The Ri e Righ ght t to Voic ice e Concer erns: s: the e role e of IAMS in in ad addr dres essin ing g the e ris isk of reta etalia iati tion on Victor oria ia Marqu quez ez-Mees es, Chief ef Ac Acco coun unta tabilit ity Office icer – Indepe ependen ndent t Project ct Ac Accoun ounta tabil ility ty Mech chan anism ism (EBR BRD) D) OHCHR R Ac Accoun counta tability ility and Remed edy y Project ct III: Prevent nting ing ret etalia iati tion n through gh non-stat state-based ased grievan ance ce mech chan anisms isms 9th UN Forum on Busin iness ess and Human n Rights hts 17 November 2020
Discussion Items 1. 1. The IAM exper erien ience ce: : steps ps taken en to date e and progress gress made e 2. The ARP III find 2. nding ings s and nd their ir relevance ance to our ur work rk 3. 3. Challen llenges ges ahead 17/11/2020
The IAM AM experience: ience: st steps ta s taken n to date and progress ress ma made e Gener eral l con ontext: t: • Growing number of complaints where fear of reprisals was cited • Increasing role of private sector in development • Shrinking space for civic society Limited knowledge amongst IAMs about how to address these issue • What t did we do? • Commission the Guide for Independent Accountability Mechanisms On Measures to Address the Risk of Reprisals in Complaint Management (available in English and Spanish) • Mechanisms started drafting guidance in line with each one’s mandate: WB Inspec ection tion Panel , IFC’s CAO , IADB’s MICI CI , EBRD’s IPAM • Engagement with Senior Management from IFI’s to raise awareness about these issues 17 November, 2020 3
The AR e ARP III fin indi dings gs and d thei eir rel elevance nce to our ur work rk IAM response Policy objective 8: Non-State-based grievance mechanisms are accessible 1. All IAM policies and 8.9 The mechanism adopts and procedures should include implements policies & processes provisions on: appropriate - Preserving confidentiality a. To preserve confidentiality - How Risk of Retaliation is regarding identity and the addressed grievance process itself 2. Staff requires training on b. To ensure risks of retaliation are properly assessed and who to implement provisions addressed 2. Engagement with requesters and joint decision making on measures 17 November, 2020 4
The AR e ARP III fin indi dings gs and d thei eir rel elevance nce to our ur work rk IAM response Policy objective 9: Non-State-based grievance mechanisms are predictable 1. Websites and materials 9.2 The mechani chanism sm publis lishes hes accurat curate e and realisti alistic c should provide clear and informati ormation, on, suffici cient ent to fost ster er a clear ear under erstandi standing ng as transparent guidance on to: how we deal with risk of (f) The extent to which the mechanism can assist in retaliation and its scope cases where there may be a risk of retaliation and the form it may take. 2. Engagement with IFI management 9.3 The mechani chanism sm adopt pts, imp mplem ements ents and 3. Engagement with other comm mmuni unicat cates es clear ear poli lici cies es and proced cedures ures for IAMs colla llabora boration tion with th ot other her non-St Stat ate e grievanc ance e mechani chanism, m, Stat ate-based based mechani chanism sms s and/or or Stat ate e agenc ncies es with th respec pect t to a grievance ance which ch clearl learly y set et 4. But not yet there on out: t: collaboration with other (b) Appropriate safeguards relating to protecting people non-state grievance from the risk of retaliation. mechanism 17 November, 2020 5
The AR e ARP III fin indi dings gs and d thei eir rel elevance nce to our ur work rk IAM response Policy objective 12: Non-State-based grievance mechanisms are rights- compatible 1. Not yet there 12.4 The mecha hani nism sm adopts ts and imp mplemen ements ts policies cies & processes sses neede ded d to ensure ure that t 2. Risk assessment and joint engageme agement nt with State e agencies cies is underta taken en plans are part of the approach now c. Best st calcul culated ed to re reduce ce the ri risk of ret retalia iati tion on against nst the relevan ant t rights ts holders, s, infor ormed med by a 3. Dynamic process of thorough ugh risk assess essmen ment. t. alignment d. Which h compl mplies es with policies, cies, commi mitme tment nts s with h rights ri ts holders ers wrt confiden denti tialit ity and prot otecti ction on of personal onal safety ety 17 November, 2020 6
Some more challenging issues Preservi ving a clear deline neation ation bet etween n the roles s and respo pons nsibiliti ties es of non-Stat State-base ased d grievance nce mechani nisms ms and State-base ased d mechani nisms ms. Non-State-based grievance mechanisms must not limit access by rights holders to judicial mechanisms in such cases Ret etaliat atory y behavi viour ur (and the risks sks of the same) may not ot be o obvious us to law enforcement agencies, highlighting the need for greater institutional awareness of different forms that retaliation can take in practice. Such efforts should promote a proper appreciation of the structural, sociocultural and economic issues that can underpin or exacerbate risks and the risks that arise in challenging operating contexts, such as conflict-affected areas or areas in transition from conflict Non-State-based grievance mechanisms will not ot be e effecti ctive mechani nisms sms for dealing ng with th busi siness ness-rel relat ated d human n rights ghts harms ms if they y are not ot themsel mselves es aligned gned with h int nternati rnationa nally recogni nize zed d human rights (6.1). Mechanisms should act responsibly to address rights holder concerns about the possibility of retaliation, and to reduce risks of harm (8.9). need for accessibility may be best served by providing for the possib ssibili lity ty of anonymous us complaints laints, provided due process concerns are properly addressed 17/11/2020
WHY ACT BECAUS USE E IT IS IS A HUMAN N RIGHT! HT!! ! Thank you
Recommend
More recommend
