NGO WORK
Misplaced Trust: Why development banks should not rely on their clients to address reprisal risks
“Misplaced Trust” – a new report of the Defenders in Development campaign out on July 5 – shows how development banks are putting human rights defenders at serious risk by relying on their clients to address reprisals.
The research, based on the analysis of 38 case studies of reprisals in the context of development projects, shows that in all but two cases development banks’ clients have played a direct role in the perpetration of attacks.
The report also includes a series of recommendations, indicating that development banks should stop to uncritically delegate reprisal risk assessment and response to clients. Instead, banks should develop protocols and guidelines for what they will do themselves on reprisal issues.
KEY FINDINGS
The cases analyzed in “Misplaced Trust” show that:
- In all but two of the cases, clients play a role in the perpetration of reprisals against defenders.
- Reprisals where the responsibility can be attributed to the clients range from threats to killings; criminalization is one of the most common types of reprisals.
- Reprisals are typically perpetrated by security forces, private companies’ staff/contractors, and state and government officials.
- Public security forces often play a role in perpetrating or facilitating reprisals.
- Often, clients also contribute to the conditions leading to reprisals (e.g., failing to ensure meaningful consultations).
The analysis of the policies of eight major development banks show that the banks tend to rely on client-generated information for key processes (such as environmental and social risk assessments, stakeholder engagement, and consultations with affected communities) that are key to prevent and address reprisals.
KEY RECOMMENDATIONS
Implementing zero tolerance for reprisals requires DFIs to stop entrusting their clients with reprisal risk assessment and response, unless the clients have actively worked with directly affected communities and defenders to earn their trust first. DFIs cannot uncritically delegate reprisal risk assessment and response to clients.
Instead, DFIs should develop protocols and guidelines for what they will do themselves on reprisal issues. These protocols and guidelines must cover the entire project cycle and should be prepared in close consultations with those who have directly experienced reprisals, as well as with CSOs specializing in human rights issues.
Under these protocols and guidelines, DFI should:
- Assess reprisal risks and respond when reprisals occur.
- Strengthen capacity and incentives of bank staff, management and consultants to prevent and respond to reprisals.
- Align client incentives (including by implementing negative consequences) to avoid reprisal risks and respond when reprisals occur.
Source: Coalition for human rights in development.
Read full report here: Misplaced Trust
Related posts:
