Nairobi, Kenya: On June 11-12, the Dispute Resolution Service (DRS) of the World Bank Accountability Mechanism met civil society organizations (CSOs) in Nairobi, following up on its December workshop in Francophone Africa. Twenty-five participants representing 10 countries from East and Southern Africa attended a two-day workshop on “Accountability and Dispute Resolution: The Role of Civil Society,” once more co-organized with the Independent Recourse Mechanism (IRM) of the African Development Bank.

The objective of the workshop was to provide participating CSOs with an overview of independent accountability mechanisms (IAMs) and their dispute resolution functions and processes, as practiced by the DRS and the IRM within the framework provided by their parent institutions. The nature of conflict was also discussed in a dedicated session, along with the topic of threats and reprisals.

In addition to presentations by the DRS and the IRM, substantial efforts were made to engage participants. Joint sessions included practice activities on dispute resolution in development projects that provided insights into real-life casework with communities. The workshop concluded with the roundtable, “Moving Forward: Identifying Opportunities, Improving Effectiveness and Working Together.”  

Over the course of the two days, key issues were identified by participants for future work and outreach events by IAMs. As communities have limited awareness of IAMs and how to proceed through grievance procedures, including mediation, IAMs should engage with them through tailored communication methods. This should include capacity building for CSOs so that they can better support communities. IAMs should also manage expectations as regards what they can and cannot do. Critically, participants suggested that protective measures to address threats and reprisals should also apply to CSO representatives.

A pre-and post-workshop survey revealed that participants’ understanding of IAMs grew significantly as a result of the workshop. Before the event, about 17 percent of participants rated their understanding of IAMs as “very good” while 28 percent said it was “limited.” After the event, those numbers improved significantly, with 80 percent reporting their understanding as “very good” and none reporting their understanding as “limited.” Participants also reported gaining more confidence in their ability to engage with IAMs. Before the event, 61 percent reported feeling “very confident” in their ability to engage with IAMS, a number that climbed to 75 percent after the event.

Kelvin Kabya, a programs lawyer for Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights, participated in the workshop to gain a deeper understanding of the dispute resolution processes of the DRS and IRM—and to increase his capacity to participate in dispute resolution as an alternative to litigation. “One of the main reasons why I decided to participate is the fact that there’s a growing trend towards alternative means of resolving disputes globally,” he said. After having attended the workshop, he reported, “I’m definitely going to be able to identify opportunities to engage the independent accountability mechanisms.”

Another participant, John Mwebe, the Africa finance campaigner for Recourse, felt the workshop clarified the role of IAMs and civil society organizations in dispute resolution processes—what they can do and what they cannot do. “[The workshop] lays bare what the IAMs can provide, so that they manage the expectations of civil society organizations as primary supporters of communities that make the complaints. For me, this is major.”

“Often times, civil society is not really that knowledgeable about how these mechanisms work, about how they can support communities,” Mwebe said. “This [workshop] is about supporting civil society to know their role, to know the extent to which they can go, to know the limits of IAMs, but also to know that they are valued partners in this work.”

The Dispute Resolution Service is grateful to its IRM colleagues and facilitators, not to mention the CSOs whose voices and ideas made this workshop so meaningful.

This article was orignally published in June and has been updated with new research and information.