What is the EPG?

The Eminent Persons Group was established by Commonwealth Heads of Government at their summit in November 2009.

In the 'Affirmation of Commonwealth Principles' agreed at their 2009 meeting in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, Commonwealth leaders called for the “creation of an Eminent Persons Group to undertake an examination of options for reform in order to bring the Commonwealth’s many institutions into a stronger and more effective framework of co-operation and partnership.”

The Group is also tasked with looking at the format, frequency, and content of Commonwealth ministerial meetings.

The Group met at Marlborough House, London, from 19 to 20 July 2010 and from 24th to 26th October 2010. It is scheduled to meet again in January 2010 and March 2011 before reporting to leaders at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), to take place in Perth in October 2011.

The Group’s goals are to sharpen the impact, strengthen the networks, and raise the profile of the Commonwealth.

Importance of Youth Participation in Decision Making

Uganda's Best Practice as Case Study;Youth Participation in Leadership in Uganda

1.0 INTRODUCTION:

Participation can be defined as the effective involvement in the formulation and implementation of Public Policy at all levels of society, local, National and International. Every individual regardless of age, race, religious affiliation or ideological inclination has a fundamental right to participate in making and implementing of such decisions either directly or through genuinely elected representatives.

Participation in its broadest sense refers to the involvement of individuals and /or groups in policy making; their involvement in decisions, bureaucracies and legislation responsive to their needs and aspirations with a view to improving the quality of policy and making policies responsive to the concerns of the people. Participation should not be taken to simply been taking part or being present (tokenism).

Participation and representation of youth must be considered a basic necessity if sustainable development is to be achieved. This paper examines the framework, policies and legal provisions for young people’s participation in leadership in Uganda. It also points out lessons learnt from young people’s participation in leadership and delivery of services.

2.0 DEFINITION OF YOUTH:

Across nations there is no unusually agreed upon age definition of a youth. For purposes of relating to law, planning purposes, public policy and social perception the category in the population referred to as youth has been defined variously for example, the Common wealth Youth Programme defines a youth as a person who is between the age of 14 and 29 years, other international agencies like the United Nations (UN) including WHO define the youth as persons between 15 and 24 years. Most political parties in Africa have 15 to 35 years as a youth age group. For purposes of this paper however, I will use the definition as provided for by the National Youth Council Statute (1993), which defines a youth as female and male persons between the age of 18 and 30. This is however, not to ignore the definition of the youth as per the National Youth Policy, which defines a youth as all young persons, female and male aged 12-30 years. It is also important to point out that the legal definition of youth also varies according to purpose such as marriage, military service, voting rights and criminal responsibility. What is very basic is that, whichever way one defines youth, the pivotal issue is that this is a group of people who have different characteristics from adults. These are people at a period of time where their potential, vigour, adventurism, experimentation with increased risks and vulnerabilities show themselves in a socially meaningful pattern.

It is un-disputable that young people are the majority. It is estimated for example that in sub-Sahara Africa, the young women and men (14-29 years) are over 50% of the total population and this is not any different from Uganda’s case. Apart from the numerical imperative, young women and men are energetic and vibrant. They are courageous and brave. It is because of these characteristics that our societies must consider youth as a key resource for both their own development and for the entire nation. It is important for everyone to know that young people are their best representatives for they know their problems better and are therefore better suited to articulate them. The young people must not at any one time be at the periphery of political decision-making. In this chapter, the words “Youth” and “Young People” are used interchangeably.

3.0 YOUTH DEMOGRAPHICS:

Available global statistics do indicate that young people under 25 years of age constitute 50% of the World’s population. There are 1.3 billion persons in the age group of 15-24 - this means (if one took this age group to mean youth) that youth make up 17% of the world’s population. Of these 84% live in developing countries, more than one-third of whom live in the Commonwealth; in some countries the figure exceeds 50% (The Commonwealth Plan of Action for Youth 1995). In Uganda’s case, nearly 80% of the population are young people below the age of 30 years. Out of Uganda’s estimated 24.8 millions, 47.3% are young people aged below 15 years. While young people aged between 10-24 constitute 35.5%.

There is therefore a demographic statistical imperative (numerical strength) to cushion and sustain the argument for young people’s participation in leadership.


4.0 GENERAL REPRESENTATIONS OF YOUNG PEOPLE:

Young people are painted variously by various academicians and politicians; depending on the purpose. One of the features of academic and non-academic representations of youth is the widespread construction of youth in general and specific groups of young people in particular, as “problems” (MacDonald et al 1983). This problem status may involve being seen as the source of a particular policy focus of adult concern such as football hooligans, or as being at risk of getting into difficulty such as teenage pregnancy, contracting AIDS, etc. Young people are frequently presented as, either actively “deviant” or passively “at risk”, and sometimes as both simultaneously “(Griffin, 1993)”.

Because young people too often appear in policies as a problem, as a cause of concern, the responses of a range of key institutions, schools, schools, police, employment schemes have been to regard young people as a danger to be confined and appeased (Solomons 1997).

Other academicians have “painted” young people as apprentice or incomplete citizens. They are afforded the rights of protection and provision but are put in the same company as lunatics and criminals in being denied political rights. Rather than being an entitlement, the right to participate is mostly regarded as a privilege available only to a fortunate few”. (Huge Mathews 2001).

5.0 HOW HAVE THE YOUTH PARTICIPATED?

5.1 YOUTH PARTICIPATION SINCE 1986 UNDER THE MOVEMENT GOVERNANCE:


The Government of Uganda since 1986 has been consistent inter-alias on two things; the youth and women. Whatever policy document one lands on, the issue of empowering these two groups is stressed. For example the current poverty eradication plan (PEAP) emphasizes the role of women and youth and so does the Plan for Modernization of Agriculture (PMA). This is in recognition of the fact that these two groups are fundamental in transforming the economy and ensuring self-sustenance.



5.2 YOUTH PARTICIPATION IN LOCAL COUNCILS (L.CS):

Since the formation of local councils to the enactment of the Local Government Act (1997), the youth were represented at all levels, (L.C.1- L.CV) by a Secretary for Youth. In addition, the position of Secretary for Security has been in many instances assigned to young people possibly believes because of their strength.

The Local Government Act (1997) ushered in yet a new era:

-Under the Local Government Act (1997), Article 11 provides for youth representation in the District Local Councils.

-“District Councils shall consist of …. Two councilors one of whom shall be a female youth representing the youth in the district”.

-Consistent with the above Article, Article 24 (1) c provides thus:
“A sub-county council shall consist of two Youth Councilors representing the youth in the Sub-country, one of whom shall be a female”

What then is the role of Youth Councilors?

(a)The Youth Councilors at sub-county and district levels are the representatives of the youth in the local councils at the respective levels.

b)The Youth Councilors should maintain close contact with the youth councils and get their views, opinions and present them to local council for consideration.

(c)Lobby for financial, moral and material support for youth programmes such as reproductive health programmes, IGAs, employment schemes, etc.

(d)Reports to the council any pertinent decisions of the local council

(e)Acts as a bridge between the local councils and the youth councils and strives to ensure that there is harmony between the two structures.

5.3 IMPORTANCE OF PARTICIPATION

According to Diana McNeish the main arguments for viewing participation as a positive outcome in its own right can be summarized as follows:

•It contributes to self esteem, which in turn affects physical and mental well-being

•It contributes to people feeling more in control of their lives and their welfare

•It leads people to being more likely to access the information and skills they need to lead successful lives

• It leads people to being more assertive with services and increasing the likelihood of services being responsive to their needs.

Alongside the notion of participation being a positive outcome is the theory that it can be a beneficial process for achieving other outcomes. The basic premise is that participation generates greater ownership of an issue and that people are more likely to accept plans and messages, which they have played a part in formulating. The danger of regarding participation primarily as a means to an end is that, whilst the process might be participatory, the outcomes remain defined by the ‘experts’.

5.4 CONCLUSION:

Uganda has made very important strides in the area of youth participation and does indeed stand up to be counted as a model in the entire Commonwealth. The country is now at a stage of strengthening youth structures like the National Youth Council to make them able to deliver, more effectively and efficiently.

The mission for the National Youth Policy 2001, “Youth Empowerment” enjoins everybody to make a contribution towards the cause of the youth. At all times, it is important to know that investment in youth is not only a social obligation but also rewarding in economic sense – the youth are the country’s most valuable asset and are an integral component of the development process – they provide for and safeguard the future of the Nation. The youth’s participation is therefore a clear safety net for the future. The existing social order that largely consider youth as “deviants”, or a problem must be transformed.

We need to appreciate that our young people are inheritors and torchbearers of our fundamental values of respect for diversity, economic and social development and good governance. We therefore need to effectively harness the enthusiasm of the youth for the benefit of our country and to carry forward and redefine the values that we so much cherish.

The Role of Youth In Peace Building

Peace Building: The term "Peacebuilding" came into widespread use after 1992 when Boutros Boutros-Ghali, then United Nations Secretary-General, announced his Agenda for Peace (Boutros-Ghali, 1992). Since then, "peace building" has become a broadly used but often ill-defined term connoting activities that go beyond crisis intervention such as longer-term development, and building of governance structures and institutions. It includes building the capacity of non-governmental organizations (including religious institutions) for peacemaking and peacebuilding. The emphasis of the United Nations has been on structural transformation, with a primary focus on institutional reform.

Peacebuilding involves a full range of approaches, processes, and stages needed for transformation toward more sustainable, peaceful relationships and governance modes and structures. Peacebuilding includes building legal and human rights institutions as well as fair and effective governance and dispute resolution processes and systems. To be effective, peacebuilding activities requires careful and participatory planning, coordination among various efforts, and sustained commitments by both local and donor partners. To summarize a construction metaphor used by Lederach, peacebuilding involves a long-term commitment to a process that includes investment, gathering of resources and materials, architecture and planning, coordination of resources and labour, laying solid foundations, construction of walls and roofs, finish work and ongoing maintenance. Lederach also emphasizes that peacebuilding centrally involves the transformation of relationships. "Sustainable reconciliation" requires both structural and relational transformations (Lederach, 1997, 20, 82-83).

Let us explore the role of youth as peace-builders through illustrating their unique power and untapped potential. Young people are typically considered a problem to peace and thus are left out or manipulated by decision-making process especially in societies that have difficulties handling change in constructive ways.

Youth as peace-builders: Similar to that of youth being violent, there is extensive evidence of youth not only being peaceful but of being agents of positive social change. However, this phenomenon has not been analysed by academic research. How many young people are violent and how many young people are peace builders? Social research using quantitative and qualitative methods can help to answer this question. My experience as a youth leader, worker and activist in several context suggest that there are many youth who are peace-builders. They are pro active agents in their communities, in their schools, work places, sports teams, youth groups and universities. Their stories are yet to be told.

McEvoy writes: In any conflict context one examines, the dominant presence of the young people in youth work, in community development, and in inter-ethnic and dialogue and peace group is clear. Many have direct experience of violence, conflict and imprisonment themselves. They are not well paid, their projects are under-funded, often stressful and can be life threatening. Like other civil society actors they are less visible in analysis of peace processes than key elites.

One of McEvoy’s final proposition is that “youth are the primary actors in grassroots community development/relations work; they are at the frontlines of peace building.” Along this line, Ardizzone studied the activities and motivation of youth Organisations in New York City. She highlights Global Kids, an organisation which conducts student-run conferences on children’s rights; Youth Force which teaches teens on how to respond when stopped by the police; and Youth Peace/Roots which tries to counter the active role military recruiters take with inter-city youth by educating about alternatives to militarism. She emphasizes that young people whom she interviewed show a commitment to changing the situation of their peers and the image adults have of youth: “The youth in this study have witnessed injustice and rather than becoming hopeless and apathetic, or perpetrators of direct violence, have chosen to work for social change.” Further studies should be taken to document similar and so visible initiatives in other geographical and cultural contexts, linked to studies of civil society strengthening.

Another aspect to highlight from the conclusion of Ardezzone is that there seem to be parallel with the emancipating functions that war some times has on women. Women are compelled to take on roles left vacant by men-typically soldiers-during times of war. In this case, youth take up the role of a generation of adults who are either hopeless, too comfortable to change or incapable of implementation transformation. The experience of agencies working with youth support this idea. The Oxfam International Youth Parliament Report “Highly affected, rarely considered”, cited earlier, states:

The experience of the International; Youth Parliament (IYP) is that an increasing number of young people are rejecting violence and becoming involved in peace-building efforts at the grass roots, national and international level. How are young people changing their societies? What is their specific power? How can their unique potential be harnessed? Extensive research is needed on innovative and spreading youth initiatives.

Finally there is need to tap the potential of youth by public policies of governments and international institutions. Involve then in all peace processes of their countries sine young people stand to be major stakeholders in the affairs of their nation.