MAPPING STUDY The Role of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in Security Sector Governance and Reform FINAL REPORT Geneva, 20 December 2013 Prepared by the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF) at the request of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs and with the support of the OSCE Secretary General About This Report This report summarizes the key findings of a project entitled “The Role of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in Security Sector Governance and Reform”, mandated by the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs with the support of the OSCE Secretary General. It consists of a mapping and comprehensive review of the OSCE’s role in supporting security sector governance and reform (SSG/R) at both normative and operational levels, and uses desk-based research complemented by interviews with over 170 interlocutors, including representatives of the OSCE Secretariat, institutions and field operations, national counterparts and members of the international community in four selected field contexts: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kyrgyzstan, Serbia and Tajikistan. Acknowledgements DCAF extends its gratitude to all those who have contributed to the project – in particular, the OSCE officials, experts, national counterparts and representatives of the international community who agreed to be interviewed for this study (please see the full list of interviewees in Annex 3). Also, DCAF is most grateful to the following officials of the OSCE Secretariat, external experts and representatives of the Swiss delegation to the OSCE who provided comments and/or participated in a workshop to review the draft report in December 2012: John Crosby, Fabian Grass, Thomas Greminger, Hans Georg Lüber, Lars-Erik Lundin, Alexey Lyzhenkov, Claus Neukirch, Marcel Pesko, Pierre von Arx and Wolfgang Zellner. DCAF is also grateful to those who provided comments and/or participated in the workshop to review the final draft study in October 2013: Snjezana Bokulic, Aimee Louise Comrie, Simon Deignan, Thomas Greminger, Claus Neukirch, Lukas Schifferle, Fred Tanner, Friederike Wuenschmann, Yurdakul Yigitguden and Wolfgang Zellner. The views expressed in this report do not in any way represent the views of either the institutions or their representatives involved in this project. DCAF Project Team Project supervision: Heiner Hänggi ([email protected]) Project management/lead author: Vincenza Scherrer ([email protected]) Research assistance: Isaline Thorens, Stephan Nunner (phase I), Christian Wägli (phase II) Field research: Vincenza Scherrer (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kyrgyzstan, Serbia, Tajikistan); Eden Cole (Kyrgyzstan); Isaline Thorens (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia); Christian Wägli (Tajikistan). Copyright © 2013 by the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces CONTENTS I INTRODUCTION 1 II CONCEPTS AND METHODS 4 III MAPPING OVERVIEW 9 Normative Roles of the OSCE in SSG/R 9 Operational Roles of the OSCE in SSG/R 13 Secretariat 13 Institutions 16 Field Operations 19 IV COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW 23 The OSCE’s de Facto Approach to SSG/R Support 23 Strategic Level 23 Thematic Level 27 Programmatic Level 36 Lessons Identified from OSCE Experience in SSG/R Support 40 1. Develop an Overarching Framework for SSG/R Support 41 2. Adopt a Cross-Dimensional Approach to SSG/R Support 42 3. Identify and Build on the OSCE’s Comparative Advantages 44 4. Enhance a Sustainable Approach to SSG/R Support 48 5. Increase Cross-Dimensional Engagement with Civil Society 49 6. Delineate Roles and Responsibilities in SSG/R Support 51 7. Enhance Effective Coordination in SSG/R Support 54 8. Adapt SSG/R Support to Available Human Resources 55 9. Adapt SSG/R Support to Available Financial Resources 57 10. Strengthen Monitoring and Evaluation of SSG/R Support 58 V CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 60 Conclusion 60 Recommendations 63 General Recommendations for the OSCE 64 Strategic-Level Recommendations on SSG/R 65 Operational-Level Recommendations on SSG/R 67 ANNEXES 71 A.1 Mapping Overview Tables 71 A.2 Comprehensive Review Tables 74 A.3 List of Interviewees 79 ACRONYMS ATU Action against Terrorism Unit BiH Bosnia and Herzegovina BMSC Border Management Staff College CPC Conflict Prevention Centre CSCE Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe CSO Civil Society Organization DCAF Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces DD Democratization Department DDR Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid EU European Union FSC Forum for Security Co-operation HCNM High Commissioner on National Minorities HRD Human Rights Department ICT Information and Communication Technology LGBT Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MC Ministerial Council MoU Memorandum of Understanding MP Member of Parliament NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization NSP National Security Policy OCEEA Office of the Co-ordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities ODIHR Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights OECD DAC Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Development Assistance Committee OSCE Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe OSG Office of the Secretary General OSR/CTHB (SRC/THB) Office of the Special Representative and Co-ordinator for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings P2P Peer to Peer PA Parliamentary Assembly PC Permanent Council PESU Programming and Evaluation Support Unit POLIS OSCE's Online Information System on Law Enforcement Activities within the OSCE Area SALW Small Arms and Light Weapons SPMU Strategic Police Matters Unit SSG Security Sector Governance SSG/R Security Sector Governance and Reform SSR Security Sector Reform TND Tolerance and Non-Discrimination Department TNT Transnational Threats Department ToR Terms of Reference UN United Nations UNODC UN Office on Drugs and Crime UNSC United Nations Security Council VERLT Violent Extremism and Radicalization that Lead to Terrorism PART I: INTRODUCTION Security sector governance (SSG) and security sector reform (SSR)1 are increasingly recognized by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and its participating States as playing an essential role in peacebuilding, conflict prevention, early warning and crisis management.2 It has been noted that the OSCE’s comprehensive and multidimensional approach to security can add value to efforts in the area of SSG.3 At the normative level, security sector governance and reform (SSG/R) concerns are reflected in many of the principles and concepts developed by the OSCE.4 At the operational level, the OSCE is actively engaged in supporting SSG/R activities through its Secretariat, institutions and field operations. The 2007 OSCE Spanish Chairmanship’s perception paper on this subject notes that the OSCE has over 30 years of “extensive practical involvement in security sector reform/governance, in particular in relation to activities such as democratic control of armed forces, confidence- and security-building measures, border security and management, counter-terrorism, combating trafficking, police training and reform, anti-corruption, electoral legislation and judiciary reform and the rule of law”.5 Moreover, in terms of its operational support, it has been noted that “the OSCE’s added value to international operations is its work in the areas of security sector reform and its role in the stabilisation and democratic processes in transition countries”.6 While the OSCE has a wealth of experience in this domain, activities are not implemented as part of a common and coordinated approach to SSG/R. Concerns have been raised that the lack of a coherent approach has limited the effectiveness of its assistance “in both scope and impact”.7 Strong calls have emerged from the OSCE Secretariat, institutions and field levels to develop such an approach. For example, the annual reports of the Secretary General on police-related activities have twice called for coherence in the OSCE approach to SSG/R, notably to “link together the operational elements of the Organization in order to guide the formulation of OSCE mission mandates, present a clear statement of purpose in association with existing ones and distinguish between the activities of the OSCE and its international 1 The concepts of SSG and SSR are defined in Part II of this report. 2 OSCE-MC, “Chairmanship’s Perception Paper on OSCE Basic Norms and Principles in the Field of Security Sector Governance/Reform”, OSCE Ministerial Council, Madrid, 30 November 2007, MC.GAL/9/07, www.osce.org/mc/29386. 3 See for example OSCE-MC, “Statement by H.E. Mr. Petras Vaitiekünas, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Lithuania, at the 14th OSCE Ministerial Council”, OSCE, Brussels, 4–5 December 2006. 4 For example, among others: CSCE-FSC, “Code of Conduct on Politico-Military Aspects of Security”, 3 December 1994, DOC.FSC/1/95; CSCE Conference on the Human Dimension, “Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE”, 29 June 1990, www.osce.org/odihr/elections/14304; OSCE-MC, “Border Security and Management Concept”, 6 December 2005, MC.DOC/2/05. 5 OSCE-MC, note 2 above. 6 OSCE Mission to Serbia and Montenegro, “Police Reform in Serbia. Towards the Creation of a Modern and Accountable Police Service”, OSCE Mission to Serbia and Montenegro Law Enforcement Department, Belgrade, January 2004, p. 35, www.osce.org/serbia/18310. 7 Victor-Yves Ghebali, “The OSCE’s SSG/R Operational Activities: A Piecemeal Approach