Francis M. Deng, the Representative of the UN Secretary-General on Internally Displaced Persons (1992-2004), developped these guidelines in 1998. It is a set of 30 recommendations, which define who Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) are, outline the large body of existing international law protecting people’s basic rights, and describe the responsibility of states. Although not legally binding, they constitute a comprehensive minimum standard for the treatment of IDPs and are being applied by a growing number of states and institutions. They may also help empower IDPs themselves by providing them with information about their rights as citizens of their own country. Principle 23 is about the right to education.
This study examines the relationship between institutional autonomy and the security of higher education institutions from violent and coercive attacks. The paper includes a review of the limited literature available, as well as a series of examples illustrating different forms of attacks. These include arrests related to classroom content in Zimbabwe, sectarian divisions in Iraq, impunity for murders of academics in Pakistan, and physical intimidation on campuses in Tunisia. The study suggests that institutional autonomy plays a direct and indirect protective function. It directly helps protect systems of higher education from government interference, making it more difficult for states to act as perpetrators. It also indirectly helps preserve higher education against actual and perceived politicization and ideological manipulation, which in turn might help insulate it from attacks by nonstate parties. The study suggests a framework for examining questions of autonomy and security which in turn suggests a need to develop strategies aimed at increasing autonomy and security simultaneously. This necessarily requires approaches aimed at encouraging states to fulfill their obligations not to engage in or to be complicit in attacks (negative obligations) and obligations to protect higher education from attack and to deter future attacks by holding perpetrators accountable (positive obligations). The study concludes with brief recommendations on how different stakeholders might work to encourage greater understanding and implementation of these obligations, including further research, expert roundtables and information-sharing, development of guidelines and related advocacy campaigns.
Si les données sur les attaques contre l’éducation sont devenues plus largement disponibles grâce à une meilleure prise de conscience et aux efforts des organisations nationales et internationales et des organes de contrôle, des lacunes de données critiques subsistent. Les systèmes de signalement peuvent être absents, médiocres ou déconnectés des réponses efficaces aux attaques contre l’éducation. Les moniteurs, ainsi que les victimes et les témoins, peuvent faire face à des menaces pour leur sécurité, ou l’insécurité peut empêcher les observateurs d’accéder aux zones où des attaques se produisent. De ce fait, un grand nombre d’attaques et incidents d’utilisation militaire ne sont pas signalés, ce qui compromet les efforts de calcul de leur prévalence.
Même lorsqu’il existe des mécanismes de signalement, les données ne sont pas souvent ventilées par genre, âge, lieu, type d’attaque ou auteur. Les violations telles que le recrutement d’enfants et la violence sexuelle par les forces armées ou les groupes armés à l’école ou sur le chemin de l’école sont souvent sous-déclarées. Les impacts des attaques contre l’éducation et de l’usage militaire – comme les jours d’école perdus, les abandons et les fermetures d’écoles – restent difficiles à calculer en raison de ces écarts. Et même lorsque la collecte de données a lieu régulièrement, leur analyse et leur signalement ne se produisent pas toujours à intervalles réguliers.
Les pages suivantes présentent un Kit pratique pour collecter et analyser les données sur les attaques contre l’éducation exhaustif qui comble les lacunes susmentionnées dans la collecte de données ; favorise la collaboration intersectorielle sur la collecte, l’analyse et la communication des données ; et renforce et harmonise les définitions et les concepts liés aux attaques contre l’éducation.
While data on attacks on education has become more widely available thanks to better awareness and efforts by national and international organizations and monitoring bodies, critical data gaps remain. Reporting systems may be absent, weak, or disconnected from effective responses to attacks on education. Monitors, as well as victims and witnesses, may face threats to their safety, or insecurity may prevent monitors from accessing areas where attacks occur. As such, many attacks and incidents of military use go unreported, undermining efforts to calculate their prevalence.
Even when reporting mechanisms exist, data is not often disaggregated by gender, age, location, type of attack, or perpetrator. Violations such as child recruitment and sexual violence by armed forces or armed groups at, or en route to, school often go underreported. The impacts of attacks on education and military use – such as school days lost, drop-outs, and school closures – remain difficult to calculate due to such gaps. And even when data collection occurs regularly, its analysis and reporting do not always occur at regular intervals.
The following pages comprise a comprehensive Toolkit for Collecting and Analyzing Data on Attacks on Education which addresses the abovementioned gaps in data collection; promotes inter-sectoral collaboration on data collection, analysis, and reporting; and strengthens and harmonizes definitions and concepts related to attacks on education.
The Latin American Campaign for the Right to Education (CLADE, by its Spanish acronym) is a pluralistic network of civil society organizations with a presence in 18 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, which promotes social mobilization and political advocacy to defend the human right to education. This collection of articles, essays and statements reflect on the vital role of public education in the region and the fault lines exposed by the pandemic, considering both the challenges public education in Latin America faces and possible solutions, alternatives and ways forward.
At the end of 2019, at least 13.4 million school-age children (5-17 years old) were internally displaced due to conflict or violence. These numbers are likely an underestimate with many internally displaced children unaccounted for due to lack of data. The periods of internal displacement are becoming longer, with years becoming decades and internally displaced children spending the majority of their school-years displaced. The majority of these children do not have access to quality, safe and inclusive education due to discrimination, financial, legal, and insecurity barriers.
The five country case studies (Afghanistan, Colombia, Somalia, Syria Ukraine) in this report demonstrate that adopting legal and policy frameworks is not enough to uphold the right to education for internally displaced children. Challenges to implementing these policies are linked to institutional, financial, political, and cultural factors.
The COVID-19 pandemic and the responses of States thereto have had a very significant impact on the enjoyment of a wide range of social rights. The Council of Europe’s European Social Charter provides a framework for the measures that must be taken by States Parties to cope with the pandemic as it unfolds. The treaty also provides a necessary framework for the post-pandemic social and economic recovery as well as for preparation for and responses to possible future crises of this nature.
With the present statement the European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR) aims to highlight those Charter rights that are particularly engaged by the COVID-19 crisis. (It does not address the right to protection of health under Article 11 of the Charter, which was the subject of a separate statement adopted in April 20201 ). The statement provides guidance to States Parties, organisations of workers and employers, civil society and other key stakeholders by clarifying certain aspects of the Charter rights in question as they apply in the current crisis.
This list contains 51 indicators relevant to the monitoring of education under attack. They are divided into four sections - Attacks on schools and universities; Attacks on students, teachers and other educational personnel; Military use of schools and universities; and transversal or cross cutting indicators, which apply to more than one category and that are crucial to the analysis from a human rights’ perspective.
Each indicator is accompanied by comments and supplementary detail.
This monitoring guide is designed to help civil society organisations monitor education under attack from a human rights perspective. It will guide you through:
I: the importance of monitoring
II: give you advice on what to look for and how to collect data
III: provide you with a list of indicators you might want to look at
IV: give recommendations on how and who to report to when identifying violations of the right to education.
It is part of a series of thematic guidance notes providing practical advice on monitoring various aspects of the right to education from a human rights perspective. These guides are based on, and supplement, the Right to Education Initiative’s right to education monitoring guide, which provides a human rights framework for monitoring education and education-related issues, as well as our experiences across various monitoring initiatives that we have undertaken with partners from all over the world.
See also the sister publication: Education Under Attack: a guidance note for journalists and photographers