Security and Rule of Law Applied Research Fund

NWO-WOTRO - SRoL – self-assessment report

Security and Rule of Law | Applied research fund

ARF 1: Embedding Justice in Power and Politics

FINAL REPORT

1. Registration

Fill out this fact sheet.

1. General project details

Project title: / The Transitional Justice Barometer
File number: / W 08.400.102
Name project coordinator: / Prof. Paul Gready
Total project budget: / €267,000
WOTRO budget: / €312,100
Start date: / 16.10.2014
End date: / 16.11.2014

1. Deviations from the initial administrative set-up. In case you have made changes to the initial set-up, explain:

Changes to initial set-up in terms of human resources and/or other administrative issues: / None

If applicable, please fill out details for changes in project team members below

(please extend table if needed)

Family name:
First name(s):
Organisation:
Role in the project:

Do these changes have any impact on the financial set up of your project? Yes/No

If yes, please report on the financial consequences of these changes in thefinancial report

Self-assessment workshop

For the final evaluation of the project the consortium has been requested to organise a self-assessment including a workshop where progress and results are discussed with the consortium members, project staff and with a broader group of stakeholders that did not participate in the project. This final report must be based on the conclusions of this workshop.

Please add the following final workshop-related documents to the final report:

-(Annex 1) The report of the final workshop (discussion and conclusions).

-(Annex 2)A list of actual participants to the workshop, including name, affiliated organisation and a description why they are important as a stakeholder.

2. Popular summary of the results (max 200 words)

Provide a popular summary of your results. Refer to the analytical methodologies/instruments developed and insights obtained, the main results and the relevance of the results for policy and/or practice. Note that this page will be published on the NWO-WOTRO website.

The Transitional Justice Barometer conducted empirical research that aimed to impact positively on Tunisia’s transitional justice process. It built capacity in creating and training a research unit, and supported victim communities to both contribute to knowledge production around the transition and support the participation of their communities in the process. The principle outputs of the Barometer were a set of four research reports on victim participation, reparations for histories of social and economic rights violations, history and memory in the transition, and research in the transitional justice process. These have guided both institutions of the transitional justice process, notably the Truth and Dignity Commission (TDC) as well as civil society, providing practical knowledge that can advance the process. The Barometer also worked with victims and communities alongside these projects, supporting the submission of applicationsto the TDC from two marginlised communities as ‘victim zones’ and the making of a film telling the largely forgotten story of a battle of the independence, as a part of the memory project. As such, the Braometer also had a grassroots orientation that could show how communities can better engage with and play a role in the transitional justice process.

3. Project approach and results(max 750 words)

Report on the results of the project and reflect on the contribution of the project to the aim and objectives of the call. This section must include:

a. Introduction

-the local political and economic context;

-the problem you were trying to tackle with your project;

-the innovation (see aim of call[1]) that the project aimed to achieve;

-the research methodology and analyses that were used;

b. Co-creation

-the management of the collaborative design (consortium) and execution of the project;

-the scientific and practitioner knowledge that has been integrated during the project;

-the tangible added value of collaboration that would not have occurred without collaboration;

c. Results

-the analytical methodology or instrument that has been (partly) developed (objective A[2]);

-how the methodology or instrument has been shared with (which) stakeholders and with what result (objective B[3]);

-(Annex 3)Add a list of tangible output (for instance, publications in all kinds of media,data-sets,models for new methodologies etcetera)

Tunisia’s transition appears consolidated in terms of peaceful politics, but continues to be contested as to what the revolution of 2011 means, and how ‘justice’ is understood. The Barometer began after an election victory by a political party that included many linked to the former regime, and has been perceived as antagonistic to the transitional justice process in general and the TDC in particular. The Barometer sought to explicitly play a role in increasing the credibility of the TJ process, by ensuring that the perspectives of ordinary Tunisians were understood through qualitative research, and by enhancing the potential for citizen participation in the process. The innovation of the project was to seek to not only conduct research, but to create a sustainable capacity in Tunisia to continue knowledge production around the transition, while linking this effort to a greater popular engagement with the transitional justice process. Research methodologies were predominantly qualitative, involving interviews with a range of those concerned by a particular topic, most notably victims of violations, as well as concerned elites. Parallel to this was the effort at citizen and community engagement in which research projects were linked to the goals of communities who were supported to implement these.

Both the design and the implementation of the project sought to utilise the complementary talents of the three consortium members.

-KADEM brought a deep knowledge of the context, and contacts with all relevant actors, including the TDC and civil society. As such the work was embedded in local approaches to the TJ process, and benefitted from networks with actors throughout the country;

-The international partners, the CAHR and Impunity Watch, brought both long experience of research around TJ, including participatory approaches to research, and experience of practice oriented interventions in a range of contexts. The lead Impunity Watch researcher came to the project with a long experience of work in Tunisia around the TJ process.

The project proposal sought to leverage these complementary capacities. First, by giving the nascent research team in KADEM a strong support through training – largely ‘on the job’ – and broader technical support. The strong links to local communities and civil society gave foreign researchers access to data they could not otherwise have collected, and ultimately it was this combination of local access and contact, combined with international experience and expertise that gave the project its unique value. Management integrated this approach, with a consensual approach amongst the key team members driving the topics chosen for research and how research as implemented. In practice, study topic choice and planning emerged from meetings with the entire team in Tunis.

The net result of this integration of approaches has been the creation of a research team who have absorbed the lessons of many years of international TJ research experience, and experienced researcher – most with little knowledge of Tunisia – who have been able to make a contribution to the Tunisian TJ process, through the local knowledge of the KADEM team.

Research was conducted in the form of four independent studies, on the topics of victim participation, Reparations for histories of social and economic violations, history and memory, and research in TJ. These topics were chosen on the basis of what would be most useful in the Tunisian context, the interest to global TJ research, and the unique characteristics of the Tunisia process. Research methodology was qualitative, with interviews being made with those most concerned with each issue. As such, a new research instrument and a sampling strategy was jointly developed by the team for each study. Research interviews were carried out by the KADEM team, with some initial; support from international researchers. The first report was largely based on analysis by international researchers who also write up the final report; by the fourth project all analysis and almost all writing was done by the KADEM team, representing an evolution and a demonstration of the success of the capacity building approach over the duration of the project.

In most studies, there was a local partner who supported the project in the concerned community, and was in turn supported to achieve its own project-linked goals. Examples included the two communities who submitted applications as ‘victim zones’ to the TDC, and that which made a film about a largely forgotten battle that occurred nearby 50 years earlier. This represents another element of collaboration, rooted in traditions of participatory research, that saw communities not only as sources of data but as collaborators with their own agenda that can be supported as a part of the project. As a result, such communities have been able to play a role in the TJ process that they would not otherwise have been able to.

4. Reflection onoutput, outcomes and impact (max 500 words)

Please describe the progress towards the envisioned outputs, outcomes and impacts and refer to each of the indicators that were presented in the impact pathway of your project. Furthermore, reflect on the initial impact pathway and explain if and how the outputs have contributed to the outcomes as foreseen. If not, please explain why.

There were a number of routes to impact as revealed in the impact pathways diagram (Figure 1) from the original proposal.

Figure 1 Diagram showing the research impact pathway

One can go through the inputs and outputs of the project in turn to determine the extent to which the ambitions of the project have been met and use the discussion of the final event to empirically inform this. It is evident however, that to evaluate impact immediately on conclusion of the project does however over-estimate the timescale on which this occurs. Issues on the far right of the impact pathways diagram – governance, legitimacy, human security – will only be impacted in the longer term. We are able however to reflect on outcomes, in terms of how the various stakeholders targeted have responded or changed their behaviour, as well as on the quality of outputs and how these have been received.

The table in the proposal of how research outputs lead to impact can be used to track research outputs and outcomes relative to expectations, as a first effort to understand impacts, these are summarised in Figure 3 and these data can then be supplemented by statements from stakeholders from the final event.

Research output indicators
Production of 4 high quality research reports during project / Four reports were produced: these are some of the only such empirically driven research outputs produced around the TJ process (see the research bibliography in report no. 4), and are almost unique in being available in English. In terms of quality, comments at the final event included:
-“The importance of the Barometer is its objective approach, non–emotional in nature” (M. Ibrahim, Historian)
-“A week ago, we had a large TJ conference, but this work is much more important,” (M.Amor Safraoui, president of CNIJT[4])
Stakeholders attend debate forums and report launches;
Number of media reports discussing research findings / 248 stakeholders attended the 4 debate forums, and included IVD Commissioners. Members of Parliament, senior civil society leaders
The project has been discussed in a large number of reports in the media, print, broadcast and online.[5]
Peer research data contributes to published research reports / Peer research elements contributed to all reports, except the final one.
Community leaders understand TJ mechanisms and how they can interact with them, and the benefits and drawbacks of participation / Those who led community and local civil society engagement with the project have clearly learned about the process and their capacity to interact with it. Most notably, the communities of Ain Drahem and Sidi Makhlouf have made submissions to the IVD claiming ‘victim zone’ status, that would likely not otherwise have been possible without the project’s support. The benefits of participation are clear, as they are to the Gafsa community who were supported to make a documentary filmand a report about the battle of Sidi Ayech. No drawbacks to participation have been observed, beyond a raising of expectations that have not – and may never – be met.

Figure 3 Research output indicators

Research outcome indicators
NGOs, authorities and officials of TJ mechanisms demonstrate awareness of the needs and perspective of a diverse range of Tunisians / This remains a difficult indicator to demonstrate on any scale. It is clear that the Barometer reports do indeed provide a wealth of evidence and testimony concerning the needs and perspectives of a range of Tunisians. The studies were designed such that each one drew upon data from a different region of the country such that the project addressed the entire nation. Confirming that relevant actors have been informed by the project is - in the short-term - dependent upon anecdotal evidence from a range of sources:
-The community of Ain Drahem said that the IVD had reported that the file submitted to the Commission “contained data that helped them”
-A prominent activist said that “the IVD must pay attention to collective reparations and the right to development”, as a result of the Barometer reports: (Mme Wahchi)
-A member of Parliament pointed out the importance of oversight of the process and the failure of civil society to create an observatory of the process, and thus the importance of what the Barometer has done. (Mme Zoghlemi)
Community members are satisfied with their interaction with TJ mechanisms / This is likely to be a difficult impact to create: most communities have been deeply demoralised by the ongoing debate around and denigration of the TJ process, and remain with low expectations and a dissatisfaction with their engagement with the process:
-Community members from Sidi Makhlouf reported: “We believe in the process, but have low expectations of the state”. They also demanded that the IVD visit affected regions and listen to testimonies from affected populations, something that has not yet happened concerning collective victim zones.
-The Ain Drahem community – during the final event – asked “what has happened to the file” they submitted: they have heard nothing from the IVD since they received the submission.
-“Listening to the voices of the marginalised is a form of reparation”: this is an argument that simply allowing the views of those in excluded regions to be articulated is in itself the beginning of the process of addressing such exclusion.
Communities engaged with the project create local mechanisms and establish links to national mechanisms / Tunisia’s vibrant civil society has been supported by the project to engage more directly with the formal process and in so doing has demonstrated that at the local level there remains huge potential. In addition to the two ‘victim zone’ submission and the documentary film, the project has encouraged local memory projects, school museums, and a general mobilisation to understand better the process and to engage with it through local initiatives. However, the establishing of links to national mechanisms - such as the IVD – is constrained by the limited modalities of interaction, such as through the submission of testimony. There is for example, no formal way for the documentary film or other local memory projects to be input to the formal process.

Figure 4 Research outcome indicators.

5. Message topractitioners (max 300 words)

Please

-Describe the main message of your policy brief to practitioners(specifyingto which practitioners/target groups the policy brief is directed) and if available, of other scientific and knowledge sharing products;

-Explain per target group what change they couldcontribute to in following up on your advice captured in the policy brief;

-(Annex 4)Add as an annex to this report, a policy brief (500 - 2500 words) and – if available – other (audio/visual) knowledge sharing output capturing the main findings to practitioners (specify which type of practitioner). The policy brief must explain how the practitioner targeted may use the research results for what change, under which condition.

The policy brief addresses several audiences in summarising the recommendations of the project:

-The Truth and Dignity Commission

-Civil society

-The international community

-The Tunisian authorities

-Researchers and academics

In summary, these suggest:

-The TDC promote greater inclusion of victims in the TJ process, including through enhanced communication with victims and their representatives, a more collaborative relationship with civil society, and a more gendered approach to collecting testimony; The TDC to broaden the process through which ‘victim zones’ are defined, investigate their forms and causes, and hold public hearings on the issue in concerned regions;

-Civil society to strengthen collaboration with victims’ groups, increase their presence outside Tunis, and resist politicisation;

-The international community to support Tunisian civil society to act as an intermediary between victims and TJ mechanisms, and to resist politicisation;

-The Tunisian authorities to recognise their role in regional marginalisation, and to link its addressing to the decentralisation process, and to amend history teaching to challenges the authoritarian history of the past and to use new methods and better teacher training to create a critical citizenry;

-Academics and researchers to interrogate non-legal elements of the TJ process, builds bridges between research and practice, and ensure historians are a part of this effort.