NEW DELHI (TrustLaw) - An international conference on Afghanistan has endorsed President Hamid Karzai’s proposals to combat corruption and promote good governance in the war-torn nation (see factbox).
A communiqué issued on Tuesday also backed his call for the international community to channel at least half of development aid through the Afghan government within the next two years.
Experts in Afghanistan give their reaction to the pledges made by the government:
What do you think of the pledges made?
Ashley Jackson, head of policy and advocacy, Oxfam International
These promises have all been made before - we need to see action. In fact, an informal justice policy was drafted in wide consultation with civil society, human rights activists and the international community last November. Unfortunately, it was never implemented.
Hopefully this commitment will finally move it forward, as many Afghans continue to rely on informal justice structures and such policies are critical to expanding the reach of the formal justice system over the long term.
Nicholas Krafft, country director, World Bank
The Kabul conference was a significant departure from previous meetings on Afghanistan. All the paperwork, policy papers and preparation was done by the Afghans themselves with consultations from donors. It was an internally driven Afghan process, with broad endorsement from all Afghan officials involved, and as a result we hope that we have more “buy-in” from Afghans to make it work.
What do you think is missing from the government’s pledges?
Yama Torabi, co-director, Integrity Watch Afghanistan
Something that was missing is the participation of Afghan citizens and civil society in curbing corruption and increasing the accountability of both state institutions and aid providers. We have been advocating this.
Most recently, we asked the Afghan government to pass a law of access to information allowing us and other civil society organisations to hold accountable both state officials and aid providers delivering public services or government functions. We only see one part of our request being satisfied by Karzai's promise: the disclosure of international contracts and officials assets. Citizens' participation in these issues is important.
We have seen, through our experience with Afghan communities and the Afghan government, that an approach that exclusively relies on reforming state institutions without sufficient pressure from the bottom is doomed to fail.
Krafft, World Bank
Some of what is mentioned (in the communiqué) is broad-based and we think there now needs to be a “go-through” of these plans and the specific points should be put into monitorable, actionable targets.
(On the question of addressing impunity for those found guilty of corruption:)
The donors would like to see the rule of law applied where everyone is treated equally and no one is immune. But we also have to remember that building institutions and making reforms in the judiciary will not be done in 12 months.
Jackson, Oxfam
One item that should have gone in the communiqué is a pledge to enact a freedom of information act. Corruption within the government is abetted by the lack of access that Afghans have to information about their rights as well as how to access basic services.
Without knowing what the policies should be, for example what fees they legitimately should pay for specific services, Afghans have little recourse to stand up to corrupt officials.
Do you think that the transfer of 50 percent of foreign aid should be channelled through the government within two years? Or is this too soon?
Krafft, World Bank
Currently we have about a third of all foreign aid going through government channels, to increase it to 50 percent within two years is a stretch but it is possible.
Afghanistan needs to build capacity. This cannot be done if donor X is building a road on their own with no Afghan input or involvement in the process. You not only have to train people but also have to let Afghans learn by doing.
Torabi, Integrity Watch
This is only possible if the Afghan government is able to design and upgrade some of these national programmes that guarantee absorption of aid and accountability. For the moment, I see capable leadership in only some of the Afghan ministries.
The biggest share of the 50 percent aid that needs to go through government will be spent through the development budget rather than daily functioning of the state (such as salaries and operations).
If the government is not able to present credible national programmes such as the National Solidarity Programme in the coming six months, I would not expect the international community to channel a high proportion of the aid money through government budget.
Jackson, Oxfam
Much of this aid is likely to continue to go through World Bank-administered trust funds, which have sound accountability mechanisms. But the government still must do more to improve its own accountability and transparency. So far we've seen little action, only promises to do so.
The lack of government capacity and ability to deliver services is also an issue, as they still struggle to spend much the 20 percent of aid money that is channelled through them. But in all this talk of who gets the money, the real issue at hand is whether this aid will make a positive difference in Afghan lives being lost.
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
