Report from the Commission on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 443/97 of 3 March 1997 on operations to aid uprooted people in Asian and Latin American developing countries - Consolidated report for 1997-1999
Date: 2000-06-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Asia, Latin America, aid to refugees, development aid, humanitarian aid

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 16.06.2000
COM (2000) 367 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION

on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 443/97 of 3 March 1997 on
operations to aid uprooted people in Asian and Latin American developing countries

Consolidated report for 1997-1999

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction: refugees, displaced persons and returnees worldwide

1. THE REFUGEE ISSUE IN ASIA AND LATIN AMERICA.................................. 7

1.1.

Overview of the situation in Asia.................................................................. 7

1.1.1.

1.1.2.

1.1.3.

1.1.4.

1.1.5.

1.1.6.

1.1.7.

1.1.8.

1.1.9.

Afghanistan .............................................................................................. 7

Afghanistan/Pakistan................................................................................ 7

Afghanistan/Iran....................................................................................... 7

Bangladesh/Myanmar............................................................................... 8

Thailand/Myanmar ................................................................................... 8

Bhutan/Nepal ........................................................................................... 8

Sri Lanka.................................................................................................. 8

Indonesia.................................................................................................. 9

Cambodia ................................................................................................. 9

1.2.

Overview of the situation in Latin America .................................................. 9

1.2.1.

1.2.2.

1.2.3.

1.2.4.

1.2.5.

Guatemala ................................................................................................ 9

Mexico ..................................................................................................... 9

Nicaragua ................................................................................................. 9

El Salvador............................................................................................. 10

Honduras................................................................................................ 10

2. IMPLEMENTATION OF AID FOR THE UPROOTED...................................... 10

2.1.

Guidelines .................................................................................................. 11

2.1.1.

2.1.2.

Asia........................................................................................................ 11

Latin America ........................................................................................ 11

2.2.

Implementation .......................................................................................... 13

2.2.1.

2.2.2.

2.2.3.

2.2.4.

2.2.5.

Grounds for the diversity of operations................................................... 13

The resources available .......................................................................... 13

Contracting arrangements....................................................................... 14

Sectors of activity by region ................................................................... 15

Partners .................................................................................................. 16

2.3.

Coordination............................................................................................... 17

2

2.3.1.

2.3.2.

Internal coordination .............................................................................. 17

Coordination and liaison with other donors............................................. 17

2.4.

Supervision and management of programmes by the Commission .............. 17

2.4.1.

Supervision and monitoring ........................................................................ 17

2.4.2.

Review of projects by the Commission................................................... 18

2.5

Review of operations, including findings of evaluations

by outside experts ......................................................................................... 18

3. CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................. 19

3

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION

Introduction: refugees, displaced persons and returnees worldwide

This report has been drawn up in fulfilment of Article 12 of Council Regulation (EC)
No 443/97 of 3 March 1997 on operations to aid uprooted people in Asian and Latin
American developing countries.1 In view of its late drafting, it covers activities planned and
implemented throughout the period covered by the Regulation, namely 1997-99.

According to the latest estimates by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees
(UNHCR),2 there were 21.5 million uprooted people3 (refugees, returnees, displaced persons)
in the world at the start of 1999, 5.5 million of them Asia. In Latin America, the same
estimates suggest that political change and aid have reduced the numbers to no more than
100 000.

From 19844 to 1997 the Commission used an ad hoc budget heading with no legal basis to
launch and fund projects for these people. Throughout those years the Commission drew up
and published regular implementation reports.

Regulation (EC) No 443/97 entered into force on 3 March 1997. While allowing some
flexibility, it defines the objectives of aid to uprooted people and distinguishes it from both
humanitarian aid and rehabilitation and development aid. The development programmes
financed take place before any real social policy or economic stability is possible.

The Regulation has enabled measures to be financed at every stage of the displacement
process: aid to refugees or internally displaced persons, aid before or during repatriation and
aid for the social and economic reintegration of returnees.

It has addressed the needs of people uprooted for a variety of reasons, be it prolonged internal
conflict or the political and economic marginalisation of certain groups or minorities. In some
places, the two situations exist side by side.

1

2

3

4

Council Regulation (EC) No 443/97 of 3 March 1997 on operations to aid uprooted people in Asian and
Latin American developing countries - OJ No 68, 8.3.1997, pp.1-4 – Art. 12 of Regulation n° 443/97:
"After each budget year, the Commission shall submit to an annual report to the European Parliament
and to the Council, summarising the operations financed in the course of that year and evaluating the
implementation of this Regulation over that period. The summary shall in particular provide iformation
those with whom contracts have been concluded. The report shall also summarise any
about
independent evaluations of specific operations."

UNHCR-Global Appeal 2000, December 1999
The Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951 defines a refugee as any person
who,"owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality,
membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality,
and is unable to or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country."
The term "displaced persons" refers to persons who, like refugees, flee their place of origin, but, unlike
refugees, remain inside their country. A "returnee" is any person returning to his or her country of
origin. For the purposes of this report, returnees are former exiles (who left for the reasons cited above).
The year in which the European Parliament prompted the creation of the budget heading "Aid towards
self-sufficiency for refugees and displaced persons" in Asian and Latin American developing countries.

4

The circumstances that uprooted people in Asia and Latin America during the period in
question are complex. In Asia they have mainly been the consequence of civil wars rooted in
political or ethnic cleavages (Afghanistan, Burma, Cambodia, Sri Lanka). In Latin America
too they are the result of protracted civil war.

There are various situations in which uprooted people need international aid:

i)

ii)

iii)

iv)

v)

vi)

refugees remaining in the country of first asylum;

internally displaced persons having to cope away from their village and region of
origin;

returnees from abroad or other parts of the country;

demobilised soldiers or fighters;

in Asia, people living in the vicinity of refugee camps in the country of first asylum,
whose economic situation cannot be consistently worse than that of the refugees
living among them;

people still in their place of origin who need aid to survive if they are not to increase
the numbers of refugees.

Since the operations financed take an average of two years, the implementation report covers
some projects first financed before the reporting period, while others decided during the
reporting period will largely be implemented in the years ahead.

5

1. THE REFUGEE ISSUE IN ASIA AND LATIN AMERICA

1.1. Overview of the situation in Asia

1.1.1.

Afghanistan

There appears to be no immediate prospect of a solution to the political crisis that has beset
Afghanistan since 1978.

Afghans remain the world's largest refugee group. Official UNHCR estimates suggest that
there are still 1.2 million refugees in Pakistan and 1.4 million in Iran. A further 343 000
internally displaced persons or returnees are still reckoned to need external aid. Births and
continuing migration mean that the real figures are likely to be much higher.

In 1999 the UNHCR oversaw the voluntary return of about 90 000 Afghans from Pakistan
and 6000 from Iran. A similar number returned with the help of Afghanistan's embassy in
Teheran or the Iranian-backed Hezb e Wahadat, the country's main Shi'ite political party.

Though there is no official record of new arrivals (asylum seekers or economic migrants) or
the numbers of Afghans born in Pakistan and Iran, the latter figure probably exceeds 150 000
a year. The most recent repatriation operation took place in the Taliban-controlled southern
and eastern provinces, which are relatively calm. People have been far less keen to return to
the northern, western and central provinces, where fighting continues.

Recession in Pakistan and Iran has also encouraged refugees to return to Afghanistan.
Without a comprehensive political settlement to the conflict or a reconstruction programme,
however, there is little scope for increasing the rate of return. Moreover, continued fighting is
maintaining a steady flow of internally displaced persons away from the frontline.

1.1.2.

Afghanistan/Pakistan

Pakistan, which has signed neither the 1951 Convention on refugees nor the 1967 Protocol
thereto, has pursued its generous asylum policy for Afghan refugees (most of them Pathans),
granting them freedom of movement and access to employment. The influx of the early 1980s
was followed by another wave of Afghan refugees after the Taliban took Kabul in 1996. The
fall of Mazar-I-Sharif in 1998 brought more refugees, most of them from ethnic minorities. A
summer offensive by the Taliban saw this trend continue in 1999. Pakistan's new military
the refugees are
government appears to have a similar attitude to the refugees. Yet
increasingly being blamed for the country's economic crisis and worsening economic and
social conditions.

1.1.3.

Afghanistan/Iran

The number of Afghan refugees in the Islamic Republic of Iran (most of them Tajiks and
Hazars) has fallen from between 4.5 and 5 million at the height of the crisis in their country to
1.4 million today. Only a small proportion live in camps, the great majority having been
integrated into local communities. Similarly, they have enjoyed access to Iran's public and
social services for the past twenty years. However, the climate is increasingly in favour of the
to facilitate the
return of Afghan refugees. Iran and the UNHCR signed an agreement
voluntary repatriation of Afghan refugees in February 1999.

6

1.1.4.

Bangladesh/Myanmar

In 1991 and 1992 discrimination caused more than 250 000 Muslims to flee Rakhine State in
northern Myanmar (Burma) for Bangladesh. Though most have now returned, about 22 500
continue to live under UNHCR protection in the two remaining camps pending a settlement.
Myanmar halted the repatriation operation in August 1997. The process resumed on a very
limited scale in November 1998. According to the UNHCR, only 600 people returned to
Myanmar between November 1998 and September 1999.

The position of the returnees remains highly precarious because they are stateless and have no
travel permits. They therefore remain in need of resettlement support and international
protection.

1.1.5.

Thailand/Myanmar

Most of the minorities living along Myanmar's frontier with Thailand have been in open
rebellion against the military regime for years. In June 1998 the Thai government formally
asked the UNHCR to help it cope with Karen and Karenni refugees from human rights abuses
in Myanmar. These refugees were sheltering in camps along the frontier, which made them
vulnerable to incursions by the Burmese armed forces. At the end of 1999 there were about
107 000 refugees in Thailand.

1.1.6.

Bhutan/Nepal

It is unlikely that the 95 600 people living in camps in Nepal will be able to return home in
the foreseeable future. This refugee problem dates back to 1990, when the Bhutanese
authorities' announcement of a national integration policy scared citizens of Nepalese origin
into fleeing southern Bhutan.

Despite several rounds of talks, the governments of Bhutan and Nepal have yet to reach an
agreement permitting the refugees to return. The main sticking-point is checking that the
refugees are actually Bhutanese nationals, there being no common frontier between the two
countries and strong demographic pressure from their neighbours. However, recent progress
offers some hope for a settlement in the near future. The refugees in the Jhapa and Morang
districts of eastern Nepal remain dependent on international aid.

1.1.7.

Sri Lanka

The war waged by the Sri Lankan authorities and the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil
Eelam (LTTE) in the north of the island has claimed over 55 000 lives since 1983. The
destruction has been such that thousands of Tamils have sought refuge in India or other parts
of the island. The UNHCR reckons that there are about 800 000 internally displaced persons
in Sri Lanka's northern provinces.

At the same time about 140 000 displaced persons have returned to Jaffna, while others have
made their way to the southern regions of Vavuniya and Mannar. The violence has also
caused repeated population movements in the Vanni region and further departures for India.
Since March 1999 another 20 000 people have been displaced.

7

1.1.8.

Indonesia

independence

Between voting for
referendum and gaining that
independence, over three-quarters of East Timor's people were displaced and over 70% of
housing and public buildings destroyed. About 200 000 people have been expelled from East
Timor and other regions of Indonesia. Half a million more reportedly fled to the mountains.

in August 1999's

1.1.9. Cambodia

In the 1970s thousands of Cambodians fled the large-scale human rights violations of the Pol
Pot regime for Thailand. Renewed fighting between government forces and the Kampuchean
National Army (Khmer Rouge) in July 1997 displaced many and drove thousands of others
over the Thai border.

Following the formation of a coalition between the government and the opposition in
late 1998, the voluntary repatriation from Thailand of about 37 000 Cambodian refugees
picked up speed, being completed in April 1999. The camps along the Thai border were then
closed down. There remains, however, the problem of demobilising soldiers.

1.2. Overview of the situation in Latin America

1.2.1. Guatemala

Since the peace accords signed on 29 December 1996 put an end to a 36-year civil war, which
left 100 000 dead, 30 000 "disappeared" and almost a million internally displaced persons or
refugees, the process of resettling the uprooted and demobilised fighters has generated
considerable needs.

1.2.2. Mexico

Recent years have seen steady progress towards a positive outcome for uprooted people in
Mexico. The signing of peace agreements in Guatemala and a political will to integrate
Guatemalan refugees wishing to remain in Mexico (a measure decreed by President Zedillo)
brought the repatriation process to a close in July 1999 and ended Guatemalans' exile in
Mexico.

Over 40 000 refugees returned to Guatemala, while 23 000 others opted for integration into
Mexican society.5

In Chiapas the awkward political situation and the government's sensitivity about foreign
interference have led the Commission to keep a low profile while continuing programmes to
generate economic inputs and prepare Guatemalan refugees for return. Help for Mexicans
displaced by the Zapatista conflict has been confined to strictly humanitarian assistance.

1.2.3. Nicaragua

Nicaragua is both the country where the conflict has been settled longest and that where
spending under this budget heading has been highest (in 1997 and 1998).

5

About 2300 in the State of Quintana Roo, 9200 in Campeche and 12 400 in Chiapas. Note that over half
are children born on Mexican soil and therefore entitled to choose Mexican nationality on reaching their
majority.

8

Activities have been concentrated in the north of the country, once the theatre of the war,
where aid and assistance for self-sufficiency have laid the foundations for reconciliation and
rehabilitation.6

Ten years after the signing of the peace agreements and two peaceful changes of government,
Nicaragua is well on the way to political normalisation. The fact that some small armed
groups remain accounts for the special attention given to the country.

1.2.4.

El Salvador

The long process of national
January 1992's peace agreements has been consolidated in recent years.

reconciliation and democratisation undertaken since

However, the definitive integration of displaced groups in the country has been impeded by
the slow registration of land ownership, the difficulties of transferring social and production
infrastructure from asentamientos humanos (human settlements) in Morazan and
Chalatenango departments, and farm debt. These problems account for the projects financed
under the Regulation for uprooted peoples.

1.2.5. Honduras

In 1992 the International Court of Justice in The Hague ruled in Honduras's favour in the
"Bolsones" frontier dispute with El Salvador, confirming its sovereignty over the area.

The disputed area, which was a war zone in the Salvadorean conflict, now shelters some 4000
people of Salvadorean origin and former combatants of the FMLN. The Commission set up a
project in 1994 to promote self-reliance and smooth the institutional transition.

In 1998 this initial project had to be supplemented by support for production, industrial
development and the improvement of basic infrastructure, with due consideration for the
area's very fragile environment.

2. IMPLEMENTATION OF AID FOR THE UPROOTED

2.1. Guidelines

To take account of the sheer diversity of situations experienced by uprooted people in Asia
and Latin America,
the Commission adopted the following guidelines for programmes
financed under this instrument in the period 1997-99.

a)

6

Some countries emerging from prolonged crises have seen peace processes enabling
large numbers of refugees to return to their countries of origin. Examples include
Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. In such cases
activities under heading B7-212 have focused on the long-term resettlement of
uprooted people, which entails a strategy of
rehabilitation, development and
cooperation with the governments concerned. Aid for uprooted people helps
reinforce the peace process under way, stimulate production, create jobs and income
and relaunch social services.

Nine similar projects jointly executed by the Commission and successive Nicaraguan governments
(successively under the PRRN, MAS and the IDR) represent, when extensions are included, a
Community commitment of the order of EUR 40 million.

9

b)

Other countries, among them Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Afghanistan, are still
suffering internal hostilities, violations of human rights and the fear of losing their
cultural identity. In such countries the aim is to mitigate the impact of the conflict by
financing operations of a stabilising nature.

Elsewhere the marginalisation of ethnic minorities has caused population movements.
Examples include Bhutanese in south-east Nepal, Chakma in Bangladesh or Rohingya, Mon
or Karen in Burma. Such situations warrant particular attention.

2.1.1.

Asia

In Asia operations have been designed in the light of the (often volatile) situation on the
ground and the process of protracted residence in camps, repatriation, resettlement and
reintegration, which comprises the following stages:7

i)

ii)

iii)

preparing for the return of refugees, with a particular emphasis on vocational training
programmes aimed at helping refugees acquire skills relevant to their resettlement in
their country of origin and their temporary integration into the economy of the host
country; the emphasis is also on health services, and in particular mother-and-baby
projects, and basic education;

assisting repatriation by helping transport refugees, their goods and livestock and
providing basic household goods;

rehabilitating basic infrastructure (schools, wells,

resettlement in the country of origin, which can involve reintegrating people into the
social and economic fabric, supplying water, restarting production on a long-term
basis,
irrigation channels,
secondary roads etc.), distributing seeds, granting loans to increase income and
relaunching basic health and education services, including vocational training and
outreach programmes.

Where possible, priority has been given to the most vulnerable groups: widows, families with
no income, mothers and children and the handicapped.

2.1.2.

Latin America

Since 19848 the Commission has, in addition to supporting political dialogue and peace
through the Diálogo de San José,9 done much to assist and promote the self sufficiency of
people uprooted by armed conflict in Latin America.

Since 1989 in particular,
framework of

the Conferencia Internacional

in conjunction with the Esquipulas II agreement10 and in the
sobre los Refugiados Centromericanos

7

8

9

10

The ALA Committee approved general guidelines for activities under budget heading B7-212 in 1998
and 1999 in April of those years.
The year in which the European Parliament prompted the creation of the budget heading "Aid towards
self-sufficiency for refugees and displaced persons" in Asian and Latin American developing countries.
The San José Dialogue is a model process of political and economic coordination and cooperation. It is
aimed at restoring peace and democracy in preparation for more equitable and sustainable development
in a context of regional integration.
The peace initiative launched by the five Central American heads of state in 1987 at the behest of Costa
Rican President and holder of the Nobel Peace Prize, Oscar Arias.

10

CIREFCA,11 there has been a massive expansion in the Community's activities in Central
America (2 million beneficiaries and almost EUR 150 million in funding).

In this time the Commission has backed localised operations aimed at reconstructing the
social fabric and reviving the tattered economies of former war zones.

From the early days of direct assistance to victims of the fighting, the focus of the Community
programme has in recent years, with the restoration of peace, gradually shifted towards
measures aimed at promoting self-sufficiency, reintegration into social and economic life and
social cohesion.

The priorities for the period 1997-99 were to contribute to the Guatemalan peace process, the
newest and perhaps the most complex in the region,12 and help consolidate the processes of
reconciliation and social and economic development under way in El Salvador and Nicaragua.

This delicate task had to be performed in a difficult situation: the Central American countries
continue to suffer serious structural problems.

The content of the aid has been geared to consolidating the efforts of the past ten years,
acquiring all the while an increasingly regional, comprehensive dimension contrasting with
the one-off operations of the past.

The main planks of the intervention strategy have been:

• to encourage the exploitation, consolidation and globalisation of past operations, with
special emphasis on basic social services (health and education), in order to complete them
in the best possible conditions and to promote the transfer of responsibilities to the
competent national institutions;

• to promote economic revival and integration by means of technical assistance, supervised
credit,13 agricultural diversification, organisation, creating non-agricultural
jobs and,
crucially, developing the recipients' commercial capabilities. In this area, priority has been
given to the most vulnerable groups, such as widows and the war disabled;

• to guarantee a territorial approach, extending the benefits of this heading beyond the
traditional beneficiaries to neighbouring or host communities living in what are sometimes
even worse conditions, who cannot reasonably be excluded from the development
processes being stimulated.

11

12

13

A process launched by the UNHCR and the UNDP in 1989, which brought together, though fighting
continued, Central America's heads of state heads, the international community and civil society to seek
a practical solution to the population movements affecting the region. In five years the action plan
received about EUR 450 million, most of it from the Commission and the Member States.
See joint declaration signed on 6 June 1997 by Foreign Minister Eduardo Stein and Commissioner
Marín.
The credit fund has gradually become a key instrument in projects, mulitplying the benefits of the
resources available and promoting a "credit" culture among the beneficiaries that can bridge the gap
between assistance and economic development.

11

2.2.

Implementation

2.2.1. Grounds for the diversity of operations

Any analysis of the effectiveness of the operations financed must
take account of the
objectives laid down in the Regulation and the often difficult circumstances in which they
were implemented.

As described above, the Commission has funded operations in countries where internal
conflict persists, political and economic marginalisation continues and national reconciliation
has made repatriation and permanent reintegration possible. These circumstances vary in their
nature and intensity. They therefore demand a range of strategies, policies and appropriate
technical responses. The implementation of projects in these conditions can also call for
measures and responses specific to uncommon situations.

The successful implementation of projects depends largely, though not exclusively, on the
degree of conflict and the process of national reconciliation. The scale of the damage to the
country's economic and social fabric is another key factor.

The projects launched in the period 1997-1999 reflect the diversity of the problem of uprooted
people in Asia and Latin America.

2.2.2.

The resources available

For the first two years of the period covered by this report, budget resources for the two
regions were grouped in a single heading (B7-2120). The budgetary authority split
the
heading in two for 1999 (B7-3020 for Asia and B7-3120 for Latin America).

a) Commitments

The below table breaks down commitments by region:

Asia - 1997 Asia - 1998 Asia - 1999

Latin
America -
1997

Latin
America -
1998

Latin
America -
1999

Total

€
36 117 300

€
37 623 600

€
29 550 000

€
20 860 000

€
15 220 000

€
20 715 000

€
159 087 900

Actual
commitment

% of
allocation

Budget

budget

95.04

99

77.86

97.7

71.3

99.88

89.71

€
38 000 000

€
38 000 000

€
37 950 000

€
21 350 000

€
21 350 000

€
21 240 000

€
177 890 000

Generally speaking, the commitment rate has been relatively high (almost 90%), though it
dipped in 1998 for Latin America and 1999 for Asia. In 1997 and 1998 the Commission
divided the allocation between the two regions. When the budgetary authority split
the
heading in 1999, the allocations remained the same.

The breakdown of funds between the regions shows the substantial percentage earmarked for
Latin America. The Commission felt that Community aid could contribute to the peace
process in the region. These efforts helped reintegrate uprooted people into economic and
social life. This being so, the Commission has proposed no allocation for Latin America in the
2000 budget. In Asia conflict makes operations in support of self-sufficiency more difficult.

12

If account is taken of the numbers of people concerned, Latin America has received a far
greater share of the funding. However, in Asia continuing conflict meant that Community
funding could do no more than help people survive and prepare them for return sometime in
the distant future. In Central America it was able to play a key role in a long-term solution to
the problem in a new political order.

b) Payments

Payments *

% of actual
commitments

* to 7 January 2000

Asia - 1997

Asia - 1998 Asia - 1999

Latin
America -
1997

€

27 978 666

€

14 400 802

€

0**

€

13 564 861

Latin
America -
1998

€

4 235 186

77.46

38.27

0

65.02

27.82

Latin America
- 1999

€

0**

0

** Contracts unsigned at 15 February 2000.

c) Operations financed

Some 111 operations were financed during the period, 67 of them in Asia and 44 in Latin
€
1 433 200 per project. When broken down regionally, grants were
America. Grants averaged
€
€
1 290 000) owing to differences
1 542 252) than Latin America (
larger on average in Asia (
in needs and conditions.

The number of operations in each budget year was as follows:

1997

1998

1999

Asia

Latin America

41

27

18

11

8

614

Given the continuing need, each operation, and many of them are still under way, follows on
from earlier projects and is the subject of a contract or financing agreement with the partner
implementing it. The signing of contracts for the 1998 budget year was delayed by the
reorganisation of the Relex services and the writing into those contracts of tighter procedures.
As a result contracts were not finalised until summer 1999.

This had knock-on effects on the signing of contracts for the 1999 budget year, which were
not ready until the end of the year. Their signing was delayed until March 2000 by the need to
them,
was
verify
Regulation (EC) No 443/97 having expired on 31 December 1999

Commission

empowered

whether

sign

still

the

to

2.2.3. Contracting arrangements

Financing conditions for aid have been tailored to promoting the project's medium-term
viability. Grant contracts have run for one to three years.

14

The 2001-04 multiannial regional programme comprises four components: a technical assistance
component and three country components (Guatemala, Mexico and Nicaragua).

13

A contribution in cash or kind has been sought from the partners and, where possible, the
beneficiary communities. Such "cofinancing" has been adapted to the means of the partners in
question and the nature of the operation concerned. The Community has generally granted
between 75% and 100% of the funding for each contract.

To make it easier to manage contracts, a decision was taken in 1998 to group certain projects
under the umbrella of the UNHCR or an NGO consortium headed by the organisation signing
the contract. In Asia this approach led to the creation of two NGO consortia and a major
financing agreement with the UNHCR. This greatly reduced the number of projects financed
in 1999 (down from 68 in 1997 to 14 in 1999).

2.2.4.

Sectors of activity by region

a) Asia

In Asia resettlement aid has accounted for two thirds of commitments, though aid for
repatriation and refugees in exile has been maintained. This is in part attributable to a fall in
new arrivals and the departure of refugees. Repatriation continues at a low level. For instance,
the repatriation of refugees to Afghanistan absorbed a considerable part of the budget in the
period 1997-99.15

Commission aid has been focused on operations with a clearly defined geographical scope,
the aim being to support resettlement (demining, farm rehabilitation and social programmes).
The field of operations and the scale of aid have increased in Afghanistan as the concentration
of fighting along a stable frontline has restored access to large areas of the country. However,
political and security considerations have imposed a number of restrictions. Appropriate
operations have nevertheless been carried out at local level in most regions of Afghanistan
with large numbers of returnees.

The Commission has backed operations (most of them by the UNHCR) specifically
promoting the rights of refugees and returnees (protection, amnesty, property rights). It has
financed operations to protect the human rights of the beneficiary communities, and in
particular such basic needs as food, water, shelter and access to health and education services.
The operations financed have included demining and mine-awareness schemes, gender issues
and support for property rights.

b) Latin America

Aid has been channelled to refugees, displaced persons, returnees and host communities.
Considerable weight has been attached reconciliation and building peace. Where relevant,
projects have been evaluated in terms of their contribution to preventing conflict. Particular
account has been taken of the ethnic and political balance.

At every stage of the project cycle the participatory approach has been emphasised as a key
strategy guideline for promoting reconciliation and peace. It has also been central to the
design and viability of projects. Note, however, that security conditions, the attitude of the
local authorities and cultural and social obstacles have not always been conducive to such an
approach. Access to communities that have experienced violent conflict, political oppression
and displacement can be a tricky business.

15

See SEC (2000) 934 – 30/05/2000

14

The period 1997-99 saw the funding of operations in horizontal sectors (demining, drinking
water, education) and measures to rehabilitate specific sectors (agriculture, community
organisation, social welfare). This is shown by the sectoral breakdown.

2.2.5.

Partners

Projects are implemented by partners possessing the requisite operational and management
capacities and a very good knowledge of the situation on the ground.

their specific
European and local NGOs are favoured partners by virtue of
knowledge of the needs of the target communities and their capacity to deliver aid in
difficult circumstances, without the authorisation of the authorities or the armed
forces and where security cannot be totally guaranteed. They play a key role in
meeting people's basic needs

By virtue of its international mandate to protect refugees, the UNHCR is also a
for operations
favoured partner. It
complementing those of other European or local partners.

is chosen for specific solo operations or

On rare occasions operations operations have been implemented by other
international organisations, e.g. UNOCHA.

Operations have also been carried out by the host government, especially in Latin
America. Projects are carried out under financing agreements signed with the
governments of beneficiary or host countries. In such cases a project management
unit (PMU) comprising a European and a national codirector is responsible for the
execution of activities.

Partners are chosen according to the situation, the aim being to finance the most
capable and reliable partners in a country or region:

a)

b)

c)

i) Asia

In Afghanistan, there being no government partner, funding international and national NGOs
has been the best option. Operations by some UN agencies have also been successfully
financed, in sectors such as agriculture and demining.

ii) Latin America

in Central America has warranted substantial government
The new political order
participation, while continuing to involve NGOs (which achieved so much during the war
years) and guaranteeing genuine participation by the beneficiaries and other sectors of civil
society.

Aid in Central America is now geared to supporting a far smaller number of more integrated
projects. Their
its
responsibilities, that the beneficiaries are involved in the design, programming and execution
of the project and that consultation is beefed up.

implementing structures

the government

assumes

ensure

that

15

2.3. Coordination

2.3.1.

Internal coordination

To further enhance consistency and potential synergies with other Commission aid
instruments (and in particular food aid, aid in support of food security and emergency
humanitarian aid),
the different Commission departments involved devised a common
approach.16 This approach has been supplemented by interdepartmental communications on
the ground (coordination office/delegations) and at headquarters. Consultation of all
Commission departments involved in aid to uprooted people is guaranteed by the permanent
inter-service group (PISG) chaired by ECHO and including all
the directorates-general
concerned. A common strategy has been developed in Afghanistan.

2.3.2. Coordination and liaison with other donors

The Commission has convened coordination meetings and been an active participant in many
forums for coordinating aid to uprooted people. Coordination has taken place at two levels:

–

–

at national
international donors (UN);

level, between the Commission,

the Member States and other

at international level, in the Afghan Support Group set up by the Dutch development
minister, Mr Pronk, which has been bringing together the main international donors
for Afghanistan twice a year since April 1997.

2.4. Supervision and management of programmes by the Commission

The appraisal and management of programmes and projects have complied with Article 9 of
the Regulation, which provides for the evaluation of projects, financial procedures and
contracting procedures. The Commission has followed the procedures laid down in
Article 9(3) of the Regulation and submitted projects of more than EUR 2 million for the
opinion of the ALA Committee.

2.4.1.

Supervision and monitoring

Projects are supervised from Commission headquarters and the Delegations. For the purposes
of maintaining technical supervision of projects, three technical coordination offices have
been maintained or opened in the Pakistani city of Peshawar (to monitor projects in
Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran), Guatemala and El Salvador (to monitor projects in Central
America. These offices are intended to inspect projects under way and help the Commission
identify areas for future action.

In Pakistan the technical coordination office responsible has received EUR 810 000 in
funding over three years (July 1997-July 2000).17 Two-year contracts worth EUR 1 990 000
were signed for the two Latin American offices in 1998.18 They are set
to expire on
31 December 2000.

16

17

18

COM(96)153: Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on
linking relief, rehabilitation and development (LRRD).
It comprises a European technical consultant and ten local support staff.
They comprise two European technical consultants and ten local support staff.

16

2.4.2.

Review of projects by the Commission

a) Asia

In July 1997 DG IB and ECHO carried out a joint evaluation of aid to Sri Lanka. The report
found that the Community projects had generally met the needs of the target population and
been implemented efficiently.

In March 1998 DG IB and ECHO jointly reviewed the UNHCR programme for Rohingya
refugees returning to Burma or remaining in Bangladesh (Cox’s Bazaar).

While emphasising the broadly positive results of the operations carried out in Bangladesh,
the mission highlighted the need for the UNHCR, which was considering pulling out, to
maintain its presence in the region and to step up its protection for the Rohingyas. In Burma
the Commission's support for the UNHCR repatriation programme has contributed to the
return of Rohingya communities from Bangladesh.

A joint Commission/SIDA mission in June 199719 inspected projects financed by the
Commission and carried out by the Swedish Committee for Afghanistan (project B7-
2120/97/707),20 especially in the fields of education and health. The mission emphasised the
quality of the activities and the difficult operating conditions (political instability, power
vacuum), but felt that operations had been spread over too wide an area in response to local
pressures.

b) Latin America

Twice-yearly missions by the official responsible for the programme at Commission
headquarters (DG Relex) and, since the establishment of the SCR, the official responsible for
the execution of programmes have permitted regular monitoring of operations, including field
inspections.

2.5.Review of operations, including findings of evaluations by outside experts

i) Asia

a)

b)

19

20

21

22

An external mission carried out in 1998 covered the fund run by the government of
Laos with European technical assistance for Laotian returnees from Thailand. The
experts concluded that the programme had generally failed to achieve the objective
of reintegrating returnees into the local economy, just as it had failed to strengthen
the provincial authorities' capacity to reintegrate returnees.21 In terms of social
reintegration, however, it had helped meet the most pressing needs of returnees from
Thailand. It has also helped foster a consensus in the administration on the
repatriation of refugees.

In June and July 1997 assistance for refugees, returnees and displaced persons in
Sri Lanka was reviewed and a study carried out of future needs.22

See the report on the June 1997 mission by Mr Luxen, Mr Pehrsson and Mr Öström
See SEC (2000) 934 – 30/05/2000
See report of December 1998 by the team comprising Mr Recter, Mr Lothe, Mr Olding and
Ms Chamtamh.
Mission by Mr John Wilding.

17

c)

d)

e)

In November 1997 the programme financed by DG IB and implemented by the non-
governmental Danish Committee for Aid to Afghan Refugees (DACAAR) was
evaluated. Acknowledging the high technical quality of projects and DACAAR's
efforts to develop an integrated approach in the agricultural sector, the report
proposes that the project be continued.23

In November 1997 a team visited eastern Afghanistan, in particular to evaluate the
impact of programmes financed by the Commission,
identify needs and select
strategic and sectoral priorities for the future. The main conclusion of their report is
that aid remains important to a country suffering chronic political instability. It notes
the direct impact of the Commission's contribution on the relaunch of activities in the
target regions, and in particular demining, farming, irrigation and rehabilitation. The
report proposes establishing a strong and unified management presence in
Afghanistan to increase the impact and visibility of Community action.24

Other operations were reviewed in the period 1997-99 by independent experts paid
out of the project budgets.25 Projects for which funding was committed in 1998, but
for which agreements were not signed until 1999, will be evaluated in 2000.

ii) Latin America

Supervised by the relevant Commission Delegations, the two independent experts responsible
for field coordination have monitored operations.

The Proyecto de apoyo a la integración definitiva de los refugiados guatemaltecos en los
Estados de Campeche y Quintana Roo, México was subjected to an independent external
evaluation before the proposal for stage II of the project was put to the ALA Committee for
financing under the 2001-04 multiannual programme.

3. CONCLUSIONS

The following lessons can be drawn from the 1997-99 budget years:

a)

b)

c)

d)

23

24

25

The funding available is adequate to the needs of uprooted people.

Operations in Asia and Latin America reflect real needs and the scope for improving
the situation.

The number of Commission staff assigned to implement the operations remains
insufficient and necessitate recourse to outside consultants, who have provided
crucial and effective assistance with identification, monitoring and evaluation.

Organisational and procedural changes account for the delays described in this
report.

Report of 1998 by Mr Glensvig.
See mission report of January 1998 by Mr MacCall and Mr Wilding
Projects AFG/B7-2120/1B/97/0319, AFG/B7-2120/1B/97/0174, AFG/B7-2120/1B/97/0625, AFG/B7-
2120/1B/97/0324 See SEC (2000) 934 – 30/05/2000

18

Preparing and managing numerous contracts imposes a considerable workload on the
Commission. Matters have been further complicated by a shortage of staff, the reorganisation
of the Commission's departments during the period in question and the introduction of new
administrative procedures aimed at reducing the risks inherent in working with NGOs and
cutting the workload at the payment and financial control stages (the requirement by NGOs to
provide a financial security for projects over EUR 1 million, formation of consortia, etc.).

These new procedures have led to delays in the finalisation of contracts for projects financed
from the 1998 budget and brought many requests for riders to adapt projects under way to the
change in circumstances. It was not until the second half of 1999 that all contracts for 1998
commitments had been signed. Contracts committed from the 1999 budget were signed in
March 2000.

This budget heading has, however, contributed substantially towards meeting basic needs of
uprooted people in Asia and Latin America that could not be met by humanitarian aid. The
implementation of the Regulation has been highly encouraging from the standpoint of annual
commitments and the issue of uprooted people. The budget allocations have reflected both the
numbers of uprooted people and the context, scale and nature of their needs. Programme
design and project selection have taken account of the determining factors and causes of
problems (aid, repatriation, reintegration). They have taken account of the nature of the
conflict, the policies of the host government, the operating environment, the order of sectoral
priorities and the management and implementing capacities of the partner agencies. Greater
complementarity between operations should make it easier to keep track of the issues,
programme management and absorption capacities on the ground. Priority has been given to
the beneficiaries and the implementation of programmes, which accounts for the delays in the
presentation of this activity report.

In short, the Regulation has generally been complied with.

19