View allAll Photos Tagged Accountable
and i'm back.
when you've been "robust" for most of your life like i have, your weight is your albatross. and at this point in my life, having a weight loss goal as one of my resolutions AGAIN makes me kind of feel like a loser and a failure in spite of any and all of my accomplishments. but we all have our weaknesses. and i feel better about mysef when i at least try.
on the positive side, i'm 6 lbs lighter than i was on january 1, 2009. and it so easily could have gone the other way and more. and i only gained one pound over the holidays. it's that time in france that really fucked me up. oh well.
so here i go again. a fresh start.
feel free to join me.
CPAC stands for Civilian Police Accountability Council. In others words, it means civilian control of the police force.
I'm starting this up again, not so much because I really care about the number specifically, but because I like the idea of a weekly check in to help me stay inspired and keep thinking about what I'm doing and what I'm putting into my body to keep it healthy.
I've recently been inspired by Wendy of Wendy Knits to look into the "Eat Clean" books. I've been staying away from processed foods and high sugar items for some time because of my hypoglycemia, but I've acquired some bad habits that could use a revamp. I'm also not certain that I've been balancing my meals well, especially in the protein department so I'm examining that a little more too.
I'm also getting married in just under 9 months. They ordered my dress in a size 12 and told me not to gain any weight. That was last March. No pressure or anything!! ;)
Also, looking back at the last photos I can find for this I'm pretty much right where I was before. But I've been doing a lot more yoga so hopefully I'm building more muscle... right?!
Happy Wednesday and good luck to all those that are starting this (or may be starting again)!
Do you ever wonder why nearly all disposable and reusable water bottles are round? I’ve always disliked that since they’re big and bulky and take up so a lot area in my bag. As people are moving away from the disposable, single use bottles, reusable ones are popping up more and far more and abs...
www.housedecorating-ideas.com/a-slim-environmentally-acco...
An international civil society coalition - including International Rivers, Amazon Watch, the International Accountability Project, the Institute for Policy Studies and the Jeunes Volontaires pour l’Environnement - has launched a new effort to shift global energy finance towards clean energy solutions for the poor.
The Power 4 People campaign is part of the global month of action, Reclaim Power and supports the Global Indigenous Peoples' Day of Action on Energy. An international day of action on Power 4 People took place on October 12, 2013.
Photo by Zachary Hurwitz
For more information, go to: www.internationalrivers.org/node/8091
BRUSSELS, BELGIUM - June 1: Juan Pablo Gutierrez speaking at “Justice is Everybody’s Business”’, a civil society campaign for strong corporate due diligence legislation stages a stunt in front of the EU Parliament, Square Luxembourg on June 1, 2023 in Brussels, Belgium, 1/06/2023 ( Photo by Philip Reynaers / Photonews
The Inspection Panel is completing 25 years in its role, as an accountability mechanism of the World Bank. As you are aware, the Bank’s failure to comply with its operating policies was seen by the entire world in the Bank’s financing with the Sardar Sarovar Dam project on River Narmada. The tenacity of massive grass-roots uprisings from our communities in the 80’s and the sustained hard work of our social movements along with our resoluteness to link it with international coalitions to question the hegemony of the Bank, subsequently led the Bank, for the first time, to commission an independent review of its project. The Independent Review Committee (Morse Committee) constituted by the Bank in 1991 to review the social and environmental costs and benefits of the dam, after years of consistent struggle by Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) and its allies led to a demand from the civil society around the globe for the creation of a grievance redressal system for project-affected communities, which ultimately pressurized the Bank to constitute the Inspection Panel in 1993. We expected this might be a crucial backstop and an opportunity for us to raise our issues of livelihoods, economic loss, displacement from our lands, alienation from natural resources, destruction of environment and threat to our biodiversity and cultural hotspots, where Bank invested in large, supposedly ‘development’ projects like mega dams, energy and other infrastructure projects. Yet, the outcome we expected rarely delivered sufficient remedy for the harm and losses people have experienced over the years.
A number of accountability mechanisms over the next couple of decades in several development finance institutions were formed following the model of World Bank, commonly known as ‘Independent Accountability Mechanisms’[IAMs]. Each year the number of complaints rise which is an indication of the increasing number of grievous projects happening around the world. While IAMs of most MDBs are advertised to provide strong and just processes, many of our experiences imply that the banks are accommodating practices which suit their own needs and their clients, which are borrowing countries and agencies, and not the people for whom the IAMs were built to serve.
Many a time, we have been disappointed by these mechanisms, since these are designed by the banks who are lending for disastrous projects in our lands. And as a result, the already existing narrow mandate of IAMs is further restricted.
In our efforts to hold the lending bank accountable, the communities are always presented with the arduous process of learning the complex formalities and detailed procedures to initially approach the IAMs and get our grievances registered. Our many years’ time and energy then is channelised into seeing through the various cycles of these complaint handling mechanisms, that our entire efforts go into this process, and often our complaint gets dropped off in midst of the procedural rules of the IAMs. People are made to wait many months to clear procedural levels and our cases with the IAMs get highly unpredictable. Further, we face intimidation and reprisals from the state and project agencies for having contacted the IAMs who themselves do not possess any authority to address the violations hurled out to us when we seek dignity, fair treatment and justice from them. There are many of us who feel a loss of morale after long years of struggling with lenders when we fail to see concrete benefits or changes in our circumstances, by which time considerable irreplaceable harm is already done to our lives, environment and livelihoods.
In this manner, our immediate and larger goal of holding banks for their failure to consult with and obtain consent from communities before devising action plans for our lands, water and forests is deflected in the pretext of problem-solving and grievance hearing offered to us in the name of IAMs.
With over 50 registered complaints sent to different IAMS from India in the past 25 years, many more left unregistered due to technical reasons and only a few got investigated, assessed and monitored at different levels, we have a baggage of mixed experiences with the IAMs. A few of the prominent cases from India apart from Narmada project are Vishnugad Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project [WB’s IP], Tata Mega Ultra-01/Mundra and Anjar [IFC’s CAO & ADB’s CRP], India Infrastructure Fund-01/Dhenkanal District [IFC’s CAO], Allain Duhangan Hydro Power Limited-01/Himachal Pradesh [IFC’s CAO] and Mumbai Urban Transport Project (2009) [WB’s IP].
As we now know, what is being witnessed recently is an influx of approved and proposed investments majorly in energy, transport, steel, roads, urban projects, bullet trains, industrial zones/corridors, smart cities, water privatization and other mega projects in India. This has been financed from different multilateral and bilateral sources, foreign corporations, private banks as well as Export-Import Banks (ExIm Banks). It has become a brutal challenge for communities, social movements and CSOs, with lenders and governments constantly shutting their eyes and ears to us who demand accountability for their actions. A compelling and timely need has arisen among diverse groups amongst us to gather together and critically analyze the various trajectories of our engagements with accountability mechanisms of MDBs in order to bring together past 25 years’ learning, insights and reflections of various actors of this accountability process. This urging demand is also an attempt to define the collective experiences in India among our social movements, projected-affected communities and CSOs with IAMs and lending banks, especially appropriating the global political opportunity of Inspection Panel celebrating its 25 years this year.
Speakers:
Thomas Franco, Former General Secretary, AlI India Bank Officers’ Confederation
Arun Kumar, Eminent scholar, Former Professor Jawaharlal Nehru University
C.P. Chandrashekar, Economist, Professor Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sucheta Dalal, Managing Editor, Moneylife
Soumya Dutta, National Convener, Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha
Dunu Roy, Hazards Center, New Delhi
Medha Patkar, Senior Activist, Narmada Bachao Andolan
Tani Alex, Centre for Financial Accountability
M J Vijayan, Activist and Political commentator
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Anirudha Nagar, Accountability Counsel
Madhuresh Kumar, National Alliance of People’s Movements
A J Vijayan, Chairperson, Western Ghats and Coastal area Protection Forum
Meera Sanghamitra, National Aliance of People’s Movements
Vimal bhai, Matu Jan Sangathan, Uttarakhand
Daniel Adler, Senior Specialist, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Birgit Kuba, Operations Officer, Inspection Panel
Anuradha Munshi, Centre for Financial Accountability
Bharat Patel, General Secretary, Machimar Adhikar Sangharsh Sangathan,Gujarat
Awadhesh Kumar, Srijan Lokhit Samiti
Amulya Kumar Nayak, Odisha Chas Parivesh Surekhsa Parishad, Odisha
Dr. Usha Ramanathan, Legal Scholar
Manshi Asher, Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
I've decided I must start enforcing some motivation and accountability into my health & fitness regimine. I'm not really all that preoccupied with the number on the scale. For me, it's about how clothes fit and how I feel. But I won't lie and say I wouldn't like that number to be taken down by 10. Hopefully doing accountability wednesdays will help!
Sorry for the pasty, skeletor feet. I will wear socks in the future!
A joint African Union-United Nations delegation has concluded a three-day visit to South Sudan, expressing hope for “full cessation of hostilities” and a promise to “hold accountable” those who may derail the peace process.
Speaking to journalists in the capital, Juba, they said the signing of the revitalized peace agreement in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia on 12 September 2018 “is the starting point of the hard work,” and that their visit sought to hear from the Government, civil society, women’s organizations and others about what needed to be done immediately in support of the agreement.
“The implementation of the peace agreement is primarily a responsibility for South Sudanese,” said the Under-Secretary-General for UN Peacekeeping Operations, Jean-Pierre Lacroix. “And I think the partners of South Sudan are keen to see a few things materialize on the ground, particularly the cessation of hostilities which would be, of course, so important – a full cessation of hostilities,” he added.
African Union Commissioner for Peace and Security, Ambassador Smail Chergui, acknowledged there would be challenges ahead, but warned, “let us just take note today that everybody wants to implement that agreement faithfully and we will [hold] accountable anyone going the other route.”
During their visit, the delegation said they had a chance to see first-hand and talk to some of those who had suffered years of conflict.
“The population has suffered tremendously,” said the UN Peacekeeping chief, Lacroix, adding, “We are looking forward to further improvement in the security situation and other such positive signals that will certainly generate confidence and mobilization from the international community.”
Listing various expectations from the women she met, UN Women’s top official said women wanted to be included in the security sector reforms which would include greater participation and contribution by women in securing the country.
“They also wanted to encourage the Government to interact with them directly so that they, too, can have an opportunity to exchange directly with Government about their expectations and get additional assurance about the future which they are very excited about,” said the Executive Director of UN Women, Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka.
“They also want to make sure they take advantage of the 35% participation provision and they would put it on themselves to find the best candidates to fill in those positions,” she told journalists, adding that the women “want to go back to being economically productive citizens.”
The delegation had earlier met with various government officials, reiterating their support for the revitalized peace agreement.
“[It] was good to hear from both the UN [and AU] representatives about the commitment of the UN to support the peace process and they are waiting to see us giving important signals, milestones that prove our commitment and seriousness in implementing this agreement,” said Cabinet Affairs Minister, Martin Elia Lomuro after his closed-door meeting with the delegation, adding, “We have also heard from the African Union about their desire to participate with us in the security sector reform.”
He said the government was committed to implementing what it had signed, including the 35 per cent quota for women.
“That agreement was an agreement by all of us. They didn’t have to fight for it. They should remain calm and trust those in charge – particularly the members of the national review committee who will be ensuring that the objectives of the agreement are followed,” he said, voicing the government’s reassurance on an issue that was at the centre of the delegation’s visit.
Photo: UNMISS / Eric Kanalstein
The "plebgate" affair with Andrew Mitchell was highlighted by a channal 4 documentary. Not his own party the shamed ipcc or any statutory body. Its suggested he was stitched up and that police statments may have been at best creative with the truth. Why should a comercial company revisit the dead political story ? Altruisim? The same motivation that prompted the Guardians intervention that caused a revision of the whitewash on police behaviour at the G20 protests? Of the sniff of a good story? Or did mr mitchels "friends" have a quiet word and point the way? In any event its unlikely the same vindication would be possible for the vast majority of the public. Or that the 30 man team investigating- initially the leak of police logs to friendly media contacts - would be involved.
What chance then for an unfortunate teenager stopped while carrying his wages home. And having them confiscated. Or loosing his rag at the third or fourth stop n search that week?
The Inspection Panel is completing 25 years in its role, as an accountability mechanism of the World Bank. As you are aware, the Bank’s failure to comply with its operating policies was seen by the entire world in the Bank’s financing with the Sardar Sarovar Dam project on River Narmada. The tenacity of massive grass-roots uprisings from our communities in the 80’s and the sustained hard work of our social movements along with our resoluteness to link it with international coalitions to question the hegemony of the Bank, subsequently led the Bank, for the first time, to commission an independent review of its project. The Independent Review Committee (Morse Committee) constituted by the Bank in 1991 to review the social and environmental costs and benefits of the dam, after years of consistent struggle by Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) and its allies led to a demand from the civil society around the globe for the creation of a grievance redressal system for project-affected communities, which ultimately pressurized the Bank to constitute the Inspection Panel in 1993. We expected this might be a crucial backstop and an opportunity for us to raise our issues of livelihoods, economic loss, displacement from our lands, alienation from natural resources, destruction of environment and threat to our biodiversity and cultural hotspots, where Bank invested in large, supposedly ‘development’ projects like mega dams, energy and other infrastructure projects. Yet, the outcome we expected rarely delivered sufficient remedy for the harm and losses people have experienced over the years.
A number of accountability mechanisms over the next couple of decades in several development finance institutions were formed following the model of World Bank, commonly known as ‘Independent Accountability Mechanisms’[IAMs]. Each year the number of complaints rise which is an indication of the increasing number of grievous projects happening around the world. While IAMs of most MDBs are advertised to provide strong and just processes, many of our experiences imply that the banks are accommodating practices which suit their own needs and their clients, which are borrowing countries and agencies, and not the people for whom the IAMs were built to serve.
Many a time, we have been disappointed by these mechanisms, since these are designed by the banks who are lending for disastrous projects in our lands. And as a result, the already existing narrow mandate of IAMs is further restricted.
In our efforts to hold the lending bank accountable, the communities are always presented with the arduous process of learning the complex formalities and detailed procedures to initially approach the IAMs and get our grievances registered. Our many years’ time and energy then is channelised into seeing through the various cycles of these complaint handling mechanisms, that our entire efforts go into this process, and often our complaint gets dropped off in midst of the procedural rules of the IAMs. People are made to wait many months to clear procedural levels and our cases with the IAMs get highly unpredictable. Further, we face intimidation and reprisals from the state and project agencies for having contacted the IAMs who themselves do not possess any authority to address the violations hurled out to us when we seek dignity, fair treatment and justice from them. There are many of us who feel a loss of morale after long years of struggling with lenders when we fail to see concrete benefits or changes in our circumstances, by which time considerable irreplaceable harm is already done to our lives, environment and livelihoods.
In this manner, our immediate and larger goal of holding banks for their failure to consult with and obtain consent from communities before devising action plans for our lands, water and forests is deflected in the pretext of problem-solving and grievance hearing offered to us in the name of IAMs.
With over 50 registered complaints sent to different IAMS from India in the past 25 years, many more left unregistered due to technical reasons and only a few got investigated, assessed and monitored at different levels, we have a baggage of mixed experiences with the IAMs. A few of the prominent cases from India apart from Narmada project are Vishnugad Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project [WB’s IP], Tata Mega Ultra-01/Mundra and Anjar [IFC’s CAO & ADB’s CRP], India Infrastructure Fund-01/Dhenkanal District [IFC’s CAO], Allain Duhangan Hydro Power Limited-01/Himachal Pradesh [IFC’s CAO] and Mumbai Urban Transport Project (2009) [WB’s IP].
As we now know, what is being witnessed recently is an influx of approved and proposed investments majorly in energy, transport, steel, roads, urban projects, bullet trains, industrial zones/corridors, smart cities, water privatization and other mega projects in India. This has been financed from different multilateral and bilateral sources, foreign corporations, private banks as well as Export-Import Banks (ExIm Banks). It has become a brutal challenge for communities, social movements and CSOs, with lenders and governments constantly shutting their eyes and ears to us who demand accountability for their actions. A compelling and timely need has arisen among diverse groups amongst us to gather together and critically analyze the various trajectories of our engagements with accountability mechanisms of MDBs in order to bring together past 25 years’ learning, insights and reflections of various actors of this accountability process. This urging demand is also an attempt to define the collective experiences in India among our social movements, projected-affected communities and CSOs with IAMs and lending banks, especially appropriating the global political opportunity of Inspection Panel celebrating its 25 years this year.
Speakers:
Thomas Franco, Former General Secretary, AlI India Bank Officers’ Confederation
Arun Kumar, Eminent scholar, Former Professor Jawaharlal Nehru University
C.P. Chandrashekar, Economist, Professor Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sucheta Dalal, Managing Editor, Moneylife
Soumya Dutta, National Convener, Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha
Dunu Roy, Hazards Center, New Delhi
Medha Patkar, Senior Activist, Narmada Bachao Andolan
Tani Alex, Centre for Financial Accountability
M J Vijayan, Activist and Political commentator
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Anirudha Nagar, Accountability Counsel
Madhuresh Kumar, National Alliance of People’s Movements
A J Vijayan, Chairperson, Western Ghats and Coastal area Protection Forum
Meera Sanghamitra, National Aliance of People’s Movements
Vimal bhai, Matu Jan Sangathan, Uttarakhand
Daniel Adler, Senior Specialist, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Birgit Kuba, Operations Officer, Inspection Panel
Anuradha Munshi, Centre for Financial Accountability
Bharat Patel, General Secretary, Machimar Adhikar Sangharsh Sangathan,Gujarat
Awadhesh Kumar, Srijan Lokhit Samiti
Amulya Kumar Nayak, Odisha Chas Parivesh Surekhsa Parishad, Odisha
Dr. Usha Ramanathan, Legal Scholar
Manshi Asher, Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
Op 9 juni 2017 vond in de Tweede Kamer in Den Haag de tweede editie van Accountability Hack plaats, een hackathon waar met open data de prestaties van de overheid in kaart worden gebracht. Accountability Hack is een initiatief van de Algemene Rekenkamer en de Tweede Kamer samen met het CBS en de ministeries van Binnenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Zaken, Financiën en Infrastructuur en Milieu. De hackathon werd georganiseerd in samenwerking met Open State Foundation. Kijk voor meer informatie op accountabilityhack.nl/
The Inspection Panel is completing 25 years in its role, as an accountability mechanism of the World Bank. As you are aware, the Bank’s failure to comply with its operating policies was seen by the entire world in the Bank’s financing with the Sardar Sarovar Dam project on River Narmada. The tenacity of massive grass-roots uprisings from our communities in the 80’s and the sustained hard work of our social movements along with our resoluteness to link it with international coalitions to question the hegemony of the Bank, subsequently led the Bank, for the first time, to commission an independent review of its project. The Independent Review Committee (Morse Committee) constituted by the Bank in 1991 to review the social and environmental costs and benefits of the dam, after years of consistent struggle by Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) and its allies led to a demand from the civil society around the globe for the creation of a grievance redressal system for project-affected communities, which ultimately pressurized the Bank to constitute the Inspection Panel in 1993. We expected this might be a crucial backstop and an opportunity for us to raise our issues of livelihoods, economic loss, displacement from our lands, alienation from natural resources, destruction of environment and threat to our biodiversity and cultural hotspots, where Bank invested in large, supposedly ‘development’ projects like mega dams, energy and other infrastructure projects. Yet, the outcome we expected rarely delivered sufficient remedy for the harm and losses people have experienced over the years.
A number of accountability mechanisms over the next couple of decades in several development finance institutions were formed following the model of World Bank, commonly known as ‘Independent Accountability Mechanisms’[IAMs]. Each year the number of complaints rise which is an indication of the increasing number of grievous projects happening around the world. While IAMs of most MDBs are advertised to provide strong and just processes, many of our experiences imply that the banks are accommodating practices which suit their own needs and their clients, which are borrowing countries and agencies, and not the people for whom the IAMs were built to serve.
Many a time, we have been disappointed by these mechanisms, since these are designed by the banks who are lending for disastrous projects in our lands. And as a result, the already existing narrow mandate of IAMs is further restricted.
In our efforts to hold the lending bank accountable, the communities are always presented with the arduous process of learning the complex formalities and detailed procedures to initially approach the IAMs and get our grievances registered. Our many years’ time and energy then is channelised into seeing through the various cycles of these complaint handling mechanisms, that our entire efforts go into this process, and often our complaint gets dropped off in midst of the procedural rules of the IAMs. People are made to wait many months to clear procedural levels and our cases with the IAMs get highly unpredictable. Further, we face intimidation and reprisals from the state and project agencies for having contacted the IAMs who themselves do not possess any authority to address the violations hurled out to us when we seek dignity, fair treatment and justice from them. There are many of us who feel a loss of morale after long years of struggling with lenders when we fail to see concrete benefits or changes in our circumstances, by which time considerable irreplaceable harm is already done to our lives, environment and livelihoods.
In this manner, our immediate and larger goal of holding banks for their failure to consult with and obtain consent from communities before devising action plans for our lands, water and forests is deflected in the pretext of problem-solving and grievance hearing offered to us in the name of IAMs.
With over 50 registered complaints sent to different IAMS from India in the past 25 years, many more left unregistered due to technical reasons and only a few got investigated, assessed and monitored at different levels, we have a baggage of mixed experiences with the IAMs. A few of the prominent cases from India apart from Narmada project are Vishnugad Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project [WB’s IP], Tata Mega Ultra-01/Mundra and Anjar [IFC’s CAO & ADB’s CRP], India Infrastructure Fund-01/Dhenkanal District [IFC’s CAO], Allain Duhangan Hydro Power Limited-01/Himachal Pradesh [IFC’s CAO] and Mumbai Urban Transport Project (2009) [WB’s IP].
As we now know, what is being witnessed recently is an influx of approved and proposed investments majorly in energy, transport, steel, roads, urban projects, bullet trains, industrial zones/corridors, smart cities, water privatization and other mega projects in India. This has been financed from different multilateral and bilateral sources, foreign corporations, private banks as well as Export-Import Banks (ExIm Banks). It has become a brutal challenge for communities, social movements and CSOs, with lenders and governments constantly shutting their eyes and ears to us who demand accountability for their actions. A compelling and timely need has arisen among diverse groups amongst us to gather together and critically analyze the various trajectories of our engagements with accountability mechanisms of MDBs in order to bring together past 25 years’ learning, insights and reflections of various actors of this accountability process. This urging demand is also an attempt to define the collective experiences in India among our social movements, projected-affected communities and CSOs with IAMs and lending banks, especially appropriating the global political opportunity of Inspection Panel celebrating its 25 years this year.
Speakers:
Thomas Franco, Former General Secretary, AlI India Bank Officers’ Confederation
Arun Kumar, Eminent scholar, Former Professor Jawaharlal Nehru University
C.P. Chandrashekar, Economist, Professor Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sucheta Dalal, Managing Editor, Moneylife
Soumya Dutta, National Convener, Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha
Dunu Roy, Hazards Center, New Delhi
Medha Patkar, Senior Activist, Narmada Bachao Andolan
Tani Alex, Centre for Financial Accountability
M J Vijayan, Activist and Political commentator
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Anirudha Nagar, Accountability Counsel
Madhuresh Kumar, National Alliance of People’s Movements
A J Vijayan, Chairperson, Western Ghats and Coastal area Protection Forum
Meera Sanghamitra, National Aliance of People’s Movements
Vimal bhai, Matu Jan Sangathan, Uttarakhand
Daniel Adler, Senior Specialist, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Birgit Kuba, Operations Officer, Inspection Panel
Anuradha Munshi, Centre for Financial Accountability
Bharat Patel, General Secretary, Machimar Adhikar Sangharsh Sangathan,Gujarat
Awadhesh Kumar, Srijan Lokhit Samiti
Amulya Kumar Nayak, Odisha Chas Parivesh Surekhsa Parishad, Odisha
Dr. Usha Ramanathan, Legal Scholar
Manshi Asher, Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
The Federal Reserve is an unusual institution of the American democracy: Congress has given the Fed the power to set interest rates and manage credit because it believes an independent central bank will do a better job at that than elected politicians. But in the wake of the financial crisis, the Fed’s independence, governance and accountability have come under intense scrutiny.
The Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy at Brookings examined these issues on March 2. We began with Peter Conti-Brown (Stanford/Princeton), who argued that the role of the presidents of the regional Federal Reserve Banks in making monetary policy is both unconstitutional and unjustified in the 21st century. Charles Plosser, who retires at the end of February as president of the Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank, responded. Then Viral Acharya (New York University) discussed the tension between the independence of the Fed in making monetary policy and its expanding role as guardian of financial stability. Jeremy Stein of Harvard Business School, a former member of the Fed’s Board of Governors, responded.
We then convened a panel discussion on Fed accountability and governance – and its relations with Congress – that included Ben Bernanke, the former Fed chairman and now a Distinguished Fellow in Residence in Economic Studies at Brookings; Barney Frank, the former chairman of the House Financial Services Committee; Ruth Porat, chief financial officer of Morgan Stanley and a member of the Hutchins Center’s Advisory Council, and Sarah Binder, a Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at Brookings and professor of political science at George Washington University.©Paul Morigi Photography
New York City Mayor Eric Adams holds a rally with union leaders for mayoral accountability on the steps of City Hall on Monday, May 9, 2022. Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report:
www.gao.gov/products/GAO-23-106117
IT Systems Annual Assessment: DOD Needs to Improve Performance Reporting and Development Planning
A girl involved with Leemah poses for a portrait in Kakata. In Liberia, many young girls engage in commercial sex in order to survive or to pay for school. Miatta’s vision is “a Liberia where teenage girls are not exposed or forced into harmful practices that endanger their health or their future.” Through her organization Leemah, Miatta is using music and street theater to advocate for and raise awareness among girls in Montserrado and Margibi counties, ages 11-25, who face challenges of sexual violence, abuse, poverty. Leemah strives to change the mindsets vulnerable Liberian girls, and the broader community, to understand their rights and responsibilities as citizens and to rethink their future.
The Inspection Panel is completing 25 years in its role, as an accountability mechanism of the World Bank. As you are aware, the Bank’s failure to comply with its operating policies was seen by the entire world in the Bank’s financing with the Sardar Sarovar Dam project on River Narmada. The tenacity of massive grass-roots uprisings from our communities in the 80’s and the sustained hard work of our social movements along with our resoluteness to link it with international coalitions to question the hegemony of the Bank, subsequently led the Bank, for the first time, to commission an independent review of its project. The Independent Review Committee (Morse Committee) constituted by the Bank in 1991 to review the social and environmental costs and benefits of the dam, after years of consistent struggle by Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) and its allies led to a demand from the civil society around the globe for the creation of a grievance redressal system for project-affected communities, which ultimately pressurized the Bank to constitute the Inspection Panel in 1993. We expected this might be a crucial backstop and an opportunity for us to raise our issues of livelihoods, economic loss, displacement from our lands, alienation from natural resources, destruction of environment and threat to our biodiversity and cultural hotspots, where Bank invested in large, supposedly ‘development’ projects like mega dams, energy and other infrastructure projects. Yet, the outcome we expected rarely delivered sufficient remedy for the harm and losses people have experienced over the years.
A number of accountability mechanisms over the next couple of decades in several development finance institutions were formed following the model of World Bank, commonly known as ‘Independent Accountability Mechanisms’[IAMs]. Each year the number of complaints rise which is an indication of the increasing number of grievous projects happening around the world. While IAMs of most MDBs are advertised to provide strong and just processes, many of our experiences imply that the banks are accommodating practices which suit their own needs and their clients, which are borrowing countries and agencies, and not the people for whom the IAMs were built to serve.
Many a time, we have been disappointed by these mechanisms, since these are designed by the banks who are lending for disastrous projects in our lands. And as a result, the already existing narrow mandate of IAMs is further restricted.
In our efforts to hold the lending bank accountable, the communities are always presented with the arduous process of learning the complex formalities and detailed procedures to initially approach the IAMs and get our grievances registered. Our many years’ time and energy then is channelised into seeing through the various cycles of these complaint handling mechanisms, that our entire efforts go into this process, and often our complaint gets dropped off in midst of the procedural rules of the IAMs. People are made to wait many months to clear procedural levels and our cases with the IAMs get highly unpredictable. Further, we face intimidation and reprisals from the state and project agencies for having contacted the IAMs who themselves do not possess any authority to address the violations hurled out to us when we seek dignity, fair treatment and justice from them. There are many of us who feel a loss of morale after long years of struggling with lenders when we fail to see concrete benefits or changes in our circumstances, by which time considerable irreplaceable harm is already done to our lives, environment and livelihoods.
In this manner, our immediate and larger goal of holding banks for their failure to consult with and obtain consent from communities before devising action plans for our lands, water and forests is deflected in the pretext of problem-solving and grievance hearing offered to us in the name of IAMs.
With over 50 registered complaints sent to different IAMS from India in the past 25 years, many more left unregistered due to technical reasons and only a few got investigated, assessed and monitored at different levels, we have a baggage of mixed experiences with the IAMs. A few of the prominent cases from India apart from Narmada project are Vishnugad Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project [WB’s IP], Tata Mega Ultra-01/Mundra and Anjar [IFC’s CAO & ADB’s CRP], India Infrastructure Fund-01/Dhenkanal District [IFC’s CAO], Allain Duhangan Hydro Power Limited-01/Himachal Pradesh [IFC’s CAO] and Mumbai Urban Transport Project (2009) [WB’s IP].
As we now know, what is being witnessed recently is an influx of approved and proposed investments majorly in energy, transport, steel, roads, urban projects, bullet trains, industrial zones/corridors, smart cities, water privatization and other mega projects in India. This has been financed from different multilateral and bilateral sources, foreign corporations, private banks as well as Export-Import Banks (ExIm Banks). It has become a brutal challenge for communities, social movements and CSOs, with lenders and governments constantly shutting their eyes and ears to us who demand accountability for their actions. A compelling and timely need has arisen among diverse groups amongst us to gather together and critically analyze the various trajectories of our engagements with accountability mechanisms of MDBs in order to bring together past 25 years’ learning, insights and reflections of various actors of this accountability process. This urging demand is also an attempt to define the collective experiences in India among our social movements, projected-affected communities and CSOs with IAMs and lending banks, especially appropriating the global political opportunity of Inspection Panel celebrating its 25 years this year.
Speakers:
Thomas Franco, Former General Secretary, AlI India Bank Officers’ Confederation
Arun Kumar, Eminent scholar, Former Professor Jawaharlal Nehru University
C.P. Chandrashekar, Economist, Professor Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sucheta Dalal, Managing Editor, Moneylife
Soumya Dutta, National Convener, Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha
Dunu Roy, Hazards Center, New Delhi
Medha Patkar, Senior Activist, Narmada Bachao Andolan
Tani Alex, Centre for Financial Accountability
M J Vijayan, Activist and Political commentator
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Anirudha Nagar, Accountability Counsel
Madhuresh Kumar, National Alliance of People’s Movements
A J Vijayan, Chairperson, Western Ghats and Coastal area Protection Forum
Meera Sanghamitra, National Aliance of People’s Movements
Vimal bhai, Matu Jan Sangathan, Uttarakhand
Daniel Adler, Senior Specialist, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Birgit Kuba, Operations Officer, Inspection Panel
Anuradha Munshi, Centre for Financial Accountability
Bharat Patel, General Secretary, Machimar Adhikar Sangharsh Sangathan,Gujarat
Awadhesh Kumar, Srijan Lokhit Samiti
Amulya Kumar Nayak, Odisha Chas Parivesh Surekhsa Parishad, Odisha
Dr. Usha Ramanathan, Legal Scholar
Manshi Asher, Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
Syrian human rights defenders spoke out at a Human Rights Council side event September 21 to appeal to the international community to work to end the conflict in Syria and to ensure justice and accountability for the victims.
The discussion reinfored the essential role of Syrian civil society in the pursuit of a political solution to the war. The
The event was organized by No Peace Without Justice and the Euro-Syrian Democratic Forum, and co-sponsored by the U.S. and other national delegations to the HRC.
Speakers included: Hussein Sabbagh, Secretary General Euro-Syrian Democratic Forum; Niccolò Figà-Talamanca, Secretary General No Peace Without Justice; Riyad Al-Najem, Hurras, Syrian child protection network; Husam Alkatlaby, The Violations Documentation Center in Syria; Ola Aljounde, Women Now for Development; Diab Serrih, The Day After, Ambassador Peter Matt (Liechtenstein); Ambassador Julian Braithwaite (UK) and Ambassaodr Maurizio Enrico Serra (Italy). Ambassador Keith Harper, U.S. Representative to the Human Rights Council delivered concluding remarks.
U.S. Mission Photo/Eric Bridiers
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, where U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill serves as the top-ranking Democrat, today unanimously approved three McCaskill-backed bills to save taxpayer dollars and strengthen accountability. The bipartisan pieces of legislation prohibit bonuses for employees who commit serious misconduct, target misuse of government purchase and travel cards, and make it easier for agencies to solicit feedback from taxpayers.
Click HERE for more photos from today’s committee meeting.
“We need to do all we can so taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars aren’t going to waste—and I’m proud to come together with my Republican and Democratic colleagues to help hold government more accountable to the people,” said McCaskill, former Missouri State Auditor. “There are many areas where we can and should work hand-in-hand to find solutions to common problems, and I’m committed to doing exactly that.”
The following bills unanimously passed the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee today and now await approval from the full Senate:
• The Federal Agency Customer Experience Act rolls back federal regulations that make it difficult for agencies to get feedback from the public concerning their satisfaction with agencies’ performance. McCaskill introduced the bill with Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma.
• The Stop Improper Federal Bonuses Act prohibits bonuses to government employees who have engaged in serious misconduct. McCaskill introduced the bill alongside Republican Senators Deb Fischer of Nebraska and Dean Heller of Nevada.
• The Saving Federal Dollars Through Better Use of Government Purchase and Travel Cards Act cracks down on waste, fraud and abuse in federal agency travel and purchase cards spending. McCaskill joined Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democratic Senator Tom Carper of Delaware to introduce the bill.
Since her time as Missouri State Auditor, McCaskill has been a leading voice in Missouri and Washington for cutting wasteful government spending. In addition to the bills that passed the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee today, McCaskill also introduced the Eliminating Government-Funded Oil-Painting (EGO) Act with Republican Senators Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, and Deb Fischer of Nebraska to prohibit federal dollars from being used for lawmakers’ portraits. McCaskill has also targeted waste, fraud, and abuse by expanding whistleblower protections to government contractors, subcontractors, and others who the federal government directly or indirectly hires through bipartisan bills that have been signed into law. During her first term in the Senate, McCaskill waged a successful six-year effort to crack down on waste, fraud, and abuse in wartime contracting.
Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau meets with President of the European Union Ursula von der Leyen on the sidelines of the G20 Summit in Rome, Italy, on Sunday, Oct. 31, 2021. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick
The Inspection Panel is completing 25 years in its role, as an accountability mechanism of the World Bank. As you are aware, the Bank’s failure to comply with its operating policies was seen by the entire world in the Bank’s financing with the Sardar Sarovar Dam project on River Narmada. The tenacity of massive grass-roots uprisings from our communities in the 80’s and the sustained hard work of our social movements along with our resoluteness to link it with international coalitions to question the hegemony of the Bank, subsequently led the Bank, for the first time, to commission an independent review of its project. The Independent Review Committee (Morse Committee) constituted by the Bank in 1991 to review the social and environmental costs and benefits of the dam, after years of consistent struggle by Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) and its allies led to a demand from the civil society around the globe for the creation of a grievance redressal system for project-affected communities, which ultimately pressurized the Bank to constitute the Inspection Panel in 1993. We expected this might be a crucial backstop and an opportunity for us to raise our issues of livelihoods, economic loss, displacement from our lands, alienation from natural resources, destruction of environment and threat to our biodiversity and cultural hotspots, where Bank invested in large, supposedly ‘development’ projects like mega dams, energy and other infrastructure projects. Yet, the outcome we expected rarely delivered sufficient remedy for the harm and losses people have experienced over the years.
A number of accountability mechanisms over the next couple of decades in several development finance institutions were formed following the model of World Bank, commonly known as ‘Independent Accountability Mechanisms’[IAMs]. Each year the number of complaints rise which is an indication of the increasing number of grievous projects happening around the world. While IAMs of most MDBs are advertised to provide strong and just processes, many of our experiences imply that the banks are accommodating practices which suit their own needs and their clients, which are borrowing countries and agencies, and not the people for whom the IAMs were built to serve.
Many a time, we have been disappointed by these mechanisms, since these are designed by the banks who are lending for disastrous projects in our lands. And as a result, the already existing narrow mandate of IAMs is further restricted.
In our efforts to hold the lending bank accountable, the communities are always presented with the arduous process of learning the complex formalities and detailed procedures to initially approach the IAMs and get our grievances registered. Our many years’ time and energy then is channelised into seeing through the various cycles of these complaint handling mechanisms, that our entire efforts go into this process, and often our complaint gets dropped off in midst of the procedural rules of the IAMs. People are made to wait many months to clear procedural levels and our cases with the IAMs get highly unpredictable. Further, we face intimidation and reprisals from the state and project agencies for having contacted the IAMs who themselves do not possess any authority to address the violations hurled out to us when we seek dignity, fair treatment and justice from them. There are many of us who feel a loss of morale after long years of struggling with lenders when we fail to see concrete benefits or changes in our circumstances, by which time considerable irreplaceable harm is already done to our lives, environment and livelihoods.
In this manner, our immediate and larger goal of holding banks for their failure to consult with and obtain consent from communities before devising action plans for our lands, water and forests is deflected in the pretext of problem-solving and grievance hearing offered to us in the name of IAMs.
With over 50 registered complaints sent to different IAMS from India in the past 25 years, many more left unregistered due to technical reasons and only a few got investigated, assessed and monitored at different levels, we have a baggage of mixed experiences with the IAMs. A few of the prominent cases from India apart from Narmada project are Vishnugad Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project [WB’s IP], Tata Mega Ultra-01/Mundra and Anjar [IFC’s CAO & ADB’s CRP], India Infrastructure Fund-01/Dhenkanal District [IFC’s CAO], Allain Duhangan Hydro Power Limited-01/Himachal Pradesh [IFC’s CAO] and Mumbai Urban Transport Project (2009) [WB’s IP].
As we now know, what is being witnessed recently is an influx of approved and proposed investments majorly in energy, transport, steel, roads, urban projects, bullet trains, industrial zones/corridors, smart cities, water privatization and other mega projects in India. This has been financed from different multilateral and bilateral sources, foreign corporations, private banks as well as Export-Import Banks (ExIm Banks). It has become a brutal challenge for communities, social movements and CSOs, with lenders and governments constantly shutting their eyes and ears to us who demand accountability for their actions. A compelling and timely need has arisen among diverse groups amongst us to gather together and critically analyze the various trajectories of our engagements with accountability mechanisms of MDBs in order to bring together past 25 years’ learning, insights and reflections of various actors of this accountability process. This urging demand is also an attempt to define the collective experiences in India among our social movements, projected-affected communities and CSOs with IAMs and lending banks, especially appropriating the global political opportunity of Inspection Panel celebrating its 25 years this year.
Speakers:
Thomas Franco, Former General Secretary, AlI India Bank Officers’ Confederation
Arun Kumar, Eminent scholar, Former Professor Jawaharlal Nehru University
C.P. Chandrashekar, Economist, Professor Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sucheta Dalal, Managing Editor, Moneylife
Soumya Dutta, National Convener, Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha
Dunu Roy, Hazards Center, New Delhi
Medha Patkar, Senior Activist, Narmada Bachao Andolan
Tani Alex, Centre for Financial Accountability
M J Vijayan, Activist and Political commentator
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Anirudha Nagar, Accountability Counsel
Madhuresh Kumar, National Alliance of People’s Movements
A J Vijayan, Chairperson, Western Ghats and Coastal area Protection Forum
Meera Sanghamitra, National Aliance of People’s Movements
Vimal bhai, Matu Jan Sangathan, Uttarakhand
Daniel Adler, Senior Specialist, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Birgit Kuba, Operations Officer, Inspection Panel
Anuradha Munshi, Centre for Financial Accountability
Bharat Patel, General Secretary, Machimar Adhikar Sangharsh Sangathan,Gujarat
Awadhesh Kumar, Srijan Lokhit Samiti
Amulya Kumar Nayak, Odisha Chas Parivesh Surekhsa Parishad, Odisha
Dr. Usha Ramanathan, Legal Scholar
Manshi Asher, Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
Syrian human rights defenders spoke out at a Human Rights Council side event September 21 to appeal to the international community to work to end the conflict in Syria and to ensure justice and accountability for the victims.
The discussion reinfored the essential role of Syrian civil society in the pursuit of a political solution to the war. The
The event was organized by No Peace Without Justice and the Euro-Syrian Democratic Forum, and co-sponsored by the U.S. and other national delegations to the HRC.
Speakers included: Hussein Sabbagh, Secretary General Euro-Syrian Democratic Forum; Niccolò Figà-Talamanca, Secretary General No Peace Without Justice; Riyad Al-Najem, Hurras, Syrian child protection network; Husam Alkatlaby, The Violations Documentation Center in Syria; Ola Aljounde, Women Now for Development; Diab Serrih, The Day After, Ambassador Peter Matt (Liechtenstein); Ambassador Julian Braithwaite (UK) and Ambassaodr Maurizio Enrico Serra (Italy). Ambassador Keith Harper, U.S. Representative to the Human Rights Council delivered concluding remarks.
U.S. Mission Photo/Eric Bridiers
On 17 September, the EBRD’s Project Complaints Mechanism (PCM) team played host to around 40 colleagues from similar mechanisms at 15 other international financial organisations, as well as to NGOs and civil society representatives, at a one-day Open Symposium on the Practice of Independent Accountability Mechanisms
Ukraine and the Netherlands are working on joint defense production and continue preparing the necessary legal infrastructure to hold all those responsible for Russian aggression accountable. This was stated by President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy following his meeting with Prime Minister of the Netherlands Dick Schoof in The Hague.
The Head of State expressed gratitude for the principled and unwavering support of Ukraine, which affects the ability to protect lives. The President also highlighted the recent EUR 700 million defense package, support for the PURL initiative, and assistance for energy resilience.
"We are working towards joint defense production as well, including modern drones, in Ukraine and in the Netherlands. Ukraine is defending its independence, defending the lives of its people, and therefore, every step of support now carries special significance," said Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
In recent days, the Head of State briefed Dick Schoof and other partners on the situation on the battlefield. Russia constantly seeks to create a false impression at the front, but Ukrainian warriors are accomplishing incredible feats and defending positions, no matter how difficult the circumstances.
"Putin has never counted the lives of his own people or his losses at the front. And now – when he wants to use every meter as an argument in negotiations – those losses matter even less to him. Russian assaults are indeed tough, but we are holding our positions – and this helps us greatly, particularly in our political dialogue among leaders, certainly first and foremost with our partners from the United States," the President emphasized.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy also stressed that Ukrainian and Dutch teams continue preparing the necessary legal infrastructure. Our country, on its part, will do everything to identify and hold Russian murderers accountable.
"But it is also essential that international law functions and ensures legal accountability and appropriate compensation for losses. The Netherlands is helping us in this regard. It is crucial that all justice mechanisms work – from a Tribunal on Russian aggression to the Claims Commission," the Head of State emphasized.
Dick Schoof noted that the Netherlands has expressed willingness to host, under the auspices of the Council of Europe, an International Claims Commission for Ukraine.
"Our ultimate goal is a sustainable and just peace for Ukraine. And this can only be achieved simultaneously with ensuring the rule of law. Without justice for the millions of Ukrainians affected by Putin’s aggression, we open the door to further violence," emphasized the Prime Minister of the Netherlands.
Norman Eisen, a senior fellow in Brooking’s Governance Studies program, welcomes attendees to the event and introduces the day’s speakers.
There is growing momentum for initiatives that encourage “open governance” (transparency, accountability, and participation) to combat corruption and deliver sustainable and inclusive growth. These initiatives have, however, had mixed results despite the engagement of many international, national, public, private and other actors. The efficacy of open governance continues to be debated, with stakeholders asking: how to build on successes and learn from what has not worked; what role complementary governance factors may play (e.g., the rule of law, a free press, or space for civil society); and how the enormous array of existing public data produced by open governance initiatives can be better utilized.
On September 18, 2017, Brookings hosted an event to discuss new developments in how transparency, accountability, and participation initiatives can contribute to reducing corruption and achieving sustainable development. The morning commenced with a general, cross-sectoral perspective and then pivot to a particular case: that of the natural resource value chain.
Christine Lagarde, the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund, delivered opening remarks on governance and corruption. Following her remarks, Madame Lagarde participated in a panel with other distinguished speakers to assess the state of the global fight against corruption and emerging developments in that battle.
After a short break, we had a second session to discuss these issues in the natural resource extraction context, and to introduce two new research initiatives, one led by the World Bank and International Finance Corporation, and the other led by Brookings and its partners, Results for Development and the Natural Resource Governance Institute. This session was an interactive, town-hall style discussion that benefitted from the insights of experts attending from around the world, including representatives of international financial institutions, academia, think tanks, civil society, and the public and private sectors.
This event was co-hosted by the World Bank and International Finance Corporation, the Partnership for Transparency’s Anti-Corruption Forum, and Brookings.
Photo credit: Sharon Farmer
FORT CARSON, Colo. – Nekoletta Brown, logistics management intern specialist, Civilian Logistics Career Management Office, Fort Lee, Va., currently assigned to Fort Carson Mission Support Logistics office, and Sgt. Derrick Moore, logistics specialist, Supply Support Activity Warehouse, 704th Brigade Support Battalion, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, inventory equipment for an upcoming deployment to Afghanistan at the SSA Warehouse, Feb. 15, 2012.(U.S. Army photo by Pfc. Andrew Ingram, 4th Inf. Div. PAO)
Weil Family Professor of Journalism Leonard Downie Jr. lead a discussion about the role of universities in supporting local accountability journalism. Photo by Molly J Smith
Julie Sandorf, president of the Charles H. Revson Foundation, listens to Callahan and Downie discuss the role of universities in supporting local accountability journalism.. Photo by Molly J. Smith.
Richard Rosenthal, who will oversee investigations into police incidents causing death or serious harm, talks to media about his appointment, announced Dec. 7. (L to r): Premier Christy Clark, Attorney General Shirley Bond, Vancouver Police Department deputy chief constable Warren Lemcke and Vancouver Police Union president Tom Stamatakis.
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, where U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill serves as the top-ranking Democrat, today unanimously approved three McCaskill-backed bills to save taxpayer dollars and strengthen accountability. The bipartisan pieces of legislation prohibit bonuses for employees who commit serious misconduct, target misuse of government purchase and travel cards, and make it easier for agencies to solicit feedback from taxpayers.
Click HERE for more photos from today’s committee meeting.
“We need to do all we can so taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars aren’t going to waste—and I’m proud to come together with my Republican and Democratic colleagues to help hold government more accountable to the people,” said McCaskill, former Missouri State Auditor. “There are many areas where we can and should work hand-in-hand to find solutions to common problems, and I’m committed to doing exactly that.”
The following bills unanimously passed the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee today and now await approval from the full Senate:
• The Federal Agency Customer Experience Act rolls back federal regulations that make it difficult for agencies to get feedback from the public concerning their satisfaction with agencies’ performance. McCaskill introduced the bill with Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma.
• The Stop Improper Federal Bonuses Act prohibits bonuses to government employees who have engaged in serious misconduct. McCaskill introduced the bill alongside Republican Senators Deb Fischer of Nebraska and Dean Heller of Nevada.
• The Saving Federal Dollars Through Better Use of Government Purchase and Travel Cards Act cracks down on waste, fraud and abuse in federal agency travel and purchase cards spending. McCaskill joined Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democratic Senator Tom Carper of Delaware to introduce the bill.
Since her time as Missouri State Auditor, McCaskill has been a leading voice in Missouri and Washington for cutting wasteful government spending. In addition to the bills that passed the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee today, McCaskill also introduced the Eliminating Government-Funded Oil-Painting (EGO) Act with Republican Senators Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, and Deb Fischer of Nebraska to prohibit federal dollars from being used for lawmakers’ portraits. McCaskill has also targeted waste, fraud, and abuse by expanding whistleblower protections to government contractors, subcontractors, and others who the federal government directly or indirectly hires through bipartisan bills that have been signed into law. During her first term in the Senate, McCaskill waged a successful six-year effort to crack down on waste, fraud, and abuse in wartime contracting.
Syrian human rights defenders spoke out at a Human Rights Council side event September 21 to appeal to the international community to work to end the conflict in Syria and to ensure justice and accountability for the victims.
The discussion reinfored the essential role of Syrian civil society in the pursuit of a political solution to the war. The
The event was organized by No Peace Without Justice and the Euro-Syrian Democratic Forum, and co-sponsored by the U.S. and other national delegations to the HRC.
Speakers included: Hussein Sabbagh, Secretary General Euro-Syrian Democratic Forum; Niccolò Figà-Talamanca, Secretary General No Peace Without Justice; Riyad Al-Najem, Hurras, Syrian child protection network; Husam Alkatlaby, The Violations Documentation Center in Syria; Ola Aljounde, Women Now for Development; Diab Serrih, The Day After, Ambassador Peter Matt (Liechtenstein); Ambassador Julian Braithwaite (UK) and Ambassaodr Maurizio Enrico Serra (Italy). Ambassador Keith Harper, U.S. Representative to the Human Rights Council delivered concluding remarks.
U.S. Mission Photo/Eric Bridiers
Governor Hogan Signs an Executive Order Regarding School Accountability Initiatives. by Joe Andrucyk at Governors Reception Room, 100 State Circle, Annapolis MD 21401
Last week fitness stuffs:
Pro: ran my 2nd 5K, and finished it in 30 minutes as opposed to my previous time of 33 minutes. Even though it had HILLS, yo.
Con: have NOT been able to stop digging my arm into that Golden Grahams box and monching giant handfuls of dry cereal. Someone just . . . take the freaking box away, dammit.
(For the Accountability Flickr pool. Details here.)
Pol Pot died, but other members of the Khmer Rouge leadership were only arrested in 2007 and the trial is taking a very long time. For news... www.google.co.th/?gws_rd=cr&ei=OYywVOTcJYuIuwTh4ILADQ...
Governor Hogan Signs an Executive Order Regarding School Accountability Initiatives. by Joe Andrucyk at Governors Reception Room, 100 State Circle, Annapolis MD 21401
Op 9 juni 2017 vond in de Tweede Kamer in Den Haag de tweede editie van Accountability Hack plaats, een hackathon waar met open data de prestaties van de overheid in kaart worden gebracht. Accountability Hack is een initiatief van de Algemene Rekenkamer en de Tweede Kamer samen met het CBS en de ministeries van Binnenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Zaken, Financiën en Infrastructuur en Milieu. De hackathon werd georganiseerd in samenwerking met Open State Foundation. Kijk voor meer informatie op accountabilityhack.nl/
The Inspection Panel is completing 25 years in its role, as an accountability mechanism of the World Bank. As you are aware, the Bank’s failure to comply with its operating policies was seen by the entire world in the Bank’s financing with the Sardar Sarovar Dam project on River Narmada. The tenacity of massive grass-roots uprisings from our communities in the 80’s and the sustained hard work of our social movements along with our resoluteness to link it with international coalitions to question the hegemony of the Bank, subsequently led the Bank, for the first time, to commission an independent review of its project. The Independent Review Committee (Morse Committee) constituted by the Bank in 1991 to review the social and environmental costs and benefits of the dam, after years of consistent struggle by Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) and its allies led to a demand from the civil society around the globe for the creation of a grievance redressal system for project-affected communities, which ultimately pressurized the Bank to constitute the Inspection Panel in 1993. We expected this might be a crucial backstop and an opportunity for us to raise our issues of livelihoods, economic loss, displacement from our lands, alienation from natural resources, destruction of environment and threat to our biodiversity and cultural hotspots, where Bank invested in large, supposedly ‘development’ projects like mega dams, energy and other infrastructure projects. Yet, the outcome we expected rarely delivered sufficient remedy for the harm and losses people have experienced over the years.
A number of accountability mechanisms over the next couple of decades in several development finance institutions were formed following the model of World Bank, commonly known as ‘Independent Accountability Mechanisms’[IAMs]. Each year the number of complaints rise which is an indication of the increasing number of grievous projects happening around the world. While IAMs of most MDBs are advertised to provide strong and just processes, many of our experiences imply that the banks are accommodating practices which suit their own needs and their clients, which are borrowing countries and agencies, and not the people for whom the IAMs were built to serve.
Many a time, we have been disappointed by these mechanisms, since these are designed by the banks who are lending for disastrous projects in our lands. And as a result, the already existing narrow mandate of IAMs is further restricted.
In our efforts to hold the lending bank accountable, the communities are always presented with the arduous process of learning the complex formalities and detailed procedures to initially approach the IAMs and get our grievances registered. Our many years’ time and energy then is channelised into seeing through the various cycles of these complaint handling mechanisms, that our entire efforts go into this process, and often our complaint gets dropped off in midst of the procedural rules of the IAMs. People are made to wait many months to clear procedural levels and our cases with the IAMs get highly unpredictable. Further, we face intimidation and reprisals from the state and project agencies for having contacted the IAMs who themselves do not possess any authority to address the violations hurled out to us when we seek dignity, fair treatment and justice from them. There are many of us who feel a loss of morale after long years of struggling with lenders when we fail to see concrete benefits or changes in our circumstances, by which time considerable irreplaceable harm is already done to our lives, environment and livelihoods.
In this manner, our immediate and larger goal of holding banks for their failure to consult with and obtain consent from communities before devising action plans for our lands, water and forests is deflected in the pretext of problem-solving and grievance hearing offered to us in the name of IAMs.
With over 50 registered complaints sent to different IAMS from India in the past 25 years, many more left unregistered due to technical reasons and only a few got investigated, assessed and monitored at different levels, we have a baggage of mixed experiences with the IAMs. A few of the prominent cases from India apart from Narmada project are Vishnugad Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project [WB’s IP], Tata Mega Ultra-01/Mundra and Anjar [IFC’s CAO & ADB’s CRP], India Infrastructure Fund-01/Dhenkanal District [IFC’s CAO], Allain Duhangan Hydro Power Limited-01/Himachal Pradesh [IFC’s CAO] and Mumbai Urban Transport Project (2009) [WB’s IP].
As we now know, what is being witnessed recently is an influx of approved and proposed investments majorly in energy, transport, steel, roads, urban projects, bullet trains, industrial zones/corridors, smart cities, water privatization and other mega projects in India. This has been financed from different multilateral and bilateral sources, foreign corporations, private banks as well as Export-Import Banks (ExIm Banks). It has become a brutal challenge for communities, social movements and CSOs, with lenders and governments constantly shutting their eyes and ears to us who demand accountability for their actions. A compelling and timely need has arisen among diverse groups amongst us to gather together and critically analyze the various trajectories of our engagements with accountability mechanisms of MDBs in order to bring together past 25 years’ learning, insights and reflections of various actors of this accountability process. This urging demand is also an attempt to define the collective experiences in India among our social movements, projected-affected communities and CSOs with IAMs and lending banks, especially appropriating the global political opportunity of Inspection Panel celebrating its 25 years this year.
Speakers:
Thomas Franco, Former General Secretary, AlI India Bank Officers’ Confederation
Arun Kumar, Eminent scholar, Former Professor Jawaharlal Nehru University
C.P. Chandrashekar, Economist, Professor Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sucheta Dalal, Managing Editor, Moneylife
Soumya Dutta, National Convener, Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha
Dunu Roy, Hazards Center, New Delhi
Medha Patkar, Senior Activist, Narmada Bachao Andolan
Tani Alex, Centre for Financial Accountability
M J Vijayan, Activist and Political commentator
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Anirudha Nagar, Accountability Counsel
Madhuresh Kumar, National Alliance of People’s Movements
A J Vijayan, Chairperson, Western Ghats and Coastal area Protection Forum
Meera Sanghamitra, National Aliance of People’s Movements
Vimal bhai, Matu Jan Sangathan, Uttarakhand
Daniel Adler, Senior Specialist, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Birgit Kuba, Operations Officer, Inspection Panel
Anuradha Munshi, Centre for Financial Accountability
Bharat Patel, General Secretary, Machimar Adhikar Sangharsh Sangathan,Gujarat
Awadhesh Kumar, Srijan Lokhit Samiti
Amulya Kumar Nayak, Odisha Chas Parivesh Surekhsa Parishad, Odisha
Dr. Usha Ramanathan, Legal Scholar
Manshi Asher, Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
Cameron Murphy NSW Council for Civil Liberties...a massive reduction in police accountability to the community.
NSW police now have special emergency powers to bug or track people for up to four days without a warrant.
Under the biggest shake-up to the state's surveillance laws, police will have up to four days to monitor people before needing to apply retrospectively for an emergency warrant from a Supreme Court judge.
NSW Attorney-General John Hatzistergos said the new police powers flowed from an inter-governmental Australian terrorism summit in 2002.
"I don't believe the threat of terrorism has disappeared," Mr Hatzistergos said. "The law says the emergency powers may be used if there is an imminent threat of serious violence or substantial damage to property, or if a serious narcotics offence could be committed.
"To adequately track and prosecute terrorists, we need to be able to monitor computers, as well as be able to watch and listen with whatever means available."
Mr Hatzistergos said police would come under the full scrutiny of the issuing judge and be audited by the Ombudsman. Reports would also be made to the Attorney-General and State Parliament.
Only material relevant to a possible prosecution could be kept and it must be stored in a secure place. If a judge refuses to grant a warrant, all records gathered must be destroyed.
Under the Surveillance Devices Act 2008, which came into effect on Friday, NSW Police can now also cross state borders, and the operational time for surveillance warrants has risen from 21 days to 90 days.
NSW Council for Civil Liberties president Cameron Murphy said the new powers were a massive reduction in police accountability to the community.
"We have seen a number of high-profile police in NSW and Victoria in trouble," he said. "It raises the question: 'Can we trust them with these powers where there is an accountability-free zone?' "
publik18.blogspot.com/2008/08/concern-as-police-bugging-p...