WORKSHOP REPORT

BRASILIA, 8-9 OCTOBER 2012

DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE FOR CITIZEN SECURITY

IN LATIN AMERICA

Developing South-South Cooperation to manage knowledge

and promote democratic governance approaches to citizen security

1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report was written by Melissa Andrade, Claudia Melim-McLeod and Danae Issa, based on the

speeches, presentations and discussions conducted at the Regional Workshop on Governance for

Citizen Security in Latin America held in Brasilia on 8 and 9 October 2012.

DISCLAIMER The views expressed in this report reflect the presentations and discussions which took place at the

workshop, and do not necessarily represent those of the United Nations, including UNDP, or UN

Member States.

2

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION: WHY TALK ABOUT DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE FOR CITIZEN SECURITY IN

LATIN AMERICA? 3

���� Citizen security: a priority in Latin America 3

���� Citizen security: a governance issue 3

���� Latin America: a pioneer on citizen security issues 4

���� Brasilia workshop on democratic governance for citizen security 5

PART 1: HOW CAN SOUTH-SOUTH COOPERATION PROMOTE INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO

CITIZEN SECURITY? 6

���� South-South Cooperation from Brazil: a horizontal process 6

���� A mechanism to identify, promote and replicate local innovation 7

���� The UN platforms for South-South Cooperation 9

���� A case of South-South cooperation strategy on citizen security: the Nicaragua police project 10

Summary of recommendations on South-South Cooperation for citizen security 11

PART 2: WHAT CAN BE LEARNT FROM LOCAL EXPERIENCES TO IMPROVE CITIZEN SECURITY

IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES? 12

���� An integral approach to citizen security policy-making at the local level – the case of the State

of Minas Gerais, Brazil 12

���� Inclusive participation for citizen security – the case of Santa Tecla, El Salvador 14

���� Promoting security for the poor in Bogota, Colombia 15

Summary of recommendations on local governance for citizen security 16

PART 3: HOW CAN INFORMATION ON CITIZEN SECURITY EFFECTIVELY SUPPORT POLICY-

MAKING? 17

���� A Regional initiative to harmonize citizen security indicators – CISALVA’s SES project 17

���� Modern national citizen security information systems – Mexico and Brazil 18

���� Qualitative citizen security indicators to inform state policies in Mexico 20

���� From information to action – participatory policy design at the national level in Costa Rica 21

���� Gender-sensitive indicators for safe cities – UN Women’s experience in Quito, Ecuador 22

���� A National Human Security Index for Indonesia 23

���� Going beyond the Human Development Report in the Caribbean 23

Summary of recommendations on citizen security information 24

PART 4: HOW CAN DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONAL REFORM ADVANCE CITIZEN SECURITY? 25

���� Making the Police part of the community – Nicaragua and Rio de Janeiro 25

���� Submitting the Justice system to citizen monitoring – Michoacán, Mexico 27

Summary of recommendations on institutional reform for citizen security 28

FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS: WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? 29

ANNEXES 33

1. Workshop agenda 2. Participants list

3

INTRODUCTION: WHY TALK ABOUT DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE

FOR CITIZEN SECURITY IN LATIN AMERICA?

In their opening remarks on 8 October 2012, the representatives from UNDP Headquarters,

UNDP-Brazil and the Brazilian government highlighted 3 main reasons why this regional

exchange on governance for citizen security in Latin America was particularly relevant and

timely: (1) the high priority level of the citizen security issue in the region, (2) the high and

insufficiently recognized importance of governance to tackle security issues, and (3) the value

of sharing innovative successful practices from Latin America.

���� Citizen security: a priority in Latin America

In spite of remarkable achievements in economic development as well as democracy, peace

and stability in traditional terms in the last decades in the region, most Latin American

countries face important challenges related to extreme socio-economic inequalities and

increasing levels of internal threats to the security of their citizens.

With the highest rate of homicides in the world as a region (25 homicides per 100,000

persons in Latin America, and 44 in the Central American sub-region alone, versus a world

average of 91), citizen security is still currently a major issue in Latin America. Public opinion

surveys show that security is the number one concern of a majority of citizens in several

countries of the region, in Central America (83% of Salvadorians and 75-76% of Nicaraguans,

Guatemalans and Costa Ricans mention crime as the most serious problem facing their

country, over economic or any other issues2), but even in countries with relatively lower

crime rates such as Uruguay or Chile. Facts and perceptions thus converge to make citizen

security a top priority for Latin American policy-makers and societies.

���� Citizen security: a governance issue

Personal security is not only a basic human right in itself but also a condition for the fulfilment

of all other human rights, as well as human development. The “human security” concept

introduced by UNDP’s 1994 Human Development Report had already operated this shift from

traditional “national security” or “State security” to a people-centred approach, and

highlighted the fact that human security consisted in enabling people to safely and freely

utilize a range of options to develop their lives.

The notion of “citizen security”, more restricted than the broader “human security”

concept3, refers to “the protection of all persons against the risk of suffering a violent or

predatory crime”4, and encompasses all types of crimes against persons as well as crimes

against property – including private and public property. It puts the citizen at the centre of

security concerns, thus implying that any action meant to improve security should

focus on the needs, rights, and engagement of citizens.

1 Central America Human Development Report 2009-10: Opening spaces for citizen security and human development 2 idem 3 Human security broadly includes economic, food, health, environmental, personal, community and political

security. 4 Central America Human Development Report 2009-10: Opening spaces for citizen security and human development

4

With citizenship as the essence of security achievement, the citizen security concept puts the

emphasis on the State-citizen relationship, the rights and responsibilities of citizens in

matters of security, and the obligation of the State to protect them from criminal threats.

Democratic governance is thus critical to citizen security. Any durable improvement of citizen

security will necessarily require more responsive institutions, including a genuine

improvement of performance of the typical security institutions (police, courts, prisons) but

also other public service sectors ; more inclusive participation of all citizens, especially the

most marginalized groups (even those communities systematically excluded because labelled

as “dangerous”), and a range of non-State actors (private sector, civil society organizations,

media) in identifying problems and contributing to solutions ; and an effort to respect and

protect the human rights of all people equally within the design and implementation of citizen

security policies.

It was also emphasized that citizen security is not a sector of its own nor can be addressed by

one sector alone, but requires a coordination of efforts among security and social sectors and

organizations. In view of these premises, citizen security is above all a governance issue.

���� Latin America: a pioneer on citizen security policies

Following re-democratization in the 1980’s and 1990’s, a number of LAC countries have

recognized this need for going beyond a restrictive approach to security, and the importance

of governance in tackling these issues. The 2009-2010 HDR for Central America and the 2012

HDR for the Caribbean5 both highlight the need for a governance-oriented and more integral

perspective on citizen security, taking into account the role of multiple actors in addition to

the three “classic” citizen security institutions (police, prisons, penal courts), including all

levels of government (national/local/municipal), private sector, civil society organizations,

the media, and the citizens themselves.

In practice, national and local government entities in some LAC countries have pioneered

policies based on this progressive vision with success. The creation, for example in Brazil, of

“community police” units who are based in and closer to the communities they aim to protect,

coupled with investments in improving social service delivery to the same communities in

partnership with NGOs to provide alternative activities and opportunities to the young have

proved more efficient in crime prevention than “mano dura” (‘iron fisted’) operations focusing

in law enforcement. At the same time, several governments of the region have been investing

in the development of statistical and monitoring instruments that allow more precise

diagnostics and procedures, with a view to understanding and improving the impact of public

policies.

As a result, Latin America is the region that has created some of the most innovative

approaches to understand, monitor, and tackle security matters with a holistic vision,

realizing the general failure of conservative policies to develop more inclusive, participatory

and governance-oriented solutions. Certain countries of the region have become champions in

the implementation of governance approaches to citizen security, which could greatly benefit

other countries of the region as well as beyond.

5 Caribbean Human Development Report 2012: Human development and the shift to better citizen security

5

���� The Brasilia workshop on democratic governance for citizen security

It is to make the most of these rich experiences and strengthen mechanisms for knowledge

sharing and South-South support in the field of citizen security that the UNDP Oslo

Governance Centre (Democratic Governance Group, Bureau for Development Policy)

partnered with UNDP Brazil and the Regional Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean,

with substantive support from the Crisis Prevention and Recovery team at the Panama

Regional Centre, to organize this 2-day workshop, with the following objectives:

� Provide a forum for exchange of information, experiences and lessons learned in the area

of citizen security from a democratic governance perspective;

� Showcase innovative and replicable practices promoted by UNDP as well as governments

and civil society organizations on democratic governance approaches to citizen security;

� Identify good practices and ways for improvement in the assessment/monitoring of

citizen security with a governance perspective;

� Provide a forum for South-South cooperation, by promoting intra-regional as well as

inter-regional fertilization on democratic governance practices, including governance

monitoring practices, for citizen security;

� Produce a Discussion Paper on Citizen Security to be shared with governments,

academics and development practitioners in LAC and other regions through the Global

South-South Development Academy, an initiative of the UNDP Special Unit for South-

South Cooperation.

In total, 60 people from 8 countries in the region (Brazil, Barbados, Colombia, Costa Rica,

Ecuador, El Salvador, Mexico and Nicaragua) and Indonesia actively participated in the event.

In addition to UNDP staff, participants included government officials, civil society

organizations and independent experts (see participants list in annex 2).

Left to right: Alejandro Gonzalez Gomez, Chief of

Justice of Michoacán, Mexico and Paula

Mohamed, UNDP Barbados & EC

Left to right: Beto Chavez, Rio de Janeiro Civil Police,

Claudia Melim McLeod, UNDP/OGC, and Franklin

Martinez, Municipality of Santa Tecla, (El Salvador)

6

Box 1: Facts about Brazilian cooperation:

� There are currently 95 beneficiary countries of Brazilian cooperation, incl. 42 in Africa, 32 in Latin

America, 19 in Asia and the Middle-East and 3 in Eastern Europe. Priority countries are Latin

America, Portuguese-speaking countries and Haiti.

� The priority areas of Brazilian cooperation are agriculture (24%), health (18%) and education

(11%), followed by security (7%), environment (7%), public administration (5%) and energy (5%).

� ABC coordinates cooperation efforts in all directions: it negotiates, approves, coordinates and

evaluates international technical cooperation in Brazil; coordinates and funds technical cooperation

from Brazil to developing countries; as well as identifies, develops and monitors the implementation

of South-South technical cooperation projects.

For more information see the related presentation in Annex and www.abc.gov.br.

PART 1: HOW CAN SOUTH-SOUTH COOPERATION PROMOTE

INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO CITIZEN SECURITY?

Representatives from the Brazilian government as well as the UN and several workshop

participants emphasized the need to go beyond the mere presentation of projects to each

other between countries, by truly learning how to implement successful citizen security

initiatives in different contexts, down to the local state or municipality level. They stressed

how difficult it is to actually establish good practices and replicate them within cooperation

efforts.

In support of this intention to explore concrete means of effective South-South cooperation

for citizen security, four specific approaches were shared and discussed: (1) the Brazilian

Cooperation Agency’s experience in South-South cooperation, (2) the Latin American

Observatory of Local Innovation, (2) the platform offered by the UN Special Unit for South-

South Cooperation, and (3) the case of the Nicaraguan Police’s South-South cooperation

strategy.

���� South-South Cooperation from Brazil: a horizontal process

Brazil has traditionally provided technical assistance to other countries of the “global South”

and is increasingly active in the area of South-South Cooperation, through its dedicated

Cooperation Agency (ABC - Agência Brasileira de Cooperação).

ABC works through close partnerships with all public institutions

including executive, legislative and judiciary institutions, public

foundations and enterprises, research centres and also with more

and more Brazilian civil society organizations. Partnerships with

sub-national actors are also an increasing part of this cooperation

work.

Most importantly, Brazil does not have the intention of being a “traditional” donor. Key

characteristics of Brazilian cooperation are that it is entirely demand-led, values

primarily horizontal dialogue and partnerships, and does not entail any conditionality.

7

Cooperation projects often consist of a combination of training, advisory services, equipment,

direct infrastructure development and support to structural reform. Projects are prepared

jointly between Brazil and the partner country. All South-South Cooperation initiatives should

fulfil the following criteria:

- Be entirely guided by the demand, in response to countries national priorities;

- Include the “Southern” element by allowing the Brazilian experience and knowledge to be

shared;

- Promote ownership and local leadership;

- Aim at producing structural impact and sustainable results;

- Create opportunities for innovation towards eventual sharing of experiences and

reciprocal partnerships.

Within its role in South-South Cooperation, Brazil has also developed several mechanisms

for sharing good practices inside the country and eventually with other countries. An

example of successful cooperation project in the area of citizen security is a community

police project, developed by Brazil and Japan: the community police model was adapted to the

Brazilian reality, and after successful piloting SENASP, the Brazilian National Secretariat for

Public Security, passed on the knowledge to other states in Brazil. In a third phase, Brazil and

Japan are now cooperating with El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica.

The most effective way to approach global issues such as public security within South-South

cooperation is through a process of mutual learning. This cooperation dialogue will only be

successful if there is full autonomy on both ends. In this process, the partner country must

have the final say in how to adapt lessons from elsewhere. Cooperation is a process of

mobilizing the public power for knowledge transfer, and it relies on shared political will by

all the actors involved in order to move forward. It also requires linking with practitioners

and ownership of the local government involved.

However, it was also recognized that the Brazilian cooperation was not yet consolidated and

was still work in progress, still looking to consult and join efforts with new actors.

���� A mechanism to identify, promote and replicate local innovation

Identifying, sharing and replicating good practices within Brazil is both an end in itself and a

preliminary condition for sharing those practices abroad.

Brazilian Research Centre on Government and Public Administration of the Getúlio Vargas

Foundation (CEAPG/FGV) has developed a way to identify innovative initiatives on public

administration and citizenship at the local level and share and systematize them within a

national database on local innovation.

It published a call for innovative initiatives implemented or under implementation (at least

12-months old) at the local level (municipal, state or indigenous government level)

throughout the country, and selected the most relevant ones based on the following criteria:

8

- Quantitative and/or qualitative change from past practices;

- Positive impact on the quality of life of beneficiaries;

- Potential for replication in other regions in Brazil;

- Enhancement or consolidation of dialogue between civil society and public authorities;

- Responsible use of resources and sustainability beyond government change.

The database thus obtained provides an overview of what is considered as “innovative” by the

different project leaders every year, and allows analysing the diversity of issues faced in

different regions of the country and solutions found to deal with them. It contains over 8000

initiatives, covering 10 years (1995-2004) and also includes a summary of all the experiences

shared – see http://eaesp.fgvsp.br/ensinoeconhecimento/centros/ceapg.

As an incentive for public officials and local leaders to share their experiences, prizes

were awarded to the best initiatives in the country, after a thorough selection process

by a committee of academics, NGO professionals and civil society leaders in the

concerned sectors. 20 finalist projects were rewarded and presented publicly, before 5

winners were selected by a jury of civil society representatives with a specific concern for

improving Brazilian public administration.

Currently, the CEAPG continues to actively monitor the progress of the finalists and conduct

series of analyses on specific areas, using the whole database.

After 2004, this database of local innovations was picked up and pursued at the international

level, through integration within the Latin American Observatory of Local Public

Innovation. The latter was officially created in 2007 after a 3-year process of discussions

between the authorities in charge of identifying local innovations in each of the participating

countries.

Its objective is to establish and maintain a system of observation and monitoring of local

public innovations in different countries of Latin America. It seeks to identify and visualize

public programmes and experiences promoted by various public and social actors, including

governments, civil society organizations or associations of municipalities among others.

Today 7 countries (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru) in addition to 2

regional associations of local governments and municipalities are sharing the same database –

which is available on www.innovacionlocal.org.

One of several useful conclusions drawn from the analysis of this regional database is that the

successful initiatives are in most cases joint initiatives between the different spheres of

government and civil society organizations.

An important lesson learned from this experience is that the presence of one coordinator

dedicated to this type of regional knowledge-sharing initiative is key to its sustainability. A

current challenge is to secure the funding required to keep the database alive and maintained

while also increasing the visibility of all the information already available in it.

9

Box 2: Facts about UN support to South-South cooperation:

� The UN Special Unit for South-South Cooperation (SU/SSC) was established in 1978 by the UN

General Assembly.

� It reports to the UN General Assembly’s High Level Committee on South-South Cooperation.

� It is hosted in UNDP but aims to support South-South and triangular cooperation on a UN system-

wide basis.

For more information see http://ssc.undp.org.

���� The UN platforms for South-South Cooperation

The role of the UN in supporting South-South Cooperation is to act as a convener, bringing

actors together, encouraging dialogue, facilitating consensus building and coordination; a

broker, matching offer and demand for experiences, expertise and technology; a partnership

builder, facilitating inclusive partnership and strategies, mobilizing resources and engaging

relevant expertise; and to gather intelligence, compiling and analyzing data, reporting trends

and providing support and continuity to intergovernmental decisions.

The UN Special Unit for South-South Cooperation supports 4 main inter-related mechanisms:

1- South-South policy development;

2- The Global South-South Development (GSSD)

Academy: offers publications, workshops, communities of

practice, experts rosters and more;

3- The GSSD Expo: showcases Southern-grown

development solutions through Meetings, Solution

Exchange Forums, Solutions Exhibition Floor, launching of

New Initiatives and Partnerships, Solutions Matching;

4- South-South Assets and Technology Exchange

(SS-GATE) network: network of virtual and physical

venues where entrepreneurs, CSOs and governments can

interact and obtain needed technology, assets and financing.

In the area of citizen security, the GSSD Academy is working to support the areas of safety &

security and justice, notably through a WIDE Roster Platform powering rosters of experts in

these areas. A Discussion Paper on South-South support for Citizen Security will also be

produced, based on the present workshop.

All participants were encouraged to make use of the platforms provided by SU/SSC by

contributing to the SSC policy space; documenting, peer-reviewing and disseminating

Southern solutions and expertise; suggesting names for the roster of experts; showcasing

Southern solutions, and/or transferring southern technologies.

10

���� A case of South-South cooperation strategy on citizen security: the

Nicaragua Police project

Nicaragua has a relatively lower crime rate than its neighbouring Central American countries,

and has become known in the field of citizen security for the relationship it has built between

the Police force and local communities, with a focus on human rights and a results-based

management approach. This has generated demand from other countries to learn from the

Nicaraguan Police experience.

With the help of UNDP-Nicaragua, in coordination with the Panama Regional Centre, a South-

South Cooperation Strategy (SSCS) was elaborated in order to respond to this demand

in an organized, pro-active and flexible manner. As previously mentioned by Brazil, a key

characteristic of South-South cooperation is reciprocity, which results in mutual and

multiple benefits for all the participating countries. The SSCS allows the National Police of

Nicaragua (NPN) to propel itself to the international environment to systematically share its

experience and learn from other countries too, and at the same time functions as a capacity-

building mechanism for the NPN itself, as it requires the strengthening of institutional

structures in order to implement, monitor, evaluate and sustain the strategy.

The activation of the SSCS implied an effort to develop and present a “model” out of the NPN

practice in a generic format adaptable to other contexts, and a mapping of elements in offer

and in demand from the NPN as well as the other countries involved. Methodologies

developed to implement the strategy include the setup of a network of experts of the NPN,

production of communicational and educational material, exploratory field missions and

technical assistance missions, bilateral exchanges and study tours between Police Forces,

technical and academic training (fora, courses and training of trainers), knowledge fairs on

citizen security from the Police’s perspective, etc.

So far Central America, Bolivia, Brazil, Venezuela and Egypt are the countries included in this

SSCS, which is currently at its piloting stage.

General Commissioner Francisco Javier Díaz Madriz, General Sub-Director of the National Police of

Nicaragua, presents the Nicaraguan Police model shared within the NPN’s South-South Cooperation

Strategy.

11

Summary of recommendations on South-South Cooperation (SSC) for citizen security:

SSC is:

• Different from traditional donor aid as it does not imply any conditionality;

• A horizontal process of reciprocal learning and support between countries of the global South,

made of joint initiatives between countries to share, promote and support innovative practices from

the South to the South.

To be effective, SSC requires:

• Shared political will between all the parties involved at both “ends” of the cooperation agreement;

• Concrete learning of how to adapt and implement successful practices, beyond just knowledge

sharing;

• Translation of detailed written documentation and explanations of the day-to-day operation of the

innovative approaches in question, to overcome the language barrier between countries;

• To look for “the best local fit” in a particular context rather than “the best practices” in general,

as cloning or blind replication of innovative initiatives will not work;

• The establishment of mechanisms to identify successful practices and replicate/adapt them

elsewhere within one country, first, and then towards other countries – indeed experience and

knowledge can only be shared effectively if digested, systematized and owned internally first;

• Incentives for innovative local practices to be documented and shared by their leaders, such as an

award;

• A strategy for South-South support, in order to respond to demand in an organized manner;

• Institutional capacity-development in the country providing SSC, in order to be able to share an

support effectively and implement, monitor, evaluate and sustain SSC;

• Dedicated means and capacity (financial, human, institutional…) for coordination and

sustainability;

• Extensive partnership development at all levels of the SSC process: between various actors inside

the country providing support itself, inside the recipient country, and between the countries involved

in SSC.

• Follow-up of initiatives benefiting from SSC over time, from both sides of the SSC agreement.

Among other, SSC brings:

• Innovation: the identification, promotion and development of innovation at local, national, regional

and global levels;

• Institutional strengthening and capacity development for all countries involved on both sides

of the cooperation, as it becomes a motor for development in itself, through the strategies and

mechanisms that need to be established for its implementation as well as its reciprocal character.

SSC is available

• A number of SSC agencies, mechanisms and platforms already exist at the regional level in Latin

America and at the global level – more countries and actors are welcome to use them!

12

Box 3: Citizen Security Conceptual and Policy Framework

As presented by Prof. Hector Riveros from Colombia (translated from Spanish.)

PART 2: WHAT CAN BE LEARNT FROM LOCAL EXPERIENCES TO

IMPROVE CITIZEN SECURITY IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES?

Governance at the local level – state, district, city, or municipal level – is critical when it comes

to citizen security. In the continuous perspective of learning from successful local practices,

representatives of local institutions from Brazil, El Salvador and Colombia shared concrete

local experiences of democratic governance approaches to citizen security.

The integral approach:

Manifestations of violence and factors of citizen insecurity are multiple, and only an integral

approach can tackle them durably. Past and current Latin American experience confirms

the relevance of such an integral approach and has allowed to develop a generic

conceptual and policy framework – see Box 3 below.

This framework, flexibly adapted to specific contexts, has already proven to deliver results

as shown by the first ever sustainable decrease of crime rates and insecurity perception

in the countries of the region that adopted it. However, such results are not immediate and

continuity and consistency in these security policies are crucial to their long-term success.

Institutional capacity building is thus key to guaranteeing these results, as are political will

and leadership, partnership between all stakeholders and genuine citizen participation.

13

���� An integral approach to citizen security policy-making at the local

level – the case of the State of Minas Gerais, Brazil

One example of successful use of this precise framework was presented by the municipality of

Contagem in the Brazilian State of Minas Gerais, where an impressive collaboration process

took place within an initiative called “security with the citizens”, with the triple objective to

(a) Reduce violence affecting children, adolescents and youth in vulnerable situations; (b)

Strengthen capacities of local communities to act for peaceful coexistence and joint security

planning and (c) strengthening local governance to ensure sustainability of these actions.

A collaboration mechanism was put in place between a number of public institutions,

including the Municipality of Contagem, the Ministry of Justice, the Brazilian Cooperation

Agency (ABC) of the Foreign Affairs Ministry, UN organizations joined as “one UN” (UNDP,

UNESCO, UNODC, UNICEF, UN-Habitat and ILO), and other, as well as private local actors,

including leaders of social projects, community leaders, religious leaders, local

businesses, children, adolescents, youth, women and mothers.

All these actors, organized under the “Municipal System of Social Protection and

Prevention of Violence” jointly developed the municipality’s security plan, using the

above-described framework to identify causes of and solutions to local violence, with

an integral “citizen security” approach and a human development focus based on the

MDGs, rather than a traditional security focus. The plan has been under implementation

and includes a diversity of measures ranging from municipal police training to the

development of cultural, sport and leisure activities, a network of assistance to victims of

violence, guarantee of formal education or awareness campaigns to foster a culture of peace.

It is already showing positive results.

Making this collective effort happen and succeed required careful joint planning and a

diversity of targeted activities including regular meetings, technical visits, community

meetings, training towards local actors on how to use the framework, thematic sub-group

work, specific meetings in each district, media relations and coverage, production and

dissemination of materials, etc. For more information see http://segurancacomcidadania.org.

State-level initiative:

At the level of the entire State of Minas Gerais, homicide control and public security in general

has been a priority since 2003, when a comprehensive state security plan was developed, as

embodied in the ´Fica Vivo!´ (literally:“Stay Smart/Stay Alive!”) Programme. Its vision has

been an integral one, generating public policies that ensure crime prevention through a

citizen security approach based on a multi-causal analysis, which led to the development of

plural solutions. It includes two main axes of action: strategic intervention (coordinated

action by Federal, Military and Civil Police as well as judiciary organs for more traditional

security interventions focusing on enforcement) and social protection. In the social

protection axis, a network of public services contributes to crime prevention through

assistance to the population, including Crime Prevention Centres which provide citizens at

14

risk with psychological care and a series of activities such as workshops, youth activities

groups or local projects to encourage the construction of lifestyles away from direct

involvement with crime – for more details see www.seds.mg.gov.br.

Similarly to the municipal initiative previously described, a key success factor of this

programme was the creation of a network among all relevant institutions, including those in

charge of data collection, systematization of information, reporting and follow-up of cases.

The challenge now is to think through pilot programmes and continue to innovate after 10

years of work in this area. It is important to systematize what was done and revisit the

programme, bringing in new concepts and methods.

���� Inclusive participation for citizen security – the case of Santa Tecla,

El Salvador

Inclusive participation of the concerned citizens is a key element of citizen-centred

approaches to security, and a factor of success of integral local security policies, as

demonstrated above with the Brazilian examples. In a similar approach, the Municipality of

Santa Tecla in El Salvador presented its participatory strategic planning process for

security policies focusing primarily on prevention as the essence of citizen security –

enforcement being only a complementary component.

Fostering citizens’ participation and interaction, encouraging social inclusion and creating

public spaces free from violence, thus developing a culture of peace, was major component of

the process. The initiative sought to to integrate and unify strategies and policies at multiple

levels and helped restore trust in public institutions through citizen participation,

institutional mobilization and coordination, which was achieved with the establishment of a

council of 21 public institutions,.

Having the practical, technical, legal and financial means to follow it through is another

important condition of effectiveness and sustainability of such a process is for the concerned

local institutions to give themselves. Resource mobilization and the allocation of sufficient

budget for the work on citizen security (37% of the total municipal budget in the case of Santa

Tecla) are crucial to support all the different lines of action – including the training of a future

generation of leaders committed to this new security paradigm.

Youth and children in Contagem, Minas Gerais, Brazil: beneficiaries and participants in the “Security with the citizens” initiative.

15

���� Promoting “security for the poor” in Bogota, Colombia

The Secretary of Government of Bogota stressed the distinction between “segregationist”

security that focuses on security for a few, and citizen security for all citizens, especially

the poor and marginalized.

He noted that overall improvements in the security situation had taken place since 2006, after

negotiations between the government and the paramilitary groups, innovative actions and

policy coherence by the city authorities. However, he described the overall previous tendency

as “elitist security”, targeting mainly national level issues such as drug trafficking and

terrorism, or problems of concern to well-off population groups such as kidnapping, and

rather neglecting the poor. The predominant security paradigm in the city was one of private

“self-defence” by those who could afford it, rather than “public” security, which resulted in

part of the population acquiring arms or hiring private security services.

The current policy aims to fight measures that focused on wealthy segments of society and

fostered a self-defence culture through a more integral and inclusive approach, with a

combination of strategies, all converging towards a long term strategy for “Territories of Life

and Peace”. They include the promotion of political responsibility; adequate information

systems; better coordination with the national police; disarmament; and very specific

measures to ensure police presence in the most marginalized areas and population groups

and during high-risk hours and times of the year, for example: division of the city into smaller

territories for the police to cover; intensification of police controls; increased control in

critical locations at critical hours; prohibition of alcohol sale and consumption after 11pm;

massive security operations on holidays with traditionally peak crime rates due to the

consumption of alcohol (Mother’s Day, Valentine’s Day, Halloween, Football Cup Finals, etc.);

imposing a curfew for minors, etc.

The graphs and figures presented showed that both the homicide rate and the perception of

insecurity of the inhabitants of Bogota had strikingly dropped since the beginning of

implementation of these actions.

Left to right: Guillermo Asprilla, Secretary of Government of Bogota, Colombia; Beto Chavez, Civil

Police of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Claudia Ocelli, Municipality of Contagem, Brazil; Claudia Melim-

McLoed, UNDP Oslo Governance Centre; Franklin Martinez, Municipality of Santa Tecla, El

Salvador and Michele Silva, Fica Vivo, Minas Gerais, Brazil

16

Summary of recommendations on local governance for citizen security:

Citizen security is:

• A new security paradigm, which has been developed at the conceptual and practical level through

innovative thinking and practices in Latin America over the past decade or so, particularly within

initiatives at local levels of government – state, city, municipality levels;

• An integral approach in which violence is viewed as a multi-causal phenomenon calling for multiple

and multi-sector solutions, which require coordination among all actors involved and citizen

participation, and whose ultimate goal is human development.

The success of local citizen security initiatives depends on the following conditions:

• Violence prevention rather than law enforcement becomes the chore rationale of security

policies.

• The municipality rather than the police becomes the central agent of citizen security that partners

with all other entities (including the police itself) to coordinate complementary actions across all

sectors – similarly, at the state-level the state plays this role.

• “Collaboration, coordination, partnership, networks, collective effort” between all sectors and

all actors concerned, public and private, are the most frequent words used when describing factors of

success in citizen security. Research also shows that the most successful local initiatives are those

driven by partnerships between government, civil society, police and other actors across all sectors.

• Integral security policies include a combination of programmes and actions to improve the quality

of law enforcement (through police training and other) and at the same time improve social

protection and build a culture of peace in local communities (through alternative activities and

other).

• Actual citizen participation, including the poorest and most marginalized is systematically

ensured in problem identification, planning exercises and implementation of solutions.

• Consistency of integral policies in the long term, a key to their success, is safeguarded by putting

aside ideologies traditionally attributing security policies to “the right” and social policies to “the

left”.

• Efforts are made towards institutional capacity-strengthening in legal, financial, operational,

technical and technological terms, in view of enhancing the overall response capacity of institutions.

• The necessary resources are mobilized and adequate budget is allocated to citizen security.

• Strong political will and leadership at the local level are present and sustained.

17

PART 3: HOW CAN INFORMATION ON CITIZEN SECURITY

EFFECTIVELY SUPPORT POLICY-MAKING?

Within efforts to tackle citizen security issues in the above-described integral and effective

manner, one particular challenge that arises is the difficulty of obtaining reliable and relevant

information to identify specific problems accurately and generate corresponding policy and

programmatic responses. The most commonly used reference of crime rates per 100,000

inhabitants is recognized as conveying only part of a complex picture, as many crimes go

unreported, certain types of crimes such as corruption or domestic violence are often not

considered, etc. The capacity of official systems to collect, compare and centralize data on

crime reports, citizen complaints, police detentions and court judgements is often weak, thus

making accurate statistics practically impossible to obtain.

The call for an integral vision and policy-making process on citizen security is accompanied by

a pressing need for better, broader and more inclusive monitoring of all its aspects. This

includes quantitative data on a broader range of elements and sectors than the restrictive

crime rate figure, as well as capturing of citizen perceptions and experiences, and a

combination of quantitative and qualitative information to obtain a more complete vision of

the reality that is being dealt with. The integral and participatory approach (see Part 2) also

implies that all the people concerned by citizen security, both on the supply-side and the

demand-side of it, take part in the process of assessing it, in a way that reflects their actual

concerns on the ground.

Innovative practices on citizen security indicators and their integration into policy-making

were shared and discussed, as summarized below.

���� A Regional initiative to harmonize citizen security indicators –

CISALVA’s SES project

The Regional System of Standardized Indicators on Peaceful Coexistence and Citizen

Security (SES) project, supported by the IADB and hosted at the CISALVA Institute for Peace

Promotion and Violence Prevention based in Cali, Colombia, intends to put in place, as a

regional public good, a regional system of indicators for the measurement, monitoring and

regional comparison of the phenomena of crime and violence, strengthening the capacity of

decision-makers to formulate, implement and evaluate citizen security policies.

This initiative addresses the fact that the different countries of the region tend to use different

basic concepts of citizen security, definitions of homicide or other offences, types of sources of

information, methodologies or technological tools, unequal records and data quality, diverse

technological tools, etc., which makes the evidence base for regional comparisons,

collaboration and policy-making on citizen security issue weak.

The project works through a sub technical unit under the relevant government institution in

each partner country, which typically brings together representatives from National Police,

18

Judiciary, Ministry of Health, institutions in charge of family/domestic violence, National

Statistical Offices and others. It operates under the principles of institutional leadership,

decisions by consensus and collective building.

After a series of strategic meetings and intensive technical work across the region since 2008,

it has managed to develop standardized concepts, make institutional diagnostics, formulate

consistent national and regional indicators, produce manuals and protocols for the region,

standardize and validate data sets between countries, create regional networks between key

institutions and build their capacity. As of 2012, 15 Latin American countries are entering

their data into the joint online database – see www.seguridadyregion.com. But a lot of work

remains to be completed for further improvement and expansion of the database,

sustainability of the initiative and partnership development with other regional and

international actors.

���� Modern national citizen security information systems – Mexico and

Brazil

At the national level, the Mexican Statistical Institute (INEGI – Instituto Nacional de

Estadística y Geografía) offers a world-pioneering practice on citizen security

measurement.

The INEGI was empowered by a Constitutional Reform in 2006, which gave the Institute the

autonomous and independent responsibility of producing objective, transparent and

accessible data of national interest, to be considered as official and mandatory information for

policy-making at all levels of government of the Mexican Federation. Additionally to the

common categories of demographic, socio-economic and geographical data, a new national

sub-system of information on governance, public security and justice was created in

2008, with the objective of producing, integrating, managing, conserving and disseminating

information on the administration and performance of public institutions in their

functions of government, public security and justice, in order to support processes of

designing, implementing, monitoring and evaluating policies in these areas. The

creation of this sub-system in itself is a major statement of recognition of the crucial

importance of governance in citizen security issues as well as the key role of statistics

to improve policy-making in this field.

Starting from a situation where, like in many countries of the region, information was rare or

hardly accessible, scattered and heterogeneous, outdated or even absent, where 32 states

each had their own criminal justice systems and tens of thousands of sub-state units used

their own data collection systems of unequal quality, INEGI undertook a massive

partnership mobilization enterprise to create an Executive Committee and 4 Specialized

Technical Committees with several relevant Ministries and other government institutions,

police authorities and judiciary institutions at Federal and local level, as well as research and

academic institutes, and a number of professional associations in the areas of local

governance, security and justice. This allowed harmonizing indicators and data collection

19

mechanisms and significantly improving registries throughout the country, among other

benefits.

An additional strength of this system is the diversity of data collection mechanisms and

sources used, which allow to triangulate information and include, in addition to

administrative data, the actual experiences and points of view of citizens and victims of

violence, through national census and victimization surveys as well as perception and

satisfaction surveys. Systematic national surveys on insecurity have been conducted yearly

since 2009 and national victimization surveys since 2011.

INEGI has also been active on the international arena, using the Mexican experience to

promote the development of governance and citizen security statistics in other

countries of the region and the world. With UNODC support it created a Centre of

Excellence with a regional and global vision to develop countries statistical capacities and

processes in the areas of governance, public security, victimization and justice, and to

continue to produce innovative methods and instruments for measuring these areas. It also

presented a proposal to the United Nations Statistical Commission, and organized the first

International Conference on Governance, Public Security, Victimization and Justice Statistics

in 2012. A second conference is being planned for 2014.

See www.inegi.org.mx and www.cdeunodc.inegi.org.mx.

In Brazil, the citizen security information system (called SINESP) is hosted in the Ministry of

Justice’s National Secretariat of Public Security (SENASP).

Data in this area is currently available throughout the country; however, there is no common

methodology for data collection across the 27 Brazilian states, which makes inter-state

comparisons unreliable – today one cannot base a statement that one state has more violence

than another on any reliable evidence. SINESP is currently being revised to unify the

language and methodology for data collection across the country, in order to allow a

consistent assessment of each region’s performance on citizen security. All the existing

information systems will be coordinated under one single Portal, including also the Police’s

INFOSEG system, among others. The aim is to make SINESP entirely digital to avoid manual

data insertion. Intelligence information will be protected through restricted digital certificate-

controlled access.

The states are taking an active part in the debate on this revision of the Brazilian IT system on

public security, which is being actively discussed to its implications. But the revision is a

necessary and important initiative which has the attention of the President and has become a

high priority for the current government – who decided that the states which fail to

provide the data requested will not receive certain resources from the federal government,

thus creating strong incentives for all to participate and the system to work.

In terms of partnerships and coordination, it was noted that the dialogue between the SINESP

system and the National Observatory of Citizen Security – a project of the federal

government – could be strengthened.

20

���� Qualitative citizen security indicators to influence state policies in

Mexico

Qualitative information comes as a complement to quantitative data on citizen security such

as the national or regional statistical systems described above, as it helps identify and

describe other angles of citizen security issues that cannot be captured by statistics

alone, but are equally important as inputs into policy-making or advocacy work.

Mexican Research Centre CIDE (Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas)

coordinated a network of research institutions, civil society organizations and public

institutions to conduct a qualitative assessment of local governance and the performance

of the 32 Mexican states in a series of areas, including citizen security. This initiative fills

a gap of information on local governance in Mexico. The results allow for in-depth analysis

of local public policies and governance in the areas of concern. The assessment report on

citizen security describes trends and characteristics on the functions, performance and good

practices of the states in this area. It also identifies and elaborates on current key challenges,

thus providing state governments with precious information and recommendations on the

structural and normative reform of the security and criminal justice systems, the application

of the citizen security paradigm, with focus on prevention, citizen participation and pro-

active police action, human-rights based security policies, or the strengthening of police

capacities to foster peace and prevent violence – considering the very heterogeneous

capacities of the different states.

The database produced with all the information collected offers a combination of

quantitative and qualitative data with over 1600 variables, all freely accessible online as a

public good for use by decision-makers, advocates, communicators, academics, students, etc.

(see www.mexicoestatal.cide.edu). It offers comparable systematized information on all 32

states, thus facilitating studies and the generation of more dialogue between government

institutions and academia. The different partners involved in the project are continuing to

update the database.

But even such an online database and its analysis in academic reports, regardless of how

useful the information is in itself, is not sufficient to promote its actual impact on policy-

making. This requires a strong communication and partnership strategy to promote

policy uptake, which CIDE has also been developing. Reader-friendly reports were produced

and launched officially with each concerned state authority and broad media coverage.

Several meetings were organized to introduce the database to advocacy NGOs and media

organizations. Specific short briefs were produced to aliment electoral debates. New

technologies are also being mobilized through online blogs on the project and the

development of a mobile app to view and use the database.

Besides this specific project, CIDE is also leading a research project on human rights and

security in Latin America, including victimization surveys and surveys in prisons. It has also

become the CLEAR Centre for Latin America, a World Bank-funded initiative to develop

national and sub-national results-oriented monitoring and evaluation systems for public

21

policies and programmes in the region. In this context, it offers training and assistance

services to the countries of the region, in a South-South learning perspective – for more

information see www.clear-la.cide.edu.

���� From information to action – participatory policy design at the

national level in Costa Rica

The Minister of Planning of Costa Rica exposed an example of how the collection of

information through a participatory process at the national level can feed directly into policy-

making and help improve citizen security policies.

POLSEPAZ, Costa Rica’s “Integral and sustainable policy for citizen security and social peace”

is the result of an unprecedented massive national consultation and participatory policy

development process, directly engaging several thousands of people from the three branches

of power, numerous public institutions, political parties, academia, civil society, local

communities and other through innovative methodologies including community and sectorial

workshops, a free telephone line and social media activity. The rigorous collection and

analysis of inputs eventually allowed the elaboration of an integral policy document providing

guidelines for the country for the next 10 years.

The fact that this policy was elaborated through this inclusive process allows it to

provide a comprehensive response to phenomena of violence in the country. It aims to

organize the action of the State to engage sustainable processes of construction of trust, peace

and quality of life. It includes indications of actions for all three branches of power, local

governments and even civil society, does not limit itself to a sectorial approach nor to merely

reactive measures. Human development is its ultimate goal and underlying principle.

Within the POLSEPAZ framework, the joint programme called “Networks for peaceful

coexistence and communities without fear” ensures that knowledge and information

continue to feed into action, not just as a one-off but as a cyclic process. The point of

departure of the cycle is the generation of knowledge through local diagnostics regularly

updated, the addition of a victimization module in national household surveys, a specific

victimization and violence prevention survey at the district level, mapping of local actors and

inter-institutional coordination and social cartography. The data thus obtained is analysed

and feeds into political agreements, legal reforms and local development plans, which in turn

allow for better local articulation of action and distribution of resources, towards reviving of

public spaces, resolution of conflicts and tackling of risk factors, with the goal of achieving

peaceful coexistence.

Costa Rica is currently facing the challenges of operationalizing the policy into concrete

actions and coordinating the various actors for the implementation of the plan designed. More

lessons are to be learnt through the policy and programme implementation!

For more information see related presentation and www.mideplan.go.cr or www.pnud.or.cr.

22

Box 4: Quito’s index of violence against women and girls

Presented by UN Women-Ecuador and Quito Municipality

���� Gender-sensitive indicators for safe cities – UN Women’s experience

in Quito, Ecuador

Within inclusive approaches to citizen security assessments and policy-making, gender

sensitivity of indicators is crucial to acknowledge and assess the particular situation of

women and girls, who are victims of specific forms of violence, in order to address it

adequately.

UN Women supports the “Safe Cities” initiative currently piloted in 5 cities in the world,

including Quito. Its objective is to prevent and reduce violence against women and girls in

public spaces, particularly all forms of sexual violence, and to integrate a gender focus into

governments’ security agendas. It also intends to produce a global model of safe cities for

women – cities where women and girls can enjoy public spaces and social life without

fear of being assaulted, raped or killed, and where they can participate in taking

decisions that affect the communities where they live.

The municipality of Quito, where about 70% of women are fearful of being attacked in the

public space and 42% affirm having been victim of sexual harassment, is adopting the integral,

cross-sectorial approach implied by the citizen security paradigm. In this perspective, it has

taken significant steps to obtain more accurate information on the specific challenges of

women and girls, captured through its own local gender violence index.

The elaboration of Quito’s index of

violence against women and

girls involved a participatory

process to identify and

characterize the specific violence

problems and conceptualize each

category identified – abuse,

assault, sexual violence, symbolic

violence etc. A combination of

qualitative and quantitative

research methods was proposed,

and a matrix of 52 indicators was

developed, organized into 4 main

dimensions (exclusion from

public space; sexual violence and

human rights; differences in

exclusion of different categories

of women; perception of risks and

violence in high risk zones),

crossed by 3 transversal axes

(inclusion, participation and

power relations) – see Box 4.

23

The key importance of a having strong gender sensitivity in citizen security approaches and

better linking gender issues and security policies was highlighted by all participating

countries. In Brazil, the government is currently working to define a national standard on

gender violence, including consideration of the relationship-level between the aggressor and

the victim – an initiative with high demand from the Observatories on security in the country.

���� A National Human Security Index for Indonesia

In an inter-regional South-South cooperation perspective, a delegation from Indonesia, who

participated in the workshop to learn from LAC experiences on measuring citizen security,

presented its own experience with nationally grown governance indices. The Indonesian

Democracy Index (IDI) is the result of a thorough participatory process throughout

Indonesia, to reflect the state of democracy at the national level and in each of its provinces. It

is a country-led assessment with full national ownership and specificity, which provides

useful, policy-oriented information on 28 indicators of civil liberties, political rights and

democratic institutions. The IDI has been included as a target in the National Midterm

Development Plan (2010-2014) and a budget for maintaining it throughout the

implementation of the plan is secured by the State, thus making it sustainable over time, even

after UNDP support to the initial initiative has ended – for details see

www.gaportal.org/undp-supported/indonesia.

Indonesia now plans to develop a second index in a similar, country-led manner: the

Indonesian Human Security Index, with technical support from UNDP and the other

partners present at the workshop. Other participants mentioned the intention to develop such

nationally-led human security indices: for example El Salvador is planning to create an index

which reflects manifestations of crime as well as exclusion in the country.

���� Going beyond the Human Development Report in the Caribbean

The 2012 Caribbean Human Development Report on Citizen Security provides an

unprecedented level of information and analysis on citizen security with a human

development perspective for the Caribbean sub-region – see http://hdr-

caribbean.regionalcentrelac-undp.org. The first of its kind for the Dutch and English-speaking

Caribbean, the report presents striking – and largely alarming – findings on the status of

citizen security and was called by the media a “security wake-up call”. However, this “wake-

up call” is not enough to change policies and practices. Some governments are finding it

difficult to accept and integrate the report, and the uptake of the data by Parliaments is slower

than expected. As a follow-up, UNDP has contacted all the Parliaments in the region and

connected with concerned communities, to facilitate democratic dialogue around the report’s

results, implications and follow-up actions. The Human Development Office is also organizing

a workshop for the media in Barbados, which may be of interest to other countries.

24

Summary of recommendations on citizen security information:

Developing citizen security indicators…

• At the regional level, it is useful to harmonize conceptual definitions and indicators of citizen

security, in order to facilitate regional comparisons, analysis and South-South interaction, but it is

also important to reflect each country’s specificities within the harmonized system.

• At the national level, it is necessary to harmonize citizen security information systems in order to be

able to compare different provinces or states and better inform national and local policies.

• National Statistical Offices, as official providers of public information, have a key part to play in

developing and promoting governance and citizen security statistics for use by all audiences – in

collaboration with the sectoral institutions dealing with citizen security.

• Partnership mobilization, networks creation and collaboration between different institutions and

sectors are indispensable for ensuring complete and effective national information systems on

citizen security. Similarly, at the regional level, partnerships inside and between all countries

involved are conditions of success of regional indicator harmonization initiatives.

• Getting all local government units of a country to start reporting into a national harmonized system

can be politically challenging, as it implies more exposure, and requires strong political will from

the national government accompanied by concrete incentives (e.g. making certain public funding

dependent on providence of data for the national information system).

• Citizen security indicators should be sufficiently disaggregated, gender-sensitive, and offer a

combination of quantitative and qualitative aspects in a complementary manner, in order to

provide a more complete and accurate vision of reality.

• There are a number of regional- and national-level databases on citizen security available and

accessible online as public goods, for all to use.

…to inform and impact action effectively and durably

• Regardless of its technical quality and usefulness, the existence and availability of a database is

not enough to influence action: it requires a solid strategy to promote the use of the data by policy-

makers, advocates and others. Such a strategy can include some of the following elements.

• “We need to sell better indicators to politicians”6 – current citizen security information systems tend

to be too technical in their presentation for generating political interest: more efforts need to be

made to better link the technical and the political within the development and presentation of

indicators.

• Innovative ways of humanizing citizen security data – from crime figures and reports to human

images, similarly to Holocaust museums for example – need to be explored.

• Local ownership and participation of decision-makers, civil society and citizens in general,

together with technical experts, in the process of selecting and developing citizen security indicators,

increases the chances of their use. Participatory processes for citizen security information and

evidence-based policies can also be powerful tools to bridge gaps between the State and citizens and

bring comprehensive responses to violence, while at the same time fostering democratic governance.

• Citizen security information should keep feeding into policy-making through a repetitive,

cyclic process – not as a one-off activity.

• The use of new technologies for promoting citizen security information needs to be further

explored.

• A Human Development Report on citizen security can be a wake-up call but is not sufficient in itself

to stimulate action: it requires follow-up engagement with the concerned actors to be taken forward.

6 Quote by a workshop participant

25

PART 4: HOW CAN DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONAL REFORM

ADVANCE CITIZEN SECURITY?

Members of institutions responsible for public security, within the security sector, i.e. mainly

the police and the criminal justice system, may in some cases become the very authorities

actually threatening the rights of citizens or reinforcing inequalities and situations of

’segregationist’ security. Democratic governance-oriented reforms of these institutions,

bringing them closer to all of the citizens they are mandated to serve, can make them more

effective, as shown in the 3 experiences described below.

���� Making the Police part of the community – National and local

experiences from Nicaragua and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

The General Commissioner of the National Police of Nicaragua (NPN) presented the

experience of Nicaragua in restructuring of the police, which has become known for its good

citizen security practice – see also Part 1 of this report. As a product of the Popular Sandinista

Revolution in 1979, the NPN was built as the antithesis to the notorious “Guardia Nacional” of

the former repressive regime, and respect of human rights and closeness with the community

are seen as part of its essence. Its role is seen as a prominently preventive one, and its

officially proclaimed goal is citizen satisfaction.

In this perspective, it has developed a model called “preventive pro-active community

police” on 3 main areas of violence prevention: (1) prevention of youth violence, combining

the fostering of a culture of peace, special attention to youth considered at risk and support to

social reinsertion with engagement from parents. (2) Prevention and attention to gender-

based violence, through a specialized department and personnel to attend to victims of

domestic and gender-based violence. (3) a “total education” model of continuous training as

an integral part of the police career at all levels, with gender and human rights mainstreamed

across the NPN training and rules of practice.

Close cooperation between police officers and the population, and citizen participation within

an approach of shared responsibility for all security planning and actions are at the chore

of this model, and officially formalized through a National Council for harmonious coexistence

and citizen security – which also allows for effective coordination with other national

institutions that contribute to violence prevention.

In terms of results, objective indicators give Nicaragua the lowest crime rate for Central

America, and a 2011 perception survey shows that over 70% of Nicaraguans trust the NPN.

The Civil Police of the State of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil has also become known for a

number of initiatives to bring the Police force closer to local communities, especially the ones

at highest risk, in what used to be considered as one of the world’s most dangerous cities. By

introducing Pacifying Police Units (UPPs) in 2008 in a number of areas previously dominated

by drug trafficking, the state has been able to reduce homicide and robberies. However, as

26

shared in person by a representative of the Rio Civil Police, these policies are still not

sufficient to close the gap between marginalized citizens and security forces. Indeed, even if

police officers receive training on human rights, this is not always internalized in practice, and

at the same time there is a pressing need to reach out to youth at risk.

“Papo de responsa” (literally: “responsibility chat”) is a bottom-up spontaneous preventive

and educational initiative carried out by the Civil Police in the city to establish

innovative communication channels between the police and the citizens, with a

particular focus on youth. The project brings people closer together so they can connect and

re-think their respective positions and opinions. The methodology is based on encounters and

informal conversation between police officers and children/youth, in alternative

environments that are not symbolically associated with repressive security and are

favourable to open-ended thinking and free expression, such as schools. The aim behind these

open conversations is to have young people understand that they can achieve much more

than their immediate environment can provide, in order to introduce a sense of hope.

Above, left and right: the Nicaraguan National Police at the service of and together with the citizens.

Hereunder: A Police Officer from the Civil Police of Rio de Janeiro chatting with schoolchildren within the “Papo de responsa”

27

���� Making the Justice system accountable through citizen monitoring –

Michoacán, Mexico

In June 2008, Mexico adopted a series of far-reaching constitutional reforms designed to

transform its criminal justice system from one based primarily on written record to a more

open adversarial system of justice where trials are oral and public.

The State of Michoacán translated this reform into its own constitution in 2011 and is now

starting to implement the reform through a double process: through necessary technical

and juridical actions, on the one hand, and on the other hand a broad awareness

programme for raising citizen knowledge of and participation in the new system, by

changing the form, contents and channels of communication between the Judiciary and

the citizens.

In a context where only an estimated 15 out of 100 crimes were reported, 1 out of 4 court

cases are settled and trials take place several months after they have been requested or often

get indefinitely postponed, there was a critical need for better communication and

coordination between all stakeholders critical. The state’s Judiciary responded by facilitating

the establishment of a Council for the New Criminal Justice System of Michoacán, in charge of

coordinating the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the reform, joining together

the legislative and the executive powers as well as academia and citizen representatives.

Among its activities to enhance accountability, the Council coordinates a series of

communication and awareness raising actions towards citizens, through substantive and

systematic partnerships with education institutions, civil society organizations and media

organizations. Additionally, a new participatory monitoring mechanism of the penal system

allows taking into account citizens’ views for further planning and implementation of the

reform.

This is the first time the Judiciary of Michoacán has a communication strategy, and the feeling

at this early stage of implementation is that it is already beginning to build trust in the state’s

justice system.

In general, communication and media relations were highlighted as major issues in this

discussion, as the media in several Latin American countries tend to explore the theme of

violence in their broadcasting and thus increase the feeling of insecurity, sometimes beyond

reality, which in turn further exacerbates citizens’ mistrust in public institutions. Examples of

innovative attempts in this area include Costa Rica, where the police is looking to develop a

better external communication system, and Panama, where a National Council of Journalists

allows for discussions between the government and the media on coverage of citizen security

issues.

28

Summary of recommendations on institutional reform for citizen security:

• Prioritizing a preventive, pro-active and community role of the police – law enforcement being

only a secondary measure of action – has proven to bring results in improving citizen security.

• Changing the “identity” and image of the police in countries, cities or boroughs where it has

traditionally been associated with repressive action is key, in parallel with substantive reform.

Alternative activities such as informal chats with citizens in education-friendly environments can

help change this image.

• Similarly, images and perceptions of the justice system can make a difference in the promotion of

reform. Developing an innovative communication strategy, in parallel with concrete actions to

improve the efficiency of the institution, is crucial. New channels of communication between citizens

and judiciary institutions are to be explored.

• Relations with and training of the media need to be given more attention, in order to foster more

rigor in media coverage of citizen security issues, and thus avoid reinforcing stereotypes to rather

help promote reform. In this effect, some LAC countries have attempted to institutionalize media

relations.

Above: workshop participants during the debates on institutional reform

Hereunder: side meeting of workshop participants following up on county initiatives

29

FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS: WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

In addition to the substantive recommendations summarized above at the end of each of the

four main parts of this report, participants worked in groups to elaborate key follow-up steps

to keep the community of practice created through this event alive, and continue the

promotion of innovative citizen security practices through South-South cooperation.

In their conclusions, they described this event as particularly useful, and the first of its kind in

the sense that it brought together not only UN practitioners on citizen security but also

national actors representing different levels of government and branches of the State as well

as independent public institutions, civil society and academia from different countries. The

participation of Indonesia was also appreciated and said to represent the first time that a

substantive link was being made between Latin America and Asia around these issues.

They recommended that similar events are repeated, and more specifically indicated follow-

up directions of two main types: (1) particular thematic issues that would merit further

discussion in follow-up events or other work and (2) practical measures to keep the

community of practice alive and continue to develop South-South cooperation in the field.

Thematic questions for further discussion:

� Governance and citizen security indicators, data and information systems:

• How to increase the use of citizen security information at all levels of government?

• How to better coordinate citizen security information systems, monitoring and

evaluation mechanisms that exist at different levels (national and local), not only

government-led but also from other organizations, to organize all information available

and translate it into concrete action?

• How to link citizen security indicators and governance indicators more strongly?

• How to produce and present citizen security data in a more politically-relevant manner

while maintaining its technical quality and complexity?

• How to “humanize” citizen security data to “make it speak” to larger audiences?

� Assessment of results of citizen security policies:

• How to improve and systematize methods for assessing the actual effectiveness and

impact of citizen security policies and programmes?

� Communication strategies and media relations in the field of citizen security:

• How to develop and implement more effective communication strategies and methods

to support citizen security reform?

• How to enhance and institutionalize relations with the media to improve the quality of

the coverage of citizen security issues? How to train the media in this perspective?

� Participation and cross-sector collaboration for citizen security:

30

• How to overcome some of the challenges of inter-sectoral dialogue to promote holistic

social policies?

• How to create further synergies among diverse actors and sustain them?

• How to further promote, coordinate and sustain civil society participation?

� Education for citizen security:

• How to further develop and formally institutionalize multi-faceted educational methods

on citizen security, to better target children and youth through the educational system

and thus promote future generations of peaceful citizens and leaders?

Practical follow-up measures proposed:

� To circulate names and addresses of all participants to facilitate future exchanges;

� To make all documents used by the speakers available to all other participants – not only

their presentations but also the substantive documents used to prepare them;

� To continue a regular exchange of information among participants on the development of

indicators and data collection methodologies on citizen security;

� To make use of existing virtual platforms for a continuous knowledge exchange and

discussion on the theme – such as the platforms provided by the UN Special Unit on South-

South Cooperation (see Part 1), Teamworks (a UNDP virtual platform where partners can

be invited to dialogue and information can be posted) and other.

� To make use of the existing organizations of regional scope that offer South-South support

in the development of citizen security indicators and country-led M&E mechanisms in the

field of citizen security. These include CISALVA, INEGI’s Centre of Excellence, and CIDE as

the CLEAR Centre for Latin America (see Part 3).

� To systematize a database of innovative initiatives on citizen security (possibly following

the model of the Latin American Observatory of Local Public Innovation – see Part 1),

starting with the initiatives already shared in this workshop and other previous events, in

order to avoid starting from zero every time a new project is designed.

� To use the experience accumulated in Latin America to develop universal knowledge and

policy advice on preventive citizen security programmes and initiatives. In this

perspective, UNDP-RBLAC is currently preparing a guide on public policies in the area of

citizen security with a focus on local governance, which will use inputs and materials from

this workshop.

� To explore triangular cooperation approaches for support in the field of citizen security,

for example from Brazil to the Small Island Developing States (SIDS) in the Caribbean

possibly with UNDP facilitation.

31

FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT:

UNDP Oslo Governance Centre/Democratic Governance Group: danae.issa@undp.org,

claudia.melim-mcleod@undp.org

UNDP Brazil: erica.machado@undp.org

UNDP Regional Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean: gerardo.noto@undp.org

UNDP Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery: pablo.ruiz@undp.org, daniel.luz@undp.org

1

Introduction

In spite of remarkable achievements in economic development as well as democracy, peace and stability in traditional terms in the last

decades in the region, most Latin American countries face important challenges related to extreme socio-economic inequalities and

increasing levels of internal threats to the security of their citizens. With the highest rate of homicides in the world as a region, citizen

security is still currently a major issue in Latin America. Yet, this is also the region which has created the most innovative approaches to

understand, monitor, and tackle security matters with a holistic vision, realizing the general failure of restrictive “mano dura” policies to

develop more inclusive, participatory and governance-oriented solutions. Certain countries of the region have become leading pioneers in

implementing governance approaches to citizen security, which could greatly benefit other countries of the region as well as beyond.

To make the most of these rich experiences and strengthen mechanisms for knowledge sharing and South-South support in the field of

citizen security, UNDP-Brazil, UNDP’s Regional Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean (RBLAC), the Panama Regional Centre and

the Oslo Governance Centre (OGC) propose this event. It aims to provide a space for exchange of information, experiences and lessons

learned, as well as joint work towards a better understanding of existing capacities and resources in the region and a sustainable South-

South cooperation system to optimize progress in the area.

REGIONAL WORKSHOP: GOVERNANCE FOR CITIZEN SECURITY IN LATIN AMERICA

DEVELOPING SOUTH-SOUTH COOPERATION TO MANAGE KNOWLEDGE AND

PROMOTE GOVERNANCE APPROACHES TO CITIZEN SECURITY

BRASILIA, 8-9 OCTOBER 2012

2

Agenda

Day/Time Session name Session contents Speakers

DAY 1: MONDAY 8 OCTOBER

9:00-9:30 Registration

OPENING

9:30-10:00 Opening remarks

Welcome all participants and highlight the importance of

governance approaches to citizen security, and of South-

South cooperation to promote them

Regina Miki, National Public Security Secretary,

Ministry of Justice of Brazil

Jorge Chediek, UN RC Brazil

Claudia Melim-Mcleod, Democratic Governance

Adviser, UNDP Oslo Governance Centre

SETTING THE STAGE: DEBATE ON THE VALUE OF SOUTH-SOUTH COOPERATION TO MANAGE KNOWLEDGE AND PROMOTE INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO CITIZEN SECURITY

Chair: Maristela Marques Baioni, UNDP Brazil

10:00-11:00 Keynote speeches: Introduction to South-South Cooperation (SCC) for

Citizen Security

Lessons learned from Brazil’s experience in South-South cooperation (SSC)

Innovation and systematization in the field of public

management in Brazil: successes, challenges and

sustainability

Wófsi Yuri de Souza, Manager, General Coordina-tion of Bilateral Technical Assistance, ABC

Jacqueline Brigagão, Lecturer and Researcher,

EAESP - FGV

11:00-11:15 Coffee-break

11:15-12:30 Introduction to South-South Cooperation for Citizen Security -

continued

The UN support architecture for South-South Cooperation

A concrete example of establishing a South-South

mechanism for citizen security

Ines Tofalo, Programme Specialist, Special Unit for South-South Cooperation, UNDP

Maria Nelly Rivas, Deputy Resident Representative,

UNDP Nicaragua

12:30-14:00 Lunch

3

THEME 1: IDENTIFYING AND DISSEMINATING LOCAL GOVERNANCE EXPERIENCES IN CITIZEN SECURITY

Chair: Claudia Melim-McLeod, Oslo Governance Centre

14:00-15:45

Learning lessons from experiences of promoting citizen security

through local governance

Local-level policy-planning of security in Colombia

Participatory process for integrated policy planning at the local level in Contagem, Minas Gerais State, Brazil

The Fica Vivo initiative of Minas Gerais, Brazil

Prof. Hector Riveros Serrato, exSecretary of Government of Bogota

Claudia Ocellli, Secretary Assistant of of Public Policy of Contagem

Michele Silva, Fica Vivo

15:45-16:00 Coffee-break

16:00-17:30

Learning lessons from experiences

of promoting citizen security through local governance (cont.)

The experience of the disarmament of Bogotá, Colombia

The “municipios libres de armas” initiative in El Salvador

The “Papo de Responsa” initiative in Rio de Janeiro

Guillermo Asprilla, Secretary of Government of

Bogota

Councilor Franklin Martinez, Municipality of Santa

Tecla, El Salvador

Beto Chavez, Civil Police of Rio de Janeiro

4

DAY 2: TUESDAY 9 OCTOBER

THEME 2: ENSURING INCLUSIVE INFORMATION SYSTEMS TO IMPROVE POLICY-MAKING IN CITIZEN SECURITY

Chair: Danae Issa, Oslo Governance Centre

09:30-11:00 Innovative systems of information

on citizen security at the national and regional level

CISALVA: Regional Project on Standardization of citizen

security indicators

The Mexican Centre of Excellence on Governance and

Citizen Security statistics

The Brazilian citizen security information system at

SINESP–SENASP

Juan Pablo Gordillo, Regional Project on

Standarization of Citizen Security Indicators, CISALVA

Edgar Guerrero Centeno, General Direction of

Government, Public Security and Justice Statistics, INEGI

Marcello Barros, SENASP Cabinet Chief, and Rogério

Carneiro, SINESP Project Coordinator

11:00-11:15 Coffee break

11:15-13:00 Promoting participatory and

inclusive evidence-based policy making on citizen security

Systematization of participatory policy-development at

the national level in Costa Rica

Local Governance Indicators on Citizen Security in the Mexican States

Gender-based indicators on citizen security in Quito, Ecuador

Roberto Gallardo, Minister of Planning of Costa Rica

Juan Salgado, Profesor, Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas (CIDE)

Elizabeth Arauz, UN Women Ecuador and Beatriz Jarrín, Municipality of Quito

13:00-14:30 Lunch

5

THEME 3: PROMOTING INSTITUTIONAL REFORM FOR CITIZEN SECURITY

Chair: Pablo Ruiz, Panama Regional Centre

14:30-15:45 Experiences on police reform and

citizen monitoring of penal reform

The Nicaraguan National Police Project

Citizen monitoring of the Justice system in Mexico

General Commissioner Francisco Javier Díaz Madriz,

General Sub-Director of the National Police of Nicaragua

Alejandro González Gómez, President of the Judiciary of Michoacán

15:45-16:00 Coffee break

BUILDING THE WAY FORWARD

Chair: Pablo Ruiz, Panama Regional Centre

16:00-17:30 Building a South-South support

mechanism on citizen security: way forward and next steps

Plenary discussion on best practices identified during the

workshop and participants’ recommendations for next steps in sharing experiences and supporting initiatives

based on existing and new South-South cooperation

mechanisms.

NOME - NAME - NOMBRE

INSTITUIÇÃO

INSTITUTION

INSTITUCIÓN

PAÍS COUNTRY E-MAIL

ADILSON SILVA SSP-DF BRASIL stpmadilsonsilva@gmail.com

ADRIANA ACCORSI SSP-GO BRASIL adrianaaccorsi@bol.com.br

ALEJANDRO GONZÁLEZ GÓMEZ Poder Judicial MEXICO aggomez@pj@email.com

ALINE LIRA VILLAFANE GOMES SSA -BA PNUD BRASIL alinevillafane@hotmail.com

BEATRIZ JARRIN SIS Município Quito ECUADOR bacchisjj@yahoo.com

CADIMIEL ASSUNÇÃO SSP-DF BRASIL kadimavai@gmail.com

CARLOS SPEZIA ONU BRASIL carlos.spezia@undp.org

CÍNTIA YOSHIHARA PNUD BRASIL ciyoshi@yahoo.com.br

CLAUDIA MELIM-MCLEOD PNUD NORUEGA claudia.melim-mcleod@undp.org

CLAUDIA OCELLI PM Contagem BRASIL claudia.ocelli@contagem.mg.gov.br

DANAE ISSA PNUD NORUEGA danae.issa@undp.org

DANIEL CARSANA PNUD EL SALVADOR daniel.carsana@undp.org

DANIEL RICARDO VARGAS REYES PNUD Colombia COLOMBIA daniel.vargas@undp.org

DIEGO RAFAEL ANTONI PNUD MEXICO diego.antoni@undp.org

EDGAR GUERRERO CENTENO INEGI MEXICO edgar.guerrero@inegi.org.mx, mtro_edgar@hotmail.com

ELISABETE MORAIS SSP-DF BRASIL elisabete.seprol@gmail.com

ELIZABETH ARAUZ ONU MUJERES ECUADOR elizabeth.arauz@unwomen.org

ELTON MAGALHÃES SSP-GO BRASIL eltonrima@hotmail.com

ERALDO AUGUSCO SSP-GO BRASIL eraldo.augusto@mj.gov.br

ÉRICA MACHADO PNUD BRASIL erica.machando@undp.org

FRANCISCO JAVIER DIAZ MADRIZ POLICIA NACIONAL NICARAGUA seguridadpublica@policia.gob.ni

FRANKLIN MARTINEZ ALCADIA STA TECLA EL SALVADOR fkmartinezquin@gmail.comGABRIELA DUTRA PNUD PANAMA gabriela.dutra@undp.orgGUILLERMO ASPRILLA Sec. Gob. Bogotá COLOMBIAHAYDÉE CARUSO UNB PANAMA haydee@unb.br

HECTOR RIVEROS SERRATO CONSULTOR COLOMBIA riversoshector@gmail.com

ENCONTRO REGIONAL: GOVERNANÇA E SEGURANÇA NA AMÉRICA LATINA - BRASÍLIA, 08-09 OUTUBRO 2012

REGIONAL WORKSHOP: GOVERNANCE FOR CITIZEN SECURITY IN LATIN AMERICA - BRASILIA, 8-9 OCTOBER 2012

HELVISNGY DOS REIS CARDOSO Ministerio da Defensa BRASIL neyrcd@gmail.com

HUSAIN MUHAMMAD UNDP INDONESIA muhammad.husain@undp.org

INDRAJAYA SYUKRI BAPPENAS INDONESIA indrajaya@bappenas.go.id

INES MARIA TOFALO PNUD - SU/SSC USA ines.tofalo@undp.org

IVA LOPES PNUD BRASIL maria.lopes@undp.org

JACQUELINE BRIGAGAO FGV BRASIL jbrigagao@yahoo.com

JORGE CHEDIEK ONU BRASIL jorge.chediek@undp.org

JACOB SAID PNUD BRASIL jacob.said@undp.org

JOSE FERNANDES MOTTA SSP - DF BRASIL jonaomotta@gmail.com

JUAN PABLO GORDILLO CISALVA COLOMBIA jpgordillo@gmail.com

JUAN SALGADO CIDE MEXICO juan.salgado@cide.edu

JULIANA DALVI PNUD COLOMBIA jumattedi@hotmail.com

KARLA SKEFF UNESCO MEXICO karla.skeff@unesco.org

LINA MARIA VALÊNCIA CISALVA COLOMBIA linavalenciacisalva@gmail.com

MARCELO DE SOUZA MACHADO PM Contagem BRASIL marcelo.souza@contagem.mg.gov.br

MARCELLO BARROS SENASP BRASIL

MARÍA NELLY RIVAS PNUD NICARAGUA maria.rivas@undp.org

MARINA CAIXETA UNODC BRASIL marina.caixeta@unodc.org

MARISTELA BAIONI PNUD BRASIL maristela.baioni@undp.org

MAURO CABRAL SSP - DF BRASIL mauroakaiser@gmail.com

MELISSA ANDRADE RHD BRASIL melissaandrade909@gmail.com

MICHELE SILVA SEDS - Fica Vico BRASIL michele.silva@defesasocial.mg.gov.br

MOISÉS SILVA DIAS SSP - DF BRASIL moisesdias193@gmail.com

NENA MACEDO PNUD BRASIL nenamacedo@bol.com.br

NIKLAS STEPHAN UNICEF BRASIL nstephan@unicef.org

NIVIO NASCIMENTO UNOCD BRASIL nivio.nascimento@unodc.org

PAULA MOHAMED UNDP BARBADOS paula.mohamed@undp.org

PAULO RICARDO DE PAIVA E SOUZA PNUD BRAZIL ricardo@nove.ws

PAULO RUIZ PNUD PANAMA pablo.ruiz@undp.org

RANDALL BRENES PNUD COSTA RICA randall.brenes@undp.org

ROBERTO CHAVES PCERJ BRASIL rchavesalmeida@ig.com.br

ROBERTO JAVIER GALLARDO NUÑEZ MIDEPLAN COSTA RICA roberto.gallardo@mideplan.go.cr

ROGEIRO CARNEIRO SENASP BRASIL

WOFSI YURI DE SOUZA ABC BRASIL