question
Q. What mechanisms has UNHCR put in place to ensure accountability in its protection efforts, and how effective are these mechanisms in practice?
UNHCR, as an international agency responsible for administering the UN Refugee Convention, has established several mechanisms to enhance accountability for its protection work. These mechanisms include:
Evaluation and Policy Analysis Unit (EPAU): This internal unit conducts evaluations and produces reports aimed at assessing UNHCR's operations. However, the scope and content of these reports can be influenced by the information available and the staff's willingness to disclose certain details.
Office of International Oversight Services (OIOS): OIOS primarily conducts audits related to UNHCR's use of operational funds and services. These audits focus on financial accountability and operational efficiency.
Inspector General's Office (IGO) serves as a channel for feedback and concerns from affected populations, allowing them to engage with UNHCR directly through email.
In practice, the effectiveness of these mechanisms can vary, and their impact on improving accountability may not always align with their intended roles. Additionally, UNHCR's accountability is also subject to scrutiny by donor governments, with a particular emphasis on fiscal accountability in fund management.
Ask the office for information about the upcoming UNHCR appointments for case processing interviews, the contact number of the info-line/helpdesk and information leaflets, the location of the complaint boxes if available, and how you can access the the operational level complaint or feedback mechanisms or the Inspector General's Office.
Tags
gap minder
Accountability Beyond Review
International law scholars have long been debating how the evolving nature, character, and limits of the global administrative law could be applicable the hearings, acts, and decisions of UNHCR which remain not reviewable. But until such a paradigm shift happens, in instances when UNHCR commits procedural breaches in undertaking protection activities while playing a “state substitution role” and failing to advocate with the governments to protect the rights of the people, Inspector General's Office is the only available mechanisms for the affected populations to hold the organisation into account for not living up to their protection obligations.
While UNHCR outlines a framework of accountability through its existing mechanisms, their application and effectiveness need to be questioned on transparency and constructiveness of internal dialogue and learning with a responsive communication channel between refugees and UNHCR, one that transcends beyond formal participatory assessments and allows for real-time, unfiltered feedback. We could interpret the Inspector General's Office figures presented to Executive Committee to consistently represent a positive trend in UNHCR’s efforts to reinforce an internal system to address misconduct and create an environment in which the staff aggrieved by misconduct, and witnesses, feel able to speak up and report concerns without fear of retaliation or other negative repercussions for their careers or personal lives. However, the observed uptick trend in the Inspector General's Office's reports cannot be fully understood or validated without detailed data answering the following critical questions.
Questions:
- What is the number of complaints made by the persons of concern to UNHCR?
- Through which channels they were made?
- What they were about?
- How were they were resolved.
- What measures does UNHCR have in place to prevent and rectify indirect violations or acts of omission?
- How does UNHCR track and report on indirect violations or acts of omission within their operations?
- How are such instances handled and what steps are taken to mitigate their impact?
- What safeguards are in place to ensure accountability for such violations?
- How transparent and open to scrutiny are the internal processes of UNHCR in practice?
- Are there robust, accessible channels for refugees to voice grievances and provide unmediated feedback to seek corrective action?
- How does UNHCR handle internal criticism and use it to drive positive changes in their operations?
- In what ways can UNHCR improve its engagement with donors to ensure a transparent and honest representation of refugee situations?
- How could UNHCR foster a culture that values spontaneous and unfiltered feedback from those it serves?
