Submission on Prevention of Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Harassment Policy Discussion Paper - Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade February ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Submission on Prevention of Sexual
Exploitation, Abuse and Harassment Policy
Discussion Paper
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
February 2019
1
Contents
About ACFID............................................................................................................................................. 3
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 3
General comments .................................................................................................................................. 7
Issues related to the risk context ............................................................................................................. 8
Groups most likely to experience SEAH .............................................................................................. 8
Humanitarian context ......................................................................................................................... 8
Issues related to the risk context ........................................................................................................... 10
International commitments and standards. ..................................................................................... 10
Issues related to policy scope................................................................................................................. 11
Definitions ......................................................................................................................................... 11
Scope of Application ......................................................................................................................... 11
Issues related to policy approach ........................................................................................................... 12
Zero tolerance ................................................................................................................................... 12
Accommodating diversity ................................................................................................................. 12
Gender Equality and leadership ........................................................................................................ 13
Victim/Survivor centric approaches.................................................................................................. 14
Issues related to staff integrity ............................................................................................................... 14
Workplace practices.......................................................................................................................... 15
Transactional sex............................................................................................................................... 16
Issues related to reporting ..................................................................................................................... 16
Reporting by partners to DFAT ......................................................................................................... 16
Guidance ........................................................................................................................................... 18
Other issues to consider ........................................................................................................................ 18
Alignment .......................................................................................................................................... 19
Implementation of the policy ........................................................................................................... 19
2About ACFID
The Australian Council for International Development (ACFID) is the peak body for Australian
nongovernment organisations (NGOs) involved in international development and humanitarian
action. Our vision is of a world where all people are free from extreme poverty, injustice and
inequality and where the earth’s finite resources are managed sustainably. Our purpose is to lead
and unite our members in action for a just, equitable and sustainable world.
Founded in 1965, ACFID currently has 122 Full Members and 22 Affiliate Members operating in more
than 90 developing countries. The 2017-18 total revenue for ACFID members amounted to more
than $1.6 billion. Our members range between large Australian multi-sectoral organisations to
agencies with specialised thematic expertise, and smaller community-based groups, with a mix of
secular and faith-based organisations. A list of ACFID Member Organisations is at Annex A.
ACFID members must comply with the ACFID Code of Conduct, a voluntary, self-regulatory sector
code of good practice that aims to improve international development and humanitarian action
outcomes and increase stakeholder trust by enhancing the transparency, accountability and
effectiveness of signatory organisations. Covering 9 Quality Principles, 33 Commitments and 90
compliance indicators, the Code sets good standards for rights, protection and inclusion of primary
stakeholders, program effectiveness, fundraising, governance and financial reporting. Compliance
includes annual reporting and checks. The Code has an independent complaints handling process.
Introduction
ACFID welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the consultation on the Department of Foreign
Affairs and Trade (DFAT) Prevention of Sexual Exploitation Abuse and Harassment (PSEAH) policy
Discussion Paper. ACFID supports enhancing strong frameworks, leadership and culture for PSEAH.
In May 2018, with support from DFAT and ACFID’s members, ACFID commissioned the Victorian
Institute of Forensic Medicine (VIFM) to undertake an independent review into sexual misconduct
incidents and systems and practice in place among ACFID members to protect staff, volunteers,
partners and communities from sexual misconduct. The VIFM report ‘Shaping the Path’ provide
comprehensive and important insights in developing effective policy and approaches to PSEAH and
we would recommend the outcomes of the report be considered by DFAT.
ACFID also undertook a review of the ACIFD Code to Conduct to ensure if reflected best practice in
PSEAH standards. The Report on the review of the Code provides recommendations which have
been endorsed by the ACFID Code of Conduct Committee and the ACFID Board and are being
implemented by ACFID. In a unanimous decision, at ACFID’s AGM in October 2018, ACFID’s
members amended the Code of Conduct to include a clear-cut, high-level commitment for NGOs to
advance the safeguarding of people vulnerable to sexual exploitation and abuse. We would
recommend the outcomes of the Code Review report also be considered by DFAT.
This submission complements the consultations already undertaken by DFAT with ACFID’s Code of
Conduct Committee and Development Practice Committee (DPC), as well as the additional
comments provided by the DPC (see Annex 2). ACFID also supports the submissions from our
members through the Child Protection Community of Practice (see Annex 3) and Gender Equity
Community of Practice (see Annex 4).
ACFID would be happy to provide additional clarity on any of the statements contained within this
submission. Requests to meet can be directed to Marc Purcell, CEO, ACFID on (02) 8123 2216 and
mpurcell@acfid.asn.au.
3Summary of Recommendations
Recommendation 1 - DFAT to consider the IASC AAP/PSEAH Task Team’s Key messages for Donors
on PSEAH in developing their approach to enhancing PSEAH with partners.
Recommendation 2 - DFAT report annually and publicly on progress to enhance PSEAH on its
website, as well as annual reporting, as demonstrable measure of accountability and transparency.
Issues related to risk context
Recommendation 3 - The policy should require DFAT country programs, and DFAT partners to
conduct a comprehensive contextual analysis to understand and identify groups most likely to be at
risk of SEAH in their operating environment and programs.
Recommendation 4 - DFAT should support programs that encourage diversity in humanitarian
leadership, including an increase in women’s leadership and women’s engagement at all levels in the
humanitarian sector.
Recommendation 5 - DFAT should work with other donors to support the development of
humanitarian passporting or registration schemes that confirm individuals have met safeguarding
requirements while also preventing the redeployment of perpetrators.
Issues related to policy scope
Recommendation 6 – The PSEAH policy include a definitions of sexual harassment that
acknowledges that sexual harassment extends beyond office based harassment to harassment that
occur between partners, implementing partners and local communities. DFAT should encourage
this definition to be taken up internationally through international processes.
Issues related to policy approach
Recommendation 7 - The PSEAH policy should require DFAT partners to have an organisational wide
approach to PSEAH and to implement a policy that demonstrates this.
Recommendation 8 - The PSEAH policy should promote survivor-centric and Do No Harm
approaches within the zero tolerance approach so that zero tolerance doesn’t inadvertently harm
survivors.
Recommendation 9 - The PSEAH policy should include a requirement for DFAT and its implementing
partners to communicate to stakeholders and general population are aware of the expected
behaviour of DFAT staff and its contracted partners. This should include a requirement for
organisations to implement complaints and feedback mechanisms that are accessible to affected
populations and are focussed on the needs and safety of the survivor.
Recommendation 10 - Proportionality consideration in the policy should be driven by the risk to
vulnerable people rather than the nature and size of organisations.
Recommendation 11 - The policy should allow flexibility for partners to implement a single policy for
safeguarding which meets all safeguarding requirements set out in relevant DFAT policies.
4Recommendation 12 - DFAT should support its partners to work with staff, partners and communities
to address all the root causes of gender inequality including economic empowerment, gender
imbalances within organisations and gender norms and attitudes to women’s roles.
Recommendation 13 - DFAT should recognise that changing gender norms can take significant time
and resources and adequately resource and support partners to deliver such work (including capacity
development and training).
Recommendation 14 - DFAT should support Posts to build PSEAH capacity and provide a leadership
role with DFAT partners in country (for example through development of PSEAH communities of
practice at country level).
Recommendation 15 -DFAT should seek the voices and views of survivors/victims in the design and
development of this policy.
Recommendation 16 - DFAT should recognise the central cost of sexual misconduct safeguarding
expertise as an eligible program costs for offshore work (for example mapping existing legal, health
psycho-social and livelihood services and capacity building with partners).
Issues related to staff integrity
Recommendation 17 - The PSEAH policy should require partners to undertake effective vetting of and
PSEAH training for staff and volunteers.
Recommendation 18 - DFAT must work with other donors to ensure interoperability between
registration/identity platforms and other forms of regulation-tech and promote the wide-scale
application of these platforms across the humanitarian and development sector. Flexibility should be
provided within the PSEAH policy to adapt to such approaches as they are implemented.
Recommendation 19 – DFAT should consider prohibiting non-disclosure agreements to settle cases of
sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment.
Recommendation 20 - The PSEAH policy should include a requirement that PSEAH is explicitly
reflected in staff Codes of Conduct, clarity is provided on consequences for breaches (include
termination of employment) and training on expected behaviours is undertaken.
Issues related to reporting
Recommendation 21 - The PSEAH policy should require allegations involving criminal sexual
misconduct to reported to local enforcement authorities as a default position. This should be
regardless of local mandatory obligations, unless this is at odds with the wishes or welfare of the
affected person or the life or serious welfare of the alleged perpetrator.
Recommendation 22 - Reporting systems need to be able to allow for confidential, anonymous and
informal reporting. They need to be integrated into organisations existing community-based
complaints and reporting systems.
Recommendation 23 - DFAT prioritise how it could centralise resourcing and building capacity for
investigations among their commercial and non-government partners as a Government leadership
and efficiency measure.
5Recommendation 24 - DFAT build their own capacity to effectively manage PSEAH reporting. This
would need to include ensuring:
a. DFAT teams have appropriate skills and knowledge of survivor centric approaches and best
practice in PSEAH investigation. This may include recognising that limited action on a
report may be in the best interests of a survivor.
b. DFAT teams can provide technical advice and support to partners, particularly in regards
to survivor centric approaches and investigations.
c. reports can be address quickly - delays to SEAH cases could result in additional harm.
d. a culture of encouraging reporting is developed. It is important for organisation to feel
that they will not be negatively affected for reporting.
Other Issues
Recommendation 25 - DFAT advocates for aligned policy and reporting requirements with other
donors. This could be done through the donors technical group on PSEAH and the implementation of
the 22 donor commitments.
Recommendation 26 - DFAT commits to continued learning and a policy review after one year in order
to update the policy as required to ensure it is fit for purpose.
6General comments
Recommendation 1 - DFAT to consider the IASC AAP/PSEAH Task Team’s Key messages for Donors
on PSEAH in developing their approach to enhancing PSEAH with partners.
Recommendation 2 - DFAT report annually and publicly on progress to enhance PSEAH on its
website, as well as annual reporting, as demonstrable measure of accountability and
transparency.
ACFID welcomes the Australian Government’s global commitment to enhancing PSEAH through
signature to the Tidewater Joint Statement on Combatting Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in
Development and Humanitarian Sectors and the Whistler Declaration on Protection from Sexual
Exploitation and Abuse in International Assistance in June 2018 and their endorsed the Joint
Statement and 22 Commitments from Donors at the UK-led International Summit to Tackle Sexual
Exploitation, Abuse and Harassment in the Aid Sector in October 2018.
Significant work has been happening globally on best practice approaches to PSEAH. In May 2018,
the Inter-Agency Standing Committee’s PSEAH Task team develop 7 key messages for Donors aimed
at enhancing their work on PSEAH. We would encourage DFAT to consider this document in its
development of the policy. They state that underpinning the work on PSEAH is the need for common
reporting requirements, common definition and common standards as well as the need for
continuity/multi-year funding to be prioritised and reach out and support to civil-society
organisations should be provided when needed and possible1.
The importance of culture and leadership
Culture and leadership as demonstrate through attitudes to gender, power and protection are
central to effective PSEAH approaches and practice. ACFID welcomes the development of this policy
to provide a strong framework for all DFAT partners to strengthen PSEAH. We support DFAT’s
continued leadership in PSEAH both globally and locally. We would encourage DFAT to demonstrate
its ongoing commitment to leadership and transparency by reporting annual on progress to enhance
PSEAH.
However, a contractual requirement for policy implementation is not sufficient to effectively
implement PSEAH. The Humanitarian Accountability Report clearly highlighted this:
Until organisations end the sexist culture that underpins power abuse, such as SEA and
sexual harassment, and follow through on ensuring gender balance at all levels, including at
the top, delivering the kind of transformation of behaviour and fundamental shift in norms
will be difficult2.
We encourage DFAT to include cultural relevant and sensitivity into all aspects of the policy and to
support and encourage leadership on PSEAH across DFAT and its partners.
1
IASC June 2018, Key Messages for Donors on PSEAH, Developed by IASC AAP/PSEAH Task Team Members in
IASC PSEAH-focused Task Team Meeting on 14 May 2018
https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/system/files/key_messages_for_donors_on_PSEAH_28_may_2018
_0.pdf
2
CHS Alliance 2018, ‘How change happens in the Humanitarian Sector’, Humanitarian Accountability Report
2018,p77
7This submission follows and addresses the sections outlined in the discussion paper. In addition,
ACFID has highlighted key issues of alignment and implementation. These are addressed at the end
of the submission.
Issues related to the risk context
Recommendation 3 - The policy should require DFAT country programs, and address the
heightened risk due to intersecting drivers of vulnerability and provide flexibility for DFAT partners
to conduct a comprehensive contextual analysis to understand and identify groups most likely to
be at risk of SEAH in their operating environment and programs.
Recommendation 4- DFAT should support programs that encourage diversity in humanitarian
leadership, including an increase in women’s leadership and women’s engagement at all levels in
the humanitarian sector.
Recommendation 5 - DFAT should work with other donors to support the development of
humanitarian passporting or registration schemes that confirm individuals have met safeguarding
requirements while also preventing the redeployment of perpetrators.
Groups most likely to experience SEAH
ACFID agrees with DFAT’s statement on the groups most likely to experience SEAH. DFAT’s
approach should prioritise the voice and needs of women and girls and sexual and gender
minorities. While certain groups may be at heightened risk of SEAH, it should not be assumed that a
member of such groups are always vulnerable.
The policy should consider the heightened risk due to intersecting drivers of vulnerability. ACFID’s
Code and Quality Assurance Framework articulate possible intersecting drivers of vulnerability as
“including but not restricted to race, religion, ethnicity, indigeneity, disability, age, displacement,
caste, gender, gender identity, sexuality, sexual orientation, poverty, class and socio-economic
status.” We would encourage DFAT to consider this framing as consistency of language would be
beneficial.
The policy should help DFAT partners (and implementing partners) to conduct a comprehensive
contextual analysis to understand and identify groups most likely to be at risk of SEAH in their
operating environment and programs.
Humanitarian context
There has been significant focus on PSEAH in the humanitarian context over the last few decades,
most notably around the ‘sex for food’ scandal that emerged in West Africa in the early 2000s in
which aid workers ‘traded’ food and other assistance in return for sexual favours. While there was
significant action to address SEA, reports continued to emerge around sexual misconduct in the
humanitarian sector, particularly around SEA committed by UN Peacekeepers (for example in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo as exposed in 2004-05, and the Central African Republic more
recently exposed in 2016-17).
PSEAH in the humanitarian sector again gained significant focus in 2018 after reports emerged of
misconduct by Oxfam GB staff in Haiti, and when the unsatisfactory responses to sexual harassment
and abuse within humanitarian organisations gained public attention and condemnation - most
notably within Save the Children UK, UN Women and UNAIDS.
There are a number of considerations specific to the humanitarian context that DFAT’s PSEAH policy
will need to take into account:
8Power Imbalance and culture: Unequal power relations are at the heart of all forms of sexual
exploitation, abuse and harassment; however, these power inequalities are exacerbated during
times of crisis. The complexity of settings in which humanitarian action takes place – due to
displacement, family separation and the destruction of community safety structures - exacerbates
vulnerabilities and increases the risk of SEAH, particularly for women, girls, and sexual and gender
minorities. In these contexts, humanitarian workers (particularly ex-patriates) wield considerable
power, including because they control the distribution of goods and services to those who most
need them.
There are also gendered power differentials within humanitarian organisations. Research from the
Humanitarian Advisory Group suggests that ‘women are greatly underrepresented in humanitarian
leadership’ with most leadership and management positions in the sector filled by men, particularly
in the field.
In her report Cowboys and Conquering Kings on SEAH in the humanitarian sector, and the underlying
power and cultural factors that allow it to continue, Danielle Spencer suggests that
Harmful masculinities and the neo-colonial culture of the humanitarian system does result in an
atmosphere of impunity for perpetrators and an atmosphere of fear for those who would wish to
expose them and their victims’ (author’s emphasis).
She further suggests that many men who were known to be perpetrators were ‘promoted and
moved to humanitarian locations where they perpetrated again’ signalling both a culture of
impunity, and systemic failures in HR and reporting procedures.
For SEAH to be meaningfully addressed within humanitarian organisations, leadership must be
shown by women and men in management and leadership positions to embed codes of conduct and
challenge the power imbalances and culture of impunity.
Further, women’s participation in all levels of humanitarian action, including in surge, should be
promoted and supported. The ActionAid and CARE report on women in surge suggests that
women’s participation in humanitarian action both ensures that women’s issues are not neglected
by the sector, and that ‘women’s presence itself is a deterrence which safeguards women’s rights’.
HR Considerations: The rapid nature of recruitment in the humanitarian sector and the use of surge
staff means that there is less time for ‘on-boarding’ of staff and ensuring they understand and are
committed to organisational PSEAH policies. The transitory nature of field positions, the lack of a
whole of system registration and regulation system, and the under-reporting of SEAH incidents
means that it has been difficult to identify perpetrators working in the humanitarian system. This
makes the harmonisation of referencing and vetting systems particularly important. Effective and
consistent referencing, pre-screening and consent are some of the areas where a number of IASC
organisations have taken steps to prevent transgressors moving through the system.
Further discussion on HR considerations, which are relevant for both development and humanitarian
sectors, are outlined in Workplace Practices section of this submission.
Accountability: Several reports have highlighted the need for accountability mechanisms to both
address and prevent SEAH in humanitarian settings. The 2002 report into the ‘sex for food’ scandal
revealed that widespread exploitation and abuse was able to occur because there was no safe
means by which affected people could report the abuse . A subsequent study by the Humanitarian
Accountability Partnership in 2008 suggested that sexual exploitation and abuse was ‘a predictable
result of a failure of accountability to beneficiaries of humanitarian aid’.
9The 2018 Humanitarian Accountability Report shows that the humanitarian sector continues to lag
behind in terms of downward accountability, or accountability to affected populations (AAP). In its
examination of humanitarian organisations’ performance against the nine Core Humanitarian
Standard (CHS) commitments3, the lowest scoring commitment was Commitment 5: complaints are
welcomed and addressed. Further, the lowest indicators under this commitment were:
- Key Action 5.1: Communities and people affected by crisis are consulted on the design,
implementation, and monitoring of complaints handling processes; and
- Organisational Responsibility 5.6: Communities and people affected by crisis are fully aware
of the expected behaviour of humanitarian staff, including organisational commitments made on the
protection against sexual exploitation and abuse.
Localisation: The Grand Bargain acknowledges that national and local actors are first responders in
crises and have the greatest knowledge of local contexts. For this reason, it outlines that such actors
should be enabled to take a leading role in humanitarian responses, and that a major reallocation of
power and resources to national and local actors must occur.
In supporting localised humanitarian responses, donors and the humanitarian community must also
support and resource local and national actors to adequately prevent and address SEAH. Donors and
international actors must also understand the different complexities in addressing SEAH with local
and national actors. This must extend to an understanding of different cultural interpretations of
what counts as SEAH (and potentially challenging some perspectives) and understanding the
additional complexity of addressing accountability for local perpetrators who are situated within the
affected community, increasing the potential for backlash against the survivor/victim.
DFAT’s support for the localisation of humanitarian action must also ensure that existing gendered
power imbalances within the humanitarian system are not simply replicated at the local level. In
order to address these power imbalances, ensure localised responses best meet the needs of
women, girls and other diverse groups, as well to provide protection from SEAH the international
community must build the capacity and provide ongoing support to local women’s organisations and
women’s rights actors at times of humanitarian crises and on an ongoing basis. DFAT should hold
the humanitarian sector accountable for being accountable to affected populations, in line with
the Core Humanitarian Standard.
Issues related to the international context
International commitments and standards.
International alignment of minimum standards and definitions are the basis for a harmonised
approached to PSEAH. We note that the 2018 Donor Commitments commit DFAT to adhering to
either the CHS and/or the IASC MOS-PSEAH. We also note that these two standards are largely
aligned. Given that DFAT has partnerships across a range of international actors there is benefit
maintaining adherence to both standards.
The ACFID Code is aligned with the CHS and the CHS is designed for civil society and the ACFID Code
is broadly aligned with the CHS requirements. However, it is important to note that the CHS is
written to apply to humanitarian emergency response situations.
3
CHS Alliance 2019, CHS Verification Data, January 2019 - https://www.chsalliance.org/what-we-
do/verification/chs-verification-data
10There could be greater benefit in using the standards of the ACFID Code. The Code has been
reviewed to enhance PSEAH requirements. The ACFID Code takes a holistic approach to PSEAH and
has requirements that address not only the risks of incidents occurring in the immediate term, but
also obliges agencies to take steps to address the underlying causes of power imbalances such as by
addressing gender inequality.
Issues related to policy scope
Recommendation 6 – the PSEAH policy include a definition of sexual harassment that
acknowledges that sexual harassment extends beyond office based harassment to harassment
that occur between partners, implementing partners and local communities. DFAT should
encourage this definition to be taken up internationally through international processes.
Recommendation 7 - the PSEAH policy should require DFAT partners to have an organisational
wide approach to PSEAH and to implement a policy that demonstrates this.
Definitions
Consistency of definitions internationally is important to a shared understanding and approach to
PSEAH. ACFID supports the use of existing international definitions of sexual exploitation and
sexual abuse.
It is important that the definition of sexual harassment does not just a focus on office-based
harassment. Data from the VIFM report found that sexual harassment indecent occurred in the field
as well a head office. This includes incidents by aid workers against individuals from affected
population, by individual from affected population against aid workers, between aid workers and
between individuals from affected population4. ACFID supports the extension of the definition of
sexual harassment to conduct between staff and local partners and populations.
Scope of Application
SEAH can occur across at all levels of an organisation and as such we advocate for DFAT partner
organisations to take an organisational wide approach to PSEAH and have in place a policy that
demonstrates this.
The principles and approach of the policy should apply to all partners (including non-funded and
multilateral organisation) at an organisational level. However, a number of ACFID members and
other DFAT partners, work both domestically and internationally and DFAT funded projects may only
form part of their program of work. Consideration and clarity should be provided on scope of
application of the processes and reporting requirements.
While application of the policy to partners is an important approach – DFAT should recognise that a
contractual requirement is not sufficient to effectively implement PSEAH. Culture and leadership
play a key part in effective PSEAH approaches. Attitudes in different cultures and countries and
circumstances to gender, power and protection will play a role and partners need to be supported
at an organisational level but also a systemic level. The VIFM report identified areas such as gender
equity, heath and justice system strengthening that DFAT should continue to strengthen through
bilateral engagement with other government to enhance the PSEAH work of partners in countries
where they work.
4
VIFM, 2018 ‘Shaping the Path’ Independent Review into the Practice and Response of ACFID Members in the
Prevention of Sexual Misconduct p 149 https://www.vifm.org/wp-content/uploads/ACFID-Report-Final.pdf
11Australian NGOs often work through international consortiums and coordination groups that include
UN bodies, national NGOs, private sector and others. The policy needs to consider the role of DFAT
partners within this space and their ability to extend policy requirements in these situations.
Issues related to policy approach
Recommendation 8 - The PSEAH policy should promote survivor-centric and Do No Harm
approaches within the zero tolerance approach so that zero tolerance doesn’t inadvertently harm
survivors.
Recommendation 9 - The PSEAH policy should include a requirement for DFAT and its
implementing partners to communicate to stakeholders and general population are aware of the
expected behaviour of DFAT staff and its contracted partners. This should include a requirement
for organisations to implement complaints and feedback mechanisms that are accessible to
affected populations and are focussed on the needs and safety of the survivor.
Recommendation 10 - Proportionality consideration in the policy should be driven by the risk to
vulnerable people rather than the nature and size of organisations.
Recommendation 11 - The policy should allow flexibility for partners to implement a single policy
for safeguarding which meets all safeguarding requirements set out in relevant DFAT policies.
Recommendation 12 - DFAT should support its partners to work with staff, partners and
communities to address all the root causes of gender inequality including economic
empowerment, gender imbalances within organisations and gender norms and attitudes to
women’s roles
Recommendation 13 - DFAT should recognise that changing gender norms can take significant
time and resources and adequately resource and support partners to deliver such work (including
capacity development and training).
Recommendation 14 - DFAT should support Posts to build PSEAH capacity and provide a
leadership role with DFAT partners in country (for example through development of PSEAH
communities of practice at country level).
Recommendation 15 -DFAT should seek the voices and views of survivors/victims in the design
and development of this policy
Recommendation 16 - DFAT should recognise the central cost of sexual misconduct safeguarding
expertise as an eligible program costs for offshore work (for example mapping existing legal,
health psycho-social and livelihood services and capacity building with partners)
Zero tolerance
DFAT has had considerable success with their zero-tolerance approach through their fraud and child
protection policies. We would encourage DFAT to build on these approaches.
It is important to ensure that a zero tolerance to inaction approach does not undermine survivor
centric approaches. There may be some instance where limited action is in the best interests or
wishes of the survivor and policy approaches should accommodate this. Zero tolerance needs to be
handled in culturally appropriate ways and based on a Don No Harm approach.
Accommodating diversity
A one size fits all approach would not address the diversity of actors or contexts which DFAT
partners work in. While recognising the nature and size of organisations can and should impact on
their approach to PSEAH, in addressing diversity, the driving principle should be risk to vulnerable
12people not the size of an organisation. The UK Department for International Develop approach to
proportionality based on risk provides a useful approach in considering proportionality5.
There is holistic approach to safeguarding being taken in the UK and other countries – which
includes Child protections, PSEAH and other vulnerabilities. Such an approach may be beneficial to
smaller organisations or those who work in global federations. Noting that DFAT will continue a dual
policy approach, with separate Child Protection and PSEAH policies, partners should have the
flexibility to implement a single safeguarding approach within their own organisations. Any single
safeguarding approach should meet the all safeguarding requirements set out in relevant DFAT
policies.
Gender Equality and leadership
Gender equality and power imbalance is at the heart of a culture that tolerates PSEAH. ACFID
supports the submission of the ACFID Gender COP.
As found in the VIFM and other reports, overwhelmingly (but not exclusively) victims are female and
perpetrators male6. We support an approach that addresses the causes of gender inequality. While
economic empowerment and gender imbalances within organisations can form part of this
approach, gender norms and attitudes to women’s roles can normalise SEAH. DFAT should support
its partners to work with staff, partners and communities to challenge male attitudes towards
women, girls and other groups vulnerable, which allow or excuse sexual misconduct7. The Do No
Harm Toolkit8, developed by IWDA and the Department of Pacific Affairs at the Australian National
University and jointly funded by DFAT identifies key elements for integrating ending violence against
women approaches into women's economic empowerment programming and would be valuable in
considering PSEAH and gender equality issues.
Any approach to gender inequality needs to consider gender across its full spectrum and gender
norms in different contexts and communities. Shifting cultural and community norms is a complex
process that needs to be done in partnership with local communities and implementing partners.
Such topics can raise sensitivities in different contexts that need to be respected. DFAT should
recognise that this can take significant time and resources and adequately resource and support
partners to deliver such work.
We would encourage DFAT to continue to address gender inequality at systemic level through
bilateral partners and projects and to share this work with their implementing partners in order to
ensure complementarity between systemic and programmatic approaches to gender and power.
We agree that leadership is a central requirement to successful implementation of PSEAH. We
acknowledge and support culture and leadership as one of the key strategic shifts identified in the
2018 Donor commitments. The Review of the ACIFD Code identified 3 key changes practices to set a
foundation for leadership that can be articulated in a policy9; this includes:
5
Department for International Development 2018, Enhanced Due Diligence Safeguarding for External Partners
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dfid-enhanced-due-diligence-safeguarding-for-external-
partners
6
VIFM 2018 p 54 and 59
7
VIFM 2018 p 18.
8
International Women’s Development Agency, Do No Harm Toolkit https://iwda.org.au/resource/do-no-
harm-toolkit/
9
Learning 4 Development 2018, Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse Recommendations for the
ACFID Code of Conduct
13• Making an organisation commitment through an explicit policy position
• Appointing an investing in a focal person to implement the policy
• Ensuring governing bodies are made fully aware of any serious incidents and are
accountable for ensuring they are appropriates addressed
Developing effective leadership however cannot be delivered through policy development alone and
we would encourage DFAT to support partners in enhancing leadership and culture within their
own organisations. The role of DFAT in country posts could be powerful in bringing together a range
of DFAT partners in country to share information and create a leadership group on PSEAH in context
specific ways.
Victim/Survivor centric approaches
Victim/survivor centric approach must be the key driver for all approaches to PSEAH. We welcome
DFAT’s commitment to this approach and to the commitment to a survivor centric approach
outlined in the international statements, declarations and commitments that DFAT has endorsed.
We would encourage DFAT to seek the voices and views of survivors/victims (or the groups that can
represent them) in developing this policy to ensure that a survivor centric approach is central to the
approach.
Protection for whistleblowers and affected people wishing to report is essential. For most, the
decision to stay silent is an entirely rational consequence of assessing the risks and trauma involved
in coming forward, risks to their careers, their reputations, their families and even their lives,
especially when perpetrators are seen to be treated with such impunity while whistleblowers are
marginalised at best and attacked at worst.
The policy will need to ensure that processes such as reporting requirements, zero tolerance and
investigations do not unintentionally run counter to a survivor centred approach. Guides such as
those produces by Core Humanitarian Alliance and UN Women can assist partners to develop
survivor-centric protocols.
A key step towards a survivor centric approaches is for aid organisation to map existing legal, health
psycho-social and livelihood services and to ensure they are in place as soon as they arrive in a local
community. Putting such survivor centric approaches into practice often requires additional
funding, particularly in humanitarian situations.
Partners would also benefit from advice, guidance and support on survivor centric processes in
particular with investigations.
Issues related to staff integrity
Recommendation 17 - The PSEAH policy should require partners to undertake effective vetting of
and PSEAH training for staff and volunteers.
Recommendation 18 - DFAT must work with other donors to ensure interoperability between
registration/identity platforms and other forms of regulation-tech and promote the wide-scale
application of these platforms across the humanitarian and development sector. Flexibility should
be provided within the PSEAH policy to adapt to such approaches as they are implemented.
Recommendation 19 - DFAT prohibit partners from using non-disclosure agreements to settle
cases of sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment.
https://acfid.asn.au/sites/site.acfid/files/ACFID%20Code%20of%20Conduct%20PSEAH%20Review%20Final%20
Report%20by%20L4D%2028.8.18.pdf
14Recommendation 20 - The PSEAH policy should include a requirement that PSEAH is explicitly
reflected in staff Codes of Conduct, clarity is provided on consequences for breaches (include
termination of employment) and training on expected behaviours is undertaken.
Workplace practices
Movement of staff internationally is a key challenge to consistent and effective vetting systems.
This is particularly challenging in humanitarian situations which require rapid recruitment and
deployment processes.
While effective vetting processes (similar to those required under the child protection policy) should
occur in all organisations, we encourage DFAT to support the development of globally effective
vetting systems. We would encourage DFAT to draw lessons from the vetting requirement in Child
Protection and Fraud policies in considering the practicality of extension of vetting through delivery
chains.
The VIFM Report noted a number of initiatives focused on global vetting or passports for
humanitarian and development workers such as the IASC’s Inter-Agency Misconduct Disclosure
Scheme10 are being developed and tested. The purpose of these schemes is to enhance PSEAH by
working to a common minimum exchange of relevant sensitive information, while respecting
applicable legal and regulatory requirements. There are also examples of such platforms being
developed in Australia for the humanitarian sector. For example, the Australian Red Cross is
developing a blockchain-enabled identity product and open ecosystem to support the onboarding
and management of volunteers and staff for domestic and international mobilisation. The system
allows aid organisations to trust one another’s verification processes, thus reducing duplicate
identity and compliance procedures across the sector as well making the reputation of participants
more transparent. This new initiative will help accelerate novel approaches to safeguarding the
communities that aid agencies support. The Disability Worker Exclusion Scheme11 currently in place
in Victoria provides a useful model for how an Australian based system may be implemented within
our sector. Such processes must address both the interested of victim/survivors and natural justice
and privacy protections. As recommended by the VIFM report we would encourage DFAT to
monitor the development of multi-lateral international passporting and registration schemes and
other forms of regulation-tech12 and provide flexibility within the policy to adapt to such
approaches as they are implemented.
Navigating privacy concerns in reducing movement of individuals who had admitted to sexual abuse
and misconduct through the sector is challenging. However, non-disclosure agreements have added
to this difficulty. Australia’s Sex Discrimination Commissioner has noted that Non-disclosure
Agreements have prevented organisations learning from past incidents and taking steps to prevent
them reoccurring13. DFAT should consider prohibiting non-disclosure agreements to settle cases of
sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment.
10
IASC November 2018, Inter-Agency Misconduct Disclosure Scheme Final Draft
https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/accountability-affected-populations-including-protection-sexual-
exploitation-and-abuse/news-87
11
VIFM 2018, pg 85, https://providers.dhhs.vic.gov.au/disability-worker-exclusion-scheme
12
VIFM 2018, Recommendation 3.
13
Attard, Maria, 2018, ‘Confidentiality agreements frustrate national inquiry into workplace sexual
harassment,’ ABC News, 20 Nov 2018, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-20/sexual-harassment-
workplace-inquiry-confidentiality-agreements/10513908
15Organisational Code of Conduct can be a powerful tool in setting and shaping clarity and
expectations regarding behaviours. Staff should be aware of the shared responsibility in PSEAH,
their expected behaviours and the consequences for misconduct. The review of ACFID’s Code of
Conduct14 recommended that PSEAH is explicitly reflected in staff Codes of Conduct, clarity is
provided on consequences for breaches (include termination of employment) and training on
expected behaviours is undertaken. Expected behaviours should also be made clear to
implementing partners, communities and the public.15
Transactional sex
The exchange of money, employment goods or services for sex (transactional sex) is often based in
power imbalances. We acknowledge that sex workers are not inherently vulnerable and exploited.
We also recognise that not all transactional sex involves sex workers or those who identify as sex
workers. There are a range of complex issues surrounding transactional sex including, consent,
power imbalances and livelihoods.
Any policy approach to transactional sex should be focused on eliminating exploitation and
predation on the part of those procuring sex. DFAT policy should ensure that partners and
downstream partners have an informed and understanding of what behaviours are inappropriate.
Partners should also undertake a contextual power analysis for each different operating
environment, and then a clear policy position communicated to relevant working staff and partners.
Issues related to reporting
Recommendation 21 - the PSEAH policy should require allegations involving criminal sexual
misconduct to reported to local enforcement authorities as a default position. This should be
regardless of local mandatory obligations, unless this is at odds with the wishes or welfare of the
affected person or the life or serious welfare of the alleged perpetrator.
Recommendation 22 - Reporting systems need to be able to allow for confidential, anonymous
and informal reporting. They need to be integrated into organisations existing community-based
complaints and reporting systems.
Recommendation 23 - DFAT consider prioritise how it could centralise resourcing and building
capacity for investigations among their commercial and non-government partners as a Government
leadership and efficiency measure.
Recommendation 24 - DFAT build their own capacity to effectively manage PSEAH reporting. This
would need to include ensuring:
a. DFAT teams have appropriate skills and knowledge of survivor centric approaches and
best practice in PSEAH investigation. This may include recognising that limited action on a
report may be in the best interests of a survivor.
b. DFAT teams can provide technical advice and support to partners, particularly in regards
to survivor centric approaches and investigations.
c. reports can be address quickly - delays to SEAH cases could result in additional harm.
d. a culture of encouraging reporting is developed. It is important for organisation to feel
that they will not be negatively affected for reporting.
Reporting by partners to DFAT
ACFID agrees that effective reporting systems can help create a culture of accountability and
transparency as well as valuable information on understanding and responding to the problem.
14
Learning 4 Development 2018
15
VIFM Report, 2018 Recommendation 19 and Learning 4 Development 2018
16There has been considerable progress and success seen through DFAT reporting requirement for
Child Protection and Fraud and we would encourage DFAT to build on the success and lessons from
these approaches. ACFID recognises that three quarter of the Child Protections notifications to DFAT
between 2015-2017 did not involve Australian NGOs. We support the requirement for reporting
across all DFAT partners.
We know that underreporting of SEAH is high - difficult reporting processes, lack of assistance and
support, confidentiality concerns, lack of action and possibility of redress, risks of losing aid or risk to
careers and reputations have all been identified as barriers to reporting. 16
In May 2018, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee’s PSEAH Task team developed 7 key messages
for Donors aimed at enhancing their work on PSEAH. One of their key messages was to shift
reporting requirements from quantitative to qualitative. What is important is not the number of
cases or the number of complaint mechanisms but the quality of the PSEAH systems in place and
how they protect and respond to affected people17.
The safety, well-being and wishes of the survivor must be at the centre of PSEAH reporting
responses. It is important that the requirement for reporting does not drive the approaches to
PSEAH. Reporting systems need to be able to allow for confidential, anonymous and informal
reporting. Though the extent to which such reports can be investigated may be limited, they do
provide useful information on the extend of the issue and the challenges in reporting.
There is the potential for confusion among partners and communities and an overburden for DFAT
partners in complaints and reporting requirements. Reporting systems need to be integrated into
organisations existing community-based reporting systems.
Many organisations do not have staff with skills and capacity to undertake appropriate investigations
in this area. DFAT should give consideration to resourcing/building capacity for investigations
among their partners.
The VIFM report identified that there is an over-reliance on internal reporting, support services and
investigation processes and a reluctance to report criminal sexual misconduct to local law
enforcement authorities. Acknowledging that there is significant variation in capacity of local
authorities to effectively address SEAH issue and the primary importance of a survivor centric
approaches, partner should be reporting criminal offenses. to the appropriate authorities.
It is important the DFAT build their own capacity to effectively manage PSEAH reporting. This would
need to include ensuring:
• DFAT teams have appropriate skills and knowledge of survivor centric approaches and best
practice in PSEAH investigation. This may include recognising that limited action on a report
may be in the best interests of a survivor.
• DFAT teams can provide technical advice and support to partners, particularly in regards to
survivor centric approaches and investigations.
16
HAP 2008, ‘ To complain or not to complain: still the question
http://www.PSEAHtaskforce.org/uploads/tools/tocomplainornottocomplainstillthequestion_hapinternational
_english.pdf ; CHS Alliance 2018 p 77 ; Martin V, 2010, Literature Review: Complaints Mechanisms and
Handling of Exploitation and Abuse Submitted to the Humanitarian Accountability Partnership Standard
Review Process Working Group on Handling Complaints of Exploitation and Abuse March 9, 2010
http://www.PSEAHtaskforce.org/uploads/tools/literaturereviewcomplaintsmechanismsandhandlingofexploitai
tonandabuse_veronikamartinhapinternational_english.pdf
17
IASC June 2018
17• complaints can be address quickly. It is noted that fraud cases can take months to be
reviewed/processed by DFAT; such delays to SEAH cases could result in additional harm.
• a culture of encouraging reporting is developed. It is important for organisation to feel that
they will not be negatively affected for reporting.
There is the potential for a proliferation of reporting requirements regarding vulnerable people.
Consideration should be given to aligning the requirement of donors and government agencies so
that each case only requires one reporting and investigation process. The VIFM report has
recommended the establishment a Reportable Conduct Scheme (RCS) subject to funding and
legislative requirements to apply to all organisations subject to the ACNC External Conduct Standard.
ACFID has called on the Government to implement such a scheme. At the international
Safeguarding Summit held in the UK in October 2018, donors made commitments to clearly
communicate requirements for the reporting of incidents and to work towards aligned reporting
practices18. We encourage DFAT to monitor national and international reporting requirement and
ensure the policy can response to reduce reporting burdens.
Guidance
ACFID welcomes DFAT’s focus on supporting partners through good practice guidance and
resources.
With significant focus on PSEAH globally, there is a risk of proliferation of guidance and tools with
separate specific requirements. We would encourage DFAT to monitor progress on the proposed
International Safeguarding Hub and identify where DFAT and its partners can provide additional
context specific guidance.
The VIFM report highlighted a number of areas where resources would be valuable19. These include
• practical implementation guides for localisation of sexual misconduct policies for
implementing partner organisations.
• a Safeguarding Expertise Register for specialist investigation agencies and
investigation trainers; medico-legal services and ethics advisory bodies.
Significant guidance and good practice exists among DFAT partners. Good Practice solutions by the
sector to addressing PSEAH should be supported by DFAT, starting with a conversation with the
humanitarian sector on how this can be done.
ACFID will continue to work with DFAT through the PSEAH working group to share and align resource
and training in PSEAH.
Other issues to consider
Recommendation 25 - DFAT advocate for aligned policy and reporting requirements with other
donors
Recommendation 26 - DFAT commit to continued learning and a policy review after one year in
order to update the policy as required to ensure it is fit for purpose.
18
Commitments made by donors to tackle sexual exploitation and abuse and sexual harassment in the
international aid sector, October 2018
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/749632/
donor-commitments1.pdf
19
VIFM report 2018, Recommendation 30
18Alignment
International alignment
The strong engagement of international processes in PSEAH issues highlight the international nature
of development and humanitarian systems as well as foreign policy systems. As outlined in the 22
Donor recommendations and recommendations from ‘Shaping the Path’ we encourage DFAT to
advocate globally for aligned policy and reporting requirements and in particular, for international
donor cross-recognition and accreditation of the ANCP accreditation system and ACFID Code of
Conduct and ancillary Quality Assurance Framework systems1. This could be done through the
donors technical group on PSEAH and the implementation of the 22 donor commitments.
Interaction and alignment between the Child Protection and PSEAH policy
We would encourage DFAT to ensure alignment and clarity between requirements of their Child
Protection Policy and PSEAH policy – in particular in relation to reporting requirements. While there
are areas of overlap, there are also specific risk factors and dynamics of offending relating to the
sexual exploitation and abuse of children and specific response requirements. These are often
different to SEAH of adults and it is important that these requirements are addressed effectively
within the PSEAH policy. ACFID supports the submission of the ACFID Child Rights Community of
Practice in consideration of child rights perspectives in PSEAH.
Implementation of the policy
We note that DFAT intends to have developed a final PSEAH policy by April 2019. Given the short
timeframes and the complexity of implementing effective PSEAH systems and practice, we
recommend DFAT commit to continued learning and a policy review after one year in order to
update the policy as required to ensure it is fit for purpose.
Noting the complexity of PSEAH and the success DFAT and its partners have had in committing
significant focus and resources to Child Protection and Fraud control, we would encourage DFAT to
ensure adequate resources to effective implementation of the PSEAH policy across DFAT and with
partners.
19You can also read
