Sri Lanka

The project is designed to strengthen civil society organizations (CSOs) in Sri Lanka in their diverse roles, contributing to the enhancement of democratic governance and sustainable development. The framework service contract is aimed at providing technical assistance to facilitate civil society's involvement in governance processes and ensure their capacity to engage effectively with public authorities. This project aligns with the European Union's priorities for Sri Lanka under the Multiannual Indicative Programme (MIP) 2021-2027.

General Objective:

The overall objective of the framework service contract is to strengthen Sri Lankan civil society actors, in their full diversity, in their roles to enhance democratic governance and promote sustainable development. By doing so, the project seeks to empower CSOs to effectively participate in policy dialogue, promote inclusive development, and ensure a more accountable and transparent governance system in Sri Lanka.

Specific Objectives:

1.) Establish and Maintain an Inclusive Structured Dialogue:

The first specific objective is to establish and maintain an inclusive structured dialogue between the EU, Member States, and civil society. This dialogue aims to improve the analysis and monitoring of the enabling environment and development cooperation landscape in Sri Lanka. Furthermore, it will feed into future EU political and policy dialogues with public authorities and EU services, ensuring that civil society's perspectives are included in shaping development policies and governance reforms.

2.)

Enhance Partnership Between CSOs and the Government:

The second specific objective focuses on enhancing the partnership between CSOs (including associations representing women, youth, and persons with disabilities) and the Sri Lankan government, including provincial and local authorities. This objective aims to strengthen the collaboration and coordination between civil society and public authorities at various levels, creating a more inclusive and participatory governance structure in Sri Lanka.

The purpose of the Exploratory Mission was to collect factual information concerning this election process, in line with the criteria contained in the Commission Communication on Electoral Assistance and Observation [COM(2000)191]. The experts have also in particular:

1. Assessed the pre-election situation in the light of international standards for democratic elections and national legislation. The assessment covered: (i) Political situation, (ii) legal and electoral framework, (iii) election administration, (iv) voter registration, (v) party and candidate registration, (vi) human rights and fundamental freedoms, (vii) potential for electoral violence, (viii) traditional and online media, as well as social media, (ix) security aspects, (x) logistics and operational matters, (xi) use of electoral ICT and (xii) any other relevant issues relating to the elections and possible deployment of an EU EOM.

2. Assessed, when relevant, the state of implementation of recommendations of previous EU election missions (both EU EOMs and EEMs).

3. Made necessary preliminary logistics related enquiries and provided advice on how to organise the operational component of a possible EU EOM.

4. Assessed the security situation in the country, in particular in connection with the possible deployment of an EU EOM.

5. Advised on the composition, number and length of stay of the Core Team members and long and short-term observers of the EU EOM.

6. Drafted tentative specifications and Terms of Reference of a possible EU EOM and related estimated costs and budget breakdown.

7. Assessed the relevance of providing support to domestic observer organisations.

8. Acquired updated information on EU election support (both EU and Member States) and other major partners (Canada, Norway and Switzerland) and possible other major actors plans in this field, including in the area of electoral assistance.

9. Liaised closely with domestic and international election observation organisations that were present on the ground regarding the preparation of elections.

10. Prepared a number of specific reports as outlined in section 'VI. Output' of these ToR.

11. Participated in the briefing of the EU EOM Core Team should the deployment of an EU EOM be decided.

The main objectives of this evaluation are to provide the relevant services of the European Union, the interested stakeholders with:

• An overall independent assessment of the performance of selected CT-P/CVE measures funded by FPI.2 during the years 2017-2022, paying particular attention to its different levels of results measured against its expected objectives; and the reasons underpinning such results
• As a particular approach to regional actions, a specific case study shall be carried out to assess the regional framework for support to CT-P/CVE measures in the Asian context, managed by the Regional Team in Bangkok. It is expected that the present evaluation assesses the relevance, added value and success of developing a model for CT and P/CVE actions, respectively, which have been replicated in different countries/contexts in Asia/Pacific (in Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Maldives for CT; and in Southeast Asia, Sri Lanka and Maldives for P/CVE). If deemed relevant, links can also be made to regional approaches in other RTs;
• Key lessons learned, conclusions and related recommendations in order to improve current and future interventions.

In particular, this evaluation will serve the contracting authority and other interested services to better understand the performance of the Intervention, its enabling factors and those hampering a proper delivery of results to inform the planning and implementation of current and future support to tackle CTP/CVE.

The main use of the results of the evaluation is expected to be

• To draw general lessons that can be used for the future approach to interventions in the sector
• To draw specific lessons that can be replicated in other similar interventions
• To draw specific lessons from the regional approaches, in particular the one applied by the Regional Team in Bangkok in terms of stocktaking, dynamics and replicability.

The main users of this evaluation will be the contracting authority, FPI.2, including its Regional Teams in Bangkok, Nairobi, Dakar, Eastern Europe and Central Asia (managed from Brussels). The Regional Team in Brasilia is less involved since they currently do not manage any CT-P/CVE projects.

This action contributed to the effective implementation of international human rights instruments, principles and standards, primarily by means of exchange of best practices with partner countries.

The project was conceived to serve and preserve EU values and interests by means of complementary actions. It promoted policy cooperation with partner countries of strategic interest to the EU as well as enhanced the EU's visibility and coherence. This was done through the development of an analysis of the human rights situation in 13 countries, the organisation of seminars/roundtables and outreach activities. This ensured increased human rights awareness and access to human rights knowledge.

The Specific objectives were:

• 1)
  To ensure appropriate follow-up to political and human rights dialogues with partner countries. This includes, inter alia, facilitating south-south cooperation and exchange of ideas, knowledge and expertise on commonly identified human rights issues; providing technical assistance including in the form of trainings and roundtable discussions with governments in partner countries in order to strengthen their human rights expertise; facilitating interaction among representatives from the private sector and government representatives in partner countries to ensure compliance with the internationally recognised human rights framework; and facilitating regular interaction between partner countries with a view to building and reinforcing regional alliances which may contribute to serving EU interests in multilateral fora;
• 2)
  To contribute to bringing together experts from the EU and partner countries such as academics, private sector and government representatives in order to equip the EU to remain innovative and tackle emerging subjects of EU interest as a vehicle of cooperation with partner countries such as artificial intelligence, academic freedom, right to water and sanitation, economic social and cultural rights;
• 3)
  To support and enhance the monitoring of Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP) GSP+/ Everything but Arms (EBA) beneficiaries' commitments under the seven GSP core human rights conventions.

Internal studies analysing Human Rights situation in the following countries

• Armenia
• Bangladesh
• Bolivia
• Cabo Verde
• Cambodia
• Kyrgyztan
• Mongolia
• Myanmar
• Pakistan
• Philippines
• Sri Lanka
• Tajikistan
• Uzbekistan

The global objective of the assignment was to identify and formulate priority areas for a new focal sector on Good Governance and Reconciliation by considering a medium and long-term time-frame of Reform processes.

The specific objective of the assignment was two-fold:

• Identify and frame the new focal sector on Good Governance and Reconciliation to be included in the reviewed Multiannual Indicative Programme 2014-2020.
• Identify and subsequently formulate (a) detailed proposal(s) and/or programme(s), including activities, expected results, implementation modalities, delivery mechanisms, budget estimates and complete logical framework.

Relevant background

Since early 2007, the Commission, the UN-family and the World Bank have worked together in setting up a platform for cooperation on post-crisis needs assessments for natural disaster (Post-Disaster Needs Assessment, PDNA) and conflict (Recovery and Peacebuilding Assessment (RPBA), previously named Post-Conflict Needs Assessment, PCNA) scenarios. This trilateral cooperation was framed and formalised through the signature of a Joint Declaration on “Post-Crisis Assessments and Recovery Planning” in September 2008. The EU/UN/WB platform covers the whole PDNA/RPBA(PCNA) process, including strategic coordination, development of joint methodologies for post-crisis assessments, joint deployment of assessment teams, joint training and joint recovery planning and monitoring.

In line with the 2008 Declaration on Joint Post-crisis Assessments and Recovery Planning, the overall objective of the project is to assist and develop third countries’ in-country capacity to gradually assume a more prominent role in Post-Disaster Needs Assessments and Post-Conflict Needs Assessments (now changed to Recovery and Peacebuilding Assessments, RPBA).

The purpose of this project was:

• to support further development of joint PDNA/RPBA(formerly PCNA) methodologies, tools, training programmes, etc.;
• to support joint PDNA/RPBA(formerly PCNA) missions in-country/in region (in coordinating with EU Heads of Delegations and with the European External Actions Service (EEAS) and European Commission). While such support could cover any relevant technical field (long-term and short-term expertise), it is foreseen that a particular emphasis is put on expertise in mission planning and development of final reports/recovery frameworks.

The two phases of the project contributed to a variety of outputs and results, including:

• Phase 1 (01/01/2013 – 31/07/2015): revision of the PDNA methodology and development of the joint EU/UN/WB PDNA Guide, development of the Disaster Recovery Framework (DRF) Guide, review of the PCNA methodology, development of training and capacity building materials, delivery of information/capacity building sessions, joint PDNA/PCNA training courses for national authorities and regional/international organisations, support to over 15 joint EU/UN/WB PDNA/PCNA missions;
• Phase 2 (10/07/2015 – 09/07/2017): revision of the PCNA methodology and development of the RPBA methodology, development of training and capacity building materials, delivery of information/capacity building sessions, joint PDNA/RPBA training courses for national authorities and regional/international organisations, support to over 10 joint EU/UN/WB PDNA/RPBA missions.

The global objectives of the evaluation were:

a) to provide the relevant external and co-operation services and other impacted services of the EU (FPI, EEAS, DEVCO, NEAR) with an independent assessment of the achievement of the intended results of EU election observation missions and b) to identify key lessons and forward looking recommendations in order to improve future actions in this field.

The specific objectives of the evaluation were as follows:

a) The evaluation will assess EU election observation activities worldwide during the period January 2012–June 2016, using two of the standard five DAC criteria for evaluating Development Assistance, namely those of effectiveness and impact. As the evaluation should reflect a results-oriented management approach, these two DAC criteria were selected being the most relevant for this purpose.

b) The difference of this evaluation, compared to the wider one on the EIDHR in the context of the Mid Term Review Report, is that it is more focused on effectiveness and impact and takes also into consideration the beneficiaries' side with field visits of the evaluators in countries in which EU election observation has been conducted. This evaluation has also a shorter time span.