Advocacy and campaigning
techniques for NGOs in Central and Eastern European countries in Transition
Report and recommendations
Supported by the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, the Foreign Ministry of the Netherlands and UNHCR
October 2001
Advocacy and campaigning
techniques for NGOs in Central and Eastern European countries in Transition
Report and recommendations
Supported by the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, the Foreign Ministry of the Netherlands and UNHCR
1. Introduction
The report and recommendations
contained in this document are based on a seminar held from September 10th
to 12th 2001 by the European Council on Refugees and Exiles, with
the financial support of the Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD) and the
Foreign Ministry of the Netherlands, entitled “Advocacy and campaigning
techniques for NGOs in Central and Eastern European countries in
Transition”. The seminar was held at the Hotel ‘Sarunas’,
Vilnius, Lithuania. As stated in the project proposal approved by the WFD, the
aim of the project was to “improve the capacity of NGOs in the region to
promote and protect the human rights of refugees, asylum seekers and other
disadvantaged groups by making effective representations to officials,
including politicians, government ministers and civil servants, and to allow
them to learn about the tools used in running focused and targeted public
campaigns”. This aim was to be achieved in the following ways:
·
Exploring examples of good practice already existing in the region;
·
Introducing the participants to examples successful campaigning and
lobbying techniques from Western Europe;
· Encouraging participants to explore together how they would campaign or lobby on a specific issue related to the rights of refugees or asylum-seekers.
To reach this end, ECRE invited 18 participants from the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and two trainers from Western Europe who led the discussions. All the participants were professional members of staff of Ngos in Central and Eastern Europe concerned with refugees, asylum-seekers and other categories of forced migrants. They included:
Lydia Grafova |
Forum
of Migrants’ Organisations, Russia |
|
·
Jelena Karzetskaja |
Legal Information Centre for Human Rights, Estonia |
Dobromira Naydenova
|
Bulgarian Helsinki Committee |
|
·
Evgeny Grabko |
Solidarnost, Russia |
|
·
Aleksandr Fedorenko |
Edelweiss, Ukraine |
|
·
Svetlana Petrova |
Caritas Kaliningrad, Russia |
|
·
Mihai Potoroaca |
Society of Refugees of the Republic of Moldova |
|
·
Andrey Chuprikov |
ADRA Ukraine |
|
·
Lucia Ruzova |
OPU Slovakia |
|
·
Florentina Covaliu |
Romanian National Council for Refugees |
|
·
Tetyana Mazur |
Human Rights Without Borders, Ukraine |
|
·
Vladimir Kravchenko |
Belarusian Movement of Medical Workers (Minsk) |
|
·
Vladimir Sobolev |
Belarusian Movement of Medical Workers (Vitebsk) |
|
·
Audrone Sileikyte |
Lithuanian Red Cross |
|
·
Laurynas Bieksa |
Lithuanian Red Cross |
|
·
Margarita Petrossian |
Memorial Human Rights Centre, Russia |
|
·
Cristian Lazar |
ARCA,
Romania |
Dimitar Krastev Zafirov
|
Bulgarian
Red Cross |
The trainers included Bill Seary,
consultant to ECRE, and Jessica Yudilevich, Head of Public Affairs at the
British Refugee Council. Administrative support for the meeting was provided by
Daniel Drake, Project officer for Eastern Europe at ECRE, with the kind
assistance of the Lithuanian Red Cross. The working languages of the seminar
were English and Russian.
2. Monday 10th
September
After a welcome reception on the
evening of Sunday 9th September, the workshop began on Monday 10th
September. All participants were given a welcome pack containing agenda,
participants’ list, name badge, notepad, pen and handout material with
key words to remember in the process of lobbying. A copy of this material
appears in Annex 1. At the start of the seminar Daniel Drake from ECRE gave an
introduction to the workshop, mentioning that the focus of the seminar was to
be on campaigning, lobbying and working with the media. The results of the
seminar would be the sharing of experience but there would also be an element
of joint planning which would lead to a series of written recommendations.
Jessica Yudilevich of the British Refugee Council (BRC) then introduced
herself, referring to the ways in which advocacy techniques had changed in the
last few years to take account of the increased media interest in refugee
issues. Bill Seary then gave an introduction to his role as trainer and
facilitator of the seminar, stating that he had spent all his life working in
or around NGOs, and that experience had shown him that opinions within the
group were often more relevant to the participants than assistance offered from
outside, and that therefore a major aspect of his role was to give the
participants a chance to learn from each other. Participants then split into
pairs and were given ten minutes to introduce themselves to each other before
reporting back in plenary.
Following this, participants were
asked in plenary what they expected from the seminar. The results appear below:
Expectations
of the seminar ·
· Information on legislation on lobbying ·
· How are lobbying activities defined? ·
· Techniques for meeting lobbying
targets ·
· Work with mass media and influencing
public opinion ·
· Advocacy in local authorities ·
· How to influence implementation of
legislation once first target of passing legislation has been reached ·
· How to identify points of mutual
activity to enable lobbying to take place ·
· Use of ‘creative lobbying’
techniques ·
· Materials and resources and how to use
them ·
· Influencing decision-makers in ministries
and raising their awareness of specific needs of refugees ·
· Examples of successful lobbying ·
· Concrete problems faced ·
· Definition of ‘lobbying’:
is work with the media included if it has limited influence on
decision-makers?
Participants were then split into two groups according
to language ability, and given a copy of a document produced by participants at
an NGO planning meeting held by ECRE for NGOs in Russia, Belarus and Ukraine in
St Petersburg in June 2001. A copy
of this document is attached in Annex 2. The document gives a definition of
lobbying and participants were asked to discuss it and decide whether they
agreed with the definition or whether other aspects needed to be added to the
definition. The results of this discussion are given below:
Bill Seary then offered his own definition of
lobbying, suggesting that lobbying was “helping those people responsible
for taking decisions to take the right decisions”. Advocacy, in contrast,
was a wider activity not specifically designed to influence a certain
decision-making process. It was agreed that in certain countries of Central and
Eastern Europe lobbying could be effective on a regional level even if it was
not effective on a national level. The force behind the lobbyist is that he or
she believes they are supporting a cause which is ‘right’, and can
supply arguments to prove this. Hence, a crucial part of successful lobbying is
being able to provide good argumentation.
In the final part of the Monday session, participants
were divided into three working groups and given the first part of a three-part
exercise to complete. The exercise appears overleaf.
Small group exercise 1 Situation You
are a group of people working for refugee-assisting NGOs in a major city.
Over the last five years your city has received considerable numbers of
people (mainly women and children) displaced from various conflicts in
other countries. Some
of the arrivals have now been recognised as refugees and their children
are able to attend local schools on roughly the same terms as local
children. However
many of the arrivals have problems with accessing refugee recognition
procedures and, even when they achieve this, the procedure is slow and the
results at first instance are often negative. These families have
difficulty finding school places for their children. The experience varies
a bit but normally either they are not admitted at all or they find that
they are expected to pay for the education at a rate appropriate for
foreigners with good jobs. As a result some of the children involved have
not has any education for over a year. At
the national level, the education authorities give conflicting advice and
instructions about the status of these children. At
the very local level, you have found that the heads of schools are often
sympathetic. However in recent months the heads have been coming under
pressure from the city administration to exclude all foreign children
unless they have refugee status and their family had a residence permit
for the city. Your
country has acceded to the 1951 Geneva Convention, with the 1967 Protocol,
to many UN human rights conventions (including the Convention on the
Rights of the Child) and to the European Convention on Human Rights (with
individual petition). International conventions, once ratified, take
precedence over all national legislation apart from the constitution. All
courts should apply them. Multi-party
democracy has been established in your country for ten years now. However,
although there is a city council and an elected Mayor, real power in local
government is still dependent upon personalities. Tasks 1
Agree as a group what situation you would like to see in five year's time
with regard to the education of the
children of displaced people. 2
Identify as many as you can of the possible ways of working towards that
situation. 3
Identify one SPECIFIC change you would like to achieve by the end of the
current academic year.
The results were as follows:
Group 1 ·
1. All
asylum-seeker children should have free access to education, and this
right is guaranteed ·
2. This
aim should be achieved through: o
· Meetings with local authorities o
· Trainings for local authorities o
· Media activity (TV, radio,
newspapers) o
· Position paper o
· Public meetings §
3. In
a year’s time, instructions from local authorities should be
harmonised Group 2 ·
1. Strategic
goal: To realise in
practice the right afforded in international law for children to attend
school regardless of the legal status of their parents ·
2. Means
of realisation: o
· To encourage national legislation to
be in line with international norms o
· To put pressure on local authorities
with the aim of reserving illegal restrictions on education o
· Individual contact with the directors
of schools o
· Create a positive image in society of
refugees o
· Win court cases on the right to
education o
· Fight in the courts legislation
restricting the right to education o
· Organising alternative programmes of
study o
· Technical support to schools with
refugee children o
· Speed up the process of gaining legal
status for refugees §
3. Concrete
change: Prevent
illegal pressure from some parts of the local adminstration Group 3 ·
1. All
children must have access to school and secondary education in the given
city ·
2. Means
of realisation: o
· Trial class o
· Developing a tolerant attitude
towards refugees o
· Formation of a legislative basis at
the level of the local administration o
· Provision of information to the
public o
· Collecting information on the
decision-makers o
· Precedent-setting legal decision o
· Lobbying of local administration o
· Making a complaint to a human rights
ombudsman o
· Preparing an individual dossier of
case studies ·
3. Prevent
children from being excluded from school
3. Tuesday 11th September
The second day of the seminar began with a
presentation by Jessica Yudilevich, Head of Public Affairs at the British
Refugee Council. She began by stating that an organisation such as the BRC,
which provides direct assistance is also well-placed to use that experience in
developing lobbying and advocacy activities. However, she stated that NGOs must
be clear about the ultimate goal of their lobbying. Her first presentation
focused on running an effective campaign. She stated that NGOs must answer the
following questions in order to run as effective a campaign as possible:
· Do they know and understand the political
climate in the target area?
· Is a campaign really needed to bring about
change?
· What are the short and long-term objectives
of the campaign?
· Who or what are the targets of the
campaign?
Jessica began answering these questions by looking at
different lobbying tools. One such tool, she said, was the research report. Such a report should involve research on
a specific issue. Although the conclusions of the research may already be
widely known, the fact that they are corroborated by an academic document adds
weight to the argument. An example of such a report, for example, could be an
analysis of the conditions for asylum-seekers dispersed in certain parts of the
UK. However, Jessica also stated that most journalists and decision-makers were
unlikely ever to read the whole report, and therefore it was essential to
produce a summary of the main conclusions.
A second such campaigning resource were letter-writing
campaigns. Supporters of
the campaign would be encouraged to write letters of support to local MPs, or
to fill in specially produced postcards and send them to Parliament. An example
of this kind of campaign in the UK was designed to put pressure on the
Government to rethink its policy of giving vouchers rather than cash to
asylum-seekers.
The BRC has run two campaigns in 2001, the first to
commemorate the 50th anniversary of the 1951 Convention on the
Status of Refugees, and the second a campaign against vouchers for
asylum-seekers. Jessica referred to the need to create effective coalitions in order to promote a specific campaign.
Aside from the postcards mentioned above, the BRC has worked with the Body Shop
in the UK to provide information on refugees in their shops. They have also
co-operated with trade unions in order to gain access to the Labour Party
conference in 2000. It was decided that a party conference was a very
successful way of putting pressure on the Government ‘from within’,
that is through its grass-roots supporters in the party itself. In September
and October 2001 the BRC expects to attend all the major party conferences to
encourage them to address refugee issues seriously and compassionately.
Another campaigning method referred to by Jessica was
the petition. However,
she pointed out that petitions by themselves carried little weight, as the
government receives hundreds of petitions a year. The trick, she said, was to
combine the petition with some other event which might attract the attention of
the media, which in the case of the BRC meant making a giant birthday cake to
celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the 1951 Convention on the Status
of Refugees.
Jessica then talked about organising a Refugee Week, to give a sustained programme of
awareness-raising activities. She said that it was very useful for such an
event to involve a variety of different media. For example, the 2001 Refugee
Week in the UK involved a series of films shown at the National Film Theatre,
as well as art exhibitions, street music and debates on asylum issues. Further
elements of a Refugee Day or Week could include exhibitions of food from the
region of origin of groups of refugees, and using this opportunity to provide
more information on countries from which refugees flee.
Finally, Jessica stated that no campaign could be
effective without the provision of accurate information with which to back up statements. She gave
as an example a series of briefing sheets produced by the BRC on asylum issues.
Each sheet was relatively brief (around one or two pages) and contained clear
answers to common questions about asylum-seekers. In particular, the briefing
sheets were designed to address issues often raised in the press, so that they
could be sent to journalists to counter claims made against asylum-seekers. For
example, one such sheet referred to the popular statement that most
asylum-seekers are ‘bogus’ by stating that over half of all asylum
applicants are given some kind of legal status in the UK. In this way briefing
sheets are a simple and effective way of increasing public understanding of
asylum issues and representing refugees more objectively in the media.
After a coffee break, Bill Seary then introduced the
second group exercise by stating that it was important, in lobbying for a
specific change, to look at different ways of approaching a given problem. The
group exercise is given below:
Small group exercise 2 Situation You
have decided to spend the next year trying to convince the city education
authorities to instruct all schools to accept – on the same basis as
refugee children - the children of people whose claim for refugee status is
being considered. Your
research has shown that some of the Mayor’s close colleagues have
been influential in forming the current policy of city administration and
that the most effective way of countering their influence is to approach
the Mayor himself. Tasks 1
List the arguments that the Mayor will find convincing 2
Identify the organisations and people most likely to be able to influence
the Mayor in making this decision. 3
Highlight the ones that you may be able to influence. 4
List the arguments that will make them wish to work with you in achieving
your aim.
The results of this exercise are shown below:
Group 1 ·
1. Arguments convincing to the
mayor: o
· The mayor should be sympathetic to
alleviating the suffering of the refugee children by helping alleviate
their suffering o
· Spending money on refugee
children’s education is less expensive than spending money later on
social security or, indeed, paying if they are driven to crime and are put
into prison o
· International law states that children
should have the right to education regardless of their legal status §
2. Organisations
and people of support: ·
· Teachers’ organisations ·
· Organisations promoting children’s
rights ·
· Churches ·
· Organisations promoting women’s
rights ·
· Mayor’s wife ·
· Social centres dealing with young
people ·
· City Hall Council ·
· Local journalists ·
· Representatives of
‘conservative’ parties ·
· Xenophobic groups or organisations ·
· Local leaders of the mayor’s own
party
Group 2 ·
1. Arguments for the mayor: ·
· The present practice contradicts
international legislation and national constitutional norms ·
· There should be no wish to create a
negative image of the municipality ·
· Failure to give access to schools
could increase criminality in the long-run o
2. Organisations and individuals
of support §
· Wife of the mayor §
· Head of the city’s educational
institutions §
· Party leaders §
· Media §
· NGOs §
· Ministry of Education §
· Businessmen ·
3. Who
can be influenced o
· Wives and friends of local personalities o
· Media o
· Educational institutions o
· Party leaders §
4. Arguments
to be used ·
· Involvement of the mayor’s wife in public activities ·
· Sensational stories ·
· Technical assistance ·
· Offering support during elections
Group 3 ·
1. Arguments to be used o
· International obligations o
· All children are equal and there
should be no discrimination in the education system o
· The mayor’s image will be
improved if she shows compassion in this issue o
· Support could be given to him during
elections §
2. Organisations and individuals to be
influenced ·
· Deputies in the city parliament ·
· Deputy mayor ·
· People surrounding the mayor ·
· Legal department of the municipality ·
· Parents’ Committees ·
· School support ·
· NGOs ·
· Media o
3. Arguments
for allies §
· Parents/schools: it could be your
children; it offers a chance for children to sponsor refugee children; it
is good for the image of the school; it could lead to a change in the
school’s status §
· Municipalities/deputies: it can win
votes; it will receive good coverage in the press; it will lead to reports
of other work being done by the local authorities §
· People surrounding the mayor: it
creates a personal interest in the plight of refugees; it improves the
image of the mayor §
· Media: it can increase the personal
interest of journalists if they already have some interest in refugee
issues
After lunch the floor was once more given to Jessica
Yudilevich to speak on working with the media. She was joined by Lydia Grafova,
a journalist with the Literary Gazette in Moscow who also runs the Forum of
Migrants’ Organisations. Lydia spoke of the importance of a dialogue
between the media and civil society in promoting the democratic process in the
former Communist bloc. She said that in the old system the media often had a
direct impact on government policy, but that now, in a democratic system, the
media was more instrumental in influencing public opinion and the views of the
electorate, who in turn influenced decision-makers through the electoral
process. However, in the troubled countries of Central and Eastern Europe,
Lydia added that many journalists were not interested in covering the problems
of refugees because of the desperate problems facing the local population
itself. In short, speaking of Russia, Lydia said that the public had had enough
negative stories and were likely to be less sympathetic towards the plight of
refugees because of the problems they faced themselves.
There followed a discussion on media coverage of the
Chechnya conflict and, in particular, an apparent tendency on the part of some
of the media to concentrate more on the suffering of the Chechen population
than that of the Russian who had fled Grozny. After some discussion all
participants agreed that it was essential to give fair coverage of all groups
affected by conflict, but it was also admitted that, outside Chechnya, ethnic
Chechens were sometimes subjected to racism and attacks by the Russian
population, and that this also needed to be covered in the media.
Jessica Yudilevich then spoke on her own experiences
of working with the media. She reiterated the need to base stories about
refugees on real individual cases which could often be more effective than a
purely abstract discussion. She then described the difference between passive
and active media work. Passive media work involved answering queries from journalists and
responding to requests made of the organisation. A point to bear in mind with
this kind of work was the fact that journalists work under very tight
deadlines. For this reason it is important to have an efficient system for
dealing with journalists’ enquiries. For example, organisations should
have press forms which can be filled out when a journalist makes a request.
This form can then be forwarded to the relevant person to respond as necessary.
Organisations should also be ready to fax statements to journalists in response
to specific questions. This avoids the possibility of misquotation. These
safeguards helped the BRC deal with around 700 enquiries by journalists over a
six-week period in summer 2001.
Active media work is that initiated by the organisation itself, and can
involve press releases and requests made by the organisation to the press for
interviews. However, for this to be successful certain guidelines should be
followed. When drawing up a press release NGOs should answer the questions
“What? When? Who? Where? Why?”. Each press release should be no
longer than one side. The first two paragraphs are most important as they may
be the only part the journalist reads. The text should be preceded by a sharp,
appealing headline. The press release should be double-spaced with wide margins
to make it easier to read. Once the press release has been sent, follow-up
telephone calls should be made to the journalists to check that they have
received it. Jessica also added that it could be particularly useful to time a
press release to coincide with the launch of a new document, for example a
research report.
Jessica stated that, in the UK, press conferences were a less useful tool than contact with
individual journalists. The reason was that journalists were less likely to
agree to be in a certain place at a specific time, but more willing to have
contact with NGOs from their offices. However, in discussion it was clear that
in several countries of Central and Eastern Europe press conferences were still
a good way of gaining the attention of the press. For example, in Bulgaria
expectations of refugee flows from the conflict in Macedonia led journalists to
go out of their way to gain more information about refugees in the country,
even leading them to travel a long way out of Sofia to visit refugee summer
camps. Jessica ended the session by giving some general advice on talking to
journalists, mentioning in particular that, to the journalist, there was no
such thing as talking ’off the record’. The day ended with a social
event for all the participants.
4. Wednesday 12th September
The final day of the seminar began with the third
group exercise. This was a continuation of the first two group exercises,
involving a role-play for three of the participants in each group. The task is
outlined below:
Small group exercise 3 Situation As
a result of your efforts, the Mayor has agreed to see three of you in his
office for ten minutes so that you can present your arguments for extending
school admission to the children of asylum seekers. Your
research has shown that the Mayor’s main concern is with the high
level of unemployment in your city. He was a University professor,
specialising in constitutional law, before a conservative party persuaded
him to run for office as Mayor five years ago. His first term of office
coincided with a period when a number of new businesses opened in the city,
which brought economic improvements and a reduced crime rate. He was
re-elected eighteen months ago and comes up for election again next year.
He has the reputation of being honest, though some of his party were
recently rumoured to be involved in diverting funds intended for improving
school buildings to the upkeep of their own properties. The Mayor is
married with two grown up sons, both of whom are practising lawyers. Tasks 1
Agree exactly what you will ask the Mayor to do. Decide what line to take
if he categorically refuses to agree to it. 2
List the organisations you represent and decide which three to send to the
meeting. 3
Agree what arguments and tactics these three should use in the meeting.
There were two ‘delegations’ of three
participants each nominated to meet the ‘mayor’ during the actual
role play. Both delegations involved ‘representatives’ of different
groups concerned with education and refugee issues. The first delegation
included: a social scientist who had produced a research report on the link
between access to education and reductions in the crime rate; a representative
of a children’s charity; and a teacher who worked in a school where
refugees studied. This group worked effectively when there appeared to be a
risk that the “mayor” would talk non-stop through the allotted
time. They introduced several persuasive arguments to convince the mayor to
address the issue of access to education for refugee children. They mentioned
that allowing children access to schools reduced the chances of unemployment
amongst the refugee population, made children less likely to resort to crime and
illegal business to earn a living, and allowed them to contribute to the local
economy. This group also referred to the fact that making a statement on this
issue could improve the mayor’s profile and make him appear as a leader
committed to human rights. Lastly they pushed successfully for the mayor to
agree to a follow on meeting. However, one criticism made of the group
afterwards was that they were unwilling to use concrete examples to back up
their arguments, even though this would have made their case even more
persuasive. It was also suggested that they had come close to threatening the
mayor with electoral consequences if he did not take the action requested.
The second delegation included: a lawyer who had
studied under the mayor when he had been a university lecturer; a
representative of a parents’ committee; and a local politician loyal to
the mayor’s party. This group took a different approach. They first
referred to the obligations under international law for children to have the right
to education regardless of the legal status of their parents, then spoke of the
good relations between refugee children and local children which in turn
encouraged the local population to take a stronger interest in foreign
cultures. They also referred to the votes the mayor could gain if he supported
education for refugee children, as he would appear in public as a humane,
compassionate leader. However, a criticism made of the group afterwards was
that they took a rather ‘heavy-handed’ approach to the meeting
early on, referring to international law in a way which seemed quite
confrontational, and this could have alienated the mayor from the arguments the
group was trying to put forward.
The participants then broke into three groups to
discuss three thematic topics nominated by the participants themselves. These
topics were: producing and using written materials; working with the media; and
having face-to-face meetings.
Each group had the task of producing a series of
recommendations on the topic of their choice. These recommendations are
reproduced in Annexes 3-5.
This task was followed by the final, evaluation
section of the seminar. Participants were asked to list the most valuable
aspects of the seminar for them. These appear below:
Most
valuable aspects of the seminar ·
· Meeting with the mayor ·
· Presentations by the British Refugee
Council ·
· Friendly atmosphere ·
· Lobbying techniques as explored in the
group exercises ·
· Simplification of complex issues in
the handout materials ·
· Balance between using own style and
working towards a common aim ·
· Practical nature of the work ·
· Professionalism of the participants
Participants were also asked to complete an evaluation
form, the results of which appear in Annex 6.
Annex 1: Handout material
1. Planning a Campaign
Know What You Want to Happen
Know Where You are Coming From
Know Who Matters
Know What in particular You Want to
Happen
2. The Tactics of Lobbying 1
Find the pathways
Variations on a theme
PREPARE!
know the issues
know your
cases
know the
structures
know the
opposition
3. The
Tactics of Lobbying 2
Get the
timing right
Get the
level right
Get the
right person
Know your
strength
Tell what
you want
Avoid
confrontation
Review,
review, review.....
4. Effective materials
The need
The message
The audience
The medium
The cost
5. Face to Face
Listen, listen, listen....
Control the conversation
Let them be nice
Match them
Be yourself
6. The Power Argument
after Gerry Spence
1 Prepare
Prepare until you have become the
argument
2 Open the other to receive your
argument
Remind them that they have a choice
3 Give the argument in the form
of a story
People are conditioned to listen to
stories
4 Tell the truth
Credibility is power
5 Say what you want
Do not leave them guessing
6 Avoid sarcasm, scorn and
ridicule; use humour cautiously
Respect is reciprocal
7 Logic is power
Do not give up creativity for logic.
However the creative mind will soon see that creativity is often served by
logic.
8 Action and winning are brothers
Take the initiative. Do something.
Do not defend when you can attack, but attack issues, not people.
9 Admit at the outset the weak
points in your argument
An honest admission endows you with
credibility. It also leaves your opponents with less to attack with.
10 Understand your power
But remember, arrogance, insolence
and stupidity are close relations.
7. After the Meeting
Thank
Record
Report
Assess
Celebrate - but don't
gloat
Move on
Annex
2: Lobbying and implementation (from NGO planning meeting, St Petersburg, June
4-5 2001)
·
The group which worked on “lobbying and implementation”
looked first of all the definition of the term ‘lobbying’ itself.
There was a discussion on the distinction between lobbying’ and
‘advocacy’ (ongoing protection versus representing the interests of
concrete persons in regard to specific legislation). The group came to the
conclusion that lobbying is an activity (influence, effect or protection), the
result of which is the taking of decisions necessary for NGOs, in this case
regarding the improvement of the legal and social status of refugees. These
decisions are taken by those people who are targeted by the lobbyists: the
government, parliament, civil servants, ministries and government bodies, local
authorities and so on.
·
Methods of lobbying were also discussed. Lobbying was classified
according to level (local, national, international), but also by the subject of
lobbying (adopting new legislation or ratifying agreements, developing
mechanisms to implement decisions or agreements, or improving the way laws work
in practice).
·
Since lobbying is a form of social activity, and as it is a process, a
strategy can be developed to lobby effectively, which is separated into stages.
An approximate diagram of such stages is the following:
·
As a specific form of activity, lobbying has different characteristics
at the level of developing and realising decisions. In order to act effectively
in this case, we need to answer the following questions:
o What do we want to
achieve? (aims and activities of lobbying); for example, ratification of the
1951 Convention, passing a law on citizenship, helping refugees to be granted
citizenship etc.
o Who does the decision
depend on? (choice of target group or individual target of lobbying). Very
often such a decision does not depend on the president of the country, the
government (that is, on first persons); very often the issue at stake (the
draft law, regulation, or government directive) depends on the work of working
groups, ministries or government bodies, commissions of deputies, other
institutions on a national or regional level or depends on a vote within the
legislature. Therefore, it is important to be clear about who is responsible
for this legislative initiative or who wishes to introduce concrete changes
into existing draft legislation or mechanisms.
o Who can influence those
who are taking the decisions? (choice of lobbyist/lobbying tool and allies in
lobbying)
o How can the lobbying
itself best be done?
METHODS
Aim
Such a lobbying structure was developed on the basis of discussion of an example of lobbying by a coalition of non-governmental organisations, carried out at the UN Preparatory Commission debates on ratification of the Rome Treaty (to create an International Criminal Court).
·
In developing methods and activities of lobbying we must take into
account that lobbying tasks must be: concrete, measurable, achievable,
realistic, and suited to the time and resources available. Therefore, the group
has identified factors influencing possible methods of lobbying:
o The stage the
decision-making process is at
o The decision which those
involved in the process are most likely to take
o The general situation at
the present time
o What personal contacts
are available
o The image of the lobbying
organisation in society
o International influence
o What support already
exists in the decision-making bodies
o What contact exists with
the media
o The existence of
coalitions of networks of NGOs which could act as allies in the lobbying
process
o The professionalism of
the lobbyists themselves
The group also discussed the
different forms of lobbying, namely:
· Organising the signing of
petitions, appeals, letter-writing
· Organising advertising
campaigns (posters, interviews with leaders of organisations etc.)
· Formal and informal
meetings with deputies or officials responsible for taking decisions
· Organising training
courses or conferences with the participation of decision-makers
· Using public relations
· Organising public appeals
· Using VIPs
o The group also discussed
the question of implementation and came to the conclusion that this problem
arises at the level of monitoring the results of decisions which have been
taken after lobbying. Problems of implementation can include: incompatibility
of new legislation or regulations; legislative gaps; conflicts between federal
and local legislation; and the absence of mechanisms for realisation. In
evaluating these problems, it is the group’s point of view that we should
use the lobbying diagram outlined above, but with a change of aims.
Annex 3: Recommendations by
working group on using written materials
The group which worked on
„written materials” for lobbying campaigns looked first of all the
definition and categories of „written materials”.
The group agreed that
„written materials” are an important tool for lobbying and advocacy
campaigns. Written materials were clasified according to aim (internal and
external), but also by the target group and by the target of the campaign (for
example leaflets, statements, cards, booklets, posters, reports, surveys etc).
All members of the group agreed
that internal materials are more detailed and constitute a base for elaborating
the external ones, that are more specific and focused on a certain issue.
Concerning the preparation and use of written
materials for lobbying and advocacy campaigns, the group made the following recommendations:
Whenever planning to write
materials for a lobbying/advocacy campaign:
· reasearch
the context
· find
the aim
· define
the target group
· ellaborate
the budget
· allocate
resources (use persons experienced in the field that concerns the campaign)
· find donors
and supporters
· match
the content of respective written material to its target/aim
· write
every step that was made and evaluate periodically the outcome and think of
alterations you might have to make
· choose
the right time for distribution/organize the distribution and delegate/divide
responsibilities carefully
· use the
language that makes peple to react or at least to think
· plan
follow up
· don’t
exagerate/fake information
· do not
necesarily hire an advertising company for writing materials for lobbying
· do not
give more information than needeed
· do not
be too agressive in the content/form of materials
· do not
use language that is too specific
· do not
give up if the initial aim was not met
Annex 4: Recommendations from working
group on face-to-face meetings
The group on ‘face-to-face meetings’
developed the following recommendations:
·
On preparing
for the meeting it is important to set out, exactly what result you would like
to achieve, that is to set out a concrete aim
·
Then you
should clarify, who is responsible for taking the decision you are concerned
about, and try to get a meeting with him/her
·
Spend some
time before the meeting studying the given problem and preparing substantial
arguments
·
It is useful
to search out allies and form a team with them to co-ordinate your approach
·
It is useful
if, before the meeting, you can briefly acquaint the relevant official with the
topic under discussion, by sending a fax or letter
·
During the
meeting you should make sure you give the correct impression. The official should
be thinking about the content of your discussion, rather than the clothes you
are wearing
·
It is
essential to show respect for others at the meeting and not lose your sense of
self-worth. Do not forget to introduce yourself, if possible right at the start
of the meeting, and leave your contact details
·
Explain the
essence of the problem precisely, present the facts in a logical progression,
illustrated with concrete examples. Try to be brief but do not leave out vital
details. Do not hurry the way you speak, try to use as little jargon or
specialist terminology as possible, because the official may simply not
understand you
·
Do not be
afraid to offer personal benefits which the official can gain from taking the
decision you want (for example, improving of his or her public image, support
at elections etc.), but do not apply pressure
·
Be able to
listen but try to take the discussion in the direction you want, as you were
the initiator of the meeting
·
Try to relate
to your interlocutor, but at the same time be yourself and speak honestly and
plainly
·
When the
meeting comes to a close, do not forget to leave materials behind to acquaint
the official with the issues further
·
If the
decision has still not been taken, then find out the date and time of the next
meeting
·
Thank the
official for his/her time and attention, and express your hope that the
decision you are looking for will be taken, which will lead to productive
co-operation. Invite the official to an event which is being run by your
organisation, so that he or she has the opportunity to see first-hand the
results of your work.
·
If the
decision you want is taken immediately, then write a letter of thanks and send
the official additional materials.
GOOD LUCK!
Annex 5: Recommendations from working
group on working with the media
Aim:
To create a positive image of refugees in
the eyes of the local population and convince the authorities that integrating
refugees is advantageous for them because:
· Refugees are a source of new energy in
society
· Refugees are a stimulus for the development
of the country
Activities:
· To search for allies amongst journalists
and organisations which have contact with journalists
· To befriend journalists and editors who may
have been refugees themselves (comrades in unhappy situations)
· To offer the media sensational subjects
from the lives of migrants
· To create means of moral and material
stimulation for journalists writing on migration issues
· To offer expert assistance to the media
Methods of working with the media:
·
Press
releases
·
Press
conferences
·
Inviting
interested journalists to important events hosted by NGOs and refugee community
groups
·
Analysis of
publications on migration-related topics from the point of view of their
benefit for refugees, summaries of which can be sent to the media, government
departments and partner NGOs
·
Immediate
responses to presentations by media bodies of use to refugees (such as letters
of thanks, telephone calls to the editor or to the journalists themselves)
·
Countering
subjective information presented in the press about refugees
·
Trying to use
mistakes made by the press to the advantage of refugees, for example:
o By countering false information, it is
possible at the same time to draw attention to the problems of refugees
o In criticising subjective articles in the
press, it is possible to refer to publications which are supportive of refugees
o It is possible to play on the moral
sensitivities of journalists who wrote inaccurate articles on refugees, and
encourage them to write new pieces offering more objective information
o NGOs themselves can present ready-made
material for publication to the media about the work of their own organisation
or the plight of refugees, and display their own journalistic skills!
What to avoid:
§
Do not
present the media with ‘hot-headed’ information which has not been
verified as being accurate
§
In press
releases or at press conferences, do not speak about the problems of refugees
in general terms (the press will only focus in on clear concrete facts and
accurate statistics)
§
Try to influence
the press, but do not try to ‘pressurise’ them
§
Do not be
drawn into conflict with the media for insignificant reasons
§
Do not
isolate the interests of refugees from the interests of the local population
§
Do not
exploit feelings of compassion of the reader by representing refugees only as
victims
§
Do not lose
heart if the media takes no notice of your suggestions
What is essential:
·
Patiently
and creatively to search for new approaches to existing problems of refugees
·
Study the
changing psychology of the reader
·
Relate
the tragedies of refugees to other tragedies in the country or in the world
·
Believe
truly in the importance of your mission (namely, protecting the dispossessed)
and, through concrete actions, encourage those who are not interested in hearing
about refugees to take interest by putting yourself in their place and
understanding their needs and feelings.
·
Remember that “In the Beginning was the
Word”
Annex 6: Summary of evaluation forms
1. How successful was the seminar in
your opinion?
·
Very successful
(14)
·
Quite
successful (3)
2. What did you hope to gain
from this seminar?
·
Concrete
recommendations on lobbying methods from western NGOs
·
Practical
knowledge of working with journalists and preparing materials
·
Concrete
examples of lobbying
·
A systematic
approach to the problem
·
How to gain
more information on lobbying, and to meet professional, interesting colleagues
·
Systematise
my knowledge, learn of the experience of other NGOs, learn of practical
examples of lobbying
·
Systematise
my views on lobbying, campaigning, writing materials
·
Practical and
theoretical information, inspiration and motivation, and new contacts
·
Deeper
knowledge on lobbying in asylum matters
·
To study
examples of civilised and effective lobbying
·
Exchange of
experience in advocacy process, knowledge of the concepts and techniques of
lobbying
·
Theoretical
knowledge, new contacts and exchange of experience
·
Communication
with other participants, information on methodology in an intensive environment
·
New knowledge
and an opportunity to speak of my own experience
·
More concrete
theoretical knowledge and work in groups
·
Practical
ideas on media work and lobbying, and information on concrete activities of
other organisations
·
Information
on preparing materials for campaigns and lobbying activities
3. To what extent were your
expectations fulfilled?
·
Fully (14)
·
Satisfactorily
(3)
4. Which part of the seminar
did you find most useful?
·
Work in
groups (8)
·
Work with the
mass media (7)
·
Tactics of
lobbying (6)
·
Presentations
by BRC (4)
·
Meeting the mayor
(2)
·
Development
of written material
·
Reports of
group work
·
Practical
work of what we know in theory
·
All topics
5. Which topics need further
discussion in your opinion?
·
Working with
the media (4)
·
Methods of
lobbying at different levels of administration (2)
·
NGO
networking (2)
·
Using
concrete examples of lobbying in working with refugees
·
All of them
after producing the final texts
·
Practice in
face-to-face meetings
·
Practical
solutions in neighbouring countries
·
Regulating
lobbying on a legislative level
·
Looking at
all topics individually in more detail
·
Work with
refugee community groups
·
Interviews
for TV channels, lobbying at the national level and working in coalitions
·
Planning a
campaign
6. How can ECRE improve its
support to NGOs in the future?
·
Continue with
such seminars (8)
·
Follow-up to
seminars and trainings (3)
·
Publication
of guidelines to specific issues (3)
·
Seminars for
new organisations on subjects such as lobbying, working with the media,
co-operation with the authorities, capacity-building of NGOs, and forming
coalitions
·
Help with
locating funders
·
More regular
meetings with people attending the seminars
·
Advanced
courses on the same issues
·
ECRE should
take on a co-ordinating role in the CIS
·
Internships
in ECRE
7. Any further comments?
· Estonia would be a good place to organise
seminars such as these
· It would be good to have a long-term
programme for ECRE seminars