Document Library

Participatory Poverty Assessment on Safety, Security, and Access to Justice: Voices of the Poor in Uganda

Author: Government of Uganda
Date: 2002
Size: 60 pages (106KB)

Access full text: available online

Summary

What are the constraints faced by the poor in Uganda in terms of safety, security and access to justice? How can the Justice Law and Order Sector (J/LOS) give “voice” to the concerns of the poor? This first ever Uganda Participatory Poverty Assessment (PPA) is an initiative from the J/LOS to consult the poor as end-users of justice, safety, security and order issues.

This assessment, carried out in six districts of Uganda (Katakwi, Busia, Kampala, Arua, Kiboga, and Kabale) is intended to inform the policy reform process and facilitate governments and development partners to become more responsive to the concerns of the poor.

Several barriers act as constraints to the poor when accessing justice, in particular corruption levels, poorly facilitated institutions and the abuse and violation of prisoners' rights. There is a lack of supervision, monitoring and accountability of the work of officials and the business activities engaged in by the poor are incompatible with the current commercial justice system. Other findings from the study show:

• Inadequacies by government to guarantee security of property and safety of persons. In Katakwi communities suffer from disincentives to invest in livestock due to raids, in Kiboga unresolved land disputes cause insecurity.
• Legal services to the poor are a mockery. High fees, concentration in the city, lack of legal aid providers and transport costs all constrain the majority, and the rural poor in particular, from access to legal advice.
• There are inadequate levels of awareness of basic legal rights amongst the poor. High illiteracy is a major constraint, as is the use of the English language in courts.
• The absence of land tribunals and the poor handling of land disputes has meant the poor continue to lose.
• Participants have various coping strategies usually linked to activities in the informal sector. The police are largely responsible for making informal sector strategies difficult, harassing vendors and small traders, especially women and the young.

Implementing J/LOS plans should consider the financial, social and political implications of recommendations made by the poor. Physical barriers to accessing justice, timing and capacity to improve access to justice should also be investigated as well as the existence of formal and informal institutions and the strengths and weakness of existing institutional arrangements. Further recommendations from the study include:

• Fostering bottom-up accountability to ensure J/LOS accounts to poor communities. For example, monitoring and evaluating service user perceptions and attitudes.
• Adopting a social approach to administration of justice, for instance the use of Community Development Assistants.
• Reforming the law in commercial justice, exhibits and pauper proceedings to make them pro-poor.
• Designing a more pro-poor J/LOS information campaign and communication strategy for legal and human rights awareness including human rights education in schools and local government participation.
• Ensuring the poor participate in J/LOS activities such as community service and community policing.
• Understanding that these intervention strategies should be seen as proposals, rather than panacea, in strengthening the reform agenda.

Access full text: available online

Source: Government of Uganda, 2002, Participatory Poverty Assessment on Safety, Security, and Access to Justice: Voices of the Poor in Uganda, The Republic of Uganda Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Justice, Law and Order Sector (JLOS)