Document Library

From Project to Program: Effective Programming for Security and Justice

Author: N Ball and E Scheye
Date: 2008
Size: 43 pages (162 KB)

Access full text: available online

Summary

Security and justice activities in fragile states involve considerable risk. In such environments, what is the way forward for reform? This report, from the Netherlands Institute for International Relations (Clingendael), looks at security system reform (SSR) in fragile ‘post-conflict’ and fragile ‘rebuilding’ states. It suggests that donors should provide support in three linked stages, which would enable immediate needs to be met while longer-term programming is developed. An iterative approach would strengthen the relationship between state and non-state service providers and service users.

Fragile post-conflict and fragile rebuilding states are similar in many ways. Neither kinds of state have ever functioned effectively throughout their sovereign territory. Furthermore, the capacities of both groups cannot meet the demands placed on them by most SSR programmes, which are inherently state-centric and top-down. Local justice systems usually provide the bulk of services in these states and, although they do display the same types of problems that afflict the statutory state system, their faults are no more severe than those of the statutory state system. Indeed, these local justice networks may be more efficient and people-centred than state systems.

One key difference between post-conflict and rebuilding countries is that in post-conflict states there is usually a United Nations peace operation. It is not yet clear whether the UN has the organisational ability to engage in effective justice and security development. It will take time to sensitise the UN to the significance of combining a focus on service delivery with long-term strategic programming based on a careful assessment of the needs of local actors.

Justice and security development is a highly political endeavour that requires changes and transformations in service delivery, organisational structures and institutional arrangements to produce sustainable improvements in performance.

• It takes time to build the capacity to plan and carry out change.
• The environment is characterised by conflict, which may not be susceptible to reconciliation, although this does not preclude engaging in justice and security development.
• Justice and security services are delivered by a large number of actors, the majority of whom will be local justice networks and non-state service providers.
• Donors cannot know ahead of time how each development activity will alter the balance of power among competing national actors.
• National and local actors will always know more than donors and will manipulate donor programming to advance their partisan self-interests.

Donors have focused on improving the formal capacities of the state and have failed to promote sustainable institutional transformations, addressing local needs and integrating local justice and security networks into SSR programming. A change in the quality and level of justice and security delivered to citizens and residents is the best measure of an effective programme. Donors should:

• Understand the varying political contexts as well as the differences and similarities between post-conflict and rebuilding states.
• Engage in a country over the long term.
  Set realistic goals.
• Deliver improved services while strengthening governance, organisational structures and systems at the local, provincial and national levels.
• Ensure that whatever activities are supported on an urgent basis do not negatively affect long-term activities.
• Ensure that donor personnel have a broad range of political and negotiation skills.

Access full text: available online

Source: Ball, N., Scheye, E. and Van de Goor, L., 2008, 'From Project to Program: Effective Programming for Security and Justice', Netherlands Institute of International Relations, Clingendael, The Hague
Author: Nicole Ball , njball3@cs.com