglu et al 2001, Acemogly
42
Haggard, S., MacIntyre, A. and Tiede, L. (2008), “The Rule of Law and Economic Development”, 11 Annual Review of Political Science 205;
Haggard, S. and Tiede, L. (2011), “The Rule of Law and Economic Growth: Where are We?”, 39 World Development 673
43
Dam, K.W., 2006. The law-growth nexus: the rule of law and economic development. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Press.
44
See for example Botero, Juan, Simeon Djankov, Rafael La Porta, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, and Andrei Shleifer, 2004. “The Regulation of
Labor”, Quarterly Journal of Economics 119 (4): 1339-82; Alvaro Santos, Labor Flexibility, Legal Reform, and Economic Development, 50
Virginia Journal of International Law 43-106 (2009); Kennedy, David, 2006. ‘The ‘Rule of Law’, political choices and development common
sense’. In: D.M. Trubek and A. Santos, eds., 2006. The new law and economic development: a critical appraisal. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press; Faundez, Julio (2009). “Empowering Workers in the Informal Economy”, Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 1: 156–172;
Maiti, D., 2009. ‘Institutions, networks and industrialisation: field level evidence of fragmentation and flexibility from India’, IPPG
Discussion Paper, No. 26. Manchester: IPPG.
45
Stephens, M. (2009). “The Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor: An Opportunity Missed”, Hague Journal on the Rule of Law,
1, 132-157; Mahdi, S., 2010. ‘The impact of regulatory and institutional arrangements on agricultural markets and poverty: a case study of
Tanzania’s coffee market’, IPPG Discussion Paper, No. 40. Manchester: IPPG
46
Amsden, A.H., 2001. The rise of the rest: challenges to the West from late-industrializing
economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press; Pistor, K. and Wellons, P. (1999), The Role of Law and Legal Institutions in Asian Economic
Development, 1960-1995. New York: Oxford University Press; Trubek, D.M., 2008. ‘Developmental states and the legal order: towards a
new political economy of development and law’, University of Wisconsin Legal Studies Research Paper, No. 1075; Trubek, D.M., 2009. ‘The
political economy of the rule of law: the challenge of the new developmental state’. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 1(1), pp.28-32.
47
Son, Hyun and Kakwani, Nanak (2007) ‘Global estimates of pro-poor growth’ World Development 36 (6): 1048-1066; Holston, J., 1991.
‘The misrule of law: land and usurpation in Brazil.’ Comparative Studies in Society and History, 33(4), pp.695-725; Scott, J.C., 2009. The Art
of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia. New Haven: Yale University Press.
68
69
The rule of law, equity and inclusion
Legal institutions such as courts can play an important role in defining identity and thereby
guaranteeing equitable access to economic and social opportunities. In Karanja v. Karanja (1976), the
High Court of Kenya set a precedent by rejecting the argument that under Kikuyu customary law,
married women do not own property because they have no independent legal identity. The court
awarded the woman a third of the couple’s property in divorce proceedings. Source: Mary HallwardDriemeyer and Tazeen Hasan (2012). Empowering Women: Legal Rights and Economic Opportunities
in Africa.
Washington,
D.C.:
World
Bank.
 Access
to justice and
legal
empowerment
initiatives have proven to be valuable ways to do this. Legal
empowerment blends community empowerment and mobilization with legal capacity building and
advocacy to build the voice and political impact of the poor and marginalized. Access to legal
information and to institutions of the rule of law (loosely defined) may enable the poor to take
advantage of economic opportunities and resist exploitation, particularly by making local institutions
48
(such as customary courts or local magistrates courts) accessible.

The evidence that exists between specific legal empowerment initiatives and broader social and
economic outcomes – predominantly a series of detailed case studies but little comparative work - is
mixed. Where legal empowerment approaches have been correlated with more equitable
development outcomes, it is clear that social mobilization is an important factor if this approach is to
49
work. A controlled study in Bangladesh found that the incidence of illegal dowry payments dropped
in comparison to the control group following NGO-led legal education and mobilization
50
interventions. Yet a study of primary education in India found that informing the community of their
rights to push for change spurred little community activity and no improvement in education
51
outcomes. By contrast, the preliminary results from a land titling randomized control trial indicate
that an empowerment approach was more effective than the provision of court advocacy services at
promoting effective conversations among communities about land rights, spurring peaceful intra52
community conflict resolution over land and increasing community ownership of land reforms.

Studies emphasize the long, historical sociopolitical processes that have come to define citizenship
and identity; their impact on distribution of rights, resources and services; and the significant variation
53
in the possibilities of mobilization and collective action that are so important to this approach.
Preventing, mitigating and punishing conflict, crime and violence (including law and order). The link between
security, stability and development has been clearly established, as has the negative impact of the absence of
54
rule of law on growth. Civil wars are particularly devastating to development, and other forms of widespread
crime and violence divert the provision of public goods, destroy private property and infrastructure, and lead to
55
extortion, monopoly and other harmful practices.
48
Golub, S., 2010. ‘What is legal empowerment?: an introduction’, in Golub, S. (ed.), Legal empowerment: practitioners' perspectives.
Rome: International Development Law Organisation.
49
Gauri, V. and Brinks, D. eds., 2008. Courting social justice: judicial enforcement of social and economic rights in the developing world.
New York: Cambridge University Press;
50
Asian Development Bank, (2001), “Legal Empowerment: Advancing Good Governance and Poverty Reduction”, Appendix 2, at 135-49.
51
Banerjee, A., R. Banerji, E. Duflo, R. Glennerster and S. Khemani (2010) "Pitfalls of Participatory Programs: Evidence from a Randomized
Evaluation in Education in India." American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2(1): 1-30
52
Knight, R. et al (2012), Protecting Community Lands and Resources: Evidence from Liberia, Mozambique and Uganda. Rome and
Washington, D.C.: IDLO and Namati.
53
See, for a summary, Marc, A. et al (2012) Societal Dynamics and Fragility: Engaging Societies in Responding to Fragile Situations.
Washington, D.C.: World Bank; Gauri, V., Woolcock, M. and Desai, D. (2013) ‘Intersubjective Meaning and Collective Action in Developing
Societies: Theory, Evidence and Policy Implications', 48 Journal of Development Studies (forthcoming).
54
For a summary of the evidence, see The World Bank (2011) World Development Report: Conflict, Security and Development. Washington,
DC: The World Bank.
55
Collier P. (1999). ‘On the economic consequences of civil war’, Oxford Economic Papers 51:168–83; Buvinc, M., & Morrison, A. (1999).
Violence as an obstacle in development. Washington, DC: Inter American Development Bank; Ayres, R. (1998). Crime and violence as
development issues in Latin America and the Caribbean. Washington, DC: World Bank.
69
70

In addition to preventing economic development, violence and crime have a direct impact on social
56
development and wellbeing of citizens. This is often contrasted in the literature with the aspects of
the rule of law widely associated with the ability of states to ensure the human security of their
citizens, including both physical safety and fulfillment of basic needs. Recent analysis suggests that of
the various dimensions of the rule of law, the basic control of violence has the strongest correlation to
57
economic growth in developing countries.

Strengthening criminal justice institutions tends to be seen as an important step toward improving
security and enabling various forms of development, especially in the aftermath of violence conflict.
Nevertheless, studies have cautioned against an overemphasis on security (“securitization”) to the
58
detriment of other dimensions of the rule of law.
The rule of law and conflict, crime and violence
In perception surveys of six conflict-affected countries and territories, injustice,
inequality and corruption were cited as the leading drivers of violence. In Central
America, crime and violence were consistently cited as the top five constraints to
productivity and growth. According to local business owners, the high cost of crime acts
as a drag on competitiveness, reduces profit margins, and can make the difference in
whether a company survives or fails. In a 2008 survey of all Central American countries,
71% of the adult population said they view crime as a major threat to future well-being,
and more than 50% believed high crime rates would justify a military coup. Source:
World Bank (2011), World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security and
Development. Washington, DC: World Bank

56
In the context of civil conflict, Transitional Justice mechanisms – which deal with the legacy of war
crimes and abuses of authority by the prior regime – can affect the transition to greater stability and
59
development. Some development-relevant functions of transitional justice are (1) recognizing the
rights of victims, (2) building confidence that authorities intend to break with the past, and (3) re60
establishing state-society relationships. However the evidence for the impact of transitional justice
and other efforts to strengthen criminal justice institutions in the aftermath of war is highly limited
61
and very mixed. Some efforts have been criticized for focusing too much on high-level perpetrators
62
and ignoring the needs of victims or of the majority of citizens (such as socio-economic grievances).
Others have focused on re-building community level trust, and addressing the social and economic
needs of citizens whose lives have been disrupted by conflict.
Narayan D, Patel R, Schafft K, Rademacher A, Koch-Schulte S. 2000. Voices of the Poor. New
York: Oxford University Press
57
Haggard, S. and Tiede, L. (2011), “The Rule of Law and Economic Growth: Where are We?”, 39 World Development 673
58
See, for a summary, Harborne, B. and Sage, C., (2010), “Security and Justice Overview”, Background Paper prepared for the World
Development Report 2011, at
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTJUSFORPOOR/Resources/WDR_Background_Paper_Harborne_Sage.pdf. See, for a trenchant
example of this critique, Duffield, M. (2002) “Social reconstruction and the radicalization of development: aid as a relation of global liberal
governance”, 33 Development and Change 1049
59
Vinjamuri L, Snyder J. 2004. ‘Advocacy and scholarship in the study of international war crimes tribunals and transitional justice.’ Annual
Review of Political Science 7:345–62;
60
Teitel, Ruti. 2002. Transitional Justice. Oxford University Press; Mani, Rama. 2002. Beyond Retribution: Seeking Justice in the Shadow of
War. Cambridge: Polity Press; World Bank (2011), World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security and Development. Washington, DC:
World Bank; UNDP (2011), Strengthening the Rule of Law in Crisis-affected and Fragile Situations. New York: UNDP, at 18
61
Tiede, Lydia and Stephen Haggard. 2012. “The Revival of the Rule of Law in the Wake of Civil War,” 4 Hague Journal on the Rule of Law
120. Call, C (2007), “Conclusion” in Call, C. (ed.) Constructing Justice and Security After War. Washington, DC: United States Institute of
Peace Press.
62
Miller, Z. (2008), “Effects of Invisibility: In Search of the ‘Economic’ in Transitional Justice”, 2 International Journal of Transitional Justice
266.
70
71
Strengthening accountability and checks on power, and reducing corruption. The rule of law entails public and
private accountability in the exercise of power, and consistent and fair regulation and dispute resolution, in
63
national and local contexts.

Depending on a country’s constitutional and institutional setting, institutions that enforce and
adjudicate the law, such as judiciaries and regulatory agencies, may be in a position to check the
arbitrary action of government to varying degrees. This function of the rule of law shapes the meaning
64
of and possibilities for corruption, nepotism and rent-seeking, affecting costs for economic actors
and the nature of long run growth. The presence of institutional checks also affects the distribution of
65
rents and shapes the provision of public services and the quality of public infrastructure.
The
66
presence of such institutions has been correlated with investment and economic growth, and more
67
generally with more robust economic activity and higher tax revenues.

However some studies have distinguished between de facto and de jure checks on executive power.
Moreover, the direction of causation is contested: while rules and institutions matter, where they
come from and the reasons for which people follow them may be rooted in other factors that need to
be better understood, such as the nature of political coalitions and sources of authority. In other
69
words, legal institutions may be the result, rather than the cause, of agreed checks on power.
68
Enhancing the fair allocation of services by providing credible mechanisms for holding public and private actors
accountable and redressing grievances.

As such, the rule of law cuts across development endeavours: road building or the provision of primary
health care raises issues of the reallocation of rights, privileges, duties and powers. A legal system
frames these reallocations, adjudges their legitimacy, enforces them, and deals with the grievances of
70
those who lose out. It seems clear from the evidence that ROL is important to service delivery.
63
O’Donnell, Guillermo A. 2004. “Why the Rule of Law Matters,” Journal of Democracy 15(4); Weingast B. 1997. ;The political foundations of
democracy and the rule of law’. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 91(2):245–63; UNDP (2011), Strengthening the Rule of Law in Crisis-affected and Fragile
Situations. New York: UNDP, at 8, 11.
64
Hallward-Driemeier, M., Khun-Jush, G. and Pritchett, L., 2010. “Deals versus Rules: Policy Implementation Uncertainty and Why Firms
Hate It”, NBER Working Paper No. 16001
65
Bhagwati, J. (1982). ‘Directly unproductive profit-seeking (DUP) activities’. Journal of Political Economy, 90(51), 988; Poli Mauro P. 1998.
‘Corruption and the composition of government’. J. Public Econ. 68(88):263; Tanzi V, and Davoodi H. 1997. ‘Corruption, public investment
and growth’. IMF Working Paper Series WP/97/139.
66
Henisz, W. J. (2000). ;The institutional environment for economic growth’. Economic Politics, 12(1), 1; Helmke, G., & Rosenbluth, R.
(2009). “Regimes and the rule of law: Judicial independence in comparative perspective”. Annual Review of Political Science, 12, 345
67
Olson, M. (1993). ‘Dictatorship, democracy and development’, American Political Science Review, 87, 567; McGuire, M., & Olson, M.
(1996). ‘The economics of autocracy and majority rule: The invisible hand and the use of force’. Journal of Economic Literature, 34, 72;
Weingast, B. (1997), ‘The political foundations of democracy and the rule of law’, American Political Science Review, 91(2), 245.
68
Feld, L., & Voigt, S. (2003). ‘Economic growth and judicial independence: Cross-country evidence using a new set of indicators’, European
Journal of Political Economy, 19(3), 497
69
Upham, F. (2006). ‘Mythmaking in the rule-of-law orthodoxy’, in Carothers, T. (ed.), Promoting the rule of law abroad: in search of
knowledge. Washington, DC.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Stasavage, D. (2002). Private investment and political
institutions. Economics and Politics, 14, 41
70
Sage, C., Menzies, N. and Woolcock, M., 2009. ‘Taking the rule of the game seriously: mainstreaming justice in development The World
Bank’s Justice for the Poor Program’. In: IDLO Legal Empowerment working papers, No. 5. Rome: International Development Law
Organization; Sandel, M., 2007. Justice: A Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
71
72
The rule of law and equitable service delivery
In Brazil there have been over 100,000 court cases in the last decade that have enforced
the rights of individuals and groups to receive medical treatment.

Source: Varun Gauri (2011), “Redressing Grievances and Complaints Regarding Basic
Furthermore, a range of actors beyond the courts support service delivery through legal or quasi-legal
Service
World
Bank
Policy
Research
Working
Paper Series
5699
means.
In Delivery”,
India, a World
Bank
health
project
developed
a complaints
handling
mechanism sensitive to
the needs of a disadvantaged tribal community by placing staff members from a local tribal NGO in
71
health centers to assist in registering complaints and suggestions.
Protecting the environment and natural resources. The rule of law is important to any notion of sustainable
72
development: it enables the sustainable use of the environment by protecting environmental rights in
constitutions and legislation; enforcing regulations; requiring administrative protections such as environmental
impact assessments; and defining rules for natural resource exploitation and governance.

The rights of indigenous peoples to manage and share in the benefits of their land and natural
resources are a feature of the international legal regime and in some countries are incorporated into
73
national laws and policies with the establishment of protected areas.

The literature and evidence on natural resources and rule of law institutions is not very extensive :
75
resource sustainability has mainly been understood in terms of economic policy.

While the evidence base is limited, significant theoretical work and several case studies assert the
76
importance of this relationship in legal terms : for example, since 1962 more than 90 countries have
77
included a right to a healthy environment in their national constitution. Some countries have
developed this further, moving from constitutional provisions to subsidiary legislation and regulatory
or local government action. In this view, the rule of law becomes central to protecting natural
resources, to curbing illegal extraction, and to enforcing the fair allocation and distribution of
resources for sustainable development.
74
71
Dena Ringold, Alaka Holla, Margaret Koziol, Santhosh Srinivasan. 2011. Citizens and Service Delivery: Assessing the Use of Social
Accountability Approaches in Human Development. Washington, D.C.: World Bank
72
International IDEA and IDLO (2012), “Informal discussion on linkages between the rule of law, democracy and sustainable development”,
Concept Note, at http://www.idea.int/un/upload/Concept-Note-IDEA-IDLO-Italy-rev-5-0-Final.pdf
73
Anaya, S. and Williams Jr., R. 2001. “The Protection of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights over Lands and Natural Resources Under The InterAmerican Human Rights System.” 14 Harvard Human Rights Journal 33; Xanthaki, A. 2003. “Land Rights of Indigenous Peoples in South-East
Asia.” 4 Melbourne Journal of International Law 467.
74
Norman, C., 2009. “Rule of Law and the Resource Curse: Abundance Versus Intensity”, Environmental and Resource Economics, 43(2), pp.
183-207.
75
Collier P (2008), The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About It. New York: Oxford University
Press; World Bank (2010), The Changing Wealth of Nations: Measuring Sustainable Development in the New Millennium. Washington, D.C.:
World Bank. Desai, D. and Jarvis, M. (2012), ‘Governance and Accountability in Extractive Industries: Theory and Practice at the World
Bank’, 30 Journal of Energy and Natural Resources Law, 101 attempts to tell a rule of law and governance story.
76
Boyle, A. and Freestone, D (eds.) (2001), International Law and Sustainable Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press; Dasgupta,
S., Mody, A., Roy, S. and Wheeler, D. (2001) “Environmental Regulation and Development: A Cross-country Empirical Analysis”, 29 Oxford
Development Studies 173; Lehtonen, M. 2004. “The environmental–social interface of sustainable development: capabilities, social capital,
institutions”, 49 Ecological Economics, 199.
77
Law, D and Versteeg M (2012), “The Declining Influence of the United States Constitution”, 87 New York University Law Review 762, 7735
72
73
The rule of law and environmental protection
In the Philippines, the legislature –with UNDP support - produced specific rules of
procedure for environmental cases “with a view to protecting and advancing the
constitutional right of the people to health and to a balanced and healthful ecology,
and providing a simplified, speedy, and inexpensive procedure for the enforcement of
environmental rights under Philippines law.” Source: UNDP, at
http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/ourwork/democraticgovernance/projec
ts_and_initiatives/environmental-justice-philippines/
The relationships between ROL and development are more complex and multi-dimensional than any of these
functions alone suggest. ROL sits in complex terrain of political and social change allied to governance
78
reform, requiring some rethinking of what the rule of law is and what it is supposed to do for development.

The relationship between rule of law and development is complex, comprises multiple dimensions and
functions, and likely goes through multiple pathways over long periods of time. As a result, context matters
immensely.

Traditional ways of building the rule of law (i.e. a focus on strengthening certain state institutions with
explicitly judicial or legal functions) are of varying effectiveness when it comes to affecting ROL’s
development functions. Efforts that focus solely on these institutions may only have a limited impact on
equity and pro-poor growth. Although several studies have found strong correlation between ROL and
overall growth, one analysis found no association between ROL (based on the World Bank governance
79
indicators) and more equitable income distribution. This suggests more emphasis needs to be paid to
citizenship, social and economic justice, and the delivery of basic services when promoting the rule of law.

ROL may have broader effects on development than are currently understood, as ROL-related reforms
have significant political and social consequences. For example, transforming land rights protections to
formalize individual title might involve a change in social understandings of “community” property, which
80
could either exclude or expand women’s existing usufruct rights. In general, “buy-in” to reforms will in
part rest on the rule of law as a framework for the exercise of power, politics and thus collective action and
81
coalition-building.

ROL reforms must engage with the whole range of political and social rules and norms that constitute a
society, including informal legal systems that are relevant to billions of citizens. A state-centric mindset
82
often prompts donors to focus on formal systems. However, it is unhelpful to think of legal systems as
either “state” or “non-state”. Different systems operate with the backing of a range of actors: commercial
arbitration may be state-enforced, while customary or religious leaders may also be local government
83
officials. These systems are not inherently deficient: they do not always need to be remedied or put
78
Pistor, K. and Wellons, P. (1999), The Role of Law and Legal Institutions in Asian Economic Development, 1960-1995. New York: Oxford
University Press; Jayasuriya, K. (ed.) (1999), Law, Capitalism, and Power in Asia: The Rule of Law and Legal Institutions. New York:
Routledge; Khan, M. (2008) 'Governance and Development: The Perspective of Growth-Enhancing Governance', in ODI, Diversity and
Complementarity in Development Aid: East Asian Lessons for African Growth. Tokyo: GRIPS Development Forum/National Graduate
Institute for Policy Studies, pp. 107-152.
79
Son, Hyun and Kakwani, Nanak (2007) ‘Global estimates of pro-poor growth’ World Development 36 (6): 1048-1066.
80
World Bank (2010), Wan Lis, Fulap Stori: Leasing on Epi Island, Vanuatu. Washington, D.C.: World Bank
81
McGee, R. and J. Gaventa (2011) Shifting Power? Assessing the Impact of Transparency and Accountability, IDS Working Paper 383.
Brighton: Institute of Development Studies; Wild, L. and Bergh, G. (2012) “The relationship between democratic governance and MDG
achievement”, Overseas Development Institute (on file with authors).
82
Desai, D., Isser, D. and Woolcock, M. (2012), ‘Rethinking Justice Reform in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States: Lessons for Enhancing the
Capacity of Development Agencies’, 4 Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 54; Baker, B. (2010). “Linking state and non-state security and
justice.” Development Policy Review, 28(5), 597; Baker, B. & Scheye, E. (2009). “Access to Justice in a Post-conflict State: Donor supported
Multidimensional Peacekeeping in Southern Sudan.” International Peacekeeping 16 (2), 171.
83
Humphreys, S., 2011. Theatre of the rule of law: transnational legal intervention in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press; Tamanaha, B.Z., 2000. ‘A non-essentialist version of legal pluralism’. Journal of Law and Society, 27(2), pp.296-321; Tamanaha, B.Z.,
2008. ‘Understanding legal pluralism: past to present, local to global’. Sydney Law Review, 30, pp.375-411.
73
74
under direct state control. Indeed, formal court supervision of customary decisions may undermine the
84
legitimacy of customary courts. Some may raise human rights or political legitimacy concerns, but they
85
may also provide a form of ‘good enough’ governance and a safe space for dispute resolution, especially
when bolstered by the mobilization of existing social groups to apply social pressure for the desired
86
results.
As a result of this complexity, the rule of law entails numerous trade-offs, tensions and choices for policy
makers: In order for a policy maker to take a comprehensive view on ROL in the context of sustainable
development, he or she must think about the specific aspects of development to be achieved in the light of
several key choices, trade-offs and tensions. In the context of land titling, for example, there may be
compromises between generalized or context-specific rules and understandings of property, ownership and
inheritance, such as individual or community title; between actors, such as whether to focus on problems as
understood by the state, local communities, or individuals; and between institutions, such as how to engage
with non-state or informal institutions like customary title to land. No one policy option is ex ante the best: for
example, the entire universe of state and non-state institutions can be relevant to or distant from people’s
needs, trusted or illegitimate, costly or cheap.
Rule of law trade-offs
“This land ownership is the worst possible thing for livestock husbandry. Cropland can be
privatized and protected, OK. Livestock husbandry must certainly not be settled. The climactic
conditions are extremely difficult and changeable here. Therefore, pasture must be shared among
herders and used in common… it must be left as it is and has been for hundreds of years.” Mongolian pastoralist.
Source: Maria Fernandez-Gimenez and Batjav Batbuyan (2004), “Law and Disorder: Local
Implementation of Mongolia’s Land Law”, 35 Development and Change 141.
Understanding the various pathways through which the rule of law affects development can enable more
effective rule of law programming. It can broaden consensus around the functions where the evidence is
stronger; highlight those where more exploration and research are needed; and ultimately help to clarify tradeoffs and inform policy choices that can improve development outcomes.
The Evolution of Rule of Law Reform
We look to the evolution of policy and the lessons learned over several decades of development assistance to
understand how efforts to promote the rule of law as a basis for development have fared in practice. The
meaning of the rule of law, its relationship to development, and what rule of law reform looks like have all
been questions debated by policymakers and academics at least since the 1960s. This quick historical sketch
situates the discussions above in the context of rule of law and development policy. Some ideas from each of
the periods below remain relevant today.

Early development co-operation (1960s to 1974): driven by foreign aid agencies and American legal
academics. Attempted to recreate American legal education (and some institutional reform) in
84
Isser, D., 2012. “The problem with problematizing legal pluralism: lessons from the field”, in Tamanaha, B., Sage, C. and Woolcock, M.
(eds.), Legal Pluralism and Development: Scholars and Practitioners in Dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Sage, C. and
Woolcock, M., 2012. “Introduction: Legal Pluralism and Development Policy - Scholars and Practitioners in Dialogue”, in Tamanaha, B.,
Sage, C. and Woolcock, M. (eds.), Legal Pluralism and Development: Scholars and Practitioners in Dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
85
Adler, D. and Woolcock, M., 2010. ‘Justice without the rule of law? The challenge of rights- based industrial relations in contemporary
Cambodia’. In: C. Fenwick and T. Novitz, Human rights at work: perspectives on law and regulation. Oxford: Hart Publishing
86
Khan, M (2009) 'Is "Good Governance" an Appropriate Model for Governance Reforms? The Relevance of East Asia for Developing
Muslim Countries’, in: Springborg, Robert, (ed.), Development Models in Muslim Contexts: Chinese, "Islamic" and Neo-Liberal
Alternatives. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; Khan, M. (2008) 'Governance and Development: The Perspective of Growth-Enhancing
Governance', in ODI, Diversity and Complementarity in Development Aid: East Asian Lessons for African Growth. Tokyo: GRIPS Development
Forum/National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, pp. 107-152.
74
75
developing countries to transmit liberal values to a new generation of legal elites, who would then go
on to make law and social policy. Criticised as being decontextualized and unaware of the political and
87
institutional reality of the recipient countries.

Scepticism (1974 – 1990): Retreat from much law and legal institutional reform work with the
exception of the UN agencies. As deregulation and structural adjustment became primary
development tools, institutions and governance were not prioritized (although former colonial powers
continued to engage with the legal systems of former colonies, for example by building law schools
88
and strengthening legal education ).

Revival (1990-1999):
o Emergence of institutions as objects of reform and the idea that the “rules of the game” by
which people led their economic and social lives mattered to development. Incorporation of
legal reform into market-enabling policy prescriptions (for example, regulation and property
rights protection): law was no longer simply a tool to constrain state power but was a policy
tool to support economic exchange. Eventually this type of rule of law reform distilled into
strengthening criminal justice, judicial predictability, enforceability of contracts, and security
of property as enablers of economic development. It tended toward a focus on transplanting
particular best practices regarding law and organizations as part of reform packages.
o Simultaneously, the emergence of former communist states resulted in a political conception
of the rule of law, closely linked to democratization. The rule of law was a framework for the
exercise of state power and represented a political culture; however, it was generally judged
89
against a Western liberal ideal-type. Donors supported constitutional reform; law reform;
judicial capacity-building; court administration and case management reform; and the use of
law to support transition (for example privatization and market liberalization).
o The expansion of peacekeeping and peacebuilding missions led to a distinct approach in
conflict-affected countries, with an emphasis on establishing order and security, rebuilding
and restructuring justice system institutions, mitigating the sources of conflict through
improved dispute resolution, and promoting accountability for past atrocities through
90
transitional justice. Work in conflict-affected countries focused primarily on criminal justice,
including police, prosecutors, courts and corrections as a basis for security and peacebuilding,
and “rule of law” work became synonymous with rebuilding and restructuring these
institutions. Closely related to “rule of law” work was the emergence of security sector
reform, which aimed to infuse assistance to military, police and other security forces with
attention to principles of good governance and human rights.

Governance and institutions, rights and justice (1999 - ): Law has become understood not just
instrumental to market functioning or transition, but as an end of development itself. “Institutions
91
rule” – or the idea that if you get the institutions right and everything else will follow – means that
getting the rule of law “right” (per an undefined external standard) has become a donor goal.
92
Simultaneously, Sen’s idea of “development as freedom” provided this external standard – of human
rights norms and claims – against which to get the institutions right.
87
Trubek, David M. and Marc Galanter. 1974. “Scholars in Self-Estrangements: Some Reflections on the Crisis in Law and Development
Studies in the United States,” 4 Wisconsin Law Review 1062; Gardner, J. (1980), Legal Imperialism: American Lawyers and Foreign Aid in
Latin America. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
88
McAuslan, Patrick (2004), "In the Beginning was the Law… an Intellectual Odyssey", Cornell Law School East Asian Law and Culture Series.
89
Carothers, T. 2006. “The Rule of Law Revival”, in Carothers, T. ed., Promoting the rule of law abroad: In search of knowledge.
Washington, DC.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
90
Mani, Rama. 2002. Beyond Retribution: Seeking Justice in the Shadow of War, Cambridge: Polity Press; Stromseth, Jane, David Wippman
and Rosa Brooks. 2006. Can Might Make Rights: Building the Rule of Law After Military Interventions. Cambridge University Press; Call,
Charles T. (ed.) 2007. Constructing Justice and Security After War. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press; Samuels, Kirsti.
2006. “Rule of Law Reform in Post-Conflict Countries: Operational Initiatives and Lessons Learnt.” Social Development Papers: Conflict
Prevention and Reconstruction 37. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
91
Rodrik, Dani, Arvind Subramanian, and Francesco Trebbi. 2004. “Institutions Rule: The Primacy of Institutions over Geography and
Integration in Economic Development.” Journal of Economic Growth 9 (2): 131–65.
92
Sen, Amartya (1999) Development as Freedom, New York: Knopf
75
76

Context, complexity and pluralism (2002 - ): at the same time, work on institutions (which from the
start emphasised their historical and social contingency), plus experience from previous phases of rule
of law reform, has highlighted the importance of context and complexity. Legal anthropologists and
others who had engaged for decades with new or non-Western states used lessons about the
93
94
importance of context, the nature of political and cultural path-dependencies and the complexities
of non-state systems of justice to criticize one-size-fits-all approaches. Civil society groups and other
95
non-state actors have emerged as governance providers in certain areas. As a result, donors are
turning to targeted interventions – including “legal empowerment” initiatives focused on the poor - to
96
confront specific problems in their context.
They have also turned increasingly to “non-state”
systems, and examined the plurality of legal and dispute resolution systems in countries. This sits in
contrast with governance and rights approaches, which have a stronger normative commitment and
operate at a greater level of generality.

Security (2001- ): The first decade of the 2000s also included a trend toward “securitization” of rule of
law initiatives, especially in the aftermath of 9/11 and in countries affected by violent crime or
conflict. In parallel to focus on local initiatives, some donors have prioritized assistance for
strengthening the capacity of states to confront transnational crime and terrorism, and on enhancing
criminal justice cooperation across borders.
Rule of Law Programming and Evidence for Development Effectiveness
While the evidence in any one particular area is insufficient, it is becoming increasingly clear that the rule of law
matters across the board. Policy makers are starting to pay more attention to types of evidence beyond
quantitative data, such as anthropological work or political economy studies. Taken together, these sources of
information are beginning to do a much better job of describing ROL as a complex and cross-cutting
phenomenon. As a result, the evidence base remains insufficient, but clear gaps and potential solutions are
emerging.
While there is increasing evidence linking ROL to development, the evidence linking ROL programming to rule of
law and development outcomes is complex and in some cases uncertain. This uncertainty plays out at three
levels: the macro causal relationships between the rule of law and development; the micro causal relationships
between rule of law programming and its impact on immediate development program goals; and the
intermediate relationships between the achievement of program goals or outputs and broader rule of law and
development outcomes. While evidence has accumulated for the macro relationship between rule of law and
development, as summarized above (albeit with questions around causation), evidence for the impact of
development programs on immediate program goals or on broader goals related to the rule of law and
development is uncertain and contested.

Macro: causation between rule of law and development. As detailed in the section above, there’s a general
consensus that institutions matter to governance and to development. One study finds a correlation in the
World Bank Governance Indicators between a 1-point increase (out of 6) on the rule of law scale and a 2.5to-4-fold improvement in per capita incomes and infant mortality, and a 15-25 per cent increase in literacy
97
rates. Another finds a significant and strong correlation between institutional quality and per capita
98
incomes. However, these studies provide no clear evidence as to whether the rule of law causes
93
Hatchard, John, and Amanda Perry-Kessaris (eds.) 2003. Law and Development: Facing Complexity in the 21st Century. London: Cavendish
Publishing; McAuslan, Patrick (2004), "In the Beginning was the Law… an Intellectual Odyssey", Cornell Law School East Asian Law and
Culture Series.
94
Teitel, Ruti. 2005. “Transitional Rule of Law”, in Czarnota, Adam, Martin Krygier, and Wojciech Sadurski, (eds.) Rethinking rule of law after
communism. Budapest and New York: Central European University Share.
95
Sikkink, K., 2002. “Transnational Advocacy Networks and the Social Construction of Legal Rules”, in Dezalay, Y. and Garth, B., eds. Global
Prescriptions: The Production, Exportation, and Importation of a New Legal Orthodoxy. Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
96
Golub Stephen. 2006. “The Legal Empowerment Alternative” in Carothers, ed. Promoting the Rule of Law Abroad. Washington, DC:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
97
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A. and Zoido-Lobaton, P. (1999). “Governance Matters.” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series 2196.
98
Rodrik, Subramanian & Trebbi. (2004). “Institutions Rule: the primacy of institutions over geography and integration in economic
development.” 9 Journal of Economic Growth 131.
76
77
99
development or the other way round. Examples such as China had growth with a limited role for the legal
100
system, and there are few studies of specific reform efforts that question, rather than assert, causation.

Micro: Program effectiveness. There is less evidence for whether institutions can be influenced by aidbased development programs, or whether rule of law systems are instead the result of complex historical,
101
economic, political, social and cultural dynamics beyond the reach of development interventions.
Change in rule of law systems might be so complex that it is hard to attribute to development
102
interventions, especially given donor time horizons, shifting goals,
high expectations, untested
103
assumptions and normative commitments not sufficiently borne out by evidence. Furthermore, the
measures used focus heavily on formal institutions such as courts, which only represent a slice of the
104
relevant institutions making up a rule of law system. They also take limited account of citizen and
community voice, including perception survey data on the rule of law and detailed qualitative assessments
(such as ethnographies). Emerging approaches, from randomized control trials to mixed methods studies,
are increasing the sophistication of our understanding of how program effectiveness. However, these
approaches have yet to become mainstream.

Intermediate: the impact of ROL programs on broader development outcomes. Even where donors find
evidence that they are achieving their immediate goals in strengthening elements of the rule of law, the
impacts on the broader rule of law and on development outcomes is rarely established. The proposed
causal links between program outputs and broader outcomes are often poorly theorized, and measures of
105
outputs are confused for measures of rule of law. For example, U.S.-funded rule of law programs in Haiti
have focused on reducing the percentage of detainees in prolonged pre-trial detention. While these
programs address a dire human rights issue that merits attention, the results may have little impact on the
perceptions and experience of the majority of citizens who never come into contact with the criminal
justice system. Meanwhile, broader elements of program effectiveness are often left out of measurement
frameworks. For example, a World Bank-supported reform project in Venezuela led to between 20% and
106
70% reductions in case processing times, yet the systemic impact on user experience – or on broader
governance – was not studied. This again points to the need for a long-term and robust engagement with
citizen and community voice to understand impact. There is also limited data on the effectiveness of
scaling up of targeted rule of law efforts such as empowerment programs (although an attempt is taking
107
place in Sierra Leone to evaluate the scale up of paralegal provision).
More can be done to measure development effectiveness through improved data collection and better
monitoring and evaluation (M&E) frameworks. Much M&E has counted outputs (such as case processing time)
and not impact over time. Especially when looking beyond formal institutions, outcomes become even harder
99
Glaeser, E., et al, 2004. “Do Institutions Cause Growth”, 9 Journal of Economic Growth, 271.
Davis, K. and Trebilcock, M. (2008), “The Relationship Between Law and Development: Optimists versus Skeptics”, 56 American Journal
of Comparative Law 895; Jensen, E.G. and Heller, T.C. (eds.) (2003). Beyond common knowledge: empirical approaches to the rule of law.
Stanford: Stanford University Press; Samuels, Kirsti. 2006. “Rule of Law Reform in Post-Conflict Countries: Operational Initiatives and
Lessons Learnt.” Social Development Papers: Conflict Prevention and Reconstruction 37. Washington, DC: The World Bank.; Bergling, P.,
Ederlof, J., and Taylor, V. (2009), Rule of Law Promotion: Global Perspectives, Local Applications. Iustus Forlag: Uppsala; Trebilcock, M. and
Prado, M. (2012), What Makes Poor Countries Poor?: Institutional Determinants of Development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; Messick, R.
(1999), “The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development Judicial Reform and Economic Development: A Survey of the Issues”,
The World Bank Research Observer, 14 (1), 117-36.
101
Davis, K. and Trebilcock, M. (2008), “The Relationship Between Law and Development: Optimists versus Skeptics”, 56 American Journal
of Comparative Law 895
102
Cohen, Elin, Kevin J Fandl, Amanda Perry-Kessaris, and Veronica Taylor. 2011. “Truth and Consequences in Rule of Law: Inferences,
Attribution and Evaluation”, 3 Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 106
103
Wild, L. and Bergh, G. (2012) “The relationship between democratic governance and MDG achievement”, Overseas Development
Institute (on file with authors).
104
Davis, Kevin. 2004. “What can the Rule of Law variable tell us about Rule of Law reforms?” Michigan Journal of International Law
26:141-161.
105
See, for example, Jensen, E.G. and Heller, T.C. (eds.) (2003). Beyond common knowledge: empirical approaches to the rule of law.
Stanford: Stanford University Press; Carothers, T. (ed.) (2006), Promoting the Rule of Law Abroad: In Search of Knowledge. Washington, DC:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,; Hammergren, L. (2007) Envisioning Reform: Improving Judicial Performance in Latin
America. State College, PA: Penn State University Press; Trebilcock, M. and Daniels, R. (2006) Rule of Law Reform and Development:
Charting the Fragile Path of Progress. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
106
Pérez Perdomo, R. (2006) “Una Evaluación de la Reforma Judicial en Venezuela,” in Judicial Reform in Latin America: An Assessment for
Policymakers, Center for Strategic and International Studies and Centro de Estudios de Justicia de las Américas.
107
http://www.soros.org/sites/default/files/pretrial-csae-research-overview-20120710.pdf
100
77
78
108
to measure. For example, the impact of non-state systems is often poorly captured.
Two approaches have
emerged recently: first, randomized control trials designate treatment and control communities to receive
109
different levels of legal assistance (for example, to undertake land titling) and then measure the impact.
These are robust, rare and expensive. The other approach is to conduct a thorough baseline study using a
“cluster” of indicators from a variety of sources, and then measure what changed over time after a specific
110
project. Accumulating these studies from several projects is a cheaper “informed process of monitored trial
111
and error.” Yet such approaches require more attention to M&E from the start of projects. Toward this end,
UNTP is developing a new guide on measuring effectiveness of ROL programming.
A key cause of the evidence gap is the lack of emphasis placed by donors on building domestic data collection
capacity. This capacity is important for donors to evaluate programs, and also for countries to conduct
112
sustained evaluation of their institutions. This is one area that the MDG experience clearly stimulated and
which had spillover effects: increased capacity to gather data and pursue a range of data-gathering
methodologies.
Current Trends in Rule of Law Programming
In response to a growing body of evidence, policymakers have adopted new and promising efforts to pursue the
rule of law that reflect a pragmatic problem-solving approach and that cut across development. While the
evidence for traditional rule of law programming is mixed, it has also pointed towards new avenues for
strengthening the various pathways between the rule of law and development. More work is needed to
evaluate these new approaches.
On the one hand, the critiques of traditional approaches to rule of law programming are increasingly clear. A
broad consensus has emerged around certain criticisms of recent rule of law efforts from a development
perspective, and acknowledgement of what hasn’t worked:

A presumption of linear trajectories of change : rule of law reforms and their impact are socially,
economically and politically complex and often deal with values deeply embedded in society. As a
result, change is complex and will not necessarily happen in a linear fashion. Things may get worse
before they get better, and things may simultaneously get worse by some measures (e.g. property
rights) and better by others (e.g. grievances in service delivery)

Time horizons: rule of law reform is often a long-term, multi-generational endeavour requiring
114
sustained commitment. One study found that it took the fastest moving countries an average of 41
115
years to achieve significant transformations to the rule of law.

The need for robust in-country political coalitions and will: Given the complex and context-specific
nature of rule of law reform, political demand for reforms is essential, as is grappling with vested
113
108
Haggard, S., MacIntyre, A. and Tiede, L., 2008. ‘The rule of law and economic development.’ Annual Review of Political Science, 11,
pp.205-34.
109
Knight, R. et al (2012), Protecting Community Lands and Resources: Evidence from Liberia, Mozambique and Uganda. Rome and
Washington, D.C.: IDLO and Namati.
110
Parson, Jim (2011), “Developing Clusters of Indicators: An Alternative Approach to Measuring the provision of Justice,” 3 Hague Journal
on the Rule of Law 170
111
Braithwaite, John (2011) ‘The Essence of Responsive Regulation’ UBC Law Review 44(3), 475-520
112
UNDP (2011), Strengthening the Rule of Law in Crisis-affected and Fragile Situations. New York: UNDP at 48; Foglesong, T. and
Christopher Stone, 2007. “Measuring the Contribution of Criminal Justice Systems to the Control of Crime and Violence: Lessons from
Jamaica and the Dominican Republic”, CID Working Paper No. 144
113
Desai, D., Isser, D. and Woolcock, M. (2012), ‘Rethinking Justice Reform in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States: Lessons for Enhancing the
Capacity of Development Agencies’, 4 Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 54
114
World Bank (2012), New Directions in Justice Reform, http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/09/06/000386194_20120906024506/Rendered/PDF/706400REPL
ACEM0Justice0Reform0Final.pdf, at 8. See also World Bank (2011), World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security and Development.
Washington, DC: World Bank; Desai, D., Isser, D. and Woolcock, M. (2012), ‘Rethinking Justice Reform in Fragile and Conflict-Affected
States: Lessons for Enhancing the Capacity of Development Agencies’, 4 Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 54.
115
Pritchett, Lant, and Frauke de Weijer. 2010. “Fragile States: Stuck in a Capability Trap?” Background paper for the World Development
Report 2011, at https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/9109
78
79
116
interests that render reforms difficult to realize.
Policy makers should modulate expectations
accordingly: “If the efficacy of legal institutions depends on complementary features of the broader
117
political system, apparently simple reforms may be well beyond the capacity of outsiders to effect.”

Transplanting models from elsewhere: Identifying “best practices” in rule of law reform from
elsewhere (such as the ideal design of a prosecutor’s office) and transplanting them is unlikely to
118
work. Emphasis should be placed on the function that they system is meant to perform, rather than
what it looks like. That does not mean that learning lessons and sharing knowledge aren’t important,
but that they must be evaluated in each new context.
In response to these critiques, policymakers have pursued new approaches to the rule of law that better reflects
local contexts and varying perspectives on the rule of law. The landscape of rule of law efforts has broadened
beyond the narrow focus on a particular set of institutions. Policy makers have increasingly focused on the legal
and institutional underpinnings of development policy. Viewing the rule of law both as an outcome and
element of process, development agencies have incorporated attention to rule of law into a variety of
development programmes, from employment, health and education to natural resource management, crisis
prevention and mitigation, poverty reduction, and economic growth. They have also engaged a broader range
of state and non-state actors, legal systems and dispute resolution mechanisms.
Many policy makers and scholars have turned to pragmatic problem-solving. In this approach, they have
worried less about capacity-building in or service delivery from specific institutions; rather, they have made
choices, trade-offs and balances on a case-by-case basis with an emphasis on the perspective of the end-user.
They have focused on working with the range of institutions and actors that affect the desired development
outcome. Engaging with the norms, laws, regulations and mechanisms to enforce them and resolve disputes is
critical to this approach. The recent World Bank strategic document on justice reform offers an important
practical synthesis of how to understand ROL through the lens of this approach. From a development
perspective, ROL becomes (1) a set of laws, regulations and institutions spanning all three branches of
government and multiple nonstate actors carrying out relevant functions; (2) access to and enforcement of
119
these laws, regulations and institutions; and (3) the norms and values that infuse them. This approach has
some key components:

End-User Perspective: Sen articulates a “realization-focused understanding of justice”, or the “need to
focus on actual realizations and accomplishments, rather than only on the establishment of what are
120
identified as the right institutions and rules.” The World Bank commits to doing so from the
121
perspective of end-users and potential end-users , and UNDP looks at the rule of law from a people122
centred perspective. In order to know these needs and problems, policy makers and donors need to
commit to building, articulating and listening to the voices of the poor and of national-level policy
makers. This is both a development end, and a means of improving other development processes
through better monitoring and evaluation.

Starts with concrete problems facing people. Rather than starting with broadly defined principles or
international best practices, this approach seeks to identify the key challenges experienced by citizens.
123
Local appropriateness (along with participation and buy-in) will affect the sustainability of reform.
116
Trebilcock, M. and Daniels, R. (2006) Rule of Law Reform and Development: Charting the Fragile Path of Progress. Cheltenham: Edward
Elgar;
117
Haggard, S., MacIntyre, A. and Tiede, L., 2008. ‘The rule of law and economic development.’ Annual Review of Political Science, 11,
pp.205-34, at 206
118
Carothers, Thomas. 2006. “The Problem of Knowledge,” in Carothers, ed. Promoting the Rule of Law Abroad. Washington, DC: Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace.
119
World Bank (2012), New Directions in Justice Reform, http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/09/06/000386194_20120906024506/Rendered/PDF/706400REPL
ACEM0Justice0Reform0Final.pdf, at 3
120
Sen, A. 2009. The Idea of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, at 10
121
World Bank, New Directions in Justice Reform, at 1.
122
UNDP (2011), Strengthening the Rule of Law in Crisis-affected and Fragile Situations. New York: UNDP, at 11
123
International IDEA and IDLO (2012), “Informal discussion on linkages between the rule of law, democracy and sustainable
development”, Concept Note, at http://www.idea.int/un/upload/Concept-Note-IDEA-IDLO-Italy-rev-5-0-Final.pdf
79
80
124
125
For example, human rights realization in Malawi
and Angola
have been hampered not by
constitutional issues but practical issues such as access to justice and the capacity of courts.

Evidence-Based: A program on justice indicators and national-level data collection at Harvard sees rule
126
of law reform as a process of gathering data and solving problems that they bring to light. These
approaches do not presuppose the principal rule of law challenges, but seek to address them as they
127
are and however they are configured. A recent review of the UN ROL support agenda found that
“[r]ather than presupposing formal judicial and security institutions, as tends to be the practice, those
seeking to provide assistance could look instead to the immediate self-defined needs of the citizenry
as a guide…The precise sequence and prioritization of these efforts should not be generalized and
developed into boilerplate responses and they certainly need to be accompanied by sound political
128
economy and other forms of analysis.”

Cuts across a range of institutions: Policy makers have worried less about what constitutes “law” and
what counts as an “institution” in a rule of law system: concerned with “a continuum which runs from
129
the clearest form of state law through to the vaguest forms of informal social control” , insofar as
130
these mechanisms impact development outcomes.
Providers range from courts to customary
131
leaders, to youth groups to conflict-resolution NGOs and so on.
o No institution – formal or informal – is a panacea: in an evaluation of Lok Adalats (community
justice institutions) in India, Galanter & Krishnan found their judgements and effectiveness to
132
be inconsistent. A problem-solving approach is not wedded to particular institutions or
institutional forms, but takes a pragmatic approach to realize desired functions.

Cuts across a range of sectors (“cross-cutting” or “mainstreaming”). Rule of law, especially as
experienced by citizens, is not limited to the courts, police and other elements of the justice system.
The fair allocation and delivery of services, treatment of grievances and resolution of property
disputes affect citizens’ perception and reality of the rule of law. Strengthening the rule of law
therefore requires looking across sectors from health and education to economic development.
The problem-solving approach has begun to reconfigure policy approaches to ROL’s various development
functions, bringing into focus ROL’s social and political complexity; its cross-cutting nature; and the importance
of innovative tools. We see the following areas as core dimensions of the ways in which ROL relates to the
post-2015 agenda:
o
Enabling economic development: a focus on problems faced by end-users rather than specific institutions
or preconceived notions of the rule of law – for example, property rights and enabling markets - has led to
policy makers appreciating grievances and conflicts across their development portfolios as rule of law
issues. Thus resolving conflict over grazing rights is not just a question of land and agriculture policy, but a
124
Gloppen, S. and Kanyongolo, F.E. (2007). “Courts and the poor in Malawi: Economic marginalization, vulnerability, and the law.”
International Journal of Constitutional Law, 5(2), 258-293.
125
Skaar, E., Serra Van-Dúnem, J.O. (2006). “Courts under construction in Angola: What can they do for the poor?” Working Paper - Chr.
Michelsen Institute, 20.
126
The Harvard Kennedy School Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management, see
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/programs/criminaljustice
127
Scheye, Eric (2009) ‘Rule of Law in Fragile and Conflict Affected Countries: Working within the Interstices and Interfaces’ Framing Paper
Produced for the World Bank Headline Seminar on Rule of Law in Conflict-Affected and Fragile Situations, at
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTLICUS/Resources/511777-1224016350914/5474500-1257528293370/Scheye.pdf
128
Kavanagh, Camino and Bruce Jones (2011) “Shaky Foundations: An Assessment of the United Nation’s Rule of Law Support Agenda”,
NYU Center on International Cooperation, at http://www.cic.nyu.edu/staff/docs/kavanagh/kavanagh_rol.pdf
129
Woodman, G. (1998), “Ideological Combat and Social Observation: Recent Debate About Legal Pluralism.” Journal of Legal Pluralism, 42:
21-59, at p. 45.
130
Tamanaha, B. (2007). “Understanding Legal Pluralism: Past to Present, Local to Global.” Sydney Law Review, 30: 375-411
131
Baker, B. & Scheye, E. (2009). “Access to Justice in a Post-conflict State: Donor supported Multidimensional Peacekeeping in Southern
Sudan.” International Peacekeeping 16 (2), 171-85.
132
Galanter, M., Krishnan, J.K. (2004). “‘Bread for the poor’: Access to justice and the rights of the needy in India.” Hastings Law Journal,
55(4), 789-834.
80
81
133
justice issue that may be resolved through support for locally-driven community groups or committees;
service delivery projects such as basic healthcare provision now include the design of grievance
134
mechanisms and their linkages to existing courts and legal mechanisms in country.
o
Citizenship and social and economic justice: Legal empowerment approaches have emerged as useful
problem-solving tools in this context as they are targeted, flexible and participatory. For example,
paralegals help people navigate state and customary courts to have their grievances redressed, from
135
sanitation issues to the provision of healthcare. Empowerment approaches need to be considered in the
political context and power dynamics of the communities in which they operate: there is a risk of capture
136
by powerful interests and a question of accountability of the facilitators (such as paralegals) to the
137
target beneficiaries.
o
Conflict, crime and violence: the recent World Development Report 2011 highlighted the importance of
justice and the rule of law to avoiding conflict and facilitating transitions out of conflict. However, it also
stressed the importance of a problem-solving approach driven by institutional functions, as well as the
138
length of time donors needed to commit to reforms and the importance of realistic expectations.
o
Accountability: focusing on end-user perspectives, policy makers have turned to technology: for example,
in the gathering and resolution of grievances (through SMS hotlines, for example), the gathering and
139
dissemination of legal information (for example, broadcasting radio programs about rights-awareness)
140
and participation in decision processes.
o
Service Delivery. The legal frameworks for local public and judicial authorities are emerging as an
important area for rule of law reform. Many decisions affecting daily lives happen at the local level, and
local administration is a key link in the building of trust between the individual or community and the
141
state. A pilot reform effort in Quezon City in the Philippines identified specific problems with the rule of
law framework for implementation of a city housing program, in large part on the basis of end-user
142
surveys.
International Policy Commitments to the Rule of Law
Commitments to the Principle of Rule of Law
The importance of the rule of law is broadly accepted across countries and regions, as reflected in international
policy documents, conventions and resolutions of multilateral and regional organizations around the world.
Several of these documents specifically affirm the importance of the rule of law to development.
o
The UN Member States have affirmed their commitment to the rule of law through several UN General
Assembly Resolutions. Most recently the September 2012 Declaration of the High-Level Meeting of the
General Assembly on the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels (following on previous UNGA
133
Tanja Chopra (2009), “Justice Versus Peace in Northern Kenya”, 2 World Bank Justice & Development Working Paper Series 1; Knight, R.
et al (2012), Protecting Community Lands and Resources: Evidence from Liberia, Mozambique and Uganda. Rome and Washington, D.C.:
IDLO and Namati.
134
Varun Gauri (2011), “Redressing Grievances and Complaints Regarding Basic Service Delivery”, World Bank Policy Research Working
Paper Series 5699.
135
Vivek Maru (2010), “Allies Unknown: Social Accountability and Legal Empowerment”, Health and Human Rights 12, pp 83-93.
136
Hooria Hayat and Khola Ahmed (2008), “Legal Empowerment: An Impossible Dream”, DfID and Women's Empowerment in Muslim
Contexts Working Paper, at http://www.dfid.gov.uk/R4D/PDF/Outputs/WomenEmpMus/WEMC_WP_HayatandAhmed.pdf
137
Marlese von Broembsen (2012), “Legal Empowerment of the Poor: The Re-emergence of a Lost Strand of Human Rights?”, Rapoport
Center Human Rights Working Paper Series, 1/2012, at 15.
138
World Bank (2011), World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security and Development. Washington, DC: World Bank
139
Varun Gauri (2011), “Redressing Grievances and Complaints Regarding Basic Service Delivery”, World Bank Policy Research Working
Paper Series 5699.
140
UN System Task Team on the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda, “Governance and Development: Thematic Think Piece”, May 2012, at
3.
141
Per Bergling, Erik O Wennerström and Richard Zajac Sannerholm (2010), “Rule of Law in Public Administration: Problems and Ways
Ahead in Post-Conflict Peace-building”, Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 2(2), pp. 171-202.
142
Edna Estifania A. Co, Maria Faina L. Diola, Dan A. Saguil, Eleanor E. Nicolas, and Crinezza Veil Mendoza (2011), Rule of Law in Public
Administration: The Philippine Local Government Urban Poor Resettlement and Housing Program. UP NCPAG Policy Brief No. 2, at
http://folkebernadotteacademy.se/Documents/Kunskapsomr%C3%A5den/Rule%20of%20Law/Rule%20of%20Law%20in%20PA%20Philippi
nes.pdf
81
82
Resolutions including the 2005 World Summit Outcomes and follow up resolutions), stated that “the
advancement of the rule of law at the national and international levels is essential for sustained and
inclusive economic growth, sustainable development, the eradication of poverty and hunger and the full
realization of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to development, all of which
in turn reinforce the rule of law, and for this reason we are convinced that this interrelationship should be
143
considered in the post-2015 international development agenda.”
o
The Rio +20 Conference on Sustainable Development in June 2012 affirmed the essential role of the rule of
law in development. In the Outcome Document, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in
September 2012, participating states “acknowledge that democracy, good governance and the rule of law,
at the national and international levels, as well as an enabling environment, are essential for sustainable
development, including sustained and inclusive economic growth, social development, environmental
protection and the eradication of poverty and hunger.” The participants also acknowledged the need for
“strong and effective legal and regulatory frameworks,” especially to ensure sustainable development
144
through extractive industries, and to expand development to the poor and vulnerable.
o
The UN Secretary General has produced several reports focused on the rule of law (for example: the
Programme of Action;, A/66/749 and October 2011, S/2011/643; The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice
in Post-Conflict societies August 2004, S/2004/616; “Uniting our strengths: Enhancing United Nations
Support for the Rule of Law,” S/2006/908, 14 December 2006)
o
The UN Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor, which included broad representation from around
the globe, stated in its 2008 final report, Making the Law Work for Everyone, that “the rule of law is not a
mere adornment to development; it is a vital source of progress. It creates an environment in which the
full spectrum of human creativity can flourish, and prosperity can be built.” It called for more attention to
“legal empowerment,” defined as “a process of systemic change through which the poor and excluded
become able to use the law, the legal system, and legal services to protect and advance their rights and
145
interests as citizens and economic actors.”
o
The Millennium Declaration, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2000 as the basis for the MDGs,
stated that “We will spare no effort to promote democracy and strengthen the rule of law, as well as
respect for all internationally recognized human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to
146
development.”
The UN General Assembly has reaffirmed that “that good governance and the rule of
law at the national and international levels are essential for sustained, inclusive and equitable economic
growth, sustainable development and the eradication of poverty and hunger” in subsequent resolutions
147
regarding the MDGs.
o
The High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness Busan Declaration calls for combating corruption and illegal
financial flows. The G-7+ New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States includes security and justice as two of
its central Peacebuilding and Statebuilding Goals, with an underlying focus on the rule of law.
o
Regional and Multilateral Organizations have affirmed commitments to the rule of law in their charters
and founding documents, for example:

The African Union: “The Union shall function in accordance with the following principles: ...
respect for democratic principles, human rights, the rule of law and good governance”
(Constitutive Act of the African Union, Article 4)
 ASEAN: “To strengthen democracy, enhance good governance and the rule of law” (ASEAN
Charter, art. 17)
143
Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly on the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels, A/67/L.1*
(2012)
144
UN General Assembly, “The Future We Want,” A/RES/66/288 (2012).
Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor, “Making the Law Work for Everyone” Vol. 1 (2008)
146
Millennium Declaration (General Assembly Resolution) A/Res/55/2 (2000)
145
147
Keeping the promise: united to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (General Assembly Resolution) A/RES/65/1 (2010)
82
83



Organization of American States: “The effective exercise of representative democracy is the basis
for the rule of law and of the constitutional regimes of the member states of the Organization of
American States.” ( Inter-American Charter, art. 2)
The European Union: “The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom,
democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons
belonging to minorities (Treaty of Lisbon, Art. 1a); “EU partnership and dialogue with third
countries will promote common values of: respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms,
peace, democracy, good governance, gender equality, the rule of law, solidarity and justice” (The
148
European Consensus on Development, 2006/C46/01)
The Commonwealth of Nations: “Those Principles have been further elaborated and strengthened
over the years to underline that development rests on the foundations of democratic governance,
the rule of law, respect for human rights, gender equality and peace and security.”
At this level, the commitment to the rule of law is most often framed as a commitment to a general principle of
governance. This principle is most clearly defined in UN documents, including the 2012 UNGA Resolution, in the
149
definition cited above.
Although there is broad recognition of the principle of the rule of law, the specific policy commitments are
extremely varied Agreement to the broad principle has translated into a variety of substantive commitments by
member states, which span different conceptions and definitions of the rule of law. The breadth of this concept
and the resulting commitments can be illustrated by the country pledges at the 2012 UNGA High Level Meeting
on the Rule of Law. Some of the pledges are related to international relations, while others are related to the
rule of law at the national level, and involve a range of issues from individual human rights to private sector
growth. Some examples of these pledges include:






Ratify and/or apply of international human rights and humanitarian law instruments, e.g. Geneva
Conventions, Rome Statute, Convention Against Torture, Protocol Convention on Rights of the Child,
etc.
Strengthen domestic implementation of human rights norms, e.g. through development of strategies
and action plans for reducing violence against women, address needs of women prisoners, etc.
Support post-conflict rule of law development, e.g. through funding to UNDP, bilateral development
cooperation, and deployment of civilian specialists to post-conflict countries;
Strengthen international cooperation on combating transnational crime and corruption, including
trafficking in persons, drug trafficking, terrorism and financial crimes
Introduce domestic laws and policies to improve fair and efficient justice, e.g. expand legal aid, build
corrections facilities, improve mediation
Introduce domestic policies and procedures to increase legal certainty for business, e.g. administrative
burdens and barriers to trade
Specific Commitments relevant to the rule of law and development
The wide range of specific commitments reflects the varied conceptions of and approaches to measuring
countries’ adherence to the rule of law. Beyond broad statements of commitment to the principle of rule of
law, countries have adopted numerous specific commitments, ranging from binding treaties to much looser
principles and standards, in a variety of areas that are directly applicable to the rule of law. These
commitments are far too numerous and varied to list. Nonetheless, some of the broad categories that are
relevant to the rule of law are listed below.
148
Joint statement by the Council and the representatives of the governments of the Member States meeting within the Council, the
European Parliament and the Commission on European Union Development Policy: ‘The European Consensus’
149
“a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to
laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human
rights norms and standards. It requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law, equality before the
law, accountability to the law, fairness in the application of the law, separation of powers, participation in decision making, legal certainty,
avoidance of arbitrariness and procedural and legal transparency” (see S/2004/616).
83
84
o
Human Rights Conventions. These instruments are a central pillar for upholding the rule of law at the
international and national levels. States’ formal commitments to conform national law and practice to the
principles contained in these documents are a vehicle through which national actors ensure that their
governments uphold the law. Some of the more prominent examples include: Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (1948); International Covenants on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and on Civil and
Political Rights (1966); International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination;
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; Convention against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; Convention on the Rights of the Child.
o
Standards for Fair and Efficient Justice Systems. A variety of standards have evolved to guide national law
and policy on the treatment of individuals through the criminal and justice system, and on the structure of
the system overall. Although some standards are contained in binding conventions, such as the Torture
Convention, most are in the form of standards, principles and codes of conducts that are applied by
national authorities in the development of their own law and policy regarding their justice systems.
Although these standards generally reflect broad human rights and rule of law principles, they tend to
focus on specific institutions or actions, such as the conduct of judges, prosecutors and police in the
treatment of prisoners or the fulfilment of their actions. For example, the Basic Principles on the
Independence of the Judiciary set out standards for the conditions of service, qualifications and
professional ethics for judges. Other examples include: the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of
Prisoners; United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty; Code of Conduct for
Law Enforcement Officials; Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.
o
Governance and corruption. Numerous international instruments have set standards aimed at increasing
transparency and reducing corruption at the national level. The most robust and widely recognized
instrument is the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), which involves specific
commitments to adopt domestic law and policy and cooperate internationally, and includes a review
mechanisms to enforce compliance. Regional organizations, like the African Union and Organization of
American States, have adopted their own conventions and standards on corruption. Other mechanisms
consist of voluntary partnerships and commitments to adopt standards governing specific types of revenue
or services, like the Kimberly Process which involves commitments regarding the mining and export of
diamonds, and the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI) which governs the extraction and sale
of oil and mining resources. Other initiatives involve broader standards that are used as a reference point,
with varying levels of review and enforceability. Examples include the Open Government Partnership.
o
Security and Law Enforcement, including preventing and mitigating conflict, and combating crime and
terrorism. A growing number of international instruments have focused on strengthening the tools at the
national and international level to reduce violent crime that contribute to insecurity and conflict. Such
instruments range from conventions that require national action against specific forms of crime, like the
UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime, International Convention for the Suppression of the
Financing of Terrorism and related conventions, to commitments to improve cooperation in preventing
transnational crime and preventing criminal financing. States have also committed to building and
strengthening international bodies, like the International Criminal Court, with jurisdiction over
international crimes.
o
Economic activity. Several international treaties and standards focused on economic activities include
extensive provisions that affect the content of states’ law and policy and their treatment at the domestic
level. These commitments are directly related to development, and to the domestic policy instruments
that affect development through trade, investment, intellectual property, and other areas of economic
activity. The most prominent example is the World Trade Organization, and its system of trade
requirements that must be enshrined in law.
Targets and Indicators
Just as the rule of law matters, so measuring it matters. The design of targets and indicators for the rule of law
has been a challenge for development policy and programs. The broad and multi-faceted nature of the rule of
law has resulted in an incredibly varied set of indicators and tools, each with its own complexities and
limitations. Yet recent advances have produced new tools for measuring various elements of the rule of law
84
85
The first step in setting rule of law targets is defining one or more clear and measurable concepts. Donors
frequently deploy differing definitions of ROL in line with their respective conceptions, comparative advantages
and institutional mandates. Low correlation among different measures of the rule of law reveal that the
measures are highly sensitive to the specific concept measured, the methodology chosen, and the context in
150
which they are deployed.
Yet it is important to bear in mind that definitions for the purpose of
measurement are not necessarily the same as the principles of ROL that guide donor programming. Donors can
choose to measure adherence to these broad principles or the effectiveness of rule of law programming
through different indicators.
Measuring the impact of development policies is particularly difficult, due to confusion about causation
between program outputs and intended outcomes (see evidence section above). Moreover, any measure is
only an imperfect proxy for that concept. Trying to measure a more specific element of the concept inevitably
omits other core elements of the concept. Composite indicators lose precision and sensitivity to change, and
151
run into methodological problems.
Significant advances have nonetheless been made in measuring the rule of law from a variety of perspectives
and methods. Existing indicators for the rule of law focus on different concepts inherent to the rule of law and
apply various methods. Some of the approaches include the following.

Broad indices of rule of law at the country level. Attempts to capture the broad conception of rule of law
generally rely on composite measures that combine several dimensions to produce a multi-faceted
measure of rule of law at the country level. This is done either by combining several existing indicators
that measure more specific aspects of the rule of law, (e.g. World Bank’s Governance Indicators); or
through expert and public surveys that ask a variety of questions regarding different elements of the rule
of law (e.g. the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index). The broader the concept, however, the less
specific and sensitive to changes. Broad measures have also been critiqued for emphasizing certain
elements of the rule of law over others, or for favouring Western conceptions of the rule of law.
Combining multiple indicators can also lead to methodological problems in the aggregation of the data,
and how to interpret such aggregation.

Indicators of elements of the rule of law. Several indices measures more specific elements or components
of the rule of law, such as security of property and individuals (e.g. World Economic Forum, Index of
Economic Freedom, World Bank’s CPIA); contract rights and enforcement (World Bank’s CPIA and Doing
Business); compliance with human rights and civil liberties (e.g. Cingranelli-Richards CIRI Human Rights
Dataset, Freedom House); judicial independence (e.g. Judicial Independence Index); constraints on the
executive (e.g. Polity IV, Bertelsman Rule of Law index); or corruption (e.g. Global Corruption Barometer,
Global Integrity Index). These indices often rely on perception as measured by expert surveys. As a result,
they are sensitive to the sample of respondents and may be biased. Some of these indices, for example,
have been critiqued for relying too much on elite lawyers or businesses.

Measures of institutional performance. Several measures focus on the performance of specific
government institutions, usually in the justice sector, although some also include other sectors of the
government, or alternative and non-state dispute resolution. One advantage of such measures is that the
ability to collect administrative statistics on elements of government performance, such as court efficiency,
allows for direct and accurate measures. Yet the reliability and availability of such data varies widely. More
fundamentally, focusing on institutional performance, such as the efficiency of court proceedings, often
reveals little about the broader rule of law (in particular the constellation of institutions that citizens turn
to) or how it is experienced by citizens. Moreover, institutions and standards may differ considerably
across countries. Some examples include: the American Bar Association/ROLI Legal Education, Legal
Profession and Judicial Reform Indices, the National Center for State Court’s CourTools focusing on court
performance; the National Judicial Institute of Canada’s framework for assessing judicial independence,
transparency and accountability; the World Bank’s Doing Business indicators and World Business
Environment Survey of the credibility of the courts in enforcing contracts.
150
Arndt, C., & Oman, C. (2006). Uses and abuses of governance indicators.Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Haggard, S., MacIntyre, A., & Tiede, L. (2008). The rule of law and economic development. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 205–234.
151
Botero, Juan Carlos, Robert L. Nelson and Christine Pratt. 2011. “Indices and Indicators of Justice Governance and the Rule of Law: An
Overview,” The Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 3(2).
85
86

Compliance with international norms. One straightforward way to measure states’ compliance with
international law is to examine their laws and procedures, and whether they conform to international laws
and standards. Many international conventions include monitoring mechanisms, like the ICCPR’s periodic
review process, or UNCAC’s peer review process. These processes generally review whether the country
has adopted and implemented the legal and policy provisions required by the convention. However
focusing on compliance often leaves out the crucial elements of implementation and the policy trade-offs
that result from competing norms, which can be much harder to assess.

Measures of user experience and citizen perception. Another way to measure the rule of law is to focus on
the experience of users of institutions and the perceptions of citizens in general. A number of crosscountry surveys ask specific questions about people’s perception of state institutions, their compliance
with the law, and their attitude toward various aspects of the rule of law. Surveys can also focus more
narrowly on particular categories of citizens, such as those that have been in contact with courts or police
to measure their performance.
Some examples include Afrobarometer, Asian Barometer,
Latinobarometer, TI’s Corruption Barometer Relying on perceptions can be highly imprecise and reveal
contradictory findings. For instance, a government’s efforts to combat corruption can results in greater
exposure of cases, resulting in an increase in citizen perception of corruption. They also depend on the
definition of the concept to be measured, and the framing of the problem. For example, surveys on the
perception of crime rarely define what “crime” is and how serious it should be.

“Baskets” of Indicators tailored to country needs. Other indicators start from broad principles but break
down the concept into various principles and sub-principles that are aggregated into “baskets” of
measures from various sources. The measures used in a particular country can be tailored to country
needs. An example of this approach that seeks to compare across countries is the UN Rule of Law Index.
Other “basket” approaches are more tailored, and develop indicators based on an analysis of country
conditions and what is needed to achieve either higher level principles and standards, or specific
152
improvements in the provision of justice. For example, generating indicators based on a detailed analysis
of a particular issue and the data available to craft a basket of indicators focused on the particular problem
– e.g. a set of indicators focused on police searches, seizures and arrests to measure dimensions of police
153
performance identified as a problem by policymakers.
Yet the more country specific the indicator, the
less they are comparable across countries. Moreover, using multiple indicators and data source increases
the cost of collecting the data.
The foregoing discussion highlights several trade-offs in defining indicators and targets relative to the rule of
law. As a multi-dimensional social and political reality that varies by context, changes in the rule of law cannot
easily be captured through a single, time-bound or specific indicator. Many measures of the rule of law have
tended to privilege certain conceptions of the rule of law over others – such as security of property rather than
equitable enforcement – and to focus on institutional performance – such as case processing time - rather than
outcomes for citizens. Since data on each of these elements tends to be fragmented and unreliable, selecting a
single indicator that can be measured across countries can be tricky. Other trade-offs that arise in selecting
indicators include:








Specificity vs. Breadth of concept
Universal application/comparability vs. Context specificity
Sensitivity of measurement vs. Comprehensiveness of measurement
Achievable vs. Ambitious
Norm-based vs. Performance-based
Cost of Measurement
Reliability and measurability of data
Incentives created by different indicators
152
Parsons, Jim. 2011. “Developing Clusters of Indicators: An Alternative Approach to Measuring the Provision of Justice” The Hague
Journal on the Rule of Law 3(2). See also
153
Stone, Christopher and Todd Foglesong, “Strengthening Rule of Law by Measuring Local Practice, One Rule at a Time,” Program in
Criminal Justice Policy and Management at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
86
87
Efforts to measure the rule of law can also produce unintended consequences. Even where policymakers intend
to address various elements of the rule of law, selecting indicators for measuring policy impact can empower
certain actors over others, or distort institutional performance toward fulfilling targets while neglecting other
crucial functions. Significant gaps in the availability of data, both on the performance of institutions and on
outcomes for the public can exacerbate these consequences if policymakers choose to measure what is
available rather than what matters. For example, the measure of homicide rates is often used as a proxy for the
rule of law, since it is relatively reliable, sensitive to policy change, and can be compared across countries. Yet it
can also lead to a focus on certain types of crime over others, which drives the allocation of resources and the
lack of attention to important elements of insecurity and injustice.
A multi-national indicator, driven by national voices, in its political context and with clear and limited aims, can
be valuable. Such an indicator could focus global attention on elements of the rule of law that are understood
to be important across countries and contexts, and help spur improved approaches to measuring it. It could be
based on a “basket” of indicators that are grounded in local challenges and context. For example, a measure of
access to justice might include survey data showing the types of cases of most concern to citizens, capture user
perception and experience, measure the performance of several institutions, and assess the availability and
quality of a range of services – from courts and paralegals to community mediation and media access – that are
relevant to a given context. Such an approach could measure global outcomes while remaining adaptable to
local contexts. The most common criticism of universal indicators is that they lack relevance to particular
country contexts and needs in order to achieve a common concept across countries. Underlying this is the
notion that they have been built on limited input from different voices, especially from the south and at the
local level.
Countries have begun to define their own country- specific indicators. Some processes are attempting to break
the mould, using nationally-driven processes to develop targeted multi-national indicators while
acknowledging their imprecision and stressing the links between the indicator, the behavioural change they are
trying to stimulate, and a vision of the rule of law. In the context of the MDGs, Mongolia, Albania and
Cambodia defined their own “ninth” MDG focused on human rights, good governance or human security. Each
of these goals reflected varying levels of public consultation, but they were all tailored to their particular
development needs. Other countries have sought to define their own commitments and targets more explicitly
focused on the rule of law in the context of other fora. For example the G-7+ New Deal for Engagement in
Fragile States has sought to define indicators, including for security and justice that reflect the needs and
perspectives of the member countries. This effort attempts to define a set of targets and indicators that are
more comparable across contexts but rooted in country needs.
More attention could be devoted to national and local-level input in the definition of targets and indicators.
National voices are essential, but they have been “notably absent from the global discussion on rule of law
assistance, which has been replete with international experts. Government and civil society stakeholders within
recipient countries can provide substantive insight on the dynamics underlying key concepts such as national
ownership. Moreover, they might question fundamental aspects of current approaches and suggest
154
innovations to improve the likelihood of success.” More focus should be devoted to defining targets and
indicators that respond to the conditions in various countries, that are relevant to specific country contexts,
and that incorporate a broader range of voices and perspectives. This contextualized approach should not be
used to avoid challenging indicators, such as multi-dimensional ones or those that focus on end users. Rather, it
should be used to explore whether the country context – including the nature and capacity of government
authorities – suggests them to be useful.
Setting rule of law targets will also require attention to developing local sources of data on the rule of law.
This includes building capacity to collect and analyze data that is relevant to local contexts, and helps to assess
local realities, including by incorporating sub-national and local voices using a range of different methods.

This requires domestic data-collection, investment by donors in building domestic capacity for such
155
data collection, and rule of law staff in country who have a grasp of local context. It also requires
154
UNSG report A/63/226, at 17
Deborah Isser (2011), “Understanding and Engaging Customary Justice Systems”, in Deborah Isser (ed.), Customary Justice and the Rule
of Law in War-Torn Societies. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace, at 344-345.
155
87
88
effective engagement at the international with academics and policy-makers from recipient
156
countries, and facilities to promote South-South exchange of lessons.

It also requires different types of data. Legal analyses, household surveys and economic data do not
seem to be sufficient in expressing the complexity of rule of law systems in order to support the
157
design of problem-based interventions.
This is particularly true when we think of systems
incorporating traditional, customary and other forms of justice. Understanding local conceptions of
justice and capturing voice and agency through a broader range of data – for example the World
Bank’s Voices of the Poor project - is essential

This also requires a concerted effort by donors to link local and national data and understanding of
contexts. Targeted local interventions will not be successful without an understanding of the national
contexts of power and coalitions in which they play out. National or big interventions will not work
158
unless they are made relevant to power and coalition dynamics at the local level.
Additional data
and analytical techniques are required to measure these various elements of the rule of law.
Lessons from the MDGs
Experience suggests the value of the MDGs for increasing attention and resources to particular development
challenges. The most frequently cited benefit of the MDGs has been its impact on focusing attention of donors
and recipient countries on achieving common objectives and targets. The MDGs are credited with having
generated consensus around development priorities, raised international awareness of poverty, shifted the
development discourse from a focus on economic growth to poverty reduction, and encouraged governments
159
and their publics to devote resources to address these goals.
The MDGs also led to improved data collection
and techniques for measuring development outcomes, to enable the definition of concrete and measurable
160
goals.
The evidence for this impact is limited so far. Few systematic studies have been carried out to measure these
161
effects and more research is needed.
Those studies that have been conducted suggest that the impact of
MDGs on achieving goals has either varied by the specific goal – with more progress on income, primary
162
completion rates, child and maternal mortality than other goals – or has not led to any acceleration in
163
achieving goals relative to the pre-2000 period.
Moreover, studies of certain sectors, in particular health,
have noted the distortive impact of the MDGs on state systems, with an overemphasis of aid and policy on
specific targets (such as HIV/AIDS and malaria prevention and treatment) to the detriment of other essential
164
areas (such as deworming). Thus while the MDGs appear to have had an impact on increasing aid flows to
165
priority areas, the impact on effective government policy and resource allocation is less clear.
A clear lesson
156
William Twining, “Legal Pluralism 101”, in in Tamanaha, B., Sage, C. and Woolcock, M. (eds.), Legal Pluralism and Development: Scholars
and Practitioners in Dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
157
Desai, D., Isser, D. and Woolcock, M. (2012), ‘Rethinking Justice Reform in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States: Lessons for Enhancing the
Capacity of Development Agencies’, 4 Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 54.
158
Giles Mohan and Kristian Stokke, 2000. “Participatory development and empowerment: the dangers of localism”. Third World Quarterly,
21(2), pp. 247-268.
159
Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Should global goal setting continue, and how, in the post-2015 era?, DESA Working Paper 117 (2012,
ST/ESA/2012/DWP/117), 2; Charles Kenny and Andy Sumner, More Money or More Development: What Have the MDGs Achieved? (Center
for Global Development Working Paper 278, 2011), Alex Evans and David Steven, Beyond the Millennium Development Goals: Agreeing a
Post-2015 Development Framework (Managing Global Order Working Paper, 2012),
http://www.beyond2015.org/sites/default/files/evans_steven_millennium_2015.pdf, 6; and Claire Melamed and Andy Sumner, A Post-215
Global Development Agreement: why, what, who? (Paper for ODI/UNDP Cairo workshop on a post-2015 Global Development Agreement,
2011) http://www.odi.org.uk/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/7369.pdf, 2-4.
160
Claire Melamed, After 2015: Context, politics and processes for a post-2015 global agreement on development (Overseas Development
Institute, 2012), 7.
161
See Richard Manning. 2009. “Using Indicators to Encourage Development: Lessons from the Millennium Development Goals” DIIS
Report 1, Danish Institute for International Studies.
162
Charles Kenny and Andy Sumner, More Money or More Development: What Have the MDGs Achieved? (Center for Global Development
Working Paper 278, 2011), 18.
163
Sakiko Fukuda-Parr and Joshua Greenstein, How Should MDG Implementation Be Measured : Faster Progress or Meeting Targets?
(UNDP-IPC Working paper 63, 2010) http://www.ipc-undp.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper63.pdf, 22.
164
Molyneux, David H., “Combating the ‘‘other diseases’’ of MDG 6: changing the paradigm to achieve equity and poverty reduction?”,
Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (2008) 102, 509—519; Shiffman, J., 2008. Has donor prioritization of
HIV/AIDS displaced aid for other health issues? Health Policy Plan. 23, 95—100.
165
Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Should global goal setting continue, and how, in the post-2015 era?, DESA Working Paper 117 (2012,
ST/ESA/2012/DWP/117), 5.; Charles Kenny and Andy Sumner, More Money or More Development: What Have the MDGs Achieved?
88
89
learned is to devote resources and attention to ensuring that the objectives and targets are resulting in greater
resource allocation.
The MDG experience highlighted the importance of the ROL for broader development outcomes. A review of
166
country reports reveals the importance of addressing the rule of law to achieve MDG targets across sectors.
In a broad range of countries, establishing transparent and legitimate legal frameworks, ensuring predictable
enforcement of rules and procedures, and reducing corruption have enabled effective delivery of health,
education and other social services. The absence of these elements has in many cases been cited as a factor in
countries’ failure to meet targets. For example, legitimate laws and credible enforcement mechanisms have
particularly contributed to expanding opportunities for women and vulnerable groups to participate in
economic and political life – as required by the third MDG on gender equality.
In a few cases, the MDGs have encouraged countries to define context-specific approaches to promoting the
rule of law. In a handful of countries, including Mongolia, Albania, Cambodia and Iraq, the MDGs have resulted
in specific attention to elements of the rule of law. As noted above, these countries adopted additional MDG
objectives and targets related to the rule of law, anticorruption, governance or human security. The Mongolian
MDG, which on respecting human rights, ensuring free access to information, mainstreaming democratic
principles and practices, and reducing corruption, reflected broad public consultations as well as the input of
167
international expertise to define targets, indicators and measurement techniques.
The Albanian MDG
focused on improving governance, rule of law and inclusion of minorities in the context of its bid for EU
accession. Cambodia’s MDGs focused on the need to reduce the impact of landmines and improve assistance
to victims. The impact of these MDGs on the resources devoted to these issues or the success of programs so
far has not been systematically tested.
Some of the lessons learned from the MDGs are particularly relevant to the rule of law, especially the need to
better reflect varying national and sub-national contexts, and to incorporate broader consultation. One of the
main critiques of the MDGs was their insufficient attention to varying local contexts and conditions. The
selection of goals did not include broad consultations across countries, or among different groups within
168
countries, leading to the exclusion of important aspects of development.
Although common objectives and
169
targets were useful in facilitating measurement, they did not sufficiently address variations across contexts.
Globally, the targets did not address the disparities across countries that constrained the achievement of the
rule of law. At the sub-national level, aggregate indicators did not reflect the challenge of reducing inequalities
between different groups or give priority to the most disadvantaged.
The importance of navigating the tension between universal benchmarks and context-specific objectives is also
particularly relevant to the rule of law. Given the variation in the substantive underpinnings, institutional forms
and processes that affect the rule of law in different contexts, it is particularly important to engage with a
range of thinkers, ideas and perspectives from societies in both the Global North and South. Goals and
indicators should reflect a particular pathway or relationship between the rule of law and development. In
defining objectives, targets and indicators, policymakers should explore the multiple ways of measuring the
rule of law described above, that range from normative commitments to institutional performance to citizen
perception and experience, along with efforts to construct flexible baskets or systems of indicators that
respond to particular contexts. Development objectives related to the rule of law should also reflect
consultations that include different groups within societies, and be flexible to local conditions, norms and
institutions.
(Center for Global Development Working Paper 278, 2011), 4; see also Claire Melamed and Andy Sumner, A Post-215 Global Development
Agreement: why, what, who? (Paper for ODI/UNDP Cairo workshop on a post-2015 Global Development Agreement, 2011), at 14.
166
References to adequate legal frameworks, effective enforcement and resolution of grievances are sprinkled throughout country reports,
although rule of law is rarely an explicit theme.
167
Dorjsuren, P, “Mongolia’s Experience in Developing Democratic Governance Indicators,” The Academy of Political Education, Mongolia,
at http://academy.org.mn/apem/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=93
168
Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Should global goal setting continue, and how, in the post-2015 era?, DESA Working Paper 117 (2012,
ST/ESA/2012/DWP/117), 11, 12; William Easterly, “How the Millennium Development Goals are Unfair to Africa,” World Development vol.
73, no. 1 (2008), 27; Claire Melamed, After 2015: Context, politics and processes for a post-2015 global agreement on development
(Overseas Development Institute, 2012), 7.
169
Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Should global goal setting continue, and how, in the post-2015 era?, DESA Working Paper 117 (2012,
ST/ESA/2012/DWP/117), 10-11.; Charles Kenny and Andy Sumner, More Money or More Development: What Have the MDGs Achieved?
(Center for Global Development Working Paper 278, 2011), 11; Michael A. Clemens, Charles J. Kenny and Todd J. Moss, “The Trouble with
the MDGs: Confronting Expectations of Aid and Development Success,” World Development vol. 35, no.5 (2007).
89
90
Concluding Thoughts and Possible Approaches
The rule of law is of enduring importance to development policy discourse. The relationship between the rule of
law and development is multi-faceted and runs through various pathways. Nonetheless, substantial evidence
has accumulated showing its importance to development. Countries have expressed their commitment to the
rule of law through several international fora, including the UN General Assembly as well as several regional
and international bodies and international treaties establishing states’ responsibility to protect human rights.
Civil society actors have increased their calls for addressing the rule of law as part of the post-2015
170
development agenda.
Although the rule of law is highly complex, it is part of the deep structure of all societies. As states outlined in
the Rio +20 Outcome document, the post-2015 development goals should have universal appeal. Attention to
the rule of law would reflect a shared sense that human dignity and justice matter, and thus have global
political, social and economic resonance. Given the prevalence of poverty and inequality in both developed
and developing countries, it is possible to say, for example, that all countries face challenges related to
ensuring effective access to justice by the poorest and most marginalized sectors of their societies.
A growing body of evidence and practice point to the importance of the rule of across sectors of development.
The rule of law is an end in itself as well as an enabling factors and element of process that affects a wide range
of development outcomes. The evidence for the relationship between certain elements of the rule of law and
development is growing, although more research and improved measurement tools are needed. Development
practice is also changing to reflect a nuanced and complex understanding of the rule of law that is rooted in
local context.
Incorporating the rule of law into the post-2015 development agenda could increase attention to its role as an
enabler and outcome of development. The experience of the Millennium Development Goals suggests the
value of setting global targets to steer resources and attention toward translating commitments into practice.
Additional global focus on the rule of law can channel resources toward deepening the evidence base,
generating new data and measurement techniques, and designing effective solutions to challenges related to
the rule of law and development.
Efforts to incorporate the rule of law into the post-2015 development agenda should address the lessons
learned from the MDGs and fifty years of rule of law and development programming:

Incorporating the rule of law requires clarifying the concept of the rule of law, and its relationship to
development. The various conceptions of the rule of law, including differing substantive and cultural
commitments and the variety of institutions involved, can complicate efforts to define a common
objective. Nonetheless, the evidence described above suggests specific pathways through which the
rule of law matters to development. It should be possible to focus on certain pathways and outcomes
that are most relevant to the post-2015 agenda, while ensuring flexibility and adaptability to local
contexts. A robust discussion could lead to the definition of core elements of the rule of law that can
be adopted as a specific objective or incorporated into other objectives.

Efforts to measure the rule of law should take into account the potential for unintended consequences
in adopting indicators for complex and multi-dimensional concepts like the rule of law. Indicators can
empower certain actors over others, or distort institutional performance. A very narrow conception of
the rule of law focused on one aspect of physical safety, and may distort policy efforts, for example by
directing resources toward certain forms of violent crime rather than other sources of insecurity,
dispute or grievance that more commonly affect citizens.

In addressing the rule of law, any future global framework should remain sufficiently adaptable to
reflect its context-specific and complex nature. Given the rule of law’s contested nature, it is
particularly important to engage with a range of thinkers, ideas and perspectives from societies in
both the Global North and South. Moreover, the experience of unintended consequences suggests the
importance of broad input in defining rule of law elements of the development framework, including
voices within and across countries with varying conceptions and priorities. The definition of targets
170
See http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/pub/policy_brief._looking_beyond_2015_a_role_for_governance and
http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/projects/justice-and-development
90
91
and indicators should also reflect local, context-specific understanding of the rule of law and its
relationship to development, without eschewing or undermining complexity.

The post-2015 agenda should recognize the importance of the rule of law across sectors of
development. It is increasingly understood that the rule of law shapes outcomes across sectors, from
health and education to equitable growth, through institutions and processes that ensure legitimate
legal frameworks, predictable and fair enforcement, and opportunities to equitably resolve grievances
and claims. The relationship between the rule of law and development arises not only in a particular
set of institutions, but also across social, economic and political development.

Goals, targets and indicators related to the rule of law should reflect its multiple dimensions and
functions. The multi-faceted nature of the rule of law requires a flexible and multi-dimensional
approach to setting targets and indicators. Many measures of the rule of law have tended to privilege
certain conceptions of the rule of law over others – such as security of property rather than equitable
enforcement – and to focus on institutional performance – such as case processing time - rather than
outcomes for citizens. Some of the recent innovations in measuring the rule of law, including defining
baskets of indicators or indices that include multiple dimensions of the rule of law and that can be
tailored to local contexts, might better reflect this complexity than a single indicator.
Three general approaches to incorporating the rule of law into the post-2015 development agenda could be
considered. These approaches, based on current deliberations regarding the future framework as reflected in
intergovernmental discussions and outcomes, are not mutually exclusive and could be adopted in concert:
1.
2.
Define a common rule of law goal with a flexible basket of indicators that can be tailored to country
contexts. A rule of law goal would signal the importance of the rule of law as an outcome of
development on par with other outcomes such as poverty reduction and health.
o
Selecting a rule of law goal would require achieving broad consensus on a particular aspect or
function of the rule of law that resonates across borders. This might focus on safety and
security, a form of governance, access to justice, or social and economic justice. Achieving
such consensus would require consultations at the international and country levels that
include a variety of voices. The goal would also need to be sufficiently broad to reflect
variations across cultures and contexts. It would need to take into account the lessons
learned from the MDG process – such as aid distortion and unintended consequences - and
the history of rule of law policy making.
o
The goal should focus on an aspect of the rule of law that is related to other parts of the post2015 agenda. For example, if the post-2015 framework focuses on poverty reduction, the
goal might be oriented toward social or economic justice, perhaps aiming for equitable
allocation of opportunities and services or access to credible processes for resolving
grievances and disputes.
o
Developing such a goal and its targets is a complex endeavour. The goal would be specific,
time-bound and universally applied. For example, a goal on equitable access to justice might
focus on the percentage of people with access to certain types of services, or who feel fairly
treated in the delivery of services. Yet at the same time, lessons from the MDGs suggest that
countries should retain flexibility by designing at least some of their own targets and
indicators, drawing from “baskets” of indicators that can be tailored to specific contexts. For
example, a goal related to public safety and security might involve a target of reducing violent
crime by a certain percentage, but allow countries to define the type of crime that is most
salient in its context, and complement indicators based on crime statistics with measures of
citizen experience. Carefully-crafted consultations within each country would aim to develop
indicators that resonate with each society’s priorities and experience.
Adopt the rule of law as a high level “enabling” goal. Operating at a level beyond the primary
development goals, an enabling goal would commit countries to make national-level policy changes
91
92
that enable progress on other development goals. This approach recognizes that the rule of law is not
just an end in itself, but that it also enables a broader range of development outcomes.
3.
o
The enabling goal would focus on a specific element or function of the rule of law that,
according to empirical evidence, facilitates other aspects of the new development
framework. On the basis of the brief summary of the evidence presented above, an enabling
goal could focus on one or more specific functions, including enforcement of contracts;
accountable and transparent application of executive authority; protection of physical safety;
or access for vulnerable groups to knowledge about rights and means to enforce them. For
example, a post-2015 emphasis on poverty reduction and inequality might lead to a rule of
law enabling goal on participation, access to information and rights protection for vulnerable
groups to ensure they benefit equally from poverty reduction efforts.
o
The enabling goal would entail concrete, measurable commitments to adopt national-level
legal or policy changes. These commitments would focus on a national rule of law system as
a distinct object of policy change. But they would also be designed to enable achievement of
goals in other sectors. For example, to fulfil an enabling goal related to expanding access to
information and protection of rights, countries might commit to such policy changes as
adopting freedom of information laws, improving performance of law enforcement, or
expanding access to paralegal services. These targets would be designed to enable progress
on other goals such as healthcare delivery, but they would produce broader benefits as well.
o
The details of the benchmarks and indicators could vary by country. While adopting universal
goals, countries would define at least some targets and indicators based on their own
institutional needs, contexts and development challenges. For example, a goal focused on
access to justice might include a universal target focused on expanding the percentage of
people with access to fair and credible dispute resolution mechanisms, but allow local
variation in defining the specific type of mechanism – from formal courts, to customary
tribunals, to paralegal or administrative measures. The indicators for measuring the
effectiveness and fairness of these mechanisms might similarly vary according to the context.
Incorporate the rule of law across development goals. Focusing on the rule of law as an element of
process, this approach would ensure that other development goals simultaneously contribute to the
rule of law by incorporating targets and indicators related to the rule of law across these goals. This
approach highlights the importance of the rule of law across development, without defining it as a
desirable end in itself.
o
This approach would require clarifying the elements of process that are important to
achieving the post-2015 goals according to the empirical evidence. These elements might
include legitimate and transparent legal frameworks; public participation and agency; the fair
and equitable resolution of disputes and grievances; credible enforcement of the law; and/or
rights protection. Each of these elements would contribute to the achievement of other goals
by strengthening the rule of law around particular issues.
o
These elements could be applied across goals by incorporating specific targets and indicators
related to the rule of law for each goal. For example, a development goal on improving
maternal health could include targets on equitable access to services, and include indicators
on the adoption of a legal framework establishing rights to services, including mechanisms
that enforce rights and handle grievances fairly and equitably.
o
The targets and indicators would be carefully formulated to address a range of country
contexts and institutional needs. They might also combine a range of data sources. For
example, each goal might include indicators that combine user perspectives collected
through surveys, output indicators showing numbers of individuals served, and input
indicators revealing legal changes.
92
93
ANNEX X – Background Paper on Justice for the Global dialogue on
Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Agenda
By: Namati
171
Introduction
172
An estimated four billion people around the world live outside the protection of the law. Without
access to effective justice institutions, these people can be easily cheated by employers, driven from their land,
and intimidated by violence. These men and women often live at or below the poverty line, and face
institutional, legal and administrative barriers that limit their ability to participate in society on equal terms.
Despite reduction in overall poverty, it has been recognized that challenges to today’s human development are
largely shaped by growing inequalities across income and other factors, which in turn are linked to
marginalization of certain groups, such as women and ethnic minorities.
While there has been some progress in expanding legal protection worldwide, (for example, 139
constitutions include guarantees of gender equality, 125 countries outlaw domestic violence, at least 117
countries have equal pay laws, 173 guarantee paid maternity leave, 117 countries outlaw sexual harassment in
173
the workplace and 115 countries guarantee equal rights to own property for women) , the guarantees
included within the law are not always realized on the ground, where particularly the poorest and most
marginalized face many barriers to accessing justice. On any given day, an estimated three million people are
behind bars awaiting trial and in the course of a year, and approximately 10 million people will pass through
pretrial detention – most of whom will be poor people unable to afford to pay bribes or bail, or to secure a
174
lawyer.
In 2012, the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Extreme Poverty outlined in detail the barriers
that the poor and marginalized groups continue to face in accessing justice, including costs associated with
accessing justice systems, lack of information and lack of legal recognition as well as institutional barriers such
175
as corruption, lengthy court procedures, and lack of resources. The poor and certain marginalized groups are
often also penalized through law and practice, in some cases through outright criminalization, prosecution and
incarceration of persons living in poverty, or through excessive regulation and control over various aspects of
their lives, including imposition of heavy fines, loss of child custody, disentitlement from social benefits and
176
infringement on rights to privacy and autonomy.
Additionally, lack of legal accountability allows corruption to flourish unchallenged, diverting resources
away from those who need them the most. The 2013 Global Corruption Barometer found that the judiciary is
perceived as the fifth institution most affected by corruption. In 20 countries, the judiciary is seen as the most
177
corrupt institution.
In these countries, an average of 30 percent of people who come in contact with the
178
judiciary report having paid a bribe.
Lack of legal identity leaves millions of people unable to participate fully in society or to access state
benefits such as healthcare and education. Women and girls in particular are routinely denied a voice in the
*For a list of the sources we cited as “similar recommendations” in the target and indicator tables, refer to the bibliography. For more
details on the selection criteria for the illustrative targets and indicators outlined in this paper, download Namati’s discussion note and
annex at http://www.namati.org/consultations.
171
Namati is an international organization dedicated to legal empowerment. Namati produced the initial draft of this paper, which has
been shaped it to fit the specific needs of the Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Agenda.
172
UN Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor. (2008). Making the Law Work for Everyone, 19.
173
UN Women. (2012). Progress of the World’s Women: In Pursuit of Justice, 24.
174
Open Society Justice Initiative and UNDP (2011). The Socio-Economic Impact of Pretrial Detention, 12.
175
Report of the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights (access to justice). 2012. (A/67/278)
176
Report of the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights (penalization of poverty). 2011 (A
/66/265)
177
These countries are: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Croatia, Democratic Republic of Congo,
Georgia, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Lithuania, Madagascar, Moldova, Peru, Serbia, Slovakia, Tanzania, Ukraine. Transparency International (2013).
Global Corruption Barometer, p.17.
178
Ibid.
93
94
179
decisions that affect their lives. Addressing challenges women face in accessing justice would require a
holistic approach that strengthens gender responsiveness throughout the justice chain.
To overcome poverty and inequality, citizens must be able to understand, use, and improve the laws
and institutions that govern them. Legal forums for obtaining redress and resolving conflicts must be effective.
Justice systems must apply the rule of law consistently, adopting measures that account for social and
economic barriers. These related principles strengthen the legal empowerment of all people, enhancing their
ability to demand justice and more effective and fair outcomes from institutions.
A growing body of opinion, including the recent contributions from the Secretary General’s High Level
Panel of Eminent Persons (HLP), asserts that justice should have an important place in the post-2015 global
180
development framework.
The 2013 Secretary General’s report to the General Assembly also highlights
respect for human rights and the rule of law, endorsing such principles as legal empowerment, access to
181
justice, an independent judiciary, and universal legal identification.
Because justice cuts across most
development issues, integrating justice-related targets and indicators throughout the development framework
can help to realize, sustain, and monitor gains in multiple sectors.
This paper starts by demonstrating how justice improves development outcomes, highlighting the
central role legal empowerment plays in the pursuit of justice. It then proposes four key justice-related
principles to incorporate into the global policy agenda that will succeed the UN Millennium Development Goals
in 2015, and provides illustrative targets and indicators that embody these principles. The paper contributes
to a rich discussion among governments, civil society, and international institutions on forming a global
182
development agenda that promotes peaceful, well-governed, and just societies.
Justice and Development: Relationship and Evidence
A growing consensus of scholars, practitioners, and governments agree that justice matters to
183
development, although the relationship is complex.
Justice prevents and mitigates conflict, crime, and
184
violence, all of which are major barriers to development.
It also improves the accountability of government
development efforts by constraining arbitrary decision-making, promoting effective delivery of basic services,
179
Open Society Foundations and Namati. (2013). Justice 2015 Factsheet: Justice plays a fundamental role in eliminating poverty, 1.
Retrieved from http://www.namati.org/entry/justice-2015-justice-plays-a-fundamental-role-in-eliminating-poverty
180
High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda. (2013). A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and
Transform Economies through Sustainable Development, 9.
Civil society organizations who have issued public statements supportive of a strong role for justice in the post-2015 framework include:
Advocats sans Frontiers; Amnesty International; Center for Economic and Social Rights; Hammerskoljd Foundation; Human Rights Watch;
Namati; Open Society Institute; Save the Children; Saferworld; Vera Institute; World Justice Project and World Vision. In June 2013 the
chairpersons of the UN’s ten human rights treaty bodies issued a public statement saying: “We highlight the critical link between
development and human rights, including the rights of the most vulnerable groups.” (Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights,
Chairpersons of the Human Rights Treaty Bodies Joint Statement on the post-2015 Development Agenda, 2013 ,p1). Additionally, seventeen
independent human rights experts appointed by the General Assembly recently made recommendations of how and why human rights can
be properly integrated into the post-2015 framework. See Harris, Aidan. (17 June 2013). Human Rights ‘Fundamentally linked to
Development,’ say UN Treaty Body Chairs. Open Society Foundations. Retrieved from
http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/voices/human-rights-fundamentally-linked-development-say-un-treaty-body-chairs
181
United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Secretary General, A life of dignity for all: accelerating progress towards the Millennium
Development Goals and advancing the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015, 26 July 2013, A/68/202, 15. Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/A%20Life%20of%20Dignity%20for%20All.pdf
182
See, e.g, The United Nations Development Program (UNDP). (2013). Rule of Law and Development Issue Brief: Integrating Rule of Law in
the post-2015 Development Framework. Retrieved from http://issuu.com/undp/docs/issue_brief_-_rule_of_law_and_the_post2015_develo; Global Thematic Consultation on Governance and the post-2015 Development Framework. (2013). Consultation Report.
Retrieved from http://www.worldwewant2015.org/governance/finalreport; United Nations Development Program. (2013). The Global
Conversation Begins: Emerging Views for a new development agenda. Retrieved from
http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/MDG/english/global-conversation-begins-web.pdf; Save the Children (2012). Ending
Poverty in Our Generation: Save the Children’s vision for a post-2015 framework. Retrieved from
http://www.savethechildren.org/atf/cf/%7B9def2ebe-10ae-432c-9bd0.pdf; for additional see Bibliography.
183
The World Bank. (2012). The World Bank: New Directions in Justice Reform, 2. Retrieved from http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/09/06/000386194_20120906024506/Rendered/PDF/706400REPL
ACEM0Justice0Reform0Final.pdf
184
World Bank. (2011). World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security and Development, 56. Retrieved from
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDRS/Resources/WDR2011_Full_Text.pdf
94
95
enforcing regulatory frameworks and circumventing elite capture of public resources. Economic growth is
185
enhanced when contracts can be enforced, business disputes resolved and property rights respected.
186
Box 1
The evidence for the relationship between access to justice and development can be found in the
everyday experiences of the poor, as well as in policy studies and academic research. Consider the story of
Kadiatu, a cigarette seller from Sierra Leone, who is brutally beaten by a drunken off-duty police officer. As she
lies unconscious, bystanders steal her main income source: her cigarettes. At first, Kadiatu’s complaints to the
police go nowhere. Then, community paralegals — citizens trained in the workings of law and government —
step in. They meet with the officer, plan to monitor how the police discipline him, and prepare to file a lawsuit
for damages. The officer, realizing that he cannot get away with his actions, publicly apologizes to Kadiatu and
pays compensation for her suffering and lost income.
As with Kadiatu, people’s livelihood, safety, and dignity often hinge on their legal empowerment –
their ability to understand and use the law. Indeed, Kadiatu’s experience resonates with the findings of many
studies exploring legal empowerment’s central role in the pursuit of justice and its impact on development.
This small selection below, from a large body of evidence, illustrates the broader effects of legal
empowerment.
In the Philippines, the Asian Development Bank studied the impact of training community members as
paralegals to support agrarian reform. Paralegals assisted farmer-beneficiaries in the transfer or long-term
lease of land, and represented them in hearings before provincial adjudication boards. Farmers in communities
with paralegals saw higher levels of productivity, greater farm incomes, and more investment in their farms.
In Indonesia, a local NGO called PEKKA used female paralegals to expand understanding about rights
and entitlements in female-headed households. Alongside international partners, PEKKA partnered with the
Indonesian government to reform state and religious justice institutions by raising awareness and assisting with
women's cases. Their efforts contributed to a fourfold increase in the number of women able to access circuit
courts the following year.
In Ecuador, the World Bank evaluated five legal aid centers focused on enforcing child support
payments for poor women and reducing domestic violence. The study found that the centers’ clients seeking
child support were 20 percent more likely to succeed than those without access to legal aid. They were also 17
per cent less likely to experience physical violence after separation from their partners.
In India, filing claims under the Right to Information Act (RTIA) has helped New Delhi’s slum dwellers
to obtain ration cards for subsidized foodstuffs. A Yale University study found that 94 per cent of ration card
applicants who filed RTIA inquiries into the status of their application received their cards within a year. Only 21
per cent of those who did not file a claim received their cards.
In Sierra Leone, extended or unlawful pretrial detention damages the prosperity and health of prisoners and
their families. An Oxford University study showed that a program placing paralegals in prisons to provide free
legal services has reduced the numbers of prisoners held on remand by 20 per cent and increased the
percentage gaining access to bail by 13 per cent.
Justice and legal empowerment interventions can be complicated and context specific; achieving the
desired results is not a straightforward task. A post-2015 agenda with justice-related targets and indicators
would produce valuable data that governments and civil society need to objectively inform better practice.
Indeed, one of the key recommendations of the HLP report calls for a ‘data revolution’ – an investment in more
185
The World Bank. (2012). The World Bank: New Directions in Justice Reform, 2. Retrieved from http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/09/06/000386194_20120906024506/Rendered/PDF/706400REPL
ACEM0Justice0Reform0Final.pdf
186
See Maru, Vivek. (2006). “Between Law and Society: Paralegals and the provision of justice services in Sierra Leone and worldwide.” Yale
Journal of International Law, 31, 432-433, 444-445; Asian Development Bank. (2001). Law and Policy Reform at the ADB, Appendix 1:
Philippines, 127-129. Retrieved from http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/2001/lpr-adb.pdf; World Bank. (2011) Increasing Access
to Justice for Women, the Poor, and Those Living in Remote Areas: An Indonesian Case Study. Justice For the Poor Briefing Note, 6(2), 1.
Retrieved from http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2011/03/16/000356161_20110316053255/Rendered/PDF/602130BRI0
P1171l60Issue203110111web.pdf; The World Bank. (2003). The Impact of Legal Aid: Ecuador, 5, 11. Retrieved from http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2003/10/08/000012009_20031008144152/Rendered/PDF/269150English01of0L
egal0Aid0scode09.pdf; Peisakhin, Leonid and Pinto, Paul. (2010). Is transparency an effective anti-corruption strategy? Evidence from a
field experiment in India, Regulation and Governance, 4, 272. Retrieved from http://www.accountabilityindia.in/article/documentlibrary/1610-transparency-effective-anti-corruption-strategy-evidence-%EF%AC%81eld-experime; Varvaloucas, Alaina, Simeon Koroma,
Momo Turay, and Bilal Siddiqi. (2012). Improving the justice sector: Law and institution building in Sierra Leone. In: O.E.G. Johnson (ed.)
Economic Challenges and Policy Issues in Early 21st Century Sierra Leone, 9, 72.
95
96
research and data to improve implementation of the development agenda.
relating to justice would encourage efforts to scale up approaches that work.
187
Meanwhile, national targets
Justice: The Missing Element
Neither a justice goal nor justice targets were included in the Millennium Development Goals.
However, proposals put forth by governments, the HLP, civil society, and participants in UN global
consultations reveal a widespread recognition that justice was an important missing component. The HLP
recognized that rule of law and access to justice are “both a means to an end and an end in themselves” and
188
“help drive development and have their own intrinsic value”. The question now is how justice can be
accounted for in the post-2015 agenda. Is justice best secured through a standalone justice goal or
mainstreamed across other development goals? There are credible arguments for both positions.
Mainstreaming justice targets across other development goals highlights how justice interventions
contribute to various aspects of human development. The counter-argument is that justice targets merit their
own stand-alone goal because they involve freedoms that are important in their own right and precisely
because they are relevant to more than one development sector. For example, access to legal forums, and the
legal remedies they provide, is a fundamental human right whose importance need not be justified by
reference to other development goals, though it is relevant to many. Finally, the heightened visibility of a
stand-alone justice goal might also better serve the mainstreaming of legal empowerment within other goals.
One compromise might be to reframe the HLP’s Goal 10 on governance as a “Governance and Justice”
goal, thereby asserting that justice is a main pillar of good governance, or expanding HLP’s Goal 11 to “Ensure
Stable, Peaceful and Just Societies.” As the framework of the post-2015 development agenda develops, we will
gain greater clarity on how justice goals, targets, or indicators might best be integrated.
Integrating Four Key Justice Principles into the Post-2015 Agenda
The HLP’s report of 30 May is a groundbreaking affirmation of the role of justice in development. It
189
cites good governance as one of five transformative shifts that are core elements of well-being and proposes
190
a range of justice-linked goals and targets. It repeatedly aspires to a people-centered, legal empowerment
191
approach where everyone has a say over the decisions that affect their lives.
It also recognizes a range of
institutions, including civil society and people from all walks of life, as key to equitable and sustainable
192
development.
The HLP report – combined with the existing proposals of a number of governments, civil society
organizations, independent experts, UN bodies, and a global network of grassroots justice practitioners – offers
a platform on which to build. Drawing from a comprehensive review of these contributions, we have distilled
four key citizen-centered principles for empowering people to seek justice, which can guide efforts to
incorporate justice into the post-2015 development framework.
For each principle, we offer a basket of sample indicators that demonstrate the measurability of
193
related targets. Both the targets and indicators are illustrative. There is ongoing to debate as whether the
194
post-2015 framework will permit flexibility in the use of contextually developed targets and indicators. The
examples offered below are universally applicable, but can be easily customized for local or national use.
187
High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda. (2013). A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and
Transform Economies through Sustainable Development, 21, 23-24.
188
High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, 2013. A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and
Transform Economies through Sustainable Development, 4.
189
Ibid, 7-9.
190
Ibid, 30-31.
191
Ibid, 12.
192
Ibid, 5.
193
Data for all indicators can be gathered from administrative data, public surveys, geographic information systems, existing third party
monitoring or indices, or basic budget and legal analysis.
194
See, e.g. Fukuda-Parr, Sakiko, Alicia Ely Yamin, and Joshua Greenstein. (2013). Synthesis Paper - The power of numbers: A Critical Review
of MDG Target for Human Development and Human Rights, 24-28; Manning, Richard. (2009). Using Indicators to Encourage Development:
Lessons from the Millennium Development Goals, DIIS Report 2009, 64-70. Retrieved from
http://www.oecd.org/site/progresskorea/44117550.pdf
96
97
Principle One: Access to legal identity
Legal identity is the starting point for all legal rights and benefits. If you are not legally recognized as a
195
person, it is difficult to make the law work for you.
And people who do not have proof of their legal status
196
are often vulnerable to discrimination and exploitation.
The HLP partly recognizes this in its target 10a: “Provide free and universal legal identity, such as birth
registrations.” Birth registration is a precondition for most formal identity documents, including ID cards, birth
certificates, and passports. Yet, between 2000 and 2010, an estimated 49 per cent of births worldwide went
197
unregistered. The sample indicators below demonstrate how governments might track progress in this area.
Target: Universal birth registration implemented by law for all children in all countries.
Possible Indicators
Similar Recommendations
Existence of legislation requiring births to be registered by an IADB, Soros and Abed, Plan
official institution, which makes allowances for late birth Int’l and UNHCR
registration
Proportion of babies who receive registration at birth per year
Brinkman,
Lawson-Remer,
Langford, UNICEF, Vienna
Meeting
Target: Reduce the number of people who suffer for lack of secure legal identity.
Possible Indicators
Similar Recommendations
The proportion of people in a state who possess a registered form UNHCR
of legal identification
A fair, transparent and accessible process for obtaining legal ADB, IADB, UN Commission
identification exists
on Legal Empowerment of
the Poor
The proportion of requests for identity documents fulfilled or WJP
rejected on stated grounds within a reasonable amount of time,
defined as X days
The proportion of people denied access to services (e.g. healthcare,
education) because of lack of identity documentation
If governments adopt these targets, they should also ensure that a lack of legal identity does not lead to
violations of basic rights. This may mean eliminating identity requirements for critical services like health and
education. It is also worth noting that acquiring legal identity inherently deprives individuals of some privacy by
documenting their existence. Some governments may seek to misuse such procedures, for example to
persecute or deport certain minorities. Provisions to guard against such abuses need to accompany targets for
legal
identity.
195
See, for example, Soros, George and Sir Fazle Abed. (2012, September 26). “Rule of law can rid the world of poverty.” Financial Times.
Retrieved from http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/f78f8e0a-07cc-11e2-8354-00144feabdc0.html#axzz27cvwHasi
196
Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA) and the Open Society Justice Initiative. (2010). Communication Submitted
to the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. Retrieved from
http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/nubian-minors-submission-20100603.pdf; Gerber, Paula. (2009). “Making
Indigenous Australians ‘disappear’: Problems arising from our birth registration systems.” Alternative Law Journal, 34(3), 157-162; Islam, S.
(2007, December 19). “Kenyan Nubians: Without Papers, Who Are You?” Open Society Justice Initiative. Retrieved from
http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/voices/kenyan-nubians-without-papers-who-are-you
197
UNICEF. (2012). State of the World’s Children, 123. Retrieved from http://www.unicef.org/sowc2012/pdfs/SOWC%202012Main%20Report_EN_13Mar2012.pdf. This number excludes China.
97
98
Principle Two: Participation in services and poverty reduction
Legal identity and transparent government are foundational principles; they help people seeking
justice to not only enjoy the benefits and protection provided by the law, but also to take part in creating and
implementing laws, in particular those that affect them most directly.
This includes local governance over community land and natural resources. Approximately three
billion people around the world live without secure rights to what are often their greatest assets: their lands,
forests, and pastures. Research shows that giving communities the power to govern their natural resources—
including the ability to make and enforce rules—leads to better decisions, greater livelihood benefits, and more
198
sustainable development.
Another area where laws significantly affect people is the delivery of public services, including
education, health, and water. Citizens can strengthen the accountability of these services by providing
community oversight to ensure compliance with laws, or by working with service providers to determine what
199
local implementation of national policies might look like.
More broadly, people should be empowered to
engage in national lawmaking and constitutional processes.
The HLP alludes to this people-centered approach in its targets 10c, “Increase public participation in
political processes and civic engagement at all levels,” and 1b, “Increase by x% the share of women and men,
communities, and businesses with secure rights to land, property, and other assets,” as well as 10e, “Reduce
bribery and corruption and ensure officials can be held accountable.”
Below, we offer more detailed targets and indicators to help flesh out the HLP’s recommendations.
We start with sample indicators that assess the quality of implementation of community land rights laws, and
the role citizens play in governing their land.
Target: Increase the amount of land for which 1) women, men, communities and businesss have
secure land tenure and 2) decisions about land and natural resource use are taken through a
process of local democratic governance.
Possible Indicators
Similar Recommendations
The existence of legally recognized customary land tenure and/or Alden Wily, FAO, Global
community land and resource rights
Witness, USAID
Amount of land (ha) for which a) local communities possess rights to a) Almeida, Ubiñas
own, use, and conserve, and b) decisions about land and natural b) FAO, IIED and FAO,
resource use are taken through a process of local democratic Knight et. al., World Bank
governance
Confidence in tenure security: The proportion of households who ILC and CAPRi
believe that household and community land will not be confiscated
or wrongfully acquired
Proportion of households who believe they have a fair say in CAFOD, Global Witness, ILC
decisions about local land and natural resources
and CAPRi
Reduction in amount/proportion of communal land expropriated per World Bank
year for private purposes, or through compulsory state acquisition
Proportion of businesses expressing confidence in enforceability of Vienna Meeting
contracts in national courts
198
A global study of 80 forest areas across Asia, Africa, and Latin America found that greater local autonomy in making rules about forest
management was associated with high carbon storage and many livelihood benefits, such as firewood, fodder, fertilizer, and timber. The
findings suggest that when people perceive insecurity in their rights, they consume more forest products; but when their tenure rights are
secure, they conserve biomass and use their forest commons in a more sustainable manner. See Chhatre, Ashwini and Arun Agrawal.
(2009). Trade-offs and synergies between carbon storage and livelihood benefits from forest commons. PNAS, 106(42), 17667-17670. See
also Knight, Rachael, Judy Adoko, Ailas Siakor, Alda Salomao, Teresa Auma, Ali Kaba and Issufo Tankar. (2012). Protecting Community Lands
and Resources: Evidence from Liberia, Mozambique, and Uganda. Namati and International Development Law Organization (IDLO), 118.
199
There is increasing recognition that strengthening the accountability of services to local communities and end users is essential in
addressing service delivery failures. See, eg, The World Bank. (2004). World Development Report: Making Services Work for the Poor, ch. 4;
Gauri, Varun and Daniel Brinks eds. (2008). Courting Social Justice: Judicial Enforcement of Social and Economic Rights in the Developing
World, which demonstrates, on the basis of empirical studies in five countries, that rights and courts play a significant role in shaping health
and education services.
98
99
Next, we propose additional indicators that measure people’s ability to participate in the implementation of
laws and policies relating to essential services.
Target: Ensure the participation of citizens in developing and monitoring essential services such
as healthcare, water, and education.
Possible Indicators
Similar Recommendations
Existence of local and national oversight bodies for essential Commission on Health
services that are inclusive of all stakeholders, that publicize all
information, and that have the capacity to recommend remedial
action
A process exists by which civil society and communities can JALI Health
participate in the development of local/national standards and
plans of action relating to essential services
Existence of grievance redress mechanisms for public services
Principle Three: Access to fair and effective justice institutions
Everyone should have access to forums for resolving private conflicts fairly, for seeking protection
from violence, and for addressing grievances with the state when rights are infringed or policy is breached.
Around the world, however, justice institutions are still learning how to accomplish these objectives effectively
and equitably.
Governments must commit the financial and logistical support necessary to improve justice
institutions of all kinds: not only courts and police forces, but also administrative tribunals across government
200
sectors, ombudsman offices, and customary and community-based institutions.
They must ensure that
institutions respond to and learn from the lived experience of the people they are meant to serve.
The HLP addresses this priority in its targets 11b, “Ensure justice institutions are accessible,
independent, well-resourced and respect due-process rights,” and 11d, “Enhance the capacity, professionalism
and accountability of the security forces, police and judiciary.” These are well-established objectives for which
targets and indicators have been widely discussed. In June 2013, the members of the UN Task Team leading the
Conflict and Fragility Global Consultation and other international partners convened a meeting of experts in
New York. They formulated a range of indicators building from the HLP’s indicative list of targets particularly on
201
supporting justice institutions’ ability to contribute to stable and peaceful societies, among other areas.
The HLP also proposed targets aimed at reducing violence, crime, and corruption, responsibilities
falling within the domain of justice institutions. These targets include 2a, “Prevent and eliminate all forms of
violence against girls and women,” 11a, “Reduce violent deaths per 100,000 by x and eliminate all forms of
violence against children,” and 11c, “Stem the external stressors that lead to conflict, including those related to
organized crime.” A number of international efforts in recent years have identified indicators for the
measurement of progress against crime, including the United Nation’s a Rule of Law Indicators handbook,
202
which elaborates 135 separate metrics. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime convened a meeting
of technical experts in Vienna in June 2013 to address the place of security and justice in the post-2015
development agenda. The group articulated 42 potential indicators for measuring progress on security and
justice in the development context.
200
Our definition of “justice institution” is informed by the World Bank’s broad understanding of justice systems. “[A] justice system can be
thought of in terms of the formal and informal institutions that address breaches of law and facilitate peaceful contests over rights and
obligations. In organizational terms, a justice system may span all three branches of government and multiple nonstate actors, including:
the courts, the police, prosecutors’ offices, public defenders, state and civil society legal aid providers, alternative dispute resolution
mechanisms, administrative adjudication and enforcement mechanisms, customary and community - based institutions, anticorruption and
human rights commissions, ombuds offices, and property and commercial registries.” See The World Bank. (2012). The World Bank: New
Directions in Justice Reform: 2. Retrieved from http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/09/06/000386194_20120906024506/Rendered/PDF/706400REPL
ACEM0Justice0Reform0Final.pdf
201
Glen Cove Report: Expert Meeting on an Accountability Framework for Conflict, Violence and Disaster and the post-2015 Development
Agenda. (2013). United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF), Development Program (UNDP), and Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO), 2.
202
United Nations (2011). Rule of Law Indicators Implementation Guide and Project Tools, 41-65. Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/publications/un_rule_of_law_indicators.pdf
99
100
The indicators below draw from the recommendations of the above groups, among others.
Target: Increase the number of people with access to justice institutions that are affordable, fair,
and timely.
Possible Indicators
Similar proposals
The proportion of the population who live within reasonable G7+, Lawson-Remer, WJP
reach (measured in km, time of travel, or perception) of a legal
forum whose resolutions are fair and enforced
The proportion of overall budget allocated to the justice sector
as ratio of total government expenditure
DfID, G7+
Percentage of the population who express confidence in police
and justice institutions
DfID, DPKO and OHCHR, G7+,
Glen Cove Meeting, Vienna
Meeting,
DfID, Glen Cove Meeting,
Vienna Meeting
Intentional homicide or violent injury rate per 100,000
Percentage of people who paid a bribe to a security, police or
justice official during the last 12 months
CIGI, DfID, DPKO and OHCHR,
Vienna Meeting, WJP
Percentage of total detainees in presentence
detention
Vienna Meeting
Number of deaths in custody per 100,000 persons detained
within the last 12 months
Vienna Meeting
Principle Four: Legal Information, Assistance and Legal Aid
Legal aid schemes, public interest lawyers, community paralegals and other civil society legal
empowerment actors have proven effective in helping people to understand and use the law. These valuable
intermediaries have aided people in navigating administrative and legal procedures, taking part in governance,
and resolving disputes. A growing body of evidence shows that such legal aid and empowerment efforts have
203
led to tangible benefits, including greater personal safety and material well-being.
Legal aid and paralegal support also has a key role to play in fulfilling the HLP’s goal to empower
women and girls, especially target 2c: “Ensure equal right of women to own and inherit property, sign a
contract, register a business and open a bank account.” Legal empowerment programs often help women
204
overcome the barriers they face in accessing justice. In Morocco, for example, unwed mothers seeking
identity papers for their children often face discrimination and unwarranted prosecution for extramarital
relations. Local legal empowerment groups accompany them through the administrative process and help
205
them to resist abuse.
Additionally interventions supporting legal aid and one-stop shops have been seen to be effective.
These initiatives respond specifically to issues such as domestic violence and other forms of sexual and gender-
203
See, for example, Sandefur, Justin and Bilal Siddiqi. (2013). Delivering Justice to the Poor: Theory and Experimental Evidence from a Field
Experiment in Liberia; Rodriguez, M. (2000). Empowering Women - An Assessment of Legal Aid Under Ecuador's Judicial Reform Project;
Seron et al. (2001). “Impact of Legal Counsel on Outcomes for Poor Tenants in New York City.” Law & Society Review 35(2), 419-434;
Castagnola, M. A. (2003); Asian Development Bank. (2001). Law and Policy Reform at the ADB, Appendix 1: Philippines.
204
See, for example, International Development Law Organization. (2013). Accessing Justice: Models, Best Strategies and Best Practices on
Women's Empowerment. Retrieved from http://www.idlo.int/Publications/Women-AccesstoJustice.pdf; Donovan, Bremen. "Paralegal work
has been very important to women in our community." African Voices Blog Series. Namati. 19 December 2012. Retrieved from
http://www.namati.org/entry/paralegal-work-has-been-very-important-to-women-in-our-community/
205
Stephanie Willman Bordat and Saida Kouzzi (2020). “Chapter 8: Legal empowerment of unwed mothers: Experiences of Moroccan
NGOs,” in Stephen Golub (ed.) Legal Empowerment: Practitioners’ Perspectives. International Development Law Organization: 179.
Retrieved from: http://www.idlo.int/documents/legal_empowerment_practitioners_perspectives_book.pdf
100
101
based violence; they also support women in securing their access to inheritance and property rights and
206
addressing discrimination in family and personal law.
A comprehensive effort to ensure access to well-resourced justice institutions should include support
207
for civil society, potentially through autonomous bodies like ombudsman offices or public legal aid boards.
Establishing a global fund could narrow the financing gap for legal empowerment efforts.
The indicators below encourage greater accessibility to legal forums by measuring the equitable and
systematic delivery of high quality legal aid services. For the purposes of this sample set, we adopt a definition
of ‘legal aid’ that is inclusive of legal empowerment services.
Target: Increase the number of people with access to high quality legal aid.
Possible Indicators
Similar Recommendations
The proportion of overall budget allocated to legal aid services DFID, G7+
as ratio of total government expenditure.
The proportion of the population who live within reasonable Lawson-Remer, UNDP
reach (measured in km, time of travel, or perception) of a legal
aid provider (e.g. a qualified lawyer, paralegal, or other person
trained to act as a legal advisor)
The proportion of persons who report confidence that they can Brinkman, CAFOD, DPKO
access affordable and effective legal aid in the event that they OHCHR, UNDP, WJP
need legal advice or assistance
Ratio of legal aid providers per capita (on national, provincial,
and local level)
The proportion of citizens satisfied with cost/quality of legal
services provided
Percentage of defendants in criminal cases who are
represented in court by legal counsel or by non-lawyers, where
relevant
and
Government of Mongolia, G7+
DfID, UNDP, Willis
Vienna Meeting
Conclusion
This paper outlined four principal ways in which justice can be incorporated into the post-2015
development framework. It offered illustrative targets and indicators for each. The prospects for integrating
justice into the global policy agenda are improved if it can be shown that justice matters to development, and
that justice targets can be measured with credible metrics. At the same time, we must continue to develop
creative ways to measure progress towards meaningful targets, rather than crafting our targets to reflect what
can be easily measured.
The HLP report recommends that goals and targets need to be easy to understand and communicate
208
without jargon, compelling, widely applicable and consensus-based. This is essential. Ultimately, the post2015 agenda should aim to set justice targets and indicators that are meaningful and responsive to the lived
209
reality of the poor.
206
UN Women. (2012). Progress of the World’s Women: In Pursuit of Justice.
In 2012, over fifty organizations from more than twenty African countries adopted the Kampala Declaration on Community Paralegals,
which calls on governments to recognize the role paralegals play, to invest in delivering legal aid at scale, and to respect the independence
of paralegals and recognized legal aid providers. Retrieved from http://www.namati.org/kampala-declaration
208
High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, 2013. A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and
Transform Economies through Sustainable Development, 4.
209
Ibid, 13-14.
207
101
102
Bibliography of “Similar Recommendations”
from: Target and Indicator Tables
Alden Wily, Liz. (2012). Customary Land Tenure in the Modern World. Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI): 5.
Retrieved from http://www.rightsandresources.org/documents/files/doc_4699.pdf
Almeida, Fernanda and Jeffrey Hatcher. (2011). Measuring the Depth of Indigenous Peoples and Community
Forest Tenure: Preliminary Findings from a Legal Analysis of 33 Forest Tenure Regimes in 15 Countries. Rights
and Resources Initiative (RRI): 3-4. Retrieved from
http://www.rightsandresources.org/documents/files/doc_2493.pdf
Asian Development Bank (ADB). (2007). Legal Identity for Inclusive Development. ADB: 47-53. Retrieved from
http://www.adb.org/publications/legal-identity-inclusive-development
Brinkman, Hans-Jenk. (2013). Think piece on the inclusion of goals, targets and indicators for peace and security
and related areas into the post-2015 development framework. United Nations Peacebuilding Support Office:
12. (On file with author).
Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) and Korean Development Institute (KDI): Bates-Earner,
Nicole and Barry Carin, Min Ha Lee, Wonhyuk Lim, Mukesh Kapila. (2012). Post-2015 Development Agenda:
Goals, Targets and Indicators. CIGI: 55. Retrieved from
http://www.cigionline.org/sites/default/files/MDG_Post_2015v3.pdf
CAFOD: Frecheville, Neva and Bernadette Fischler. (2013). Building from the Ground Up: How the foundations
of a post-2015 framework should translate into change for people in poverty. CAFOD: 22-23. Retrieved from
http://www.cidse.org/index.php?option=com_k2&Itemid=195&id=257_ac177dba671250653204763d1189c2b
9&lang=en&task=download&view=item
Commission on information and accountability for Women’s and Children’s Health (“Commission on Health”).
(2011). Keeping Promises, Measuring Results. World Health Organization: 5. Retrieved from
http://www.everywomaneverychild.org/images/content/files/accountability_commission/final_report/Final_E
N_Web.pdf
Department for International Development (DfID). (2011). Indicators and VFM in Governance Programming.
Annex 1: Suggested Indicators for Security and Justice: 21. Retrieved from
http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/PDF/Outputs/Mis_SPC/60797_GovernanceIndicatorsVFMNoteFINAL.pdf
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. (2012). Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible
Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security. FAO: 3-4, 14.
Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i2801e/i2801e.pdf
G7+ International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding. (2012). Draft List of Peacebuilding and
Statebuilding Indicators: 5. (On file with author).
Glen Cove Meeting. (2013). Report: Expert Meeting on an Accountability Framework for Conflict, Violence and
Disaster and the post-2015 Development Agenda. United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF), United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP), and United Nations Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO): 10, 13, 16-20.
Global Witness. (2012). Report Card Guide and Indicators: 8, 12. Retrieved from
http://www.foresttransparency.info/cms/file/709
Government of Mongolia. (2011). Millennium Development Goals Implementation: Fourth National Report.
National Development and Innovation Committee: 122. Retrieved from
http://www.undp.mn/publications/mdg4eng.pdf
Inter-American Development Bank (IADB): Harbitz, Mia, and Tamargo, Maria del Carmen. (2009). The
Significance of Legal Identity in Situations of Poverty and Social Exclusion: The Link between Gender, Ethnicity,
102
103
and Legal Identity: 23-25. Retrieved from
http://idbdocs.iadb.org/wsdocs/getdocument.aspx?docnum=2255297
International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO):
Mayers, James, Elaine Morrison, Leianne Rolington, Kate Studd and Susanne Turrall. (2013). Improving
governance of forest tenure: a practical guide. Governance of Tenure Technical Guide No. 2: 45. Retrieved from
http://www.rightsandresources.org/documents/files/doc_6299.pdf
International Land Coalition (ILC) and Collective Action and Property Rights (CAPRi): Wilusz, Daniel. (2010).
Quantitative Indicators for Common Property Tenure Security: 43. Retrieved from
http://www.landcoalition.org/sites/default/files/publication/985/web.pdf
Joint Action and Learning Initiative (JALI) on National and Global Responsibilities for Health. (2012). The
Framework Convention on Global Health (FCGH) and the post-2015 development agenda: Incorporating the
principles of an FCGH into the new development goals. JALI: 5, 7. Retrieved from
http://www.jalihealth.org/documents/post-2015%20development%20agenda.pdf
Knight, Rachael, Judy Adoko, Ailas Siakor, Alda Salomao, Teresa Auma, Ali Kaba and Issufo Tankar. (2012).
Protecting Community Lands and Resources: Evidence from Liberia, Mozambique, and Uganda. Namati and
International Law Development Organizations: 118, 184-7.
Langford, Malcolm. (2012). The Art of the Impossible: Measurement Choices and the Post-2015 Development
Agenda. OHCHR/UNDP Expert Consultation, New York: 32-34. (On file with Author).
Lawson-Remer, Terra. (2013). Governance and Human Rights in the Post-2015 Development Framework: 12-14.
(On file with author).
Plan International & United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR). (2012). Under the Radar and
Under Protected. Plan & UNHCR: 7. Retrieved from http://plan-international.org/birthregistration/files/underthe-radar-english
Soros, George and Sir Fazle Abed. (2012, September 26). “Rule of law can rid the world of poverty.” Financial
Times. Retrieved from http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/f78f8e0a-07cc-11e2-835400144feabdc0.html#axzz27cvwHasi
Ubiñas, Luis. (2013, March 21). “Look to the World's Forests—and the People Who Live There—for Climate
Change Solutions.” Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.fordfoundation.org/issues/sustainabledevelopment/climate-change-responses-that-strengthen-rural-communities/news?id=747
The United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF). (2012). State of the World’s Children: 123. Retrieved from
http://www.unicef.org/sowc2012/pdfs/SOWC%202012-Main%20Report_EN_13Mar2012.pdf.
The United Nations Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor (“Commission on LE”). (2008). Making
the Law Work for Everyone. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP): 6-7. Retrieved from
http://www.undp.org/content/dam/aplaws/publication/en/publications/democratic-governance/legalempowerment/reports-of-the-commission-on-legal-empowerment-of-the-poor/making-the-law-work-foreveryone---vol-ii---english-only/making_the_law_work_II.pdf
The United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) and Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights (OHCHR). (2011). Rule of Law Indicators Implementation Guide and Project Tools. OHCHR: 41-65.
Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/publications/un_rule_of_law_indicators.pdf
The United Nations Development Program (UNDP). (2013). Rule of Law and Development Issue Brief:
Integrating Rule of Law in the post-2015 Development Framework: 6-7. Retrieved from
http://issuu.com/undp/docs/issue_brief_-_rule_of_law_and_the_post-2015_develo
103
104
The United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR). (2013). Addressing Statelessness: UNHCR Global
Report 2012: 62. Retrieved from http://www.unhcr.org/51b1d61db.html
United States Agency for International Development (USAID). (2005). User’s Manual for the Implementation of
the Blueprint for Strengthening Property Rights: 3. Retrieved from
http://www.pinzonhidalgo.com/pinzonhidalgo/manual.pdf
Vienna Meeting. (2013, August 27). Accounting for Security and Justice in the Post-2015 Framework. The United
Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC): 49, 56, 74, 76, 86. (draft on file with author).
Willis, Matthew. (2010). Indicators used internationally to measure Indigenous Justice Outcomes. Indigenous
Justice Clearinghouse: 5. Retrieved from http://www.indigenousjustice.gov.au/briefs/brief008.pdf.
The World Bank: Deininger, Klaus, Harris Selod, and Anthony Burns. (2012). The Land Governance Assessment
Framework: 41-43. Retrieved from
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/2376/657430PUB0EPI1065724B09780821387
580.pdf?sequence=1
World Justice Project: Botero, Juan Carlos and Ponce, Alejandro. (2011). Measuring the Rule of Law: 49 (legal
identity - timely administrative proceedings), 50 (access to legal aid). Retrieved from
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1966257 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1966257
104
105
ANNEX XI – Background Paper: Insecurity and violence in the post2015 development agenda
Introduction
“One-and-a-half billion people live in areas affected by fragility, conflict, or large-scale, organized criminal
violence, and no low-income fragile or conflict-affected country has yet to achieve a single United Nations
Millennium Development Goal” (WDR, 2011, 1).” While the links between conflict, violence, insecurity and
st
development are complex, there is little doubt that violence acts as a development disabler. In the 21 century,
violence and insecurity take many forms, from large and small wars, to inter-communal political violence,
criminal, gang and economically-motivated violence, and inter-personal or gender-based violence. Each has its
particular impact on socio-economic development and human well-being; together they add up to a major
obstacle to achieving the post-2015 development agenda.
This note highlights the negative impact of violence and insecurity on development and argues for the direct
inclusion of a specific and holistic goal dealing with violence and insecurity as the best means to focus
international and national efforts on security promotion and violence reduction. Its first two parts focus on the
negative impact of violence and insecurity, and on the negative impacts of armed violence on achievement of
the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Section 3 presents the case for a single universal goal dealing with
security and violence reduction, embedded within the initiatives on the post-2015 development agenda. The
final section looks at how conflict, violence and insecurity have been included in relevant parallel international
processes.
While the number of armed conflicts between and within states, and the number of associated battle deaths,
has declined since the 1990s (World Bank 2011, GBAV 2011), more than 1.5 billion people continue to live in
areas affected by fragility, conflict or large-scale organised criminal violence (International Alert, 2013).
Contemporary violence blurs the lines between armed conflict and other forms of organized violence, and
between political and economic violence, and requires a holistic approach to prevention and reduction in the
post-2015 development framework.
Violence prevention and reduction is a universal concern. Although it may assume different forms and affect
different groups, violence and insecurity exist in low, medium and high human development countries, and
touch the lives of men, women and children around the world. Many other tragedies kill people: diseases,
natural disasters, or accidents. But violence is unique because it involves the deliberate killing of fellow human
beings, and high levels of violence corrode the social and economic fabric of communities in all regions.
The Impact of Armed Violence and Insecurity on Development
Armed violence kills, on average, 526,000 people each year, but only one out of ten die as direct victims of
armed conflicts. Three-quarters of the victims (roughly 396,000 people) die in interpersonal and crime-related
210
violence outside of armed conflicts.
These figures do not include the many more affected by the indirect impacts of armed violence, due to the loss
of access to clean water, food, sanitation, and basic health care, or through the destruction of their livelihoods.
Nor does it capture the hundreds of thousands of survivors and victims who experience physical and
psychological harm from firearms violence and insecurity: between 500,000 and 750,000 people are injured in
non-conflict settings each year (Alvazzi del Frate, 2012). Violence is the second leading cause of death for
young men in developing countries (WHO, Global Burden of Disease, 2010), and the loss of these potentially
productive members of society is undeniably a development burden.
210
The Global Burden of Armed Violence database on lethal violence covers 2004–09: These deaths include 396,000 intentional homicides,
55,000 direct conflict deaths, 54,000 ‘unintentional’ homicides, and 21,000 killings during legal interventions (GD Secretariat, 2011, p. 4).
105
106
Map 1 The Geography of Armed Violence and Human Development, 2009
Source: Global Burden of Armed Violence database and selected development and violence indicators.
Violence and insecurity have a global impact as they erode a country’s human and social capital, reduce life
expectancy at birth, destroy its productive and financial capital, and can threaten macro-economic stability
(Soares, 2006; Geneva Declaration, 2008, p. 89). Violence has negative economic effects both at the macroeconomic (lower rates of savings and investment) and individual level (lower rates of participation in the labour
market, lower productivity) (Buvinic and Morrison, 1999, p. 4). Security expenditures and the costs of
containing violence may also increase disproportionately, with parallel decreases in welfare spending.
Conflict and violence represent “development in reverse,” generating costs that adversely affect countries and
communities for decades. ‘The average cost of a civil war is equivalent to more than 30 years of GDP growth for
a medium-size developing country” (World Bank, 2011, pp. 5–6). More generally, the World Development
Report 2011 found that “a country that experienced major violence over the period from 1981 to 2005 has a
poverty rate 21 percentage points higher than a country that saw no violence” and for every three years a
country is affected by major violence, poverty reduction lags behind by 2.7 per cent (World Bank, 2011, pp. 45). In 2011, armed conflicts displaced as many as 40 million people (UNHCR, 2012).
Figure 1 Poverty Rates and Major Violence, 1981-2005
Source: World Bank, World Development Report 2011, p. 4.
106
107
211
Although the countries with high and very high homicide rates
are concentrated in the low human
development band (as the figure below illustrates), violence and insecurity are not an exclusive concern of the
poor. In the medium and high human development categories, 51 of 120 countries report severe homicide
levels. Only in the very high human development category do countries enjoy low rates of lethal violence, and
even here, some forms of non-lethal violence (such as violence against women) are widespread.
Figure 2 Lethal Non-Conflict Violence and the Human Development Index, 1986–2009
Source: Global Burden of Armed Violence database and UNDP Human Development reports.
212
Globally, 1.5 billion people live in fragile situations affected by conflict or large-scale criminal violence. In
most of these countries, long-term economic growth prospects are poor and the stress on state institutions,
especially those intended to provide security and justice, is serious (Homi and Rogerson, 2012). The capacity of
a state to build and sustain effective justice and security institutions is related to the levels of violence:
research has shown the existence of a link between weak rule of law and high levels of homicide (GBAV, 2011,
p 107). Violence prevention and reduction is thus a means to build justice and security for all (UN General
Assembly, 2012).
Armed Violence and Development Goals
Without sustainable security, attaining development goals, and specifically the eight Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs), is a difficult challenge for conflict and violence-affected countries. Analysis of the MDGs and 21
213
214
of their indicators confirms that higher levels of homicide are correlated with high poverty levels (MDG 1:
211
Homicide rates are categorized in three intervals: low (≤7.25 per 100,000), high (7.26–18.57 per 100,000), and very high (>18.57 per
100,000) (GD Secretariat, 2011, p. 151).
212
According to the OECD (2007, p. 2), states are fragile when ‘state structures lack political will and/or capacity to provide the basic
functions needed for poverty reduction, development and to safeguard the security and human rights of their populations’. The World
Bank (2012b) ‘defines a set of fragile situations. A fragile situation is defined as having either: a) a composite World Bank, African
Development Bank and Asian Development Bank Country Policy and Institutional Assessment rating of 3.2 or less; or b) the presence of a
United Nations and/or regional peace-keeping or peace-building mission ... with the exclusion of border monitoring operations, during the
past three years’.
213
Measured as the population living below USD 1 per day.
214
Among the 97 low- and lower middle-income countries, 31 report high and 10 very high homicide rates. Among the 64 high-income
countries, 4 report high and 3 very high homicide rates (GD Secretariat, 2011, p. 153); using the classification of countries by income group
is from the World Bank (2012a).
107
108
Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger) and that a strong positive relationship exists between income inequality
and lethal violence.
The direction of causality is clear: five years of sustained conflict with only a moderate level of direct fatalities
on average pushes 3-4% of the population into undernourishment, and armed conflict also increases infant
mortality. For every soldier killed in battle, one infant dies that would otherwise have survived through the
indirect effects of conflict (Gates, Hegre, Nygard and Strand, 2012, p 1720).
There is also a clear correlation between armed violence and youth un- and underemployment as well as with
215
low primary education enrolment (MDG 2) (GD Secretariat, 2011, p. 154–55).
Exposure to war in early
childhood has a severe impact on early childhood health and adolescent educational attainment, and youth
falling out of the education system at a risk-prone age are more predisposed to violence and more susceptible
to recruitment into gangs or armed groups (Bundervoet, 2012; Cilliers and Schünemann, 2013, p.9).
High levels of homicide are positively associated with high mortality rates of children under five (MDG 4) and
high adolescent birth rates (MDG 5), and negatively with the number of births attended by skilled personnel
(MDG 5) (GD Secretariat, 2011, pp. 156–57). These results highlight that the lack of access to health care and
basic infrastructure often accompanies situations of high conflict, violence and insecurity. Lack of access to
basic infrastructure seems also to explain the relationship between countries with high levels of lethal violence
and lower access to drinking water and sanitation facilities (MDG 7).
Violence against women has distinct characteristics from other forms of violence, and has far-reaching
repercussions for those affected, their children, and families. “Globally, 35.6% of women have ever
experienced either non-partner sexual violence or physical or sexual violence by an intimate partner, or both,”
(WHO, 2013, p. 20) and even in high-income countries, is one of the last forms of violence to be tackled
216
effectively. Analysis of the indicators for the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women
(MDG 3) indicates that improving the physical security of women would help the realization of other MDGs,
and especially MDG 5 (OECD, 2010, p. 7).
Armed violence and insecurity have demonstrable long-term, far-reaching, and costly effects on development.
Violence reinforces social and economic inequalities, as well as political and economic marginalization, limits
the role of women, and erodes the quality and capacities of state institutions, especially those related to the
rule of law. These issues are relevant for all countries and should be captured in a post-2015 goal dealing with
development and insecurity.
Armed Violence and the post-2015 Agenda: Goals, Targets and Indicators
The MDG review process offers a key opportunity to bring violence and insecurity into the global development
framework. As noted by UNDP Administrator Helen Clark, “The MDGs were silent on the devastation caused by
217
violence and conflict.” The reflection process has been started by the UN System Task Team and the UN
Secretary General’s High Level Panel (HLP). The Task Team’s report to the Secretary General –Realizing the
Future We Want for All – identified “peace and security” as one of the four inter-dependent dimensions around
218
which future development frameworks should be crafted.
The HLP - co-chaired by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of Indonesia, President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of
Liberia, and Prime Minister David Cameron of the United Kingdom called for a universal post-2015 agenda
driven by five, big transformative shifts. “Build peace and effective, open and accountable institutions for all” is
215
The analysis considered the net enrolment ratio in primary school and literacy rates of 15–24-year-olds.
There is an association between lethal violence and the share of women working in the non-agricultural sector, and with the ratio of
girls to boys in primary and secondary education.
217
http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/speeches/2013/08/19/speech-helen-clark-at-2013-robert-chapman-lectureon-beyond-the-millennium-development-goals-/#.UhHVAb_8LW0.twitter
218
The other dimensions being: inclusive social development, inclusive economic development, environmental sustainability.
216
108
109
219
one of these five shifts (United Nations, 2013, p. 8).
It also stressed that “conflict – a condition that has been
called development in reverse – must be tackled head-on, even within a universal agenda” and it included a
standalone goal on “ensuring stable and peaceful societies, with targets that cover violent deaths, access to
justice, stemming the external causes of conflict, such as organised crime, and enhancing the legitimacy and
accountability of security forces, police and the judiciary” (United Nations, 2013, p.16).
During the UN global thematic consultations focusing on “Conflict, Violence and Disaster and the Post-2015
Development Agenda,” participants strongly supported the proposal of including a standalone goal to reduce
220
violence, to promote freedom from fear, and to encourage sustainable peace.
In the frame of the Global
Thematic Consultations, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of Indonesia said: “Governments and all the
stakeholders must work to create a lasting solution to today’s conflict[s] … and organized crime. When we
221
escape from this violence-trap, we also stand a better chance to escape the poverty-trap.”
Although there are significant sensitivities around language on violence and insecurity, few deny their
importance for development and human well-being, or the evidence of its negative impact. Peace and conflict,
armed violence and insecurity are clearly development disablers, and should have an important place in the
post-2015 architecture.
There are political and practical challenges facing any new post-2015 development goals, and violence and
insecurity are no different. National and global capacities to measure and monitor the scope, distribution and
impacts of armed violence on development do exist and have been improving in the past decade, and many
experts accept that reductions in violent deaths, the incidence of sexual violence or the proportion of people
feeling unsafe are key indicators of insecurity and violence. The post-2015 discussions represent an opportunity
to enhance national capacities for security promotion and violence reduction, by supporting efforts that
countries are already making in reducing and preventing armed violence and insecurity, and generating
momentum to improve data-gathering and analysis on security, justice and rule of law issues.
219
http://www.un.org/sg/management/hlppost2015.shtml . United Nations (2013), A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and
Transform Economies Through Sustainable Development. New York. The five HLP transformative shifts are: Leave No One Behind; Put
Sustainable Development at the Core; Transform Economies for Jobs and Inclusive Growth; Build Peace and Effective, Open and
Accountable Institutions for All; Forge a New Global Partnership (United Nations, 2013).
220
The Global Thematic Consultations on Conflict, Violence and Disaster, and the Post-2015 Agenda, Draft Synthesis Report, 11 March
2013. The consultation was co-led by UNDP, UNPBSO, UNICEF and UNISDR with the support from the Governments of Finland, Indonesia,
Liberia and Panama. Participants cautioned against a single goal to include conflict, violence, and disaster, warning against lumping a
relatively non-controversial theme such violence and disaster with politically sensitive issues such as conflict and fragility.
221
http://www.presidenri.go.id/index.php/eng/pidato/2012/12/13/2018.html (accessed 14.08.2013)
109
110
Box 1: A universal goal for security, safety and violence reduction
“Ensuring stable and peaceful societies”, the goal suggested by the High Level panel, has the best potential as
the overall universal goal addressing peace and security in the post-2015 framework.
Consultations have shown that there is widespread agreement that ‘the reduction and prevention of violent
deaths and the elimination of all forms of violence against children, women and other vulnerable groups’ should
be a key target for such a goal. Reducing violent deaths and other forms of violence will enhance socioeconomic and human development, but is also a valuable end in itself. Security and safety are rights, enshrined
222
in international norms, to which all citizens are entitled.
The most straightforward and universal ‘objective’ indicator to measure progress towards this target is violent
deaths per 100,000 people, including homicides, deaths in armed conflict, and other forms of lethal violence.
This indicator is based on well-established methodologies, is comparable across settings, and is less subject to
manipulation that some other security, safety and justice indicators. Violent death rates are of course only one
indicator, but they can be a proxy for overall levels of security and safety. Other important indicators
(especially in particular contexts) could focus on the prevalence of rape and other forms of sexual violence,
suicide rates, and recruitment of children into armed forces and armed groups, although these indicators suffer
to different degrees from data collection, comparability and conceptual concerns.
A second target could focus on ‘enhancing the capacity, professionalism, accountability of security, police and
justice institutions.’ Establishing effective and accountable justice and security institutions based on the rule of
law is crucial to reducing the risk of armed violence. When security and justice institutions are weak or absent,
individuals and communities may turn to violence as a coping strategy to seek remedies for their grievances. By
contrast, in a state with well-functioning and accountable justice and security systems, the cost of resorting to
violence to meet political, economic, and justice objectives is prohibitively high.
A third target could focus on ‘enhancing equity and social cohesion and ensur[ing] adequate formal and
informal mechanisms are in place to manage disputes peacefully’. The legitimacy of state institutions in the
eyes of society, relations between different groups in society, and equitable access to services for individuals
and communities have been identified as important factors to reduce the risk of insecurity and violence and
should be highlighted with a specific target.
Indicators of the ‘objective’ situation (the first target) should be accompanied by indicators of capacities to
address the problem, and of public perceptions (UNDP, 2013, p.1). The institutional dimension of targets 2 and
3, for example, focuses on the formal laws, informal norms and practices, means of enforcement, and
organizational structures of institutions such as the police or the justice systems. Annexes 2 and 3 provide
details of the suggested targets and indicators for objective as well as institutional capacities and public
perceptions, and indicate in schematic form some of the issues associated with different indicators.
A goal on “stable and peaceful societies” also needs to be supported by relevant targets distributed in other
relevant goals, especially those dealing with governance and justice issues, management of natural resources
or external stress factors.
223
The global consultations and expert meetings conducted out so far have shown that a standalone universal
goal on violence and insecurity is possible and desirable, especially since it will capture issues and challenges
not included in other goals and targets. But such a goal should be focused on clear and relatively
uncontroversial concepts, include specific targets focusing on key risk factors, and have operationally feasible
222
Sanctity of life and freedom from fear are enshrined in the Universal Declaration and the Millennium Declaration. See
http://www.theglobalobservatory.org/analysis/382-why-personal-security-should-be-part-of-the-post-2015-development-agenda.html.
223
Two expert meetings have been organized in Glen Cove (18-19 June 2013) on ‘An Accountability Framework for Conflict, Violence,
Governance and Disaster in the Post-2015 Development Agenda’ and in Vienna, Austria (24-25 June 2013) on ‘Accounting for Security and
Justice in the Post-2015 Development Agenda’.
110
111
and reliable indicators. Goals and targets should be universal, with shared indicators, but with timeframes and
steps for reaching targets potentially adjusted to country contexts. As progress towards the realization of
targets and goals cannot always be measured by a single indicator, it may be useful to use baskets of indicators
to monitoring peace, violence and insecurity in the new framework. These baskets should combine indicators
of the ‘objective’ situation, of public perceptions, and of capacities to address the problem (UNDP, 2013, p.1).
Geographic, temporal and demographic disaggregation is also critical for producing a robust evidence base on
which to develop practical programmes and policies.
th
th
In the expert meeting held in Vienna on 24 and 25 June 2013 as part of the global thematic consultations on
the post-2015 framework, a matrix has been developed to assess the reliability and utility of goals and targets
in the areas of security and justice. It differentiates between indicators that are internationally applicable and
comparable (Global, ‘G’) or more applicable in certain national contexts (National, ‘N’) and between indicators
for which there are few methodological issues and concerns (Tier 1) and those where significant differences or
uncertainties in methodological approach or data collection persist (Tier 2).
G
1



Well-established methodology
Generally applicable to all countries
Comparable
across
different
countries
N
 Well-established methodology
 More relevant for certain country
contexts
Source: UNDP, 2013 a
2



Developing methodology
Generally applicable to all countries
Comparable across different countries


Developing methodology
More relevant for certain country contexts
Annex 3 presents a variety of targets and indicators, at both the global and national level, that would fit with a
universal security and justice goal.
Building International Consensus on Armed Violence and Development
The 2000 Millennium Declaration was a landmark document that set the ground for the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs). The eight MDGs were to provide relevant and robust measures of progress
towards these commitments; however, they did not include goals related to peace, security and disarmament,
despite these issues being prominent in the Declaration. The international agenda has, however, evolved since
2000. A wide variety of initiatives and stakeholders have recognized the importance of violence reduction and
security promotion as a critical contribution to development processes. These processes have been supported
by several authoritative reports highlighting the devastating impacts of armed violence on development,
including the Global Burden of Armed Violence reports (2008, 2011), the World Bank’s World Development
Report 2011 on “Conflict, Security and Development,” and the UNODC 2011 Global Study on Homicide.
Yet fragmentation of the available information and tools within specific communities (disarmament,
development, public health, crime prevention) remains an obstacle to a more comprehensive approach to
security promotion and violence reduction as a contribution to sustainable development.
The 2006 Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development, a high-level diplomatic initiative supported
by 112 states and civil society actors, aims to achieve measurable reductions in the global burden of armed
violence by 2015 (and beyond). Within this framework, the UN General Assembly in 2008 adopted a consensus
resolution on Promoting Development through the Reduction and Prevention of Armed Violence (A/RES/63/23)
which called on the Secretary-General to seek the views of the member states on the interrelations between
armed violence and development. The Secretary-General’s subsequent report on Promoting Development
through the Reduction and Prevention of Armed Violence (A/64/228) recognizes that armed violence
undermines development and constitutes an impediment to the achievement of the Millennium Development
Goals. Building on these efforts, the government of Norway supported the development of the Oslo
Commitments, adopted by 61 states in 2010, which affirm that armed violence and development are closely
111
112
linked and that countries should include armed violence reduction and prevention in MDG achievement
224
strategies.
At the Fourth High‐Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan in November 2011, 39 developing countries,
bilateral and multilateral donors, and the UN Development Group endorsed an agreement on a new global
direction for engagement with fragile states, including those facing high levels of armed violence. The New Deal
225
for Engagement in Fragile States sets out five “peacebuilding and statebuilding” (PSGs) goals to give clarity to
the priorities in fragile states (see Annex 1), and commits signatories to work towards full consideration of the
PSGs in the post‐MDG development framework beyond 2015.
The UN Security Council has also discussed aspects of security promotion and armed violence reduction on
several occasions, and in 2010 it underlined “the necessity to address the root causes of conflicts, taking into
account that development, peace and security and human rights are interlinked and mutually reinforcing”
(S/PRST/2010/18). Particularly relevant is the “High Level Open Debate on the interdependence between
security and development” organised on 11 February 2011, under the presidency of Brazil, which stressed the
226
importance reducing criminal violence and addressing the proliferation of small arms.
More recently (June
2013), the Security Council, debating the issue of “women, peace and security,” stressed the need not to
227
overlook “the inter-linkage between security, development and sustainable peace.”
In 2012, the UN General Assembly also underlined the strong and mutually reinforcing relationship between
development and rule of law and stressed that “the advancement of the rule of law at the national and
international levels is essential for sustained and inclusive economic growth, sustainable development, the
eradication of poverty and hunger and the full realization of all human rights and fundamental freedoms,
228
including the right to development …” (A/Res/67/1). Gender-based violence and its impact on development
have also been addressed in various forums, including in the 66th World Health Assembly (May 2013). Seven
countries – Belgium, India, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, United States, and Zambia – adopted a Statement on
“Addressing Violence against Women” and called upon countries to “show our collective commitment to
addressing interpersonal violence (…) to address this important health issue, particularly for women and
229
girls.”
These initiatives, although often focusing on a particular domain and addressing specific constituencies, all
highlight the need to adopt a comprehensive approach to violence, insecurity and development, and to provide
a policy frame that addresses the social and economic risk factors associated with insecurity and violence, the
quality and capacities of institutions, and the positive role that particular groups such as women and youth can
play in peace and security promotion.
Armed violence is a global concern, and not an issue important only for a specific group of countries affected by
or dealing with the consequences of armed conflict. However, low- and middle-income countries bear a
disproportionate share of the burden of armed violence. Armed violence reduction and security promotion
thus needs to be recognized as a basic human need and a development issue, and not only a matter for
security policy or law enforcement.
224
http://www.osloconferencearmedviolence.no/
The New Deal has been developed by the International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding (ID) which comprises g7+ group of
fragile states and the International Network on Conflict and Fragility (INCAF). See: http://www.pbsbdialogue.org/
226
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10172.doc.htm
227
http://www.un.int/brazil/speech/13d-lafm-CSNU-Women-Peace-Security.html
228
See United Nations General Assembly, 2012. Resolution A/Res/67/1 on Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly
on the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels, 30 November 2012, para. 7.
229
http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/wha_outcome_statement.pdf
225
112
113
Annex 1 - Suggestions for Security Promotion and Violence Reduction Goals
Suggestions for Security Promotion and Violence Reduction Goals
Geneva Declaration’s Goals for Armed Violence Reduction
Goal 1: Reduce the number of people physically harmed from armed violence
Goal 2: Reduce the number of people and groups affected by armed violence
Goal 3: Strengthen institutional responses to prevent and reduce armed violence
Source: Geneva Declaration Secretariat (2010), Measuring and Monitoring Armed Violence: Goals, Targets and
Indicators
The New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States: Peacebuilding and Statebuilding Goals
Goal 1: Fostering inclusive political settlements and conflict resolution;
Goal 2: Establishing and strengthening security;
Goal 3: Addressing injustices and increasing access to justice;
Goal 4: Generating employment and improving livelihoods; and
Goal 5: Strengthening management capacity and accountability to deliver services.
Source: International Dialogue for Peacebuilding and Statebuilding (2011)
Potential Goals in the post-2015 Architecture
The Global Thematic Consultation on Conflict, Violence and Disaster: Possible Goals on ‘Violence and
Security’
Goal 1: Reduce violence and promote sustainable peace and freedom from fear
Goal 2: Protect children and youth from violence
Goal 3: Eliminate all forms of violence against women and girls
High-Level Panel Report
Goal 11: Ensure Stable and Peaceful Societies
Source: United Nations, 2013
Sustainable Development Solutions Network Report: Specific Targets within SDGs
Under Goal 1: Target 1c: Provide enhanced support for highly vulnerable states and Least Developed Countries,
to address the structural challenges facing those countries, including violence and conflict.
Under Goal 4: Target 4c: Prevent and eliminate violence against individuals, especially women and girls
113
114
Annex 2 – Proposals from the Expert Meeting on an Accountability Framework for Conflict, Violence , Governance and
Disaster and the post-2015 Development Agenda (New York, 18-19 June 2013)
Goal: Ensure a Safe and Peaceful Society (Report of the Expert Meeting on an Accountability Framework for Conflict,
Violence , Governance and Disaster and the post-2015 Development Agenda (New York, 18-19 June 2013)
Targets
Indicators
Source / Data Issues
Target 1:
Reduce and prevent
violent
deaths
per
100,000 people by x and
eliminate all forms of
violence
against
children, women and
other
vulnerable
1
groups.
1a. Intentional homicide rate per 100,000
Disaggregated by age, sex, social
groups, time, region, and income.
Target 2:
Enhance the capacity,
professionalism,
accountability
of
security, police and
5
justice institutions.
2a. Percentage of the population who express
6
confidence in police and justice institutions
Target 3:
Enhance equity and
social cohesion and
ensure adequate formal
and
informal
mechanisms are in place
to manage disputes
peacefully
1b. Direct deaths from armed conflict per 100,000
1c. Suicide rate per 100,000
2
1d. Violent injury per 100,000
3
Reliable measurement not possible
with the current stock of data
1e. Percentage of citizens who feel safe
1f. Number of children recruited by armed forces and
non-state armed groups
1g.Rape and other forms of sexual violence per
100,000
4
1h.Rate of child maltreatment
2b.Degree of civilian and parliamentary oversight of
security institutions and budgets which are public
2c.Percentage of security, police and justice personnel
prosecuted over the total number of reported cases of
misconduct
2d.Number of police and judicial sector personnel
(qualified judges, magistrates, prosecutors, defense
attorneys) per 100,000 and distribution across the
7
territory.
2e. Ratio of formal cases filed to cases resolved per
8
year
3a. Degree of equitable access to, resourcing of, and
outcomes from public services
3b. Level of trust and tolerance within society
3c. Perceptions of discrimination
3d. Degree to which there are effective formal or
informal mechanisms and programs in place to prevent
and resolve disputes peacefully
Perception Survey
Disaggregated by age, gender, social
groups, time, region, and income.
Expert Survey
Administrative Data
Administrative Data
Perception and Administrative Data
Disaggregated by age, gender, social
groups, time, region, and income.
114
115
1
Percentage agreed by national governments. States may give consideration to a global target.
Possibly belongs under public health targets.
3
There are serious data limitations and differing definitions (inclusive political difficulties) across countries. Participants
strongly recommend the strengthening of statistical capacity to create a data revolution.
4
Participants stressed difficulties in practical measurement.
5
In line with the lessons learnt from some of the existing MDGs, concern was expressed about framing this target in terms
of capacities which are assumed to lead to a desired outcome, rather than as the outcome itself. The outcome should be
public safety/security, and developing capacity, professionalism and accountability of security, police and justice
institutions. It should be measured by indicators of capacity that sit alongside indicators on levels of public security and
confidence.
6
The International dialogue Statebuilding and Peacebuilding indicators were used as a ‘starting point’. It should also be
based on the need to capture trust in institutions.
7
Identifying targets or appropriate levels by countries may be necessary to not simply encourage a higher number of
police.
8
Some participants suggested the need to focus this kind of indicator on the achievement of justice outcomes by focusing
on the ratio of persons convicted by due process to the total number of perpetrators (as measured by victimization
surveys).
2
115
116
Annex 3 Security and Justice Goals, Targets and Indicators (Vienna Expert Meeting, UNDP, 2013a, Figure 5)
Goal 11: Ensure Stable and Peaceful Societies (as formulated by the UNODC expert meeting report, “Accounting for
Security and Justice in the Post-2015 Development Agenda,” draft of 27 August 2013.
Target: Reduce and prevent violent deaths per 100’000 by x and eliminate all forms of violence against children
G
Intentional homicide rate per 100’000 Reported incidents of violence against children per 100’000
population
Percentage of detained children who die in detention
Percentage of the population who feel safe in Percentage of children who have experienced physical or sexual
their own neighbourhood after dark
violence
Percentage of the adult population who have
experienced physical or sexual violence within
the last 12 months
N
Direct deaths from armed conflict per 100’000 Indirect Deaths from armed conflict per 100’000 population
population
Percentage of persons convicted of a violent
crime who have previously been convicted of a
violent crime within the past five years
(recidivism)
Target: Enhance the capacity, professionalism, accountability, security, police and justice institutions
G
Percentage of people who paid a bribe to a Percentage of population who express confidence in police
security, police or justice official during the last Percentage of prisoners who report having experienced physical
12 months
or sexual victimization while imprisoned over the past 6 months
Number of deaths in custody per 100,000
persons detained within the last 12 months
Number of police and justice personnel per
100’000 population
N
Proportion of violent criminal cases formally initiated that are
resolved
Target: Ensure justice institutions are accessible, independent, well-resourced and respect due-process rights
G
Percentage of total detainees in pre-sentence Percentage of defendants in criminal cases who are represented
detention
in court by legal counsel or by non-lawyers, where relevant
Percentage of victims of violent crimes who Average length of time spent in pre-sentence detention
reported victimization to law enforcement or Number of children in detention per 100’000 child population
other authorities
N
Proportion of businesses expressing confidence in enforceability
of contracts in national courts
Percentage of criminal cases decided upon within a timeframe
of 1 year (first instance)
Target: Stem the stressors that lead to violence and conflict, including those related to organized crime
G
Percentage of persons and business who Level of global production of cocaine and opium
report being a victim of extortion
Intentional homicide by firearm rate per
100,000 population
N
Value of illicit economy as a percentage of GDP
Percentage of people who have experienced what they consider
racially or ethnically-motivated violence
Percentage of the elements mandated by the UNTOC and its
protocols that are included in domestic legislation
116
117
References
Alvazzi del Frate, Anna. 2012. ‘A Matter of Survival: Non-lethal Firearm Violence.’ In Small Arms Survey, Small Arms Survey
2012: Moving Targets. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 79–105.
Bundervoet, Tom. 2012. War, Health, and Educational Attainment: A Panel of Children during Burundi’s Civil War.
Households in Conflict Network Working Paper No. 114. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of
Sussex.
Buvinic, Mayra and Andrew Morrison. 1999. Violence as an Obstacle to Development. Technical Note No. 4. Washington,
DC: Inter-American Development Bank.
Cilliers, Jakkie and Schünemann Julia. 2013. The future of intrastate conflict in Africa, more violence or greater peace, ISS
Paper 246, Institute for Security Studies
Gates, Scott, Hegre, Håvard, Nygard, Håvard Mokleiv and Strand, Håvard. 2012, Development Consequences of Armed
Conflict, World Development Vol. 40:9, pp 1713- 1722.
Geneva Declaration Secretariat. 2008. Global Burden of Armed Violence. Geneva: Geneva Declaration Secretariat.
—. 2011. Global Burden of Armed Violence: Lethal Encounters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Homi, Kharas and Rogerson. Andrew, 2012. ‘Poverty Trends: Fragility.’ Horizon 2025 – Creative Destruction in the Aid
Industry, p. 8. London: Overseas Development Institute. 1 July. http://www.odi.org.uk/publications/6687-creativedestruction-aid-industry-development-kharas-rogerson
International Alert. 2013, Crime, Violence and Conflict, Rethinking peacebuilding to meet contemporary challenges,
London, International Alert. Accessed at http://www.international-alert.org/resources/publications/crimeviolence-and-conflict
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2007. Principles for Good International Engagement in
Fragile States and Situations. Paris: OECD.
—. 2010. Gender Inequality and the MDGs: What Are the Missing Dimensions? Paris: OECD.
—. 2011. Breaking Cycles of Violence: Key Issues in Armed Violence Reduction. Paris: OECD.
—. 2013. Fragile States 2013: Resource flows and trends in a shifting world. Paris: OECD.
Soares, Rodrigo. 2006. ‘The Welfare Cost of Violence across Countries.’ Journal of Health Economics, Vol. 25, No. 5.
September, pp. 821–46.
United Nations, 2013. A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies Through Sustainable
Development. New York
UN (United Nations) Committee for Development Strategy. n.d. ‘The United Nations Development Strategy Beyond 2015.’
Accessed June 2012.
UN General Assembly. A/Res/67/1, 30 November 2012. ‘Declaration of the High-level Meeting of the General Assembly on
the Rule of Law at the National and International Levels.’
<http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/.../2012cdppolicynote.pdf>
UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). n.d. ‘Human Development Index (HDI).’ Accessed June 2012.
http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/hdi/
UNDP. 2013, Report of the Expert Meeting on an Accountability Framework for Conflict, Violence, Governance and Disaster
in the Post-2015 Development Agenda,’ New York, 18-19 June 2013
UNDP. 2013 a, Accounting for Security and Justice in the Post-2015 Agenda, Report of the Expert Meeting organised by
UNODC in Vienna on 25-26 June 2013. Draft of 27 August 2013.
UNHCR. 2012. ‘A Year of Crisis: Forcibly Displaced People World-Wide.’ UNHCR Global Trends 2011, p. 2. Geneva: United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. 18 June.
UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN), 2013. An Action Agenda for Sustainable Development, available
at www.unsdsn.org
World Bank. 2011. World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security and Development. Washington, DC: World Bank.
117
118
—. 2012a. ‘How We Classify Countries.’ <http://data.worldbank.org/about/country-classifications>
—.
2012b.
‘Fragile
and
Conflict-affected
countries.’
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/PROJECTS/STRATEGIES/EXTLICUS/0,,menuPK:511784~pagePK:64171
540~piPK:64171528~theSitePK:511778,00.html
World Health Organization (WHO). 2010. Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2010, Geneva: WHO.
—. 2013. Global and regional estimates of violence against women: prevalence and health effects of intimate
118
119
ANNEX XII – Background Paper: The linkages between rule of law and
development: an empirical intimation
Mark Orkin
230
The evidence base for the relationship between the rule of law and
231
development is multi-faceted, complex and sometimes contested.
Overview
1. This Note reports a particular empirical exploration of the manner and extent to which the rule of law (RoL) predicts
development, focussing on using two well-established indexes. RoL is conceived by the World Justice Project (WJP) to
have eight components, of which four may be taken as core to RoL (limited government powers, regulatory
performance, civil justice, and criminal justice), and four may be taken as cognate, in that they are equally well
regarded as aspects of good governance (absence of corruption, order and security, fundamental rights and open
government). Development is measured by the UNDP’s Human Development Index, which compounds measures of
education, life expectancy and gross national income.
2.
The overall finding of the statistical exploration is that the components of rule of law, differentiated as above but
operating in conjunction, powerfully predict development. The particular findings are fourfold:
a)
b)
c)
d)
Of the core components of RoL, limited government powers and regulatory performance are the most
proximate in relation to development (see Figure 2);
The respective relationships are subtle. Regulatory powers does not have a direct effect on HDI, but rather via
the cognate component of absence of corruption. And limited government powers is unexpectedly found to
have an negative direct correlation with HDI, but its overall impact on HDI is nevertheless positive because it
has a larger indirect positive effect on HDI via the cognate RoL components of fundamental rights and
transparency;
The other two core components of RoL appear to function more as corollaries: civil justice is supported by
regulatory performance; and criminal justice is supported by absence of corruption, and in turn supports order
and security. The latter may thus be viewed as an additional outcome of RoL.
The measurable indicators for each component are prioritised in the context of these linkages to development.
Their overall number may be reduced without diminishing the force of the model.
The World Justice Project’s index of Rule of Law
3. The Washington-based World Justice Project (WJP) undertakes a massive programme of monitoring progress on the
rule of law (RoL) across ninety seven countries, accounting for more than 90% of the world’s population. WJP
232
identifies eight components of RoL, derived from international standards, national constitutions and scholarly
literature through expert consultations.
Table 1: World Justice Project: Components of Rule of Law
“Core” components
Limited government powers
Regulatory enforcement
Civil justice
Criminal justice
230
231
232
Label
1. Limits
6. Regul’ns
7. Civil J.
8. Crim. J.
“Cognate” components
Absence of corruption
Order and security
Fundamental rights
Open government
Label
2. Integrity
3. Security
4. Rights
5. Transpar.
Dr Mark Orkin ([email protected]) is a Visiting Professor in the School of Public and Development Management at the University of the
Witwatersrand, and Associate Fellow of the Department of Social Policy and Intervention at Oxford University. He was previously Head of Statistics
South Africa, and CEO of the statutory Human Sciences Research Council.
UNDP, “The rule of law and development: Issue brief” (New York: UNDP, January 2013).
There is a ninth WJP component, informal justice. It does not yet publish data on this component, because of the difficulties still experienced in
systematic and comparable measurement. See Agrast, M.et al., WJP Rule of Law Index 2012 (Washington, D.C.: The World Justice Project, 2102), p. 17,
n. 9.
119
120
The components represent a balance between “thin” and “thick”, formal and substantive, conceptions. Four of them
may be viewed as core to RoL; and four as cognate, in that the latter are often viewed as aspects of good
233
governance.
4.
Each component is an aggregate of between three and eight measurable indicators. There are forty-eight indicators
234
235
in all, as shown in Appendix A that is a re-arrangement of WJP’s table. For example, the six indicators for Limits
are effective limitations by the legislature, judiciary, and independent audit; sanctions of officials’ misconduct; nongovernmental checks; and lawful transitions of power. Table 1 above also shows the abbreviated labels that will be
applied to the components during the analyses.
5.
The indicators are scored by WJP in two ways: by sample surveys in each country of 1000 members of the public
across the three largest urban areas, and by assessments from relevant local experts. These are weighted equally.
The WJP has subjected the overall RoL index to statistical audit. This confirmed the balance among the eight
components, and the approximately equal importance of the indicators of each component. The WJP itself prefers to
display the eight component scores separately for each country.
The UNDP’s Human Development Index (HDI)
6. The UNDP’s influential Human Development Index (HDI) is a complex statistical compound “of the average
achievements in a country in three basic dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, access to
236
knowledge and a decent standard of living” , respectively indexed by life expectancy, mean and expected years of
schooling, and gross national income per head. It is calculated annually and covers 187 countries, including all of
those included by the WJP.
The broad correlation between HDI and the RoL
7. The auditors of the WJP’s RoL index note that, although WJP prefers to diagram the separate component scores for
237
each country, an “aggregated RoL index would also appear statistically justified given the data”. When one
2
accordingly compares this aggregated index with the HDI, for the year 2012, a linear trend-line fits quite well, with R
is 0.58 and quite a steep slope (see Fig. 1, and Appendix B for the country codes). To each ten-point rise in HDI there
corresponds a seven point rise in RoL.
8.
In other words, without yet surmising a causal direction, there is an evident linkage between rule of law and
development – the former subsuming not only its core legal aspects but its cognate good-governance aspects, and
the latter subsuming not only economic but health and education aspects.
9.
The country-level detail is also illuminating. To the left, one sees among low-HDI countries that a dozen relatively
recently democratizing African countries fare considerably better on RoL than the linear regression line would predict
(while Bangladesh, Pakistan and Cambodia fare worse, as well as Cameroon). To the right, among high-HDI countries,
some long-industrialised European and especially Nordic countries fare even better on RoL than predicted (plus
Japan, and Australia and New Zealand). At the centre, among medium-HDI countries, some European transition
states and South American countries do less well than expected, notably Russia and Venezuela respectively; while
Ghana and especially Botswana do conspicuously better. This examination suggests that a non-linear relationship
238
may fit even better, with increasingly close fit for higher levels of HDI.
233
234
235
236
237
See, for example, Mark Orkin, “Democratic governance and accountable institutions”, forthcoming in Wonhyuk Lim (ed.) One World Goals: Post-2015
Development Agenda (Seoul: Korea Development Institute, 2013).
Loc. cit., p. 11. The forty eight indicators span some four hundred variables, which are normalised to run from 0 to 1 before arithmetic aggregation.
The WJP does not apply indicator 1.1.
United Nations Development Programme, “Technical notes”, in UNDP Human Development Report 2013: The Rise of the South (New York: UNDP,
2013), p. 2. The data for the HDI are supplied by UNDESA, UNESCO Institute for Statistics, World Bank, IMF, and UN Statistics Division.
Michaela Saisana and Andrea Saltelli, European Commission Joint Research Centre, “Statistical audit”, in WJP Rule of Law Index, op. cit., p. 198. As
items in a scale, the eight components yield Cronbach’s alpha=.965; and on a principal components analysis the first factor explains 81% of the
variance.
238
As the eye suggests from the discussion of Fig. 1, a non-linear relationship might fit even better. Indeed, an R2 of 0.78 is obtained if one allows
permits a cubic polynomial, for which RoL barely rises until HDI ~ .65, and then increases steeply, with increasingly close fit to the curve. This pattern is
confirmed by separate linear regressions: up to HDI=.65, significance is only p=.09, and there is a modest slope and lots of scatter (std B=.36, adj.
R2=.07), whereas and above HDI=.65 there is a steep slope and good fit (std. B=.89. R2=.75, p=.000).
120
121
WJP Rule of Law (roL) aggregated score
0.90
0.80
Pol
Bot
0.70
Geo
Uru Chil
Por
Hun
Uni
MalRom
Mac
Cro
Bra
JorTun Bos
Sou
Bul
Sri
Sen
Tha
Bur
Ino
PanBel
Jam
Mad
MonDomTur
Per
Leb Ser
Arg
Mlw
Egy
Nep
Mor
Phi
Col
Alb
Tan
Vie
Chi
Ira
ElS
EcuUkrKazMex
Sie
Ind GuaNic Kyr Mol
CotZam
Ken
Uzb
Rus
Eth
Uga
Lib
Cmb
Bol
Nig
Ban
0.60
Gha
0.50
0.40
Zim
Pak
Cam
0.40
0.50
Swe
Den
Fin
Nor
Net
New
Asl
Aus
SinJap
Can
Ger
UnK Hon
Fra
Est
Blg
Spa Rep USA
Cze
Slo
Ita
Gre
y = 0.67x + 0.09
R² = 0.58
Ven
0.30
0.30
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
Human Development Index (HDI)
Figure 1: Correlation between Rule of Law aggregate score and Human Development Index
Assessing the linkages of RoL components to HDI: a puzzling discovery?
10. The obvious next question that arises is the manner in which the different components of RoL, core and cognate,
contribute to this overall correlation. This is easier to ask than to answer. A typical first step might be to undertake a
239
multiple regression of all eight components with HDI. The results are contained in an end-note. They tentatively
suggest (subject to the reservation in the next paragraph) that Rights and Transparency are significantly positively
correlated with HDI, and Integrity nearly significantly so. But, with these three components simultaneously at work,
one then finds that Limits has a significant negative correlation with HDI! (The remaining four components do not
feature significantly.) This is unexpected, but perhaps not unprecedented. There has been vigorous debate in the
239
The table below summarises the result of the multiple regression of HDI on the components of RoL. The components Limits, Rights and Transparency
are significant for p<.02, and Integrity is nearly significant. But the correlation of Limits with HDI is negative. (So, more weakly, might be those for Civil
and Criminal Justice, but the effects are not statistically significant.)
Component
Std B
p
1. Limits
Tolerance
-0.51
0.003
0.13
2. Integrity
0.40
0.069
0.08
3. Security
0.12
0.212
0.40
4. Rights
0.44
0.001
0.21
5. Transpar.
0.38
0.023
0.14
6. Regul’ns
0.24
0.308
0.07
7. Civil J.
-0.20
0.224
0.14
8. Crim. J.
-0.02
0.896
0.15
Overall adjusted Rsq=.666, p=.000
121
122
240
241
literature about whether democracy may, at least initially, be inimical to development. Have we identified three
(cognate) components of RoL which tend to be favourable to development, by contrast with a fourth (core)
component, Limited government power, which is not – when in the presence of the other three?
11. However, we warned of a reservation with making this typical first step. The analysis also signals that, for statistical
regression purposes, there is excessive inter-relation among the eight components (called “multi-collinearity”) in the
242
multiple regression. This is unsurprising, given their shared conceptual provenance. But it means that one should
243
be wary of the reported strengths of the correlations, and the share of variance they explain. May this be the
reason for the one unexpected negative linkage?
A comprehensive “map” of linkages: among RoL components (and indicators), and to HDI
12. Happily, a more apt technique is available, to check. It is stylishly called “partial least squares structural equation
244
modelling”, and has five advantages for answering our particular question. In the variant we shall use it is relatively
unfazed by multi-collinearity; it is relatively comfortable with the modest sample of 97 countries to which WJP is
presently confined; as a bonus, it yields a “path diagram” showing not only the significant linkages predictive of
development, but also among the components themselves; and as another bonus , it indicates the contribution of
each component’s constituent indicators to the task. Moreover, it does hint at causal directions, in that, when one
confronted with paths about which theory (or intuition) is uncertain, the relative strengths may improve appreciably
when tries “swopping” the direction. However, the approach finesses the overall direction of causality, in that we
245
take HDI as the dependent variable, i.e. we are exploring the predictive force of the RoL components on HDI.
13. The resulting path diagram is simplified in Fig. 2. (The technical version is in Appendix C. It shows the correlation
246
2
coefficients for the various significant paths in the context of overall prediction of HDI, the overall R of the model
at 0.666 – in the HDI hexagon – and also the relative strengths of the indicators of each component.) Ignoring for the
moment the blued, paler part of the diagram, one sees immediately that the direct link from Limits to HDI is still
present, and it is still negative as denoted by the dashed line.
240
“The first phase of market reform turns on large-scale policy decisions by a small band of policy officials. The second phase involves building
institutions...and the general amelioration of governance.” T. Carothers, “The rule of law revival”, Foreign Affairs, 77: 2 (1998), p. 98.
241
See for example S. Haggard, A. MacIntyre and L. Tiede, “The rule of law and economic development”, Annual Review of Political Science 11 (2008), pp.
205-34, especially pp. 213-215; and more broadly, J. N. Bhagwati, “Democracy and development: cruel dilemma or symbiotic relationship”, Review of
Development Economics, 6:2 (2002), 151-162.
242
In the “Tolerance” column of the table above, there are two cells <.1 and a further four <.2. This signals excessive multi-collinearity.
243
For the criterion in n. 13 above, see Andy Field, Discovering Statistics Using SPSS, 3rd Edition ( Los Angeles: Sage, 2009), p. 224.
244
J.F. Hair etal., A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (Los Angeles: Sage, 2013).
245
For opposing examples on the causal-direction issue, see for example R. Rigobon and D. Rodrik, Rule of law, democracy, openness, and income”,
Economics of Transition, 13:3 (2008), 533-564; and James A. Robinson, “Economic development and democracy”, Annual Review of Political Science, 9
(2006): 503-527.
246
All correlations are highly significant at p<.001 except for Limit->HDI which is p<.01.
122
123
Figure 2: Significant linkages among components of Rule of Law, and to Human Development Index
But the puzzle is perhaps solved. Limits also has two indirect, positive linkages to HDI – via Rights and via
247
248
Transparency – and their combined strengths outweigh (or “mediate” ) the direct, negative link. Given the causal
direction assumed in the application of the predictive modelling, an interpretation might be this: although Limits of
itself does not conduce to HDI, this effect is outweighed by its supports for Rights and Transparency, both of which
do.
14.The paler lower part of Fig. 2 indicates another “mediation”. Regulation has its impact on HDI not at all directly, but
via Integrity. And the other two core RoL components are more corollaries than enablers of the linkages described.
To the left, Civil Justice is very strongly supported by Regulation which itself is backed by Transparency. At the
bottom, the diagram plausibly suggests that Integrity (recall that this is the label for Absence of corruption) supports
Criminal Justice, which in turn supports Security. The latter may thus be construed, alongside HDI, as an attribute
predicted by the other RoL components.
Further insights from the map of linkages: the heightened effect of Transparency on HDI
15. In some instances, a mediating variable may not only provide an additional or alternative path to a direct path, but it
may cause the size of the direct effect to vary significantly, depending on whether the mediator variable is taking low
or high values. This is an “interaction”. The partial least squares technique indicates that Transparency (but not
Integrity or Rights) does indeed “interact” with the direct path from Limits to HDI. It is easiest to see this with the
variables dichotomised, to display simple contrasts.
247
This part of the diagram resembles what social scientists call the “multiple mediation” of the link from Limits to HDI, by Rights, Transparency and
Integrity. A suitable statistical technique, an add-on macro to SPSS called INDIRECT, further confirms the partial least squares finding of a negative
direct link from Limits to HDI, and of stronger, combined positive indirect links via the three “mediators”. To bring the remaining components into
reckoning, a model was tried with all of them as mediators as well. Interestingly, the results were very similar to the partial least squares model: a
negative direct effect from Limits to HDI of -.49, and a positive total effect of .61, in a model of R2=.67 and p=.00. See K. J. Preacher and A.F. Hayes
(2008). “Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models”, Behavior Research Methods,
40, 879-891.
248
Indeed, there is a third, even more indirect path via Regulations and Integrity. The direct effect from Limits to HDI has a negative standardized
coefficient of -.583.The software reports that the total effect, summing this negative path and all the positive indirect paths from Limits to HDI, is
+.581. (For each path, its effect is the product of the coefficients for its various “limbs”.)
123
124
0.850
Human Development Index (HDI)
0.800
0.750
0.700
Rights High
Transpar. High
Rights Low
Transpar. Low
0.650
0.600
0.550
Low
High
Limits to Gov't Power
Low
High
Limits to Gov't Power
Figure 3: Interaction of Transparency with HDI (by contrast with Rights)
16. One sees from the left panel of Figure 3 that, obviously, the dashed line is always higher than the solid one i.e.
whatever the state of Limits on the x-axis, it is better to be in a high Rights context than a low one. Then one sees, as
one moves on the x-axis from a state of low to high Limits, the improvement in HDI is roughly the same whether one
is in a low or a high Rights situation, i.e. the lower and upper lines are nearly parallel. But in the right panel, regarding
Transparency, as one moves from a state of low to high Limits there is a significantly more marked difference in HDI,
i.e. the lower and upper lines are conspicuously not parallel. This is the “interaction” effect.
The measurement foundations of the components of RoL
17. The technical diagram in Appendix C shows, for each core and cognate component of RoL, in the context of
predicting HDI, the strength of correlation between the component and its measurable indicators (scored, it will be
recalled by both sample citizen surveys and expert assessments in each of the ninety-seven countries). For instance,
one sees that for Rights, indicators 4.2 and 4.6 are the strongest, with standardized coefficients of .916 and .894
respectively. Appendix A shows these to be “The right to life and security of the person” and “Freedom from
arbitrary interference with privacy”.
Appendix A has the indicators for each component arranged in descending order of strength. The correlations are
generally high, and the relevant test statistic confirms the contributions of the respective measures to be largely
249
uniform, as the WJP’s auditors noted. Indeed, if with Occam’s Razor one allows each RoL component only its top
two indicators, reducing to sixteen in all rather than forty-eight, the overall model fit actually improves slightly from
.666 to .679! The relative size of the linkages is preserved, though their magnitudes alter somewhat.
Conclusion: a critical enabling role
18. The Concept Document for this Expert Workshop sees the RoL as “grounded on international human rights norms
and standards”, and adds that ”establishing legal frameworks, ensuring enforcement of rules and procedures, and
250
reducing corruption have enabled effective delivery of health, education and other social services.”
These
contentions are more easily asserted than demonstrated. Towards the latter, this Note has drawn a distinction
between core and cognate components of RoL, the latter being equally understood as aspects of good governance.
249
Cronbach’s alpha is >.89 for all components except Security, where it is .61.
250
“Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Agenda,26-27 September 2013, New York”.
124
125
Then it has sought empirically to explore the relationships among them, and the manner in which they may predict
development, by applying statistical techniques to two well-established indicators, the eight-component World
Justice Project’s RoL Index and the UNDP’s Human Development Index (HDI), and.
19. There is an encouragingly strong correlation between an aggregated RoL index and the HDI. But when one
disaggregates RoL, noteworthy effects emerge. The important core RoL components of Limits and Regulations (see
Table 1 for the meaning of these abbreviated labels) exert their effects on HDI indirectly, via the mediators of Rights
and Integrity respectively. Indeed, Limits of itself would exert a negative direct effect on HDI, which is however
outweighed by the strong, combined, positive but indirect effect it exerts on HDI via the two cognate components –
Rights and Transparency. This insight may contribute towards resolving an endemic controversy: it may well be true
that Limits is somewhat inimical to advancing HDI, but it is also true that this lesser effect is outweighed by the
composite and greater positive effect that Limits has on HDI via good governance components of RoL. The seeming
contradiction perhaps arose in the literature because of inadequate disaggregation of RoL, and inadequate attention
to mediated effects. Additionally, Transparency “interacts” with the link between Limits and HDI, in that an
improvement in HDI for an increment in Transparency is amplified compared to Rights.
20. The remaining core components of RoL – Civil and Criminal Justice – appear to participate as corollaries in relation to
HDI, being supported by Regulations and Transparency. However Criminal Justice in turn supports Security, yielding
another positive separate developmental outcome alongside HDI. The analysis also ranks the relative importance of
the various indicators of each RoL component, in the context of predicting HDI, although many of these are roughly
equally powerful.
21. The overall “map” conveys that two core, legal components of RoL –Limits and Regulations – play an enabling role in
advancing development, via their enabling of the cognate, good-governance components of RoL. (The other two
core components are sensible concomitants.) But it is an essential role, in that the powerful overall correlation with
development is achieved by the entire linked configuration of components, each based in turn upon diverse but
relevant measurable indicators at country level. As the WJP tellingly insists, “The rule of law is not the rule of lawyers
251
and judges. All elements of society are stakeholders in the rule of law.”
251
WJP Rule of Law Index, op. cit., p.1.
125
126
APPENDIX A: WJP Rule of Law Index - Components, with respective Indicators sorted by strength
Std B
n/a
0.947
0.909
0.908
0.894
0.864
0.849
0.975
0.943
0.923
0.900
COMPONENT 1: Limited Government Powers
1.1 Government powers are defined in the fundamental law
1.3 Government powers are effectively limited by the judiciary
1.2 Government powers are effectively limited by the legislature
1.4 Government powers are effectively limited by independent auditing and review
1.7 Transition of power is subject to the law
1.6 Government powers are subject to non-governmental checks
1.5 Government officials are sanctioned for misconduct
COMPONENT 2: Absence of Corruption
2.1 Government officials in the executive branch do not use public office for private gain
2.3 Government officials in the police, military do not use public office for private gain
2.2 Government officials in the judicial branch do not use public
2.4 Government officials in the legislative branch do not use public
COMPONENT 3: Order and Security
0.889 3.3 People do not resort to violence to redress personal grievances
0.860 3.1 Crime is effectively controlled
0.424 3.2 Civil conflict is effectively limited
0.916
0.894
0.871
0.854
0.820
0.795
0.745
0.724
COMPONENT 4: Fundamental Rights
4.2 The right to life,security of the person is effectively guaranteed
4.6 Freedom from arbitrary interference with privacy is effectively guaranteed
4.3 Due process of law and rights of the accused
4.4 Freedom of opinion and expression is effectively guaranteed
4.8 Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed
4.7 Freedom of assembly and association is effectively guaranteed
4.1 Equal treatment and absence of discrimination
4.5 Freedom of belief and religion is effectively guaranteed
0.883
0.881
0.869
0.862
COMPONENT 5: Open Government
5.4 Official information is available on request
5.2 The laws are stable
5.1 The laws are publicized and accessible
5.3 Right to petition the government and public participation
0.936
0.902
0.895
0.844
0.832
COMPONENT 6: Regulatory Enforcement
6.2 Government regulations applied, enforced without improper influence
6.1 Government regulations are effectively enforced
6.4 Due process is respected in administrative proceedings
6.5 The Government does not expropriate without adequate compensation
6.3 Administrative proceedings are conducted without unreasonable delay
0.888
0.874
0.777
0.762
0.762
0.741
0.642
COMPONENT 7: Civil Justice
7.3 Civil justice is free of corruption
7.6 Civil justice is effectively enforced
7.7 ADRs are accessible, impartial, and effective
7.1 People can access and afford civil justice
7.4 Civil justice is free of improper government influence
7.2 Civil justice is free of discrimination
7.5 Civil justice is not subject to unreasonable delays
0.922
0.920
0.896
0.887
0.838
0.818
0.646
COMPONENT 9: Criminal Justice
8.5 Criminal system is free of corruption
8.7 Due process of law and rights of the accused
8.3 Correctional system is effective in reducing criminal behavior
8.2 Criminal adjudication system is timely and effective
8.4 Criminal system is impartial
8.1 Criminal investigation system is effective
8.6 Criminal system is free of improper government influence
COMPONENT 9: Traditional Justice (Not presently measured)
126
127
Appendix B: Country codes used in Figure 1, with 2012 HDI and RoL scores
Alb
Arg
Asl
Aus
Ban
Bel
Blg
Bol
Bos
Bot
Bra
Bul
Bur
Cmb
Cam
Can
Chil
Chi
Col
Cot
Cro
Cze
Den
Dom
Ecu
Egy
ElS
Est
Eth
Fin
Fra
Geo
Ger
Gha
Gre
Gua
Hon
Hun
Ind
Ino
Ira
Ita
Jam
Jap
Jor
Kaz
Ken
Kyr
Leb
Albania
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Bangladesh
Belarus
Belgium
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegov.
Botswana
Brazil
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Chile
China
Colombia
Cote d'Ivoire
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Estonia
Ethiopia
Finland
France
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Guatemala
Hong Kong SAR, China
Hungary
India
Indonesia
Iran
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kyrgyzstan
Lebanon
HDI RoL Tot
0.75
0.49
0.81
0.51
0.94
0.83
0.90
0.81
0.52
0.40
0.79
0.53
0.90
0.75
0.68
0.40
0.74
0.57
0.63
0.70
0.73
0.58
0.78
0.55
0.34
0.53
0.54
0.41
0.50
0.35
0.91
0.79
0.82
0.69
0.70
0.48
0.72
0.49
0.43
0.45
0.81
0.58
0.87
0.67
0.90
0.88
0.70
0.51
0.72
0.46
0.66
0.50
0.68
0.47
0.85
0.76
0.40
0.42
0.89
0.87
0.89
0.76
0.75
0.63
0.92
0.79
0.56
0.59
0.86
0.60
0.58
0.46
0.91
0.79
0.83
0.65
0.55
0.46
0.63
0.52
0.74
0.48
0.88
0.63
0.73
0.52
0.91
0.81
0.70
0.57
0.75
0.46
0.52
0.45
0.62
0.45
0.75
0.51
Lib
Mac
Mad
Mlw
Mal
Mex
Mol
Mon
Mor
Nep
Net
New
Nic
Nig
Nor
Pak
Pan
Per
Phi
Pol
Por
Rep
Rom
Rus
Sen
Ser
Sie
Sin
Slo
Sou
Spa
Sri
Swe
Tan
Tha
Tun
Tur
Uni
Uga
Ukr
UnK
USA
Uru
Uzb
Ven
Vie
Zam
Zim
Liberia
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Mexico
Moldova
Mongolia
Morocco
Nepal
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Nigeria
Norway
Pakistan
Panama
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Republic of Korea
Romania
Russia
Senegal
Serbia
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sweden
Tanzania
Thailand
Tunisia
Turkey
United Arab Emirates
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
United States
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Venezuela
Vietnam
Zambia
Zimbabwe
HDI RoL Tot
0.39
0.41
0.74
0.59
0.48
0.52
0.42
0.50
0.77
0.60
0.78
0.47
0.66
0.46
0.68
0.52
0.59
0.50
0.46
0.50
0.92
0.85
0.92
0.84
0.60
0.46
0.47
0.40
0.96
0.87
0.52
0.37
0.78
0.52
0.74
0.51
0.65
0.49
0.82
0.72
0.82
0.66
0.91
0.73
0.79
0.61
0.79
0.43
0.47
0.54
0.77
0.51
0.36
0.46
0.90
0.80
0.89
0.66
0.63
0.56
0.89
0.73
0.72
0.55
0.92
0.89
0.48
0.49
0.69
0.53
0.71
0.57
0.72
0.52
0.82
0.64
0.46
0.42
0.74
0.46
0.88
0.78
0.94
0.73
0.79
0.68
0.65
0.43
0.75
0.36
0.62
0.49
0.45
0.46
0.40
0.35
127
128
Appendix C: Partial least squares structural equation model of linkages among components of RoL, and to HDI; and to their indicators
128
129
ANNEX XIII – Notes from the Working Group Discussions
Accountability, Legal identity and access to public services (Group 1)
The group discussed public services, legal identity, and accountability.
In terms of public services it was discussed that people need to be aware of administrative processes and as well
as mechanisms (such as courts) to enforce the benefits (e.g. access to safe water, or health services). Additionally,
it is important to be able to hold accountable public services provided – especially in cases where certain groups
may have less access e.g. because of illiteracy or because of information asymmetry or because the services
provided are not culturally appropriate. Often, economic status determines whether people have good or bad
services and civil servants often don’t have a client oriented culture.
In terms of legal identity, it was noted that often, legal identity is necessary to be able to access public services.
For example, in many cases children need to be registered in order to access schools or to be able to exercise
political rights or other citizenship rights. Birth registration should be separated from legal identity (for adults).
Some potential ways to measure could include birth registration, i.e. percentage below 5 years of age registered at
birth. However, it is important to note that legal identity should not be the rule for access to basic services,
especially in emergency situations where documentation may have been lost.
In terms of accountability, the discussion focused on corruption – e.g. judges making illegal decision or quicker
access to legal identity if a bribe is paid or delaying decisions to ‘allow’ for more time for bribery and corruption.
Some methods to measure corruption include – legal/expert analysis, perceptions surveys and regional
barometers.
Access to information was seen as one of the ways in which to strengthen accountability. For example, by making
judicial decisions public, justifying court decisions and ensuring processes are transparent. Additional examples
were provided of ensuring that court appointment processes are public or that the court budget is accessible.
Increased investment in ensuring court decisions are accessible to the public was also discussed.
The quality of the legal framework was another point of discussion, i.e. legal review of good practices. But the
quality of legal frameworks are not sufficient and it is necessary to also monitor the quality of the implementation
of the law, for example, by ensuring people are able to understand and use the law.
Another mechanism for promoting accountability includes public participation in decision-making and
monitoring. This could be measured by the level of public participation in legal processes, for example, public
participation in the law making processes so that it reflects peoples perspectives. Emphasis could be placed that in
law drafting and reform processes, that the government consult with the public and that laws are drafted in simple
language so that they are accessible to more people. Similarly, public participation can play a role in monitoring
quality of public services including services provided by courts and other justice providers.
Civil society has a critical role to play in ensuring accountability. Ensuring that there is an enabling environment for
civil society to play this role is necessary.
In terms of data, the group noted that there is a need for both qualitative and quantitative data, however there
are significant challenges. This includes the fact that data collection takes time, can be difficult to measure impact,
129
130
limited availability of existing data, possibility of distortions, etc. Additionally there are questions of the reliability
of data – i.e. how data is being gathered, comparability of data, no triangulation of data, etc. Investments in
national statistics systems, encouraging data triangulation and comparability, promoting the use of technology and
automation, identifying data sources, capacity development on data collection and monitoring and evaluation in
general, and promoting the use of third party data were some suggestions. It was also noted that civil society has a
role to play, but need to ensure that they are also accountable to the people and also be aware that they can also
sometime polarize the debate and positions.
In the discussion of targets and indicators, a number of targets and indicators were reviewed and refined (see
table). It was also noted that there needs to be a target for public participation in decision-making and monitoring
which would include access to law making processes and use of simple language.
TARGETS
INDICATORS
TARGET 1: Ensure all people can effectively participate in decision-making and monitor service delivery in formal
252
and informal public institutions at all levels
Legal frameworks requiring public participation in decision-making and
service delivery
Right to information legislation (can also be a target)
 Must include access to budgets, particularly for delivery of public
services to enable accountability efforts by the public
 Effective implementation of RTI framework (# claims, rejected
requests for information, proportion of requests completed in
given time)
Public awareness and education/literacy and accessible laws
Oversight mechanisms involving stakeholders (% participation, # claims)
 Include marginalize groups
Enabling environment for civil society index, ensure a space for effective
participation
Participation in political processes, e.g. elections
Grievance redress is available and functioning (justice systems)
TARGET 2 Legal Identity
Universal
birth
registration
 Existence of legal framework
implemented by law for all children
 % children registered
under 5 / Provide all people with
free legal identity documentation,
such as birth registration cards
Provide all people with free legal
 Legal framework recognizing fair, transparent process for obtaining
identify documentation, such as
ID
birth registration cards [Glenn
 Percentage of people who possess legal ID
cove]/ Reduce the number of
 Number of requests for ID rejected
people who suffer from lack of
 Number of people denied access to services due to lack of ID (to
secure legal identity [Namati]
avoid perverse incentives)
beware of the perverse incentive that link legal services to basic services; legal ID should not be required to require
public services
TARGET 3. Capacity, professionalism and accountability of public sector
 Level of trust and confidence surveys
252
This requires an enabling environment for civil society to carry out its work (existence of legal framework and
practices that do no constraint civil society work – cf. indicators on enabling environment for civil society index)
130
131

Corruption (experience & perception)
o Number of prosecutions
 Equity and accountability of access to services
o Monitoring and redress mechanisms
o Disaggregated data by groups, gender, etc.
 Percentage of trained public services (initial and continuing
training)
 Merit-based selection & advancement / Impartial and clear
placement exams
 Internal performance evaluation
 Sanctioning systems
 Percentage of budget dedicated to institutions
 Oversight mechanisms (internal and external – civil society,
parliament, etc.)
TARGET 4. Accessible, well-resourced, impartial, independent and accountable justice systems
 Legal redress for complaints dealing with public services
 Processes for pursuing grievances with basic services must be
simple, accessible, impartial, independent, open and accountable,
independent ,efficient and due process
 Public awareness of redress mechanisms – public outreach
 Merit based, selection and advancement mechanisms
 Performance and evaluation (initial and continuous training)
 Disciplinary systems
Legal Empowerment and Legal Aid (Group 2)
The group began by defining what is understood as legal empowerment- legal empowerment is to ensure access to
justice and understand the legal framework and enabling people and communities to access their rights. However,
it was noted that empowerment is hard to measure.
There was also a discussion on the legal aid where participants noted that there is an increase in legal aid provided
by CSOs or through pro-bono legal aid services by lawyers since States, even in cases where there are strong legal
aid institutions are not able to do much because of lack of resources. However, in many cases, the State often lacks
capacity, lacks the institutions and lacks the legal framework to provide legal aid. It would be necessary to also look
at legal aid not just in criminal law but also civil cases.
It was also discussed that in some countries the number of lawyers is very small so it there is an increased in
investment in paralegals who can work both with the formal system and the informal system. However, for all the
different forms of legal aid/assistance provision, it is important to be able to monitor the quality of service
provision.
Legal empowerment and its relation to development was also discussed, in particular how it relates to poverty and
poverty reduction. Many participants felt that the definition of poverty needed to be broadened not only to look at
the tangible elements of poverty but also the absence or deprivation of other rights and entitlements including
avenues for seeking redress for injustices or equal protection under the law.
The group discussed that it would be important to measure (numerical and quality measures), confidence
measures, people’s capacity to understand rights, impact measurement, measurement of the structural
131
132
challenges. They noted that data may not be easily available or could be inaccurate or manipulated. Participants
also noted that it would important to be aware of perverse incentives.
Key points of the discussion included:
•
•
Include a goal or target related to ensuring access to a plurality of justice services looking at both supply
and demand side:
o Decrease by percentage the number of people who fail to report a grievance or case, for the
following reasons: financial reasons; lack of confidence and trust in justice mechanism; lack of
access to justice mechanism because of geography, gender, language, efficiency; lack of
knowledge of options or processes
o Legal infrastructure that is diverse, inclusive and gender-sensitive (Increase participation in
shaping justice options)
Indicators could examine:
o Likelihood to report a grievance
o Number of people going through justice processes
o Inclusion of views into the legal system
o Improving attitudes
o Increased knowledge
o Participatory systems
o Range and coverage of justice institutions
o Costs
o Budgets
o Disaggregated data
Access to Justice (Group 3)
The group began by defining what they understood as access to justice – that it is about ensuring that legal and
judicial outcomes are just and equitable; that different social groups are able to access formal and informal justice
systems; that barriers facing different people in accessing these systems are removed; that it includes formal and
informal procedures. Justice is understood as a way of solving problems and providing redress for grievances or
resolving disputes. It is the way in which society (through traditions, procedures, systems) addresses grievances
that individuals and groups suffer and how it deals with injustices. It is about providing legal solutions to problems
and establishing judicial outcomes according to legal norms. Justice means that fair and just outcomes depend on
the norms that are established. To enable access, barriers must be removed – this can include financial, cultural,
social barriers. Access to justice would mean that barriers are erased and everyone has equal opportunity to
activate the judicial systems when they face a grievance or have a dispute to resolve.
The group also discussed justice is a driver for opportunities. For example, laws regarding to land, property and
contract are very important to small businesses. It was also seen as a way in which to enable marginalized groups
to have a voice and to exercise their agency. For example, legal aid was discussed as a means through marginalized
groups would be able to access justice. However, it was also noted that legal aid programs and very costly and are
therefore not easily replicable.
Additional discussions included questions around what types of issues should be addressed within a goal/target on
access to justice such as land disputes, administrative justice, etc. The discussions also centered around ensuring
users-perspective, how to measure accessibility/what is success, what can be currently measured vs. what would
be good to measure.
Some of the key points of the discussion included:
132
133
•
Taking the user perspective - including data on user perspectives and noting that the distinction between
case types/resolution fora may not so important if one takes on the perspective of the user and whether
they are able to obtain a remedy for grievances.
•
No one left behind – it would mean that all people are equally able to access justice.
•
Access to Justice = spaces (formal/informal; courts/administrative fora) to resolve grievances and
disputes (public and private; criminal/civil with a legal connection, i.e. in the complaint or process of
remedy). It would mean more than access to the legal system but less than addressing all injustices
•
Regarding HLP Target 11B – focus on justice institutions (take out security functions, but take on a broad
understanding of justice institutions) and focus on outcomes important to users – let each country
determine inputs needed to reach those outcomes and also take into consideration existing data on user
needs.
•
Characteristics for the target:
– Accessible (geographical; cost; socio-cultural; etc.)
– Independent (include concept of ‘impartiality’ and ‘fairness’.
– Well resourced – no -more of an input; may not be the issue in some places
– Due process rights - What are these/differ across locations/included in other characteristics,
– Possible Other Characteristics Important to Users (Check data) - Efficiency/Expeditiousness,
Equality, Transparency
•
Indicators (see table)
Accessibility
Equality
Impartiality/
Independence
Efficiency
Percentage of
people
who
want
representation
who
are
represented
Do (i) laws,
(ii) policies,
and
(iii)
practices
guarantee
equal
treatment
of various
segments of
the
population?
(Freedom
House
Freedom in
the World)
Judicial
independence
score (Source:
WEF-GCR
/Bertelsmann
Transformatio
n Index (BTI))
Average
length of
time spent
in
presentence
detention
Enforceability
Transparenc
y
Due process
Suspension or
arbitrary
application of
the rule of law
and
widespread
violation
of
human rights
score (Source:
Fund for Peace)
133
134
Ability of poor
people
to
appeal judicial
decisions
in
serious offense
cases (Source:
piloted by Vera
Institute
of
Justice)
Population
perception
indicator
–
w.r.t.
accessibility
experience,
attitude
(disaggregated)
Separation of
powers
(Source:
Legatum
Foundation’s
Legatum
Prosperity
Index)
Percentage
of
cases
decided
with
a
time-frame
of
x
months*
(danger of
perverse
incentives)
*countryspecified
Population
perception
indicator
of
judicial
impartiality
(experience,
access
– attitude)
experience,
attitude
(disaggrega
ted)
Population
perception
indicator
of judicial
promptnes
s within a
reasonable
time
(experienc
e, attitude)
Population
perception
indicator
w.r.t. equal
treatment/
Ability of poor
people
to
appeal judicial
decisions
in
serious offense
cases (Source:
piloted by Vera
Institute
of
Justice)
Population
perception
indicator
of
judicial
enforcement
(experience,
attitude) – users
or all
Do you have confidence in the judicial system and the courts? (Source: Gallup world poll)
Administrative
indicator, e.g.
no of public
defenders/paral
egals
Fees, grants
Administrative
data
on
enforcement*
*countryspecified
Expert
assessment of
statutory
provisions re
judicial
appointments,
Expert
assessment of
whether
enforcement is
provided,
Expert
assessment of
quality of due
process
according
to
schedule
Criminal and Civil justice scores (including effectiveness, timeliness, impartiality, corruption, due process and
rights of the accused) (Source: World Justice Project)
134
135
Social and Economic rights (including and, property and environmental and natural resource management)
(Group 4)
The group began with ‘big picture’ thinking on the kinds of development changes the group wanted to see through
a focus on economic and social rights within the post-2015 framework. It then sought to work down towards goals
and indicators, thereby producing a ‘storyline’ or logical flow those changes. In setting indicators, the group aimed
to be realistic, and informed by the availability of data, but not constrained by it. Key points discussed included:

Development IS the realization of economic and social rights. But where does state responsibility lie – with
promoting access (i.e. providing opportunities or creating capacities to assert rights) or guaranteeing
outcomes?
Or is it on the remedial side (i.e. state obligation to ensure that there is access to judicial
remedies when rights are denied). Should economic and social rights as legal binding, for example, to be
secured through mandatory/effective social security system? Can the promoting the rule of law play a role in
improving awareness of economic and social rights (especially among vulnerable groups) and ensuring social
and economic equity? At the very least, all people (women and youth in particular) should be informed about
economic and social rights and able to protect them through expanded access to justice. Along with
information and awareness, people must also be empowered (capacity to act) to enforce their rights.

Educate elites about the rule of law and development: Development, the rule of law, and the linkages
between them, are not properly understood by elites. Often the understanding of what it means is very
different and the importance is not fully understood. In order to include the rule of law in the development
agenda, and achieve rule of law-related objectives, it would be important to engage and educate political
figures on what the rule of law is, why it matters, and how it is both an enabler and outcome of development.

Emphasize the state obligation to realize economic and social rights by focusing on supporting the State to
provide remedies to violations of these rights. Economic and social rights don’t exist in the abstract – only in
terms of the ability to deliver them when they are denied. Therefore, it makes sense to focus on the functions
in the justice system (the building blocks) which can provide remedies.

Align content and application of laws with development objectives by auditing entire body of law and legal
system from the perspective of poor: Development cannot take place until and unless there are
developments of the law itself. In some countries, the problem is often not implementation of the law, but
implementation of bad laws – meaning that the functioning of the legal system actually diminishes
development outcomes.
Development of law is under-researched, under-emphasized, and poorly
understood. Law reform efforts are key, and need to be informed by analysis on what kinds of legal changes
actually enable the law to serve development objectives. For example, how does one change the law,
regulations, institutions, and mechanisms to secure rights to food, shelter, housing, family, etc.? Auditing
laws from poor people’s perspectives, and involving people in law reform processes, and then design entire
development strategies around law reform for the promotion of human rights. The law too often serves the
wealthy, urban elite instead of the poor – either in terms of the content of the law, or the structure of the
institutions. This would entail changes in the content of the law, as well as the development of detailed
strategies on what mechanisms are required to ensure implementation of those laws: i.e. what steps must be
taken, with outcomes of each step defined, and budgets allocated. There should be a comprehensive ‘rule of
law development plan’ alongside the national development plan. Without this, the law will not promote
human rights or development.

Importance of a systems perspective. Systemic reforms are needed to meaningfully improve access to
justice. This is both in terms of supporting reforms to the justice systems (including police, prosecution,
courts, corrections), and the broader governance system (because rule of law does not just concern police,
justice and corrections). Piecemeal approaches do not, and cannot, promote the rule of law. Additionally,
adequate resources should be made available for judicial reforms including strengthening capacity of systems
to investigate, prosecute, sentence, and implement sentences for perpetrators of crimes.
135
136

Diverse approaches necessary for access to justice. We need to offer people several avenues to achieve
justice – not just courts. We need to promote access to the legislative, NHRIs, regional and international
mechanisms to enable people to play a role in reforming and implementing laws.

Land rights, property rights, and labour rights are essential to economic and social rights.
Given the
centrality of property/land rights, promoting economic and social rights will require attention to both
procedural and distributive justice. This is likely to make promoting economic and social rights a highly
political endeavor. Attention to context means calibrating expectations based on what is politically feasible.

Securing land and education rights require legal identity: Efforts to use the law to secure economic and
social rights need to be focused on supporting poor people to obtain legal identity. Examples were shared of
the right to education being linked to legal identity (i.e. birth registration as a pre-condition to register at
schools). People from vulnerable groups not being able to access courts or secure their land/property because
of lack of legal identity. In some cases, administrative fees have been waived for registering property for
women in order to encourage land ownership among women.

To ensure access to justice, there needs to be more legal education, more legal aid efforts, as well as efforts
to establish the credibility of the institutions themselves: People want access to an independent judiciary.
But availability of legal aid is limited, and the institutions which implement the new laws are too far away from
needy communities, and are not trusted.

Judicial outreach is needed: Focus not just on bringing people from vulnerable communities to courts, but on
how to bring the courts to those communities. The burden for access to justice needs to be shifted from
people to institutions.

Economic and social rights often derive from land ownership/use, so people need to participate in
environmental decision-making, and be informed of the outcomes: Without the rule of law, development
itself can create rights deprivations (e.g. mining, pollution).
Too often, elites manage environmental
decision-making processes: set them up, write the reports in a different language from those affected by landuse decisions, and do not make information about the outcomes of those processes available to them. To
enable meaningful participation, environmental and social impact assessments must be conducted. Too often
consultation and participation is not taken seriously (tick-box to receive development aid).

Consider international/global dimensions of the law: Do multi-national companies count as legal persons, to
whom rights and obligations apply? We need targets and indicators for transnational aspects of development
through rule of law. We need to take into account the challenges posed and contributions made by non-state
actors. Justice institutions can ensure transnational investment does not have an adverse impact on economic
and social rights/increase capacity of justice system to ensure that transnational agreements (e.g. contracts)
do not undermine economic and social rights.

Human rights needs are enormous, but we can have progressive realization. At the most fundamental level,
the right to life needs to be protected, so addressing conflict and armed violence issues is of primary
importance. National laws should be informed by international human rights standards but also need to
balance universal application of human-rights compliant legislation with a need for context specificity.

Human rights should be mainstreamed in national laws and policies through participatory processes, and
subject to performance indicators. Development plans define rights and how these are to be implemented
and so should also be budgeted for.

Legal services are as important as health and education services. Access to justice is a fundamental right. You
can’t have security unless you invest in justice in the same way that you invest in health and education.
136
137

Laws and processes are needed which protect the environment: The environment is often made vulnerable
by development, so we need processes to protect it. In Philippines and Brazil, if someone says that a project
breaking law, the project automatically stops. Development policy therefore defers to the rights of nature,
and the burden is placed on the developers to prove that the environment is not being harmed. States must
play a role in ensuring environmental rights, including through justice institutions.

Indicators: It is necessary to go down to an operational level, and have very concrete indicators. It was
suggested that indicators relating to the functioning of various components of the justice system can be
included which ‘add up’ to the rule of law. It was also suggested that consideration be given to incorporating
the perspectives of the people directly through survey evidence.
Gender Justice (Group 5)
The group on gender discussed some of the linkages between rule of law and development generally and some of
the gaps in the on-going debate. Some issues they flagged as missing in the discussion included – participation of
civil society, private sector (and the impact they have on women, including the need for a sound accountability
framework for the private sector), inequalities of wealth within and across nations, complexities and multifaceted nature of the rule of law, autonomous women’s movements are not adequately represented, need for
leadership of women at all levels, instituting quotas (but noting that they are not enough in themselves to address
gender equality).
The group encouraged a focus on basic substantive rights such as inheritance, property, maternity, sexual and
gender-based violence/domestic violence, sexual and reproductive rights, labour and other socio-economic rights.
The rule of law facilitates attaining these rights – for example, through mechanisms for alternative dispute
resolution or the justice systems.
The group agreed on an overall statement on development and rule of law broadly:
“Aiming for development justice with more ambitious transformative shifts that are redistributive, human rights
based, create new economic and environmental consensus and include strong accountability frameworks. Rule of
law and access to justice are crucial to deliver the regulatory framework required for development and rights
enjoyment. ‘Development’ is the realization of all human rights as its primacy. All legal systems (include plural legal
systems) should be measured using the same rule of law indicators that require human rights to be the yardstick of
access to justice. The High Level Panel report includes valuable aspirations but the indicative goals and targets do
not provide the totality of a transformative agenda. A goal to redress inequalities of power, wealth, resource use
and opportunities between countries, between rich and poor and between men and women is required. The
measurement framework should also recognize economic, social and cultural rights. The new agenda also needs to
allow for participation and an enabling environment for civil society, particularly women’s movements. It should
also consider how the rule of law can be applied to create global and national regulatory frameworks for the
private sector.”
Some consideration within the group on targets and indicators include:
Prevent and eliminate all forms of violence
against women and girls


Percentage of women who experience physical or sexual
violence in the past 12 months (UN Women)
Percentage of women who seek a remedy for violence
perpetrated against them (human rights based) –
disaggregated by economic status, ethnicity, indigenous,
age, disability, sexual orientation, marital status
137
138









Justice systems are accessible to women






Laws, policies and practices are nondiscriminatory and promote substantive
equality






Prevent child / early marriage


Increased access and control over land,
resources, energy for women and men.



Existence of fully funded operationalized National and local
plans of action on the elimination of violence against
women (BP4A)
Proportion of budgets allocated to plans of action on
violence against women
Percentage of women who report feeling safe at all times in
public space and at home
Percentage of women who report confidence in legal
systems to achieve rights based remedies
Percentage of people who think a woman can refuse to have
sex with her husband under any circumstances by sex
Percentage of law enforcement officials (judges, police,
prosecutors) who are women
Existence of autonomous women’s rights movements able
to operate freely in country
Percentage of public officials who undertake human rights
and gender equality capacity development with civil society
Number of weapons available in community (both state and
non-state)
Percentage of national budgets spent on military
Comparison of military budget to gender budgeting
Assessing human right compliance of judicial outcomes
Percentage of women who are able to achieve a remedy as
complainants (in criminal and civil matters) disaggregated by
geographic location, economic status, etc.
Percentage of court days dedicated to matters relating to
violence against women
Legal aid and assistance is available to women complainants
of sexual violence and family law applicants at all stages,
including ADR
Women have equal inheritance, property rights
Family laws including, divorce, custody, property exist and
apply equally to men and women
Existence of legislated right for women to decide the timing,
spacing of children.
All legislation is subjected to gender audit prior to
enactment
Laws and practices that contravene CEDAW and other IHR
are deemed repugnant
Percentage of women’s rights organisations / movements
involved in drafting (and empowering women to participate)
in consultative processes for legislation
Existence of laws prohibiting marriage before the age of 18
CRC
Percentage of women aged 18-25 who were married (de
jure or de facto) before 18
Average age of mother at birth of first children
Percentage of women and men who have protected and/or
documented rights to use and control land.
Percentage of land that is appropriated by governments or
corporations
138
139
Workers are paid a living wage





Labour rights protection extended to all
workers




Promote participation in decision making
at all levels








Create new GLOBAL GOVERNANCE
systems and institutions that are
democratic, accountable to people and
promote equitable and sustainable
development (transparent, participatory,
non-discrimination, CBDR rule making
procedures)
Private sector accountability is enforced











Legislated minimum wage is set at a rate sufficient to
support dignified life for 4 people (using living wage metrics)
Percentage of unpaid care work that is performed by
women and men
Percentage of workers (by sex) earning less than minimum
wage
Percentage of minimum wage compared to average wage
Percentage of women who have access to fully funded
maternity leave of at least 18 weeks
Percentage of workers who are covered by national labour
codes – including 8 hour day, OH&S, nursing rights,
Inclusion of domestic workers, informal sector in national
labour codes
Percentage of people, by sex, able to access unemployment,
pension, superannuation, insurance
Percentage of workers, by sex, who are members of trade
unions or able to bargain collectively
Percentage of women who have a say in decisions over
house-hold spending
Percentage of people who think important decisions in the
household should be made by both men and women
Percentage of women’s rights representatives in multi
stakeholder development governance bodies
Proportion of women in national parliaments (existence of
TSM)
Proportion of women in local governance
Proportion of women in regional and international
governance bodies
Proportion of women trade union leaders
Proportion of women who are members of civil society
organisations
Proportion of media professionals who are women
Percentage of disputes brought from developing countries
Percentage of disputes where complainants are women
Trade agreements have human rights as central objectives
and primacy
UPR / TB reporting
Percentage of tax paid on profit
Subsidies
Bribery and corruption
Transfer pricing
Tax havens
Public information on sexual and reproductive rights and
health is accessible and promoted
139
140
Security and Justice Institutions (Group 6)
The group began be noting that the technical indicators of each justice and security institutions should be
considered separately, in order for measurements to be accurate and give a precise idea about the effective of the
institution. The assumption is that justice and security are directly to development, also how development is
directly affected by the violence and crime in the society. It is also important to be think about the impact of
justice and security and clarify what is exactly meant by development – i.e. how to free the society from hunger,
eradication of poverty, provision of health and education services and how all of that is directly affected by justice
and security institutions.
Justice and security institutions are the chain linking the rule of law to the society, and needs to be considered
within the post-2015 development agenda as safety and justice are necessary for the society to prosper. However,
one of the questions raised was that some of the available data does not show an obvious link between justice
systems and development. The lack of good statistics means that it becomes difficult to measure the impact of
justice and security institution.
The group also discussed corruption and noted that it is directly linked to development. Effort should be made by
governments to educate the public to use justice systems, including through general awareness and outreach to
communities so that they are aware of their rights and can detect a violation once it occur, for example citizen
rights in investigation and administrative detention. Independence of the judiciary and separation of powers were
also discussed as key to promoting accountability. Additionally, there is often a gap between the judiciary and law
enforcement systems and the gap in coordination not only means less efficiency but also opens the door for
corruption. Access to justice in civil cases also need to be emphasized as legal aid provisions for civil cases are not
usually supported by governments which can often lead to bribery or taking justice into their own hands.
With regard to formal and informal system, there is a problem that we need to look at supporting the informal
system when the systems may be biased and not fair, and which may mean that the formal system is neglected. At
the same time informal systems cannot be neglected because of the service they provide to the community and
because it is trusted by the community. Same targets need to be established for both the formal and informal
institutions.
Target One: Improve the capacity professionalism accountability of law enforcement and justice institutions.

% of people who manifest trust in the justice system (general perception, b) users perception, c) women
perception)
Target Two: Ensure justice institutions are accessible independent well-resourced and respect HR due process
rights.









Proximity to courts, Geographical access
# of cases submitted per 100000
# of judges per 100000
# public defense lawyers per 100000
% of total detainees in per sentence detention
% of people with family related problems who report to formal justice systems
Avg. length of time spend pretrial detention
Avg length of time pre-sentencing detention
Perception of CSO’s about government responsiveness to suggestions for improvement of the legal
system.
140
141





% of defendants represented by legal counsel (Private/ public)
% of people who paid a bribe to security/justice official in the past 12 month
% of justice/security officials reporting undue influence in discharge of duties
% of victims of violent crime who reported victimization to CE or justice
% of cases being resolved within one year (in the first instance).
Armed Violence Reduction (Group 7)
The group began by discussing the links between violence and development including violence and transitional
justice and peace processes. There was some discussion also around what some of the concerns of Member States
might be in terms of sensitivities and what would be acceptable. Data availability was also discussed. The critical
question within the group was whether the discussion should be guided by political reality or a technical approach.
It was agreed that taking a too technical approach would not work and that the process is ultimately a political
process informed by technical reality. The only statistic that exists everywhere is ‘homicide rates’ which is simple
and Members States can also easily understand it. Homicide reduction could not only be a goal for armed violence
reduction, but for other rule of law issues. It would also be important in developing targets and indicators to
consider what national statistics surveys can collect while recognizing that capacities to collect additional data can
be supported. Some of the measures can include homicides and violent deaths in violent situations. Violent deaths
has also correlated with the capacity of justice and security institutions and can be used as a proxy. Some of the
challenges include establishing a baseline and ensuring government buy-in by developing a compelling message.
It would also be important to identify the risk factors of violence from a development perspective such as youth,
employment, etc. One possibility would be to mainstream ‘social risk factors’ into other development goals and to
ensure that these risk factors are also considered as cross-cutting.
The group also suggested considering the external drivers of violence such as drug trafficking, organized crime,
illegal exportation of natural resources and the transition from informal economies to formal economies.
On reflection on the question of universality vs. context specificity, it was discussed that the types of violence
faced in different countries are different – from conflict situations to those of organized crime and gang violence,
for example. Additionally, it would be necessary to define violence – would it be only armed violence or also
consider issues such as domestic violence. Definitions are key, for example, when looking at kidnapping rates, it is
necessary to clearly define what it means. Homicide rates are the ‘clearest’ proxy indicator, however there are
challenges in disaggregating the indicator.
Target
1.
Reduction of violent deaths
(deaths of aggression,
direct deaths due to armed
conflict, deaths from legal
intervention)
Indicator
1.1. Reduce by X% violent
deaths per 100,000
(intentional homicide rate,
direct deaths from conflict
deaths, legal interventions)
1.2. Firearm deaths per 100,000
( not including suicides,
accidents)
1.3. Reduce persons victims of
violent death who are
children
1.4. Reduce victims of violent
deaths who are women
Benchmarks
1.1. Reduce by *** %
1.2. Reduce by ***%
141
142
2.
Reduction and prevention of
violence against women,
children and vulnerable groups
3.
To ensure access to security
and justice institutions that are
profession, accountable and
show integrity
4.
Stem the risk international risk
factors of violence
Peaceful non-violent and
enhance the capacity of
community based non-violent
conflict mechanisms Existence
of formal and informal
mechanisms
5.
2.2. Reduce by % the % of women
who declare to have been subjected
to physical or sexual violence over
the last 12 months (through
victimization survey)
2.2. Percentage of population who
accept capital punishment for
children
2.3. Reduce the number of children
recruited into armed forces, nonstate actor, illegally armed groups
How to ensure we don’t only rely on
surveys
2.3 – risk of criminalization
142
143
Annex XIV - Summary of the E-Consultation on Rule of Law and the Post2015 Development Agenda
Introduction
To contribute to the discussions on the post-2015 Development Agenda, the Government of Mexico, the Kingdom
of Denmark, the Republic of Senegal and the Republic of Turkey, in partnership with UNDP, are co-hosting an
event entitled Global Dialogue on Rule of Law and the Post-2015 Development Agenda event, which is scheduled
to take place in New York on 26-27 September 2013.
The event will bring together policymakers, government officials, technical experts and practitioners, academics,
and activists from a range of Member States, primarily from the Global South, to take part in a series of discussions
focused on reviewing the evidence for including the rule of law in the post-2015 development agenda, and to
identify options and strategies for doing so.
The product of the meeting will be a final outcome document which will elaborate on global priorities around rule
of law and development, particularly in the areas of justice/access to justice/legal empowerment and violence
reduction/security. The findings in this outcome document will 1) inform ongoing high-level discussions on rule of
law and the post-2015 development agenda at the national, regional, and global levels and 2) help to generate
momentum around the inclusion of rule of law within goals, targets and indicators of the post-2015 development
framework.
This document is a summary of the virtual consultation that was launched in preparation to the meeting which ran
th
st
from the 26 of July until the 31 of August 2013. There were 69 contributions on the first phase of the ediscussion and a total of 21 on the second phase for a total of 90 contributions.
The e-consultation ran in 2 staggered phases (dates below), with each phase covering a different topic:


Phase 1: The Rule of Law and Sustainable Human Development – What are the Linkages?
Phase 2: How to Include the Rule of Law in the Post 2015 Development Agenda
The Rule of Law and Sustainable Human Development – What are the Linkages?
The three questions under this topic aim at exploring how the rule of law, justice, and security are linked to
sustainable human development, taking into consideration the multi-faceted role of rule of law as:





A facilitator of equity, inclusion and social justice
An enabler of sustainable economic development and poverty reduction
A means to prevent and mitigate violent crime and conflict and as an enabler of peace
A vehicle to strengthen accountability and checks on power
A mechanism to support sustainable environment and natural resource management.
Guiding questions:
1.
2.
Question 1. Why is it important to consider the rule of law as part of the post-2015 development agenda?
Question 2. In your opinion, which, if any, dimensions of justice (access to justice and legal
empowerment) and security (violence reduction) are necessary for sustainable development - including
social, economic, environmental and human development?
143
144
3.
Question 3. What are some examples of the role that justice and security institutions (including laws and
policies as well as informal rules of social interaction) play in enabling sustainable development? How can
the role of informal/non-state justice systems be factored into the articulation of a post-2015
development framework?
The discussion in this section focused on identifying what is understood by the rule of law and the different ways it
relates to people and to overall sustainable development. Respondents felt that the rule of law should be central
to defining the next development agenda including in terms of protection of human rights, participation in
governance, independence of the judiciary and accountable institutions. Some also noted that the rule of law,
while promoting individual well-being, should do so without infringing on people’s rights or the rights of the
environment. Still others noted that the rule of law should not only be seen as a mechanism to foster economic
growth, but also a means to prevent and overcome human poverty, by strengthening disadvantaged people’s
choices to seek and obtain a remedy for grievances. The negative relationship between violence and development
was also highlighted in some of the contributions which emphasized that violence often diverts resources away
from development interventions towards security related expenditures.
Some of the contributions discussed the linkages between the rule of law and environmental sustainability and
natural resource management. Secure community land rights for slowing deforestation, providing food security
and lifting people out of poverty was highlighted. As was the need to uphold environmental laws and regulations,
“…as much as the extractive industry is perceived to be contributing to the improvement of that country's economy,
regulatory frameworks have to be put in place, in order to minimize tensions between mining companies and
inhabitants of certain communities. Without access to justice and legal empowerment, the voices of voiceless could
not be heard, especially in the area of land rights for women.” It was also noted that 350 specialized environmental
courts and tribunals have been established in 40 countries which are meant to contribute to upholding the right to
a healthy environment.
Many contributions emphasized that the poor and vulnerable people are often disproportionately affected when
their rights are violated and they are unable to seek recourse for the injustices that they face. The importance of
ensuring legal identity, for example, was highlighted as a means through which people are better able to access
services. The need to focus on enabling access to justice for the poor and marginalized groups was also discussed
as it was seen as helping to translate legal guarantees into real improvements in the lives of people. For example,
interventions on access to justice have supported women in cases of domestic violence, sharing in benefits from
natural resources, retaining control over loans taken out in their name, and accessing inheritance to which they
are entitled or retaining property upon divorce. There were also contributions that argued for an expansion of the
understanding of ‘access to justice’ so that it is seen as “a comprehensive framework to ensure that women and
men from all groups in society can participate in policy and decision-making, and have fair and accessible
procedures (political, administrative and judicial) to resolve disputes.’
The links between rule of law and development were also elaborated in relation to the rule of law as critical to
women’s rights. The promotion of women’s rights can help in strengthening the position of women in society
which can contribute overall to better family nutrition and health; improved education for children; reduced
vulnerability to transmitted diseases; better access to assets and finance for families; and greater economic growth
and security for communities and nations.
In defining the understanding of the rule of law, some contributors discussed, that while the rule of law generally
reflects the norms that is commonly shared in society, it should have a moral foundation – that the ‘rule of law’
should not only be about developing more laws, but be focused on developing just laws which reflect the shared
communal norms. It was noted that there is also the danger that the law itself can embody inequality and can be
enforced in a discriminatory way. Equal and fair implementation of the laws is seen as a major challenge. “The rule
of law is about substantive justice as well as procedural fairness. It helps to create more equitable and inclusive
societies in which there is greater opportunity for all and where every individual can lead a decent life free from
fear and want.”
144
145
Without the rule of law, it was noted, “there can be no sustainable and equitable foundation for institutions to
distribute resources and to provide public goods such as health and education. Without mechanisms to enable
citizens to enforce the terms of this social contract, there is no safeguard for the weaker against the stronger;
injustice within society will undermine the terms for fair cooperation and create a ‘vicious circle’ of further injustice;
and citizens will resort to violence to solve disputes and achieve their ends, creating insecurity which undermines
the framework for all public goods…The post-2015 framework needs to redress this balance and highlight the
importance of rule of law as the guarantor of the social contract without which resources will be distributed in the
interest of elites and to the detriment of the poor, women and excluded groups.”
Institutions that uphold the rule of law, such as justice and security institutions that are responsible for the
implementation of the law have a significant role in promoting the rule of law. Reform of laws and these
institutions, however, is not easy as these reforms would “likely impact the foundations of political power and
societal and elite interest and can require a fundamental transformation of culture and power relationships.’’ These
institutions are also vital for promoting peaceful and secure environments for sustainable development. Reform
efforts would need to also focus not only on changing laws but in reforming institutions so that they are more
accountable and responsive.
Some of the contributions argued that rule of law interventions should focus on bringing justice closer to people
by, among other things, increasing the number of judges and courts as this can help reduce delays as well as
distances and costs involved in accessing justice. As was noted in one response, “If citizens do not have access to
justice, if they are unaware of their rights or unable to enforce their rights, or if the institutions are unable to fulfil
those rights and meet the citizen’s demands, then there can be no sustainable development.’’ The importance of
the provision of legal aid services through lawyers and paralegal networks was also raised in some of the
contributions.
The role of traditional and non-state justice systems was also discussed in many of the contributions. Informal
justice systems were seen as a significant means of upholding peace and stability and enabling people to settle
disputes, for example over land and entitlements. In many cases, the poor and marginalized groups often prefer to
use these systems because the formal system is seen as too costly, biased against them, too distance (physically
and culturally), they lack access to legal services and language is a barrier. “Poor people are more likely to use nonformal institutions for the resolution of disputes, because they are often more accessible and able to deliver quicker
and, in some cases, more appropriate forms of justice. However, it is as important to recognise that, like formal
institutions, non-formal justice mechanisms may not provide just and equitable outcomes for all.”
Phase 2: How to Include the Rule of Law in the Post 2015 Development Agenda
In addition to elaborating on ‘why’ the rule of law is important within a future post-2015 development framework,
it will be important to also address the practical challenge of ‘how’ this could be achieved.
The three questions under this topic aim to explore how specific aspects of rule of law can be included in the post2015 development agenda, including in terms of measuring progress on rule of law, justice and security.
Contributions should also discuss the challenge of how to ensure that while reflecting overall global priorities, the
post-2015 agenda on the rule of law can also be tailored to reflect the specific realities of different country
contexts.
Guiding questions:
1.
Question 1. How can we measure progress on rule of law within a future post-2015 development
framework? Which targets and indicators on the rule of law, justice and security could be proposed that
would enable us to advance towards universal goals but also allow the space to reflect national priorities
and context specificities? (Please note that the UN Secretary-General’s High Level Panel Report on the
145
146
Post-2015 Development Agenda, for example, highlighted a number of possible targets related to justice
and security, which are specified in the attached concept note.)
2.
Question 2. In what ways could this framework address inequities and marginalization of specific groups
of people who may face significant barriers in accessing justice and security (e.g. specific targets and
indicators)?
3.
Question 3. The UN Secretary-General’s High Level Panel Report on the post-2015 development agenda
calls for a ‘data revolution’. In your opinion, is such a ‘data revolution’ possible in the area of rule of law?
What actions can be taken and what investments are required, for example, to collect the data on rule of
law? Please provide specific recommendations/initiatives that could be undertaken.
The contributions on measuring rule of law raised many questions around what is being measured and how.
Contributors raised the question of the purpose of the indicators, whether they should measure the accuracy of
the plan or whether they should measure impact. Some noted that when developing indicators, it is important to
be clear what is being measured: “..capacity are not the same as better outcomes – and better outcomes are not
enough unless they generate confidence among all social groups.” Some contributors have argued for “capacity”,
“outcome” and “perceptions” indicators for each target. It was also noted that “the rule of law works when it
creates a culture of justice and this means measuring impact, especially for those who are disenfranchised and
marginalized such as women, indigenous peoples, minorities, victims, and children.”
The contributions highlighted the various dimensions that indicators can focus on, from capacity, performance to
outcome, to thematic areas: reduction of violence, capacity & performance of justice and security institutions, civil
and political rights, organized crime & illegal activity; access to legal forums and legal aid, legal identity, right to
information, and community rights and land and natural resources; to human rights values, separation of powers,
consistency and predictability, and fair, independent and transparent administration of justice.
In addition to a range of proposals around indicators, some considerations that need to be kept in mind when
developing indicators were also highlighted including:
 The danger of relying on a single (often proxy) indicator
 Capacity indicators may indicate the level of effort, but not the impact
 Statistics that are available may not be reliable or may be politicized or manipulated
 There may be negative incentives that may be created by the targets and indicators developed
Some suggested that indicators on governance and rule of law should be cross-cutting and be able to measure
socio-economic and other developmental aspects such as access to health, access to education, access to housing.
Contributors suggested that indicators should measure the responsiveness of rule of law institutions. Some
indicators proposed included:

setting of time frames/lines in relation to responding to reported crime,
 completion of investigations,

completion of cases in courts and reduction of backlogs

passage of legislation in parliament
 Indicators to measure the quality delivery of services such as the fair resolution of disputes by
independent tribunals
 Collection of disaggregated data by sex and other factors
 Separation of powers
 Measures on the independence of the judiciary
(Additional proposed indicators can be found in Annex I).
146
147
Some also noted that the discussion on rule of law needs to move away from institutions and processes to
measuring rule of law outcomes i.e. fulfillment/realization of rights, cultivating and nurturing a culture of respect
for rule of law by both the duty bearers and rights holders.
In discussing how measures on rule of law can include a focus on poor and marginalized groups, the need to collect
disaggregated data to uncover horizontal inequalities (inter- and intra groups) was highlighted, as was the need to
ensure that interventions are better able to target marginalized groups. ‘‘Marginalized population groups tend to
be invisible in these national surveys. The need to provide disaggregated statistics, based on the grounds of
discrimination prohibited by international law, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other
opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status, require more resource and capacity building for
data collection.’’
In order to measure the rule of law, contributors agreed that a ‘data revolution’, as called for by the
UN Secretary-General’s High Level Panel Report on the post-2015 development agenda is indeed necessary. They
noted that in addition to data that is collected by the government, civil society organisations can also contribute to
the data gathering process and cooperation in data collection is necessary. Some raised the concern that data
gathered may not always be accurate or reliable and that it was necessary to be aware that data can also be
manipulated. There was also some discussion on universality versus context specificity of the data that is collected,
where it was noted that the indicators developed should help in making regional comparisons possible. Many
agreed that the data collected should reflect the user’s perspectives.
Data sources discussed include governance indicators and governance barometers, case management monthly
returns, performance management systems, perception surveys, as well as informal social media activity in order
to monitor citizen perceptions. It was also suggested that in developing indicators and targets, it is not necessary
to only include indicators for data that is already available, but to use the opportunity to also identify areas where
data can be collected and to invest in data collection capacities at the national and sub-national levels. Whether or
not rule of law is part of the post-2015 development agenda, the current discussions illustrate the need to increase
investment in data collection on rule of law globally.
147
148
ANNEX I –Detailed Contributions on Targets and Indicators
1.
SAFERWORLD
Possible indicators
Examining in turn those of the High Level Panel’s targets that are relevant to the debate on the rule of law
illustrates Saferworld’s current thinking on possible indicators. These are largely illustrative of possibilities and
proposed as contributions for further discussion and debate.
11a. Reduce violent deaths per 100,000 by x and eliminate all forms of violence against children
This is an important target, but must not be separated from other targets on broader security and justice issues or
targets that support better state-society relations. The target largely sets out its own indicator, but it may be
advisable to combine this with a broader range of security indicators on such factors as forcible displacement and,
crucially, people’s perceptions of safety. This may give a more rounded picture of the level of security achieved in
reality, and help guard against problems with the quality of data on violent deaths. Although the HLP includes a
target on violence against women, it should be noted that violent deaths predominantly affect males, so a
separate target and indicators on forms of violence that predominantly affect women are indeed essential.
Indicator options on violence and insecurity include:
Perceptions







In the last 12 months, were you
assaulted, mugged, or was
property or money stolen from
you or another household
member? (Source: Gallup
World Poll)
Do you feel safe walking alone
at night in the city or area
where you live? (Source: Gallup
World Poll)
How much do you trust the
police? (Source: Arab, Asian,
East Asia and Afro-barometers)
Do you have confidence in the
military? (Source: Gallup World
Poll / Alternative: How much do
you trust the army?
(Afrobarometer))
Percentage of population who
believe that they could contact
the police to report a crime
within 24 hours (Source: piloted
by Vera Institute of Justice)
How easy or difficult is it to get
help from the police? (Source:
Afrobarometer / Alternative:
Difficulty in getting help from
the police? (Arab Barometer))
Do the police treat people
Capacities
‘Objective’ situation





Rule of law score
(Source: World Bank
Worldwide Governance
Indicators)
Number of convictions
over number of police
(Source: UNODC)
Number of security
officers and police per
violent death (Source:
UNODC, EIU)
Extent to which
soldiers/police receive
pay and compensation to
which they are entitled
(Source: none known;
suggested in UN
Monitoring Peace
Consolidation)




Deaths due to violence, war,
civil conflict and other
intentional injuries per
100,000 population (Source:
WHO Global Burden of
Disease / Alternative:
Homicides per 100,000
population (Source:
UNODC))
Rate of population
displacement due to
violence (Source:
International Displacement
Monitoring Centre/UN High
Commissioner for Refugees
(UNHCR))
Number of deaths from
armed conflict (Source:
Uppsala Conflict Data
Program (UCDP)/ IISS)
Number of children
recruited by armed groups
and violent gangs per
100,000 population (Source:
none known)
Political stability and
absence of violence score
(Source: World Bank
148
149






equally? (Source: piloted by
Vera Institute of Justice)
Victimisation (attack, threat or
stealing by force) in the past
year (Source: ICVS)
Victimisation (sexual assault) in
the past year (Source:
International Crime Victims
Survey (ICVS))
Reliability of police services
score (Source: World Economic
Forum - Global Competitiveness
Report (WEF-GCR))
Perception that the national
security forces operate in
accordance with the law/in the
best interest of the people
(Source: none known;
suggested in UN Monitoring
Peace Consolidation)
Over the past year, how often,
if ever, have you or anyone in
your family been physically
attacked? (Source:
Afrobarometer)
Over the past year, how often,
if ever, have you or anyone in
your family had something
stolen from your house?
(Source: Afrobarometer)

Worldwide Governance
Indicators)
Total of all recorded crimes
per 100,000 people (Source:
UNODC)
11b. Ensure justice institutions are accessible, independent, well-resourced and respect due-process
rights
11d. Enhance the capacity, professionalism and accountability of the security forces, police and
judiciary
These are clearly relevant HLP targets for the rule of law. It is very positive that targets have been included on
these themes. However, the targets are more focused on strengthening capacities and less on achieving whole-ofsector outcomes than they should be – in contrast with the avowed focus on outcomes in the HLP’s illustrative
framework. Security and justice targets need to be clearly defined in terms of achieving (human) security and
justice for all social groups, and indicators need to be agreed for these targets that include a focus on people’s
perceptions of whether they are secure and whether justice is being done. Indicator options here include:
Perceptions
Capacities
 Do you have confidence in the
judicial system and the courts?
(Source: Gallup world poll)
 Do laws, policies, and
 How much do you trust courts
practices guarantee equal
of law?
treatment of various
(Source: Afrobarometer)
segments of the
 In your opinion, how often do
population? (Freedom
‘Objective’ situation

Physical integrity rights
score (composite index on
levels of extrajudicial killing,
disappearance, torture and
political imprisonment)
149
150


ordinary people who break the
law go unpunished? (Source:
Afrobarometer)
In your opinion, how often do
officials who commit crimes go
unpunished? (Source:
Afrobarometer)
How often has your group
been treated unfairly by the
government? (Source:
Afrobarometer)






House - Freedom in the
World)
Conviction rate (number of
persons convicted per
recorded/perceived crime)
(Source: UNODC)
Number of judges per
violent death (Source:
UNODC)
Judicial independence score
(Source: WEF-GCR
/Bertelsmann
Transformation Index (BTI))
Ability of poor people to
appeal judicial decisions in
serious offense cases
(Source: piloted by Vera
Institute of Justice)
Separation of powers
(Source: Legatum
Foundation’s Legatum
Prosperity Index)
Property rights & rule-based
governance (Source: World
Bank CPIA)




(Source: Cingranelli-Richards
(CIRI) database)
Criminal justice score
(including effectiveness,
timeliness, impartiality,
corruption, due process and
rights of the accused)
(Source: World Justice
Project)
Deaths in police custody
(Source: piloted by Vera
Institute of Justice)
Percentage of police
complaints resolved
(Source: piloted by Vera
Institute of Justice)
Suspension or arbitrary
application of the rule of law
and widespread violation of
human rights score (Source:
Fund for Peace)
11c. Stem the external stressors that lead to conflict, including those related to organised crime
12e Reduce illicit flows and tax evasion and increase stolen-asset recovery by $x
It is critical to include a credible target on these global level issues in the post-2015 framework, and rule of law
discussions should not overlook them. Overall, the HLP was positive in this regard but the debate must now
become much more specific. Saferworld believes that the following issues, for example, might be relevant for a
RoL approach:




Illicit drugs flows
Organised crime
Illicit trade in precious minerals
Illicit arms flows
Specific indicators on each of these are also needed. Some concrete suggestions include:
Perceptions
Capacities
‘Objective’ situation
 To what extent does
organised crime (mafiaoriented racketeering,
 Ratification of the Arms
 Adherence to the Arms
extortion) impose costs on
Trade Treaty
Trade Treaty/Incidence of
businesses in your country?
involvement of countries’
 Active co-operation within
(Source: WEF-GCR)
officials, companies or
Interpol (Source: Interpol)
 If someone in your
citizens in arms transfers in
Active participation in UN
community wanted to obtain
violation of UNSC arms
Programme of Action on
an illegal small arm, how
embargoes in last 5 years
SALW (Source: Biting the
easy would this be? / How
(Source: review of UN
Bullet Red Book / review of
150
151

would you describe the
number of illegal weapons in
your community? (Source:
none known; adapted from
UN CASA International Small
Arms Control Standard
05.10)
Prevalence of drug use
among general population
(Source: UNODC)




UN documents)
Active participation in the
International SALW Marking
and Tracing Instrument
(Source: review of reports to
the UN)
Active participation in
Kimberley process (Source:
review of Kimberley Process
data)
Active participation in
Egmont Group of Financial
Intelligence Units (Source:
review of Egmont Group
documents)
Active participation in Forest
Law Enforcement,
Governance and Trade
(FLEGT) or equivalent illicit
logging control initiative
(Source: none known)













documents)
Incidence of involvement of
countries’ officials,
companies or citizens in
trade of diamonds in
violation of UN sanctions
(Source: review of UN
documents)
Homicide by firearm rate per
100,000 population over
homicide rate per 100,000
population (Source: UNODC)
Drug seizures/laboratory
seizures over prevalence of
drug use among general
population (Source: UNODC)
Drug-related crime per
100,000 population (Source:
UNODC)
Estimated number of drugrelated deaths and rates per
million population aged 1564 (Source: UNODC)
Profits generated by
trafficking in cocaine
(Source: UNODC)
Global criminal proceeds
(Source: UNODC)
Global volume of money
laundering (Source: UNODC)
Ease of access to weapons of
minor destruction (Source:
Economist Intelligence Unit)
Anti-money laundering index
score (Source: Basel Institute
on Governance)
Volume of illicit financial
flows (Source: Global
Financial Integrity)
Global volume of money
laundering (Source: UNODC)
Extractive industries
transparency status:
compliant, candidate,
suspended or other (Source:
Extractive Industries
Transparency Initiative)
151
152
10b. Ensure people enjoy freedom of speech, association, peaceful protest and access to independent media
and information
10c. Increase public participation in political processes and civic engagement at all levels
10d. Guarantee the public’s right to information and access to government data
Governance-related targets are relevant to discussions on the rule of law. These targets are very positive and
contain a range of crucial issues for peace. It would be important to proceed quickly to the political and technical
conversation about how to build an accountability framework around these. Some relevant options to help create
an indicator basket on these targets include the following:
Perceptions
Capacities
‘Objective’ situation
 Percentage of voting age
population registered to
 Confidence in honesty of
vote (Source: Institute for
elections (Source: Gallup
 Voice and accountability
Democracy and Electoral
World Poll/ Legatum
score (Source: World Bank
Assistance (IDEA))
Foundation’s Legatum
Worldwide Governance
 Internet users per 100
Prosperity Index)
Indicators (WGI))
people (Source: World Bank
 Ability to express political
 Percentage of voter turnout
World Development
opinion without fear (Source:
in national and local
Indicators (WDI))
Gallup World Poll)
elections (Source: IDEA; also
 Combined scores: electoral
 Freedom of opinion and
proposed by IDPS)
process & pluralism, political
expression is effectively
 Election integrity (Source:
culture (Source: EIU Political
guaranteed (Source: World
Global Integrity Index)
Democracy Index)
Justice Project)
 Freedom of the press index
 Enabling space/environment
 How would you rate the
score (Source: Reporters
score (Source: CIVICUS Civil
freeness and fairness of the
Without Borders)
Society Index)
last national election? (Source:
 Number of journalists killed,
Afrobarometer/Arab
 Non-governmental
imprisoned, missing or in
organisations, public
Barometer)
exile (Source: Committee to
information & media score
 Overall, how satisfied are you
Protect
(Source: Global Integrity
with the way democracy works
Journalists/Reporters
Index)
in your country? (Source:
Without Borders Press
Afrobarometer)
 Electoral process (Source:
Freedom Barometer)
Freedom House - Freedom
 How free are you to join any
 Combined scores: freedom
in the World)
political organisation you
of speech, freedom of
 Diversity in representation
want? (Source: Afrobarometer)
assembly & association,
(by gender, region and social
 How free are you to say what
electoral self-determination
groups) in key-decision
you want? (Source:
(Cingranelli-Richards (CIRI)
making bodies (legislature,
Afrobarometer)
database)
government, security
 During election campaigns,
 Civic activism (Source:
services, judiciary) (Source:
how much do you personally
Institute for Social Studies
none known; proposed by
fear becoming a victim of
Indices of Social
IDPS)
political intimidation or
Development (ISS – ISD))
violence? (Source:
 Combined scores: civil
Afrobarometer)
liberties, political
 Level of civil liberties (Source:
participation (Source:
Freedom House’s Freedom in
Economist Intelligence Unit
the World Survey)
(EIU) Political Democracy
 Level of political rights (Source:
Index)
Freedom House’s Freedom in
 Voting and pparty
the World Survey)
information score (Source:
Global Integrity Index)
152
153
10e. Reduce bribery and corruption and ensure officials can be held accountable
Issues of bribery and corruption have relevance for discussions on the rule of law. Furthermore, he Institute for
Economics and Peace and others have shown how peaceful countries are closely tied to levels of corruption.
Indicator options - which in the below case include those related to the effecitve governance of national resources
and revenue - on this crucial target include:
Perceptions
Capacities
‘Objective’ situation
 Percentage of firms
identifying corruption as a
major constraint (Source:
 Open budget index score
 Efficiency of revenue
World Bank Enterprise
(Source: International
mobilisation (Source: World
Survey)
Budget Partnership)
Bank CPIA)
 Do you think the
 Quality of budgetary &
 Transparency, accountability
government is doing enough
financial management
& corruption in public sector
to fight corruption or not?
(Source: World Bank CPIA)
(Source: World Bank CPIA)
(Source: Gallup World Poll /
 Quality of public
 Control of corruption score
Alternative: Is the
administration (Source:
(Source: World Bank
government effective in the
World Bank CPIA)
Worldwide Governance
fight against corruption? (TI
Indicators)
 Regulatory quality score
Global Corruption
(Source: World Bank
 Tax revenue as a percentage
Barometer))
Worldwide Governance
of GDP (Source: World Bank
 Was there at least one
Indicators)
WDI)
instance in the last 12
 Combined score:
 Anti-money laundering index
months when you had to
government conflicts of
score (Source: Basel Institute
give a bribe/present, or not?
interest safeguards, checks
on Governance)
(Source: Gallup World Poll /
& balances; public
 Volume of illicit financial flows
Alternative: Bribe payers’
administration &
(Source: Global Financial
index score (TI)
professionalism;
Integrity)
 Corruption perceptions
government oversight &
 Global volume of money
index score (Source:
controls; anti-corruption
laundering (Source: UNODC)
Transparency International
legal framework (Source:
 Extractive industries
(TI))
Global Integrity Report)
transparency status:
 Do you think the level of
 There is an open and
compliant, candidate,
corruption in this country is
transparent bidding process
suspended or other (Source:
lower, about the same, or
for receiving public contracts
Extractive Industries
higher than it was five years
(Source: piloted by Vera
Transparency Initiative)
ago? (Source: Gallup World
Institute of Justice)
Poll)
 The Government publishes
 Absence of corruption score
the results of all
(Source: World Justice
procurement decisions
Project)
(Source: piloted by Vera
 Fairness in decisions of
Institute of Justice)
government officials score
 Quality of public financial
(Source: WEF-GCR)
management and internal
 Percentage of population
oversight mechanisms
who believe they could
(Source: suggested by IDPS report a crime without
could be derived from PEFA
having to pay a bribe
studies)
(Source: piloted by Vera
Institute of Justice)
153
154
2.
NAMATI
How these reduce inequity: Increased provision of affordable legal services is likely to make a difference for the
most marginalized. Measuring by a per capita ratio not only at the national level, but also across smaller
administrative units can address some of the sub-national distribution problems in such a commitment.
How to collect the data: Government data on legal forums is readily available. Governments and civil society
would need to cooperate to collect data on legal aid/ primary justice service providers, as services are often
provided by NGOs. However, this may be problematic in fragile and conflict-affected states, states lacking political
will, and regions with poor communication and transportation infrastructure. Increasingly, Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) can overlay geographic population data with that of justice services so as to generate
per capita ratios of coverage.
How these reduce inequity: This target seeks to address the present inequality experienced by undocumented
persons, empowering both the current population and those yet-to-be-born with one of their universal human
154
155
rights. The implementation of nondiscriminatory laws and practices for granting identity documents offers strong
protection of undocumented persons’ rights.
How to collect the data: Legal identity documents and birth registration is tracked by many national governments
as well as UNICEF and the World Bank population indicators.
How these reduce inequity: This target seeks to empower all citizens globally with the right and ability to access
state information. If implemented effectively, it empowers people to monitor the actions of those who make
decisions affecting their lives.
How to collect the data: This data is generally available in administrative records, although not all countries
reliably measure these statistics. Widely available and comprehensive global transparency and governance indices
can help make up for gaps in data.
155
156
How these reduce inequity: Large-scale acquisitions and concessions are disproportionately concentrated in
countries where land rights are weakest, despite the various problems and conflicts associated with this
practice. Legislating and enforcing community control over land ownership and use should decrease the
imbalance of power between landholders and investors.
How to collect the data: Most national governments collect data on land tenure within their borders. The Land
Portal extensively documents land transfers. Tenure systems vary greatly, however, so each country would need
to determine the meaning of “local” and “community.”
3.
OHCHR
Some examples of draft illustrative indicators on human rights, rule of law, justice and security are:
 Homicide (intentional and non-intentional) rate and physical and sexual violence victimization rate per
100,000
 Number of deaths due to armed conflict
 Number of deaths in custody per 100,000 persons detained or imprisoned within the last 12 month
 Proportion of women/children that were victims of physical, sexual or psychological violence during the
past year [life time]
 Number of arbitrary killing, detention, torture, enforced disappearance, forced evictions, human
trafficking reported by United Nations and other relevant human rights mechanisms
 Proportion of all detainees in pre-sentence detention
 Number of refugees, asylum seekers and internally displaced persons by country of origin and by country
of asylum or residence (and per 100,000)
 Proportion of population feeling (un-)safe (e.g. walking alone after dark in their neighbourhood or being
alone at home at night)
 Proportion of children under 5 whose birth has been recorded[1]
 Proportion of victims of crime, including physical and sexual violence, who reported them to the police
 Existence of credible national institutions for the protection of human rights (compliant with United
Nations standards)[2]
 Country’s ratification of United Nations human rights treaties entailing accountability mechanisms
(reporting, observations and review of complaints by UN bodies)[3]
 Conviction rates / average length of sentence for indigent defendants provided with legal representation
as a proportion of conviction rate for defendants with lawyer of their own choice
 Prison occupancy rates
 Proportion of population who paid a bribes to a security, police and justice officials during the last 12
months
 Proportion of population who manifested trust in the police / in the judiciary
 Qualitative indicators: recommendations formulated by United Nations human rights mechanisms and
specifically relevant to achieving the targets
 Proportion of seats in elected or appointed bodies and high level positions held by women and other
population groups
 Average voter turnouts disaggregated by women and other population groups and number of elections,
referenda or initiatives during the reference period
 Killing, disappearance, detention or torture of journalists or human rights defenders reported by United
Nations and other relevant human rights mechanisms
 Number of websites blocked and number of data on users provided by internet service providers at the
request of governments
 Proportion of population reporting satisfaction with how involved they feel in decision-making process at
national and sub-national levels
 Proportion of population who consider the Media in their country as free
156
157
4. INFLUENCE AFRICA
A table below summarizes some of the targets and indicators on the rule of law, justice and security [1]
Indicators
targets
Personal freedom Public awareness
& respect for
human rights
Respect for rights
Justice and
and equality
security
indicators
Estimated deaths
due to external
wars;
Estimated deaths
due to internal
wars;
Accountability and
transparency
Freedom from
corruption
Level of organized
internal conflict;
Political Stability &
lack of violence
Rule of law
Low government
corruption, with
high zero
tolerance to
corruption
society
Regulatory quality Governors,
institutions and
the governed are
accountable to the
law due to
existence of
Separation of
effective oversight
power
and regulations
Sustainable and
equal Economic
Opportunity
Fight against
Impunity free
impunity
society
targets
Public awareness
& respect for
human security
(political stability)
Number of
Lowest suffering
refugees and
of humanity
displaced persons
as percentage of
population;
Level of violent
crime
personal &
property safety
157
158
Annex XV – Submissions to the Dialogue
Asian Consortium For Human Rights-Based Access to Justice (HRBA2J-Asia)
NOTES/POSITION OF THE ASIAN CONSORTIUM FOR HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED ACCESS TO JUSTICE
(HRBA2J-Asia) ON THE GLOBAL DIALOGUE REGARDING THE RULE OF LAW AND THE POST2015
DEVELOPMENT AGENDA
The Asian Consortium on Human Rights-based Approach to Access to Justice (HRBA2J-Asia) lauds the
holding of a two-day Global Dialogue from 27-28 September 2013 in New York on the integration of the
rule of law in the Post2015 Development Agenda. It is an honor to have been invited to participate in
this most significant event. It is also an occasion where the voice of Asia can also be listened to.
The themes on commitment to the rule of law, context and specificity and the multi-faceted pathways
towards the rule of law are relevant. They address the need for democracy and development in many
countries. Since rule of law is important to promote democracy, equity and development, there are
various ways towards accomplishing the same which the Global Dialogue should look into and
emphasize. Rule of law has development functions.
As a network with forty (40) members in at least twelve (12) countries in Asia building a “community of
practitioners on human rights-based approach to access to justice” since 2010, we wish to share our
views on the following:
1 .Framework: Rule of law is beyond legal, beyond courts, should be enforceable, . and accessible
especially to the marginalized and vulnerable.
From experience, traditional institutions of the rule of law (legislature, executive agencies, judiciary,
security agencies, etc. ) exclude the poor. Legal exclusion maintains poverty when laws, policies and
programs neglect or ignore the rights, needs and contexts of the poor. Disempowerment of the poor is
a result of legal exclusion253 (see diagram below).
2. Some proposals integrating Rule of Law into a rights-based Post 2015 Development Agenda
2.1 The post 2015 agenda must build the capacity of people and strengthen institutions to implement
and enforce the rule of law – indeed a gigantic task. We need to emphasize the "preventive" aspects to
avoid the breakdown of the rule of law.254
Much of the "unpeace and undevelopment" stems from the fact that the rules are established but are
not quite followed - enforced, implemented. It has to do with the rule of the elites - political and
economic elites. The implication is we need to mobilize, organize and sensitize the global citizenry by
touching the “bottom”.
2.2 Context-based and clear policy agenda and budgetary allocations for “unreached” segments or
sectors “left behind” in meeting the Millenium Development Goals.
253
Glenda Litong, Reducing Poverty and Ensuring Access to Justice Through Legal Empowerment of the Poor, The Way Forward, A Policy
Resource Book on Legal Empowerment of the Philippines, ESCR-Asia, Manila, p. 46, Manila,2007
254
Lucita. Lazo, Views on Concept Paper of Rule of Law and Post2015 Development Framework, September 26,2013
158
159
These “left-behind sectors” composed of the poorest of the poor : women, small scale farmers, smallscale fisherfolk, informal settlers-urban poor, evacuees and or the internally-displaced, indigenous
peoples, key populations at higher risk to HIV (males who have sex with males, female sex workers,), the
LGBT and the out-of-school youth.255
In many countries in Asia, these sectors confront and carry multiple burdens in hurdling poverty, not the
least of which are legal and social exclusions and the worst, discrimination.
2.3 Inclusion of civil society actors and people’s organizations in rights-based development planning
specially budgeting.
2.4 Inclusion of business specially TransNational Corporations adopting human rights clauses. All
business areas should be governed by human rights but special mention is given to the following:
natural resource extraction, extraction industries, supply-chains, large-scale development projects,
pharmaceutical and food supply companies industries that exploit child labor256.
2.5 Inclusion of labor migration
Migration is a symptom of the failures of the rule of law . We need to get to the roots of
‘malgovernance.'
There is an imperative for effective protection of labor migrants through
enforcement of law e.g. in Cambodia, Korea257 and cross countries (country of migrant destination and
home country) in general. An example would be the establishment of an Asian lawyer’s network that
specializes in providing legal aid to migrants and or share mutual experience in cooperation with
government agencies such as national human rights institutions, and discuss future cooperation.258
2.6 Other access to justice concerns:
2.6.1 Mainstreaming legal aid /clinics as a right by reforming government and establishing rural
and urban legal aid systems.
2.6.2 Judicial activism of judges in the protection of human rights and rule of law through public
interest litigation.259
2. 6.3 Socially responsible lawyering for victims
2.6.4 Empowering communities, whereby marginalized persons more fully understand the
meaning of rule of law, their rights, duties and privileges, and how to access these rights and
privileges within society;260
2.6.5 Recognition of judicial systems of Muslims and indigenous peoples
2.6.6 Reparations to victims of climate changes by countries primarily and historically
responsible for polluting the atmosphere with greenhouse gases
255
Philippine Legislator’s Committee on Population and Development Foundation, Inc. (PLCPD), Briefing Paper on Policy Agenda of Sectors Left
Behind in Meeting the Philippine’s Millennium Development Goals, presented during The 4th National Multisectoral Policy Conference on
Human Development, Sulo Hotel, Quezon City, September 18, 2013
256
Hwang, Pillkyu,Views on Concept Paper on Rule Law and the Post2015 Development Agenda, July7, 2013
257
Phun Vidjia, Sam-Onn Kong,Views on Concept Paper on Rule of Law, Cambodia Law Services, July 9, 2013
258
Hwang Pillkyu, The Past, Present and Future of Access to Justice of Migrants in Korea, in The Changing Face of Asia: Stories and Opportunities
of Human Rights-based Access to Justice, HRBA2J-Asia, Manila, p.107, 2011
259
Geeta Pathak-Sangroula and Ravi Vyas, Views, Concept Paper on Rule of Law, Kathmandu School of Law (KSL), July 8,2013
260
Bruce A.Lasky,Community/Clinical Legal Education Networks and Providing Access to Justice Throughout Asia, in The Changing Face of Asia:
Stories and Opportunities of Human Rights-based Access to Justice, BABSEA CLE, Manila, p.182, 2011
159
160
2.7 On targets and indicators
2.7.1 measurable targets that will also include legal services, not only legal information and the
availability of non-legal remedies in addition to the legal ones261
2.7.2 clear linkage of the rule of law, environmental justice and sustainability262
2.8 inclusion of rule of law in context-based development goal setting
2.9 necessity for increased capacity-building of both rule of law and development planners/actors on
developing and managing human rights-based equal/equitable access to justice projects and
programs263
2.10 “data revolution” on the rule of law as an imperative resource needed to be established
2.10.1 Build database by documenting and creating “spaces” for regular sharing on country
and regional –level good practices and or success stories of rule of law / human rights basedaccess to justice . For example, HRBA2J-Asia has documented and culled lessons regarding new
strategies to protect the rights of persons with disabilities in China, to people’s cultural and
Constitutional claims to forestry resource in Thailand, women’s empowerment and gender
budgeting and women and the judiciary in the Philippines.264
2.10.2 Focus on the breaches of the rule of law by local governments ( in addition to the
attention given to national institutions, which have been subject of research and studies in the
past).265
For example, in the Philippines where poverty is high, political power is cornered by a small
group and corruption is a norm, development is seriously affected in scandalous proportions e.g.
pork barrel scam.
In the case of Cebu City, where political factions had been fighting each
other for decades, worthy and meaningful projects had been derailed by simply abusing the rule
of law in favor of political greed or expediency.
In this regard, the "evidence -based" problem solving approach is highly warranted. There is a
need to continue to emphasize development and the implementation of the rule of law from
below - from the level of the local governments. The local governments can help implement
numerous unenforced laws. However, in many cases, local governments or communities that
have the opportunity to push the proper type of development are not doing enough in this
regard.
International is beneficial. National is better. Local is the best.
261
Minerva Gonzales, Views, Concept Paper on Rule of Law and the Post2015 Development Agenda, Chairperson, ESCR-Asia, July 4, 2013
Resurreccion T. Lao, Views, Concept Paper on Rule of Law and the Post2015 Development Agenda, Facilitator-Secretariat, Manila, Sept. 26,
2013,
263
Maria Socorro I.Diokno,Developing Human Rights-bases EA2J Interventions, Module3, Manual on Human Rights-based Approach to Realizing
Equal Access to Justice, HRBA2J-Asia,Manila, 2011
264
Jefferson R. Plantilla, Human Rights-Based Approach to Access to Justice: Some Experiences, The Changing Face of Asia: Stories and
Opportunities of Human Rights-based Access to Justice, p.7, Manila, 2011
265
Edmund T.Lao, Views, Three Guide Questions on How to Include the Rule of Law in the Post2015 Development Agenda, September 26, 2013,
Cebu City, Philippines
262
160
161
Defining a common concept of the rule of law, making it a high enabling goal, and incorporating it in the
Post2015 development agenda are issues worthy of the time and resources of the New York Dialogue.
They are challenges that call for urgent and concerted action.
Thank you.
Steering Committee and Members of HRBA2J-Asia
Contact Us: The Secretariat, HRBA2J-Asia Address: c/o ESCR-Asia,
Rm. 6, Mezzanine Flr., Manila Observatory, Ateneo de Manila University,
Loyola Heights, Quezon City, Philippines, Telefax: 063 2 9293482;
website: www.hrbajustice.asia
ACCESS TO JUSTICE & RULE OF LAW ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK
SOCIAL and CULTURAL CONTEXT
STRATEGIES
Context of the Poor
• Perception of the law by the
poor.
• Legally disempowered and
invisible
• Situation of women and
children,fisherfolks,
farmers,Out-of -school youth,
indigenous peoples,LGBT,Sex
workers, etc.
Legal, policy &
regulatory
framework
. State of legal
Exclusion
. Homogenous
treatment of all
sub-groups
Access to Justice And Rule of Law
. Law as an instrument of social change
and a developmental tool.
. Should lead to legal empowerment.
. Should take into account the differences.
in the context, characteristics and profile
of every sub-group of work and within
the subgroup itself
STRATEGIES
Societal Factors Affecting the poor and vulnerable groups :
 Inequality and power relations.
 Legislative capacity to formulate laws for the poor
and marginalized
 Executive Implementation
 Access to the courts
161
162
Earth Law Center - Integrating Human Rights and Earth Rights for Sustainability: “Nature’s Rule of Law”
SUMMARY:
 World leaders and civil society are advancing global, “post‐2015” Millennium Development Goals (MDG)
and “Rio +20” Sustainability Goals to promote the well‐being of people and planet. Implementation of
these initiatives is being supported through renewed efforts to apply the Rule of Law, which recognizes
that no person or institution is above the law and that everyone is equal before the law.
 If we are to achieve these Goals, however, we must also recognize the inherent rights of ecosystems and
species to exist, thrive and evolve, consistent with implementing “Nature’s Rule of Law.”
PROBLEM:
 Despite some successes, our environmental laws and agreements have failed to prevent grave challenges
such as climate change, drying waterways and disappearing species, which in turn contribute to growing
human populations without clean water, healthy food, or other necessities.
 These dilemmas result in large part because our overarching governance systems treat the natural world
as property to be exploited. Because they subsume protection of nature to the incessant driver of
economic growth, they only slow, rather than reverse, the downward slide of environmental health.
 The myth of infinite economic growth drives human rights violations as well as violations of nature’s
rights.
Examples unfortunately abound world‐wide. Reports include:
 Madhya Pradesh, India: Coal mining is forcing thousands of tribal villagers from their traditional home and
livelihoods; many of the mines also impact critically endangered species habitats.
 Manila, Philippines: In the last decade, dozens of environmental advocates have been murdered,
including many protesting illegal deforestation that threatens endangered species and exacerbates
typhoon impacts.
 Jeju Island, South Korea: Human rights violations, including excessive police force and freedom of
assembly violations, are affecting objectors to a proposed Naval Base. Jeju is a UNESCO Biosphere
Reserve, World Natural Heritage site, and Global Geoparks Network member.
 In a December 2011 UN Human Rights Council report, the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders
found that: “defenders working on [land and environmental issues] … face a high risk of violations to their
physical integrity,” including killings and attempted killings, excessive use of force by the police, assaults
and intimidation. Violations are “carried out by both State and non‐State actors.”
 To date, the UN has failed to offer a response commensurate with the gravity of such violations. This must
change. A critical element of the post2015 MDG and Sustainability Goals framework must be
implementation of a Rule of Law protecting both human and nature’s rights.
SOLUTION:
 We must expand the Rule of Law to include “Nature’s Rule of Law,” which dictates that we cannot
continue to chase the myth of infinite, nature fueled “growth” on a finite planet. We further must
create governance systems that recognize and advance in law nature’s rights to exist and thrive.
 The drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights wrote that “value of the human person…did
not originate in the decision of a worldly power, but rather in the fact of existing.” Like our own value,
the value of nature does not arise from our decisions on its worth, but from its existence on this planet.
This perspective is reflected in the 2010 “Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth,” approved
by over 35,000 people representing 140 countries in Cochabamba, Bolivia.
 Rather than “sustainable development,” we must re-envision governance to serve “sustainable
communities,” which include both humans and the natural world. Rights‐based laws protecting both will
best ensure the success of new sustainability goals. Rights-based laws already exist and are expanding to
promote thriving human and ecological systems. For example:
162
163
o
o
o
o
Ecuador’s Constitution recognizes that nature “has the right to exist, persist, maintain itself and
regenerate its own vital cycles, structure, functions and its evolutionary processes,” and provides
citizens with enforcement authority to advance its application.
An August 2012 New Zealand agreement between the government and Maori iwi recognizes
Whanganui River and its tributaries as a legal entity, with rights to exist and flourish as an
“integrated, living whole.” Guardians will be appointed to oversee the rights of the River.
Santa Monica, California adopted in April 2013 a law recognizing the rights of nature and
providing residents with authority to enforce its provisions.
The Rio +20 “Future We Want” Outcome Document recognized the spread of nature’s rights laws
and called for new metrics of economic well‐being.
CONCLUSION:
 The 1987 Declaration of the World Commission on Environment and Development states that: “[h]uman
laws must be reformulated to keep human activities in harmony with the unchanging and universal
laws of nature.” We must broaden the Rule of Law to encompass the natural world, just as we expanded
it to encompass people everywhere through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
 Recognition in law of the rights of nature to exist, thrive and evolve will better guide our behavior to
protect the natural world, to the benefit of both people and planet.
 These foundational principles must underlie our efforts to advance global sustainability goals if we are to
best ensure their success in securing the well‐being of all.
September 2013
Contact: Linda Sheehan, Executive Director, Earth Law Center, [email protected]
For More Information:
UN‐NGLS, “Post‐2015 Primer Series,” available at: http://www.un‐ngls.org/spip.php?article4333/.
UNDP, “Issue Brief ‐ Rule of Law and the Post‐2015 Development Agenda” (Jan. 2013), available at:
http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/341332.
UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders,
A/HR/C/19/55 (21 Dec. 2011), available at:
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session19/A‐HRC‐19‐55_en.pdf.
Earth Law Center is a contributing author to the upcoming Rule of Law for Nature: New Dimensions and Ideas in
Environmental Law (Dec. 2013, Cambridge University Press) (Christina Voigt, ed.)
163
164
Annex XVI - Additional Resources
Accounting for Justice and Security, UNODC (draft)
A life of dignity for all: accelerating progress towards the Millennium Development Goals and advancing the United
Nations development agenda beyond 2015 (A/68/202) [Accessible at:
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/A%20Life%20of%20Dignity%20for%20All.pdf]
A Million Voices: A Sustainable Future With Dignity For All [Accessible at:
http://www.worldwewant2015.org/bitcache/9158d79561a9de6b34f95568ce8b389989412f16?vid=422422&dispo
sition=inline&op=view]
A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies through Sustainable Development, The
Report of the Secretary-General's High-Level Panel of eminent persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda
[Accessible at: http://www.post2015hlp.org/THE-REPORT/]
Human Rights Indicators: A Guide to Measurement and Implementation [Accessible at:
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Human_rights_indicators_en.pdf]
Report from the Expert Meeting on an Accountability Framework for Conflict, Violence and Disaster and the Post2015 Development Agenda (Glen Cove, June 2013) [Accessible at:
http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/371755]
Report form the Expert Consultation on Democratic Governance and Human Rights: Criteria and Measurement
Proposals for a Post-2015 Development Agenda (OHCHR/UNDP, November 2012) [Accessible at:
http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/277879]
Statistics and indicators for the post-2015 development agenda [Accessible at:
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/untaskteam_undf/UNTT_MonitoringReport_WEB.pdf]
UNDG Thematic Consulation on Governance [Accessible at: http://www.worldwewant2015.org/GOVERNANCE]
UNDG Thematic Consultation on Conflict and Fragility [Accessible at: http://www.worldwewant2015.org/conflict]
Who will be accountable? Human Rights and the Post-2015 Development Agenda
[http:\www.ohchr.org\Documents\Publications\WhoWillBeAccountable.pdf]
164