DOCSLIB.ORG

RSRTF Consolidated Annual Report 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
RSRTF Consolidated Annual Report 2019 SOUTH SUDAN ANNUAL REPORT 2020 © <No data from link> © RSRTF/Andreea Campeanu CONTENTS Executive summary 3 The year in review 5 Context 8 The RSRTF approach 9 Coverage and projects 11 RSRTF at a glance 13 Case study: The nexus in operation 14 2020 launch of the Small Grants Window: Peace and good governance 17 RSRTF and COVID-19: Challenges and action 18 Designing an RSRTF response to violence in Jonglei 21 Snapshot of results 24 RSRTF results 2020 27 Looking ahead to 2021 40 Fund financial performance 42 Definitions 48 Acronyms 49 The first area-based programme, launched in Koch in 2019, is beginning to demonstrate progress towards realizing its objective to consolidate peace and realize conditions for recovery. © RSRTF/Andreea Campeanu © RSRTF/Andreea EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is the third South Sudan Multi-Partner Trust Fund for Reconciliation, Stabilization and Resilience (RSRTF) Consolidated Annual Report. The report demonstrates the compelling relevance of the RSRTF approach currently in South Sudan as progress in the implementation of the R-ARCSS offers an opportunity to break the cycle of violence. The report highlights the value of the pooled funding mechanism to enable integrated programming across the humanitarian, development and peace nexus, to link national level political and security processes to local conflict resolution and establish incentives as well as a conducive environment for peace to be sustained. In 2020, the total financial volume of the and six outcome areas. The first area-based Fund doubled from US$20 million to US$39.4 programme, launched in Koch in 2019, is million owing to the generous contributions beginning to demonstrate progress towards from the governments of Norway, Germany, realizing its objective to consolidate peace and Sweden, as well as the Government of the and realize conditions for recovery. Peace Netherlands, which the Fund secured as a new committees established through the project donor in December 2020. While only $1 million have conducted intra-communal peace was recorded in transfers to partners in 2020, dialogues in and across both government- and the Fund in fact added four new projects to the opposition-controlled areas. Partners report portfolio amounting to $7 million, taking the improvements in early warning and sharing cumulative amount allocated to implementing of information with local authorities, which partners to $12.2 million. Funding allocations contributed to reduced violence related to and transfers were significantly below 2020 cattle raiding. The peace committees have also planning as a result of disruptions caused by the been supported, together with local chiefs, to COVID-19 pandemic. resolve 56 community cases related to housing, land and property rights. A decrease in cases Of the total $39.4 million commitments at the of forced marriage and domestic violence end of 2020, the Fund had transferred only 33 has been observed, and women’s roles in percent to partners’ implementing projects. influencing their husbands, sons and other However, by the close of the year, a further $12.5 family members to desist from revenge killings million had been endorsed for allocation under a have been enhanced. The rehabilitation of the new area-based programme in central-southern Bhang Secondary School has meant more girls Jonglei and the Greater Pibor administrative are given equal opportunity to enrol in school area (Jonglei/GPAA), for which transfers would and the project’s cash-for-work activities have take place in January 2021. This report provides forged linkages and fostered trade between a detailed analysis on the Fund’s financial communities. United Nations Mission in South performance and gives a breakdown of RSRTF Sudan (UNMISS) peacekeeping presence and contributions, deposits and allocations against patrols have enabled access to programme outcomes, as well as expenditure to date. sites and made a significant contribution to The report highlights the impact and results improved safety, security and community of the RSRTF programmes across the country confidence. The number of formerly displaced against the Fund’s three essential elements persons returning to Koch County has risen Executive summary | 3 since the start of the project, from 6,375 in government by building governance capacity 2019 to 13,043 returnees in 2020.1 and fostering cohesion among political actors. In 2020, allocations made through the Small The second area-based programme was Grants Window aligned to the stabilization launched in January 2020 in response to an pillar of the RSRTF Results Framework, unprecedented intensification of violence specifically RSRTF Outcome 4, which envisions between Luo farmers and Dinka cattle-keepers communities, including women, youth and in the Jur River border areas between Wau and disadvantaged groups being empowered and Warrap. The programme had a problematic increasingly able to meaningfully participate in start-up because of restrictions related to the local and broader political, peace and security COVID-19 pandemic. Despite these challenges, processes. Through the Small Grants Window it has made significant progress in securing programmes, the RSRTF supports the United a warrant for the establishment of a joint Nations Cooperation Framework priorities of special mobile court with jurisdiction over building peace and strengthening governance, cattle-related crime in the states’ border areas. and empowering women and youth. Once established, the activities will make a significant contribution to RSRTF Outcome The RSRTF is still a relatively new fund and 3, which envisions justice sector actors more 2020 saw further refinements and streamlining effectively delivering justice, even in areas with of the allocation and assessment procedures. previously limited or no judicial infrastructure. The Fund also further developed the Everyday The programme was able to prevent and Peace Indicator (EPI) initiative, which will reduce violent tensions between farming and enable systematic measures of change in the cattle-keeper communities through a number local perceptions of safety and security in of direct mediations, and community and all its area-based programme locations. The high-level dialogues. The peace sensitization Fund Secretariat team also strengthened and campaigns, ongoing support for the peace enhanced hands-on support to ensure more committees, and livestock enhancement coherent and coordinated programming, activities paved the way for sustainable to bridge silos and shape complementary peacebuilding efforts in the target areas. initiatives. This report details how the RSRTF launched 2021 will see a continued commitment both a Small Grants Window to allow for nimbler to financial growth and to further refinement application of funding within a shorter and development of RSRTF programming. implementation timeframe to deliver quick With a growing body of evidence across its impacts, taking opportunities to build on portfolio, the Fund will prioritize learning and the momentum of the February formation development of best practice and undertake of a transitional unity government. The an early-stage Fund evaluation. The intent Small Grants Window, launched in 2020, is to assess the extent to which the Fund is specifically sought to finance initiatives that delivering on its terms of reference and to would strengthen and promote inclusive make recommendations for how the Fund can civic participation in the implementation act on the lessons from early implementation of the peace agreement and support the in order to realize the objective of integrated development of a robust political system and a programming across the triple nexus for more accountable, transparent and responsive sustained peace. 1 IOM South Sudan Mobility Tracking Round 9, September 2020. 4 | RSRTF Annual Report 2020 THE YEAR IN REVIEW 2020 was a year of unprecedented challenges as countries around the world battled the COVID-19 pandemic. In South Sudan, the daunting task of responding to COVID-19 and safeguarding staff and communities was exacerbated by pre-existing vulnerabilities, a flailing economy, intensified subnational violence, and a second consecutive year of major flooding. In Jonglei, for instance, the 2020 floods were described as the worst in 60 years, as the 2020 rains began before the previous year’s flood waters had fully receded. These events highlighted the need for In January 2020, the second area-based innovative RSRTF programming approaches programme was launched, designed to respond and reinforced the relevance of coordinated to an unprecedented intensification of violence actions championed by the Fund. At the same in 2019 between Luo farmers and Dinka cattle- time, these circumstances presented additional keepers in the Jur River border areas between complications for partners, including access and Wau and Warrap. logistical challenges that markedly affected the The RSRTF grant is enabling the implementation pace of the Fund’s programmes. operationalization of an innovative, common Despite these challenges, the second year United Nations strategic approach to mitigate of operations for the RSRTF has been one of cattle-raiding-related conflict. Through its growth and consolidation, as well as adaptation multi-sector programming, the pilot project and innovation. The financial volume of the links community-based peace building, Fund doubled from $20 million to $39.4 economic security and rule of law reform million, due to the generous contributions with broader
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sudan: the Crisis in Darfur and Status of the North-South Peace Agreement
    Sudan: The Crisis in Darfur and Status of the North-South Peace Agreement Ted Dagne Specialist in African Affairs June 1, 2011 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL33574 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Sudan: The Crisis in Darfur and Status of the North-South Peace Agreement Summary Sudan, geographically the largest country in Africa, has been ravaged by civil war intermittently for four decades. More than 2 million people have died in Southern Sudan over the past two decades due to war-related causes and famine, and millions have been displaced from their homes. In July 2002, the Sudan government and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) signed a peace framework agreement in Kenya. On May 26, 2004, the government of Sudan and the SPLM signed three protocols on Power Sharing, on the Nuba Mountains and Southern Blue Nile, and on the long disputed Abyei area. The signing of these protocols resolved all outstanding issues between the parties. On June 5, 2004, the parties signed “the Nairobi Declaration on the Final Phase of Peace in the Sudan.” On January 9, 2005, the government of Sudan and the SPLM signed the final peace agreement at a ceremony held in Nairobi, Kenya. In April 2010, Sudan held national and regional elections. In January 2011, South Sudan held a referendum to decide on unity or independence. Abyei was also expected to hold a referendum in January 2011 to decide whether to retain the current special administrative status or to be part of South Sudan.
    [Show full text]
  • Building Legitimate and Accountable Government in South Sudan Re
    Developing Country Studies www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-607X (Paper) ISSN 2225-0565 (Online) Vol.5, No.8, 2015 Building Legitimate and Accountable government in South Sudan Re-thinking inclusive governance in the post CPA-2005 Dalmas O. Omia Research fellow, Institute of Anthropology, Gender and African Studies, University of Nairobi, Kenya Email: [email protected] Josephine Anyango Obonyo Ph.D Lecturer Institute of Women Gender and Development Studies, Egerton University, Kenya Email: [email protected] Abstract Inclusive governance is significant to the realisation of democracy and peace dividends in states emerging from conflict. In principle, it offers platform for equitable representation of the ethnic majority, minority, marginalised and indigenous groups in public decision making bodies as well as ensuring that these groups benefit equally from development initiatives. In South Sudan, the exercise of inclusivity has been marred with contradictions between constitutional provisions and extant practices, for example, political parties are found to be the foci for rewarding the ‘warlords’ dubbed as freedom fighters at the expense of participatory civilian structures, the nerves of ethnic factionalism over nationalism, exercise of centralised nomination system, all of which breed disaffection and tensions among the citizenry. Moreover, the observed militarisation of public service, perception of ethnic favouritism in public employment and appointments, the ‘felt’ development marginalisation of regions outside Central Equitoria, and unequal share of national resources comprise practices that violate the foundations of inclusive governance. In effect, these malpractices around inclusivity have fermented call for federalism (return to 23 semi-autonomous colonial districts with federal mandates) as a viable inclusive development platform over the current constitutionally mandated decentralisation (where South Sudan is sub- divided into 10 states).
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Usaid/South Sudan's Democracy And
    EVALUATION OF USAID/SOUTH SUDAN’S DEMOCRACY AND GOVERNANCE ACTIVITIES UNDER THE IRI PROJECT — 2012-2014 APRIL 2016 This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by Luis Arturo Sobalvarro and Dr. Raymond Gervais under contract with Management Systems International (MSI). EVALUATION OF USAID/SOUTH SUDAN’S DEMOCRACY AND GOVERNANCE ACTIVITIES UNDER THE IRI PROJECT 2012 – 2014 Management Systems International Corporate Offices 200 12th Street, South Arlington, VA 22202 USA Tel: + 1 703 979 7100 Contracted under Order No. AID-668-I-13-00001 Monitoring and Evaluation Support Project DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. ii CONTENTS ACRONYMS ......................................................................................................................................... II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 1 Recommendations ..................................................................................................................................................... 5 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 7 Purpose of Evaluation ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Annex 2 USAID South Sudan Gender Based Violence Prevention And
    USAID/SOUTH SUDAN GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND RESPONSE ROADMAP SEPTEMBER 2019 Contract No.: AID-OAA-TO-17-00018 September 26, 2019 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Banyan Global. Contract No.: AID-OAA-TO-17-00018 Submitted to: USAID/South Sudan DISCLAIMER The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) or the United States Government. Recommended Citation: Gardsbane, Diane and Aluel Atem. USAID/South Sudan Gender-Based Violence Prevention and Response Roadmap. Prepared by Banyan Global. 2019. Cover photo credit: USAID Back Cover photo credit: USAID USAID/SOUTH SUDAN GENDER- BASED VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND RESPONSE ROADMAP SEPTEMBER 2019 Contract No.: AID-OAA-TO-17-00018 4 USAID/SOUTH SUDAN GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND RESPONSE ROADMAP CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 9 1.1 ROADMAP OBJECTIVE 9 1.2 STRUCTURE OF ROADMAP 9 2. INTEGRATING GBV IN THE USAID/SOUTH SUDAN OPERATIONAL FRAMEWORK 11 2.1 THEORY OF CHANGE 11 2.2 INTEGRATING THE THEORY OF CHANGE INTO THE USAID/SOUTH SUDAN OPERATIONAL FRAMEWORK 12 3. GBV PREVENTION AND RESPONSE ROADMAP PROGRAMMATIC GUIDING PRINCIPLES 19 4. BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER – GBV PREVENTION, MITIGATION AND RESPONSE ROADMAP 27 5. GUIDELINES TO ADDRESS GBV IN MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING 39 6. KEY RESOURCES 41 ANNEX A: GBV PREVENTION AND RESPONSE ROADMAP LITERATURE REVIEW 57 ANNEX B: PROGRAM AND DONOR REPORT 73 ANNEX C: GBV LITERACY TRAINING 95 ANNEX D: LIST OF KEY DOCUMENTS CONSULTED 99 ANNEX E.
    [Show full text]
  • South Sudan: Jonglei – “We Have Always Been at War”
    South Sudan: Jonglei – “We Have Always Been at War” Africa Report N°221 | 22 December 2014 International Crisis Group Headquarters Avenue Louise 149 1050 Brussels, Belgium Tel: +32 2 502 90 38 Fax: +32 2 502 50 38 [email protected] Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... i I. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 II. Jonglei’s Conflicts Before the Civil War ........................................................................... 3 A. Perpetual Armed Rebellion ....................................................................................... 3 B. The Politics of Inter-Communal Conflict .................................................................. 4 1. The communal is political .................................................................................... 4 2. Mixed messages: Government response to intercommunal violence ................. 7 3. Ethnically-targeted civilian disarmament ........................................................... 8 C. Region over Ethnicity? Shifting Alliances between the Bahr el Ghazal Dinka, Greater Bor Dinka and Nuer ...................................................................................... 9 III. South Sudan’s Civil War in Jonglei .................................................................................. 12 A. Armed Factions in Jonglei ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Envisioning a Stable South Sudan
    AFRICA CENTER SPECIAL REPORT Envisioning a Stable South Sudan Africa Center Special Report No. 4 May 2018 Envisioning a Stable South Sudan Special Report No. 4 May 2018 Africa Center for Strategic Studies Washington, D.C. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................1 THREE TRAJECTORIES FACING SOUTH SUDAN ....................................................3 By Luka Kuol TAMING THE DOMINANT GUN CLASS IN SOUTH SUDAN ....................................9 By Majak D’Agoôt SECURITY SECTOR STABILIZATION: A PREREQUISITE FOR POLITICAL STABILITY IN SOUTH SUDAN ...........................................................17 By Remember Miamingi BLURRING THE LINES: ETHNICITY, GOVERNANCE, AND STABILITY IN SOUTH SUDAN ............................................................................25 By Lauren Hutton DURABLE STABILITY IN SOUTH SUDAN: WHAT ARE THE PREREQUISITES? .........31 By Phillip Kasaija Apuuli CONFRONTING THE CHALLENGES OF SOUTH SUDAN’S SECURITY SECTOR: A PRACTITIONER’S PERSPECTIVE ......................................................................39 By Kuol Deim Kuol THE RULE OF LAW AND THE ROLE OF CUSTOMARY COURTS IN STABILIZING SOUTH SUDAN ............................................................................47 By Godfrey Musila NAVIGATING THE COMPETING INTERESTS OF REGIONAL ACTORS IN SOUTH SUDAN ............................................................................................53 By Luka Kuol CONTEXT AND THE LIMITS OF INTERNATIONAL
    [Show full text]
  • South Sudan Country Report BTI 2018
    BTI 2018 Country Report South Sudan This report is part of the Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Transformation Index (BTI) 2018. It covers the period from February 1, 2015 to January 31, 2017. The BTI assesses the transformation toward democracy and a market economy as well as the quality of political management in 129 countries. More on the BTI at http://www.bti-project.org. Please cite as follows: Bertelsmann Stiftung, BTI 2018 Country Report — South Sudan. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2018. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Contact Bertelsmann Stiftung Carl-Bertelsmann-Strasse 256 33111 Gütersloh Germany Sabine Donner Phone +49 5241 81 81501 [email protected] Hauke Hartmann Phone +49 5241 81 81389 [email protected] Robert Schwarz Phone +49 5241 81 81402 [email protected] Sabine Steinkamp Phone +49 5241 81 81507 [email protected] BTI 2018 | South Sudan 3 Key Indicators Population M 12.2 HDI 0.418 GDP p.c., PPP $ - Pop. growth1 % p.a. 2.9 HDI rank of 188 181 Gini Index 46.3 Life expectancy years 56.3 UN Education Index 0.297 Poverty3 % 64.8 Urban population % 19.0 Gender inequality2 - Aid per capita $ 141.0 Sources (as of October 2017): The World Bank, World Development Indicators 2017 | UNDP, Human Development Report 2016. Footnotes: (1) Average annual growth rate. (2) Gender Inequality Index (GII). (3) Percentage of population living on less than $3.20 a day at 2011 international prices. Executive Summary On December 15, 2013, disagreements among the political elites of the ruling Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) escalated and led to violent confrontations between presidential guards loyal to President Salva Kiir and the former Vice President Riek Macher.
    [Show full text]
  • Sudan: the Crisis in Darfur and Status of the North-South Peace Agreement
    Sudan: The Crisis in Darfur and Status of the North-South Peace Agreement Ted Dagne Specialist in African Affairs June 15, 2011 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL33574 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Sudan: The Crisis in Darfur and Status of the North-South Peace Agreement Summary Sudan, geographically the largest country in Africa, has been ravaged by civil war intermittently for four decades. More than 2 million people have died in Southern Sudan over the past two decades due to war-related causes and famine, and millions have been displaced from their homes. In July 2002, the Sudan government and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) signed a peace framework agreement in Kenya. On January 9, 2005, the government of Sudan and the SPLM signed the final peace agreement at a ceremony held in Nairobi, Kenya. In April 2010, Sudan held national and regional elections. In January 2011, South Sudan held a referendum to decide on unity or independence. Abyei was also expected to hold a referendum in January 2011 to decide whether to retain the current special administrative status or to be part of South Sudan. The Abyei referendum did not take place. In the Southern referendum, 98.8% voted for independence and 1.17% for unity. In late May 2011, Sudan government forces dissolved the joint Abyei Administration and invaded the town, displacing more than 100,000 people in the Abyei area. The crisis in Darfur began in February 2003, when two rebel groups emerged to challenge the National Congress Party (NCP) government in Darfur.
    [Show full text]
  • The Crisis in Darfur and Status of the North-South Peace Agreement
    Sudan: The Crisis in Darfur and Status of the North-South Peace Agreement Ted Dagne Specialist in African Affairs August 5, 2010 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL33574 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Sudan: The Crisis in Darfur and Status of the North-South Peace Agreement Summary Sudan, geographically the largest country in Africa, has been ravaged by civil war intermittently for four decades. More than 2 million people have died in Southern Sudan over the past two decades due to war-related causes and famine, and millions have been displaced from their homes. There were many failed attempts to end the civil war in Southern Sudan. In July 2002, the Sudan government and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) signed a peace framework agreement in Kenya. On May 26, 2004, the government of Sudan and the SPLM signed three protocols on Power Sharing, on the Nuba Mountains and Southern Blue Nile, and on the long disputed Abyei area. The signing of these protocols resolved all outstanding issues between the parties. On June 5, 2004, the parties signed “the Nairobi Declaration on the Final Phase of Peace in the Sudan.” On January 9, 2005, the government of Sudan and the SPLM signed the final peace agreement at a ceremony held in Nairobi, Kenya. In April 2010, Sudan held national and regional elections. In January 2011, South Sudan will hold a referendum to decide on unity or independence. Abyei is also expected to hold a referendum in January 2011 to decide whether to retain the current special administrative status or to be part of South Sudan.
    [Show full text]
  • South Sudan Report, Prospects for Democracy in the World's Newest
    REPORT SOUTH SUDAN PROSPECTS FOR DEMOCRACY IN THE WORLD’S NEWEST STATE 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMAry 03 INTRODUCTION 05 POLITICAL BACKGROUND 05 THE SOUTHERN SUDANESE: DIVERSE, DISPLACED AND IN DEBT 06 SOUTH SUDAN’S INTERIM INSTITUTIONS: WELL DESIGNED ON PAPER 07 AVOIDING A ONE-PARTY STATE 08 CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW: AN OPPORTUNITY FOR POLITICAL ACCOMMODATION? 09 01. From an Interim to a Transitional Constitution 09 02. The Post-9 July Transitional Arrangements 10 03. A Constituent Assembly: How to Ensure Inclusivity? 11 04. The Permanent Constitution: Time to Reflect. Time to Consult 11 LEGISLATION: MUCH TO DO 12 01. Political Parties Act 12 02. Elections 13 03. Election Management 13 04. The Electoral System 13 05. The Census 15 06. The Media 15 RECOMMENDATIONS 16 PROSPECTS FOR DEMOCRACY IN THE WORLD’S NEWEST STATE EXECUTIVE SUMMAry THE RESUlt OF THE JANUAry 2011 REFERENDUM ON Since attaining independence, many other African countries SELF-DETERMINATION for SOUTH SUDAN, AloNG have been unable to develop strong state structures and a sense WITH THE North’S AcceptANCE OF THE OUtcome, of shared nationhood. Too often, one political force or tribe has PAVES THE WAY for SOUTHERN INDEPENDENCE ON sought dominance over others, political space has been restric- 9 JUly 2011. THIS IS THE DATE THE COMPREHENSIVE ted, military interference has impeded progress in civil affairs PEACE AgreemeNT (CPA) EXPIRES, estABLISHING or competition for resources has led to instability, displacement THE world’S Newest stATE: THE REPUBLIC OF and conflict. SOUTH SUDAN. The overarching question for South Sudan is whether such scenarios can be avoided. Even before independence, much remains to be done.
    [Show full text]
  • Elections Worth Dying For? a Selection of Case Studies from Africa Elections Worth Dying For? a Selection of Case Studies from Africa
    Edited by Almami Cyllah Elections Worth Dying For? A Selection of Case Studies from Africa Elections Worth Dying For? A Selection of Case Studies from Africa Edited by Almami Cyllah, IFES Regional Director for Africa Elections Worth Dying For? A Selection of Case Studies from Africa Edited by Almami Cyllah, IFES Regional Director for Africa Chapters by Elizabeth Côté Almami Cyllah Dr. Staffan Darnolf Sidi Diawara Carl W. Dundas Christian Hennemeyer Robert David Irish Greg Kehailia Dr. Magnus Ohman Jide Ojo Michael Yard Elections Worth Dying For? A Selection of Case Studies from Africa Copyright © 2014 International Foundation for Electoral Systems. All rights reserved. Permission Statement: No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system without the written permission of IFES. Requests for permission should include the following information: • A description of the material for which permission to copy is desired. • The purpose for which the copied material will be used and the manner in which it will be used. • Your name, title, company or organization name, telephone number, fax number, e-mail address and mailing address. Please send all requests for permission to: International Foundation for Electoral Systems 1850 K Street, NW, Fifth Floor Washington, D.C. 20006 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 202.350.6701 Cover photo by Carla Chianese Page 84: Thaddeus Menang Page 104: Kate Stanworth All other photos are property of IFES Introduction Acknowledgements First, I wish to thank all of the authors who provided valuable insight and information on the many forms electoral violence can take, as well as recom- mendations on how to best monitor, resolve and prevent such violence.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf | 656.27 Kb
    RECONCILIATION FOR PEACE IN SOUTH SUDAN Evaluation Report January 2019 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Management Systems International, A Tetra Tech Company. RECONCILIATION FOR PEACE IN SOUTH SUDAN EVALUATION REPORT JANUARY 2019 Contracted under AID-I-668-13-00001, Task Order # 72066818F00001, Task Order 3 DISCLAIMER This report is made possible by the support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the sole responsibility of the Management Systems International (MSI) and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. CONTENTS ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................................................................... II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2 KEY FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]