A Framework for Rights Based Advocacy
- Respect – Acknowledgement of the rights. Identification of a ‘gap’ or ‘disadvantage’ in the person’s ability to lead a ‘diginified’ human existence in the absence of this particular right. This acknowledgement should ideally exist in law but it can also be explicitly mentioned in public policy and programming related documents. The information that the state acknowledges this gap/disadvantage should be widely available to all, especially those who are disadvantaged, and to those who may be implicated in this creating this disadvantage or may be in a position to reduce it.
- Fulfill – To provide necessary services to address the gap/ disadvantage that has been identified. The state is the principle responsible agent to ensure that the service is available to the person who needs it without any barrier related to ability to pay for such services. The necessary services may be provided by a ‘non-state actor’, but the responsibility that such services (of desired quality and measure) are provided rests with the state.
- Protect – To ensure that the person who has a disadvantage is protected from further ‘violation’. The actions of the state would include education, control, and prohibitions of other ‘third party ’and‘ non-state actors’ who may otherwise be implicated in creating or aggravating the disadvantage.
- Rights holders – Individuals and communities endowed with rights, but due to certain circumstances are not able to completely enjoy these rights. In some cases these rights holders may not be fully aware that they possess these rights, and thus make no efforts to ‘claim’ these. Entitlement awareness implies a change from passive rights holding to active rights claiming among rights holders.
- Duty bearers – Agencies and functionaries of the state engaged in the management and provision of services, either directly or through ‘third parties’. These agencies and functionaries are accountable for the services that they are mandated by the state to provide to the rights holders. They usually comprise of the ‘executive’ wing of the state
- Ombudsman institutions – Agencies of the state charged with the responsibility of arbitration whether rights are being violated and whether conditions necessary for the fulfillment of rights are being provided by the state. They include the ‘judicial’ wing of the state and include both course and other arbitration mechanisms.
- Human rights advocates – Individuals and agencies who work with either the duty bearers, ombudsman institutions and the community to ensure the respect, protection and fulfillment of rights and redressal of grievances.
- Evidence based Advocacy – generating evidence in different ways about the nature of rights violations, and impact of services on rights holders, and using this evidence for advocacy – either feedback, negotiation or arbitration. This evidence may be generated by the community or by human rights advocates. The evidence may be collated from existing documents or be separately generated at individual and at the community or population levels. Social Audit, Community Score Card, Citizen report cards are examples of evidence based advocacy. Evidence based advocacy is an important component of rights claiming.
Social Audit and Community Score Cards are two different mechanisms for facilitating rights claiming through the use of evidence.