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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

prominent national level IDP NGO working on IDP-related issues. A European Union official made thefollowing description of CHCA: “They come up with good proposals, they’re daring…they came up with aproposal to…do more research on private sector IDPs…They come up with very good ideas, they ask formeetings, they lobby for it.” 141 Taken together, such organizations play an important role in advocatingfor IDPs at the national level.In order to present a unified voice on common concerns, IDP NGOs are also involved in IDP networks.The Synergy Network, comprised of around 20 IDP NGOs, has been particularly active with politicalparties – trying to inform party platforms and policies, and working with IDP communities to encouragevoting. 142 Synergy Network meetings are valuable opportunities for local NGOs to involve themselves indiscussions on national policies that affect them. For example, during the Synergy Network meetingsheld in January 2012, trainings were held to inform local IDP NGOs on the application process formunicipal tenders, procurement, and contracting. 143 Not only does this provide NGO leaders withnecessary knowledge and skills to be better involved in these processes, it also ensures a monitoringmechanism to minimize corruption. Despite this valuable work, competition for limited internationalfunding and the absence of strong leadership weakens the impact and unified message of the SynergyNetwork, discussed in further detail below. 144Geneva Peace ProcessThe participation of IDPs in Track I Diplomacy is a rather limited, partly because the Geneva peace talksare at an impasse. The actors in this process include representatives from three internationalorganizations, the UN, OSCE, and the EU, in addition to Georgia, Russia, the US and participants from thede facto and the de jure authorities from Abkhazia. A senior Georgian official outlined that the talksinclude representatives of displaced persons and the people that displaced them. 145 The Action Plan onthe State Strategy for IDPs foresees the involvement of IDPs in the peace process. 146 However, thisaspect of the action plan, on the right to return, has been described as “inactionable.” 147Whereas IDPs are involved in the Geneva talks through their representatives in the Abkhaziangovernment-in-exile, there seems to be no mechanism through which IDPs are more broadly involved orrepresented. The government-in-exile as highlighted above also does not have the capacity to representIDPs more comprehensively, while some IDPs may not want to be involved due to the politicization ofthe return issue. IDPs are more focused on the difficulties of their daily lives and therefore have less ofan incentive to be involved in such efforts. 148 In general, the Geneva talks have not been considered141 Caroline Stampfer, Personal Interview.142 Mira Sovakar, Personal Interview.143 Synergy Network Conference. Tbilisi. January. 2012.144 Eka Gvalia, Executive Director, Charity Humanitarian Centre ‘Abkhazeti’, Personal Interview, 18 April 2012.145 Senior Government Official, Personal Interview.146 Staff member (Office of the Public Defender of Georgia), Personal Interview.147 International NGO Representative, Personal Interview.148 Stan Veitsman, Personal Interview.31
substantive, and there is much more interaction, and IDP inclusion, through Track II diplomacy orgrassroots peacebuilding efforts. 149Local Level ParticipationLocal governmentParalleling the landscape of participation at the national level, IDPs’ engagement at the local level alsoremains limited in many ways. Limits on their right to vote in national and local elections during theirfirst decade of displacement could play an influential role in this. The 1998 Law of Georgia on Electionsof Bodies of Local Government explicitly stipulated that IDPs were ineligible to vote in local elections intheir place of residence. 150 The revised Unified Electoral Code of August 2003 overturned this, affirmingthe right of every citizen to be elected to Parliament and representative of local government, withoutany apparent restriction, such as loss of IDP status. 151Despite these amendments, however, many were still concerned that by voting for representatives ofthe areas in which they resided, they would be accepting the de facto territorial situation and therebyrelinquish their right to return. 152 Although these concerns are currently unfounded, the Georgiangovernment has not worked to dispel these rumors for political reasons, as they lay claim to thebreakaway territories through the IDP population and their wish to return to their homes. 153This misconception partially explains the low participation of IDPs in elections as voters and ascandidates in local elections. For instance, a survey on IDP voting that was commissioned by UNDP andundertaken by a consortium of Georgian research organizations determined that voter turnout amongIDPs nationwide was only 35 percent, which was “much lower” than among the general population. 154Moreover, as one study on the situation of IDPs in Georgia highlighted, because “access to services (e.g.,education) and employment opportunities often relies on ‘connections’ with the elected officials, IDPsare at a disadvantage compared to the general population.” 155Although IDPs generally face these barriers, women face additional obstacles to running and beingelected for office at the local level. According to an IDP NGO participant, IDP women have run for office149 David Phillips (Director, Institute for the Study of Human Rights, Columbia University), Personal Interview, 8 March 2012.150 Mooney, 211-212.151 Brookings Institution, The Voting Rights of Internally Displaced Persons: The OSCE Region, Nov.2004, 44.152 Ibid.153 Simon Bagshaw, Internally Displaced Persons and Political Participation: The OSCE Region ,Occasional Paper, The Brookings Institution Project on Internal Displacement, September 2000, 18.154Business Consulting Group (BCG) Research, Internally Displaced Persons and Their Behavior During the Elections (May 2004),4.155 Larry Dershem, Nana Gurgenidze, Steve Holtzman, Poverty and Vulnerability Among InternallyDisplaced Persons in Georgia: An Update of their Current Status and Circumstances, paper prepared for the World Bank,November 2002, 36.32
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 30 and 31: Defender’s Office) and leave no r
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?