UN-Reform, Human Rights & Conflict Prevention

Good afternoon. Am I on? You can hear me? Okay, perfect. Good afternoon, Excellencies and colleagues. Welcome, everyone. My name is Jenna Russo. I'm the Director of Research at the International Peace Institute and the head of the Brian Urquhart Center for Peace Operations and Peacebuilding. And it's my pleasure to moderate today's discussion on advancing peacebuilding through human rights. And we'll have a specific look at Colombia and Liberia. And I want to especially thank our hosts, which also include the two host countries that we'll be speaking about today, Colombia and Liberia, along with Germany, Switzerland, and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. So thank you so much to all the partners for convening us today. And I also want to extend a big thank you to each of our panelists, who I will introduce in just a moment. Human rights have been at the core of the UN since its from its founding, and as the system faces profound shifts in the current environment, it is critical that we continue centering human rights both in responses to urgent contexts and in discussions around reform of the system. Not only do human rights have tremendous normative value in and of themselves, but they are also critical to the effectiveness of efforts across the peacebuilding and sustaining peace spectrum. Yet human rights are facing tremendous strain within the current political and financial environments, including in mission settings where recent contingency measures have led to the reduction of approximately 25% of personnel and programming. During our discussion today, we'll hear firsthand experiences from the field of how human rights have helped enable broader peacebuilding objectives and opportunities to strengthen human rights mainstreaming across the peace and security pillar. And we'll also hear how the UN80 reform initiative can strengthen system-wide coherence on human rights and amplify its contributions to peacebuilding. So we're very excited about this discussion, but before I turn to our panelists, I'm pleased to welcome Ambassador Frank Guter, Permanent Representative of Switzerland, to provide opening remarks. Ambassador, you have the floor.

Thank you very much. And also from my side, many thanks to you and all the panelists for being available today, and I look forward to an interesting discussion. This event is part of the first Peacebuilding Week here in New York, and this Peacebuilding Week takes place at a pivotal moment for the United Nations. On the one hand, we are celebrating the 20th anniversaries of the Peacebuilding Commission, the Peacebuilding Fund, and the Human Rights Council. And on the other hand, the UN is suffering from geopolitical tensions, underfunding, and a severe liquidity crisis. Many parts of the organizations are cutting costs while discussing reforms to make the UN better equipped to reach the people it serves. So it is hence particularly opportune to reflect on how the UN can remain both effective and true to its our founding values and serve the people. As co-chair of the Human Rights and Conflict Prevention Caucus, I'm extremely pleased to welcome a very distinguished panel of speakers. Together, all of them have vast experiences from within and outside the UN system on issues like policy work, day-to-day operations, and system-wide reform. Their insights will help us explore a central question: How can we ensure that human rights are not merely an appendix to peacebuilding, but one of their central pillars? This question matters because the evidence is clear. Human rights, peace and security, as well as development, are not separate agendas. They are mutually reinforcing. Time and again, experience has shown that societies are more resilient, institutions more legitimate, and peace more sustainable when human rights are respected. Placing human rights at the center of prevention and peacebuilding is therefore not simply a normative choice, but a strategic one. It means addressing the drivers of instability before they erupt into violent conflict. It means tackling exclusion, discrimination, and inequality. In short, it means investing in the conditions that make peace durable. We look forward to hearing more about these experiences in the context of Colombia and Liberia. As we continue to advance the implementation of the twin resolutions on sustaining peace, we should seize this opportunity to strengthen the links between the organization's different pillars. Reform should reinforce the normative foundations of the UN. Initiatives such as the recently, recently established UN Human Rights Group can play an important role in this endeavor. We must also recognize that realizing this vision requires political and financial commitment. For many years, expectations on the human rights pillar have increased while political support and resources at times have lagged behind. If we genuinely want more effective peacebuilding and a stronger culture of prevention, we must be prepared to invest in institutions, capacities, and partnerships. The Human Rights and Conflict Prevention Caucus is one example of how member states translate this vision into practice. Over the last 10 years, the caucus has worked closely with OHCHR to strengthen the links between Geneva and New York, promote preventive diplomacy, and highlight how human rights contribute to conflict prevention, peacebuilding, and sustaining peace. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Ambassador, and thank you for emphasizing both the normative and strategic dividends that human rights have in peacebuilding contexts. Next, I will turn to our first panel of speakers, and we're very fortunate to have with us today Guy Ryder, who is Under-Secretary-General for Policy, followed by Claudia Fuentes Julio, Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, and Sigrid Gruner, Deputy Executive Director of the Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation. And to ensure we have time to hear from each of our speakers, I'm kindly going to ask each speaker to speak for no more than 5 to 7 minutes for the first round of intervention so that we have time to come to the room. Mr. Ryder, I'll start with you. Thank you so much for joining us today. Of course, you've been central in helping to lead the Secretary-General's UN80 initiative. What challenges and opportunities does UN80 provide to transversely integrate human rights across the other UN pillars, including in peace and security. Over to you.

Well, thank you very much, Jenna, and thank you to those who have brought us together for this very important discussion in the context of this very encouraging Peacebuilding Week, very important. Look, the UN80 initiative, I think,, but it does speak to some of the imperatives that we are here to think about. The first thing I think I need to say by way of preamble, as it were, about UN80 is the metric of success for UN80 will be the extent to which it improves, strengthens the impact of what the United Nations does. It is not an exercise in austerity. It is not an exercise in a management of decline or shrinkage. So I think it is a very important question to ask, as you are, of how UNHCR can materially contribute to the fundamental objectives of prevention and peacebuilding. And I think there are some very clear indicators at this stage of how we are trying to do that. Of course, the most visible result— we can talk about it later on perhaps— is the establishment of the Human Rights Group, which itself is an emanation of the mandate received in the Summit of the Future. It's something UN80 has picked up. It also shows how the substantive policy agenda of the United Nations in a forward-looking sense set out by the Pact for the Future interacts with UN80 to give this greater impact that we're looking for. Now, in respect of the precise issues on the table before us, one of the objectives of UNAID is to strengthen each of the pillars of UN action of the Charter, but it's also to try to reinforce the horizontal connections between those pillars. And of course, one of the fundamental connections is between human rights, and our peace and security pillar, notably prevention and peacebuilding. And to pick up on what the Ambassador has just said so very clearly, everything tells us, and we know, that respect for human rights, protection of human rights, is a major contribution to the prevention of conflict. Denial of human rights is a driver of conflict. And if we look for the signs, we know that where human rights are being weakened, where human rights are under pressure, often this can be a precursor of worse things to come. And history shows us that. And it also shows us that where conflict has occurred, exits from conflict situations are also, I think, secured by protection of human rights. So we have to translate, I think, those very well accepted and understood linkages into coherence in the way that we operate as a UN system, and therefore we have to create these transversal linkages between our pillars. I would make the same point, it's not so much the subject of conversation today with development issues. We are very lucky to have the experiences of Liberia and Colombia to look upon today. From a previous job that I did in the UN system, I know in the case of Colombia the extent to which the defense and promotion of labor rights and the provision of economic and social opportunities was of fundamental importance. In the peace process in that country. It's very clear. Now, there are different ways in which we are translating these linkages into action. The Human Rights Group is an important one. It's about coordination. But I think also there are ongoing processes in the UN system which move in the same direction. I am encouraged that in the new agenda for Peace, which was part of the Summit for the Future, and the Peace Operations Review, which will be forthcoming in the context of UN80, there is very clear recognition of the need to place increased emphasis in the UN's overall activities on prevention and on peacebuilding. This is clearly the music of our moment, and I think the Peace Operations operations review, which you will see in the coming weeks, will I give more substance to how that can be achieved. So I think that we have to understand human rights in this context, not simply as an obligation, something that we have to protect. It's an asset. It's an asset in our hands as we seek to pursue the objectives that we set for ourselves.— so an obligation but also an asset in the field of prevention. There's much more I can say, and perhaps we can continue the conversation about other areas of activity in UNATD. All of the transversal things we are doing to improve system coherence, the enablers, the work we're doing to improve our humanitarian delivery systems, how we are trying to reinforce and rationalize our country-level presence to make sure that it meets the specific needs of different country settings, and regrettably too many of them are characterized by conflict, imminent or real, I think will contribute to the same logic that we are pursuing together. So there are a few thoughts, there are many more, about how UNAT fits into this agenda.

Thank you so much, Mr. Ryder, for starting us off, and I understand you have to leave a little bit early today, So I'm actually going to ask you a follow-up question before I turn to the other panelists, just so we can catch you. Um, can you tell us a little bit more about the UN Human Rights Group that you referred to, uh, any action that has already been taken to operationalize the group and its goal of coordinating human rights systematically across UN activities?

Yeah, thanks. The Human Rights Group is up and running. It's one of the, the first results of the UN 80 initiative, and it was effectively building on a mandate given to— it is building on the mandate given to us from the Summit of the Future 2 years ago. The human rights group held its initial meeting in the margins of the Chief Executive's Bureau board meeting, which took place in Japan last month, chaired by Volker Atatürk, who is responsible under the leadership of the Secretary-General for its operations. I was not present in that meeting, I have to tell you, but the feedback has been extremely positive. And let's be clear, this is not a group which intends to create new mandates. It is a group which is intended to coordinate, to bring coherence, to make sure that human rights consideration are appropriately integrated transversely in all areas of UN action. And I want to say again that the first meeting seems to have been very well received. The work of the principles level group will be underpinned by an interagency working group, which in fact already exists under the Secretary-General's call to action on human rights. An important initiative which made very, very clear the importance which the Secretary-General attaches to this notion that human rights needs to underpin all areas of UN activity. And I think that we are going to find that the group is going to be extraordinarily important in breaking down silos which can sometimes get in the way of the proper connections that we need to make, and also, and it's no less important, ensure that headquarters to ground integration and coordination is properly assured. You know, what's said between principals in meeting rooms like this is not always translated into full understanding of what is required at the national level. We have to make sure that there is a two-way flow of understanding in that regard. Can I just say that the— no, the human rights group, I've said there is, I think,— a movement in terms of accentuating the importance of prevention and peacebuilding. The Peacebuilding Architectural Review, of course, has been seminal in that regard. As I've mentioned, there is a forthcoming Peace Operations Review, which I think will touch on some of these issues, and I think there is a lot of positive momentum in these difficult times to ensure that we meet the imperatives of these times. Thank you.

Thank you so much for that. I really appreciate your time today. Next, I'll turn to Miss Fuentes Julio, um, and hoping we can dig a bit deeper into the substance of today's topic on the potential of human rights work in relation to conflict prevention and peacebuilding. Why are human rights important to center within peacebuilding spaces? I think we're all here because we believe that in some aspect But we'd love to hear from you more about that. And if I may, just following up on what Mr. Ryder said about shifting the perspective so that we're not just seeing human rights as an obligation, but an asset. But when it comes— when push comes to shove and we're actually talking about the allocation of scarce resources, how do we get people who are holding the purse strings on board with that? And, you know, I was in a briefing a week or two ago with some mission representatives talking about the contingency measures in peacekeeping. And I know we need to keep a bit of a space between discussions on reform and the liquidity crisis, and I do definitely appreciate that. But in the SG's own reporting and in what we heard from mission leaders, topics like the protection of civilians, or I should say priorities like the protection of civilians and human rights, are among the most affected tasks in the field right now. So when push comes to shove and resources are being allocated, we're seeing that it's having a massive impact on what we're talking about today. So I'd love to hear more from you. I know that's a lot to put on the table, but the floor is yours and really happy to hear what you have to say.

Thank you so much, Jenna, for your moderation and for your questions. Of course, thank you so much to USG Ryder for being with us today and for what he has said about the importance of human rights in the context of prevention. Let me start also by thanking Switzerland and Germany. For bringing us together in this very important conversation. And as you know, I have been in my role 2 weeks, so a very few days. But what is interesting to say is that I have been repeatedly hearing that the COCOS is a champion of human rights, and in particular is a champion on a very important idea: that human rights are not an afterthought to prevention and peacebuilding, but one of their essential foundations. So at a time in which prevention sometimes struggles to get the political attention, and of course also financial attention that comes attached to it, your leadership has really helped, you know, to me, to move this— the leadership of the COCOF has been fundamental to move this agenda forward. So thank you so much for that. So on the specific question related to the potential of human rights work in conflict prevention and peacebuilding, a few thoughts so we can then continue our conversation. So also, since the beginning of this week, I have attended different discussions. There are so many different meetings going on. I think there are more than 60. It's even confusing. But I have been listening to colleagues, UN colleagues, member states, and field practitioners. And I think through— in all this conversation, the message has been quite clear. Which is that prevention remains our most effective investment. Um, this also, this also resonates with, uh, sorry, I apologize, resonates with a lesson that I have learned as previously as a diplomat and also a scholar, that, that is, societies rarely move from peace to conflict overnight. More often, as you know, tensions accumulate gradually through exclusion, discrimination, inequalities, declining trust in institutions, and the absence of meaningful participation. By the time violence erupts, many warning signs have already been visible, not for months but normally for years. If prevention is our objective, human rights are not just part of the solution, they are one of the most fundamental tools to make prevention possible in practice. So I think, and, and coming back also what UC Ryder is saying in terms of that they are our asset, I think I would like to highlight 3 aspects in which they are really— human rights are a solution and an asset. So one of them is that human rights help us identify risk before they become crisis. That's one. Second, human rights ensure that those most affected by tensions and conflict are part of the solution. And third, human rights help address the grievances that often lie at the root of instability and violence. So let me give examples of each one of, of this. First, Human rights help identify risks before they become crises. Through OHCHR field presence, national human rights institutions, special procedures, treaty bodies, and the Universal Periodic Review, the human rights ecosystem often detects patterns of exclusion, discrimination, shrinking civic space, government deficits, or rising tensions, as I said before, long before they appear in traditional conflict settings. This provides the UN system and member states with valuable early indicators of potential instability and opportunities for preventive action. In many cases, the challenge is not the absence of warning signs, but ensuring that the wider system is able to act on them early enough. This is also why the Twin Resolutions of 2025 review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture recognized the importance of drawing on human rights expertise as part of the toolbox available to support national prevention strategies. In The Gambia, just to come also for examples from the field, support to the implementation of the Truth, Reconciliation and Reparation Commission recommendations helped address unresolved grievances and accountability gaps that, if left unattended, could have undermined confidence in the democratic transition. Human rights expertise helped in the context of The Gambia to translate lessons from past violations into concrete institutional reforms aimed at preventing and renewing stability in the country and social— and foster social cohesion. My second point, which was about human rights, ensure that those most affected by tensions and conflict are part of the solution. So inclusion, inclusion. In Haiti, through a Peace Building Fund-supported initiative, my office, OHCHR, worked with young women in communities affected by gang violence to strengthen their role in local prevention and mediation. These women were trained and supported to identify early signs of escalation, mediate local disputes, and help defuse tensions before they turn into violence. In practice, this meant intervening in neighborhood disputes and community tensions at a stage where trust in formal institutions was quite weak. The project helped create trusted local mediation capacities and demonstrated that when adequately supported, communities themselves can become frontline actions— frontline actors for prevention. Third, an example: human rights help address underlying grievances that frequently drive conflict. Honduras, human rights-based approaches supported efforts to address long-standing dispute over land and natural resources, which is a common pattern of conflict settings in the world. In this case, in Honduras, in the Garífuna Afro-Honduran and rural communities in particular. In practice, this includes strengthening legal empowerment so that affected communities could better assert and defend their land and collective rights, supporting more inclusive dialogue processes between communities, authorities, and other stakeholders, and reinforcing institutional attention to cases of land claims and grievances. These examples come from very different contexts, as you realized. None of these interventions alone resolve, of course, all underlying challenges. Their value lies in showing how human rights, when connected with development, with peacebuilding and political efforts, become part of a broader preventive response. This is precisely what instruments such as the Peacebuilding Fund play a critical role by bringing together different actors and tools in support of more coherent and preventive action. No single actor or instrument can prevent conflict alone. And we want to really emphasize this— effective prevention requires bringing together all the tools and actors available across the UN system: political engagement, development cooperation, peacebuilding support, and human rights expertise all together. One of the most promising aspects of the New Agenda for Peace, the Pact of the Future, and the Peacebuilding Architecture Review is precisely their recognition that these tools are more effective when they work together. And with this, I finish, and of course, I look forward to the comments.

Thank you so much, Ms. Fuentes Julio, and it's really wonderful to be able to hear from you at the beginning of your tenure in this position and really looking forward to continuing to work with you. Next, I'll turn to Sigrid Gruner. Sigrid, maybe you can also get at my question about how we kind of bring everyone on board with this. So from your perspective, what should member states and the broader UN system focus on to ensure a strong human rights architecture that effectively contributes to peacebuilding? Over to you.

Thanks so much, Jenna. And let me start by saying thank you to Germany and Switzerland for hosting us, this important event together, co-sponsored, co-hosted with Liberia and Colombia and in partnership with OHCHR.. And I want to thank you for inviting the Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation to be a part of it. For those of you who are not familiar with us, we're an independent operational foundation based in Uppsala, Sweden, working in the name and legacy of the second Secretary General to support sustainable development and peace. And I suppose we were invited to be a part of this panel not because we're an organization specifically focused on human rights or peacebuilding and prevention, although that is my background and focus,— but because we have as our mission to strengthen the UN as one organization at the center of an effective multilateral system. And in that regard, have over the years been working very closely with different partners to support reform and renewal efforts, including the engagement in the various reviews of the peacebuilding architecture, and also the reviews and reforms to the development system, including those in 2017-2018, which I think are very much at the heart also of the ongoing UNADY reforms to sort of fulfill those, accelerate those that were left unfinished. We work very closely with PBPSO, DCO, the Executive Office, member states, civil society, so we really try to work very broadly with all stakeholders. So I was asked to reflect on what should member states and UN focus on in order to ensure strong human rights architecture that effectively contributes to peacebuilding, and I wanted to focus my few points really on those points that would have most impact at the country level. I think really reinforcing what USG Ryder mentioned, that it's really at the heart of the PBAR resolutions and really critical at this time of crisis within multilateralism to show the UN's impact at the country level. I think it's also been mentioned at every single session that we've heard this year, the importance on addressing the impact, but also on addressing fragmentation and strengthening coherence. So the first point is that human rights analysis really needs to be integrated thoroughly into the common country analysis under the leadership of an empowered resident coordinator that can be the basis for cooperation framework that sets the basis for the UN's work at the country level in agreement with governments. And that should also draw on the recommendations from the human rights pillar, including the Universal Periodic Review. And that these processes need to be inclusive and meaningfully engaging local civil society and human rights actors. And in these processes, member state representatives at the country level also need to be involved so that it helps to strengthen an informed shared understanding of the analysis and the needs and the priorities of the country, including those on human rights, peacebuilding, and prevention. I think getting to that point that USG Ryder mentioned between sometimes that disconnect that, that exists between headquarters, capitals, country level. For this, my second point is that there needs to be greater investment in human rights capacity, both within UN entities and among other partners. It's one of the strongest ways to encourage synergies between human rights and peacebuilding within programming. Human rights advisors have been highly valued where they've been deployed. Just last week, in a dialogue with the Resident Coordinator in Albania, she really emphasized the importance of that function and how that doesn't just serve one entity, but really supports the work of the entire UN system. We've also heard this previously in engagements in Jordan and in Kenya, and in particular there, where there is this combination of a human rights and a peace and development advisor, which are really sort of a very powerful combo when they can work together in support of, again, the entire UN system at the country level. Funding for these positions has been a challenge, similar to that for the Peace and Development Advisers, and so it's important to think about alternative funding modalities for those posts. And we know that they're— that's sort of part of the overall discussion around sort of looking at the different funding mix, and including sort of possible cost-sharing arrangements for these roles also among agencies' funds and programs. And I also just want to note that funding is not just critical for obviously human rights advisors, but is alongside the underfunding of the overall UN's human rights pillar, particularly OHCHR, that depends heavily on unpredictable voluntary funding. So, um, third point is to, uh, to support the UN's normative work, including on human rights, member states should increase resources they channel through pooled funding mechanisms, including the PBF. I think we've heard already from the ASG about the critical role that the PBF can play, but also where they exist, other country-based multi-partner trust funds. I think we'll hear a little bit about from Colombia where one such exists. These type of pooled funding mechanisms are one of the most effective ways to fund the UN's normative work including on human rights. And I just want to draw your attention in that regard to the thematic review that was done on the synergies between human rights and peacebuilding of the— conducted in partnership with OHCHR and supported by Switzerland that looked at 92 PBF-funded projects across 45 countries to really identify the— how integrating human rights tools strengthened conflict prevention. It's a really good study and I encourage you to read it. My fourth point is that the peacebuilding commission has an explicit mandate to break silos—we've heard this—and to promote coherence between human rights development and peace and security pillars and the humanitarian sector. I think Morocco referred to it as the architecture of coherence yesterday, which I kind of liked. The human rights Conflict Prevention Caucus, co-chaired by Switzerland and Germany, which we already heard a little bit about, aims to be a practical— be practical in providing a space for dialogue on these issues and engages across regional group of states in New York committed to placing human rights at the heart of conflict prevention and peacebuilding. The role of the caucus is strategically to identify opportunities for integrating human rights issues and to connect better to colleagues in Geneva. Members in the— of the caucus have in the past identified that one of the priorities of this group has been to find ways to better frame the narrative of human rights, not just as a focus on risks and violations, but also on building blocks for sustaining peace and prevention. This is an important forum, particularly given that many of the caucus members are also members of the PBC, so could potentially use this space more proactively to raise human rights issues, especially in the context of mission drawdown and other transitions in engagement or presence by the UN and broader international community. For example, a discussion on the contribution of regional national human rights bodies to peacebuilding and prevention could be explored in the context of the discussion around national prevention strategies and the discussion on risk and protective factors, which we heard about yesterday, and this new guidance that was developed and launched by CSC, sponsored by Australia, on national prevention strategies. And my final point is that countries can also use the voluntary national review process of progress towards the SDGs and the High-Level Political Forum as opportunities to highlight the importance of human rights in the context of sustaining peace. This could demonstrate leadership and provide key examples from specific country contexts of how human rights and peacebuilding are intrinsically connected in practice. Thank you. Sorry if I went too long.

No, thank you so much for those really concrete examples. I want to take a minute because I know Mr. Ryder needs to leave so he does not miss his flight, which none of us want to happen. So thank you again so much for joining us. And this is the perfect time actually to welcome Scott to come to the table so that we can start our second panel. And as we do that, and please go ahead and come on over to the table, Scott, I think you're coming here. Sigrid, just to pick up on your point about investment in human rights capacity, I always try to remember to point out there's not a shortage of money in the world. And sometimes we talk about how resources are scarce, and I even use that phrase myself. There's not less money, there are just shifting priorities. There is enough money to pay for these things. And sometimes I am sort of shocked when we use the resource scarcity to say how we have to cut the post of a single human rights advisor or a single women protection advisor. We're talking about a single post who is sometimes serving an entire country, and we're suggesting that we don't have the money to cover one post. Focusing on human rights or protection, it makes me think that the resource scarcity is more of an excuse than the actual reason behind it. Sorry to be very provocative. I'm also covering the transition here. Okay, perfect. So now I'm going to turn to our second set of panelists, and then we'll have time to come back to the first panelists as well with some Q&A. So I'm very pleased to welcome Christine Umutoni, the resident excuse me, the Resident Coordinator in Liberia, and Scott Campbell, who is Head of OHCHR in Colombia. And while I won't read their full bios, both Christine and Scott have worked in several countries and regions. So while their comments today will focus on Liberia and Colombia, I want to just kind of say feel free to integrate experiences and thoughts from the many hats you've worn over the years. Christine, I'll turn to you first. Thank you so much for coming all the way to New York to join us today. It's a pleasure to have you. Liberia, of course, is a post-mission context, and therefore we'd love to hear from you about how peacebuilding tools have been mobilized to sustain human rights work and prevent backsliding in Liberia after the peacekeeping mission was drawn down. Over to you.

Thank you. Thank you so much. And let me start by really thank you, Thanking you for thinking of bringing a voice from the field for practical examples, and thank everybody who has helped put this together. So definitely Liberia, I think, is a proof of concept that we can move from peacekeeping, peacebuilding, recovery, and there's hope for sustainability. I will say that, in my opinion, why this has been possible, that we see Liberia sustaining the peace even after UNMIL, after the mission, is that the mission didn't leave abruptly. It was thought through. It was planned. And I think it was very, very important that there was a peacebuilding plan. The plan that was done. And I think the fact that there was a whole thinking around national ownership of whatever is in the plan and also building national institutions, strengthening national institutions, and all this was happening at a time when the UN reform, you know, the peace peacekeeping mission left in 2018. And this is the time exactly when the idea of empowered RRC, empowered UNCT, so sort of moving from the mission to a strong UNCT was quite important. But I should mention at the onset that the country was lucky to benefit from the Peacebuilding Fund. And up to now, we are still benefiting. Its financing of the peacebuilding was quite important. Also the PBCs, because the advocacy on peacebuilding was quite important. So the transition plan positioned human rights as a core of Liberia's sustaining peace agenda, recognizing that peace, development, and human rights were mutually reinforcing. The transition from UNMIL to the UN Country Team, as I already mentioned, was deliberately designed to embed human rights across all pillars of engagement rather than confining it to a standalone sector. So as an example, ensuring continuity of human rights protection post-UNMIL, the central achievement Actually, the plan was preventing a human rights gap of the withdrawal and hence operationalized entire human rights, at least from UNMILOR to the UNCT. And at that time, the government requested for a dedicated, a fully fledged OHCHR presence in Liberia. And to us, this was the deployment of a fully fledged human rights office able to monitor and to provide technical assistance, technical capacity throughout the entire UN system, but also to the country, and helping in managing monitoring, reporting, and engagement with national and international human rights mechanisms. So this moved the idea of a security-based kind of enforcing human rights to more prevention kind of approach. So the transition safeguarded human rights gained by institutionalizing protection functions beyond peacekeeping. And again, national ownership How I want to demonstrate that it was critical, the plan thought through building national institutions, and there are many. There is the Electoral Commission, there is the Anti-Corruption, but I'll focus on the National Human Rights Commission. It was established, it was empowered, and it was really supported to work on the human rights. Education, outreach, and all that. So this reflected the shift from a sort of internally delivered protection, internationally or externally protection mechanisms, to nationally led systems, which was critical. Then I think mainstreaming human rights in everything, you know, the rule of law and accountability. I won't go into the the details because of time, but strengthening accountability mechanisms within the security sector, promoting fairness and arbitrary enforcement of law— non-arbitrary enforcement of law, enhancing focus on protection of civilians and prevention of abuses were all mainstreamed within our accountability and rule of law mechanisms. So again, advancing human rights was central to rebuilding trust in state institutions and reinforcing the rule of law. Then addressing structural drivers of human rights violation. Again, the plan we had— really, the transition plan was very well thought through, and the plan acknowledged that human rights, The challenges are rooted in structural issues, including inequalities and marginalization, so land disputes and corruption cases. So the approach combined institutional reforms and development interventions of peacebuilding efforts. So again, we see that human rights was a driver in all this. So the key message was really that the transitional plan adopted preventive approach by tackling the root causes of human rights violation. Again, protection— promoting inclusion and protection of vulnerable groups. I won't go into the details, but there was a lot of work on women groups, youth groups, you know, victims of sexual violence, and the whole plan on the SGBV, which actually culminated into the Spotlight Initiative, which I have no time to talk to. Then strengthening civil society. The plan had a whole section on the recognizing civil society as critical pillar of accountability. And it called for strengthening civil society capacity to monitor and report human rights violation. So again, sustaining human rights protection requires empowered citizens. And independent oversight. I could go on and on, but the human rights within the peace agenda also were explicit and a foundation for national reconciliation. As you know, there was the— it was a drive of inclusive government and a precondition for long-term stability and development. I think the UN and the government, this transitional plan represented critical shift from mission-driven human rights protection to sustainable, nationally owned, and system-wide approach kind of— to human rights. But I want to give, if I have time, just two examples that proof that sort of can give proof that this works. And one of them is the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and how it was, and now the Office of the War and Economic Crimes, all, by the way, led by OHCHR is the lead. We have 5 agencies, but OHCHR HR is the lead on transitional justice. But also I want to talk a little bit on the elections, but because for us the, the 2023 elections were a test that the country can't go back. And we had a one UN kind of approach to this, but with human rights at the center of, of everything. And I could say that The way we saw the country prepare for these elections, the way they were conducted, the way the training of human rights to the security sector, to the civil society, to the women groups. The SRSG came to the country like 5 times speaking to the top leaders, you know, whether it is President Weah, President Ouattara, to the warlords, to everything and everybody promising that under their watch, you know, whoever is winning or losing, they are going to accept the results and that they cannot see the country slide back. So for me, it was a test point when we had peaceful elections, peaceful transfer of power, that whatever is being preached on human rights is at the core of the Liberians. And I think the main message is strengthening national ownership and national institution, working as a coordinated UN to move this. And of course, my position as Resident Coordinator, making sure that we bring everything together. So thank you so much. I could speak so much about Liberia, but it's really a proof of concept that we can move from peacekeeping, peacebuilding, recovery, and, you know, Going forward, there's a lot on going forward. I can speak about it later, but going forward, we can see that— how do we sustain it? Yeah, thank you.

Thank you so much for sharing that, and I think it's really heartening to hear from some country experiences where they are having good progress. A lot of times it's easy to focus on all the, the countries in context where things aren't going well, and it's— it's fantastic to focus on the good lessons and what we can learn from those. So we really appreciate you sharing those experiences with us today. And Scott, I'll turn to you next. And thanks as well for coming to New York to be with us in person. Can you provide us with some examples of how OHCHR and other human rights actors have helped support the peace process in Colombia?

Over to you.

Oh, thank you, Jenna. Good afternoon, ambassadors, ambassadors. ASG Fuentes Julio, Resident Coordinator Sigrid, colleagues, my thanks to all of the permanent missions for co-organizing and co-hosting this very important event, and a special thanks to the Permanent Mission of Switzerland for making my participation possible. Much appreciated. I'm very pleased to have this opportunity to speak today about UN human rights and our office in Colombia and how we have contributed concretely to peacebuilding in Colombia. It's a very timely discussion as the country finds itself at an inflection point in peacebuilding. And I will try to stay within time. I'm setting my timer. A very skilled diplomat recently told me after I had well exceeded the allotted time of a speech, and I apologized saying, "I'm so sorry," and he said, "No, Scott, don't worry. You weren't too long. You were just overly enthusiastic about the topic." Thank you. I will try to curb my enthusiasm and stay within the time today. Two brief points of background. The first, Colombia is widely considered a peacebuilding success story by many, and this progress has been supported with important, strong international engagement from the Security Council, member states, Peacebuilding Support Office, the MPTF, the UN Verification Mission and DPPA, the UN Country Team, civil society organizations, and many others. And within that, that narrative and that story, the UN Human Rights Office in Colombia has played a key role in both integrating human rights into the negotiations of the framework for peacebuilding, namely the 2016 Peace Accord, and subsequently providing concrete support to the implementation of that accord, and in doing so, helping to address root causes of conflict supporting national ownership, as, as Christine very appropriately emphasized, and preventing relapse into violence. And a second brief point of background, and similar to many points made by co-panelists, human rights violations and diverse forms of inequality were central drivers of over a half century of armed conflict in Colombia, including racial discrimination, political exclusion, deep economic inequality, and land-related human rights issues. And these factors disproportionately affected indigenous populations, Afro-descendants, campesinos, women, and minorities. And while we've seen significant improvements, very important improvements from the period of armed conflict in Colombia, these same human rights factors persist in various forms today, and they remain risks for a renewed conflict. I'll highlight 3 concrete examples, or 3 areas, how the UN Human Rights Office has supported the peace process. First, in the design of the peace accord, integrating human rights concerns into the peace accord negotiation process over years was essential to making sure that the accord would address the root causes of conflict and provide a path towards sustainable peace. Of note, the office contributed through monitoring and analysis of the human rights situation and drawing on a long-standing field presence to provide credible evidence on structural causes of conflict and human rights violations and bringing that to the negotiating table. Secondly, a victim-centered approach, making sure that victim participation, victims' voices, victims' proposals were central to the negotiations of the Accord. Thirdly, technical expertise and providing input grounded in international standards during the long negotiation process in Havana, Cuba, and prior to arriving at the signature of the Accord in 2016. And as a result, the peace agreement assigns 7 distinct roles to the UN Human Rights Office to assist in the implementation. These include support to transitional justice mechanisms, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and the Search for Missing Persons Unit. It also calls upon us to assist with implementation, implementation of the ethnic chapter of the accord, as well as the verification of restorative sanctions that are now being handed down by the Special Jurisdiction for Peace. Secondly, the Office made contributions during the implementation phase of the peace accord. Following its signing. And I'll, I'll focus on our contributions on transitional justice. Um, uh, firstly, the Office supported, uh, 35 analytical reports that helped shape the scope, the methodology, and the priorities of all three of the transitional justice mechanisms: the Special Jurisdiction, the TRC, and the Search for Disappeared Persons Unit. Our monitoring also assisted in identifying patterns of violence and high-level perpetrators, and this informed case prioritization and judicial action by the special jurisdiction. Our monitoring and advocacy also led to and supported searches, specific searches for disappeared people numbering in the hundreds, if not in the thousands. And crucially, we promoted public awareness of the transitional justice process, which in many contexts remains a bit mysterious to the, to the broad public. And we supported victim participation across all three of the mechanisms that I mentioned. And lastly, we provided technical assistance to integrate gender and ethnic approaches to each of the transitional justice mechanisms in addressing the different— differentiated impacts of human rights violations on Indigenous peoples, on Afro-descendant communities. And all of this contributed to key outcomes. Including recognition of gender-based violence and territorial harms in specific cases handled by the Special Jurisdiction and those discussed by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The final area that I'll touch on in terms of our contribution, which was also during the implementation of the Accord, is assisting in shaping public policies that were essential to the implementation of the Peace Accord. And making sure they were aligned with international standards. And just two quick examples. One was providing technical assistance to the National Commission on Security Guarantees and developing the public policy to dismantle criminal organizations, and this was adopted in 2023. And secondly, we supported the 2024 law on women searchers for disappeared persons, from working on initial drafts with civil society to the adoption of the law and now during its, its implementation and promoting participation and alignment with international standards and effective enforcement. I'll conclude with two final points very quickly. First is prevention through human rights monitoring, and our public reporting on the human rights situation, given the centrality of violations as cause of the conflict, continues to help prevent backsliding and renewed violence. And in view of the importance of this aspect, the UN Human Rights Council has mandated us to report annually in Geneva, and including on our technical assistance to the government and to civil society on the role we're playing on, on supporting implementation of the Accord. And not by surprise, the main recommendation of our 2025 annual human rights report is the importance of continuing to implement the 2016 peace accord. And finally, partnerships. Effective integration of human rights into peacebuilding in Colombia has depended very much on strong partnerships with the UN verification mission, with the— across the UN country team, with the OAS, the Organization of American States, civil society, and support from the MPTF and the PBSO, and of course from member states. Most importantly, partnerships with state institutions and government. Those have been key in our supporting of national ownership. All of these collaborations remain essential to sustaining progress, preventing regression, and promoting durable peace.

Many thanks. Thank you so much, Scott. That's really interesting to hear about. And in listening to both you and Christine and many of the aspects that you mention, inclusion, addressing grievances, mending state-society relations. I'm, you know, in my own research, which looks at the relationship between violence and peace, those are really the key ingredients that you have to have for successful, sustainable peace. And so it's really interesting to hear about how human rights is a vehicle to help ensure that those elements exist. And I'm gonna— I'm not gonna turn back to you yet because I want to make sure we have time for the floor, but one question I'm interested in, if we have time for it, Scott, when you talk about the ability to integrate some of these really important things into the 2016 process, how was it that there was an environment in which there was a willingness to integrate all of that really hard work? And today we're in an environment where it seems like there is such a focus on sort of these light-touch deal-making processes that just kicks the can down the road for all of the hard work that really needs to happen. And so I'm curious, what, what were the conditions that enabled that more thorough process to take place? So hopefully we'll be able to come back to that. But in the meantime, I want to open up for our interactive discussion so that folks from the floor have a chance to come in in a couple minutes. If you want to take the floor to make a comment or ask a question, you'll be able to come in by, by pressing the button, and then it's a a bit tricky since we don't have names to call on from the panels. You press the button and, and you have to raise your hand. It's a two-part process. So if you can manage to do the two-part process, then you get to come in. That's the trick. And then I'll do my very best to call on you in order. I would also just kindly ask for the sake of time, for people that want to come in, please do keep your intervention to no more than 2 minutes. But to kick us off, I'm really pleased to turn to two of our other partners for today. First, I would like to turn to Ambassador Raúl Sánchez, who is the Deputy Permanent Representative of Colombia, to provide an initial comment from the floor. So, Ambassador, the floor is yours.

Thank you, thank you, Madam Moderator, and thank you to Switzerland, Germany, and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights for organizing all this discussion. Provides an important opportunity to consider how the UNAD reform can strengthen the contribution of human rights to prevention and peacebuilding. Two quick reactions of what the interventions so far. One, I think that we have to give proper due to the office of the High Commissioner in Colombia. The office is for Colombia much more than the peace process agreed. The office has been in Colombia through harsh times of Colombian violence and Colombian reality, of very dire relations with the government sometimes, but it has stood its ground in helping us as a government, as a state, to create the proper dialogue since maybe more than 25 years. So perhaps it's very important to understand that the office that is placed in Colombia has given us the opportunity as a state to interact properly with what human rights can bring to the table in our reality. For us, the contribution of human rights to prevention and peacebuilding is a pragmatic, conclusive policy question. In conflict-affected settings, decisions made in New York and Geneva translate into human lives. Whether risks are identified before violence escalates, whether threatened communities are heard, or whether victims and survivors can access truth and justice, and whether institutions can prevent further harm. That's why, to react from what ESG was saying, I am very much convinced, learning from Liberia and other experiences, Human rights gives ownership because it's a common language that goes beyond what government can put on writing, in a law, on a law, on a manual. Human rights gives ownership to the person that is 1,000 kilometers away from Bogotá and understands that those are the basic rights that have to be observed, that they are entitled to, and that the international community also observes those rights. So women, Afro-descendants, indigenous people, many communities in Colombia that have evolved in this process of finding peace find human rights as a common denominator of ownership. And that is a very important thing to understand from Colombia and what we have achieved through the collaboration of many partners, many partners such as Switzerland and Germany, many partners such as PBIF and PBC, and how we can empower people on the ground to understand human rights. I think that OHCHR has also supported a very much interesting territorial initiative to improve access to justice, including transitional justice. For women affected by forced disappearance and sexual violence and its victims. It also has given us an intersectional approach to different things that are connected to human rights. As I mentioned, these vulnerable groups and also LGBTIQ+ persons, rural populations, persons with disabilities, and other groups. The lesson from Colombia is clear: prevention is most effective when human rights expertise is present before, during, and after a crisis. And I think that the learning from the experience that we have had, not only from 2016 but before— I want to stress that, that there are many examples from before— I think that we can recommend some things that OHCHR also can can see in Colombia. I think that the office can participate consistently in peace and security planning and briefings, be more involved so that human rights risks and the perspectives of affected communities inform preventive actions. Peacebuilding Fund can also help more in financing instruments to continue to support human rights monitoring, transitional justice, civic space, community-based protection, and the meaningful participation of women in marginalized communities. We had the experience of having Germany as chair of the PBC to visit Colombia and to understand how these women community-led organizations are the key component to create peacebuilding environment in rural areas. Colombia's experience shows that sustained and iterative financing is particularly important. Transitional justice and institutional transformation cannot be achieved through short-term interventions. That is to say that we need to empower many people in Colombia to understand that human rights is their asset, not only the government's or not only a certain group of civil society. We must bring the experience of countries like Colombia and Liberia more consistently into these discussions in other setups. Also, I traveled with Germany and with Morocco to Central African Republic to bring a message that we need to learn from other experiences and we need to break those silos that also were mentioned a little bit in exchanging information. South-South cooperation doesn't belong to any state. It's an asset of countries like Colombia or Central African Republic to learn about peacebuilding. IFIs are working amazingly in CAR, and I'm sure that there are many more examples in Africa. And IFIs can bring to the table this peacebuilding component of how we get to the resources that are there but are not allocated properly. So Colombia remains committed to this agenda. We are committed to share our experience. We are committed to understand our reality. We are committed to key partners, key state partners and key state partners from the UN to understand that even if governments change, there are common grounds that we need to protect. Colombia is not the Colombia of 2010 or 2000. This is the Colombia 2026 with a lot learning the process, with a lot of missed opportunities, but with a lot of new things, an empowered community, an empowered vulnerable society that understands that has assets such as human rights. So we think that the success of Colombia and the success that we see from Liberia, it depends not only on us, because it's our situation, our reality, but also an understanding that we need to prevent violence, We need to enable victims and survivors to exercise their rights to truth, justice, reparation, and guarantees of non-recurrence.

I thank you. Thank you so much, Ambassador. And I do want to thank both you and the representative of Liberia, because I find that both Colombia and Liberia have always been very open and generous in sharing their experiences, both the successes but also the challenges along the way. And I think that's really important to helping inform other contexts. So next, I'm very happy to turn to the Deputy Permanent Representative from Liberia, Ambassador Baba Sylla, who will also provide a comment. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Moderator. Thank you to the permanent missions of Switzerland and Germany, and thanks to all of our co-conveners for bringing us here today to discuss these very pertinent issues. Let me begin— let me start off by saying that there is no human rights without justice and peace. And that often overlooked is that natural resource management issues are also rights issues. And we need to look at those very critically as well. Liberia's experience demonstrates that human rights are not simply normative principles. They are essential tools for preventing conflict, addressing grievances, and sustaining peace. The roots of Liberia's civil conflict were deeply connected to longstanding patterns of exclusion, marginalization, inequality, and the concentration of political and economic power. Greed and grievances coupled with limited access to justice and unequal distribution of opportunities and resources created deep divisions across our society and eroded public trust in state institutions. The consequences were devastating. Years of conflict weakened governance structures, undermined the rule of law, and left many communities feeling excluded from national decision-making processes. Liberia's recovery therefore required more than ending violence. It required addressing the underlying drivers of conflict through a comprehensive human rights and peacebuilding approach. Since the end of the conflict, Liberia has undertaken cross-sectoral reforms aimed at strengthening accountability, promoting justice, ensuring fairness, and rebuilding confidence in public institutions. Reforms in the security sector, governance, and justice sectors have been essential to restoring the rule of law and protecting rights of all citizens. Efforts to expand access to justice, including Establishing and strengthening courts across the country have helped bring legal services closer to communities and provided peaceful mechanisms for resolving disputes. Human rights have served as a guiding framework for promoting inclusion, protecting vulnerable populations, advancing women's participation, and strengthening democratic governance. These reforms have helped foster reconciliation rebuild trust among citizens and the state, and create conditions for peaceful democratic transitions. As the discussions on the UN-aided reform advance, Liberia sees an opportunity to further strengthen justice and human rights institutions through a more integrated and coordinated UN system. A strengthened Resident Coordinator System, A coordinated— strengthening resident coordinator system can play a critical role in ensuring coherence across the development, peacebuilding, human rights, and human rights pillar, while supporting nationally-owned efforts to address the root causes of conflict. UNHCR will also prioritize reforms that reach populations and sectors that have historically experienced exclusion and marginalization. By promoting accountability, equal access to justice, meaningful participation, and respect for human rights, the international community can help build more resilient societies and strengthen public confidence in institutions. Liberia's experience reminds us that sustainable peace is built when people believe that institutions are fair, that their rights are protected, and that grievances can be addressed through peaceful and lawful means. Finally, human rights, justice, accountability, and the rule of law remain indispensable for countries to be peaceful and prosperous. I thank you.

Thank you so much, Ambassador, for, for those comments. And now I'm happy to open the floor. We only have just a few minutes, but maybe we can take a couple of interventions. If you don't mind keeping them brief. Again, apologies, you have to actually raise your hand and then I'll do my best to call on a couple people and then we can turn back to the panelists to respond accordingly. Yes. And if you don't mind, please introduce yourself. Thank you.

Hi, thank you very much, distinguished speakers and guests.

My name is Fiona Zeka. I'm the United Kingdom's peacebuilding policy officer Traveled in from London and very happy to be here in New York for the first time. The UK champions protecting civil and political rights in fragile contexts, and we're really pleased to see how many examples there are of this across the, the UN system. I wonder whether you could speak a bit more towards the challenges you may have faced in protecting or mainstreaming human rights and how these were overcome. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll take a couple more. Yes. Can we get— there we go.

Sarah Habibi from United Nations University Center for Policy Research, the office in Geneva. Very interested in strengthening the connections between human rights and peacebuilding. And I wanted to come back, Jenna, to the question that you raised about enabling conditions.

I think that's a very important one to address.

So if you don't mind, I'd just like to re-raise the question that you posed earlier.

I didn't ask her to do that, but thank you. Yes, Lou.

Thanks. Lou Charbonneau, UN Director at Human Rights Watch. Thanks for organizing this, and good to see everyone here. I just had a simple question about something that has come up in a few of the comments that the human rights group that was promised in the Pact for the Future is now up and running.

And I just wondered if you could give details.

A lot of us have been wondering what it will actually do in practice, how it will work, what impact it will have on what we're discussing here today, you know, what's the real-world significance going to be? Thanks a lot, and welcome to the new ASG. Great to have you in the post. Thanks.

Thank you so much. Any other burning— yes, sir.

It's on? Okay. Thank you. Markus Lenz, and I'm the Deputy Chief for the Peacebuilding Fund Branch in the Peacebuilding and Peace Support Office. So obviously, the Peacebuilding Fund got mentioned a lot, so I felt I do want to raise my hand briefly. The link is not to repeat what has already been said. The Peacebuilding Fund gets asked a lot by member states to support especially transitional justice processes and other human rights dimensions. And so, a bit linked to the last question, I just want to raise awareness. Switzerland, other member states have been strongly supporting work for the UN to also really update our stance on how the UN supports transitional justice. And it's linked to— we have new mechanisms with the human rights groups sort of at the top, which is very important. But since the SG updated his guidance note on transitional justice in 2023, right, which was an important moment which really spoke strongly to how transitional justice is very political and it's a tool for peacebuilding, you know, and we need to be strategic about it, right? So this whole point of saying when we get asked that we don't risk that, you know, that agencies start doing technical assistance projects for transitional justice, that isn't enough. The whole point of it is, and I think you heard it a bit through examples that were here, right, that we need to be very strategic and political and value-driven by it. And so the good thing is we've already since then come together and have again existing working groups at expert level. We have an Interagency Task Force on Transitional Justice. OHCHR and our office co-chair this. That brings together 15 entities, because that's the thing, expertise on this sits in a lot of different places in the UN, right? Clearly in OHCHR and elsewhere, us as a funding instrument that gets asked to fund this a lot. So I just wanted to raise this for participants, you know, that we, we're not starting from scratch on these things. It remains a big challenge, but, um, and less a question, but just to echo a bit and saying that as we shift and also have a more senior level coordination through human rights group, we have already good instruments to have transmission belts back into the country level, right? Because we're here to support our colleagues on the ground better in this way. Thank you. Thank you so much.

So, for the sake of time, I'm going to turn back to the panelists. I'll ask you to keep your responses quite short, but ASG, maybe I could turn to you first, if that's okay, to come in on a couple of those points.

Okay, thank you so much. So, let me get into a couple, not all the questions, but a couple. First, The challenges in mainstreaming— there are actually many challenges in mainstreaming. I think in general states and also the UN has tended to work in silos, meaning we have three pillars in these organizations and normally the three pillars work in a separate manner and there sometimes the channels of communications and of coordinating still remains quite difficult between them for different reasons, in terms of the processes that we follow, in terms of the way also financing structure and so on. I think one, one of the objectives also of the UNHCR these days is precisely looking at that, in terms of how we can work in a more efficient manner throughout, you know, the different pillars and throughout the different institutions, agency programs that we have precisely because of that, because we need to be the coordinator on many aspects. One of them is mainstreaming human rights, um, because in this panel was very clear the link between, um, prevention and human rights and the link between prevention and peace and the critical role that human rights plays. But to be very honest with you, sometimes in our political discussions that is not so clear, and, and in, in some cases member states, uh, try to make clear political difference between the different pillars, and, and that— and our work needs to remain, you know, in that particular silo. So I think the big challenge is that we are able to see the big picture, and in order to see this big picture, we really need to, to work together enough. So coming to the Human Rights Group, it's precisely— that's what we— that's what are we intended to do. Which is one of the mandates of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, which has been always a mandate since its creation. It's to better coordinate the human rights work across the United Nations, or the UN family, if you want to put it that way. So, so this is precisely the main objective of this human rights group. So, is to institutionalize human rights coordination internally across the United Nations system It will be under the leadership of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and as you already heard, it will be basically a principal-level group that will meet twice a year. Um, there was already a meeting, and there was like, like really great support across the principals in terms of this. But there will be also a working group at a technical level that I'm going to be heading, um, that is now called, I think, the Inter-entity Working Group. It's a little strange name. I will probably name in a different way the group as well. We will— we are working precisely in, in, in terms to make it very implementable, and we will certainly be working on different specific areas, working on, on using what we already have. So the work on transitional justice that has been done, of of course, will be an integral part of what we are doing, but we will looking at issues related to how we better integrate human rights into our regional group, into our regional settings, into the group of the UNCTs, into the, into the resident coordinators, like into that regional local work. We will also be looking at how specifically on to issues related to civic space shrinking, you know, and human rights and, and prevention as well. Um, what I can tell you, and I will be calling for this group soon, soonish, once we have a, a precision, a, a more precise timetable. For now, the member states, we are going to receive, uh, very shortly also a communication in terms of informing about the human rights group and how we are we going to about to continue working together on that.

Thank you. Thank you, ASG. And, you know, I think for all of us that have heard the complaint about silos at the UN, I mean, I've been working in this neighborhood for almost 20 years, and this has been the discussion for as long as I've been here. And I think, you know, we really have to get at the fact that in theory, yes, we all believe integration is important, but the system is not set up structurally to incentivize integration. And if you're not going to deal with that issue so that staff members feel that they are motivated professionally, financially, mandate-wise, that they are incentivized to integrate, then I think it will continue to struggle. Not because people don't believe in it, but just because it's— there are too many demands. So that I think also at a reform level we have to deal with those incentives. Um, Scott, maybe I could turn to you next to talk about the enabling conditions. I'm sorry I'm shortchanging these very important interventions.— but if you can, 1 to 2 minutes, that would be great.

Sure.

No, thanks very much for the important questions, and I will— I'll be very brief. And I think I'll try to link your question, Jenna, with how we were able to get human rights integrated into the negotiation process with the question from the representative of the UK on challenges in mainstreaming. First and foremost, I think during the negotiation process, leadership from the government of Colombia at the time under President— former President Santos and openness from the former rebel group, the ex-FARC, based on, I think, broad recognition of the objective nature, the apolitical nature of the input coming from the United Nations, coming from the human rights field office. Secondly, leadership from member states as well that were involved in the negotiations. Norway and Cuba led years of negotiation. They were joined by Venezuela and Chile. In the negotiation phase. Their leadership and their openness to integrating human rights was key, and now we see that same openness from Switzerland, Germany, Venezuela, and the Netherlands as guarantors of the peace process and their continued openness to making sure that human rights are integrated into ongoing negotiations with armed groups. And lastly, very strong leadership and effective advocacy from Colombian human rights organizations, human rights organizations who were and remain incredibly professional and strong, and their voices at the table during negotiations were key. And just to second the earlier point, but I think Colombia really has been a leader in transitional justice and does have so many lessons, I think, to share with the rest of the world. Thank you. Thank you so much.

I want to provide one more minute each for Sigrid and Christine, if you want to come come back in and any final comments.

Sigrid, I'll turn to you first.

Just very briefly, I think the question around funding, which you raised earlier, how critical that is, and we know that a real focus within the UNAID reform is also around looking at the funding mix. And really, and I think here it's really for member states to thoroughly engage— in this process being led by USG, Jens Vandel, in partnership with others and with Guy Ryder, around how to find the right balance between core financing and earmarked funding, but quality earmarked funding, pooled funding mechanisms, looking at more how to sort of revise and look at the many sort of— I think it was 150 different pooled funds, but how to sort of reform that so that it's more effective mechanism. But also connecting to that, I think, you know, we talked about the human rights advisors. I think in many cases there's an idea to have those situated, located at the regional level so that they can be serving more sort of regionally. And I think in that regard, also connecting this to the conversation around the regional reset and the role of regional commissions, which I think is a whole other set of conversations,, but I think for member states really to fully engage in those dialogues. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Christine, over to you for a final word. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Regarding the UN working together and following national leadership on some of this work, I think as I said, for us, for example, during elections, as the UN, We noticed earlier on that if we don't work together, it won't happen. Because there is the political part of elections, the diplomatic part, the human rights part, then the management of the elections and all that. So all the 5 agencies involved were really working together. And for human rights, for example, It was important throughout the electoral cycle to support the monitoring, the advocacy, the early warning, the security institutions on human rights, but also during the elections for the human rights monitors. You know, we are not allowed to monitor elections there, EU and all those, but to monitor human rights during elections was critical. And the reports that came out, for example, from the elections who were informed other elections that during Nimba, but it also informed the rest of the UN work. So for us, practical test time, you know, force us to work together or otherwise things throw apart. You know, if the SRSG came to talk on politics or diplomacy, if I am doing my good offices, OHCHR is doing it, UNDP, UN Women is working on women's So, as a— and the same thing on the side of the government to whole-of-government approach. So I think that's— but also now building on the peace dividend towards development because if we don't, we are going to slide back. Yes, we've had a good projection and everything, but so now what? What next? So again, looking at the national the Liberia's national plan, and we're grateful to really have this full-fledged Office of Human Rights because during our support to the development of the national plan, human rights was mainstreamed in everything. The same when we were doing our own cooperation framework, the same was happening. Right now, OHCHR has managed to help the government come come up with a document they call the— I think it is something to do with the private sector, yeah. So there is a private sector action plan, human rights and private sector action plan that is happening. They have adopted Defenders policy, the UPR. We just concluded, which was all of government, all of UN, and they presented, and we have now an action plan. So there's so much going on, and we are riding on this UNAET, you know, doing a lot with less. And from what we learned during coming from a huge mission to a simple UN country team, but building, you know, helping the government to still sustain. So I think my message really is around continuing to work together, but knowing that human rights is at the center of everything. Yeah, thank you so much.

Thank you so much for that. And really, thanks to all of the panelists and to the co-hosts today. And to conclude our event, I'm very pleased to turn the floor to Ambassador Boynton, who is the permanent Representative of Germany to the UN for closing remarks.

Over to you.

Well, thank you.

Thank you, Jenna.

Thank you, everybody, for being here, first of all. And I want to start with a word of thanks to the co-hosts, especially both of you, for sharing your experiences of your countries, not only here today, also at the Peacebuilding Commission, but here today as well, and to our Swiss colleagues who are leaders on human rights and peacebuilding, and you've taken the lead here with this event again today, so thank you. Thanks to the panelists. I want to pick up on a few points that I heard today and then make a few remarks on where this leads us here in New York in our work, but— because I think that's important to not have events just be a one-off. I really like that everything you said was forward-looking in many ways, positive in many ways, because these are positive examples and there are so many things you can learn from that, and we need positive stories, and they are out there in what the UN does and what works on country level. Secondly, I mean, it just shows how much experience and knowledge there is in the UN, even if it's siloed. Yes, yes, but, you know, we really can learn a lot from these country experiences. And my third point, and people have heard me say that, my experience from the Peacebuilding Commission is and was when people come from civil society or from the UN system who work in the countries, they have usually more to share and more substantial and practical things to share than we do here in New York, and I include myself. So that is actually so, so helpful, and so thank you for coming and sharing this. There was a lot of substance in what you all said and what we can learn as delegations, whether we're here in New whether you come from Capital or whatever organization you're in. And being educated in this way, I think, leaves us with an obligation to further educate ourselves and educate others. We may be preaching to the converted here on peacebuilding and human rights. I'm sure that's true for many in the room, but, you know, we need to carry that message out there. And how close the interlinkage is connection between human rights and sustaining peace and peacebuilding is not— does not seem to be clear to everyone in the same way at the same time. You know, you, Ace Gee, hinted at that. And it's not only in bad faith, you know, it's knowing how things work and what is important. So one thing I think we can all do is keeping the message going and educating ourselves and others, as I said, because— and secondly, what I think we need to emphasize more is prevention. It came out in a lot of the interventions here, and it was just coming out of the Security Council where we talked about children in armed conflict today, and I made the point there. You know, there's the writings on the wall with many conflictuous situations, let's say, in human rights violations or violations on children rights, for example. It came out here again, so— and it's a bit of a— an empty statement in a way to say, yeah, it's cheaper to prevent than to clean up conflicts afterwards. Everybody intellectually understands that, but it's hard to do, to see the writing on the wall, one, and then find funding to do preventive work. I know that from my own government and own system. If things haven't happened, you need to argue more for why you need funding for something that is cheaper, but it's preventive. And I think keeping the story on prevention prevention going is something that we need to do because that's not undisputed— it's disputed, I was going to say. It's disputed by members of the Council, it's disputed among the membership widely— not widely, but by some, and we need to keep the prevention message going. And thirdly, Jenna, yes, thank you for being provocative. There's an issue of aligning political and financial support with our expectations to ourselves and to the UN. If we want the UN to be effective and to deliver and deliver on the ground, we need to give it funding. And Guy Ryder would nod his head if he were here, maybe you do as well, if you look at the funding of the UN overall, human rights is that small compared to all the rest. And the PBF is that small compared to all the rest. We're big funders of the PBF, and we will remain so, but the message has been to others all through, and it is here today as well, take that to your capitals and to your missions. The PBF is a small instrument, but it does a lot of good, and it can do more with a bit more funding, and it's not really expensive. Neither is the human rights portfolio inside the UN, and to all of us as delegations, well, let's look at the budget in the next proceedings on Fifth Committee. Do we think this Do we think that this is— and you don't need to think in pillars here, you have to think across the pillars— I think, is the human rights part big enough to help peace and security, what the UN is about and should be about in the end? Maybe not, but it's on us, it's on the member states. So there was a lot in it. Thank you for spending your lunchtime with us, especially the panelists, but everybody in the room. There was a lot in it, and it showed what Frank said at the beginning, that, you know, human rights is not an appendix to peace and security. And I really liked Guy Ryder's statement that this is not just an obligation but an asset. Human rights are an asset for peace and security. So let's carry that with us into the afternoon. Thanks.