1. Can HRBA & Access to Justice Improve the Quality
of Service Delivery & Empower People?
31 May 2012, Bratislava
A.H. Monjurul Kabir, Human Rights & Justice Adviser, UNDP in Europe & CIS
Twitter:@mkabir2011
United Nations Development Programme

2. No Easy Answer - the Governance
Scenario
Across the region, persistent governance deficits are
reflected by:
Shrinking democratic space-limited CSO &Youth
engagements
Poor legal and policy frameworks
Weak institutional capacity
Limited access to justice – Often Zero HRBA!
Growing threats to human rights
Rampant discrimination-Roma, PWD, Minority
Lack of public accountability - NHRS
Poorly conceived & implemented decentralization
Consequently lack of trust in public institutions & policies.

3. Why UNDP – UNDP BRC
• Supporting human rights & justice systems so that they work for
those who are poor and disadvantaged including young people.
• Empowering the poor & disadvantaged to seek remedies for
injustice, strengthening linkages between formal & informal
structures, & countering biases inherent in both systems can provide
A2J for those who would otherwise be excluded.- Exp. of Prof Yunus
• UNDP is committed to using a human rights-based approach
(HRBA) in its programming guided by international HR principles.
• The need to focus on capacities to seek (rights holders) and provide
remedies for injustice (duty bearers).
• But a “one-size-fits-all” does not work. DGTTF Projects are cases in point.
• Local actors must be involved from the start. “The aim must be to
leave behind strong, inclusive, responsive local institutions
when we depart”.

4. Challenges of Delivery & Empowerment
 Each Sub-region (CA -Uzbekistan, Tajikistan; WB-Croatia, Serbia, Kosovo,
B&H, W-CIS, Moldova, Belarus, S-Caucasus- i.e., Georgia, Armenia,
Azerbaijan), has their own sets of potentials & challenges.
 Examples: Excessive number of laws; formalistic and expensive legal
procedures, lack of judicial services; absence of HRBA , no youth & CSO
engagements
 Avoidance of the legal system due to economic reasons, fear, or a sense
of futility of purpose- Lack of Legal Aid contributes to this.
 Case Study– A2J challenges in Central Asia (2011):
 Unwillingness to involve others in solving disputes;
 Poor knowledge of law;
 Lack of resources;
 Practical hurdles in using the courts (delays)
 Corruption and perceived corruption
 Systemic bias (i.e., gender) in the legal system;
 Shrinking ability to access judicial services;
 Limited public participation in reform programmes.

5. Where do People go to Access Justice
According to Caucasus Research Resource Center (CRRC, 2011):
Example
of chart
placement

6. What we did in the past
 Policy Advocacy & Programming on HRBA & legal
awareness, legal protection, legal aid, enforcement, etc.
Focusing on ADRs and promote East-East knowledge
sharing and transfer (Montenegro-Kosovo);
Strengthening National Human Rights Institutions;
Targeted Rule of Law & Justice programming responding
to country and/or sub-regional specific needs/demands
 Addressing the challenges of Social Exclusion;
Developing Access to Justice wider team/CoP

7. What we want to achieve?
2011-14
Promoting Rule of Law – liked to our support for EU Accession
process (Croatia, Serbia)
Widening Access to Justice – opening new frontiers of justice :
Legal Aid, Legal Empowerment, New gender mechanisms, E-
justice;
 Ensuring Social Inclusion of Minorities, Persons with
Disabilities, Women, People living with HIV;
Addressing challenges of informality-LEP
Judicial Reforms: Linking Judicial Integrity & Independence
with A2J agenda
 Youth, Civil Society & Parliamentary engement

8. Our Strategic Priorities
1.Strengthening national human rights system (NHRS) –
2. Enhanced national engagement with international human
rights and justice principles (i.e., Bangalore Principles on
Judicial Conduct etc.) Principles and mechanisms (i.e.,
Quasi judicial bodies etc.)
3. Access to Justice and Legal empowerment –
supporting social inclusion agenda-minorities, gender
equality, disability, HIV.
4. Follow-up to the UPR Recommendations agreed by
Member States

9. How we want to achieve?
Creating space & awareness for disadvantaged &
vulnerable groups leading to empowerment;
Strengthening capacities of UNDP & national partners;
Increased sub-regional support - enhanced flow of NHRIs
& judicial services;
Support to HRBA programming [HRBA Learning Forum];
 Facilitating demand-driven, participatory regional
programming and linking regional projects with CO Rule of
Law, HR & A2J projects/support{examples: Armenia,
Croatia, Moldova, Uzbekistan, Georgia, Kosovo,
Macedonia;

10. Cross-practice: closer integration among practices in
programming (Gender, Capacity, Poverty), knowledge, and
advisory support.
Linking formal and traditional justice delivery
Systems (CA);
Using regional Networks/CoPs as support infrastructure
for other networks; Stronger Networks, CoP backed by
informed analysis, social media connectivity, technical
advice, and catalytic support;
Reaching out to CO Projects & UNCT staff, & national
partners;
UPR Follow-up Facility (UFF)-engagement of the young
lawyers-human rights defenders;

11. Got Questions?
THANK YOU
http://europeandcis.undp.org/governance/hrj