Frequently Asked Questions on Human Rights-Based Approach

y national legislation, plans and policies, and relevantrecommendations of the treaty bodies. Specific objectives(or UNDAF outcomes) imply a medium time horizon.Example of UNDAF outcomes that reflecthuman rights-based approach principlesGUYANA (UNDAF, 2006–2010)In Guyana, the UNDAF outcomes and country programmeoutcomes reflect equitable access with clear, time-bound targetsessential for monitoring the realization of human rights and foraccountability. See outcome 1: “By 2010 there will be at leasta 10 per cent increase in the proportion of Guyanese accessingquality services in education, health, water and sanitation,and housing, with capabilities enhanced to maximize availableopportunities.”This UNDAF outcome promotes quality services, rather thancoverage alone, consistent with international human rightsstandards. While it could have been strengthened further to focusexplicitly on the most disadvantaged groups, it is noteworthy inrecognizing capability improvement and the importance of peoplebeing able to claim their rights.For a more detailed discussion of the United Nations Development Group’s appraisalof this and other UNDAFs from a human rights perspective, see http://www.undg.org.UNICEF Costa Rica – moving beyond atraditional “sectoral” focusThe UNICEF country programme in Costa Rica for 1992-1996reflected a classical sectoral approach, focusing on: (1) socialpolicy, (2) education, (3) water and environmental sanitation,(4) health, and (5) children in especially difficult circumstances.Programme structure evolved markedly in response to therequirements of a human rights-based approach, leaving behind thesectoral approach. The programming priorities in 2002-2006 are:1. Rights approach in socialmanagement and justice• National Child Councilcapacity-building;• National Child WelfareBoard capacity-building;• Local rights boards;• Support Supreme Courtspecial laws.2. Active citizenship for childand adolescent rights• Assist civil society andadolescents’ organizations;• Partnership with publicand private sectors infund-raising.Source: Mahesh Patel, “Lessons Learned and the Way Forward, based on HumanRights Approaches Case Studies and Discussions”, presentation at UNDP/OHCHRRegional Consultation, http://www.un.or.th/ohchr/SR/Regional_Office/forums/llp_regional_consultation/DAY%202/mahesh%20patel/Human%20Rights%20Lessons%20Learned%20Presentation5.ppt.Finally, country programme outcomes should be gearedtowards the institutional, legal or policy changes necessaryfor desired behaviour change. The CCA capacity gapanalysis—informed by relevant recommendations of thetreaty bodies—should indicate the capacities necessaryfor duty-bearers to respond to claims, and for rights-holders(especially the most disadvantaged) to demand andadvocate the exercise of their rights. Country programmeoutcomes are defined for a short time horizon.28 Does a human rights-basedapproach bring anything new tocapacity development?Yes. Building the capacities of people to claim their rights,and of duty-bearers to fulfil their obligations, requiressome of the strategies already well known in developmentpractice along with others that are new.Capacity development has become a dominant strategyin development cooperation. Capacity in this context canbe understood as the ability of individuals, organizationsand societies to perform functions, solve problems, andset and achieve goals. Capacity development entails thesustainable creation, use and retention of that capacity inorder to reduce poverty, increase self-reliance and improvepeople’s lives. It builds on and harnesses rather than replacesindigenous capacity. It is about promoting learning,29