ACCESSING JUSTICE PROGRAMME SIERRA LEONE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT SPECIAL PROGRAMME ON AFRICA [SPA] AMNESTY International NETHERLANDS Special Programme on Africa (SPA) P.O. Box 1968 1000 BZ Amsterdam Email: [email protected] © 2011 Amnesty International ACCESSING JUSTICE PROGRAMME SIERRA LEONE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT SPECIAL PROGRAMME ON AFRICA [SPA] ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Survey report was written by Ellen Vermeulen (Special We are also indebted to the following persons and Programme on Africa/Amnesty International Netherlands), organisations who contributed greatly to the impact based on a first draft report by Mohammed Sidie Sheriff assessment in Sierra Leone, the compilation of the (consultant) and reviewed by Noeleen Hartigan (Amnesty findings and the drafting of this report: Mohammed International Ireland). The report reflects the data Sidie Sheriff (consultant, Sierra Leone); Joseph Ngaiteh generated by the Impact Assessment conducted in Sierra Lamin (programme officer Accessing Justice Coalition, Leone from February 5 to March 4, 2011. Sierra Leone); Nine de Vries (Amnesty International Netherlands); the Centre for Democracy for Human Rights In all, 1288 local respondents were interviewed in eight (CDHR), Makeni; Access to Justice Law Centre (AJLC), survey areas with the use of a semi-structured question- Makeni; Rehabilitation and Developnment Agency (RADA); naire. Nine open interviews were held with programme and Bo, and the Amnesty Sierra Leone Section (AI-SL), field staff of the SPA coalition partners, and nine focus Freetown. We also thank the Peace and Reconciliation group discussions were conducted with specific groups of Movement (PRM), Bo, for their administrative and authorities. The questionnaires were administered by local logistical support throughout the survey period. enumerators, while all open interviews and focus group discussions were facilitated by the local consultant. Finally, we would like to thank the Human Dignity Foundation (HDF) for their trust in and funding of the We would specifically like to thank all the individuals who Sierra Leone Programme from 2007 to 2011. HDF participated in this survey for their time and the precious funding also made this Impact Assessment possible. views and insights they openly shared with us. CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 5.3. Changes in Under Age Initiation 41 5.4. Coalition’s Work on FGM 41 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5.5. Focus Group Discussions Findings on FGM 42 5.6. Conclusions 44 1 BACKGROUND TO THE ASSESSMENT SURVEY 1.1. Introduction 14 6 PROGRAMME PERFORMANCE 1.2. The Accessing Justice Programme 14 6.1. Introduction 47 1.3. Measurement Parameters 15 6.2. Programme Design and Adjustments Made 47 1.4. 2007 Baseline Survey 16 6.3. Accomplishments and Programme Relevance 1.5. Amnesty International’s Dimensions of Change 17 according to SPA Partners 48 6.4. Collaboration and Communication 50 2 METHODOLOGY 6.5. Conclusions 51 2.1. Introduction 18 2.2. Survey Instruments 18 7 CONCLUSIONS, LESSONS LEARNED & RECOMMENDations 2.3. Selection of Geographical Areas 19 7.1. Introduction 53 2.4. Sampling and Selection 20 7.2. Participation and Knowledge Levels 53 2.5. Data Decoding and Data Entry 21 7.3. Recommendations 56 7.4. Situational Snap Shot (2007 – 2011) 58 3 FINDINGS ON HUMAN RIGHTS, JUSTICE AND INJUSTICE 7.5. Reflections from Amnesty International (AI) 600 3.1. Introduction 23 3.2. Understanding Human Rights 23 APPENDICES 3.3. Involvement of Human Rights Organisations 24 Appendix I: Narrative to the revised logframe, August 3.4. Understanding Justice and Injustice 25 2010 62 3.5. Demand and Delivery of Justice 26 Appendix II: Semi-structured Questionnaire 65 3.6. Equal Treatment of Men and Women 27 Appendix III: District map of Sierra Leone 75 3.7. Focus Group Discussion Findings on Human Rights Appendix IV: Tables Impact Assessment Survey 2011 & and Justice 28 Tables Baseline Survey 2007 76 3.8. Conclusions 30 Acronyms 80 4 FINDINGS ON GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE (GBV) Endnotes 84 4.1. Introduction 32 4.2. Community Response to Wife Beating and Rape 33 4.3. Focus Group Discussion Findings on GBV 35 4.4. Conclusions 37 5 FINDINGS ON FEMALE Genital Mutilation (FGM) 5.1. Introduction 39 5.2. Community Awareness and Response to Relevant Law(s) 39 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY KEY FINDINGS ON HUMAN RIGHTS, JUSTICE AND INJUSTICE A full impact assessment of the Accessing Justice The survey revealed a good number of achievements, Programme in Rural Sierra Leone was carried out in challenges and lessons learned on which further February 2011 in two separate regional operations in the programming is being built. As regards to the concepts northern and the southern areas of the country. In total, of ‘human rights’, ‘justice’ and ‘injustice’, people’s 1288 respondents were interviewed in eight survey areas knowledge and understanding have clearly improved with the use of a semi-structured questionnaire. Nine over the past few years. Respondents’ understanding open interviews were held with programme and field staff of ‘human rights’ has narrowed down compared to the of the five coalition partners of the Special Programme answers provided during the 2007 Baseline Survey. A on Africa (SPA). Nine focus group discussions were similar dynamic is visible with the concepts of ‘justice’; conducted with specific groups of authorities, including which was referred to by many respondents as a ‘fair traditional practitioners (Soweis), chiefs, police and administration of justice’ as well as the ‘availability of local court staff. 48 male and female enumerators were mechanisms to seek justice’. Participation levels in the selected and trained in two batches and subsequently operational areas are high, and a significant percentage deployed in the eight selected survey areas to administer of the respondents (80%) indicated to be aware of the the questionnaire.1 A local consultant facilitated all open human rights organisations operating in their midst. interviews and focus group discussions. The results were A high number of respondents (77%) attribute their measured against the data generated by a Baseline Survey enhanced understanding of human rights to the NGOs initiated by the programme in 2007. or the human rights committees attached to these This assessment survey aims to measure the organisations.2 outcomes of the strategies and activities implemented People’s responses to abuse and injustices in the course of the four-year programme. Secondly, the seem to have improved too. Taboos around challenging impact assessment aims to contribute to accountability authorities have crumbled, and court hearings or and transparency to the various stakeholders, which miscarriages of justice are openly discussed during includes beneficiary communities, coalition partners, the community meetings. These critical open discussions donor, and Amnesty International/SPA. are often facilitated by the human rights organisations and their community based volunteers. The availability The Accessing Justice Programme in Sierra Leone started of these trained human rights workers has probably made in 2007 after a coalition of (initially) six organisations the biggest difference in empowering individuals to not was formed and funded for a period of four years (2007 only discuss injustice, but to proactively seek and claim – 2010) by the Human Dignity Foundation (HDF). The justice. Human rights committee members are widely programme’s focus was primarily on enhancing people’s seen as ‘knowledgeable about the law’ and a means of ability to seek and claim justice within the local justice seeing justice done. Committee members have identified mechanisms at community levels. The emphasis was on cases themselves, but have also been approached by rural communities in general and on women and girls in people seeking support in challenging abuse or injustice. particular, because of their subordinated position, their lack of equality before the law and the high levels of sexual and domestic violence. 7 Treatment OF WOMEN BY AND BEFORE THE law significantly over the programme’s lifetime. Moreover, The vast majority of the respondents claimed that women responses from both the questionnaire and the focus were now more equally treated before the law. Gender group discussions indicated that people’s standards rights were seen as much wider recognized, while more are in fact changing; violence against women is more women were said to actively participate in community commonly perceived as a crime that should be followed meetings. Although these responses are (overwhelmingly) by appropriate action. Traditional and formal authorities positive, the extent to which an improvement in women’s alike indicated that their communities no longer saw ‘wife position has realistically taken place is difficult to battery’ as a cultural or traditional norm that should be determine. The barriers for women to access justice are condoned. Law enforcement in the various survey areas numerous, and culturally ingrained attitudes towards stated that people are more proactive in responding to women do not change overnight. Some attributions to this domestic violence. Wife beating was now more frequently response could be based on a number of individual cases reported than before, often by friends, neighbours or where human rights organisations successfully challenged relatives. Whether this indicates that domestic violence unjust court proceedings involving female claimants. is either declining or possibly more hidden, is not clear. Moreover,