Peacebuilding Commission

Burundi configuration

3^rd & 4^th Meetings (AM & PM)

Peacebuilding commission holds day-long discussion on Burundi,

 

agrees on fund’s use to bolster government’s priority plan

 

Burundi Minister of Good Governance Describes Priority Areas

For Action, Says Assistance Will Pay Civil Servants, Help Government Avoid Crisis

As the Peacebuilding Commission held its second country-specific meeting on Burundi today, Commission Members agreed to fill the gap in that nation’s peacebuilding efforts with approximately $25 million from the Peacebuilding Fund, according to an unofficial estimate provided by the Assistant-Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, Carolyn McAskie.

Ms. McAskie also said that a final figure would be decided pending a review, by her Office, of the Priority Plan for the Peacebuilding Fund in Burundi -- a document containing interventions to strengthen the peacebuilding process, and which was decided jointly by that country’s Government and the United Nations.

As noted by the Commission in its draft Chairman’s summary, donor per capita assistance in Burundi remained low, while a budgetary shortfall was proving worrisome to the Government’s peacebuilding efforts, especially if civil servants and members of the security force failed to receive their salaries.

According to Youssef Mahmoud, Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Burundi, that East African nation currently faced difficulties in implementing the Comprehensive Ceasefire Agreement, signed in September, between the Government and the Palipehutu-Forces nationales de liberation (FNL), even with South Africa’s assistance to resolve differences between the two parties.

Mr. Mahmoud, who was also the Resident Coordinator for Burundi, said that weaknesses in the judicial system had contributed to a sense of impunity regarding the brutal killings of civilians, the arrest of journalists and other human rights abuses.  The judicial process in the case of seven alleged coup plotters had also been slow, although the Government had recently made court proceedings public and allowed journalists to visit the detained.

Other challenges facing Burundi include conflicts over land, as returning refugees began claiming back the lands they had left behind, as well as a worrisome humanitarian situation made worse by the recent drought and food shortages.  Such issues would be taken up at the Commission’s next meeting, which would hopefully take place in Burundi in March 2007.  Meanwhile, a recent Security Council resolution had requested that a United Nations Integrated Office in Burundi (BINUB) be established following the closure of the United Nations Operation in Burundi (ONUB) at the end of December, through which United Nations support would continue for a further two years.

Venant Kamana, the Minister of Good Governance of Burundi, said that, in the face of the immensity of reconstruction and reconciliation needs, Burundi’s Government had established several priority areas for action, including good governance, security, the reinforcement of justice and promotion of human rights, and financial and budgetary issues.

But, he explained that a shortfall in the country’s budget had left the Government unable to pay its civil servants on a regular basis, which, if it were to continue, would produce tensions that could degenerate into a crisis.  Weekly strikes by civil servants might well spread to the military and police, and it was for that reason the Peacebuilding Commission was called upon to intervene.

Also addressing the Commission was Alassane Sow, World Bank Country Manager for Burundi, who said that $35 million had been released, last month, towards the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility for Burundi, to be followed by a further $25 million soon.  But, support was needed from the rest of the international community to keep the Facility on track.  For instance, if salaries were not paid, the country’s economic stability would be at risk and could prevent its completion of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative.

Mr. Sow said that, in the meantime, a $40 million credit had been approved by the Bankfor employment generation and public works projects.  Those contracts were being managed by the semi-private Agence Burundaise pour la Realisation des Travaux d’Interet Public (ABUTIP), which had, so far, overseen the building of roads, markets, slaughterhouses, primary schools, health centres, drainage and water systems and river flood protection facilities.

Today’s discussion had also centred on how the Commission could improve its working methods, with Members stressing the need to create a clear-cut peacebuilding strategy for Burundi, with time lines and benchmarks in place.  An inventory of ongoing peacebuilding activities, as well as of planned interventions, had been put forward to the Commission yesterday and was welcomed as a good starting point, though several Members lamented the delay in its circulation.

Belgium’s delegate stressed, with the agreement of many others, that the Commission must make clear its relationship with the Peacebuilding Fund and other multilateral organizations dealing with Burundi, while the representative of the United States reminded fellow delegates that the Commission should play a more strategic role in helping countries reach their peacebuilding goals and avoid becoming “just as another donor”.

The Chairman, Johan L. Løvald ( Norway), said it was important to recognize that the Government in Burundi had been in power for only a little more than a year.  In that short time, it had come a long way, but enormous challenges remained to heal the wounds of years of bitter conflict.  The Government was clearly determined to pursue peacebuilding on a broad front, fully cognizant of its own responsibilities, as well as the need to work with the Peacebuilding Commission and the international community.

The Commission will meet again at 10 a.m. Wednesday, 13 December.

Statements

The Chairman, JOHAN L. LØVALD ( Norway), recounting his trip to Burundi two weeks ago, said that the visit was a useful one, which underlined the importance of direct meetings with stakeholders at the country level.  It was important to recognize that the Government in Burundi had been in power for only a little more than a year.  In that short time, it had come a long way, but enormous challenges remained to heal the wounds of years of bitter conflict.  The Government was clearly determined to pursue peacebuilding on a broad front, fully cognizant of its own responsibilities, as well as the need to work with the Peacebuilding Commission and the international community.  It was also clear, however, that the Government required additional budgetary assistance. 

VENANT KAMANA, the Minister of Good Governance of Burundi, said that, in the face of the immensity of reconstruction and reconciliation needs, Burundi’s Government had established several priority areas for action, including good governance, security, the reinforcement of justice and promotion of human rights, and financial and budgetary issues.  It had put in place a Piloting Committee to translate those goals into action.  In terms of promoting good governance, a culture of dialogue between citizens and institutions, supported by measures against corruption, was a major advance towards peace.  Other major improvements included a Government act relating to prevention and penalties for corruption and draft laws regarding an anti-corruption court.  Despite those efforts, some problems remained, which required activities that would have an immediate impact. 

On security issues, the Government was aware of the need for outside assistance in reforming the security sector and fighting the proliferation of small arms.  As for strengthening justice and the rule of law, the truth and reconciliation commission needed funding for restoring the effectiveness of the legal system.  The issue of land titles was also a major concern.  There were presently population pressures due to the massive return of refugees from neighbouring countries, which could endanger peace and security.  The commission for land and other assets had set up a fund for resettlement activities.  As for budgetary support, the crisis had exacerbated the deficit, and the Government did not have the necessary income to meet its expenses or even pay its civil servants on a regular basis.  If that situation continued, the tensions could degenerate into a crisis that could undermine domestic security.  The Government was working to alleviate the shortfall, but that would not happen promptly enough.  For that reason, the Peacebuilding Commission must rapidly intervene to meet the challenge.

He outlined several proposals for implementing the planned recovery programs.  A joint pilot committee would be the main coordination body for decision-making and would work closely with the National Committee for Coordination of Aid to assure consistency.  A technical secretariat with Government and United Nations experts would provide technical expertise for following up on the priority plan.  Follow-up would take place through regular meetings of the joint pilot committee.  The needs for peace consolidation were too numerous to be funded by a single trust fund.  He called on the Commission to mobilize funding and finance the programme to fight poverty.

YOUSSEF MAHMOUD, Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Burundi, reported no progress in implementing the Comprehensive Ceasefire Agreement, signed in September between the Government and the Palipehutu-Forces nationales de libération (FNL), since the FNL leadership had refused return to Burundi to participate in the Joint Verification and Notification Mechanism unless FNL prisoners were first released.  South Africa had been helping the Government resolve those outstanding differences, while the African Union’s Task Force had agreed to support the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration process and to protect the FNL leadership upon their return to the country.  The South African battalion within the United Nations Operation in Burundi (ONUB) would be re-hatted to form part of the African Union Task Force as of 1 January 2007, while the rest of ONUB would be repatriated by the end of December.

Mr. Mahmoud, who was also the Resident Coordinator for Burundi, said that weaknesses in the judicial system had contributed to a sense impunity regarding the brutal killings of civilians, the arrest of journalists and other human rights abuses.  The judicial process in the case of seven alleged coup plotters had also been slow, although the Government had recently made court proceedings public and allowed journalists to visit the detained.  In this instance, it was hoped that the international community would show patience in the reform of Burundi’s democratic institutions.  As a first step, the Government had “severely sanctioned” hundreds of soldiers and uniformed personnel as a result of investigations into human rights abuses they had committed. 

He added that, for its part, the United Nations had supported the country through the Arusha peace process, organizing elections and overseeing the conclusion of the transitional period.  It had recently completed a peacebuilding mapping exercise -- placing attention on political dialogue, revitalizing consultations on transitional justice mechanisms and promoting job creation -- with budgetary estimates attached.  Meanwhile, resolution 1719 (2006) of the Security Council had requested that a United Nations Integrated Office in Burundi (BINUB) be established following the conclusion of ONUB’s mandate, through which United Nations support would continue for a further two years.

He said that his Office had been reconfiguring the strategic components of United Nations country assistance in Burundi, to ensure that cross-cutting themes such as HIV/AIDS, gender and the special needs of displaced peoples, children and youth would be taken care of.  Other challenges facing Burundi included conflicts over land, as returning refugees began claiming back the lands they had left behind, as well as a worrisome humanitarian situation made worse by the recent drought and food shortages.  Such issues would be taken up at the Commission’s next meeting, which would hopefully take place in Burundi in March 2007, in conjunction with the Round Table meeting.  The speedy disbursement of resources from the Peacebuilding Fund and other budgetary support would go a long way in consolidating the progress made so far.

ALASSANE SOW, World Bank Country Manager for Burundi, who spoke on the issue of governance, employment generation and other socio-economic issues, said the Bank had undertaken a governance diagnostic study in Burundi -- under the Ministry of Governance’s leadership -- for which civil service employees, households, non-governmental organizations and the private sector were interviewed.  The study would be completed by the third quarter of 2007.  Meanwhile, a $40 million credit had been disbursed to conduct infrastructure rehabilitation, employment generation and public works projects, to be supplemented by an additional grant of $30 million.  Management of those contracts had been delegated to a semi-private agency called the Agence Burundaise pour la Realisation des Travaux d’Interet Public (ABUTIP) and so far 165 civil work contracts with local contractors had been completed, along with 169 contracts with 48 consulting firms.  Also, some 3.8 million days of unskilled labour employment had been generated.

As a result of those projects, he said municipal infrastructure, such as roads, markets, slaughterhouses, primary schools, health centres, draining and water systems and river flood protection facilities had been built.  The African Development Bank had also been using ABUTIP to help to implement a “socio-economic reinsertion” project.  Meanwhile, $35 million had been released last month towards the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) for Burundi, to be soon followed by a further $25 million.  But, support was needed from the rest of the international community to keep the Facility on track.  If salaries were not paid, for instance, or if prices rose drastically, the country’s economic stability would be at risk and could prevent its completion of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative.

He said that, with assistance from the Bank and other donors, the Government had adopted a comprehensive plan to reform the coffee sector and similar plans would be created for the tea, cotton and sugar industries as well.  A national workshop on that topic would be held in Burundi in January 2007.  As for community development, the Bank was expected to approve a project on strengthening communal law, to build the key elements of a decentralization policy.  It was also expected to engage in an education project in support of the Government’s universal education goals.  Work was also being undertaken to complete the Bank’s next Country Assistance Strategy for 2008-2009.

JOHAN VERBEKE ( Belgium) said the Commission had identified four major challenges facing Burundi at its first country-specific meeting, which were:  governance, strengthening the rule of law, reforming the security sector and ensuring community recovery.  Meeting those challenges required political dialogue between the Government, political parties, private sector, media and civil society, and donors were called on to step up their support in those areas in a coordinated manner.  At Belgium’s bilateral meeting with Burundi, steps were taken to provide State reform assistance and to develop, with United Nations support, plans to address critical gaps in current peacebuilding efforts. 

He also stressed the need for political parties in Burundi to respect democratic rule.  So far, no concrete support had been envisaged to combat corruption, assist the land commission and strengthen the security sector, judiciary and National Commission for Human Rights.  More detail would also be welcomed in terms of environmental protection projects, the provision of decent housing and other urban development needs, as well as in reducing malnutrition.

He said that the Commission must, as a first step, identify areas where the international community must intervene as a priority.  It must then identify the areas already being supported by donors and so that the Peacebuilding Fund could turn its attention to areas not yet receiving support.  The Commission must also make clear its relationship with the Peacebuilding Fund and other multilateral organizations dealing with Burundi.

ASIM IFTIKHAR AHMAD ( Pakistan ) said that he recognized the issues faced in Burundi.  The mapping document did not appear to address questions about budgetary support, which were contained in the summary of the last meeting.  He was aware of the existence of a priority plan submitted by Burundi, which perhaps might offer some information on gaps in budgetary support.  If that was the case, he would appreciate if the plan could be shared with the Commission members.

Mr. SOW said that there was a $60 million budget for the end of 2006 and the beginning of 2007.  The first part had already been disbursed.  Disbursement of the second part was expected to be done by February.  The representative from the International Monetary Fund, who was scheduled to speak in the afternoon, might have more information on that topic.  Prospects for 2007 were difficult, with a budget gap of $60 million.  The World Bank was preparing support for the 2007 budget, but the International Monetary Fund would be better placed to answer such questions.

Mr. KAMANA said that the reasons underlying the request for budgetary support could be found on page 58 of the priority plan.

KAREN PIERCE ( United Kingdom) said that priority must be given to strengthening the country’s justice system, which was essential in giving full expression to the protection of human rights and the creation of a stable society.  That, in turn, would help attract foreign investment.  Institutional donors were asked to provide details on how they were dealing with those issues.  Also, there was a need to promote political pluralism, so that a legitimate cross-section of Government opposition, civil society and media could be involved in the process.  The Chair of the Commission was asked, as a possible follow-up, to develop a workplan for the Government, United Nations and the wider international community, with the Government’s agreement.  To prioritize its interventions, the Commission should also be told of the threats to stability.  It would also be helpful if documents could be circulated a little further in advance.  The Commission’s interactive mode of discussion was thought to be very useful.

Ms. FILIP of the International Parliamentary Union said that her organization had formulated a series of proposals to strengthen the status of the Parliament in Burundi, which were shared with the Commission a few months earlier.  The Union had already begun implementing some of those proposals, for instance:  fostering dialogue and cooperation among the various political factions within the Government.  It would embark on a project to strengthen women’s participation in politics as soon as it received operational support from the United Nations Democracy Fund and was awaiting funding to implement other proposals. 

Also, she said the Union had met with the speakers of the two chambers of Parliament to explain the mandate of the Peacebuilding Commission and to encourage their interaction with the Government and the Commission to ensure that Parliament received adequate attention.  It had also held meetings with top political leaders, United Nations representatives and others in the field, and had facilitated meetings between Parliament and the Chair of the Commission.  It looked forward to helping the Parliament reach a stage where it was capable of playing its key constitutional role in facilitating dialogue and forming a society rooted in democracy.

LARS FAABORG-ANDERSEN ( Denmark) said that the Minister of Good Governance’s mention of an initiative for a coordinating forum involving the United Nations and key donors at the local level was an important idea.  It was essential to have full alignment between the various initiatives being set into place in Burundi.  The Commission was still grappling with what was supposed to be done in the country.  There were numerous strategies already in place.  A distinct peacebuilding strategy for Burundi was needed.  The process for such a strategy should be fully owned by the Burundian Government, which would benefit from the input of donors and actors at the country level.  That was where the greatest knowledge resided, rather than in New York, so the framework should be based at the country level.

He said that a plan was needed on how to address key challenges in the area of corruption, security, the rule of law and the settlement of land disputes, and that plan needed to encompass funding requirements for such initiatives.  He was reluctant to take on budgetary support as an element in peacebuilding efforts.  Peacebuilding was more clearly identifiable than budgetary support.  More detail was needed on exactly what kind of budgetary support related to the threats currently facing Burundi.  There was a strong need for peacebuilding efforts, but there had been discouraging elements, such as human rights abuses and a poorly functioning justice system, all of which endangered long-term stability.  He would like to hear the minister’s view on the internal political situation, including the arrest and trial of the alleged coup plotters.  He would like to see a process where Burundi’s Government was “firmly in the driver’s seat” on the peacebuilding strategy. 

ALFREDO LOPES CABRAL ( Guinea-Bissau) said that the minister’s statement revealed that Burundi was extremely committed to doing everything possible to continue consolidating peace.  Without structural reform of the justice sector, it would not be possible to establish and consolidate the rule of law.  Without appropriate reform of the judiciary, confidence could not be restored.  Also, it was important that all agree on the need to contribute financially to reforming the security sector.  Contributions to the security of a country were not always well regarded, as some considered that a matter of national sovereignty.  Peace could not be decreed; it was a holistic process involving many difficult aspects. 

He said that he disagreed with the representative of Denmark.  Reducing the deficit and providing support to a Government in need did contribute to peace and to ensuring social justice.  When the army and civil servants were not paid, there was the risk of strikes and social unrest.  The contributions outlined by the World Bank did not cover all those needs.  Certainly, there were difficulties and shortcomings, but the Government had been decisive in its actions.  It was determined not to tolerate impunity, arbitrary arrests, or the absence of due process.  The international community must be demanding but patient.  There was a need to recognize the progress made and to understand the complex context.  The Government was combating corruption and waste, and those efforts needed to be supported.  The essential, and often ignored, problem in Burundi was its population density.  It needed funds to compensate those whose land had been occupied by others.  That situation could be resolved in a fair manner, but Burundi did not have the financial resources to do so.

A representative from Biraturaba (a non-governmental organization in Burundi), speaking on behalf of Burundian civil society, said that his organization had held a seminar on civil society participation, involving 83 people.  They included representatives of religious groups and organizations on human rights, peacebuilding/conflict prevention, the environment, AIDS, women’s rights and trade unions.  The seminar had identified several priorities facing civil society:  promoting good governance, providing leadership training, bolstering administrative management, teaching a respect for the separation of power within Government and the law and promoting support for State continuity.

He said that it was important for the Government to be given budgetary support, so that civil servants could be paid.  Also, there was a need to combat corruption through annual financial audits of the ministries of finance, trade and capital goods, while an independent national observer should be put in place to monitor progress.  In terms of strengthening the security sector, there was a need to ensure the independence of the country’s judiciary and to shore up its resources.  A council of lawyers and judges, too, must be created, as well as a body to monitor human rights violations.  A truth and reconciliation commission must be developed and elected officials, civil society and security forces must be given training in human rights issues.

He said it was important to implement the ceasefire between the Government and the FNL and ensure the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants.  To help normalize community life, the Government must provide some form of psychological assistance to those affected by the war and to strengthen the community centres that provide counselling and other personal development needs.  Grants and microfinancing services to develop income-generating activities would be useful, as well as policies targeted at women and youth.  Biraturaba would help coordinate activities on those priority areas through the provision of expertise and would strive to facilitate participation of grass-roots organizations.  It was proposed that a joint steering committee be created, to include Government representatives, United Nations agencies and members of civil society.

RAYMOND WOLFE ( Jamaica) said that peace and security, human rights and the rule of law, and development were the basic pillars in country-specific meetings.  The situation remained fragile in Burundi.  While there should be a focus on issues of security and the rule of law, it was legitimate for all issues to be discussed so that the situation on the ground could be fully understood.  Regarding human rights issues, another approach could be to have the Human Rights Council look at those.  Risk reduction and sustainable economic recovery went hand in hand.  As for the issue of the peace dividend, youth unemployment and self-sustaining growth could not be left out of the equation.  The issue of budgetary support was a true challenge that needed to be addressed. 

Mr. DERUFFE ( France) said that the Government of Burundi had shown a firm commitment.  He had several questions for the minister.  First, he asked how the Commission could help in implementation of the ceasefire agreement.  The Peacebuilding Fund should be involved once all priority actions had been identified and donors indicated how they could proceed.  As for combating impunity, the mapping document suggested several justice programmes.  He asked the minister whether he envisaged more specific measures in that area and what could be the input from the outside in the sector of combating corruption.  The land issue also needed to be discussed further and he would welcome any inputs from the minister.

ARJAN PAUL HAMBURGER ( Netherlands) said that the Government of Burundi was the main leader in the peacebuilding process and that members of the international community were at hand to provide support.  As for the Commission itself, there was a need to establish a true peacebuilding strategy, so as to avoid jumping from one activity to another without first knowing what Burundians wanted out of the process.  Such a strategy would also provide a basis for soliciting funds. 

He said that, while the Netherlands recognized the need to provide budgetary support “to keep a country alive”, the provision of such support should be accompanied by the streamlining of the Government sector.  Also, it was important to promote full political inclusiveness.  In that regard, opposition groups and the civil society must be present throughout the process.  The Government of Burundi should involve the donors more at the local level.  Also, the Commission must strive to provide its documents on time, to enable delegates to identify issues for discussion at its meetings.  A workplan should be developed, with the commensurate deadlines.

KIRSTI LINTONEN ( Finland), on behalf of the European Union, said that political dialogue was at the core of the peacebuilding strategy.  The Union was committed to contributing to peace in Burundi.  An effective peacebuilding strategy should be based on an analysis of the conflict’s causes and the risks to peace.  She encouraged Burundi to strengthen the democratic process, including through dialogue with various political parties and with civil society.  Political stability and the protection of basic rights, such as freedom of the press and expression, should not be endangered.  Justice and reconciliation were the cornerstones of peace efforts.  She was pleased at recent anti-corruption initiatives.  Promoting an independent judiciary was also an important component.  Further efforts in that regard should be encouraged.

FERNANDO VALENZUELA, European Commission, asked the Minister whether the projects he described in his statement were funded solely by the Peacebuilding Fund, or if the Government intended to use funds from other sources.  Also, it was important to for the Commission to clearly list its proposals for achieving the tasks outlined by the mapping exercise and to identify the risks associated with each.  There was agreement with the comments of France, Belgium and the Netherlands, regarding the fact that projects embarked on, by the Commission, must be part of a wider strategy.  The Government’s ceasefire agreement with the FNL should be seen as an essential element of that strategy, and it should be reflected in the action plan.  There must also be a time line and benchmarks to assess progress.

In planning its activities, he said the Commission must take into account, activities already undertaken by donors, such as work currently being conducted on governance and rural development by the European Commission.  Indeed, the Commission must step up its links with donors already on the ground.  The mapping document was a step in the right direction, and the Government must deal quickly and inclusively with donors, civil society and other players, to implement the plan.  New resources must be sought for the Peace Consolidation Fund and ways must be developed to quickly absorb those funds.

HEIDI HULAN ( Canada) said that she regretted reports emerging form multiple sources, regarding the fragility of multiple partnerships and the undermining of peacebuilding and governance.  Pluralism was important as a confidence-builder and as a precursor to direct foreign investment.  She welcomed the substantial work that had gone into the mapping exercise, but emphasized the importance of distinguishing between urgent and important needs.  She welcomed the joint assessment, led by the Government of Burundi, of the relative importance of the priorities on the long list of items.  Regarding the need for budgetary support and the inability to pay salaries, she would like a more detailed breakdown of the acute needs, so that a more targeted discussion could take place.  She also emphasized the need for advance documentation for the Commission’s next meeting.  On a separate note, she advised the Secretariat that Canada would be providing $20 million to the Peacebuilding Fund for the next 18 months.

MIRJANA MLADINEO ( Croatia) said that reform in the areas of security and the rule of law was the most important basis for taking the next steps.  She hoped that the mapping document would lead to a work plan or a document that would serve as a guide to programmes and activities in Burundi.  Benchmarks were needed to speed the process and raise the level of responsibility of all stakeholders.  During the Commission’s last discussions, issues regarding the empowerment of women had been touched on.  That was a cross-cutting issue that should be incorporated into what had been already done and what was going to be done.  The Government must be supported in giving educational possibilities to everybody.  That should be done in parallel with all other priorities, and not left until later, when the situation was better.

KENZO OSHIMA ( Japan) said his country had held high-level meetings with the Burundi side, including a visit, by its Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, with the Burundi President.  The two foreign ministers had also held meetings with each other in Tokyo.  At those meetings, several points had been conveyed, including the need to promote dialogue at all levels, through institutionalized dialogue mechanisms.  Also, a regional approach to dialogue was significant in the Great Lakes region of Africa, and, in that regard, the Commission should make use of the existing “3+ Burundi” mechanism.  The professionalization of the police and other security forces was needed to build trust with the people, and efforts must be spent on removing small arms from circulation, which were currently widely available in Burundi.

He asked the minister to specify the types of assistance the country required from the international community.  Also, while the Commission’s mapping document was welcomed, it had not made any mention of Japan.  Indeed, the country had provided support in many areas, such as in mine-clearing activities, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration efforts, and facilitating the reintegration of displaced persons.  It had also contributed to UNICEF’s efforts in that country.

Mr. TOLEDO ( Chile) said that one aspect in consolidating peace was establishing security and good governance.  The latter depended on the rule of law, strong institutions and the separation of powers.  It should also include human rights.  He wished further clarification from the Minister on social and economic development measures.  He agreed with what was in the mapping document, but would like a prioritized list of what it contained.  He would also like more information about the inflow of returning refugees, as well as the need for budgetary support.

JOSEPH NSENGIMANA ( Rwanda) said that in post-conflict situations, with pressing problems on all fronts, it was difficult to identify priorities because everything was a priority.  For that reason, he wished to congratulate the Government of Burundi for successfully identifying those that were the most pressing.  It was important for all actors in the country’s reconstruction to work in a situation of mutual confidence.  Once such confidence was established, then it would be possible to assess progress, especially in civil rights.

While immediate solutions were naturally sought, the partners on the ground must understand that that was a process which they needed to ensure was gradually carried through.  It was also necessary to bolster the Government in its endeavours, by providing it with resources, primarily financial ones, to carry out peace consolidation measures.  Action must be prompt, because the situation on ground could not wait and trends were difficult to reverse.  It was up to the Commission to ensure that the plan was implemented.  A patient could not diagnose his own illness before receiving care; otherwise, he might die.  For that reason, it was important for all to act urgently.

Mr. MELROSE ( United States) said the dialogue currently taking place had given the Commission a better understanding of the situation facing Burundi.  He agreed with the view of France, the United Kingdom and others on the need to identify gaps and to developing a concrete peacebuilding plan.  The Commission should not be seen just as another donor, and needed to play a more strategic role in helping countries reach their peacebuilding goals.  The Commission also needed to be cautious when providing Governments with budgetary support, since such a task more commonly fell under the purview of international financial institutions.

CARMEN MARIA GALLARDO HERNANDEZ ( El Salvador) said that the Commission must now focus on the “intangible” elements of peacebuilding, such as strengthening dialogue and helping the country draft suitable long-term public policies.  It must provide support to a national commission to help rebuild the country’s social fabric and provide space for dialogue, for which outside financial aid was essential.  Civic education was also important to the country -- a change in attitude and culture must permeate the reform of the security system, for instance.  United Nations agencies like the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization could help by providing “education for peace”.  Helping foster national reconciliation should be part of the Commission’s ongoing work.  In addition, there was a need to train and equip the nation’s security forces, alongside judicial reform efforts.

MAGED ABDELAZIZ ( Egypt) said that he would welcome the idea of holding the next Committee meeting in Burundi, and hoped that would be reflected in the document that was to be adopted.  More attention needed to be paid to the issue of documentation.  The documents received today were mostly in French, and he could not commit to speaking about something he did not understand.  If documents were not ready -- available in all United Nations languages -- the meeting should be postponed.  Nonetheless, he would base his comments on the bilateral contacts between his country and Burundi.

He said that the main concern was identifying the gaps and comparing what existed to what was required.  Only then could attention be directed to where the financing would come from.  The confusion was the fault of the Commission, not the Government of Burundi, which should have been advised on what the Commission needed, in terms of establishing comparisons.  Being from the Middle East, he preferred the term “action plan” to “road map”, but the end result should be that the Commission gave more clarity to countries on what it needed for upcoming meetings, rather than leaving that to the Secretariat.

LUIS GUILHERME NASCENTES DA SILVA ( Brazil) said that it went without saying that Burundi’s recovery would be a long-term endeavour of the international community.  Burundi should not become a mere collection of international projects, however.  A work plan reflecting the priorities of the Burundians themselves was needed.  Such a plan should have, as priorities, the functioning of the main State institutions, poverty eradication and basic services to the population.  Reform of the justice sector must be done in conjunction with other areas, such as security, the police apparatus and the corrections sector.

ADONIA AYEBARE ( Uganda) said the Peacebuilding Commission should support the priorities identified by the Government of Burundi itself.  As the chair of the peace process since 1995, Uganda had been careful to respect the priorities of the negotiators, the then-transitional Government and the present Government, which were to promote good governance and to reform the security and judicial sector.  In addition, Uganda believed that the body should improve its working methods by, for example, holding expert meetings and allowing for a proper examination of country reports before holding meetings such as today’s.

He said that, having played a leading role in the peace process, Uganda was well aware of the need to increase and solidify security in the region.  It had worked hard with the United Republic of Tanzania and South Africa to reach a ceasefire agreement and to see that it was being implemented.  Uganda was currently trying to secure a meeting with Burundi at the sidelines of the upcoming Great Lakes regional meeting, at which it would bring up the issue of immunity for exiled leaders.  Securing the immunity of those leaders could perhaps encourage their return to Burundi.  Also, several positive changes were afoot in the region.  For example, Burundi had recently joined the East African Community -- a group comprising Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya and Rwanda.  This meant that Burundi’s Parliament and court system must be harmonized with that of the Community, and augured well for its integration into the wider region.

Mr. KAMANA, the Minister of Good Governance of Burundi, responding to several of the earlier questions posed by delegations, said that one general issue appeared to be whether his country should have offered action plans.  In October, it had been agreed that Burundi should get together with national and international partners to implement what was recommended.  Upon the Commission’s recommendation, a document had been submitted with draft projects on certain priorities.  If those draft projects were acceptable to the Commission, he would meet with partners back in Bujumbura to set up a timetable to implement them.

On the question of budget support, he sensed different views of what that meant.  He was seeking a way to avoid weekly strikes by civil servants and prevent such strikes from spreading to the military and police, since that would cause the country to fall into the abyss again, which would be bad for democracy.  Regarding the judiciary, he wanted to ensure that members were established and paid.  On human rights violations, he was glad that the Secretary-General’s Special Representative had told the truth about what was happening on the ground.  Once the United Nations and his Government were speaking the same language, there could be understanding.

On human rights, it was not possible to get into details about people in prison, such as the representative of the anti-corruption group.  The group in question had lofty ideas and did not depend on one individual.  Individuals could make mistakes, and members of the group could realize that they needed to respect the penal code and not go beyond what the law provided in respect of violations.  He invited members of the Commission to come to Bujumbura to see how things were on the ground.  Courts had thousands of cases in their dockets, but the Government was trying to make preventive detention the exception, not the rule, and it was trying to bring those accused to court within a week.  He expressed the hope that he could go back to Bujumbura with an envelope.

AJAI MALHOTRA ( India) said that the positive response from Burundi had been highly encouraging, including to engage in a mapping exercise and to identify gaps in the peacebuilding process.  Also, that country had done all it could to provide information on what it would do with the money it was to receive, and it was now up to the Commission to act.  Comments in the Chairman’s summary that “a country envelope would be made available in early 2007, subject to the conversion of donor pledges into cash contributions” was worrisome, since it seemed to denote that action would not be immediate.

Mr. CABRAL ( Guinea-Bissau) said he had been gratified to hear that the Minister of Governance had not tried to conceal the nature of the problems facing his country.  Indeed, true dialogue could only take place in an atmosphere of openness.  Agreement was voiced with the statement by the representative of India, who said that the Commission must act urgently to help Burundi.  For example, the Commission had been authorized, in “the establishment, and re-establishment, of essential administrative services” to help with “the payment of civil service salaries and other recurrent costs”.  It followed, therefore, that the Commission should do exactly that.

Mr. MAHMOUD, Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Burundi, said he was delighted that the mapping document was appreciated.  He welcomed any additional information to perfect it.  Burundi had many strategies, including a poverty-reduction strategy paper, a common action plan, an emergency plan, and an action plan for immediate peace consolidation activities.  The Commission might not be aware of them, since they had been sent straight to the Peacebuilding Fund.  He added that, by the end of January, an action plan addressing those elements not financed by the Fund and including the contributions of Government, donors and the United Nations for the next two years, would be finalized.

He said that the Government was working feverishly to translate the medium to long-term goals of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers into a sectoral plan.  In post-conflict situations, there was a huge capacity deficit.  There was no way the international community could do everything for the Government, which needed time to own whatever was presented to the Commission.  He begged the Commission not to further burden the Government of Burundi.  By the time the next meeting was held, a joint action plan for peace consolidation elements would be ready.  It would combine socio-economic elements and those mandated by the Security Council.

Mr. SOW of the World Bank, said that the Burundians had worked hard to determine the next steps; it was up to the Commission to help fine tune those objectives and to put some real shape to those proposed projects.  In this case, the key word was “speed”.  Indeed, Burundi was at a crossroads: the country’s economic pie had shrunk over the last 10 to 13 years.  For instance, to reach the same per capita income level of 1993, the country must grow at a rate of 8 per cent in the next few years.  Given that situation, budget support was a “must” for the next year or two, or else the country would face economic collapse.  Also, Burundi could not enjoy decent medium-term prospects, unless it reached the completion point of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative.

Mr. ABDELAZIZ ( Egypt) said that he appreciated Mr. Mahmoud’s call not to overburden the Government of Burundi, but he also wanted to make sure that the United Nations was not overburdened.  He asked why the action plan had only been sent to the Peacebuilding Fund, but not to the Commission.  He could not accept the document to be adopted by the meeting.  Concrete action was needed to address the needs of the Burundians.  If the Commission went for two months without meetings and without addressing action plans, it was the Commission’s mistake.  He was officially against adopting the Chairman’s summary and called for a recess for consultations.

ISMAEL ABRAÃO GASPAR MARTINS ( Angola), responding to the representative of Egypt, said there was a need for more information on the status of the Peacebuilding Fund, so as to ascertain how to meet the urgent need for assistance requested by Burundi.  Since a resolution adopted earlier on Burundi already indicated what needed to be done, all that remained was to determine how much money should be allocated to that country’s needs.  He agreed with others in saying that certain paragraphs in the Chairman’s summary did not meet with his country’s satisfaction.

HERALDO MUNOZ ( Chile) said that the private sector, namely micro- and small enterprise, had a role to play in economic and democratic transitions.  Such enterprises had a large labour absorption possibility if they were given wide support, and he asked whether they could be made a priority.  The Commission could not stand by and wait, given the pressing needs outlined in Burundi.  The provisions of the Peacebuilding Fund existed to deal with situations where peace might be threatened and could not be confined only to emergency aid.  The Fund was intended to have a catalysing effect on the peace consolidation process, so it was essential not to wait until peace was threatened.  Peace was not firmly rooted in Burundi.  Although the issues were of a long-term nature, there were also pressing and immediate needs to be dealt with, based on political criteria.

In response to the questions raised on the disbursement of funds, CAROLYN MCASKIE, Assistant-Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, said the Fund had been tasked with establishing arrangements on the ground, as well as at Headquarters, to receive and disburse funds, according to a framework established by the Peacebuilding Commission.  The Fund had only just received a priority plan for Burundi; an envelope for the country would be announced once that plan was reviewed.  The total was expected to be in the region of $25 million, although a confirmed figure could only be arrived at once the priority plan was properly reviewed.

In response to concerns voiced by the representative of India, she said it was impossible to operate on the basis of pledges alone.  Such pledges – which, so far, had reached $160 million -- must first be converted to cash.  Indeed, those countries ready to convert their pledges to cash were invited to do so, since the necessary administrative arrangements were now in place.

In addition, she noted that the Fund was not designed to support all the challenges facing the country; rather, its role was that of “catalyst”.  Additional support from multilateral and bilateral donors would be required in the long-run implementation of strategic priorities, as agreed by the Commission and the Burundian Government.  The Office of Peacebuilding Support would do its utmost to ensure that the funds disbursed would reflect the Commission’s and the Burundian Government’s wishes.  Although the Fund’s resources were not extensive, it was nevertheless authorized to apply money towards salaries and other targeted budgetary interventions and would be happy to do so.  In fact, the Fund could act in any manner deemed necessary by the Government of Burundi and its United Nations partners on the ground, within the Commission’s framework.  Additional elaborations could be made by other execution agencies, as needed.

Mr. MATHIEU, of the International Monetary Fund, said that mission had just returned from Burundi, where it had concluded discussions on the fifth review of the macroeconomic and structural reform programme supported by the Poverty Reduction Framework, while proper review was expected to take place in February 2007.  A budget financing gap of about $15 million for 2007 remained to be filled.  Meanwhile, the country had experienced gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate of 5 per cent, with inflation in the low single digits.

He said, however, that a financing shortfall in the Government’s budget had severely affected the implementation of Burundi’s macroeconomic policy.  In response, the authorities had cut non-wage primary expenditure by over 3 per cent of gross domestic product.  But, delays in technical assistance provision and external budget support had caused some political tension and, in turn, had caused a lag in structural reforms.

He went on to say that the outlook for 2007 was for slightly higher growth and continued low inflation.  Technical assistance from the Fund was expected to raise revenues by 20 per cent of gross domestic product, but much would go towards paying for a rise in the wage bill.  A partnership framework for donors providing budget support had been reactivated, with involvement by major international financial institutions.  A technical team would be dispatched by the Fund and a resident policy expert would be posted to the country in early 2007.  The Fund’s 2007 programme would include components to set the conditions for sustained private-sector led growth.  Measures included steps to re-launch the privatization programme, including in the coffee sector.

Mr. AHMAD ( Pakistan) said that the Chairman’s summary did call on the international community to take action on the advice of the Commission.  While asking the international community to address gaps, the Commission was not yet clear what it was asking for, because it had not seen the document explaining what was required and what was at hand.  A priority plan had been submitted to the Peacebuilding Fund, but the Commission had not seen it.  That document contained useful information.  He wished to know which gaps were being addressed, so that they could be taken into account in future discussions.

The Chairman said that Burundi’s minister had tried to identify the gaps during his intervention in the morning, but he agreed that the document would be important to see.

Mr. MALHOTRA ( India) said that a timely response was important.  There was money in the Fund and, if a country wanted emergency help, the Commission needed to respond quickly.  It would be unbelievable if there was not at least some response.  The Commission had been asking for papers and more papers, and Burundi’s Government was doing everything the Commission asked.  The Commission should now give Burundi paper of the colour it was seeking, so that it could pay salaries.  Around $25 million would be fine.  It was important to demonstrate that something in the United Nations worked.

RAYMOND WOLFE ( Jamaica) noted the “valiant attempt” to produce a Chairman’s summary, but asked that the Commission be allowed to reflect on what had been written.  There was no intention to re-negotiate the text, but rather, agree to move in the direction that the representative of India had taken -- to provide immediate budgetary assistance to the Government of Burundi.

Mr. VALENZUELA, of the European Commission, said it was important to refine the mapping exercise as soon as possible, since funds would soon be disbursed on the ground.  Also, despite the excellent work done so far, further input must be solicited, by delegations in the field, to better mobilize those resources.

At the invitation of the Chairman, the Commission suspended its meeting to conduct a five-minute, informal consultation.

Upon resumption of the meeting, Mr. KAMANA, the Minister of Governance of Burundi, said he was delighted to hear that he could return home with “good news”.  After emerging from ten years of strife, the country was doing all it could to achieve stability.  By appealing to the Commission for help, the country had not wanted that body to single-handedly meet Burundi’s needs, but rather to breathe new life into its efforts.  All those participating in the meeting were thanked for their concern regarding the budgetary shortfall, which he hoped could be made up before the Round Table in March 2007.  Hopefully, requests made by the Government at that upcoming Round Table would also meet with acceptance.

The Chairman then said that he would ask the Peacebuilding Support Office to rewrite his summary, based on suggestions received.  Tomorrow, he would circulate the revisions and make sure that Burundi’s Minister would be able to take a summary back to Bujumbura.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record