Promoting IDPs' and Women's Voices in Post-Conflict Georgia

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Defender’s Office) and leave no recommendation or letter of the PDO without a response.” 126 The Officeof the Ombudsman, however, does not always receive timely replies from the MRA. Also, the Officeidentifies communication as a main issue hindering better cooperation between the MRA and IDPs.Lastly, Ombudsman representatives remarked that while the MRA’s data collection regarding IDP needsis not disaggregated based on gender, it is women IDPs who have been more open to discussing theirissues and needs with monitors.The Abkhaz Government-in-ExileThe Government-in-exile has faced a turbulent history over the past two decades playing different rolesin the effort to represent IDPs. The Abkhaz government of the early 1990s was reconstituted in Georgiaproper following the mass displacement of 1993-1994 from Abkhazia. The Abkhaz government-in-exilesupported the state level response to displacement and closely cooperated with the Government ofGeorgia. The government-in-exile mainly engaged in activities including: distributing monthly stipends toIDPs, allocating shelter to them, facilitating family tracing, providing humanitarian assistance, andproviding education and health services. 127However, the exiled structures had no mechanism or processes in place to channel IDP concerns, eventhough they may have been able to voice these concerns at the national level. 128 Instead, some corruptmembers were seen to instrumentalize IDP issues to promote their own interests, rather than those ofthe broader displaced community. 129 Their ineffectiveness in representing IDPs also relates to its solefocus on return and hard line stance on conflict resolution with Abkhazia. This perspective limited theirwill to represent IDP livelihood and accommodation needs within their communities, as they wereconsidered aspects of local integration, seen as efforts mutually exclusive with promoting the right toreturn. 130The government-in-exile lost most of its influence at the national level in 2004, especially with therepealed mandate of their deputies in the Georgian Parliament.As a result,“No longer ‘represented’ by ineffective but nonetheless highly vocal government-inexilebodies…[IDPs] also lacked preparation and training in how to relate with nationalpoliticians, parliamentarians or political parties.” 131The government-in-exile currently plays a minimal role. A government-in-exile representativeunderlined that “our first goal is to inform others about our problem and make it a global problem.” Thestructure continues to exist more as “a symbol. We need it. You have the government to go to once that126 Georgia: Partial progress towards durable solutions for IDPs, 157.127 Mooney, 203.128 Georgia: Partial progress towards durable solutions for IDPs, 124.129 Ibid., 15.130 Mira Sovakar (Caucasus Projects Manager, Conciliation Resources), Personal Interview, 7 March 2012.131 Out of the Margins: Securing a Voice for Internally Displaced People, 4.29
land [Abkhazia] is ours again. It's also a symbol of hope.” 132 Apart from being a symbol nationally ofattempting to restore territorial integrity, it also works to promote the durable solution of return as oneoption for internally displaced persons. They have also shifted away from a revanchist attitude,becoming ardent supporters of confidence-building and a peaceful resolution to the conflict. However,in many ways they have proven their lack of effectiveness as a political conduit for IDPs. Their failure toissue a public statement regarding the Georgian Government’s recent evictions of IDPs presents just oneexample. 133 Referring to the government-in-exile, an IDP in Zugdidi commented: “They have nothing andhow can they help me? They are my friends but how can they help me?” 134Civil Society, NGOs, and ActivismCivil society offers the main avenue for IDPs to participate in the policymaking process, advocating forthe rights of their community to the government and to international organizations, namely donors andNGOs. Officials from the Office of the Ombudsman highlighted that “civil society is the best lobbyist” ofIDPs and that “many IDP NGOs that are quite active.” 135 While civil society’s efforts are generallyconsidered to be donor-driven, it is also vibrant, with well-developed financial and human capacity. 136Civic organizations, political parties, newspapers and television stations, think tanks and advocacygroups thrived during Eduard Shevardnadze’s rule, enabling them to peacefully oust this leader in2004. 137 However, since the Rose Revolution, the perception is that many Georgian NGOs now play adecreased role as influential government critics or watchdogs. Many of the previous civil society andNGO community leaders joined Saakashvili’s government, Parliament, or the private sector, and theirsuccessors have often been apprehensive in criticizing the government. Civil society is generally weakeralso due to reduced democracy assistance support—most notably from the U.S. Previously, significantAmerican donations focused on civil society but have now shifted to providing more support to thegovernment, in effect supporting its centralization of power. Some also argue that this has reduceddemocratic freedoms. 138Both national level NGOs and IDP NGOs support IDP advocacy and the monitoring of IDP rights.Especially since 2006, the wider NGO community in Georgia has come to address IDP issues. 139 TheGeorgian Young Lawyer’s Association (GYLA) and Transparency International’s (TI) Georgia chapter TIserves more as a watchdog for the MRA whereas on GYLA’s role involves studying legislation, raisingawareness about related problems, offering free legal aid, and providing information for IDPs onbringing their cases to court. 140 Charity Humanitarian Centre “Abkhazeti” (CHCA) is also an example of a132 Ibid.133 Lawrence Sheets (International Crisis Group), Personal Interview, 13 March 2012.134 Internally Displaced Persons (Collective Center, Zugdidi). Personal Interview. 19 March 2012.135 Staff member (Office of the Public Defender of Georgia), Personal Interview.136 Mira Sovakar, Personal Interview.137 Lanskoy, Miriam and Giorgi Areshidze. "Georgia's Year of Turmoil." Journal of Democracy October 19.4 (2008): 154-68. 157.138 Mitchell (Democracy in Georgia Since the Rose Revolution), 673; Mitchell (Democracy Bound), 73-74.139 Mira Sovakar, Personal Interview.140 Vakhushti Menabde (Georgian NGO Representative), Personal Interview, 21 March 2012.30
Page 2 and 3: Promoting IDPs’ and Women’s Voi
Page 4 and 5: CONTENTSAcronyms and Abbreviations
Page 6 and 7: EXECUTIVE SUMMARYInternally displac
Page 8 and 9: THE WOMEN’S POLITICAL RESOURCE CE
Page 10 and 11: fair reporting on politically sensi
Page 12 and 13: people-to-people diplomacy efforts
Page 14 and 15: and the Guiding Principles, in Febr
Page 16 and 17: an effort to address these stereoty
Page 18 and 19: The identities, perceptions, and re
Page 20 and 21: even IDPs themselves. The HRBA seek
Page 22 and 23: Karaleti settlement, and Potskho-Et
Page 24 and 25: displacement differently, with men
Page 26 and 27: on an equal footing with men in for
Page 28 and 29: The Ministry for Internally Displac
Page 32 and 33: prominent national level IDP NGO wo
Page 34 and 35: in the past but none have yet to be
Page 36 and 37: Grassroots Peacebuilding EffortsCiv
Page 38 and 39: esettlement and local integration h
Page 40 and 41: ability to contribute to the new Ac
Page 42 and 43: Women convened a working group to a
Page 44 and 45: were involved, in addition to “wo
Page 46 and 47: towards addressing this population
Page 48 and 49: waves. 224 A Conciliation Resources
Page 50 and 51: governing shelter requirements. 238
Page 52 and 53: esults of eviction on those who did
Page 54 and 55: FINDINGSSIPA team member Drilon Gas
Page 56 and 57: unique opportunities exist for them
Page 58 and 59: an important opportunity for women
Page 60 and 61: early morning…when I was going to
Page 62 and 63: our office to investigate these iss
Page 64 and 65: on this? It’s impossible.” 322
Page 66 and 67: high levels of unemployment and pov
Page 68 and 69: groups do not differentiate between
Page 70 and 71: funding and influence to implement
Page 72 and 73: een in operation for two years or l
Page 74 and 75: organization, and highlighted that
Page 76 and 77: The Education System’s Influence
Page 78 and 79: system has an important role to pla
Page 80 and 81:
Political FactorsMany elements of t
Page 82 and 83:
international organizations working
Page 84 and 85:
uling party. 433 There were some si
Page 86 and 87:
especially highly-influential broad
Page 88 and 89:
ationale behind the government’s
Page 90 and 91:
international working for a major d
Page 92 and 93:
Also, according to a World Bank rep
Page 94 and 95:
willing to challenge authorities th
Page 96 and 97:
The lack of narrative connecting po
Page 98 and 99:
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE GEORGIAN GO
Page 100 and 101:
the government also needs to commit
Page 102 and 103:
‣ Continue to support and expand
Page 104 and 105:
‣ Address male IDP needs (Immedia
Page 106 and 107:
The campaign should have a face, su
Page 108 and 109:
APPENDIX BList of IntervieweesLocal
Page 110 and 111:
Kristy KellyLincoln MitchellLawrenc
Page 112 and 113:
Article 10 - Non-discrimination in
Page 114 and 115:
Principle 18.1 - Adequate standard
Page 116 and 117:
Esaiashvili, Mariam (Official, Mini
Page 118 and 119:
Lanskoy, Miriam and Giorgi Areshidz
Page 120:
Transparency International Georgia.
show all

Promoting IDPs' and Women's Voices in Post-Conflict Georgia

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?