1jIl0Vh

EDUCATION UNDER ATTACK 2014
241
GCPEA, Study on Field-based Programmatic Measures to Protect Education
from Attack (New York: GCPEA, December 2011), 13-15; and Save the Children,
The Future is Now: Education for Children in Countries Affected by Conflict
(London: Save the Children, 2010), 14.
242 “Nepal Case Study: Schools as Zones of Peace - PowerPoint PPT
Presentation,” Powershow.com, accessed 24 April 2013.
243 Pushpa Iyer, Peace Zones of Mindanao, Philippines: Civil Society Efforts to
End Violence (Massachusetts: Collaborative Learning Projects, October 2004).
244 Melinda Smith, “Schools as Zones of Peace: Nepal Case Study of Access to
Education during Armed Conflict and Civil Unrest,” in Protecting Education from
Attack: A State-of-the-Art Review (Paris: UNESCO, 2010), 266-267.
245
Note also that Save the Children reports that attendance levels of children in
project schools were higher than in schools not included in the Save the Children
programme; this might in part be attributed to reduced disruptions as a result of
SZOP.
246 GCPEA, Study on Field-based Programmatic Measures to Protect Education
from Attack (New York: GCPEA, December 2011), 13-15.
247 Save the Children, Rewrite the Future Global Evaluation Nepal Midterm
Country Report (London: Save the Children, March 2009), 9.
248 Ibid., 10.
249 When classes take place outside or in makeshift structures, increased
distractions for students, limited supplies, poor facilities and environmental
factors may contribute to truancy and higher dropout rates. See Bede Sheppard
and Kyle Knight, Disarming Schools: Strategies for Ending The Military Use of
Schools during Armed Conflict (New York: HRW, 31 October 2011).
250 UNESCO, Protecting Education from Attack: A State-of-the-Art Review (Paris:
UNESCO, 2010), 28.
251 ANI Video News, “India: Students in Jharkhand Worried over Maoist
Violence,” 29 June 2011, as cited in GCPEA, Study on Field-based Programmatic
Measures to Protect Education from Attack (New York: GCPEA, December 2011),
45.
252 Save the Children ran and implemented a programme entitled Rewrite the
Future, with the aim of improving education in conflict-affected states. The objectives
included increasing access, with one of the possible activities to achieve
increased access being school rehabilitation or construction. See for example:
Frances Ellery and Katy Webley, The Future is Now: Education for Children in
Countries Affected by Conflict (London: Save the Children, 2010); Save the
Children, Rewrite the Future Global Evaluation Nepal Midterm Country Report
(London: Save the Children, March 2009); and Lynn Davies, Breaking the Cycle of
Crisis: Learning from Save the Children’s Delivery of Education in Conflict-
Affected Fragile States (London: Save the Children, 2012).
253 See, for example: Daniel Dickinson, “Providing education to conflict-affected
children in the remote regions of Central African Republic,” UNICEF, 31 December
2009; “Schooling on the Run,” The Guardian, 23 April 2009; and “Central African
Republic troubles,” Thomson Reuters, last updated 17 December 2013.
254 GCPEA, Study on Field-based Programmatic Measures to Protect Education
from Attack (New York: GCPEA, December 2011), 16, 39.
255 Education For All (EFA), Global Monitoring Report - Youth and Skills: Putting
Education to Work (Paris: UNESCO, 2012).
256 Christine Groneman, “Desk Study on Field-Based Mechanisms for Protecting
Education from Targeted Attack,” in Protecting Education from Attack: A State-ofthe-Art
Review (Paris: UNESCO, 2010), 233. Alternative schooling can also prevent
or reduce future cycles of violence. Save the Children has addressed issues of
discrimination against minorities (such as Hindu and Sikh communities) in
mainstream education in Afghanistan. One school was set up in a Sikh temple,
with a Sikh director and Muslim teachers. This initiative came from a Muslim
child media group, who discovered that children from Hindu and Sikh communities
were not attending school. This initiative has implications for widening religious
tolerance. See Lynn Davies, Breaking the Cycle of Crisis: Learning from
Save the Children’s Delivery of Education in Conflict-Affected Fragile States
(London: Save the Children, 2012), 9-10.
257 GCPEA, Study on Field-based Programmatic Measures to Protect Education
from Attack (New York: GCPEA, December 2011), 43.
258 “What is Bantay Ceasefire?” Mindanao People’s Caucus, 18 November 2012.
259 Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict, Getting It Done and Doing It Right:
Implementing the Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism on Children and Armed
Conflict in The Democratic Republic of Congo (New York: Watchlist on Children
and Armed Conflict, January 2008), 6; and Moni Shrestha, The Monitoring and
Reporting Mechanism on Grave Violations against Children in Armed Conflict in
Nepal 2005 – 2012: A Civil Society Perspective (Nepal: PPCC, September 2012),
8-9.
260 Moni Shrestha, The Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism on Grave
Violations against Children in Armed Conflict in Nepal 2005 – 2012: A Civil
Society Perspective (Nepal: Partnerships to Protect Children in Armed Conflict
(PPCC), September 2012), 8-9.
261 GCPEA, Study on Field-based Programmatic Measures to Protect Education
from Attack (New York: GCPEA, December 2011), 51.
262 Lisa Deters, “Ivory Coast: Thousands of Children Still Out of School,” Save the
Children, 4 May 2011.
263 Tilman Wörtz Zeitenspiegel, The Philippines: Peace Zones in a War Region
(Tuebingen, Germany: Institute for Peace Education), 2.
264 For a detailed analysis of the nature, scope and motives of attacks, please
see the Philippines profile in Part III of the present volume; and UNSC, Children
and Armed Conflict: Report of the Secretary-General, A/66/782–S/2012/261, 26
April 2012.
265 Mario Cabrera, “Schools as ‘Zones of Peace’,” UNICEF Philippines.
266 Primary steps in the process include: establishing coordination mechanisms;
carrying out community assessments; establishing mechanisms for ongoing
dialogue between various stakeholders; establishing a Code of Conduct for the
Declaration of LIZOP; community skills assessment and capacity strengthening;
awareness-raising; community-level days of celebration and declaration of
peace; and monitoring and advocating for government monitoring and enforcement
of legislation – including establishing stronger links with MRM monitoring
mechanisms.
267 Brenda K. Diares, “A Situational Assessment of Attacks on Education in the
Philippines,” Save the Children International, 23 November 2012, 14-16.
268 Mindanao People’s Caucus (MPC), “Youth Volunteers for Peace Action
Network.”
269 Unless stated otherwise, the legislation mentioned is listed in Brenda K.
Diares, “A Situational Assessment of Attacks on Education in the Philippines,”
Save the Children International, 23 November 2012; Congress of the Philippines,
“Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination
Act,” Republic Act No. 7610, 17 June 1992; Bede Sheppard and Kyle Knight,
Disarming Schools: Strategies for Ending The Military Use of Schools during
Armed Conflict (New York: HRW, 31 October 2011); Cotabato Province, “The Child
and Youth Welfare and Development Code of Cotabato Province,” Provincial
Ordinance No. 292, 2003; “The Davao City Children’s Reference Code,”
Resolution no. 7725, 2 December 1994; Government of the Philippines,
“Philippines: GRP – MILF Sign Civilian Protection Agreement,” Relief Web, 28
October 2009; Congress of the Philippines, “Republic Act 9851,” RA 9851,
Republic of the Philippines, 27 July 2009; “Convention on the Rights of the
Child,” OHCHR, 2 September 1990 (Ratefied by the Philippines in 1999).
270 “Learning Institution as Zones of Peace (LIZOP): A case study,” PowerPoint
presentation given by Yul Olaya, 20 October 2012; and Mario Cabrera, “Schools
as ‘Zones of Peace’,” UNICEF Philippines.
271 “What is Bantay Ceasefire?” Mindanao People’s Caucus, 18 November 2012.
215