Jyotsna  Mohan: (Regional Coordinator, Asia- Asia Development Alliance) CSO perspective -

South Asia SDGs Forum on Sustainable Development , 15 November, 2021, Colombo

Today we witness a worsening situation in our region where inclusive decision-making is concerned. Many governments are moving in the opposite direction, especially during the time of pandemic, which has been used to intensify a wider crackdown on civil society and on human rights activists. Asia  remains one of the few regions which does not have a regional human rights review mechanism, which would serve to hold governments more accountable for the commitments they have made under various international human rights treaties to which they are signatories.

The commitment of various Asian governments to democracy is also uneven. The UN system is often compromised relating to whether it can intervene or not, given the disproportionate power of its Security Council. Civil society believes that the role of regional bodies such as SAARC should be explored in relation to the upholding and strengthening of democracy in South Asia.

Regarding the inclusive decision-making and participation in the national processes related to the SDGs, most of the VNRs dedicated a specific section on the principle of leaving no one behind (LNOB) and its meaning in their national context apart from highlighting the human rights based approach to development, they remain silent on human rights abuse , shrinking civic space and crumbling democracy.

Some of our key analysis in regards to the architecture and implementation of 2030 Agenda in Asia are as follow:

• More progress is needed to establish key SDG building blocks - A number of specific institutional mechanisms have been consistently reported in the VNRs, to facilitate decisionmaking and coordination for implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Many inter-ministerial committees and commissions have been created, with some chaired or overseen by the Head of State or Government. Other countries are utilizing existing institutional structures, with a specific ministry designated as responsible for advancing SDG implementation. While most countries have established institutional arrangements for implementation of the SDGs, the VNRs provide little information on the actual impact that these arrangements have had on overall policies and SDG implementation. Some countries also reported challenges in making these arrangements as effective as possible. 

Lesson Learnt and Recommendations to Strengthen Follow Up and Review in the National Level

On Interlinkages and Coherence

• Although all levels of the SDGs monitoring and review are equally important, particular attention needs to be paid to the VNR process in order to ensure that it becomes a national and locally-owned process. With this objective in mind, governments should present a draft VNR to be debated and approved by the national parliament and by official national multi stakeholder Sustainable Development Forums at a national level before it is submitted for HLPF peer review at the global level.
• The experience of civil society has also been that once the VNR has been presented at the HLPF, follow-up by governments at national levels can be weak or non-existent. The review of the HLPF should examine the extent to which VNR follow-up processes at the national level have been properly planned. Stakeholders should have opportunities to participate in updates to the national implementation plan or strategy following the presentation of the VNR at the HLPF. Public outreach and information campaigns should be launched following the official presentation of the VNR. The follow-up process after the official presentation of the VNR should be discussed with the national SD committee/council.
• Governments should develop an overarching and cross-cutting National Implementation Plan for the 2030 Agenda generally and ensure that agreed processes are developed for redesigning existing policies or ensuring that new policies and programmes embed the SDG targets.
• More official analysis needs to be carried out into the interlinkages between the various SDGs and the institutional implications at national levels of addressing potential linkages in an integrated way.
• Governments should develop a “whole of government” governance architecture as this is essential to accelerate the implementation and realization of the SDGs.
• National oversight mechanisms of the 2030 Agenda and its individual SDGs should be created by establishing multi-stakeholder national SDG working groups. The role of oversight bodies such as the National Parliament in monitoring SDG implementation should also be strengthened.
• Governments must ensure that public institutions such as election bodies, national human rights institutions (NHRI) and anti-corruption agencies are fully engaged at national level in the monitoring and implementation of the 2030 Agenda.

Participation

• Sub-national, national and regional outreach strategies should be developed with the objective of engaging all stakeholders from different local areas and regions in the VNR process. Opportunities should be provided to all stakeholders including marginalised groups (eg those suffering from poverty, violence or discrimination, persons with disabilities and/or persons from ethnic minorities) to participate in the VNR process. Access should be guaranteed to people with disabilities and outreach provided in a range of relevant languages and in accessible formats which are adapted to the needs of people with various disabilities. Opportunities should also be provided to all stakeholders to participate in formal VNR-related meetings, including ongoing institutional review mechanisms (eg SD platforms or councils, use of information and communication tools). 

Human Rights

• The VNRs should examine how human rights can be incorporated to a much greater extent into the way in which the system operates, as human rights processes are currently overlooked when assessing SDG progress. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is anchored in international human rights and affirms that the SDGs “seek to realize the human rights of all”. Consequently, the SDGs reflect key provisions of international human rights and labour standards. More than 90% of the SDG targets are linked to international human rights and labour standards.
•  Human rights and fundamental freedoms should be strengthened at the national level and awareness promoted at local as well as provincial government levels, so that human rights defenders and victims of repression and abuse are protected..
• Governments should encourage and facilitate civil society engagement in monitoring and evaluation of UN treaty bodies at the national and international levels (including drafting of civil society reports and participation in reporting processes before international treaty bodies) should be strengthened.
• Other international human rights mechanisms include peer review and expert mechanisms such as UN Special Rapporteurs on specific countries or themes, and the Universal Periodic Review mechanism. Since the SDGs are anchored in human rights, States and other actors can use the analysis, data and recommendations that are already being produced by these institutionalised human rights mechanisms, for their SDG monitoring. Human rights monitoring and reporting mechanisms can contribute to follow-up and review by providing: (i) systematised qualitative analysis and data through institutionalised reporting mechanisms by States 

Linking National, Regional and Global accountability processes. 

The High Level Political Forum provides a clear mandate to the regions and the UN regional bodies to play a significant role in the design, implementation and follow-up and review of the Agenda (in fact, Agenda 2030 includes the term ‘regional’ 33 times), including on: 1) facilitate effective translation of SD policies to concrete action at national level, 2) clear mandates for regional commission to hold regional cooperation and dialogues, 3) follow up and review mechanism at the regional level. 

Based on our experience, the regional process has much to offer in many ways including identifying regional priority issues and systematic barriers to achieve sustainable development, exploring innovative and progressive solutions based on regional cooperation, for example in garnering Means of Implementation (MOI).  In terms of stakeholder engagement, it creates proximity and accessibility for local and grassroots communities to directly engage in regional discussions and work closely with their governments at the national or local level.  Civil societies and some member states stated that to avoid putting too much focus on the HLPF at the global level, role of regional fora could be better defined in the follow-up and review process.  

Some of the ideas to strengthen the connections/coordination between multilevel processes include:

• VNRs to be reviewed at the national, regional and global levels of the HLPF cycle. This will mean that Member States should review :(I) the Voluntary National Review processes, (ii) the regional level peer review processes which take place through the UN’s Regional Sustainable Development Forums (Regional VNR) member states to submit interim VNRs to the regional forums, receive comments and subsequently submit the final reports to the HLPF.  and (iii) the global level HLPF annual peer review system that takes place in New York every July. 
• We also call for particular attention to be paid to the VNR process in order to ensure that it becomes a national and locally- owned process. With this objective in mind, governments should be required to present draft VNRs for debate and approval by national parliaments and by the official multi-stakeholder Sustainable Development Forum before it is submitted at a global level to the HLPF. 
• Regional meeting outcomes should be discussed at the HLPF by allocating sufficient time for meaningful, inclusive, and open dialogue. In this HLPF 2019, there was only one session allocated for regional exchange at the formal session (previously there were two sessions) despite the request from UNESCAP and other regional commissions.  The presentation itself can be enriched by having civil society representatives as a panel member in addition to the representatives of the regional commissions.  
• The current form of outcome document in regional processes have no political weight (report and chair summary) nor in any way connected to ministerial declaration of the HLPF.   A suggestion may include changing the HLPF ministerial declaration to a negotiated document reflecting the progressive discussions and achievements made in the regional processes; or at least attach the chair summary of all the regional processes outcomes to the HLPF Ministerial Declaration so that the regional discussions, experiences and lessons learnt are not lost in place.  
• Participation of stakeholders in regional follow-up mechanisms should be further outlined and strengthened including allocation of financial resources. There should be a call to create an official regional civil societies coordination mechanism. In addition, all regional sustainable development forums should convene a pre-meeting for stakeholders with outcomes that officially feed into the forum.  We are happy to know that ECE RCEM, ECLAC RCEM and ECA RCEM are also currently underway. On funding, civil society should be properly resourced to organize itself across national  and sub- regional boundaries. Multi-annual funding should be provided to resource permanent secretaries  AP-RCEM. Resources should also be provided under Goal 17 of the Agenda 2030 to engage in CSO capacity development at a regional level. Regional exchange and learning hubs should be established involving diverse stakeholders to promote more effective Agenda 2030 monitoring and implementation across each region.
• Regional level organizations can work together to foster a standard and quality education system, in terms of accessibility, quality, and career oriented skill based education. That will ensure employment and entrepreneurship skills for financial solvency, social mobility and reduced inequality. For these School-level management and teacher training should be improved, coordinated and monitored.
• Regional partnerships with the bigger resources and better capacity from their  members need to provide to the weaker national members more strongly the supports (technical,  financial and human resources) and to create an enabling environment for local CSOs to be able  to access SDG16 Plus principles and then plan an initial and even detailed roadmap to achieve  a peace, justice and inclusive society.  
• At a global level the HLPF should create a “ civil society forum” similar to the existing “ Business Forum” where CSOs can come together to debate issues and agree positions linked to the monitoring and implementation of the Agenda 2030. CSO Shadow Reports linked to VNRs should be given a formal status by the UN and a dedicated website linked directly to the UN website should be provided where these parallel reports  can be uploaded. 
• A common critique  of voluntary national reporting  by civil society is that it is a very state- led and state- centered process and bureaucratic in nature.   The role played by civil society and other key stakeholders in the entire process  is currently a very limited one, despite the clear commitment of the Agenda 2030 to a multi-stakeholder approach to monitoring and implementation. 
• In most of the VNRs reporting, the CSOs intervention is limited to approximately two minutes to comment publicly on the VNRs produced by governments. Also, it's also that the CSOs have very little say in the formal VNR writing process . The growing number of high-quality, CSO Shadow Reports produced in parallel to the VNRs are given no official status of any kind as part of the HLPF, and cannot be uploaded on the UN website. Fortunately, in the Asia-Pacific region, the SDG help desk has been encouraging the CSOs to put their shadow reports on their portal. 
• Global conversation from a risk-based view of transformational trends towards a positive, possibility focused perspective that recognizes global megatrends as an engine for advancing socio-economic development. 
• Elaborate a practical and positive approach for businesses and countries to leverage possibilities associated with ongoing global transformations, many of which will be accelerated by the COVID 19 crisis.
• Systemic change requires transformational policies -identified a set of characteristics common to countries that have demonstrated successful growth and increased wellbeing. In this context, successful growth means growth that improves living standards and societal wellbeing and cohesion.