In 2008, Defence for Children International-Palestine (DCI-Palestine) was part of a coalition of 14 Palestinian, Israeli and international NGOs collected together under the banner 'United Against Torture'. The coalition was an EU funded three year project (2006-2008) designed to combat the use of torture in Israel and Palestine. In the final year of the project, the coalition submitted a shadow report to the UN Committee Against Torture. Since that time, DCI-Palestine has submitted two further shadow reports:

• To the UN Human Rights Committee under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (July 2009)
• To the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (OPAC) (July 2009)

What are shadow reports?

A  'shadow report' and an  'alternative report' are one and the same thing. A state that has ratified a UN human rights treaty or convention, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the Convention Against Torture (CAT) or the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), amongst others, is typically obliged to submit a report to the treaty monitoring body charged with reviewing compliance with that particular treaty (i.e. the Committee on the Rights of the Child, the Committee Against Torture and the Human Rights Committee in the case of the ICCPR). This first report is called the Initial Report. After submitting an Initial Report, each State Party is required to submit Period Reports to the relevant committee, typically every four years, although some states are late in their submissions.

State Periodic Reports are published on the webpage of the relevant committee and relevant actors, such as NGOs, can respond by submitting their own report, known as a Shadow Report or an Alternative Report. At a later stage, the relevant treaty monitoring committee, which is usually made up of around 10 or more experts in the area, will reveiw each country that has submitted a Periodic Report for compliance with the relevant treaty and then will publish Concluding Observations, pointing out both the good and the bad, and making recommendations. The committees use the shadow reports to help inform them during this review process.

Why submit a shadow report?

There are a number of reasons, here are just some:

• It is a good opportunity to review and analyse all the evidence collected over the past four years. If you are working in a coalition, this process can reveal trends and a bigger picture.
• The process provides you with an international forum where you can raise your concerns.
• It enables NGOs and others to present another side of the story to the committee than the one presented by the State Party.
• The shadow report can be used in other advocacy work, and with a little editing can be turned into an annual report for the NGO.
• The resulting Concluding Observations issued by the committee can be very useful in subsequent advocacy work.
• In some cases, the whole process can help to bring about change in the behaviour of the State Party - sometimes!

DCI-Palestine's recent shadow reports are online at:

• ICCPR - http://www.dci-pal.org/english/display.cfm?DocId=1201&CategoryId=1
• OPAC - http://www.dci-pal.org/english/display.cfm?DocId=1195&CategoryId=2
• CAT - http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cat/docs/ngos/UAT_Israel42_1.pdf

I think the benefits of using shadow reports far outweigh any drawbacks. Here are just some of the strengths and weaknesses.

Strengths

• It focuses your advocacy within an international legal framework.
• A UN committee may take up your recommendations in its Concluding Observations, which can be useful in further advocacy.
• Publicity
• You can adapt the shadow report into another format, such as an annual report. This, in effect, gives you two reports for the effort of one.
• The process forces you to review and analyse all the material you have collected over the last four years. This can highlight further strengths and weaknesses in your work.
• The process presents a good opportunity to work in coalition with other organisations.

Weaknesses

• Perhaps not a weakness, but preparing a good shadow report is labour intensive.

Illustrations

Here are examples of where shadow reports have been adapted into a more reader friendly annual report format, and where a UN committee's Concluding Observations were used in other advocacy:

• UAT Shadow Report to CAT adapted into an annual report (2008)- http://www.unitedagainsttorture.org/assets/uat-%20english%20part%20(2).pdf
• DCI-Palestine's Child Prisoners Report (June 2009) - pages 94-96 - http://www.dci-pal.org/english/publ/display.cfm?DocId=1166&CategoryId=8

In most cases, members of the civil society and non governmental organisations do not submit shadow reports to get attention or cooperate among themselves, but they do it to show the real picture of the matters in hand.   Using a small example, In July 2007, the African Union (AU) summit dorected its executive council to submit a report of five years that the AU was in existence. They highlighted achievements of the continental organisation during that period, but as an inhouse work the report failed to give the views of ordinary Africans citizens.

In January 2008, Fahamu and some other members of the African civil society issued a parallel report, which was called "Peoples' audit of the African Union". This peoples' voice helped to explain the need of two sides of a same story given by different parties with different interests.

Governments usually like to show how they have tried to comply with the international treaties and conventions (avoiding contegious points). The civil society comes in to show the public the "lies" included in official reports of governments. And as others have said, it creates a basis for advocacy.

Yves Niyiragira

Lisa Myers, Coordinator of NGO group for the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Switzerland

There are lots of reasons to create and use a shadow report. It provides information on what has been done since the last report was submitted (i.e. has the State party followed up the previous concluding observations). It also provides a periodic analysis of the issues covered by the convention and it is an opportunity for NGOs to get together and take stock of the situation. It also provides a different perspective to the State party one. Even if the latter is self-critical, it is hard for it to know how its programmes, laws and policies are affecting the individuals covered by the convention. In the case of the CRC, the Committee has come to expect shadow reports prepared by a coaltion of NGOs. They use the reports both for their concluding observations and questions to the State party.

It is also a report that can be used at national level to raise awareness about certain issues and look at ways to address them. In quite a few cases, NGOs have used it to introduce the treaty to other NGOs so that they start having more of a rights-based approach in their work. In quite a few cases, NGOs have found it particularly helpful as a way to coordinate their work and advocate for changes at national level.

• What are ‘shadow
  reports’?  Is there a difference between ‘shadow reports’ and
  ‘alternative reports’?

IWRAW Asia
Pacific an international organisation based in Malaysia that works for the
realisation the human rights of women using the framework of the CEDAW
Convention since 1993.In particular, IWRAW Asia Pacific works through the “From
Global to Local” programme to facilitate women’s participation in the CEDAW
review of their States. The aim of the programme is to facilitate the bringing
of women’s realities at the local level to inform international processes, so
that international standards that are useful and reflective of national issues
can be used and brought back home by women’s groups.

Shadow
reports are written by NGOs to feed information on the state of implementation
of treaty obligations in a specific country from the perspective of civil
society. In most cases, shadow reports are written by NGO’s with
access to or in direct response to the content of the State report submitted to
the CEDAW Committee.  In that sense,
NGOs are ‘shadowing’ the State report as they are providing an analysis and
critique of the State report. 

In situations where NGOs do not have access to the State
report (e.g. either because their State has not written one or the report is
submitted very late), NGOs can still write alternative reports. An alternative
report would not have an analysis of the State report, but will still have
information on issues critical for women and making recommendations to the
Committee on measures which the State can take to address those concerns. It
should be noted that the Committee has in fact started the practice of
reviewing States even in absence of a State report (as in the case of Dominica
at the 43rd CEDAW session). NGO alternative reports in such
situations are absolutely critical in providing the Committee with contextualised
information that would be useful in the review of the State.

·        
How was
the decision made to use shadow reports? How does this tactic fit into your
overall strategy?

In our
experience working with women’s groups/activists at the national level, the
decision to use shadow reports comes from a recognition that CEDAW (as a legal
instrument and a monitoring and review process) is a way for various women’s
human rights /interest groups to get their agenda for change into the
government agenda. In this sense it is important to see that the CEDAW review
process is about state obligation, and about drawing accountability from the
State. The CEDAW review process is a legitimate space for NGOs to hold their
states accountable to what the State has agreed to implement as part of their
obligations under CEDAW. Shadow reports are the natural response when they have
recognised the relevance of the CEDAW review process, i.e. feeding information
to the international monitoring body to influence state actions at the national
level.

In
our work with national groups we continue to emphasise that NGOs play a crucial
role in alerting States to their obligations, collaborating with States on
their programmes where NGOs are better placed to forge links with communities
and households, developing alternative models to State models of intervention,
and monitoring State activities and their impact. Importantly, NGOs can serve
as a facilitating link with communities and individuals, and feed information
to and from State institutions to citizens.

NGOs
become particularly vital centres of advocacy around women's interests and
rights given State resistance to implementing change. This may arise in
different contexts from a combination of factors: the ideology of governing
parties or rulers, the resources that a State has and how it chooses to
distribute them, the people who staff state institutions and their biases and
prejudices, their distance from communities and field realities, the size of
implementing agencies and so on. NGOs offer a viable organisational alternative,
particularly where they may be smaller in size, and located within communities.
NGOs, particularly where staffed or influenced strongly by feminist agendas,
can play a particularly effective role in addressing issues of women's rights
and empowerment at local levels, and feeding insights from the field into
national and international advocacy.

NGO
interventions and advocacy in relation to specific processes of the CEDAW
Convention can have several spin-off effects. At the international level, NGO involvement
in the CEDAW Convention reporting process can help to feed important
information to other bodies of the UN and ultimately influence international
processes, policies and programmes. It can also work its influence
domestically, where it helps to bring NGOs together to discuss important
aspects of State action, emphasise collaborative work in expanding ideas and
activism around rights, create greater media awareness, and ensure that state
interventions are being monitored and assessed for effectiveness. NGOs can also
publicise State reports and the Concluding Observations of the CEDAW Committee
to a wider national audience, where States may avoid doing so. At the local
level, discussions around concepts and practice of women's rights can provide a
very sound basis for influencing policy and creating spaces for change.

• What is the goal of your use of
  shadow reports?

Our
observation is that national level activists are using the shadow report
process as a way to enhance national level processes for women’s rights
advocacy. It becomes a natural strategising point and locus of activity which
draws a strong response from governments (either from the shame factor or the
international limelight it gives to specific government actors). The information
in shadow reports that have been sent to an international body also gain a
certain level of credibility at the local level.

• For example, to engage the
  media, to attract international attention and pressure, to strengthen
  collaboration among human rights NGOs, etc.

From
our observation, getting the interest of the (international) media and
opportunity to highlight the local context is one major advantage of the shadow
report and the CEDAW review process. NGOs have also collaborated with the local
media to highlight the State’s performance at the international arena which allows
for stronger scrutiny of State action at the national level. In addition, coordination of efforts in preparation and writing of the shadow report makes
advocacy more effective as it will represent the voices of large numbers of
women. NGOs will have a larger base for advocacy at home after the review.

·        
What are
the strengths and weaknesses of creating and using shadow reports for advocacy?

Again, based on our observation of national level
experience , a good process (i.e. one that is inclusive, consensus building, and
representative of a wide range of issues and groups) is very time and resource
intensive. It takes a lot to coordinate the report. Good evidence-based,
comprehensive , shadow reports should be developed on a research/information
gathering frame that is based on a CEDAW compliant framework – this is an
extremely difficult task especially in most cases we see national groups are
mainly issue based. Coordination and making a cohesive national shadow report
is quite a big task for a lot of groups.

• What must be assessed before
  implementing this activity? What resources are required? What are the
  risks?

Groups
need to consider how the shadow report process/CEDAW reporting process will be
useful to add value to their current issue/strategies on women's human rights.

Groups
need to consider the time and national level priorities (will it diffuse their
national efforts by focusing on international processes if they do not see
clearly how a shadow report can help strengthen their work).

Raising
money to fund the process is another issue to note, in terms of which donors to
go to, who will hold the funds, accountability issues in terms of the funds
raised, etc.

Finding
resource people to building capacity on CEDAW and on writing shadow/alternative
reports, is very critical.

There
must be an interest and ability to mobilise larger support for their CEDAW
advocacy with other groups.

IWRAW Asia Pacific
No 80B Jalan Bangsar
Kuala Lumpur
59200 Kuala Lumpur
Malaysia
iwraw-ap [at] iwraw-ap [dot] org; iwraw_ap [at] yahoo [dot] com
Tel: 603- 22822255
Fax: 603 22832552

Lisa Myers, member of NGO group for the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Switzerland

For the CRC, NGOs generally prepare alternative reports rather than shadow reports, as they include information on the follow-up to previous recommendations, comments on the State party report and an analysis of the current situation of child rights in the country. They are also generally prepared by national coalitions of NGOs, so they are more representative and comprehensive.

The process of data collection determines the validity and acceptablitiy of a shadow report. For the data to have any kind of authenticity it must be thoroughly cross check and should involved various parties beyond the organisation submitting the report. Let me share with you the process that i was involved in with the Foundation for Human Rights initiative (FHRI), a human rights NGO in Kampala, Uganda.

The organisation made a decision, way before i joined it, to apply for an obsever status with the UN CAT. This was followed by a deliberatly slow and focussed process of collecting information on the subject of torture. This was done over a period of over a year. During which time, various organisations, media houses and governmnet officials where contacted to provide information. The information provided was crosschecked to ensure authenticity.

Shadow reports are shadow reports as the name clearly states. They are not originating reports themselves but reprts that are premised upon the offical report. A shadow report or alternative report is a shadow of  or an alternative to the ffical report. We then had to not only obtain in time, but also keep a close watch over the process of writing the offical communication. This was a challange as govermment institutions tend to play with thier cards close to their chest. At times it required peronal realtionships to obtian information.

This inlcudes making sure that the copy of the report submitted by the government is the correct copy that you have in your possession (the only blip was when the officals of FHRI showed up to present a sshadow report to the African Comission on Human and People's Rights, they were served wit ha new report by the govenment team - this was a real challange and my collegues who were in the Gambia had to go into some kind of panic mode to be able to cope. Thankfully they did)  But that demonstrates the importance of keeping tab with the government department in charge of traty reporting - in Uganda's case the minisitry of Foreign affairs.

But once the report is collected, it is important to validate them through some kind of workshop. In our case we used a virtual office - online validation. The report was shared with many partners to ensure correctness.

Becasue FHRI is not a nationwide NGO, it had to rely very heavily on other organisations and media houses for information. Additionally, a collaboration with Human Rights Watch. This collaboration gave thereport some kind of international dimension and forced government to look at it a little more seriously. It also helped to bring some expertise int he report in terms of writing style.

This worked very well and the recommendations of the committee such as the Amendment to the Prisons Act were done. Many of the recomendations still remain unimplemented but there us great momentum towards having them dealt with,

Ineed to emphsise though that i do not work for FHRI anymore.

Gerard Horton, of the Defence for Children International - Palestine Section

As part of a coalition of 14 Palestinian and Israeli NGOs, DCI-Palestine submitted a shadow report to CAT in September 2008. In this instance, working in a coalition made good strategic sense:

Strengths

• The coalition did a good deal of advocacy work in Geneva during the Committee's review of Israel's Fourth Periodic Report. The review of Israel is always politically charged. It was very helpful to be able to go into a room and be able to say that the report was produced by both Palestinian and Israeli organisations. In some instances, you could actually see relief on the faces of the audience.
• Similar to the point above, the coalition did quite alot of lobbying work with the diplomatic missions in Tel-Aviv, including a number of EU briefings. Being part of a coalition in these circumstances was a strength. Further, the process raised the profile of the active members of the coalition which continues to this day.
• The shadow report required some detailed information about Israeli military orders in the West Bank as well as Israeli domestic legislation. No single organisation had the necessary expertise over all the topics, but the coalition did.

Weaknesses

• Coalitions require work, particularly in this region. A significant amount of time was taken up with reaching consensus and agreement on the particular words used and the way arguments should be put. Different organisations have very strong views about what terminology should be used (e.g. Israeli Defence Force (IDF), Israeli Occupying Force (IOF) or the Israeli army (neutral)).

The benefits reaped from the coalition were definitely worth the extra effort, but is was extremely labour intensive. Some obvious advice is to do a little homework on your proposed partners before entering into a coalition - check to see if your approach, style, positions and terminology are broadly consistent.

The shadow report DCI-Palestine submitted to the HRC in July of this year,  was not done in coalition. This was a tactical decision based on the fact that we did not wish to dilute the focus which was on the right to life and detention and ill-treatment of children in detention for which we did not require additional technical expertise from outside sources.

Gerard Horton, of the Defence for Children International - Palestine Section

I thought I would share some experiences from my involvement in drafting shadow reports to CAT and the HRC under the ICCPR from an evidentiary point of view.

In both reports, the allegations we were making were extremely serious, namely that Palestinian children were being routinely ill-treated and in some cases, tortured. My background is as a lawyer, and my training has taught me that such serious allegations must be supported by the evidence - you can't just make these allegations without reasonable proof.

Based on the above, we drafted the reports on the basis that every serious allegation had to be supported by a number of sworn affidavits. Further, each allegation was also referenced to other reports prepared by Israeli, Palestinian and International NGOs supporting the allegations.

So, for example, one of the allegations was that detainees were regularly subjected to position abuse, being handcuffed and shackled to a small chair that was placed on an angle for hours on end, causing extreme pain to the legs, arms and back. This allegation was footnoted to a report prepared by an Israeli NGO that had investigated this violation, and also referenced to a number of sworn affidavits which were contained in an annexure to the report and filed with the Committee.

In the end, our shadow report to CAT was 50 pages long (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cat/docs/ngos/UAT_Israel42_1.pdf) with an annexure (Annexure A) containing the evidence which was 81 pages long. For ease of reference, each case was briefly summarised in the index to Annexure A - see http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cat/docs/ngos/UAT_Israel42_Annex1.pdf

In its Concluding Observations, the Committee dealt with all of DCI's concerns quite possibly because all of the allegations were thoroughly documented in evidence before the Committee.

I hope Paul Mageean will not mind that I am highlighting some key points that he shared in his tactical notebook, International Monitoring Bodies:Powerful tools for leveraging local change and others have raised during the dialogue.

"While the detail of various mechanisms differs, many of the basic techniques are the same, particularly when one is dealing with the UN system. One key lesson remains at the heart of our work: internationalising a human rights problem, particularly in a society in conflict, helps to resolve it."

"The content of [the Committee on the Adminstration of Justice] submissions, the impact on the government, the relatively easy access to Geneva we had may not always be replicated elsewhere, but the logistical approach may. Certain factors—documenting and writing the submission, submitting it, holding briefings, developing a media strategy, working with international NGOs—all appear to be common aspects of this tactic whether in Northern Ireland or elsewhere."

In regard to these last factors, Paul made some recommendations that organizations consider to help maximize their own useof  this tactic. A number of these points have been raised and quite wonderfully elaborated upon by others during the course of this dialogue. I thought these points are well worth stressing once more and providing the reasoning provided from CAJ's experience. [Note: the following information is taken directly from pages 14-16 of the tactical notebook]

PLAN ON A LONG-TERM INVESTMENT - This tactic will take time to work. It is unlikely that submitting to the Committee and attending it once will have the desired impact. To be successful, it is likely that it will take at least two hearings, so those considering using this tactic need to think in terms of years of commitment. It is also a good idea if the same staff person could undertake this work and build up personal relationships with Committee members and the secretary to the Committee. There may be budgetary considerations connected to making submissions, but most particularly connected to actually sending someone to Geneva. This person need not be a lawyer, but certainly should be someone who will be at ease with any technical legal issues that arise, because Committee members will often ask for detailed legal information about the domestic system.

INCREASE DIALOGUE WITH GOVERNMENT - One thing we would do differently would be to try to increase the dialogue we had with government in the gaps between hearings of the Committee. We have done this in our work with other UN Committees since, and it has improved our standing when we appear in Geneva. We have, for instance, asked to meet with government officials to discuss their response to various Committee recommendations and also the extent to which they are going to disseminate them to the relevant government agencies. This helps to track the extent to which the government is complying with Committee recommendations. The fact that the government knows we are going to interact with the Committee at the next hearing generally means that we are going to get a reasonable hearing from them.

USE THE MEDIA - In countries that are more immune to such criticism, the tactic may have less impact. However, the key is to realise that no state likes to face criticism at the UN. I have seen states go to extraordinary lengths to avoid such criticism or to limit it. This has included states that might be considered serious human rights abusers and that might be thought to pay little attention to the UN, particularly its human rights arm. However, states are aware of their international image, and effective NGOs working the UN system can wield significant power. It is likely that in other countries human rights activists will be placing themselves in considerable danger by even trying to engage with the Committee Against Torture. This is a serious concern when considering using this tactic.

ESTABLISH A GOOD WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH AN INTERNATIONAL NGO - Establishing a good working relationship with an international NGO that has consultative status at the United Nations or knowledge and experience working with the body that has jurisdiction over your issue is essential. The relationship facilitates access to the buildings (including booking rooms for briefings and so on) the Committee and other types of hearings. Just as importantly, it will afford the local NGO access to the expertise of the international organisation in terms of the actual workings of the Committee or other international body and potential increased credibility.

Nancy Pearson, New Tactics in Human Rights Program Manager

Paul Mageean, Director of Studies of the Graduate School for Professional Legal Education, University of Ulster, UK (Author of New Tactics Tactical Notebook, International Monitoring Bodies)

In many respects I think that much of the most important work in relation to shadow reports takes place after the concluding observations have been published.   I would be hesitant about entering into a dialogue with the state prior to submission of the shadow report but I think such a dialogue at the end of the process can be very useful.  For instance what we did in Northern Ireland following publication of concluding observations was to use those in lobbying MPs, political parties, and the government itself.  With regards to the government it was useful to remind them that if they did nothing in response to critical comments from the relevant Committee, the criticism was likely to become more acute at the next hearing.  It was of course also constructive to point out to them that positive action on their part to address issues of concern raised by the Committee would likely result in a less critical report next time around.

This I think leads to another important point which is that NGOs should view this work as long-term because the full impact is often not seen until at least two reporting cycles have been completed.  This demands considerable resources but from our point of view it was worth it because it impacted significantly on the human rights situation on the ground and also raised our profile significantly.

It is also important to think strategically about the use of the media in conjunction with the work on shadow reports.  In our experience it was worth selecting and cultivating one or two serious journalists on what was happening and keeping them informed about the process.

 In terms of participation at a hearing, the experience differed according to the different Committees.  The important thing is to develop a relationship with the Committee secretary.  They will be able to advise on a whole range of practical issues such as this. 

Greetings,

 I would like to share an example of how shadow reports can advocate an issue outside of the traditional practice of submitting the report to UN committees. I recently wrote my undergraduate thesis on advocacy tactics employed by torture treatment centers. My research took me to CVT in Minnesota, USA, the Berlin Treatment Center for Torture Victims in Germany and the Independent Medico Legal Unit (IMLU) in Nairobi, Kenya. IMLU had recently published a shadow report to the Committee Against Torture in response to Kenya's country report. 

IMLU's shadow report proved to be one of the most valuable resource tools available to me. The document gave responses to each of Kenya's claims and challenged many of the state's assertions article by article. The information-dense report provided a clear and concise picture of the status of torture in Kenya. The report helped me understand the gravity of the situation and the indifference of the government. The collection of detailed case studies and examples of state abuse were invaluable to my understanding of the issue.

I believe shadow reports are not only useful for drawing international attention to the state's behavior, but also by educating the public. Kenyans are able to educate themselves by reading this accessible report. The availability of the report provides a credible voice that can counter the narrative of the Kenyan government. If shadow reports are accessible, both in terms of physical access and language, they can be tools in recruiting civil society to the particular issue. 

In this particular case, IMLU's shadow report provided me with a critical tool for my research. Shadow reports can also go a long way in recruiting young academics to dedicating their careers to human rights.  

Lisa Myers, Coordinator of NGO group for the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Switzerland

 Each treaty body has a different process for NGOs. Some have a joint meeting for all NGOs for all the countries being examined, others only have meetings during the lunch breaks and others have pre-sessions. The treaty body with the most time for NGOs is the CRC. They have a 3 hour meeting per country for non-governmental actors (including Unicef, Ombusdspersons, etc). These are private and confidential meetings (to ensure an open discussion and ensure that NGOs and other organisations feel safe to talk freely) and are based on invitation only. To attend, NGOs need to submit a comprehensive report on the CRC or its two Optional Protocols, ideally produced by a coalition of child rights NGOs. Requests for participation are sent to the Committee via the NGO Group for the CRC. If the Committee secretariat issues an invitation, the NGO Group then facilitates the process for the national NGOs, so that they can effectively engage in the process.  

Using Shadow
Reports For Advocacy

Shadow
reports are a critical advocacy tool, they ensure states comply to realization
of rights for their citizens, commit to provide the necessary resources to
facilitate enjoyment of rights and due to states being signatories to various
human rights conventions such as CERD, CEDAW, ICESCR, and shadow reports ensure
international monitoring. States being the major duty bearer has the capacity
and resources to enable realization of various rights.

The purposes of state reporting
include:

• Provide an
  opportunity  for states to explain
  their  policies to citizens e.g.
  water policy, education policy, health etc
• Facilitate public
  scrutiny in terms of raising awareness among citizens on what the state
  has done so far , what it intends to do
• Provide basis for
  progress assessment  for instance in
  Kenya , the report could assess what achievements have been made by
  Kenyans in terms of rights realization since the coalition government came
  to power- have the rights of Kenyans improved or have they deteriorated
• Shadow reports also
  act as a means  of international
  supervision   and accountability
  mechanisms in that states  by
  ratifying various  human rights documents
  have to be responsible for  the
  realization  of various rights
• Shadow reports
  facilitate  constructive
  dialogues  between duty bearers and
  claims holders , they also enable  claim
  holders articulate their issues 
  through sharing on the situation on the ground( reality of lives
  lived by deprived people)  for
  instance the Kenya Parallel report 
  on ESCR , October 2008, highlights various rights gaps experienced
  by Kenyans  and points out the
  performance of the state as far as the various rights are concerned. Among
  the highlighted rights include :

Right to adequate standard of living: where the
National Rainbow Coalition promised upon election that it would create 500,000
jobs annually- this is a declaration which has turned out to be a populist
policy since the promised jobs have not yet been realized.

Right to water and sanitation

Right to housing and the appalling conditions in which
people in informal settlements live

 In our views, Shadow reports enhance advocacy through:

• Stock taking in
  progress on what has been realized so far in terms of rights and what
  needs to be done to effectively enhance the enjoyment of rights, it also
  given information on various policies including resource allocation  for various sectors to enable the  realization of given rights.
• Through shadow
  reports,  accountability is
  strengthened  as it provides avenues
  where states are questioned on their performance  whether dismal or good   and those states doing poorly are  cautioned to improve and reminded of
  their commitments
• Shadow reports
  contribute to situational assessments 
  relating to various human rights e.g. right to  security being breached through  selective swoops in poor areas,
  emergence of vigilance groups thus 
  taking up security role due to lack of effective security
  mechanisms , accessibility to the right to education  including emergent features of the
  Universal Free Primary Education such as 
  overcrowding , low teacher/ pupil ratio etc

For
the CSOs, objectives of shadow reports include:

• Strengthen capacities
  of target group to use  and
  apply  tools to enable  them present report to relevant bodies E.g.
  Committee on ESCR
• To update both the
  international community  and Kenyan
  public on the situation in the country as far as  various rights are concerned e.g.
  Economic, Social  and Cultural
  rights  incorporation in the
  national  development  programs is concerned
• Supplement  the government report in relation to fulfillment
  of  commitments  under various covenants vis – a vis  stated fulfillments by the state
• To bring  to the attention and knowledge of
  citizens , FBOs, CBOs and human rights movements  the existence of various covenants  and the commitments taken by the
  state  and in addition , to  proclaim recognition of  the various covenants
• To  legitimize  and enhance constructive dialogue  towards implementation of  measures to reduce various rights violations
  in a given country

Thank
you

Beatrice
Cheruiyot, Leonida Odongo and Peter Matheka

Ebony
Youth and Orphans Support Initiative Kenya

P.O
Box 17237
00510

Nairobi

Email:Eyosik2004 [at] yahoo [dot] com

Dear All,

The media is a very important tool in advocacy as issues highlighted in shadow reports can reach audiences that NGOs and civil society could not reach without their (media) help. Thus the need of establishing some sorts of collabaration between  the media and the civil society for effective advocacy. There are, however, some challenges in relying on the collaboration with the media. As many traditional media (TV, radio, newsletters, magazines,...) become more and more commercial driven, it becomes hard for civil society to have their stories given a space because they (NGO' stories) are not "selling".

Many newspapers prefer to publish pieces of news that will attract readers such as divisions among cabinet members, some corruption scandals, soccer matches etc and overlook human rights abuses. Organisations like Fahamu and FEMNET have been working with community radios so that they could help to popularise the Protocol on women's rights. This requires some planning and funding and the cooperation with media has to be included in the long advocacy plan.

Fortunately, the internet (though it is still a challenge in Africa where in some countries the  percent of the population who have access is something like 3 per cent) offers a wonderful opportunity to disseminate and share information. During the last period that we have been working with community radios, my experience is that NGOs need to discuss with media owners how to package human rights related news in "an attractive way" for the media to maintain their market share.

I would be glad to hear some others have been working with the media.

Regards,

Yves Niyiragira

We very much appreciate the comments that have been posted to this thread so far. Our general observation with regards to shadow reports is that the impact of NGO engagement (including shadow report writing)
generally has long term effect where the engagement with the CEDAW
review process has been consistent and rigorous. The shadow report in
and of itself is not the ‘end product’ of women’s engagement -- the writing and preparation of the shadow report is one part of the larger process to bring about change.

In the process of preparing the shadow report, where NGOs have engaged
in a national process which is inclusive and collaborative, networks
and coalitions are built and strengthened (for example, the experience of NGOs in Brazil). Such processes ensure that
there is a sense of ownership by the groups and helps mobilise women
and create a movement towards the claiming of their rights. It cannot
be denied that such a process leads to a lobby group that has a large
base and a strong voice.

Shadow reports on State action also help reveal why women’s rights
commitments often remain de jure commitments rather than representing
de facto change. Such alternative reports help experts within the
Committee to raise certain controversial issues that may not at all be
raised in the official report, or to check on the validity or veracity
of government reports, given the alternative information provided them
by NGOs.

NGO interventions and advocacy in relation to specific processes of the
Convention can have several spin-off effects. At the international
level, NGO involvement in the Convention reporting process can help to
feed important information to other bodies of the UN and ultimately
influence international processes, policies and programmes. Involvement
in the reporting process can also have an influence domestically, where
it helps to bring NGOs together to discuss important aspects of State
action, emphasise collaborative work in expanding ideas and activism
around rights, create greater media awareness, and ensure that State
interventions are being monitored and assessed for effectiveness. NGOs
can also publicise State reports and the Committee’s observations to a
wider national audience, where States may avoid doing so. At the local
level, discussions around concepts and practice of women’s rights can
provide a very sound basis for influencing policy and creating spaces
for change.

In this regard, a key role NGOs play in this process is to plan for
monitoring the implementation of the Concluding Observations.
Monitoring structures need to be established by NGOs. The alternative
information that NGOs have generated also enables them to identify
areas for intervention where the State may not be able to intervene
effectively, and where NGOs may provide support services to create
enabling conditions for women’s rights to be achieved.

It is the experience of IWRAW Asia Pacific that bringing women in to observe the CEDAW reporting process has brought positive changes. Knowing the reporting process better and how their States are being held accountable for its international obligations, has given women NGOs a better understanding of the significance of reporting and a confidence in working with the CEDAW Convention.

(Some quotes sourced from IWRAW Asia Pacific's Global to Local training kit (2009))  

Lisa Myers, member of NGO group for the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Switzerland

For the CRC, NGOs often organise workshops for national NGOs to try and get them involved in the reporting process. They often ask the NGO Group to come and share information on the preparation of alternative reports, the pre-session, and follow-up the concluding observations. In quite a few cases, many participants have not worked on a previous report, they might not work from a rights-based approach and they might find the process irrelevant to their daily work. However, when they take part in the process and the Committee listens to them and uses their information, they find it useful to participate in the process.

The NGO Group has guidelines for preparing a report and it uses that during the trainings. Otherwise, there is the video 'Treaty bodies - bringing human rights home' (a second edition is being prepared). It provides information on the human rights system with some specific examples. We are also developing a guide at the moment to facilitate the preparation of alternative reports by children, as more of them are getting involved in the process.

Hello all,

Are there any examples out there of how you have implemented a way of measuring the impact of your shadow reports?  Is it possible to measure the impact by the quality of the Committee's conclusing observations?  Or must the impact be measured by the change in government attitude/policy (which is very difficult!). I am very curious to learn about how the kinds of methods you have used to measure your impact. 

Thank you!

Kristin Antin, New Tactics Online Community Builder

Jeanne - thank you for sharing your work and efforts to use "shadow reports" to break new ground. I do not know of any groups that include Non-State Actor Torture as part of their focus. Your work on this is news to me - thank you for taking on this on!

Your comments certainly highlight what Paul Mageean also stated, that the use of shadow reports is a long-term endeavor that takes tremendous time and resources. Of significant importance is the personal resources this work entails - I'm glad that you brought that aspect to light. As human rights advocates, we often mininimize the emotional toll that the work we do (especially when working closely with victims who have suffered so greatly) can have on us physically, mentally, on our family, relationships and organizations. New Tactics in Human Rights has recognized how isolating and emotionally taxing the work can be - even when we have such passion for the work - and that's why we wanted to build this community for offering support. 

I hope that you and your colleague have gifted yourselves with a wide variety of healing support - including counselors - where you have an opportunity to debrief in-person and re-fill your spirit and energy. I learned the importance of the need for such self care when I was providing direct service social work with clients here at the Center for Victims of Torture.

Even if you are not able to to find many others doing this same kind of work you are doing - it's important to find people and places that can give you energy and support. In addition to friends and colleagues doing the work, I continue to connect with a wide variety of others doing  healing work (because I believe as human rights activists we are also doing healing work)  - not being limited to counselors, but also massage and energy therapists, acupuncturists and herbalists, theater/actors, music/musicians, dancers and artists. My point though is that it's really important to find those that help you to sustain.

Nancy Pearson, New Tactics in Human Rights Program Manager

Jeanne - I would like to give you some encouragement after this first experience with a treaty body.

As you know, OMCT (the World Organisation Against Torture) has been struggling for several years now to make the treaty monitoring system one that breaks new ground in international human rights law, is victim-oriented and contributes to civil society advocacy.

In so doing, we have fostered a development of the notion of torture that takes into account the specific vulnerability of women, children, minorities, socially disadvantaged, disabled, LGBTI persons, among others, and the social, economic and cultural root causes of torture and other forms of violence. Moreover, discrimination being one of the grounds of torture, gender discrimination is an important aspect in the qualification of an act as torture, as sexual and other gender-based violence are always discriminatory.

The inherent suffering and powerlessness that can be found in situations such as those  you have documented, as well as their gender-discriminatory aspect, are now acknowledged by the UN Special Rapporteur on torture, as well as CAT and HRCommittee, as torture. This has been a very long process but we are getting to a common understanding of state consent to or acquiecense in privately inflicted torture that includes the failure to exercise due diligence to prevent such acts and protect victims. This provides the remaining criterion to consider an act as torture.

I guess we have spoken about this when you came to Geneva to present your report.

I am afraid CEDAW is not quite acquainted with the notion of torture and may not feel compelled to use this language. I would strongly advise you to submit reports to CAT and HRC when Canada is next reviewed by these two bodies, as well as submit your cases to the Special Rapporteurs on torture and violence against women. Having your cases and recommendations taken up by these mechanisms will certainly support any other lobbying efforts.

I encourage you and Linda to keep up with your great work!

You may find OMCT's reports to the treaty bodies, many of which include gender, child-rights and socioeconomic rights perspectives at www.omct.org - see

• Human Rights Committee (HRC)
• Committee on Economical, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR)
• Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
• Committee Against Torture (CAT)
• Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)
• Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC)

See also the following documents

• Manfred Nowak's 2008 Annual Report "Strengthening the protection of women from torture": E
• CAT General Comment 2: English
• HRC General Comment 28: Article 3 (The equality of rights between men and women)

Coming soon: Guide on the submission of shadow reports to CAT by OMCT and the Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT)

Best, 
Mariana (md [at] omct [dot] org)

Thanks, Mufuliat, for sharing this example of a successful and practical use of a coalition of NGOs in Nigeria to collect data for and creating the shadow report that the Nigeria NGO CEDAW Coalition submitted to CEDAW in New York.  It is very helpful and interesting to hear of these kinds of stories!

After reading Gerard's comment above, regarding "the importance of drafting your recommendations with absolute precision," I would be curious to find out from you, Mufuliat, what your coalition came up with regarding recommendations - and whether or not CEDAW did, in fact, include these recommendations in their Concluding Observations?

Thank you!

Kristin Antin, New Tactics Online Community Builder

Jeanne Sarson, Canada

Thank you Mariana for your welcomed response as it gives me hope to know that as individuals Linda and I could participate in CAT and HRC. It gives me hope that we could continue to push for social recognition that NSAT is a distinct and specific human rights violation, distinct from abuse or human trafficking just as state torture is a distinct human rights violation. Do you know how we can connect into such a process?

When Linda and I submitted the communication to the Special Rapporteur on VAW there was another Canadian woman who also submitted her Confidential VAW Information however it was not a present day situation therefore was not addressed. This woman is a published author and highly spoken and has spent quite some years researching the who, what, where, when, and hows of her NSAT victimization. She would welcome a place to speak. She reports that the NSAT victimization she survived includes torturers who had military backgrounds. We have gathered some self-reporting evidence of such interconnections which might be of specific interest to the CAT Committee.

In reference to the usefulness of shadow reports. The reason I specifically mention this person is because she is pursuing her case before a Victim's Compensation Board and our shadow report adds weight to her pursuit. Therefore, this is another way that shadow reports can be used to support an individual who have been so harmed. And sometimes this is what is needed to break socio-cultural denial, ignorance, rejection or disbelief and trigger social-legal transformation. 

Mariana thank you also for your insight into other possibilities such as human right defender organizations ... Linda and I keep looking but appreciate your willgness to remember us if information crosses your desk.

And a special thanks for forwarding the OMCT working guidelines for submitting to CAT  when it is ready. 

With caring,

Jeanne