PHA-Exch> Food for a governing thought

[Claudio Schuftan]

Human Rights Reader 183



*CLARIFYING THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT IS AT
THE CENTER OF THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN CLAIM HOLDERS AND DUTY BEARERS. ***



1. Since most scholarly articles on human rights (HR) fall, without making
much of a sound either in the academic forest or in the real world, actively
establishing HR responsibilities and forcefully demanding HR accountability
remains the most promising avenue for the realization (respect, protection
and fulfillment) of HR.



2. To succeed in this, we first need to make clear which level(s) of
government is (are) responsible for the given function impinging on a
certain HR (of course, acknowledging that there are overlapping
responsibilities between the local and central levels). Clarifying the
responsibility of the different levels, particularly on the spending side,
is thus at the center of a policy dialogue between claim holders and duty
bearers. This is needed because, in most cases, the decision-making
authority has become remote from citizens' local concerns.



3. At the local level, claim holders find the local tier of administration
that acts on behalf of the center. (Traditionally, local authorities depend
on the center to make financing available through transfers that too often
already come earmarked for particular central objectives). This does not
mean that this level of administrative duty bearers cannot be held
responsible for outcomes (even while realizing that they themselves may be
claim holders to central level duty bearers). Claims-holding-beneficiaries
need to be aware of incomplete decentralization processes and thus be aware
of still overlapping/poorly-defined responsibilities (and/or the default on
the same) --both situations with well known HR consequences.



4. Under such a scenario, access to local-own-resources-revenue is thus
critical, coming from, for example, progressive local taxation (on property,
for instance); the latter can be used in the generation of this
local-own-revenue. The possibility to generate additional local
own-sources-revenue also provides opportunities for community representative
to *participate in local governance.*

[Participatory governance is a powerful engine to act as a 'political
kindergarten' for citizens by nurturing in them a sense of agency in an
open, direct-democracy process that fosters and protects HR. (As Amartya Sen
has said: Countries should not become fit *for* democracy, but become fit *
through* democracy)].



5. What is poorly understood is that the point in the HR framework is not
about better 'managing', but about 'governing' differently, because the
latter not only encompasses the *function of managing, but also locates it
in the larger political context. *

[Therefore, HR issues have to be brought close enough to the citizens
(through HR learning) in a way that assures more democratic solutions to
reverse current HR violations].



6. The use of claim holders/duty bearers contractual arrangements or
memoranda of understanding:

·        for the delivery of certain outcomes that redress existing HR
violations,

·        that give claim holders more direct responsibilities over the
budgeting    process and over policy decision and outcomes,

has come to be known as 'directed performance budgeting'. These
results-based, participatory budgets allow for a more accountable political
framework by clarifying HR outcomes for which duty bearing agencies will set
aside a budget line and will thus be held accountable; such a process also
puts a premium on transparency in the use of public funds, provided that
outcomes are properly and regularly monitored by the organized
beneficiaries.



7. Most local governments are unfortunately at a disadvantage in this
context, because both their resources and their capabilities are generally
limited; more so if we are talking about HR...   Moreover, another risk,
even at local level, is that rarely is the voice of the poorest heard at the
same decibel level or with the same sense of priority as that of the *
wealthier.*

[This can explain why the poorest sometimes simplistically prefer a
benevolent, populist dictator to a dysfunctional democratic government…].



Claudio Schuftan, Ho Chi Minh City

cschuftan at phmovement.org

[All Readers can be found in www.humaninfo.org/aviva   under
No.69<http://www.humaninfo.org/aviva%20%20under%20No.69>
]

Adapted from F+D, 44:3, September 2007.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://phm.phmovement.org/pipermail/phm-exchange-phmovement.org/attachments/20080120/b28e4f97/attachment-0001.html>