Evaluation of support to mobile court arrangements in post-conflict situations

Report Cover Image

Share

Document Type Language Size Status Downloads
Download document TOR_Evaluation of Mobile Courts_Final.docx tor English 48.55 KB Posted 538
Download document Mobile Courts Evaluation Report.doc report English 3820.50 KB Posted 1735
Download document Inception Report and 3 Country reports.docx related-document English 5398.76 KB Posted 1033
Download document UNDP Mobile Courts Evaluation.pdf report English 817.11 KB Posted 797
Title Evaluation of support to mobile court arrangements in post-conflict situations
Atlas Project Number:
Evaluation Plan: 2009-2013, Bureau for Policy and Programme Support
Evaluation Type: Thematic
Status: Completed
Completion Date: 05/2014
Planned End Date: 06/2013
Management Response: Yes
Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2014-2017)
  • 1. Output 2.1. Parliaments, constitution making bodies and electoral institutions enabled to perform core functions for improved accountability, participation and representation, including for peaceful transitions
Evaluation Budget(US $): 40,000
Source of Funding:
Joint Programme: No
Mandatory Evaluation: No
Joint Evaluation: No
Evaluation Team members:
Name Title Email Nationality
Monica Rispo Consultant mrispo@hotmail.com
Monica Rispo Evaluation Consultant monica.rispo@hotmail.com
Serdar Bayriyev Evaluation Manager serdar.bayriyev@undp.org
GEF Evaluation: No
Key Stakeholders: DPKO
Location of Evaluation: Global
Countries: GLOBAL
Lessons
Findings
Recommendations
1 Recommendation 1: UNDP should ensure that mobile courts are recognized in the national legislation and eventually provide technical assistance to strengthen the legal framework for mobile justice initiatives.
2 Recommendation 2: UNDP should establish a strong baseline to define the mobile court model most appropriate for each context (i.e. circuit courts, ad hoc mobile courts or a combination of both). Areas to be assessed include: the recurrence and typology of crimes and disputes in each judicial district; the mapping of justice and security actors in remote locations, with a special attention to verify that when judges travel on circuit, activities in home courts are not suspended because of lack of staff.
3 Recommendation 3: UNDP should promote partnerships with other international organizations by either ensuring that 1) all the components of a mobile court intervention are addressed with the contribution of each partner in accordance to their mandate and comparative advantage or 2) by geographically dividing the area of intervention in order to ensure that mobile courts have the widest coverage possible on the territory of the State.
4 Recommendation 4: Encourage mobile courts to dedicate special attention to GBV cases, without adopting the gender mobile court model.
1. Recommendation: Recommendation 1: UNDP should ensure that mobile courts are recognized in the national legislation and eventually provide technical assistance to strengthen the legal framework for mobile justice initiatives.
Management Response:

UNDP recognizes the positive contribution of mobile courts arrangements to access to justice, and that the lack of supportive national strategies and legislation are negatively impacting on the future sustainability of the mobile court system.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
1.1 Ensure that new proposals supporting mobile courts arrangements include the support for development or update of relevant provisions in the national legislation BCPR 2015/12 Completed Relevant provisions are included in the design of new proposals.
2. Recommendation: Recommendation 2: UNDP should establish a strong baseline to define the mobile court model most appropriate for each context (i.e. circuit courts, ad hoc mobile courts or a combination of both). Areas to be assessed include: the recurrence and typology of crimes and disputes in each judicial district; the mapping of justice and security actors in remote locations, with a special attention to verify that when judges travel on circuit, activities in home courts are not suspended because of lack of staff.
Management Response:

Based on the findings of the BCPR?s Portfolio Review, UNDP recognized the need to undertake solid contextual analyses in the process of designing new programmes. Special emphasis will be made to ensure that specific analysis is undertaken in defining appropriate mobile court models in relevant rule of law interventions.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
2.1 Ensure that the design of new mobile court interventions are informed by the analysis of the institutional and legal framework, and mapping of justice and security sector actors BCPR, RBx, BDP (engaging DPA and DPKO) 2015/12 Completed The design of new interventions incorporate analysis and baseline information on institutional and legal framework.
3. Recommendation: Recommendation 3: UNDP should promote partnerships with other international organizations by either ensuring that 1) all the components of a mobile court intervention are addressed with the contribution of each partner in accordance to their mandate and comparative advantage or 2) by geographically dividing the area of intervention in order to ensure that mobile courts have the widest coverage possible on the territory of the State.
Management Response:

In line with the concept of the Global Focal Point for Police, Justice and Corrections Areas in the Rule of Law in Post-conflict and other Crisis Situations, the UNDP recognizes the importance of the "Delivery as one" principles by the United Nations in crisis and conflict settings. In addition, the UNDP will continue to strengthen outreach and partnerships with other international organizations in support of the access to justice programmes.

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
3.1 Assess and clarify, as part of project formulation, the partnership development and resource mobilization roles of UNDP and other international organizations, based on their respective comparative advantages in the area concerned. BCPR, RBx, BDP (engaging DPA and DPKO) 2015/12 Completed As part of the Global Focal Point, partnerships and joint programming in support of rule of law programmes, including mobile court interventions, are established wherever feasible and most efficient.
4. Recommendation: Recommendation 4: Encourage mobile courts to dedicate special attention to GBV cases, without adopting the gender mobile court model.
Management Response:

The UNDP recognizes the need to ensure that special focus is placed on SGBV cases in relevant access to justice programmes

Key Actions:

Key Action Responsible DueDate Status Comments Documents
4.1 Promote special measures in support of protections mechanisms for SGBV survivors in court proceedings and train judges and judicial staff on the promotion of women's rights and the prosecution of SGBV cases BCPR, BDP 2015/12 Completed In line with its policy of allocating at least 15% of the project budget for gender-related activities, the BCPR ensured (up to end-September 2014) that new proposals include specific provisions for protection of SGBV survivors and training on women?s rights issues.

Latest Evaluations

Contact us

220 East 42nd Street
20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel. +1 646 781 4200
Fax. +1 646 781 4213
erc.support@undp.org