GENEVA, May 9 (UNHCR) – The UN Refugee Agency is calling on the Government of Kenya to reconsider its recent announcement that it intends to end the hosting of refugees.

The Ministry of Interior made the announcement on May 6 in a statement that cited economic, security and environmental burdens. It said the Government had disbanded its Department of Refugee Affairs and was working on a mechanism for the closure of Kenya's refugee camps – a move that could affect as many as 600,000 lives.

"It is with profound concern that UNHCR takes note of this announcement," UNHCR spokesperson Adrian Edwards said. "For almost a quarter of a century, Kenya has played a vital role in East Africa and the Horn of Africa in providing asylum to people forced to flee persecution and war."

Edwards noted that the safety of hundreds of thousands of Somalis, South Sudanese and others has hinged on Kenya's generosity and its willingness to be a leading beacon in the region for international protection.

"UNHCR has been, and will continue to be, in touch with the Kenyan Government to fully understand the implications of its statement," he said. "We recognize that Kenya has played an extraordinary role over many years as one of the world's frontline major refugee hosting nations, and that inevitably this has had many consequences for the country and its population."

In recognition of the country's role, UNHCR has been a prominent advocate for robust international support for Kenya, including support for host communities and a careful listening to their concerns.

Edwards stressed that, in today's global context of some 60 million people forcibly displaced, it is more important than ever that international asylum obligations prevail and are properly supported.

"In light of this, and because of the potentially devastating consequences for hundreds of thousands of people that premature ending of refugee hosting would have, UNHCR is calling on the Government of Kenya to reconsider its decision and to avoid taking any action that might be at odds with its international obligations towards people needing sanctuary from danger and persecution."

El Fasher, 8 May 2016 – As part of his meetings with senior UNAMID officials, state authorities, and the local community, the AU-UN Joint Special Representative, Martin Uhomoibhi, visited Zalingei, Central Darfur, El Geneina, West Darfur; Nyala, South Darfur, El Daein, East Darfur; between 2-6 May 2016.

During his visit, Mr. Uhomoibhi held formal meetings, consultations, popular conferences and discussions with a broad spectrum of Darfuri entities, including with key state authorities (Governors of States, Government of Sudan military and police officials and State security authorities) , internally displaced persons (IDPs) refugees and their representatives, native administration and community leaders (nazirs, umdahs and chieftains) as well as UNAMID staff and members of the UN Country Team in the sectors, in order to exchange views on UNAMID’s mandate and his efforts as Joint Chief Mediator in relation to the Darfur peace process.

First the JSR visited Zalingei and met with the acting Wali (Governor) and state officials of Central Darfur and discussed with them the Mission’s mandate and the impact of the ongoing fighting in Jebel Marra on the state. In this connection, the JSR raised the issue of access restrictions and their negative impact on the Mission’s ability to provide accurate and truthful reports reflecting the reality on the ground.

The second leg of the JSR’s tour was to El Geneina. After a formal call on the Acting Wali and state officials, Mr. Uhomoibhi and his delegation visited Ardamata camp for the displaced in West Darfur and met with the camp's residents in a popular conference. He shared with Ardamata residents his recent mediation efforts as Joint Chief Mediator and underlined the importance of non-signatory armed movements joining the peace efforts to bring peace to Darfur.

The following day, the JSR visited Nyala and met the state authorities. He then visited Kalma camp for the internally displaced where he met with the residents and urged them to exercise restraint in the wake of a recent shootout in the camp’s market by unidentified armed men and assure them of UNAMID’s commitment to their protection. He also discussed with UNAMID Sector South leadership ways of augmenting the Mission’s protection efforts to meet the needs of the population we serve in South Darfur, particularly the displaced women and children who tend to bear the brunt of such attacks. Additionally, he listened to demands from the IDPs for additional patrolling and support to community policing projects in the camp.

In El Daein, the final leg of the JSR’s visit to the sectors, he met with the Wali of East Darfur as well as native administration leaders and urged them to work in mutual cooperation to resolve longstanding tribal conflicts in the state. He reiterated UNAMID’s readiness to do its utmost to support these reconciliation efforts within its capability. Mr. Uhomoibhi also visited the Khor Omer camp near El Daein where thousands of South Sudanese refugees have sought shelter on account of the past period of instability which South Sudan had experienced. He held a popular conference attended by the South Sudanese refugees and interacted extensively with their tribal chieftains and the relief agencies operating in the camp. Ambassador Uhomoibhi commended the efforts of East Darfur State in hosting their South Sudanese neighbors and observed that this is one more reason that Darfur should have peace in order to turn from a troubled region into a safe resort.

During his interactions throughout the entire tour, JSR Uhomoibhi impressed upon the need for all the stakeholders – the federal and state authorities, UNCT partners, UNAMID staff, Native Administration mechanisms in the various states and the wider population of Darfur – to cooperate in putting together a comprehensive access strategy that would go a long way towards facilitating humanitarian access across Darfur and ensuring that UNAMID’s reporting is based on first-hand observations of the situation and not third party accounts.

The Global Education Cluster 2015 Report seeks to illustrate how the work of the Global Education Cluster and its new strategic direction have been particularly significant in achieving results despite the challenging environment faced by humanitarian agencies in 2015. The report presents examples of our work that demonstrate how our aim to be as field focused (and field informed) as possible has successfully enabled education responses to be more effective, through better coordination. Continued partner support (highlighted in the report) has also been critical to this success. Finally the report looks at the changing humanitarian landscape and the challenges and opportunities ahead.

Executive summary

The first-ever World Humanitarian Summit, to be held in Istanbul in May 2016, provides a chance to honour that pledge and lay the foundations for a reformed humanitarian system – one that puts people at the centre of disaster response, builds resilience to crises with people affected and really does ensure that no one is left behind.

To pass the first hurdle, we must listen to what older people living in the midst of crisis have to tell us. During November and December 2015, HelpAge International interviewed 300 women and men aged 60 and over in cities, towns and camps in Lebanon, South Sudan and Ukraine. These older people are living through some of the most acute global crises in the world today.

In each context we found evidence of neglect that reflects the reality for older people caught up in disasters across the globe:

• The majority of people we spoke to said they had not been consulted about their needs.

• More than two thirds said they did not have enough information about the humanitarian assistance available to them.

• Almost half said health services did not provide care for their age-related conditions.

• Close to half said they felt anxious, hopeless or depressed most or all of the time.

Warda, an 85-year-old Syrian woman living in Lebanon, spoke for many when she said: “I know that humanitarian aid might be helping, but only for those who can go and get it. How am I supposed to get this help if I can’t even leave the room?”

Humanitarian assistance is guided by core principles, underpinned by international humanitarian law. The principle of humanity gives everyone affected by crisis, including older people, the right to humanitarian assistance. The principle of impartiality means that help must be provided to the most urgent cases first without discrimination.

This report offers older people the space to share their hopes and concerns and talk about the challenges affecting their daily lives. It contributes to a growing body of evidence illustrating the failure of the humanitarian system to protect their rights and meet their needs, and demonstrates the limited progress the humanitarian system has made to address the neglect of older people.

Evaluation Summary

An Inter-Agency Humanitarian Evaluation (IAHE) was conducted in South Sudan in April 2015 under the auspices of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Transformative Agenda for the global reform of humanitarian action in large-scale emergencies. This was the first such evaluation of a response to a conflict situation and complex political emergency.

Widespread internal conflict in South Sudan began between rival government factions in December 2013. The conflict escalated rapidly as ethnic dimensions emerged and as the fighting spread geographically throughout the north-eastern states of Unity, Upper Nile and Jonglei. The situation has severely impacted the civilian population with the displacement of 1.5 million people.

A landlocked country in north-eastern Africa, South Sudan gained independence from the Sudan in 2011 following decades of civil war that cost 1 million lives and halted national development progress. Although South Sudan had been taking tentative steps towards stabilization and recovery prior to the onset of the current crisis, development indicators were among the worst in the world and in several states the proportion of children affected by acute malnutrition had reached emergency thresholds. The United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) remained in place due to sporadic local conflicts and remaining tensions with the Sudan.

Based on the standard terms of reference for the evaluation, a team of five evaluators was tasked with addressing the following four key questions:

1. Did the inter-agency response meet the objectives set out in its strategic plans and were these objectives appropriate?

2. To what extent were national and local stakeholders involved and their capacities strengthened through the response?

3. Was the assistance well coordinated and did it successfully avoid duplication and fill gaps?

4. To what extent were IASC core humanitarian programming principles and guidance applied?

The main methodological tool employed was a common evaluation matrix designed to answer the four questions and related sub-questions and used by each of the evaluators as a guide and a means of recording evidence. Each team member was assigned an area of specialization to ensure that certain themes were covered in greater depth. Geographically, the evaluation team visited 6 out of the country’s 10 states, individually or in sub-teams of two. The specific locations were chosen to provide a broad cross-section of different situations, including one state that is relatively unaffected by direct conflict but where agencies are responding to chronic food insecurity within the overall response framework. Evaluation techniques included interviews with all stakeholders, including humanitarians, community members and other key informants, as well as examination of response data (especially cluster data), literature review, focus group discussions and direct observation. Accountability to Affected People (AAP), a major initiative under the Transformative Agenda, was a particular area of focus.

One major constraint was that two team members were in Upper Nile during a resurgence in the fighting there and effectively lost several days of field work due to security restrictions. Another was that a number of clusters could not provide adequate monitoring data for 2014. Overall, the lack of outcome data in certain sectors meant that the team was not always able to draw concrete conclusions regarding the achievements of the response. The magnitude of the South Sudan LevelThree (L3) Emergency response, which involved more than 150 agencies and a range of locations spread out across vast and remote areas, meant that the evaluation was necessarily broad and summative. Based on a limited, albeit triangulated, set of response activity snapshots, the evaluation also undoubtedly involves some bias. Considerable reliance was therefore placed on examining the response-wide data held within the clusters. This data turned out to be quite patchy in some cases, however, particularly for 2014.

Notwithstanding these constraints, the evaluation concluded that the main response objectives related to saving lives, providing protection and supporting livelihoods were appropriate and have generally been fulfilled. The evidence supports the claim that the response averted any major public health catastrophe, including famine. Working in collaboration with UNMISS, the HCT response reached 100,000 people with life-saving protection in Protection of Civilians (PoC) sites. Excellent and innovative work in support of livelihoods was conducted and will form a strong basis for future expansion in this sector. These achievements were made in a country that is notoriously challenging from a logistical point of view and where there were significant security risks. Strenuous fundraising efforts, led by the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC), raised US$1.27 billion in 2014, 70 per cent of the requested funds, which represents an excellent result relative to most other emergency appeals.

At the same time, the response was slow to deploy in the early months of 2014, which undoubtedly resulted in preventable deaths and suffering. Not enough attention was paid to the spirit of the humanitarian programme cycle (HPC). Response plans were written primarily as fundraising documents rather than as truly strategic documents against which progress could be measured and regular course corrections could be made. Complex and time-consuming coordination structures were present in Juba, but the coordination presence outside of the capital was very light. The severe shortage of experienced coordinators and leaders, especially outside of Juba, was the single biggest weakness in the response and had major side effects for programme coverage and quality.

Despite some excellent practices by a few agencies, the general level of AAP was disappointing and there was a lack of leadership in this area by the Humanitarian Country Team (HCT). National nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) could have played a greater role in the response. Although they cannot always match the technical standards and logistical capacity of international agencies, national NGOs bring a number of other important qualities, such as local knowledge, staying power and cost consciousness that will become increasingly attractive. The response took a balanced and appropriate approach to working with national and local authorities, seeking to collaborate and support those elements that demonstrated a commitment to humanitarian efforts and could put politics aside.

The Transformative Agenda has not had a major impact on the South Sudan response, and the evaluators see little value in maintaining the L3 status under current circumstances. The crisis is now clearly becoming protracted and therefore requires a complete review and revision of strategic purpose. The emergency is merging with the long-term pattern of conflict and underdevelopment in South Sudan and a key lesson has been that there is no clear choice between relief and development (or resilience, recovery, etc.). Inter-agency operations in South Sudan would benefit from a fresh paradigm that can nimbly move between these approaches. In any case, funding is already waning, so hard choices must be made in regards to the way forward. A proper strategic planning process should be initiated that includes more voices, particularly those of affected people, who largely survive by their own efforts and often have more insight than humanitarians realize. Investments in better analysis are also needed, especially in relation to food security and to boost sustainable logistics infrastructure and capacity.

Reconciling the Irreconcilable? Peace-building, Humanitarianism & Development

Contents

1. Editor's Note
2. The nexus of peace building, development and humanitarianism in conflict affected contexts: A respect for boundaries
3. The evolution of NGO peacebuilding in complex emergencies: A theoretical analysis
4. Intersectionality, sexual and gender-based violence and humanitarian intervention
5. Hitting two birds with one stone? Role of humanitarian response in peace-building processes
6. The recent attack in Gambela and its implications for humanitarian operations

Editor's note

The upcoming World Humanitarian Summit scheduled to be held on the 23rd and 24th of May, 2016 in Istanbul Turkey, and the deliberations leading up to it, encompass one theme, ‘serving the needs of people in conflict’ which in theory engages with the nexus of peace-building and humanitarianism. However the theme and the issues raised by it, are framed in very general terms and do not explore the multiple complexities and challenges inherent in the marriage of the two notions.

The recent announcement by Médecins Sans Frontière (MSF) states that it is withdrawing from participation in the World Humanitarian Summit due to concerns at the continued violation of international humanitarian law in relation to refugees and conflict situations by state actors, and its fears the Summit will do little in holding states to commitments that are made during the Summit.[1] The decision by the MSF is symptomatic of the complexities and contradictions engendered by the growing fusion of humanitarianism, developmental interventions and peace-building. The desire by certain actors (states, multilateral actors and humanitarian organizations) for a more expanded and robust mandate in relation to conflict induced humanitarian emergencies is understandable but at the same time overlooks the problems inherent with an expanded mandate.

The desire for an expanded and robust fusion of peace-building, humanitarianism and development interventions ignores the growing politicization and militarization of humanitarian interventions especially in the Global South. It also plays into the growing tendency to challenge the norm of state sovereignty. The publication of the 1992 United Nations Report An Agenda For Peace is a landmark event in questioning, and in hindsight, in eroding the notion of state sovereignty. The principle of Humanitarian Intervention and the reformulation of sovereignty in terms of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ have expanded the space for humanitarian action for a whole range of humanitarian actors: from states to civil society organizations to businesses.

On a more prosaic level, integrating peace-building and humanitarianism is easier said than done. Efforts to reconcile humanitarian action and peace-building on the ground especially during conflict-induced humanitarian crises are fraught with tensions and challenges. These are compounded by definitional problems and operational paradoxes, including the sheer ambiguity of the humanitarian agenda, the nature of humanitarian space, and competing agendas.

The issues and questions that arise are of more than theoretical interest. They have profound practical significance for peace-builders and humanitarian actors in the field. The issues and questions are even more critical for the Horn of Africa, the site of many conflict induced humanitarian emergencies. The 2015 Global Humanitarian Overview (UN 2015), says that five out of the 12 ‘countries in focus’ in terms of their humanitarian need are in Africa and all of them are crises induced or exacerbated by conflict. Of these five African countries (Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Central African Republic), three are in the Horn of Africa.

The articles submitted for this issue of the Horn of Africa Bulletin interrogate and explore many of the contradictions alluded to earlier in the fusion of peace-building, humanitarianism and developmental interventions.

The article by Jens Pedersen is an incisive and critical theoretical engagement and interrogation of the tendency to fuse peace-building, humanitarian and developmental interventions. He cautions against the tendency in favour of an expanded humanitarian mandate and urges for the usefulness and practicality of respecting ‘boundaries’. Elias Opongo’s article offers a critical theoretical overview of CSOs engagement in conflict induced emergencies and peace-building and offers recommendations regarding peace-building initiatives. Both authors are critical of and caution against the fusion of developmental interventions, peace-building and humanitarian mandates. The article by Lailatul Fitriyah offers a convincing argument for the incorporation of an intersectional gendered perspective in humanitarian emergencies in response to Gender and Sexual Based Violence (GSBV). Martha Bedane’s article on the other hand takes a different position on the fusion of peace-building and humanitarian interventions. Her article argues that in spite of the problems that might arise, there are inherent synergies between peace-building and humanitarian interventions and that they are not mutually exclusive. She rounds off her article by elaborating on how one form of humanitarian intervention in conflict induced humanitarian interventions can actually lead to dividends in the peace-building sphere. The last article by Eyob Asfaw explores the inter- linkages between peace-building and humanitarian interventions by focusing on the recent attack in Gambela.[2] The article argues that the attack should be understood as emerging from the chaos of a stalled peace-building process that did not encompass local level political and security issues.

Demessie Fantaye
Editor
demessie.fantaye@life-peace.org

In May 2015, fighting erupted between the farmers from Mundri West and East counties and cattle keepers who brought their cattle from different parts of the country for grazing in the Counties. These tensions resulted in the displacement of civilians in Mundri town into neighboring villages and other locations further outside Mundri town such as Lui, Kediba, Lozoh, Lanyi, Buogyi, Lakamadi and Jambo in Mundri East county; Amadi, Kotobi, Bari, Gariya and Bangolo in Mundri West county; Yambio, Juba and several other areas. A total of 23 individuals were reported killed in Mundri town as a result of the initial conflict.

From late September 2015 to early October 2015, an armed group attacked the SPLA barracks in Mundri town sparking three days of armed clashes that re-displaced the entire population of Mundri town and spread to villages along the roads to Maridi, Mvolo, Terrekeka and Juba. More incidents that went unreported occurred in late November 2015 in Mundri town, Lui, Lanyi, Buogyi and Jambo that caused further re-displacements of the returning population in Mundri West and East. Nearly 50 people were killed as a result of these incidents. In February 2016, SPLA invasions of Lozoh, Bari, Gariya, Ladingwa and Bangolo caused further re-displacements.

The continued escalated tensions displaced nearly 30,000 individuals from Mu-ndri West County and 20,000 individuals from some locations of Mundri East many of whom scattered to villages and the bush without access to basic services.

The most affected areas in Mundri East following the skirmishes from May 2015 to November 2015 and February 2016 to March 2016 include Lanyi, Buogyi, Jam-bo, Lozoh and Lakamadi.

In April, 48 access incidents were reported by humanitarian partners, compared to 60 incidents in March and 62 in February. Violence against humanitarian personnel/assets accounted for 79 per cent of all reported incidents. Other access impediments included restriction of movement and interference in implementation. The majority of reported incidents took place in Central Equatoria, followed by Jonglei and Unity.

IMPACT ON HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE

Humanitarian action in April was primarily hampered by violence against personnel/assets, restriction of movement and interference in implementation. Out of 48 reported incidents, 38 were violence against personnel/ assets of which 23 were either attempted or completed robberies/burglaries. 11 robberies/burglaries, or just under half, occurred in Juba in Central Equatoria with the remaining 12 spread across seven other states. This is a shift from previous months where most robberies/burglaries were confined to Juba. In Upper Nile, active hostilities resulted in the relocation of 17 aid workers from Ulang County. In Central Equatoria, two aid workers were killed in an ambush in Yei County, resulting in the temporary suspension of humanitarian activities and withdrawal of staff from the area.

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia | AFP | Tuesday 5/10/2016 - 12:58 GMT

Nineteen Ethiopian children who were kidnapped last month by South Sudanese gunmen have been released, the Ethiopian government announced Tuesday, with negotiations underway to free dozens of others.

The children, who were among more than a hundred abducted during a cross-border tribal raid on April 15, were freed peacefully following mediation by South Sudanese authorities, the government in Addis Ababa said.

"There was no fighting," Ethiopian government spokesman Getachew Reda said.

"There's been effort on the part of South Sudan to locate the children and work with tribal leaders to free them," he added.

"We hope the (other) children will be brought back safely and without a need for a fight, but Ethiopian forces will continue to make every effort including taking military action if necessary."

The children were brought safely on Monday to the town of Gambella in western Ethiopia, near the border with war-torn South Sudan, the spokesman said.

The Ethiopian army had crossed the border to look for the children after the attack, which left 208 people dead. The gunmen, who were armed with Kalashnikov rifles, also stole more than 2,000 livestock.

Ethiopian officials blame Murle tribesmen for a string of attacks targeting the Nuer, one of the two main ethnic groups in South Sudan, who live on both sides of the border.

But this attack was unusually bloody in a region where inter-tribal clashes and livestock thefts are frequent.

Dubbed the "Gambella massacre" in the Ethiopian media, the raid reinforced long-standing fears that South Sudan's civil war, which began in December 2013, would spill into Ethiopia.

Some 272,000 refugees from the South Sudanese conflict -- which has left tens of thousands of people dead -- are currently living in the Gambella region.

The conflict has split South Sudan roughly along ethnic lines pitting the president's Dinka tribe against the rebel leader's Nuers. Ethiopia believes the raids are not linked to the conflict.

Reda declined to say how many soldiers were currently on the South Sudanese side of the border. An AFP reporter saw several military convoys arriving at Gambella airport in the days after the raid.

kal/kjl/ach

© 1994-2016 Agence France-Presse

Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) providing assistance to refugees in Kenya acknowledge the hospitality and responsibility that the Government of Kenya has borne over decades. Despite the huge economic and social pressure, Kenya continues to host close to 600,000[1] refugees and asylum seekers from neighbouring countries, the majority being from Somalia and South Sudan. In addition, the Burundi conflict has also led to an influx of refugees from the country into the Kakuma refugee camp. Fifty-six percent of this current refugee population in Kenya comprises women, children and the youth who are particularly vulnerable to exploitation and abuse while in displacement. The acceptance of refugees in Dadaab, Kakuma and those living in urban settings is a reflection of good practice and gesture exhibited by the Government of Kenya and host communities over the years.

However, we the undersigned NGOs view as unfortunate the position assumed by the Government of Kenya, in a statement issued by the Ministry of Interior on the 6th of May, 2016 that disbands the Department of Refugee Affairs (DRA) and indicates that this will be followed by the closure of the Dadaab and Kakuma camps within the shortest time possible. The recent announcement will have far reaching implications for the thousands of refugees and asylum seekers who have called Kenya a place of refuge, namely: § The directive to close the camps violates the general principle of voluntary repatriation of refugees living in Kenya in a safe and dignified manner back to their countries of origin. Additionally, the directive will draw back on the gains made so far in the repatriation process.

§ Kenya, over the years, has been recognized as a safe haven for persons seeking refuge from conflict and environmental disasters. Shutting down the refugee camps will mean increased protection risks for the thousands of refugees and asylum seekers – majority of who are women, children and unaccompanied minors. The current humanitarian situation in Somalia and South Sudan remains dire and fragile. Somalia is faced with drought and other security risks that are likely to see an increase in displacement and vulnerability. In South Sudan, despite the return of the Vice President, Riek Machar to Juba, a positive step towards ending the on-going conflict in the country, the humanitarian crisis is far from being over. Currently, displacements continue both within the country as well as to neighbouring countries and the situation could be exacerbated by the forced return of refugees from Kenya.

§ The Department of Refugee Affairs (DRA) as established by the Refugee Act, 2006 delivers crucial administrative services for refugees and asylum seekers and its disbandment would create an immediate critical service provision and coordination gap for management of refugee affairs. Additionally, DRA plays an extremely vital role in the current voluntary repatriation process under the Tripartite Agreement and the decision to disband it will stall these process.

We acknowledge the concerns raised by the Government of Kenya and do share in the need to reinforce security in the country as security is an integral part of any nation and for providing a conducive asylum environment. We therefore ask that: § The international community provides predictable and sufficient financial support towards refugee programmes in Kenya including supporting the Government of Kenya;

§ The Government of Kenya continues with its more sustainable security approach of boosting police reforms and improving community policing and ownership particularly within the refugee camps and the host communities in order to facilitate timely information sharing, mitigation and response to security threats;

§ The Government of Kenya continues to uphold the protection and rights of refugees who are prone to human rights violations and especially vulnerable groups like women and children. An abrupt closure of the two camps would mean a humanitarian catastrophe for the region as neighbouring countries especially Uganda, Tanzania and Ethiopia are already shouldering huge refugee populations.

§ Durable solutions must inform returns, including long-term safety, security, freedom of movement, access to basic services and livelihoods options availed to returnees and host communities. Refugee laws and asylum regimes are under attack and especially in Europe. Kenya should not follow that path but instead continue to host refugees while getting much more support to do so from the international community.

§ The international community should expand its resettlement quotas for refugees coming from the Horn of Africa in order to compliment return and integration strategies as well as share the burden of hosting refugees, on the Government of Kenya.

§ The Government of Kenya supports dialogue with other key stakeholders on this decision in a bid to facilitate sustainable solutions to the current refugee situation in Kenya.

The NGO community is committed to continue supporting the Government of Kenya in the search for long-term and sustainable solutions for refugees. We therefore urge the Government to withdraw the directive to disband the Department of Refugee Affairs and reconsider its intention to close refugee camps in the country in line with its good record of upholding its obligations towards hosting refugees and asylum seekers.

Note to Editors: For more information or media requests, please contact:
Eunice Ndonga-Githinji, Executive Director, RCK: refcon@rckkenya.org ; +254 720 943 164

Neil Turner, Country Director, NRC Kenya: neil.turner@nrc.no ; + 254 717 842 665

Heather Amstutz, Regional Director, DRC Horn of Africa and Yemen: h.amstutz@drchoa.org ; +254 723 294 999

Leila Zerrougui addresses the African Union Open Session on Children and Armed Conflict

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia – Protecting schools from attacks and military use is essential to fulfil one of the promises of the 2030 Agenda: ensuring access to education for all children, Leila Zerrougui, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict told members of the African Union’s Peace and Security Council during the third annual Open Session on children and armed conflict.

“Schools in the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Libya, Mali, Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan and Sudan, have been looted, pillaged, damaged and destroyed during military operations, including through indiscriminate attacks, ground shelling and aerial bombardments, depriving millions of children of their fundamental right to education, putting the future of an entire generation at risk,” said the Special Representative, who welcomed the African Union’s initiative to dedicate this year’s session to the protection of education.

Attacks against schools and their military use have become a common aspect of today’s conflicts, with long term consequences, especially on fragile education systems. The Special Representative emphasized the heavy burden placed on communities and post-conflict societies to rebuild or repair schools and bring back skilled teachers.

“We have a strong framework, we have tools and political momentum,” Zerrougui said. “The African Union and its Member states can and must make a difference by including measures to end and prevent attacks against schools in domestic legislation, including criminalization of these acts, and must hold perpetrators accountable.”

She called on Member States to endorse the Safe School Declaration, and thereby commit to implement the “Guidelines for Protecting Schools and Universities from Military Use during Armed Conflict” adopted in December 2014, saying that “occupying a school comes at such a high price that it can never be justified”. The declaration has already been endorsed by fifteen African countries.

Zerrougui invited world leaders to produce new commitments to ensure that conflict does not mean the end of learning for millions of children affected by war during the World Humanitarian Summit scheduled at the end of the month in Istanbul.

In conclusion, the Special Representative recalled that the international community has firmly put the protection of schools on its agenda and urged Governments to take action to realize our collective commitment.

Read Leila Zerrougui’s remarks at the Open Session of the African Union Peace and Security Council: https://childrenandarmedconflict.un.org/statement/briefing-at-the-open-session-of-the-african-union-peace-and-security-council-2/

Note to editors:
In 2011, with the adoption of resolution 1998, the Security Council requested the UN Secretary-General to identify and list, in the annexes of his annual report on Children and Armed Conflict, the armed forces and groups who attack schools or hospitals, or protected persons in relation to schools and hospitals.

The resolution asked listed parties to conflict to work with the United Nations to prepare concrete, time-bound action plans to end and prevent the violations.

There are seven parties listed in the annexes of the most recent annual report of the Secretary-General on children and armed conflict, including 5 on the African continent: the Ex-Seleka coalition and associated armed groups (Central African Republic), the Allied Democratic Forces, Forces démocratiques de liberation du Rwanda, Front de résistance patriotique en Ituri (Democratic Republic of the Congo) and Boko Haram (Nigeria).

On May 22 2014, the Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, Leila Zerrougui, launched a Guidance Note on Attacks against schools and hospitals to help ensure that everyone involved in monitoring, reporting and advocacy is equipped with the best tools to end and prevent attacks against schools and hospitals.

For additional information, please contact:
Stephanie Tremblay, Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict
+1 212 963 8285, Mobile, +1 917 288 5791, tremblay@un.org

Highlights

55,000 Refugee children under five years immunized against polio in Unity and Upper Nile
29,574 Exercise books and school kits distributed in Upper Nile and Central Equatoria
7,000 Tree seedlings planted in three newly opened nurseries in Upper Nile
3,350 IDPs received assistance from UNHCR in Upper Nile, Jonglei and Bahr al Ghazal

Unity:

In April, 1,599 Sudanese refugees from South Kordofan State arrived in Yida, bringing the number of new arrivals since 1st January 2016 to 4,635. This represents apercent increase compared to the previous month. They reported hunger, aerial bombardments and ground attacks as the main reasons for fleeing to South Sudan. UNHCR provided them, inter alia, with registration, reception assistance and transportation to Ajuong Thok.

Upper Nile:

In Maban, UNHCR and partners began implementation of preventive and mitigating measures to tackle malnutrition among refugees.
In Gendrassa and Doro camps, Supplementary Feeding Program for children under five years is ongoing and so is the distribution of Corn-­‐Soya Blend Plus for pregnant and lactating women in Yusuf Batil and Kaya camps.

Central Equatoria:

In Lasu, 1,400 refugee and host community families joined an agriculture fair, gaining access to a wide range of crop seeds for the current planting season. UNHCR, FAO and UMCOR organized the fair.

275.7 M required for 2016 including special situations
47.9 M contributions received, representing 17% of requirements
227.7 M overall funding gap for South Sudan

April 2016 - Twenty women who represent civil society across South Sudan gathered for the National Women Peace Forum to review the status of implementation of recommendations from the last year and to discuss and agree on their common concerns for peace and security in South Sudan in the context of implementation of recommendations made in 2014 on UNSCR 1325 Women Peace and Security.

The event was supported by UNMISS in partnership with the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women (UN Women) as well as the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and was held as a culmination of sixteen sub-national Women Peace Forums across the country reaching out over seven hundred women in total. In addition to the representatives from the UN agencies, civil society and media, a representative from the Embassy of the United Kingdom was present in the Opening Session.

It is part of the global initiative by the United Nations called Global Open Days for the implementation of UNSCR1325 Women Peace and Security to listen to and understand perspectives of women from civil society on women peace and security and convey them to the Security Council through good offices of United Nations’ Secretary-General. Since its onset in 2010, the initiative has reached over some countries that have undergone conflicts and peace-building processes.

In his Opening Remarks at the event, the Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General, Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator Mr. Eugene Owusu welcomed the opportunity of National Forum to understand where we are coming from in order to determine in which way we want to go in terms of the empowerment of women of South Sudan. He acknowledged that women of South Sudan have suffered for too long and desire for peace and development and called for their full participation in all aspects of the peace agreement, their voices are heard and their concerns are taken into consideration.

The participants benefitted immensely from the presentation on gender analysis of peace agreement and UNSCR 1325 by Dr. Izeduwa Derex-Briggs, Country Representative of the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment. Dr. Derex-Briggs highlighted many positive elements of the peace agreement and encouraged women to work together and forward their perspectives.

After intensive discussion and consultation processes, women adopted this year’s final report as Peace and Justice for Women. The report summarizes achievements since 2014, opportunities: and challenges in the implementation of women, peace and security agendas. The final report contains twenty three recommendations in total focusing on Participation and Peace-Making, Prevention of Violence and Women’s Human Security: and Protection and Access to Justice.

On 22nd April 2016 Friday, the women delegates met the SRSG in her conference room at the UN House. Ms. Sarah Abeja, who was selected by the other women delegates to be their representative, presented the recommendations to SRSG. SRSG warmly welcomed the women delegates to her conference room and emphasized the importance of equal opportunities in education for girls and their positive effects on family, community and society. She also highlighted the importance of peace and security for women to be able to enjoy equal participation in civic and political arenas.

In concluding, SRSG indicated the importance of bottom-up approach applied in Women Peace Forums: and agreed to review the report with a view to forward recommendations

May 2016 - The UNMISS Relief, Reintegration and Protection (RRP) organized a workshop for IDP Community leaders in the PoC site in Malakal.

The workshop is part of a series of workshops that the UNMISS, through RRP, is organizing to focus specifically on incidents of tension and conflict related to service delivery in the PoC sites.

The Acting Head of Field Office in Malakal, Hastings Amurani Phiri, said that the training is aimed to enable the IDP leaders to gain an understanding of their role in de-escalating tensions among IDPs related to service delivery.

“This training is aimed to facilitate discussions among the leaders representing various communities and groups on experience and challenges pertaining to tensions during service delivery and to develop action plans for IDP community leaders to enhance safety and security in the POC site as well promote peaceful coexistence towards return and reintegration” said Phiri.

She urged the participants to play their part in maintaining a healthy decorum of peaceful co-existence and harmony so the delivery of various services is conducted efficiently and effectively for the benefit of everyone in need.

“I would like to appeal to you all to take this workshop very seriously because the knowledge gained will serve the interests of the entire IDP population. While we have experts who will facilitate the workshop, their role is primarily to moderate the proceedings” said Phiri.

She pledged the Mission’s commitment calling on the IDP’s to play their part in keeping the PoC site free of violence.

“UNMISS remains committed to ensuring your protection while the humanitarians will also continue to ensure efficient and effective service delivery. However, for these two entities to serve the IDP population satisfactorily well, you need to play your part in terms of keeping the POC site violence-free” said Phiri.

HIGHLIGHTS

734,931
Total number of refugees

38,422
Number of Unaccompanied Minors and Separated Children

49.8%
Percentage of women and girls

57%
Percentage of Children

WORKING WITH PARTNERS

• UNHCR is fully engaged in the Humanitarian Country Team in Ethiopia consisting of UN Agencies, NGOs and donor representatives, where the refugee programmes are discussed strategically to ensure that the needs of refugees are adequately presented and addressed. The Representation Office is also building on well-established coordination fora such as the Refugee Task Force, donor and NGO and inter-agency meetings at the field and camp levels.

• UNHCR's main Government counterpart and implementing partner in Ethiopia is the Administration for Refugee and Returnee Affairs (ARRA) and the Office works well with it in ensuring continued protection of the refugees.

• Some 40 partners, including government agencies, national and international non-governmental organizations and UN agencies work closely with UNHCR to support the refugees in the country.

• The effective coordination environment that was established in response to the Level 3 emergency with refugees arriving from South Sudan is working well; a Regional Refugee Response Plan was developed with participation of all partners.