Scaling access to justice research collaboration
Globally, the evidence to increase access to justice is sparse, especially compared to other essential services like education and health. However, without the ability to access fair justice systems, people are left without a means to resolve grievances, or to protect their legal rights, their livelihoods, their assets, or their family’s physical security. This lack of protection in their day-to-day life leaves them open to abuse. The growing number of legal needs surveys clearly indicates that across countries and regions, legal problems tend to be concentrated in poorer populations, leaving them further vulnerable to social challenges.
From 2005 to 2013, only 1.8% of aid globally was devoted to justice. Much of that support focused on state institutions in a handful of countries, largely omitting front-line and civil society efforts. With the Sustainable Development Goals, the international community has, for the first time, recognized a universal commitment to achieve access to justice. Making that goal a reality will require a stronger evidence base at the national and global levels about how to scale up basic legal services and ensure access to justice for all.
This project takes up that challenge through support to two complementary efforts. The first involves local research institutions in Kenya, Sierra Leone, and South Africa that will lead country case studies to improve understanding of the relative quality, impact, and cost of services and, in turn, the appropriate “bundle” of services to scale. The case studies will focus on legal problems with strong gender dimensions, such as access to justice for spousal and child support cases, and property and tenancy disputes.
The second related effort involves the country research teams meeting at key moments in the research process to share experiences and findings and refine common research tools. A research institution with global expertise will convene the exchanges and support efforts of the individual country teams, with a view to developing a broader set of comparative findings and recommendations that can feed ongoing global debates on scaling access to justice. Taken together, this project aims to develop new tools and catalyze new ways to conduct access to justice research; target key policy openings at the country level to guide access to justice priorities and support; and build recognition of access to justice as a key priority, at both national and global levels.
Project ID
108787
Project Status
Active
End Date
Duration
36 months
IDRC Officer
Adrian Di Giovanni
Total Funding
CA$ 901,086.00
Location
Kenya
Sierra Leone
South Africa
Programs
Democratic and Inclusive Governance
Governance and Justice
Institution Country
Kenya
Project Leader
Ben Nyabira
Institution
Katiba Institute
Institution Country
Sierra Leone
Project Leader
Felix Conteh
Institution
Centre for Alternative Policy Research and Innovation
Institution Country
Canada
Project Leader
Trevor Farrow
Institution
Canadian Forum on Civil Justice
Institution Website
Institution Country
South Africa
Project Leader
Winnie Martins
Institution
Centre for Community Justice and Development
Institution Website
Outputs
|
Alternative approaches to access to justice in Kenya : a cost-benefit analysis Study
Most rural areas are geographically located far away from courts or any justice institution, making it hard for residents to access them. This report analyses relevant literature and sets out the conceptual framework; discusses the obstacles that impede access to justice in Kenya; maps out the nature of disputes and existing dispute resolution initiatives; provides a cost and benefit analysis of the existing access to justice initiatives; and concludes with a summary of the key findings, making recommendations towards enhancing access to justice policies that relate to scaling of existing access to justice initiatives. Author(s): Katiba Institute, University of Nairobi, Kamau, Paul Language: English |
Supporting and synthesizing community-based justice research (“community-based justice research”) : final technical report Report
This is the final technical report for the Supporting and Synthesizing Community-Based Justice Research Author(s): Moore, Lisa Language: English |
Brief 4 : structural and financing models in the CAO sector Brief
Author(s): Mukorera, Sophia, Martins, Winnie Language: English |
Brief 3 : profiles of CAOs in the study Brief
Author(s): Mukorera, Sophia, Martins, Winnie, Mabuza, Alwin Language: English |
Brief 5 : cost benefit analysis Brief
Author(s): Mukorera, Sophia, Martin, Winnie Language: English |
Brief 6 : assessment of case management strategies and CAO/CBP functionality in justice service delivery Brief
Author(s): Mukorera, Sophia, Martins, Winnie Language: English |
Brief 7 : African indigenous knowledge systems in the CAO sector in SA Brief
Author(s): Friedman, Carol Language: English |
Scaling access to justice research collaboration Report
Author(s): Martins, Winnie, Mukorera, Sophia Language: English |
Brief 8 : recognition, regulation and institutionalisation of the CAO sector in SA Brief
Author(s): Martins, Winnie, Mukorera, Sophia Language: English |
Brief 1 : executive summary Brief
Author(s): Mukorera, Sophia, Martins, Winnie Language: English |
Brief 2 : community-based participatory research methodology Brief
The study focuses on the models used by community advice offices in the South African provinces of Eastern Cape, Free State, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo and Mpumalanga during the period 2016 to 2018. Case management strategies were investigated, a cost-benefit analysis conducted and the perceptions of CBPs and service recipients on different aspects of community-based justice delivery were explored. This brief describes the research design and strategy followed in this study, which was driven by the community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach. The methods used for sampling, data collection and data analysis are discussed. The reliability and validity of findings are considered in the context of the mixed-methods approach that was used. Ethical considerations and the possible limitations of the research design are discussed, as well as benefits that were found related to the use of the CBPR approach. The brief concludes with a summary. Author(s): Mukorera, Sophia, Martins, Winnie Language: English |
Brief 9: the role of network governance in the CAO sector in SA Brief
This brief presents the role of network governance in the community access office (CAO) sector in South Africa. There is limited research on the role of network governance by CAOs and community-based paralegals (CBPs) regarding the facilitation of effective access to justice in South Africa. There is, therefore, a need to bring the experiences of CBPs and service recipients in this regard into the open. This brief describes network governance and the nature of work that requires network governance; whom the CBPs network with and how they build the network; and the challenges and benefits they experience and opportunities to improve their networks. The brief presents the perspectives of CBPs and service recipients at the ten CAOs in this study, organized according to the five provinces where they are located. Evidence from two case narratives is presented. Comparative findings across all ten cases are presented, along with a summary of findings. Author(s): Martins, Winnie, Mukorera, Sophia Language: English |
Brief 10 : Comparative findings and analysis across community advice offices Brief
This brief begins by comparatively analysing the quantitative data and outcomes from the ten case studies. It then compares the community-based paralegals’ (CBP) responses to the lines of inquiry, followed by thematic CBPs, focus group, and organisational affiliates responses. This brief analyses the data collected in relation to the five objective of the study which are to conduct cost-benefit analysis of the ten community advice offices (CAO) participating in the study; develop any evidence-based arguments regarding financial and human capital sustainability for and appropriate regulation and institutionalisation of the CAO sector; investigate ways that CAOs and CBPs advance African ways of knowing justice and governance in furtherance of Sustainable Goal 16; establish the role of network governance by CAOs regarding facilitation of effective justice system; and determine how to empower the CBP voice from a focus on basic justice services delivery to articulation of CAO sector advocacy and reform. The comparative analysis is presented according to each objective of the study. Author(s): Martins, Winnie, Friedman, Carol, Mukorera, Sophia Language: English |
Costs and benefits of community-based justice in Sierra Leone Brief
Sustainable development goal 16.3 aims to “promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all”. In 2012, Sierra Leone enacted a progressive legal aid law which established a mixed system of criminal and civil legal aid to be provided by a variety of players including paralegals, private and public lawyers, NGOs, and law clinics. By that law, the government committed to place at least one paralegal in each of the country’s 190 chiefdoms to provide legal advice, assistance, and education to the inhabitants. However, fiscal constraints mean that the government funded Legal Aid Board and NGOs delivering paralegal services cannot operate and deliver their services at scale. This research aims to contribute to the body of knowledge on approaches to expanding access to justice in Sierra Leone and globally in a cost-effective, strategic, and sustainable manner. Author(s): Conteh, Felix Marco, Jones, Yakama Manty, Conteh, Sonkita, Mbawa, Henry, Ibrahim, Aisha Fofana Language: English |
Scaling access to justice research collaboration Report
This cost-benefit study was undertaken to assess the outcomes of community-based justice services (paralegal NGOs) and to make recommendations on strategies for scaling up access to justice in Sierra Leone. The project’s outcomes include: evidence for policy makers to be used in decision making related to justice funding priorities; generation of reference material for future research; network building and collaboration with researchers in Canada, Kenya and South Africa; experience in building and managing research teams; and change in the data management system of community-based justice providers. Lack of data limits advocacy capabilities of justice activists, and affects government and donors’ decision making capacities. Author(s): Conteh, Felix Marco, Jones, Yakama Manty, Conteh, Sonkita, Mbawa, Henry, Ibrahim, Aisha Fofana Language: English |