1n3gwx9

PART I — GLOBAL OveRvIeW
Protecting higher education
Most responses to attacks on higher education appear
to focus on either enhancing physical protection or
promoting resilience and adaptability. This study
found no examples of responses in the form of
community protection or turning universities into
‘zones of peace’. 211 Alongside the relative dearth of
information about attacks on higher education
compared with attacks on other levels of education,
there is even less about the effectiveness of
responses at the tertiary level.
The physical protection of higher education can take
several forms, including on-campus security guards or
escorts and strengthening gates, fences and windows.
In Colombia, for example, an elaborate protection
scheme for individuals, originally set up for teachers
and teacher trade unionists, was extended to protect
academic and trade union representatives in higher
education. Established by human rights groups,
teacher trade unions, OHCHR and representatives of
the Colombian government, it is providing threatened
or targeted individuals with administrative and
financial support for physical protection measures
and, depending on the type and degree of risk of each
individual case, armed escorts or guards, mobile
phones, bullet-proof vehicles or temporary
relocation. 212
A number of measures to promote the resilience of
higher education in response to attacks have also
been taken. Distance learning programmes, such as
those established for Iraq, 213 Israel/Palestine 214 and
Zimbabwe, 215 and scholarship schemes for studying,
teaching or researching abroad have been used to
enable continuity of education where normal teaching
is no longer possible, for instance due to the security
risk of travelling to university. Iraqi academics in exile,
for example, have been able to contribute filmed
lectures to Iraqi universities on specialist subjects
through a Scholar Rescue Fund project. 216 In recent
years, scholar protection organizations have also put
an increased focus on funding placements in
countries neighbouring the conflict-affected country to
increase the likelihood of scholars returning to their
homeland when peace is restored.
Pressure for greater accountability in higher education
has stemmed primarily from political and human
rights campaigns at local and international levels,
rather than the use of legal instruments, the prosecution
of perpetrators or enhanced monitoring and
reporting. Examples include student protests and
demonstrations against repressive measures or the
allegedly excessive use of force by state security
forces; and national and international advocacy
campaigns in support of individual academics or
students. There is no clear evidence regarding the
impact of many such actions.
GCPEA’s research examining the relationship between
autonomy and security concluded that enhancing
university autonomy vis-à-vis the state may in some
situations contribute to reducing or preventing attacks
on higher education, particularly when coupled with
university-controlled internal security provision. 217 This
includes developing and extending the notion of the
university as a space outside of direct state control
(even when funding is largely state-provided) – particularly
concerning decisions about recruitment,
financial and administrative management, curriculum
and research. It also includes prohibiting state forces
from entering university campuses (unless invited in
by the institutional leadership or in extremely rare
circumstances). 218 While university autonomy alone is
insufficient to prevent attacks, many of which occur
outside of university campuses, the research found
that it appears to be an important component of
efforts to improve the protection of higher education.
These issues are explored in greater detail in this
study in the essay: ‘Protecting higher education’.
Advocacy
Advocacy has been undertaken at international,
national and local levels over the past several years to
increase awareness of the problem of attacks and
catalyse improved response and prevention.
Concerted advocacy undertaken by a number of NGOs
and UN agencies seems to have encouraged the
decision to include attacks on schools and hospitals
as a triggering offence for mandated UN monitoring
and reporting of violations against children in armed
conflict through UN Security Council Resolution 1998
74