part 1 of the african peace facility evaluation - European ...

3) “Political appropriateness” by the Council.
PSC intervention in the APF decision-making procedures is crucial and reflects its real nature:
Council political views conjoin with the Commission’s expertise in development and conflict
management/prevention. Although EC legislation makes no reference to the intervention of AWG, this
preparatory working group is also consulted so that any doubts may be discussed and resolved before
the proposal reaches the PSC, at the highest diplomatic level. The AWG meeting starts with a brief
presentation made by EEAS, but the presence of DEVCO is also important to provide an immediate
answer to any technical question from Member States. Most frequent questions relate to technicalities
such as budget lines, possible overlapping, or the future need for replenishment of APF funds. In fact,
as all the issues are resolved at AWG, the APF item in PSC agenda often becomes a procedural
matter, in particular when the Commission has been involved from the onset of the identification and
formulation of a specific programme. Within the time period under consideration, there has never been
any refusal or even problem raised at PSC level, although it occurred that PSC applied a ‘scrutiny
reserve’ delaying its decision, more for domestic/internal coordination reasons than for the substance
of the action. Upcoming PSOs such as AMISOM V and MICOPAX 1C are backed by their respective
UNSC resolutions 1964(2010) and 1923(2010). Although APF regulations establish that decisionmaking
should “be flexible enough to go ahead with funding while in the process of UN endorsement”,
in practice, this situation has never happened. The shortest time to pass through the political
appropriateness requirement is 10 days, which was the time taken for AMISOM IV.
4) Preparation of the Commission Decision ‘dossier´ for the APF financial decision.
DEVCO prepares the ‘dossier’, a very precise document (8-10 pages) containing all the necessary
documents to take an EC decision, which then goes to the Coordination Unit C3 for inter-service
consultation. The dossier contains: the ‘explanatory note’ that guides the readers through the dossier,
a draft text for the EC decision, a memo to the College of Commissioners and an annex which
contains the ‘action fiche’ presenting the detailed action, modalities, budget and calendar. DEVCO
financial/contracts Section C5 is consulted on the preparation of the dossier, especially to check the
implementation procedure because of the 4-pillar requirements for AU/RECs. The geographical desks,
now under EEAS, are also consulted to ensure that there is no overlapping with other EC actions.
DEVCO officials need around 2 weeks to prepare the dossier and make great efforts to share with
other services in order to prepare their colleagues and avoid problems during the inter-service
consultation process. The lead department needs be careful not to launch a consultation until the file
is complete and all the documents are final. Amendments after launching must be an exception.
Fortunately, an Impact Assessment is not mandatory for APF.
5) Visas (signatures) before the launch.
After the PSC has approved the political appropriateness, the dossier receives its first visas from
DEVCO: three signatures from the operational side (C6), two from the financial/contracts section 37
(C5), and then two extra signatures from the financial section 38 dealing with decisions and global
commitments. It normally (AMISOM IV) takes 10 days to obtain the 6 signatures from DEVCO
sections.
iii. Special procedure, Early Response Mechanism (ERM)
ERM will finance APF interventions that require quick reaction such as: mediation actions by
AU/RECs, preventive diplomacy, fact-finding missions for planning a PSO, and ad hoc or temporary
strengthening of those bodies in charge of planning a possible PSO.
37 ’Gestion centralisée - Coordination financière - Autorisation financière’
38 ‘Engagements primaires et dérogations’
Page 21 of 49