Sexual exploitation and abuse in the aid sector Contents

3A victim-centred approach?

63.Corinna Csáky told us that a victim and survivor centred approach to SEA is “absolutely critical”:

Without this, you are designing a system in a vacuum that, essentially, nobody will use.112

64.With this in mind, we have been struck by the apparent lack of a victim-centred approach to SEA within the sector. When we met the UN Secretary-General, he told us that up until now, a victim-centred approach to SEA within the UN system has been totally absent.113 Indeed, a review of the UN cross-agency response to the 2014 allegations against French peacekeepers in the Central African Republic concluded, amongst other criticisms, that the welfare of victims “appeared to be an afterthought, if considered at all.”114 Helen Evans told us that, in 2014, the UN representatives on the IASC PSEA Task Force argued for a merger with the IASC Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP) Task Force, on the basis that they could use the same community-based complaint mechanisms. Ms Evans objected to this merger, because “it is not the same to report fraud as it is to report the fact that someone has raped you. The approaches you need are entirely different”.115 The merger went ahead.116 We were told by the AIDS-Free World’s Code Blue Campaign (hereafter ‘Code Blue’) that UN investigations into SEA allegations have displayed an “overwhelming bias against victims”.117 From various meetings at the UN in New York, we learned that the way in which victims and survivors are kept informed about the progress of investigations requires improvement. The heavy burden of proof required to substantiate an allegation means that the accuser is often left more in the dark about an investigation than the accused. Currently the UN OIOS has no process for feeding back to victims about the progress of investigations and it does not provide protective services.118

65.It is not only the UN that has been criticised for failing to put victims and survivors at the centre of their response to SEA. DFID concluded, from the assurances that it gathered from aid charities in March 2018, that the charities needed to show more evidence of “putting beneficiaries first” and “demonstrating that survivors’ well-being, dignity and support is a priority”.119

66.We have noted recent efforts from the UN, NGOs and DFID, to ensure that going forward, responses to SEA will have victims and survivors at the centre. The UN Secretary-General named “putting the rights and dignity of victims first” as one of the four key pillars of his “new approach” to SEA in 2017. Accordingly, he appointed a Victims’ Rights Advocate in August 2017 “to ensure that reliable, gender-sensitive pathways exist for every victim or witness to file complaints and that assistance is rapidly and sensitively delivered”.120 The language of a victim-centred approach was present in some of the written evidence we received from NGOs121 and we heard from Steve Reeves that the four working groups set up by the Safeguarding Summit are currently seeking to ensure that victims and survivors are represented at the International Safeguarding Conference in October.122 The Secretary of State told us that the opening session of the Conference would involve victims and survivors of SEA.123

67.We have, however, also heard evidence to suggest that whilst the importance of a victim-centred approach is widely acknowledged, this is not yet being fully brought to fruition. In our meetings at the UN, we asked why IASC’s PSEA and AAP Task Forces remained merged, denying victims and survivors of SEA a tailored response. We were told, as the argument ran in 2014, that that the merger enabled the two Task Forces to share the same community-based complaint mechanisms. The fact that this potentially marginalises the victims and survivors of SEA was not acknowledged. We were also left questioning whether the structural separation of victims’ rights from the wider coordination of PSEA work illustrates a truly victim-centred approach. The creation of the high-level position of Victims’ Rights Advocate demonstrates a level of commitment to the rights of victims, but the fact that the position exists separately from that of the UN Special Coordinator on SEA, could also imply that the victim-centred approach is not being fully integrated into the UN’s SEA response.

68.We have also seen evidence that brings into question the comprehensiveness of DFID’s victim-centred approach. It has been stressed to us that there is a serious danger and risk of retribution for victims who report SEA in some communities. The International Rescue Committee UK wrote:

in Yemen, a survivor of SEA might be accused of adultery or engaging in the crime of prostitution and be arrested as a consequence. In less extreme cases, survivors of SEA might still prefer not reporting a case to the police or other local authorities for fear of being blamed for the violence.124

The DFID Secretary of State wrote to multilateral agencies in March 2018 demanding key assurances, of which one was:

That you have referred any and all concerns your organisation may have on specific cases and individuals to the relevant authorities, including the relevant national authorities in countries where incidents occur.125

Such a blanket requirement runs contrary to the warnings of NGOs about the potential for subjecting victims and survivors to further harm. DFID recognised in their oral evidence that a much more nuanced approach was appropriate when it comes to reporting SEA allegations to national authorities.126 Peter Taylor, the Head of DFID’s new Safeguarding Unit said:

you will hear one side of the argument saying, “Everything must be reported otherwise you risk other people being victims in the future” against, “You need to respect the views and the wishes of individuals who have been victims”.127

He also said that DFID hoped to be able to provide clearer guidance on this issue by October, and that one of the four working groups established by the Safeguarding Summit was currently working on this.128 We are still not clear why a requirement to report “any and all” cases appeared in DFID’s March letter, and not the more considered approach presented by DFID in the evidence session.

69.The inclusion of victim and survivor voices will remain important beyond the October conference. Oxfam told us:

It is critical to ensure that the voices of survivors and beneficiary communities are engaged on an ongoing basis in developing safeguarding processes.129

Helen Evans has recommended that DFID should fund consultation with survivors of SEA to define safeguarding best practice.130

70.A failure to listen to and consider the needs of victims and survivors of SEA, will engender a response that is not only ineffective, but potentially harmful. Victims and survivors should demonstrably be front and centre of all efforts to tackle SEA and this means the inclusion of victim and survivor voices in policy-making processes on an ongoing basis. The UN Secretary-General’s commitment to a victim-centred approach, and the Secretary of State’s emphasis on including victim and survivor voices in the October Safeguarding Conference are both important steps. In order to be meaningful, however, the victim-centred approach needs to be fully integrated across all aspects of the sector’s SEA response.