Gabi

[Editor’s note: This is a section of a report that had to be proofread. The brief was to proofread and do a light edit to ensure that the style is consistent throughout. The client’s name and other sensitive information has been redacted.] Finally, it was not clear if a report had been compiled to capture the outcomes of these community consultative meetings. No doubt such a report would identify for public record some of the key issues of concern for members of these communities regarding how the country ought to take local community concerns into consideration when designing an effective national strategy for dealing with gender-based violenceGBV and VAWviolence against women. 3.2.2.2. Setting up of the me Multi-sSectoral cCoordinating bBody on GBVF The establishment of a permanent multi-sectoral national coordinating body on GBVF was specifically assigned to the ISC on GBVF in line with Article 3 of the sSumbmit dDeclaration. Article 4 of the dSummit Declaration specifies that this permanent body (a) be championed by the President of the Republic of South Africa; (b) be established within six months of the date on which the sSummit dDeclaration is signed by the signatories; (c) be allocated adequate resources for its optimal functioning in accordance with the PFMAublic Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No. 1 of 1999); (d) be governed by a statutory framework to ensure its effective functioning; (e) be inclusive in its representation, with at least 51% of its members coming from civil society; (f) comply with the principles of fairness and justice when exercising voting powers; (g) is transparent in the appointment of any person to its membership; (h) develops a National Strategy with Action Plan for gender-based violence and femicideGBVF not later than six months after its establishment, which must - (i) be adequately costed and resourced in terms of the PFMAublic Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No. 1 of 1999); (ii) set out indicators to be complied with by all stakeholders, including civil society stakeholders; and (iii) be monitored and evaluated on a regular basis by the national multi-sectoral coordinating body” 1. 2 As indicated already, the ISC on GBVF had sSub-committees (i.e. Response, Care and Support) responsible to ensure that theseis responsibilitiesy areis discharged. The [REDACTED] tTeam was initially allowed to attend a meeting of this group, before access/permission was revoked. Based on initial discussions in the group, it was clear that different perspectives existed among participants regarding the nature of the structure to be established. For instanceinstance, one perspective was that the [REDACTED] be used as a reference model in conceptualising the multi-sectoral coordinating body on GBVF. Other perspectives included questions raised on whether or not such a new structure was absolutely necessary given the existence of other bodies, including the [REDACTED]. In fact, there was a strong school of thought among the members of the ISC that suggested the possibility of broadening the current mandate of the [REDACTED], including augmenting its capacity and resources or /staff to fulfil the functions of the multi-sectoral national coordinating body on GBVF as anticipated in the Summit Declaration. While it is not clear how these discussion and issues were eventually resolved, these are important debates that possibly reflected existing strands of thought within the broader civil society sector, including society in general. The [REDACTED] tTeam was initially aware of the early work of the tTechnical wWorking tTeam assigned the task of drafting an organisational structure (i.e. organogram) of the multi-sectoral national coordinating body that wasyet to be established. The [REDACTED] tTeam was also aware that the wWorking tTeam was eventually dissolved and a new tTechnical wWorking tTeam established with the task of drafting and designing a new organogram. Given that the [REDACTED] team’s permission to observe these discussions and deliberations was subsequently revoked/withdrawn by the ISC, it is not clear to what extent the new ISC wWorking tTeam enjoyed better success in forging collective consensus on proposals for the organisational structure of the proposed multi-sectoral coordinating body. Also, the design of an organisation structure is usually part of broader and intensive discussions on the nature, powers, functions and responsibilities of whatever the new organisation that needs to be established. UnfortunatelyUnfortunately, the [REDACTED] was not able to observe further discussions on the development of options for the organisational structure of the proposed multi-sectoral coordinating body. Nonetheless, another draft organisational structure was developed, contained in an official ISC discussion document made available to stakeholders, including the [REDACTED]. The organisational structure in the diagram below appears to be the latest proposed organogram at the time this report was being compiled.