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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ENCOURAGING TRANSPARENCY AND RESPONSIBILITY New procedures for APF should address the problem of the lengthy administrative procedures inside the Commission. The evaluation finds that too many signatures are required for each APF financing decision, leading to confusion and lengthiness. While the ‘four eyes’ principle is relevant, six or eight eyes constitute a waste of resources. Departmental Directors should not have to sign a document that has already been signed by a deputy. Through committees, transparency becomes opacity through dilution of responsibility. It is said that multiple signatures and multiple committees have become protection mechanisms, to avoid that any individual or department be ever held responsible for anything that goes wrong. This is perfectly plausible, but the system should be challenged. The evaluation recommends that Directors and departments - and EU Ambassadors and Delegations - should be held responsible for errors or failures, just as they should get credit for success. ATHENA-AFRICA TO SUBSTITUTE APF PSO FUNDING DEPENDING ON SCALE AND SCOPE OF CRISIS The APF only has limited resources for PSOs. Moreover, major PSOs require specialised military capabilities and expertise. The PSOs risk diverting prioritisation and commitments to the other important objectives of the EU Africa Partnership, namely political dialogue and APSA. The EU should therefore consider whether creating an Athena-Africa mechanism that, if need be, could take over APF PSO support is politically and financially acceptable. III.2.5 APF AID MODALITIES PROMOTION OF JOINT MANAGEMENT AND SOUND ADMINISTRATION Joint management is the best way for APF mechanism to provide ownership by the African organisations. Training of AU/REC staff on sound management procedures, in accordance with EC procedures, is essential for these organisations to pass the four-pillar requirements and qualify to run APF contribution agreements. This can best be done in-house, as part of a process to bring the APF and AU closer together, through adequate technical assistance to develop their own procedures, and through staff exchanges and joint staff training so that these organisations also become able to train themselves. AMENDING CONTRIBUTION AGREEMENTS Current EC regulations follow the principle that every financing decision must have a legal basis: as a consequence, amendments require a new EC financing decision. But, if new APF procedures are adopted outside EDF regulations, the evaluation recommends that an accelerated amendment procedure be created, taking into consideration the specific needs of APF and the AU/RECs, 48 provided that only the amount of money and the duration are changed, while other political and procedural conditions remain the same as in the original approval. DO NOT LIMIT THE POSSIBILITY OF AID MODALITIES It appears unnecessary to limit the range of possible aid modalities. Obviously, the Contribution Agreements are the most appropriate, comprehensive aid modalities for APF support to the AUC and RECs. However, other aid modalities are needed as alternative implementation arrangements for 48 ‘The Commission recognises that international organisations complying with international standards are different than other entities (e.g. NGOs) and hence, in view of such differences, a different type of agreement recognising their specificities may be used (cf. agreements concluded between the Commission and international organisations, treatment of international organisations in the Financial Regulations -EC Budget and EDF-, etc). However, the application of this possibility must be made public (in the relevant Guidelines).’ http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/procedures/implementation/practical_guide/documents/2010_prag_en.pdf p113 of 127 Page 36 of 49
RECs that might not qualify or for other actors that can add value to APSA or even other objectives within the Africa-EU partnership on Peace and Security. BE RESULT-ORIENTED RATHER THAN ACTOR-ORIENTED The result is what matters so APF strategic focus must be on the three objectives of the Africa-EU Partnership, namely political dialogue, operationalisation of APSA and PSOs. The AU and RECs are important actors in this context and the majority of funding should target these intergovernmental organisations. However, the AU and RECs are not the only stakeholders or drivers behind politics, APSA and PSOs. Many other actors, such as individual African member states, but also civil society groups, research and training centres, specialised entities, private sector and other international organisations should be eligible for funding. A MANUAL OF APF PROCEDURES IS NEEDED The evaluation recommends the elaboration of a specific, multilingual manual for all those involved in APF, containing the objectives, actors, rights, duties and controls related to APF activities. It should be easy to read for everyone and explain in detail how APF works with regard to AU/RECs. This manual should be a useful tool to facilitate initiatives, implementation and auditing and improve efficiencies and mutual understandings between EU and AU/RECs. Nevertheless, the mutual absorbing of institutional cultures is equally important to build partnerships as well as an understanding of why procedures exist and how they work. III.2.6 AU/REC PROCEDURES AND PRACTICE FOR APF REQUESTS According to the evaluation ToR, AU/REC capacity constraints at all levels will be a focus of APF evaluation Part 2, in particular in the areas of administrative and financial management, operational, planning and long-term capacity building planning. Nevertheless, it is necessary at this stage to make an assessment of the current AU/REC procedures and practices pertaining to APF requests. The political legitimacy of APF-funded activities in Africa comes from the AU, and for PSOs it also comes from the UN. The AU has the very important Peace and Security Council, composed of fifteen elected MS, and their decisions bear both legal and political weight. Supporting the PSC and increasing its profile will benefit the institutional capacity of AU both from a management point of view (to make the PSC function efficiently) and politically because AU MS political will and support for APSA is not guaranteed, although necessary for APSA success. Political approval of APF requests comes from the PSC. Nevertheless, as mentioned above, in less politically sensitive matters, such as CB or ERM, approval could be delivered by the AUC, including political approval for REC requests. The evaluation considers this AU endorsement to be a valuable step, since it reinforces both the institutional architecture of APSA and the necessary hierarchy to pancontinental institutions. In practice there is little or no delay caused by political approval, since the practical administrative work takes place in parallel inside APF. The P&S policy should be under the overall guidance of AU, from where doctrine should emerge. The principle of subsidiarity would reduce the risk of centralised AUC decision-making hampering APF implementation. This would require that the management of P&S be the responsibility of RECs, following doctrine established by the AU. Certain RECs will always be stronger than others (or even than the AU in some fields), but a common doctrine will bring them together politically and philosophically. Decisions of the PSC are executed by the AUC, and in particular the PSD. The PSOD coordinates and manages PSOs. The PSD should also be providing the overall leadership and doctrine to RECs Page 37 of 49
Page 1 and 2: THE EUROPEAN UNION’S EDF PROGRAMM
Page 3 and 4: Contents Executive Summary.........
Page 5 and 6: EASBRIG East African Standby Brigad
Page 7 and 8: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EU foreign policy
Page 9 and 10: The principle of subsidiarity shoul
Page 11 and 12: econstruction, relevant capacities
Page 13 and 14: ‣ Areas for further study and que
Page 15 and 16: II. GENERAL APPRAISAL OF THE APF II
Page 17 and 18: Item in the APF budget 16 Amount an
Page 19 and 20: AU, the relative limited focus on t
Page 21 and 22: European Parliament and NGOs contin
Page 23 and 24: It is argued by the military bias s
Page 25 and 26: III. MAIN FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATI
Page 27 and 28: 3) “Political appropriateness”
Page 29 and 30: ‣ EEAS, because APF finances peac
Page 31 and 32: The need to respond quickly to peac
Page 33 and 34: APF MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTING In 20
Page 35 and 36: Second, the main APF programmes (on
Page 37 and 38: aiming at allowing a fast and effec
Page 39 and 40: mechanism, EDF has its own decision
Page 41: The costs covered by ATHENA include
Page 45 and 46: IV. MAIN FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIO
Page 47 and 48: At first sight, the Instrument for
Page 49 and 50: In the short term, this evaluation
Page 51 and 52: The evaluation recommends earmarks
Page 53 and 54: Lack of Synergy between RECs and th
Page 55: IV.4.4 AFRICAN P&S FUNDING POLICIES

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?