- Evaluation Plan:
- 2011-2017, Somalia
- Evaluation Type:
- Final Project
- Planned End Date:
- 03/2018
- Completion Date:
- 01/2018
- Status:
- Completed
- Management Response:
- Yes
- Evaluation Budget(US $):
- 120,000
End of project Evaluation - Joint Rule of Law Programme
| Document | Type | Language | Size | Status | Downloads |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Report - JROLP evaluation Final.docx |
related-document | English | 140.66 KB | Posted | 1083 |
| TOR consultant for JROLP evaluation 1.doc |
tor | English | 98.50 KB | Posted | 992 |
| Report - JROLP evaluation Final.docx |
report | English | 140.66 KB | Posted | 1403 |
| Title | End of project Evaluation - Joint Rule of Law Programme | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlas Project Number: | 00085372 | ||||||||
| Evaluation Plan: | 2011-2017, Somalia | ||||||||
| Evaluation Type: | Final Project | ||||||||
| Status: | Completed | ||||||||
| Completion Date: | 01/2018 | ||||||||
| Planned End Date: | 03/2018 | ||||||||
| Management Response: | Yes | ||||||||
| Focus Area: |
|
||||||||
| Corporate Outcome and Output (UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021) |
|
||||||||
| SDG Goal |
|
||||||||
| SDG Target |
|
||||||||
| Evaluation Budget(US $): | 120,000 | ||||||||
| Source of Funding: | Programme funds | ||||||||
| Evaluation Expenditure(US $): | 120,000 | ||||||||
| Joint Programme: | Yes | ||||||||
| Joint Evaluation: | Yes
|
||||||||
| Evaluation Team members: |
|
||||||||
| GEF Evaluation: | No | ||||||||
| Key Stakeholders: | Government of Somalia, UNSOM, donors | ||||||||
| Countries: | SOMALIA |
| Lessons | |
|---|---|
| Findings | |
| 1. | Lack of clarity about ‘jointness’ and meaning of ‘RoL’. Whilst the JROLP follows the principles set out in the UNDG Guidelines on UN Joint Programming (2014), the operational environment in Somalia is unique, and therefore the way in which PUNOs work jointly needs to be explored and articulated clearly. Joint working is not automatic and cannot be assumed. Divergent views amongst PUNOs about what it means to work jointly has resulted in some inter-PUNO misunderstandings that have affected the focus and efficacy of the Programme. It was said that posturing by PUNOs has replaced mechanisms that have never been in place.
The added value in joint working under a common umbrella is that PUNOs are able to work with the Government to agree a common set of priorities, with properly sequenced and coordinated activities. Instead they are presenting to donors as a fractious group of entities that are vying for funds.
In addition, there was a lack of clarity across stakeholders concerning what is meant by ‘RoL’, especially given that several asserted that an SSR approach was being utilised, and yet the SSR department is not part of the JROLP. |
| 2. | Duplication of activities Poor communication and coordination, with consequent duplication of activities has resulted from this, e.g. projects on case management which have been carried out by multiple agencies. Training on trafficking was also said to have been duplicated by IOM and UNODC. In this respect it was asserted that PUNOs were carrying out stand-alone or multiple activities that were not linked with higher level strategic objectives.
|
| 3. | UNDP’s position within the JROLP. There was misunderstanding amongst some PUNOs regarding the role of UNDP, which has the greatest presence and broadest mandate across Somalia, and could therefore be seen to be the natural lead for a RoL Programme. About 80% of UNDP’s programming goes into joint work. UNDP has communicated great willingness to work collaboratively, saying that being defined by collaboration makes the work better. However, the larger PUNOs such as UNDP may decide that they are losing more than they are gaining through operating an integrated model in a fragmented terrain with duplicative initiatives. In fact it was stated by one donor that UNDP could carry out all activities without any need for other agencies, and that the Programme is ‘too complicated an animal’ as it currently operates.
Opposing views regarding UNDP were expressed across PUNOs. Several UN respondents referred to UNDP as a banking facility regardless of its own in-house technical expertise. Conversely, another PUNO referred to UNDP as ‘eating everyone else’s mandate’, as UNDP’s work is so broad.
In terms of the approach to the design of the Programme, it was said by some PUNOs that it was not suited to all of them, and some felt alienated from the design process. This was asserted by PUNOs that do not have the reach, funding or presence in Somalia that UNDP has. It also demonstrates a misunderstanding regarding benefits of complementarity and collaboration, taking into account the size of each entity. Joint working does not necessarily mean that all entities will have equal funding, equal reach or convening power within the Somali context. However, some PUNOs do not appear to acquiesce to this model of working, and appear to have positioned themselves in a way that can be perceived to be in competition with, and not collaborating with, UNDP. Consequently, the Programme has suffered from a failure to be focused and streamlined across agencies. It has also resulted in a degree of competitiveness and posturing from agencies as they vie for resources (see section on Challenges). The Programme, and individual PUNOs, run the risk of suffering reputationally in the light of this if these issues are not resolved in the next phase.
|
| 4. | Inter-PUNO coordination One donor described being asked on several occasions by a UN entity about how the latter should collaborate with another UN entity. This was described as being very off-putting to donors. The UN was said to have to ‘get its own house in order’ before being able to demonstrate that the JROLP vehicle is a worthy vehicle for continued large-scale funding and support. |
| 5. | Primacy and the ROLSIG function ROLSIG was said by a donor to be ‘perfectly positioned’ as it straddles the axis between both security and RoL. ROLSIG was further said to have the ‘most important contacts and the best information’, and a non-JROLP UN entity described cooperation with ROLSIG as ‘critical’. However, the fact that ROLSIG does not have a decision-making remit was consistently said to cause problems, and that it is difficult for anyone within the UN system ‘to tell anyone else what to do’, leading to what someone else described as a ‘decision-making paralysis’. Lack of ROLSIG primacy has consequently contributed towards a loss of confidence in the Programme by donors.
ROLSIG senior personnel have therefore had to leverage influence by way of persuasion as opposed to operating a ‘command and control’ model. Whilst the current system is less likely to disrupt vertical lines of accountability for each UN entity (as there is no devolved primacy function), this ‘persuasion model’ is also likely to be less effective when there is a need to make decisions in the wake of inter-JROLP disagreements. Whist senior staff have made great gains in mediating and facilitating the work of the Programme, structural restrictions mean that ROLSIG is unable to streamline and focus the Programme by prioritising issues in the face of disagreement. They also have to ensure they are seen favourably by all entities, which is virtually impossible and requires acute diplomatic skills to broker on-going agreements. |
| Recommendations | |
|---|---|
| 1 | Evaluation Finding 1: No consensus across PUNOS and stakeholders on “jointness” Recommendations:
|
| 2 | Evaluation Finding 2: The Programme was too broad and overambitious Recommendations:
Need to develop partnership with UN Habitat to benefit from mutual JROLP and UN Habitat expertise. |
| 3 | Evaluation Finding 3: Increase investment in the judiciary and the Attorney Generals’ Offices Recommendations:
Bench Books and sentencing manuals for the judiciary need to be developed and distributed. |
| 4 | Evaluation Finding 4: Programme mechanisms are too bureaucratic and unwieldy Recommendations:
A ToR for the Secretariat should be set out |
| 5 | Evaluation Finding 5: Lack of short, medium and long-term planning for sustainability as well as exit strategy Recommendations:
Need to reinforce anti-corruption work. |
| 6 | Evaluation Finding 6: Cross-cutting issues such as gender, human rights, corruption and PVE not properly mainstreamed or considered Recommendations:
Need to mainstream and fortify anti-corruption initiatives |
| 7 | Evaluation Finding 7: Linkages with other key programmes e.g. Constitutional and Parliamentary Affairs, UNDP State building and Federalism Programme and Political Recommendations:
JROLP to work closely with the Constitutional and Parliamentary Affairs Division on the Justice model |
| 8 | Evaluation Finding 8: Lack of clarity on an agreed basis for how the informal and formal justice systems will develop and interface between the two Recommendation: Further invest in researching and proposing examples of integrated pluralistic systems as part of the discussions related to the justice model (registration of clan leaders with MOJ etc.) |
| 9 | Evaluation Finding 9: Significant efforts have been made to reach and work with the FMS
|
| 10 | Evaluation Finding 10: Programmes are highly relevant and have a broad reach having contributed to development of future justice stakeholders and entities
|
| 11 | Evaluation Finding 11: Convening power of the UN is unparalleled
|
| 12 | Evaluation Finding 12: UNDP has ensured transparency and self-reflection throughout the life of the Programme No recommendation made for this finding. |
| 13 | Evaluation Finding 13: Challenges to the JROLP sometimes due to circumstances outside its control Recommendations:
|
| 14 | Evaluation Finding 14: Criminal Justice Component of UNODC has suffered several reputational issues which undermined credibility of the programme Recommendations
|
| 15 | Evaluation Finding 15: Bilateral funding versus UNMPTF Recommendations:
|
| 16 | Evaluation Finding 16: Evaluation of the programme and accountability to donors and national stakeholders Recommendations
Follow up high level evaluation in 8-12 months to assess implementation of the recommendations of this report |
1. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 1: No consensus across PUNOS and stakeholders on “jointness”
Recommendations:
- Building consensus around what it means to be joint.
- Need to define Rule of Law (includes DDR/SSR?).
- Need for subsequent agreed modality or modalities regarding joint working that are adhered to by all PUNOs and understood by national stakeholders and donors.
- Need for a high degree of commitment to the principles of one UN.
- Need to recalibrate the perception of the status of PUNOs, their respective strengths and weaknesses.
- Improve decision making within the UN (decision-making or arbiter).
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Agreed
These recommendations are being addressed internally by the United Nations through the existing Global Focal Point arrangement for Police, Justice, and Corrections Areas in the Rule of Law in Post-Conflict and other Crisis Situations (GFP).
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| These recommendations are considered by the GFP arrangement and responses are incorporated in the development of the new Rule of Law Programme in Somalia.
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2021/07/12] |
UNDP (Rol) UNSOM Police UNSOM Joint Justice and Corrections | 2021/06 | Completed | An E-Mission GFP has initiated a mission from 6th to 16th July to undertake the 3 key areas of development which are expected to result in the development of new programme on Joint Justice programme: 1) Align the next phase of the joint justice and security sector governance programmes with the political realities on the ground and the political objectives of the United Nations in Somalia. An E-Mission GFP has initiated a mission from 6th to 16th July to undertake the 3 key areas of development which are expected to result in the development of new programme on Joint Justice programme: 1) Align the next phase of the joint justice and security sector governance programmes with the political realities on the ground and the political objectives of the United Nations in Somalia. 2) Identify ways to strengthen the management of the two programmes 3) Identify the key priority areas, potential high impact interventions, and achievable milestones for the next phase of the joint programmes History |
2. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 2: The Programme was too broad and overambitious
Recommendations:
- Need to reduce the scope of the next JROLP.
- Need to define a common vision and approach with clear priorities.
Need to develop partnership with UN Habitat to benefit from mutual JROLP and UN Habitat expertise.
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Agreed
The development of justice, police and corrections projects are underway with a focus on a smaller number of key priorities that are clearly aligned with the Government priorities. Engagement is being undertaken with a variety of UN agencies, programmes and funds through the GFP arrangement to increase coordination.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.1 Drafting of police, justice and corrections projects
2.2 Consultations with the Govt. of Somalia to ensure federal, state and UN priorities align
2.3 Developing partnerships with UNHABITAT and other UN-APFs through the Global Focal Point Arrangement
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2021/07/12] |
UN Joint Justice programme UN HABITAT UNDP IOM UNHCR | 2021/06 | Completed | 2.1 3 joint programmes were launched in 2018 on police, justice and corrections. 2.2 UNCF 2021-2025 aligns Govt. of Somalia to ensure federal, state and UN priorities 2.3 Dhulka Nabada was partnership between UNDP, UNHABITAT. Other partnerships established through UN Joint Programmes for Somalia and Somaliland History |
3. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 3: Increase investment in the judiciary and the Attorney Generals’ Offices
Recommendations:
- Funding for the next phase needs to be earmarked for continued support to the judiciary and all AGOs.
- Consideration of a judicial/AGO Training Academy needs to be given.
Bench Books and sentencing manuals for the judiciary need to be developed and distributed.
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Partially agreed
It is agreed that increased support should be provided to the judiciary and to the Attorney Generals’ Offices. However, earmarking should not be a condition unless it becomes apparent that adequate funding is not being provided to individual criminal justice institutions, or to address inappropriate distribution of funds between the FGS and/or FMS. The United Nations agrees that a Judicial Training Academy (JTI), that involves the AGO is priority for the Government of Somalia and that appropriate levels of support from the UN should be considered. The UN also agrees that the Government of Somalia should increase the effectiveness of administrative systems, including the use of bench book and manuals as part of this process, but that the focus of UN support should not be on ‘train and equip’ approaches alone.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1 Consultations will be undertaken with Donors and the Government during the development of the police, justice and corrections projects to identify guidelines on earmarking and/or what is the maximum percentage of Donor funding to be directed towards thematic areas (e.g. that a ceiling is included on funding for infrastructure)
3.2 Support to the establishment of the JTI translated into the next JROLP
3.3 Bench books and manuals to be developed and (or for those already developed) translated and disseminated
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2021/07/12] |
UNOPS (police), UNDP (justice) and UNODC (corrections) and ROLSIG in all three projects | 2021/06 | Completed | 3.1The ceiling for infrastructure was established in the Joint Justice programme with the construction of the following: 1. Bossasso Court house 2. Renovation of the MOJ FGS 3. Renovation of Supreme Court FGS 3.2 The Judicial Training Institute has been established under the JJP although the legal framework is yet to be finalized. 3.3 Judicial training materials have been developed under the JJP. History |
4. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 4: Programme mechanisms are too bureaucratic and unwieldy
Recommendations:
- Changes in the governance structure needed to make it more efficient
- Clarifying and/or reiterating the roles and purpose of each mechanism
- Setting out clear ToRs for the Steering Committee
A ToR for the Secretariat should be set out
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Agreed
The Global Focal Points Arrangement in Somalia has revised the governance structure of the implementation of rule of law programmes in Somalia. A new strategy and a governance arrangement has identified separate projects on police, justice and corrections to be implemented. Each project will have its own programme steering committee consisting of the lead government agency, donors and the UN.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.1 Development of a new governance structure for the NPM Support Project used as a basis for the governance structures for the justice and corrections projects.
4.2 Justice and Corrections governance structures shall be developed as part of the new project documents.
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2022/02/04] |
GFP Secretariat UNDP, UNODC, ROLSIG-JJCS | 2022/06 | Initiated | Expected draft for new programme in June 2022 which shall cover the governance structures of justice and corrections programmes History |
5. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 5: Lack of short, medium and long-term planning for sustainability as well as exit strategy
Recommendations:
- There is a need to have agreements with Somalis about how to build upon JROLP initiatives in a systematic manner to ensure their respective sustainability (cost sharing agreements, national budget allocation, national implementation modality).
- Shift to national legal aid structure.
Need to reinforce anti-corruption work.
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Agreed
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.1 The use of UNSOM’s RBB budget will be explored to fund identified RoL projects in Somalia in 2018.
5.2 The government budget for justice and police shall be programmed and shared with the IC.
5.3 In 2018, experts on legal aid and integrating stipends & salaries shall be explored.
5.4 The mobile courts shall be limited to those areas where there are limited justice services. Regular assessment of mobile courts (twice a year) to take place in each FMS and corrective actions taken
5.6 Above to be reflected in the new justice and police projects.
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2022/02/04] |
UNSOM police and joint justice and corrections sections UNOPS, UNDP, UNOPS and SSR and ROL UNDP UNDP and ROLSIG-JJCS UNOPS, UNDP and ROLSIG | 2022/05 | Initiated | 5.1 RBB budget complements the programmatic budget. Also RBB budget although modest fills in the programmatic gaps. 5.2 One study has been undertaken on court fees in 2020; There is limited available funding in Somalia institutions. Future programme would have to undertake a public expenditure review with national partners with a new administration and in particular to bring this down to State levels in conjunction with local revenue projections. Also a detailed analytical study on court fees in Somalia needs to be undertaken through new programme to built for court revenue in future. 5.3 There is limited available funding in Somalia institutions. Future programme would have to undertake a public expenditure review with national partners with a new administration and in particular to bring this down to State levels in conjunction with local revenue projections. 5.4 A detailed mobile court review needs to be undertaken for new programme 5.6 New rule of law projects and programmes are under review and development in Somalia History |
6. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 6: Cross-cutting issues such as gender, human rights, corruption and PVE not properly mainstreamed or considered
Recommendations:
- Thematic cross-cutting issues need to be clearly identified and raised to the steering committee level
- Need for a mechanism that allows experts to quality assure and comment upon human rights considerations
Need to mainstream and fortify anti-corruption initiatives
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Agreed
Gender, human rights, PCVE and anti-corruption are integral parts of rule of law and for stabilization. Therefore the UN has initiated these discussions with the government and donors under the National Development Plan Pillar Working Groups and the Comprehensive Approach to Security (CAS) Strand meetings. The UN and the government have also initiated joint programmes and projects on human rights, PCVE and anti-corruption which are cross referenced to the Joint Rule of Law programme.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6.1 Joint programme on Human Rights launched which is linked to the JROLP
6.2 GFP to coordinate internal UN work
6.3 PIP on PCVE expected to be launched
6.4 Progress update on UPR to be undertaken at the ROL working Group
6.5. Integrate Human rights, anti-corruption, SSR, PVE/CVE in the discussion of the RoL GFP strategic group
6.6. Support to oversight mechanisms as part of anti-corruption strategy to increase in the next programme
6.7 UN Women to play a stronger role in gender mainstreaming in the new programme
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2021/07/12] |
UNDP, UNSOM Human Rights and UNICEF GFP Secretariat UNSOM and UNDP UNSOM GFP Strategic group, UNSOM HRPG, CVE/PVE UNOPS,UNDP, and UNODC, UNSOM ROLSIG UN Women | 2021/06 | Completed | 6.1 JP Human Rights has been launched and Phase I completed. 6.2 Technical Team has been working on coordination across rule of law programmes. 6.3 PCVE project Phase I has been completed. 6.4 Progress update provided in ROL CAS Strand 2C. 6.5 GFP Retreat held in Q1 2020 covering all thematic areas under rule of law. 6.6 Anti corruption law and Commission legislation launched by FGS. 6.7 UNWOMEN initiated programmatic engagement on negative social norms. History |
7. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 7: Linkages with other key programmes e.g. Constitutional and Parliamentary Affairs, UNDP State building and Federalism Programme and Political
Recommendations:
- Need to broaden the GFP mechanism by involving Constitutional and Parliamentary Affairs, Political as core component
- Need for Political and constitutional issues to be a standing agenda item for the broader GFP mechanism
JROLP to work closely with the Constitutional and Parliamentary Affairs Division on the Justice model
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Agreed
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JCM and police legal framework to be worked through joint plans with UNDP projects and UNSOM (PAMG & ROLSIG).
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2019/05/31] |
UNDP, GFP Secretariat | 2019/05 | Completed | Chapters 1 to 15 have been completed by ICRIC and technical review of the chapters have been submitted to oversight committee of the Constitutional Review Process. These chapters include legal structures on the judiciary and the security insitutions. History |
8. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 8: Lack of clarity on an agreed basis for how the informal and formal justice systems will develop and interface between the two
Recommendation:
Further invest in researching and proposing examples of integrated pluralistic systems as part of the discussions related to the justice model (registration of clan leaders with MOJ etc.)
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Agreed
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8.1 SOP for ADR centres to be harmonized through the Dutch funded project for women’s rights
8.2 A workplan to be developed between UNDP and IDLO
8.3 SOP’s to be developed on ADR
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2021/07/12] |
UNDP, UN Women, ROLSIG JJCS UNDP UNDP, UNWomen, ROLSIG-JJCS | 2021/06 | Completed | RoL working groups established in each FMS and meeting monthly. History |
9. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 9: Significant efforts have been made to reach and work with the FMS
- Establishment of Regional offices and deployment of staff in Baidoa, Kismayo and Beletweyne have been welcomed
- MOJ in FMS have been established through support from the JROLP
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Agreed
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9.1 Regional GFP structure to be established
9.2 ROL (coordination) working groups to be established at all FMS
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2021/07/12] |
GFP Secretariat GFP Secretariat | 2021/06 | Completed | In 2018 new Rule of Law Programmes in police, justice and corrections in Somalia incorporated recommendations from UN ROL programme. History |
10. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 10: Programmes are highly relevant and have a broad reach having contributed to development of future justice stakeholders and entities
- Swedish officers in the prisons who are seconded through UNODC
- Scholarships programmes which have helped increasing legal professionals
- Political buy-in to the Policing model considerable as each State has developed its own State plan
- MPCC project
- Alternative dispute resolution work in Puntland
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Agreed
These good practices shall be expanded in the new projects on justice, police and corrections.
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| These findings are being considered by the GFP arrangement and responses are incorporated in the development of the new Rule of Law Programmes in police, justice and corrections in Somalia.
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2021/07/12] |
UNDP (Rol) UNOPS (Police) UNODC (Corrections) and ROLSIG in all three projects | 2021/06 | Completed | 10.1 community conversations introduced in the JJP in 2019 11.2 The mitigation actions from the PRA were inserted in full in the JPP Project Document. The JPP has secured the commitment of the FGS and 5 FMS to implement 11 actions associated with improving human rights safeguards in policing. History |
11. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 11: Convening power of the UN is unparalleled
- Capacity to convene political and security issues in a way that no NGO or bilateral can.
- Some normative and core functions of RoL work are better suited to the UN to implement and therefore the UN should focus on what other agencies of entities cannot do.
- UN has the capacity to lift and expand the focus from security to larger development issues
- Critical role of the UN to uphold international standards
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Agreed
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11.1 The UN will undertake consultations to establish the areas that the UN is best suited to implement and what other entities (Non-UN) should consider taking the lead, for example: community based work should be undertaken by CSO/bilateral groups and be coordinated by the UN.
11.2 Support the federal and the state ministries of internal security to implement agreed recommendations in the Human Rights Due Diligence Policy - General and Preliminary Risk Assessment: Somali Police 2017.
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2021/07/12] |
GFP Secretariat UNSOM Police as lead, UNSOM Human Rights and all PUNO’s supporting the Somali Police | 2021/06 | Completed | 10.1 community conversations introduced in the JJP in 2019 11.2 The mitigation actions from the PRA were inserted in full in the JPP Project Document. The JPP has secured the commitment of the FGS and 5 FMS to implement 11 actions associated with improving human rights safeguards in policing History |
12. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 12: UNDP has ensured transparency and self-reflection throughout the life of the Programme
No recommendation made for this finding.
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Agreed
Key Actions:
13. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 13: Challenges to the JROLP sometimes due to circumstances outside its control
Recommendations:
- National expectations and accountability of national stakeholders needs to be closely monitored and managed
- Need to invest in national coordinating functions devolved to regional levels that can prioritize both bi-lateral and MPTF activities and feed into the JROLP (need to go beyond the current MOJ oversight as this raises conflict of interest issues)
- Clear discussion prior to the next iteration of the programme on how much funds will be available for each PUNOs.
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Agreed
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13.1 UNSOM to place international technical staff at all FMS and UNDP to provide national technical specialists to complement.
13.2 Greater investment/support to be provided to intern and scholarship programmes in next phase of RoL programme.
13.3 Donor conference with projects on police, justice and corrections to identify funding
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2019/05/31] |
UNSOM and UNDP UNSOM JJCS and UNDP GFP Strategic Group | 2019/05 | Completed | UNSOM JJCS and UNPOL has international staff placed in all FMS capitals and UNDP national staff appointed in all FMS capitals; internship programmes continue across all FMS. Scholarship programmes are focussed on practical education; History |
14. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 14: Criminal Justice Component of UNODC has suffered several reputational issues which undermined credibility of the programme
Recommendations
- UNODC to scale down its scope and ambitions or significantly increase its presence in-country
- Follow-up high level evaluation in 8-12 months
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Partially agree:
- The UN does not support the proposal to conduct a follow-up high-level evaluation in 8-12 months but will undertake a mid-term evaluation of Phase II of the RoL Programme (after 18 months).
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14.1 Increase of presence: Agency overall representation based in Mogadishu through the Somalia Head of Office since October 2017, in addition to long-lasting presence in Garowe, Bossaso, Hargeisa and Berbera.
14.2 Regular and direct communication structure established with the Ministry of Justice to ensure overall coordinated and realistic approach to UNODC’s involvement in the JRoL Programmes.
[Added: 2018/03/05] |
UNODC | 2018/02 | Completed |
15. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 15: Bilateral funding versus UNMPTF
Recommendations:
- Need to demonstrate why the UNMPTF is an effective funding channel
- In-depth discussion on how to operate aid coordination of all types from one platform
- Need more clarity from donors on what programmes they will fund through which mechanism
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Agree
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15.1 Discussions on use of MPTF as a transparent and accountable funding system established by SDRF as it is one of the three funding channels approved for Somalia. On 13 Nov 2017 donors and RCO initiated discussion on the use of MPTF
15.2 Facilitate discussions to continue to more effectively link the Government of Somalia’s coordination structures (NDP and the CAS)
15.3 Donor Meeting to be conducted so pledges are made to fund the future RoL Programme
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2018/06/12] |
SDRF, RCO, GFP Secretariat ROLSIG GFP Secretariat | 2018/06 | Completed | History |
16. Recommendation:
Evaluation Finding 16: Evaluation of the programme and accountability to donors and national stakeholders
Recommendations
- Development of a joint evaluation mechanism to increase qualitative reporting
Follow up high level evaluation in 8-12 months to assess implementation of the recommendations of this report
Management Response: [Added: 2018/03/05]
Management Response: Partially agree
The UN does not support the proposal to conduct a follow-up high-level evaluation in 8-12 months but will undertake a mid-term evaluation of Phase II of the RoL Programme (after 18 months).
Key Actions:
| Key Action | Responsible | DueDate | Status | Comments | Documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M&E and joint evaluation plans to be designed for the next phase of the projects.
[Added: 2018/03/05] [Last Updated: 2021/07/12] |
GFP Secretariat, UNOPS, UNDP and UNODC | 2021/06 | Completed | Goal 16 project launched in 2018 History |