Security Sector Reform And Transparency Building

Challenges to security and human rights involving extractive and other industries gave rise to an evolving framework of policy, standards and good practice generally known as business and human rights (BHR). Problems with inefficient and unaccountable security institutions are addressed by security sector reform (SSR). From an empirical perspective – the view from the often mutual operating grounds of BHR and SSR – both approaches share many challenges, as well as end goals. It is thus striking that only on rare occasions are challenges in governance of the security sector addressed upfront as problems of poor resource governance, and vice versa. This paper describes the grounds where SSR and BHR coincide in principles, actors and activities, and which synergies can be built on that base. It makes the business case for SSR, and the SSR case for business. The paper assesses how SSR can channel resources and know-how from business to address critical challenges related to ownership, capacity and sustainability of reform processes. Opportunities for bridging BHR and SSR are drawn from a broad range of policy and guidance, and by looking at lessons from case studies on Guinea, Colombia and Papua New Guinea. SSR and BHR should not collide; ideally, they should cohere. A variety of multistakeholder initiatives open new opportunities to bring this about, with particular relevance to SSR in extractive environments. The overall conclusion, supported by practical propositions for implementation, is that the existing policies and standards in SSR and BHR already allow, and call for, a less rigid approach to the challenges addressed in both fields.

Multilateral organizations - the United Nations (UN) in particular - have played, and continue to play, an important role in shaping the security sector reform (SSR) agenda, both in terms of policy development and the provision of support to a wide range of national SSR processes. This volume presents a variety of perspectives on UN support to SSR, past and present, with attention to policy and operational practice. Drawing from the experience of UN practitioners combined with external experts on SSR, this volume offers an in-depth exploration of the UN approach to SSR from a global perspective.

The OECD DAC Handbook on Security System Reform: Supporting Security and Justice contains valuable tools to help encourage a dialogue on security and justice issues and to support a security system reform (SSR) process through the assessment, design and implementation phases.

"Original versions: English and Arabic, Geneva and Ramallah, 2007"--T.p. verso.

The United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16 calls for the establishment of peaceful, just and inclusive societies. The security sector has the potential to contribute to SDG16 through the fulfilment of its traditional and non-traditional security tasks. However, the security sector can also detract from SDG16 when it acts outside the confines of the law. Good governance of the sector is therefore a prerequisite to achieving SDG16, and parliaments can make an important contribution to accountability and good governance. Parliaments contribute to both transparency and accountability of the sector through their various functions and act as a counterweight to executive dominance, including in the executive’s use of security forces. Yet, in times of crisis, states run a risk of executive dominance and executives are often quick to resort to the use of the security sector to address an array of challenges. This risk also emerged during the global Covid-19 pandemic where states used the security sector, notably the military and police, in various ways to respond to the pandemic. This study reviewed the utilisation of the security sector in South Africa, the Philippines and the UK during the first year of the Covid-19 outbreak, resulting in varied outcomes ranging from positive humanitarian contributions to misconduct and brutality that led to the death of citizens. The initial lockdowns in these countries constrained parliamentary activity, resulting in a lack of adequate parliamentary oversight of security sector utilisation when it was most needed. Parliaments did recover oversight of the sector to varied degrees, but often with limited depth of inquiry into the Covid-19 deployments. To prevent the security sector from detracting from SDG16, the study identified a need for a rapid parliamentary reaction capability to security sector utilisation, especially in cases of extraordinary deployments coupled with an elevated risk of executive dominance.

The Maidan Revolution in Ukraine created an opportunity for change and reforms in a system that had resisted them for 25 years. This report examines Ukraine’s security sector—assessing what different institutions need to do and where gaps exist—and offers recommendations for the reform of Ukraine’s security and defense institutions that meet Ukraine’s security needs and align with Euro-Atlantic standards and approaches.

Over the last decade the failure of countries to emerge from conflict has focused attention on state security sectors. This book examines how the external approaches to security sector reform (SSR) have evolved and what they entail; the specific problems faced by the SSR agenda; and what policy recommendations for engagement can be drawn from reform experiences.