Busan Democracy Forum (BuDF) on Democracy and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG): Promoting Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies in Busan, Republic of Korea on January 22-24, 2018.


The Permanent Secretariat of Community of Democracies (PSCD), Asia Democracy Network (ADN), and the Asia Development Alliance (ADA) with support of the government of the Republic of Korea and Metropolitan City of Busan organised the Busan Democracy Forum (BuDF) on Democracy and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG): Promoting Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies in Busan, Republic of Korea on January 22-23, 2018.

This three days event aimed at promoting Goal 16 of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, as the enabler of all Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and discussed the inter-linkages with other Goals. The forum also provided a platform for a wide range of stakeholders to share experiences on advocacy initiatives, implementation, national level reporting and available tools for measuring progress towards SDG 16.  The forum also deliberated various experiences related to democratization and democratic governance in Asia and beyond, highlighting the importance of democracy for sustainable development.


Keynote Session
BuDF 2018 opened on 22nd January 2018 Haeundae Grand Hotel with almost 250 civil society participants from across the globe in attendance. The representative from the Mayor of Busan Metropolitan City provided his welcome remark which was followed by the opening remark from the secretary general of Community of Democracy, Mr. Thomas E. GARRETT . He stressed the need of collective worldwide effort, in which governments, private sector, civil society, and people in general would need to work together to ensure a sustainable future for the planet. To achieve the agenda 2030 he anticipated that the Goal 16 Voluntary Supplemental Indicators developed by the CoD, present during the plenary session, would be useful for states providing inspiration in their effort to develop complimentary national indicators that consider their national contexts; and the wider democratic community, including civil society, in strengthening their monitoring processes, facilitating synergies and helping assess progress toward the achievement of Goal 16.
Mr Sangmin NAM , Acting Head, East and North-East Asia Office, UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific expressed the significance of SDGs that how can the fragile state could benefit from peace and SDG since peace can accelerate SDG and integrated part of Goal 16. UN approach to sustained peace building has been a practice moving step by step towards humanitarian assistance however the concept of peace needs sustaining approaching.

Keynote speech and Opening Roundtable
The session was moderated by Mr. Anselmo LEE, Secretary General of ADN during the roundtable with Ms LEE Mikyung, President, Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) and the panelists consisted of Mr Byambadorj JAMSRAN, Chief Commissioner, National Human Rights Commission of Mongolia and Mr Sushil PYAKUREL, Chair, Alliance for Social Dialogue, Political Adviser to the President of Nepal.

Mr. Anselmo LEE discussed the significance of having Mongolia, Nepal and Republic of Korea in the panel together, since they share almost same geographical and strategic circumstances being dependent by their neighboring states like India, China, Japan and others but also share a common goal of democracy and their sustained efforts in peace building. For example, Nepal and Republic of Korea is making a lot of efforts in localizing politics.

Mr. Sushil Pyakurel said that Nepal being a developing country gets support from many developed countries however, the component of human right and the rule of law is missing. It also a time of national reconstruction in Nepal which is inspired by the Korean movement, Busan city of democracy and Gwangju , the city of human rights.
Mr. Jamsaran from Mongolia highlighted the history of close working relations with Republic of Korea since 1990. Mongolia received development assistance from KOICA for implementing several projects on promoting democracy in the country. He further mentioned that economic capacity is very limited in implementing democracy. The state organizations although do not address human right values and democracy, however, now after 12 years, the nation is going to report on SDG and the government officials are demonstrating SDGs in the country.

Ms LEE Mikyung comprehended that it’s nice to see countries working on SDGs especially related to controlling violence on women and this should be addressed at the policy level so that the SDG becomes an integral part of policies.

Output of the session:

• Democracy is the pre-condition for SDGs
• Economic / financial resource assistance should be provided by KOICA for building capacities
• Role of CSO on fighting corruption is crucial

1.A Thematic Workshop on Gender Equality (Goal 5) 15:30-16:40 / Day 1
The thematic workshop on Gender Equality was moderated by Ms. Patricia Galdamez, Permanent Secretariat of CoD (Community of Democracies). Ms. Galdamez introduced the presentors, namely, Amb. Carmen Moreno, Executive Secretary of the Inter-American Commission of Women – Organization of American States (OAS), Ms. Koh Miyaoi, Gender Expert of the Asia-Pacific Gender Team – United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and Mr. Cheongsoo Nam, Gender Specialist of the Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA).
Presentation 1: Ambassador Moreno
Amb. Moreno shared that the OAS is the world’s oldest regional organization, dating back to the First International Conference of American States held in 1890. Today, the OAS brings together all 35 independent states of the Americas and constitutes the main political, juridical, and social governmental forum among its members. The OAS provides research, capacity building, and policy advocacy. To promote women’s participation in politics, the OAS help prepare candidates for elections, influences the discourse on multidimensional development, peace and security, and human rights.
Amb. Moreno enumerated some of the continuing challenges for women empowerment and cited statistical data and researches. The lack of recognition and social protection policies impede women’s meaningful participation which leads to women’s unequal access in decision making in political, economic and social spheres. Although the UN General Assembly has adopted the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of discrimination against women (CEDAW) almost 40 years ago, several women and girls around the world still experience physical violence, intentional homicide, and female genital mutilation, among others. In 83 countries, unpaid labor of women is practiced.
In pursuing Goal 5 – Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls, Amb. Moreno pointed out the importance of data collection and adopting common and comparable data/indicators across countries. Data collection should also be diversified. In addition to government, other data sources may be tapped: INGOs, local CSOs, and academe. Non-statistical data may also be recognized, such as personal testimonies. Amb. Moreno closed her presentation by emphasizing that in order to eliminate violence against women and girls everywhere, it is important to measure and prevent these cases. To do this, governments need to work with civil society and recognize women’s voices.
Presentation 2: Ms. Miyaoi
 Ms. Miyaoi espoused that SDG 5 is an accelerator of SDGs. She pointed out that not all goals can be pursued equally and at the same time, so pursuit of catalytic actions with impacts across multiple SDG targets need to be undertaken. It is important to identify and invest in “accelerators” – intervention areas that can yield multiple dividends such as women and girls’ empowerment. The SDGs promise to leave no one behind, so it is necessary to remove any and all forms of discrimination. If we do not take gender into consideration, we cannot expect full SDG achievement. For example, if we do not address women’s confinement from the public sphere, access to education, knowledge and justice will remain unequal.
Innovative acceleration solutions across countries should be undertaken. Ending gender-based violence (GBV), for instance, will help achieve SDG aspirations. SDG 5 aims to reduce violence against women and girls, but GBV reduction is larger than one ministry or sector – that’s why we call it SDG 5 and Beyond. In order to pursue this, we need to demonstrate the multiple “returns” of reduced GBV and embed GBV prevention across development interventions. Engaging the private sector (businesses) may be undertaken. Some businesses now consider GBV as a Human Resource concern. Also, GBV trainings may be conducted not as a separate activity, but may be integrated into community activities and meetings. Another example of an innovative acceleration solution is on addressing the issue of unpaid care and domestic work. If this is paid or redistributed, it can contribute to employment and income generation. For more information and examples of innovative solutions, Ms. Miyaoi invited everyone to visit the UNDP website.
Presentation 3: Mr. Nam
Mr. Nam presented gender and ODA of Korea. He mentioned that Korea’s aid for gender equality and women’s empowerment is foreseen to increase, especially with the appointment of KOICA’s new President, Ms. Mikyung Lee. KOICA’s ODA is highly concentrated on population and reproductive health. Mr. Nam iterated that gender equality is not only focused on SDG 5, but should also be considered in other SD goals such as Goals 1,2,3,4,6,7,10,11,13 and 16.
Mr. Nam also presented KOICA’s gender equality mid-term strategy for 2016-2020, to wit: (1) economic empowerment for gender equality; (2) social status for gender equality; and (3) basic rights for gender equality. On economic empowerment, KOICA focuses on access to productive resources, including rights and opportunities. On social status for gender equality, KOICA’s focus in on increasing women’s participation in decision making processes and in increasing women’s leadership in resolving peace and security. On basic rights for gender equality, KOICA gives emphasis on guaranteeing sexual and reproductive healthcare and rights, and on preventing and responding to gender-based violence. Mr. Nam closed his presentation by pointing out that achievement of SDG 5 needs multistakeholder partnerships among governments, CSOs, academe, and private sector, and KOICA can serve as a hub and a platform for such partnerships.
After the presentations, Ms. Eun Ha Chang, Director, Center for International Development and Cooperation, Korean Women’s Development Institute (KWDI) and Ms. Youngsook Choo, Korean Women’s Association United (KWAU) gave their responses/comments.
Ms. Chang shared three points to ponder:
First, there is a need to reflect on the current status of Korea’s gender-responsive ODA. South Korea has a complete system for gender response. It has laws, policies, structures and mechanisms for promoting gender equality which are existing. The problem is that people who implement the projects know the principle of gender equality conceptually, but are not translated into practice. As such, there is a need to assess skills and knowledge, build capacities, and conduct more research. Secondly, in order to properly implement programs for SDG 5 in South Korea, we need to have common understanding of the terminologies and words used in the goals and targets. Lastly, South Korea may lead the process of shared learning among partners in addressing crosscutting issues of women empowerment, gender equality, democracy and human rights.
Ms. Choo then shared her comments and ideas on gender equality. She candidly pointed out that it has been observed that people working on gender equality has grown tired over the years. The problems persist: no local indicators, no evidenced-based data, no tool for effective gender-based monitoring and evaluation. Complexity of gender equality is the new normal. She shared the commitments on women, peace and security:
- Ensure that women, peace and security principles are at the heart of the new peace and security architecture, by seizing the opportunities opened up by the convergence of global processes
- Increase dedicated efforts and targeted funding in addition to gender mainstreaming
- Increase predictable, accessible and flexible funding for women’s organizations working on peace and security at all levels
- Improve monitoring and coordination of ADA to gender equality in fragile states and economies to encourage a more even distribution of this aid and address the needs of women in fragile situations
- Strengthen efforts to monitor and evaluate the quality and practice of ODA in support of gender equality in fragile states and economies, and its impact on women and girls.
Ms. Choo emphasized that there is a need to focus on the outcome. We need to identify the significant change or transformation that has come out as a result of our development interventions.
 Unfortunately, there was no more time to entertain questions and insights from other delegates. The moderator thanked everyone for joining the session and encouraged everyone to continue working for gender equality and women’s advancement.

1.B Thematic Workshop on Inequality (Goal 10) 15:30-16:40 / Day 1

The presenters identified issues faced by Indonesians and Filipinos in their own respective national contexts. Mr. Sugeng Bahagijo from International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development (INFID), Indonesia shared the political and wealth distribution inequality that topples the democracy of Indonesia. He believed that one way to measure the effectiveness of democracy is the increasing number of middle class, and that the number of people below the poverty line has small number compared to the number of oligarch, or ruling class.
He also mentioned that realizing the Sustainable Development Goals can guarantee democracy. In principle, democracy promises political equality, and reduced number of unemployment population.
The four main challenges that Indonesia faces while implementing SDG 10 are racism, jihadist movement, hatred, and cultural intolerance. He emphasized the threat of radical interpretation of Islam since it proliferates prejudice and discrimination.
Miss Becky Malay from Global Call to Action against Poverty (GCAP) traced back the source of inequality of the Philippines by looking at the historical context—from the Spanish and American Colonization, the elite class took hold of the land, leaving Filipinos landless and impoverished. Amidst Philippine legislations on land reform program, the farmers are not given adequate support from the government to cultivate crops. As a consequence the lands were given to the wealthy, turned it into housing lots.
Given the Philippine scenario, she emphasized the significance of looking at multiple aspects of inequality that proliferates economic injustices. We should look into the cultural, spatial, sexual orientation, and political spectrum of inequality that disempowers marginalized and impoverished Filipino across generations.

The presenters recommended advocate/campaign for the institutionalization of women participation in private and public affairs, transparency and accountability in the government to protect democracy.

Mr. Trinanjan Radhakrishnan from Commonwealth Human Rigths Initiatives of  India appeared agreed with the presenters that inequality must be tackled hand in hand with access to justice. CSOs should look into the implementation of policies, laws, and regulations, making sure that corruption won’t be on the way of realizing the goals.

The moderator, Mr. Zia Ur Rehman from Awaz foundation, Pakistan agreed with both presenters and to the discussant that there’s a need to challenge the strata that cultivates inequality, and make sure no one is left behind. 

Lastly, both presenters identified various indicators to measure the implementation of SDG 10 such as unemployment rate, poverty index, life expectancy rate, literacy rate, number of internally displaced persons due to armed conflict, distribution of wealth in rural and urban areas, and that data must disaggregated data between men and women; young and old.

1.C Global Citizenship Education (GCED) (Target 4.7+) 15:30-16:40 / Day 1

This session was related to SDG Target 4.7, “By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development.”, especially focused on Global Citizenship Education. The session was moderated by Mr Boo Won NAM, General Secretary, Asia and Pacific Alliance of YMCAs, Hong Kong., with more than 20 participants.
Mr Utak CHUNG, Director UNESCO APCEIU presented UNESCO’s work on this target. He discussed that Global Citizenship Education is about “learning to live together” and “prevention of violent extremism through education”, with core values such as peace, human rights, globalization, cultural diversity and sustainable development. As a global agenda, GCED is a UN Secretary General’s initiative starting from 2012, and since UNESCO is in charge of this, they hosted UNESCO Forum on GCED since 2013. APCEIU’s roles are to do research and policy advices, give capacity building programs for educators and youth, and build networks and partnerships. Challenges in delivering GCED are overloaded, exam-oriented, centralized, and teacher-oriented curriculum.
We had two discussants, Ms Sheila WONG, Deputy Director, Inno Community Development Organization, and Ms Sangeun NAM, World Vision Korea. Ms Wong argued that when we talk about global citizenship, we should also note that globalization and global value chain as well as business and human rights, from her experiences of supports to ‘domestic migrant’ workers and cases of discriminations against ethnic minorities and disabled people in China. Ms Nam stated that global citizenship education movement can be a process of developing a global civil society, citing GCAP’s campaign “Make Poverty History”, and that civil society can play a critical role on promoting peace, human rights and democracy by engagements such as advocacy and campaign.
Following the presentations and interventions, there was an interaction session with comments and questions from the floor. A participant from Mongolia discussed that GCED would not be covered by school education. Another student stressed the importance of including parents in GCED. Mr Chung said North East Asia (China, Korea and Japan etc.) is a difficult region in terms of promoting GCED with critical challenges such as nationalism and extremism. Ms Nam also noted the roles of informal education.

1.D SDGs and Peace / 15:30-16:40 / Day 1

Introduction
The Moderator briefly explained the topic, set the agenda and the time frame for the speakers to adhere during their respective presentations
The Presentations
Some Key Highlights from Mr. Sangnim’s presentation
• Integrated approach is needed in promoting peace and Human Rights and democracy for sustaining peace
• Collaborating SDG 16 in sustaining peace efforts
• Addressing the root cause, strengthening the rule of law at the international and national level and promoting sustainable socio economic development is crucial in peace development initiative
• Moving away from the traditional concept of peacebuilding to sustaining peace.
• Addressing armed conflicts in Asia especially in Africa and Middle East countries need urgent attention from the global community
• Number of fragile states affected by armed conflicts are highlighted example Afghanistan, Pakistan and Myanmar to name a few
• 31 Billion People are displaced due to disaster and war.
Some Key Highlights from Ms. Hanoi’s Presentation
• Competitive arms race among the United States, China, Japan, South-North Korea, Taiwan
• National/regional tension caused by Nuclear weapons
• Establishment of US military base in Asia countries including South Korea, Japan and Guam. 
• 450 billion in military expenditure in  2016 in Asia
• The need of discourse and practice developed on peace, peacebuilding and creating a culture of peace by CSO

Summary of Discussants
• The discussants highlighted the importance of raising awareness among the community on the danger of arms race, addressing inequality, promoting peace and harmony and good governance in sustaining peace.
• Governments are to fulfill their obligations to defend and promote human rights, and enable an environment to promote democracy and open society and protect the rights of vulnerable communities.
The Outcome – The Way Forward
• Finding a link between SD and disarmament and developing SDG indicators on disarmament
• Strengthening peace provision of SDG
• Recognising the importance of CSO and supporting role of community base organisations on developing/establishing resilience, peacebuilding and culture of peace. 
• Need to look at peace in a non-silo manner but we need to look at it in a holistic and integrated manner
• The need to address and reflect the reality on the ground on sustaining peace. 

2.A SDGs and ODA in Asia  (Target 17.1-7.4) 16:50-18:00 / Day 1
-It is expected by Japanese NGOs that donors and Japan ODA are to work/invest more on leaving no one behind, ensuring overcoming poverty and inequality, making more sustainable.  But current Japanese ODA doesn’t reflect these.  Japan ODA is now more reflecting national interest/security.  Japanese government thinks to invest on ODA strategically and it will be for national benefits.  Under Abe-nomics, ODA is under Growth Strategy and SDGs are also under growth strategy; ODA is more national interest oriented.
-Low engagement of CSOs in the ODA strategy both for the recipient countries and the donor countries.  Not even accommodating/facilitating or supporting CSOs.
-ODA more on investment on infrastructure.  Better quality infrastructure but very low or fail to address environment and social aspects.  There is a need to change Japan’s ODA to make it more strategically oriented to achieve SDGs.
-An Asean experience on ODA, need supports to rural people’s organsations (RPOs); demand driven; based on needs of RPOs; two pronged: funding and advisory services. China, JICA and JOICA: main donors for SEA region.  Biggest share of source of ODA is commercial investments, especially from China (under public investment; private investment; and public and private investment).  Major chunk of ODA from Europe goes to Africa and less on Asia.  Compared to ODA from China, Japan and Korea, ODA from Europe is considered investing more on environment, capacity building, fishing, consultations, even peace building (ODA from Japan, China and Korea is considered less on these, as more on infrastructure). 
-Recommendations:
1. Direct access to ODA and finance.  NGOs, local organizations can manage development program, engaging in public development program; with capacity built and empower, local organizations can manage the development program
2. finance should be relevant to sectors or communities most affected by development initiatives.
3. a mechanism for CSOs and peoples’ organisations to participate in the process of defining, monitoring and evaluating financing for SDGs
4. ODAs to consider investing in regional cooperation for SDGs
5. JICA and KOICA to consider increased support through CSOs.  Particularly Japan ODA and JICA, current requirements and regulations to apply for finance is very complicated, not reflecting international standards, making it difficult for CSOs to work with JICA.  It needs to focus on output oriented.
6. Big ODA in the region is on infrastructure and energy sector.  This is perhaps in response to climate change and creating economic competitiveness.  There should be a clear criterion of the fact that ODA for infrastructure/energy needs to be focus on renewable sources of energy (not clean coal for example).  Justice issues with regards to climate change needs to be addressed (ODA must not be used for energy in response to climate mitigation.  ODA to be used on education, health, social welfare, etc.  there must not be competing use of ODA for climate mitigation and other social welfares)
7. need to see more on south-south collaboration focusing on rural development and poverty eradication and in sectors relevant to our region (e.g. rural, agriculture, fisheries, etc.)
8. we need to ensure environmental and social safeguards of the ODA.  Also, there is a need to push ODA to address human rights.
9. A need to call ODA agencies to contribute some percentage of money to be allocated to CSOs.  CSOs should be included in making national plan of collaboration.  A need to monitor ODA.  There is also a need to build trust among and between the governments and the civil society organizations.
2.B Multi-stake holder Partnership : Public, Public-Private and Civil Society Partnership (PPCP) (Target 17.16-17.17) 16:50-18:00 / Day 1

The session was moderated by Mr. Abdul Awal from GCAP-SUPRO, Bangladesh. The key presenters Mr Katsuji IMATA, CSO Network Japan and Mr Kihyon KIM, ??? Program Officer, Development Alliance Korea (DAK), KOICA presented their views on the current scenario of PPCP and related challenges. The main discussants were Ms Aewha LIM, ??? Manager, UN Global Compact-Korea Network  and Ms Eunju JEONG ??? Korea Human Rights Foundation (KHRF) Business and Human Rights Center.

- Challenges
• At the international and domestic levels about limited finance support the initiative of PPP
• How to realize the problems and addressing the problem together
• Imbalance of power of partnership between gov’t, private, and CSOs

- How multi-stakeholder’s partnership can complement reaching SDGs
• Changing relationship between CSOS and Cooperation from watchdog, name and shame; philanthropy and cooperative support, one-way stream, to be identifying common goal and values through engagement, collaboration and mutual support, with common solutions and address new challenges such as power imbalance between big cooperation and small CSO and financial resource dependency; distinction between genuine environmental/social response practices

- How can effective Public, Public Private and CSO partnership be promoted
• Integrative Alliance shared mission and value, common and integrated approach to solve social issues, joint development of good and services.
• Conduct research how PPP of each country can be effective
• Private sector can contribute to SDG through finance, technology and human resources 
• Promote implementation of CRS and taxation
-      Experiences and best practices of multi stakeholder’s partnership
• Best practice of CSOs and Cooperation in Japan, it was seen that more PPP events are from private cooperation in the NGOs’ hosted events;
• An experience of Development Alliance Korea that its members are from public, private, academic and CSO partnership alliance to improve communication and develop joint social development projects. Korean government made platform for PPP included CSO, private and public and academy; with a secretariat office, to communicate, regular meetings, events, capacity building, and to develop joint projects and innovative ideas between gov’t and CSO and private sectors, especially on health, education and social development program
• UN set PPP platform at global level and support implementation of PPP at regional and national levels.
• In case of China, government is leading the PPP, but not with CSO yet, due to CSOs’ capacity and professionalism

-      How National Plan of Implementation can keep scope for CSO partnership
• Create and maintain the PPP platform and think tank with CSO at country level, with a secured financial support.
• Implement business and human at global and national level
• Diversify financial resources of CSOs that does good work to promote PPP
• Promote the communication, regular meetings, events, capacity building, and to develop joint projects and innovative ideas between gov’t and CSO and private sectors, especially on health, education and social development program
• Promote partnership, transparency and effectiveness of gov’t, private and CSO
• Promote CSR and tax implementation, anti-corruption and environment
• Provide financial support to CSOs to play active role in SDG platform/PPP platform
• Promote the implementation of human right impact assessment and  due diligent system with cooperation,

2.C Data and Indicator (Target 17.18-17.19) 16:50-18:00 / Day 1
The session was moderated by Mr Heejin LEE, ??? President of KAIDEC, Yonsei University while the key presenters were Ms Young Shil PARK, ??? Deputy Director, Statistical Research Institute, Statistics Korea and Mr Kyung Ryul PARK,  ??? Fellow, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). The main discussants of thesessions were Ms Moon Suk HONG, ???, Seoul National University, Korea  and Mr Syed Aminul HOQUE, COAST Trust/Equity BD, Bangladesh. The session highlighted the importance of data and indicators for SDGs. Followings were the main points of discussion,
a. Data as foundation of knowledge in development: data relay something then contextualized as information, become know-how, understanding, experience that will lead to actions.
b. Data disaggregation will help to breakdown of observation into more details, vulnerable groups that been hidden become visible.
c. Data will help to break complexity, generate quantified knowledge
d. Data is socially managed. Having a proportional knowledge is important for a good data set.
e. Transforming out statistical structure: paradigm shift from survey to new data system
f. Data is a push to have more democratic decision making/policy

2. What is the state of indicator development on SDGs at the national level – Korea and in Asia?
a. Role of NGO in SDGs:
i. determining of targets (analysis of current status), selection of indicators, production, follow up and review
ii. Develop national indicator and monitoring frameworks: common in international statistical community

3. What are practical difficulties and challenges in developing national indicators on SDGs, in particular Goal 16 in your country?
a. institutional setting- lack of coordinated national sdgs strategy, no role of nso in existing legal setting
b. Capacity building to developing countries. Really difficult to define and implement. If we focus on statistical aspects, it’s difficult to achieve sdgs
c. Informal data with experimental method
d. Human rights indicators might bring to power structure changes which might lead into rejections from the government.
e. Categorization and classification is complex
4. What is your comments on global indicators on SDG 16 and Supplementary National Indicators by CoD?
The indicators might lead to changes in society, for example:
a. Opportunities in practices. In Kenya – using big data from the mobile. Bus provider give feedbacks to customers.
b. Satellite and airborne images are increasingly used at different stages of disaster management and mapping and detection of infrastructural damage.
c. Financial transaction data – measuring people’s economic resilience to natural disasters in Mexico
d. Implementation of open platform
e. Limitation: unable to track the data sources, unofficial data happened to be provided
f. Supplementary indicators is good, so that capacity building should be done for not only the NSO but also for civil society.
g. In Korea, data reporting platform: be transparent and efficient, managed by NSO for consistency and comparable

5. How can CSOs engage effectively for data development and indicators?
a. CSO should work together with government in order to make CSOs’ experimental data can be accepted by the government
b. Multi-stakeholder partnership is important, for example with communities who owns qualitative data and CSOs who owns experimental data.
c. Sub-national data with specific thematic data will also play a big role so that it would be great if CSOs could also reach them out.

2.D SDGs and Human Rights City (Goal 11+) 16:50-18:00 / Day 1

The session was moderated by  Mr Changrok SOH ???, Human Asia, Korea and the main presenters were Ms Aldhiana KUSUMAWATI, Government of Wonosbo Regency, Indonesia and Ms Sooa KIM, ???, Human Rights Bureau, Gwangju City, Korea  while Ms Jinjoo, ?? Gwangsan Gu, Gwangju City and Mr Dhendup TSHERING, Tarayana Foundation, Bhutan were the main discussants.

Main Points of Discussion
Ms.  Aldhiana Kusumatwati
• Indonesia suffers from poverty and related problems.
• Local Government can play vital role for this
• To Integrating human rights, to leave no one behind and non discrimination there should be some Framework and action plan align with SDGs and local government can do this.
• We have action plan to make Wonosbo city as a human rights city.
• Denis institute for human rights make some frame work for HR city we can take that as reference.
• For this we should do coordinating and collaborate different stakeholder and develop regional HR commission for HR City.

Ms. Sooa Kim

• Shared about the mechanism to sustain the Gwangju City.
• The city has different department including human rights department for sustainable progress.
• The city also follows the human right principal and work to reduce inequality, overcom from economic crisis, and responsible labor management. It will help to make equal and inclusive city.
• They also have a master plan to protect the marginalize people like disable, elder citizen, pregnant women, and other.
• To monitoring if any discrimination to marginalize community need a human rights committee
• Citizen assembly to discuss the policy formulation and implementation. Each Local government can do this.

Way forward
• Political commitment need for HR city.
• Specific Action plan and indicator need.
• Local government is important for this and need to make them accountable.
• HR city cover many SDGs so work with local government.

Day 2 Reporting

Monitoring SDG 16: Indicators for goal 16

Presenters :
• Ms Patricia GALDAMEZ, Permanent Secretariat of CoD (PSCD)
• Ms Alexandra WILDE, UNDP
• Ms Dra. Rd. SILIWANTI, Ministry of National Development Planning Unit
Commentators:
• Mr Euiyoung KIM, Political Science, Seoul National University / President of Korean Political Science Association (KPSA)
• Mr Ken INOUE,Governance Adviser, JICA, Japan

Main points of discussion:

Ms Patricia GALDAMEZ, Permanent Secretariat of CoD (PSCD)
• Indicators from OGP is important to CoD’s initiative to develop supplementary Indicators
• Empowerment of citizens is crucial as well as difficult in achieving SDGs
• Effective monitoring at national level can reach the effective SDGs implementation
• Development of supplementary indicators for participatory process, experts opinion from global organizations.
• In Developing supplementary indicators of CoD, she said that indicators are simple, relevant feasible policy actionable
• At the end she highlighted the voluntary supplemental indicators which CoD developed

Ms Alexandra WILDE, UNDP
• Alexandra from UNDP emphasized the strong accountable institution, rule of law and justice a lesson learnt from MDGs
• Theory of change around peace for social development through well-functioning government, low corruption, access to information and rights equal distribution of resources
• She shared UNDP national level monitoring pilot projects in different countries of the world

Following this, Mr. Anselmo LEE, moderator of the workshop, conducted the roundtable discussion on the topic.

Way forward of the workshop
• For the Effective monitoring in national level supplementary indicator might be useful.
• The development process of the supplementary indicator should be participatory.
• Indicator should be feasible ad actionable
• We should learn from MDGs whenever we develop indicator.

Seven countries for pilot project. UNDP is

UNDP: Alexandra
UNDP Is working on SDG 16 indicators; Pilot projects
- Closing of civic space,
- Governance, human rights and human developments are key; Indicators are tools to government
- Political inclusion of people is the
- Goal 16+
- Pilot projects are clustered with access to justice
- Supplementary indicators and National indicators 
- A homicide rate
- Trafficking
- Violence against children

• More work is needed to ensure that human rights institutions are compliant with international standard

• There is a need for global, regional and national indicators so that no one living behind principle is achieved

• Country indicators should be developed and included in the Pilot program ;

Way Forward

• How Korean Indicators can be Developed
• It’s important to measure and monitor the development
• Supplementary indicators really supplement,
• COD suggestions are good, All additional are good, although some are generic in  nature
• Desegregation of data is important;
• Local indicators and base line survey is important, every country can follow the same procedure
• In developing countries where financial resources and human resources are not adequate should be supported by the developed countries .
• Participation in the decision-making process
• Goal 16 should be integrated into the national politics while goal G17 ii international politics,
• Implementation of SDGs at the grassroot level is important to achieve the goals
• There is also a need to validate the indicators , three different types of indicators all are global indicators but also to form the national level indicators
• UNDP: Legitimacy of data is important, National level data sovereignty, Democratizing indicators, bottom up indicators, people generated data 

16.6 Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels
16.7 Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels

16.6.1
Primary government expenditures as a proportion of original approved budget, by sector (or by budget codes or similar)
16.6.2
Proportion of the population satisfied with their last experience of public services
16.7.1
Proportions of positions (by sex, age, persons with disabilities and population groups) in public institutions (national and local legislatures, public service, and judiciary) compared to national distributions
16.7.2
Proportion of population who believe decision-making is inclusive and responsive, by sex, age, disability and population group

3.A Violence against children and their protection (Target 16.2,16.9)

The session was Moderated by Mr Abid GULZAR, World Vision International while Ms Ratna YUNITA from Save the Children, Indonesia and Mr Sungho LEE, ??? Manager, Global Advocacy & Partnerthip, ChilFund Korea, made presentations.
It was discussed that One out of two suffering violence at a time child. For example, Mongolia has a highest incidence of violence which may be due to efficient may reporting system on the other hand many countries do not report so there data hence the incidence reported are comparatively on the lower side. It was also discussed that there is no space for children participation. World Vision has developed supplementary indicators for gal 16.2. here were also the discussions around preparing indicators on behaviors which is so far missing.


3.B Rule of Law and access to justice (Target 16.3)
The session was Moderated by Mr Hideki WAKABAYASHI , Secretary General, JANIC, Japan while Mr Trinanjan RADHAKRISHNAN, Program Officer, International Human Rights Advocacy, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), India , Mr Rajiv NARAYAN, Director of Policy, International Commission against the Death Penalty (ICDP), Spain and Ms Sujun SONG, ??? Governance Specialist, KOICA made the presentations. The main dicussants for the sessions were Mr Han-Kyun KIM, ??? Director, Human Rights Policy Research Division, Korean Institute of Criminology and Mr Aingkaran KUGATHASAN, Search for Common Ground , Sri Lanka , made presentations.
Followings were the main points of discussion:
- Rule of Law and Access to Justice rely on proper national priority setting and there will be no substantial happening and progress except fancy agenda if it is used as propaganda.
- The promotion of Rule of Law and Access to Justice comes from the trust, coalition, and vibration of civil society.
- The public are more aware of the changes than we thought. And if one government has proper democratic system, the leader with political will pays attention to the public. CSOs at the same time should make space for public to respond to government action.
- Clear evidence shows that 16.3 promote against exclusiveness. 
- Capacity building with a long term and official impact may be one of the direction. It helps to close the gap between legal bases and public awareness.

Conclusions and Recommendations for CSOs
- Bridging national to local indicators strategically.
- Proposed Indicators:
  -Police to population ration per 1,000,000 population
  -Judge to population ration per 1,000,000 population
 -Average length of civil and criminal trial
 -Case load statistics per police station
 -Judge and prosecutor to case load ratio
 -Death and suicide rate in custody
 -Number of people accessing legal aid as proportion of the number of BPL and/or below eligibility bar 
- Better training and awareness of between judiciary –use of ODA.
More information, more research and analysis, with use of ODA
    - on the number of death penalty sentences and executions
    - on the number of people facing the death penalty
    - more details on who those under sentenced to death are, including socio-economic indicators, gender, age group
    - for which crimes is the death penalty used most
    - Research on whether this sentencing has impacted and brought down crimes for which they have been sentenced

3.C Anti-corruption / transparency (Target 16.5) 10:00-11:20 / Day 2

The session was moderated by Ms Jung Ok LEE ??? Daegu Catholic University / Board Member of TI-Korea , while Mr Geo-sung KIM, ??? Inspector General, Gyeonggido Office of Education, Korea and Mr Eruthaiaraj (James) KULANTHAISAMY, Foundation for Community Studies and Development, Malaysia made presentations. The main discussants of the sessions were Ms Saima GUL, Center for Social Policy Development (CSPD), Pakistan and Mr Han-Beom YOU, ???, Executive Director, Transparency International - Korea

James is a grassroots researcher/ practitioner who works on sustainable community living. He shared his experience and findings under the framework of anti corruption and transparency.

He opined that it is critical to examine policies from the grassroots level and not dependent on armchair researcher or policy makers to make sure they work. He explained there are already tough laws in place to prohibit bribery among public officials, and even whistleblower protection established, yet the mastermind or senior staff are never caught only low level abettors are used as scapegoats and punished. More focus should be placed on the elites and not those from the working class.

His solution is to start inculcating values of integrity and honesty from young by teachers and family members. Such inoculation will prevent them from succumbing to bribery or corruption later in life.

Worrying statistics of how Malaysian school children are ok with exchange of gifts for favors

The appointment of judiciary by the executive will render them less impartial and more likely to show bias as a result of gratitude.

Geo-Sung Kim, inspector general for education at the provincial level shared his experience and policy advisory knowledge with us.

Conclusion
Civil society and media need to check the abuses
press/media need to be de-regulated and the industry allowed independent self co-regulation to enable an independent and free press media to develop.

Collusion is an important part of corruption
Happens usually among people of influence at especially among political elites

Discussion
• Are these indicators sufficiently capable of showing up corruption in all its forms?
• Propose independent parallel report
• CSO report vital, experts, scholars, investigative journalists and the general public must all speak out together
• Policy capture should be exposed.
• Collusion and abuse of state power cases should also be documented in the parallel reports from CSO.
• Ethical infrastructure
• Critical in social development process.
• Military and judiciary are never accountable to anyone.
Solution is to empower the citizens to counter anti corruption and push for access to information
• Formation of liaison committee with citizens to develop policy
• Educate and sensitize citizens about their right to access material
• Report card on transparency issues
• Should consider revision of GCB/CPI methodology to do policy capture
• Difficult to capture data or evidence of high level corruption without the help of experts.
• Independence of anticorruption institution must be maintained by being independent from govt.
• Monitoring must be done by CSOs independent from the government.
• Counter discourse on corruption as tradition


Output

Additional indicators on target 16.5 needed. The participants have all agreed to give their contact to the organisers to facilitate further discussions on developing the indices.

3D: Country Case Study on SDG 16 Indicators
The session was moderated by Mr Anselmo LEE, ADN Secretary General while the presentators for the panel discussions were Ms Patricia GALDAMEZ, Permanent Secretariat of CoD (PSCD), Ms Alexandra WILDE, UNDP Oslo Governance Center, Ms Dra. Rd. SILIWANTI, Ministry of National Development Planning Unit, Indonesia and Ms Samia HAMOUDA, UNDP Tunisia . and  Mr Artemy IZMESTIEV, UNDP Seoul Policy Office.
The main points of discussions were
Mr. Artemy Izmestiev, UNDP, Seoul
• Korea has been very actively taken positive steps on SDG16 on ensuring
• UNDP has taken 2 important steps: 1. SDG indicators as a knowledge based; 2. SDG need to have UN narrative towards the positive/policy changes.
• Using peer interaction for the SDG 16 framework and implementation- countries being accountable on policies and allocationto each other within the regional and nationally.
• Peer review: good practices: Malavi has done impressively well with information sharing
Mr. Hamong , Indonesia
• 2 years ago, Indonesia has become pilot project for Goal 16 under UNDP. A working group on SDG in Indonesia didn’t agree with SDG16.
• At the same time Indonesia was one of the funders of Open government partnership (OGP). They on the same hand had no problem with SDG 16.
• The process was to how to rank the pilot process. The Government took the responsibility to identify the indicators.
• The implementation of the all goals under SDG till now has worked very well.
• Access to Justice and good governance was put as the major area of interest and concern after the pilot project.
Anselmo LEE:
• Indonesia has 94 targets; Nepal has 414 indicators for SDG; Japan has no indicators for SDG 16 but has for others indicators; Philippines has SDG official plan. India has 303 indicators.
Ken, South Korea
• Need to setup the data system for the creation of Scorecard system and checklist system for evaluation of the gender sensitive response.
• SDG 5.2 and SDG 16.2 is similar so it need to be addressed together
Katusi Imata, Japan
• How much did came out of the discussions came as indicator as a political/awareness creation tool. Is there any compasion on creating peaceful and inclusive societies indicators?
Dayasagar, Nepal
• Nepal has identified the 440 indicators. The challenges-data are not available for SDG 16 indicators and definely not disaggregated data.
• How to localize the indicators may not work in the states and provinces. Government may not have the data, so how to collect the data.
Alexandria: Response
• There are data gaps, even for OECD countries there are 40% data available. There are many data which are not used properly. These are often been dissolute under SDG framework.
• Meta data need to use for creating awareness and political participation.
• Communication and awareness need to create for CSO.
• Institutional coordination should be strengthening- in relation with the statistics and line governments need to brought in line.
• Strengthening local governments for the use of the SDGs. Pilot case of Indonesia- Bufana- Mexico focused on sub national was prioritized.
• SDG 16+ is the first targets- five years down the line it must turn into major policy of democracies.
Praricia: Response
• Participating states under CoD ensuring the using SDG16 for political awareness creation.
• Levearging the use of Data which is also available to use the fill the data gap. Coordination with national statistics office
Sugan: Enquiry
• Adding some more criteria in CoD: 1 Citizen complaint mechanism: directly complain on issues; 2. Index of Happiness: like Norway and Indonesia:- peoples concept on government works.
• Possiblity of putting indicators not as outcome but as the process: to ensure the quality of government and governance.
Abdul Awal, Bangladesh
• Integrated SDg with the national development plan  (7th 5 Year plans). Government has taken 5 specific targets, but need to identify indicators.
• Localize SDG without the active local government.
Anselmo
• Network of cities to localizing and working towards bottoms up approach.
Patrick
• How to work towards creating better indicators towards the
Statistics, Korea
• What is the use the supplementary indicators, is it because of the lack of inclusiveness in the global indicators or is it to enrich the more participation?
Japan
• How to engage the CSO into more substantial dialogue with shrinking civil society space in the region.
Alexandria
• It is important to have indicators are based on the emotions and perceptions: Tier 3 –UNDP. These are exhaustive process: through household survey and similar formats. Thus using various departments with statistics office to use it successfully.
• Using UNDGs -MAPS process and programmes to localize SDGs. Engagement with MAPS process.
• Tripartite association- member state-UN-CSOs for working on the VNR
• SDG 16 portal is going to be launching at the end of the month. UNDP-Oslo
Patricia
• The supplementary indicators are to supplement the gaps of the global indicators. The process also focusing on citizen based surveys.
• Inclusion of the CSO in CoD in every action. Further developing it national level: could be
Artemy
• Perception indicator is very important to see what level the response is registered.
• Local level approach- bottom up approach should be focused by the multi city coordination to promote this process.
Ken
• Ownership of the indicators: need to own for the successful implementation and for larger change.
• Legitimacy of the indicators: International compassion to the national indicator and localizing it.
• Regional Mechanism: setup a mechanism to work together till 2030.


4.A Democratic decision-making and institution - Shrinking civic space (Target 16.6-7)

Cambodia
The session was moderated by Mr Hyungsik SHIN, ??? Director, Institute for Korean Democracy/Korea Democracy Foundation (IKD/KDF) while Mr Andrew FIRMIN, CIVICUS on Civil Society Monitoring , Mr Ichal SUPRIADI, Executive Director, ANFREL and Mr Saroeun SOEUNG, Executive Director, Cooperation Committee for Cambodia (CCC), Cambodia were the main presenters. There were two discussants of the sessions: 
Mr Jungwook LEE, ??? Civil Society Cooperation Division, KOICA and Mr Eruthaiaraj (James) KULANTHAISAMY, Foundation for Community Studies and Development, Malaysia

Theme of the session

• Civil space is Shrunk. Freedom House rated Cambodia "Not Free" while CIVICUS indicated as Repressive.
Contribution Factors
• In politics, there are still lack of rule of law, unfree election, existing of extremist ideologies, weak legal enforcement, and political tensions increases esp after dissolution of CNRP.
• In terms of democratic legislation, there are still restricted legal framework for LANGO, Trade Union Law, Taxation, Labor Law, and many activists were imprisoned while some HR Organizations were sactioned/ deregistered.
• In regards to Economic sector, Cambodia moved from LDC, 7% growth annually but with lack of fair redistribution. Many private sectors are absence of responsive bussiness conduct. There are huge funding cut for civil society which effect 65% of them closed their operations.


Role of the CSOs
• Public sensitization on SDGs: to educate public about the importance of SDGs
• CSO Capacity Development on SDGs: to foster SDGs based institutional and program development.
• Financing for supporting SDGs: To practice funding and earning approaches.
• Monitoring SDGs implementation: to conduct evidence based research and participate in VNR.

Goal 16 as a promoter of the civic space
• Effective and independent institutions in the government
• Real democratic principles are applied beyond elections
• All form of human rights are promoted, and protected by the state;
• Citizens empowered to participate in public affairs;
• Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms-enable public to enjoy their quality public services
CIVICUS Presentation
• The reality is 108 countries have closed, repressed or obstructed civic space
• Significant regional disparities, but a problem affecting all parts of the world
• Detention, attacks on journalists and excessive force against protestors are the most common kinds of civic space violation reported to the CIVICUS Monitor
• Dissent the main driver but demands for basic human rights also leads to repression
• Recent spike in reports of journalists attacked because of political reporting
• Demands for some very basic things can lead to tear gas and rubber bullets
• Yet civic space monitoring is almost entirely absent from SDG reporting processes. We should both advocate to bring it into official reporting and do our own monitoring.

Malaysia
• Employment Opportunity – Both government and private apply racial quota
• Unilateral Conversion – Case of Indra Gandhi. Violation of UDHR Article 18: Freedom of religion
• Electoral Reform: little space for constructive and civil debate for fair election. Unconstitutional Red Lineation Exercise. Not good hope for next G Election.
• Religious Insensitivity – Demolishing of a Hindu Temple Recently. Islamisation Doctrine led by illiterate islamists, propagating chronic ignorance. Enforcement officers are Muslims. This causes intimidation and stretching the tolerance level of other religion in the state.
• Violation of UDHR Art:19 – Freedom of Thoughts. There is restriction on intellectual discussion, controlling media via ownership & editorial policies, and no information bill.
• Rights to Citizenship: nearly 100,000 people remain stateless. Government is denying actual figures.
• Indigenous Community (Orange Asli) – Land Dispute: IP lost their ancestral land to encroachment and force appropriation.

CSOs in Malaysia advocate the government
- To fully ratify ICERD, ICCPR, ICESCR, and CAT.
- To introduce strong legislation to protect the OA (Orang Asli) land rights from encroachment by private bodies and state government just in the name of development.
- To adopt human rights curriculum in the school system, colleges, and universities.

4B. SDGs and the Role of National Human Rights Institutions – Target 16.10 & 16.b
Moderator
? Mr Sushil PYAKUREL, Alliance of Social Dialogue, Former Commissioner of National Human Rights Commission of Nepal
? Rapporteur: Aingkaran Kugathasan
Presenters
? Mr Byambadorj JAMSRAN, Chief Commissioner, National Human Rights Commission of Mongolia
? Ms Karen Gomez DUMPIT, Commissioner, Philippines Human Rights Commission (PHRC)
Discussants
? Ms Soohee CHOI, ??? Busan Office, National Human Rights Commission of Korea (NHRCK)
? Ms Uransooj GOMBOSUREN, Center for Human Rights and Development (CHRD), Mongolia
Mr. Pyakurel briefly introduced the topic and the purpose of the discussion. In his opening remarks, he highlighted the nature of NHRIs and the role they play in the implementation and monitoring of the SDGs.
Firstly, Dr. Byambadorj, explained the mandate of the National Human Rights Commission of Mongolia. In his presentation, he highlighted the efforts taken the Commission to work with CSOs and how effective that has been. The National Human Rights Commission along with the CSOs fought against government’s decision to shut down the National Statistical Office of Mongolia, which is an independent agency under the supervision of parliament. He further pointed out that in the annual report for the year of 2018, the Commission will highlight the importance of implementing and monitoring SDGs and as the bridge between different stakeholders, including government, civil society, development partners, UN agencies, etc. they can play a vital role in making the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development a reality. He further emphasized on the role the NHRIs can play in realizing human rights through the SDGs. He further suggested the following for promoting effective corporation between NHRIs and CSOs -
1. Creating a national database of the progress of the implementation of SDGs;
2. Raising awareness amongst the general public as well as public officers about the importance of achieving SDGs; and 
3. Conducting multi-stakeholder dialogues, including the government, CSOs, development partners, human rights activists to discuss the progress in implementing SDGs and addressing the challenges in implementing SDGs.
Secondly, Ms. Dumpit pointed out that SDGS, as globally agreed blueprint for 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, will become the major point of reference for development actors at all levels and will have a significant impact on the human rights agenda in the years to come. She also pointed out how the States’ responsibility to respect, promote and fulfill human rights is enshrined in the SDGs. She highlighted how Goal 16 acknowledges the importance of accountable institutions, good governance, participation, access to justice and information, and fundamental freedoms. She also touched upon the bridging role of NHRIs in promoting transparent, participatory, and inclusive process to monitor and realize human rights by achieving SDGs. She further stated that NHRIs should play a key role in developing tool, guidance and knowledge on promoting a (Human Rights-Based Approach (HRBA) to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Thirdly, Ms. Choi echoed the same sentiment and the role NHRIs can play in achieving SDGs. She made a few suggestions for CSOs in engaging with the government in implementing SDGs. One of her key suggestions was to utilize the National Action Plans, UPRs and other treaty body processes to hold States accountable at the national as well as the international level. She highlighted the importance of States’ responsibility in fulfilling their commitments under Merida Declaration, which outlines the various roles and functions NHRIs can undertake to make human rights the foundation for the implementation for the 2030 Agenda for the Sustainable Development, in the next Asian NGOs Network on National Human Rights Institutions (ANNI)
Lastly, Ms. Gombosuren, emphasized on the role CSOs can and should play in monitoring the implementation of the States’ commitments to their citizens as well as the international community, including the SDGs which guarantees inclusive and participatory process. 


Thematic Session 4C – Fundamental Freedoms and Non-Discrimination
Moderator