Terms of Reference for Implementing two pilot Rule of Law Centres in Mandalay City (Mandalay) and Lashio (Shan)

I. Background Terms of Reference for Implementing two pilot Rule of Law Centres in Mandalay City (Mandalay) and Lashio (Shan) Myanmar is undergoing an historic transition to parliamentary democracy. After more than 30 years of military rule, a progamme of economic liberalization and efforts to bring to an end long running armed conflicts in ethnic minority areas are underway. Although the military retains a strong role in politics, the legislative and judicial branches of government are beginning to assert their independent roles after decades of control by the military. The executive branch too is beginning to open up, and seeking to modernize after a long period of international isolation. There are active discussions underway about constitutional reform, new laws are being proposed at a rapid pace, and openly contested general elections are due in 2015. However, the legacy of policies that systematically undermined legal education, an independent judiciary and the private legal profession, combined with unchecked power of state officials and widespread corruption, have led to a serious lack of public trust in justice-sector institutions and those who are responsible for dispensing justice. Recent research shows that most people avoid using the formal justice system wherever possible. State officials, including police and local level government administrators, are often the only point of contact with official legal remedies for ordinary people, who face arbitrary responses in return. A lack of public awareness of the law, and weak accountability of state actors for enforcing and upholding the law, will take many years of upgrading formal education systems to achieve. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is working to strengthen democratic governance, along with local governance and environmental issues, as part of its country programme (2013-2015) to support sustainable development in Myanmar s transition. A key part of good governance includes promoting respect for the rule of 1

law and access to justice for all. UNDP is working simultaneously to strengthen justice institutions to uphold the rule of law and protect human rights, while also improving access to local justice services for women, ethnic groups and other vulnerable populations. UNDP is achieving these aims by supporting justice institutions to develop policies and plans that respond to public needs such as legal aid and transparent law making processes, including through conducting modern training programmes on substantive and procedural issues. UNDP is also supporting university law departments to implement clinical legal education approaches. In late 2013, under the auspices of the Parliamentary Rule of Law and Tranquility Committee, a Coordinating Committee 1 was established to explore the utility of regional rule of law centres to help fill the gap in knowledge and skills of existing legal professionals through providing intensive legal training. UNDP, at the committee s request, conducted a feasibility study that found that training key officials would have greater impact on rule of law needs in Myanmar if it included attention to issues of local justice concern, and was complemented by a public engagement component to help bridge the gap between institutions and the community they should serve. 2 In recommending this, UNDP found that training alone would have less impact and risk duplication with institutional training programmes. While UNDP also found a need for more extensive provision of community legal services, these were not feasible for testing in a short-term pilot. In adopting UNDP s recommended Model B, the Coordinating Committee has tasked UNDP with implementing two pilots of this model in Lashio (Shan State) and Mandalay (Mandalay Region), for an initial round of three months of activities to be completed before the end of 2014. Lashio and Mandalay were selected for pilots in order to represent both a major metropolitan centre and an ethnically-diverse area facing specific challenges resulting from cross-border crime and the impact of armed conflicts. 1 Please see Annex 1 for the Terms of Reference outlining the roles and responsibilities of the Coordinating Committee. 2 Available at http://www.mm.undp.org/content/dam/myanmar/docs/publications/demogov/undp_mm_bridges _to_justice_report.pdf 2

UNDP is committed to supporting this initial pilot phase of the rule of law centres in a technical advisory role. However, longer term sustainability of this project is a primary consideration. To this end, the Government of Myanmar and the Coordinating Committee will need to assume responsibility for expansion of the project beyond the pilot phase, if the independent evaluation of the pilot phase demonstrates value and effectiveness. Consequently, current UNDP support is based on the understanding that the Government of Myanmar and the Coordinating Committee will work towards assuming ownership over and responsibility for the centres following the initial pilot phase. The shared responsibilities for the pilot phase are reflected in a Timeline agreed to by all parties 3, which includes the Coordinating Committee s responsibility for requesting an independent evaluation of the pilot project. The Government has also committed to ensuring that state funds will be sought to meet most of the costs of any ongoing operation of the centres following the pilot phase, including payment of personnel and running costs for the centres. UNDP seeks to invite bids from an organization, or a group of organizations, to serve as a Contractor for the pilot centres. These Terms of Reference (ToR) provide the scope of work required and additional guidance on how the work should be performed. II. Objectives and Key Results of the Rule of Law Centres The centres seek to respond to two priority rule of law needs: 1. reinforce basic legal training in knowledge, skills and values, and general awareness of the law, for justice sector professionals; and, 2. increase public legal awareness and lay the basis for building public trust in the justice system. To this end, the pilot centres will provide training, with a substantive focus on local justice issues, to existing justice sector professionals, 3 Please see Annex 4 for the Timeline. 3

including judges, law officers/prosecutors, private sector lawyers, law professors, police officers and General Administration Department (GAD) officials. The training will provide officials with knowledge of key human rights-based rule of law principles, such as professional ethics, as well as equipping them with the skills to engage more openly with the communities they serve. In addition, the centres will extend training to selected community representatives on justice issues of local concern, and will support existing civil society leadership to engage with state officials. Although implemented through UNDP s Rule of Law and Access to Justice project, the pilot centres will also provide an opportunity to test the viability of bringing together community and official representatives to guide the work of the centres, through a pilot governance structure, a local advisory board 4, that is being developed by the Coordinating Committee with the technical support of UNDP. This pilot initiative will provide an opportunity to test and evaluate these approaches to supporting basic legal training in knowledge, skills and values and building trust in the justice system, and to generate lessons learned for future activity planning. Key results expected to result from the pilot project include: 1. Basic legal knowledge, skills and values of beneficiaries strengthened; 2. Efforts to strengthen public trust in the justice system initiated; 3. Capacity of participating national trainers strengthened; 4. Beneficiaries supported in developing a public information/awareness strategy on relevant topics and in conducting public outreach forums; 5. Small legal resource library established in each centre; 4 Please see Annex 2 for the proposed Terms of Reference outlining the roles and responsibilities of the Local Advisory Boards. 4

6. Dialogue efforts between justice sector officials and community representatives on rule of law issues strengthened. To ensure that these key results can be effectively and objectively measured during the pilot project, UNDP shall develop a monitoring and evaluation strategy. 5 UNDP shall also carry out a baseline study at the outset of the pilot project to develop a consistent set of reporting data for both centres. The Contractor is expected to implement this M&E strategy for the duration of the contract. Measuring the success in achieving these key results during the pilot project period will focus on: 1. improvements in knowledge, skills and values of the beneficiaries (e.g. knowledge of legal rights and remedies; legal skills and skills in communication, dialogue, public consultation; understanding of ethical responsibilities; understanding of respective roles of justice actors; sensitivity to gender and ethnic dimensions) 2. public attitudinal and behavioral changes of the community beneficiaries willingness or confidence to raise a given problem to different legal actors 3. improvement in training skills, expertise, and values of national trainers (substantive knowledge as well as participatory training and adult learning pedagogy); 4. improvement in developing a public information/awareness strategy in a consultative/inclusive manner; 5. improvement of perceptions of accessibility of legal information resources for target areas and groups; 6. narrowing of gaps between government and community beneficiaries respective perceptions of effectiveness and accessibility of public legal information and justice services (representing development of more common understanding through dialogue). 5 Please see Annex 3 for a preliminary monitoring and evaluation strategy prepared by UNDP. 5

III. Key Activities of the Pilot Rule of Law Centres The key activities of the pilot centres will be to test the viability of: 1. Providing basic legal training in knowledge, skills and values to the target beneficiaries; 2. Mentoring of national trainers through collaboration with international trainers; 3. Supporting the target beneficiaries in developing a public information/awareness strategy on relevant topics and in conducting public outreach forums; 4. Provide a forum for community members and justice-sector officials to seek further information on rule of law issues, including through establishing small legal resource libraries; 5. Promoting dialogue between community members and justice sector officials concerning rule of law issues; 6. Bringing together community and official representatives to guide the work of the centres, through a pilot governance structure, a local advisory board. IV. Implementing the Pilot Rule of Law Centres The Contractor will be expected to implement the two pilots in Lashio and Mandalay. This will involve responsibility for setting up and managing the centres, with assistance from UNDP as detailed below, as well as development of training curriculum and delivery of training to both national trainers and proposed beneficiaries. The duration of the contract will be over a period of 6 months that includes two months of preparatory work, three months of pilot training delivery, and up to one month of analysis and reporting. Further details are provided in the indicative timeline of deliverables, set out in section V below. At the completion of the pilot activities, the project will be subject to an independent evaluation, to be commissioned by the Coordinating Committee. 6

4. 1 UNDP Guidance UNDP shall provide overall technical guidance to the Contractor in the management and implementing arrangements for the centres, to ensure good practices and quality assurance at all steps. UNDP has gained considerable information relevant to this project during previous UNDP programme activities, including justice mapping assessments, stakeholder mapping exercises, and feasibility study consultations conducted in Mandalay Region and Shan State. UNDP shall share this information and resources with the intention to facilitate and streamline the initial set up process for the Contractor, which is particularly important given the tight timelines. In this regard, UNDP shall provide suggestions and input on the following topics to support the Contractor: 1. Location: a. The Government of Myanmar shall identify and secure venues and ensure necessary upgrades or repairs are completed, and receive and store equipment. This will be done in consultation with UNDP b. UNDP shall provide a suggested list of invitees for the opening ceremony of the centres 2. Target beneficiaries: a. UNDP shall provide a suggested draft list of civil society organizations and other beneficiaries to participate as trainees 3. Human resources: a. UNDP shall provide a suggested draft list of candidates for national trainers and national staff positions b. UNDP shall provide a list of resources including organisations that are involved with implementing rule of law related work in Myanmar, to ensure coordination and integration with existing programming, and use of pro bono services where possible 7

4. Training content: a. UNDP shall provide a draft list of existing resource and training materials, indicating Myanmar language availability b. UNDP shall provide suggestions on training times and schedules c. UNDP shall provide a baseline study for monitoring and evaluation (M&E) purposes and shall provide an M&E strategy to be implemented by the Contractor d. UNDP, in collaboration with the Curriculum Advisory Group 6, shall provide a suggested list of training topics 5. Media relations: a. UNDP shall provide a suggested media strategy 4.2 Location Pilot rule of law centres will be implemented in Mandalay city (Mandalay) and Lashio (Shan). The pilot training programmes in both locations will focus on beneficiaries within a single district so as to minimize operational obstacles such as travel time and logistics. In Lashio, this includes four townships, and in Mandalay it includes seven townships. Specific venues for the pilots shall be identified by UNDP in collaboration with the respective state/regional governments of Myanmar, which shall be responsible for bearing the costs of the rent (if any) of the building, and any other associated costs, including maintenance costs, security, electricity and water costs. UNDP shall coordinate with the government around any necessary repairs or upgrades to the building prior to opening. The Contractor is responsible for the organization of a formal opening ceremony of the centres at each location, in collaboration 6 The Curriculum Advisory Group is being established by the Coordinating Committee, and will be composed of a small group of leading Myanmar legal academics, legal professionals and former judicial officials, as well as a representative of UNDP. The group will receive and consider suggestions on curriculum content and design and provide guidance to the Contractor. 8

with UNDP and the Coordinating Committee. UNDP shall provide guidance with a suggested list of invitees, in consultation with the Coordinating Committee. 4.3 Target Beneficiaries The Contractor, in consultation with UNDP and any local advisory board established by the Coordinating Committee, will identify and select trainees to participate in the pilots and determine feasible numbers for participation. At minimum, it is expected that 50 individuals must be trained at each centre during the pilot phase. The groups of trainees should ensure balanced representation between the various target beneficiary groups. A suggested division would be as follows at each location: 1. Law officers - 8 2. Judicial officers/judges - 8 3. Police officers - 8 4. GAD officials - 6 5. Private lawyers (including up to two university law professors)- 10 6. Community Representatives 10 At least 30% of trainees must be women. UNDP shall provide guidance with a suggested list of civil society organizations from which community representative trainees may be selected. 4.4 Training Design and Methodology The Contractor will be expected to develop a detailed project design and workplan within the first month including a training curriculum containing content, structure and methodology. The finalized curricula for both centres are to be completed by the end of the first month of the contract. The project design should be informed by the results of a baseline study that shall be conducted by UNDP before the Contractor commences work. Sustainability and ownership are paramount for this project. In order 9

to promote that, the project design should feature a training of trainers approach, with an emphasis on building the capacity of national trainers. The Contractor should also ensure other sustainability measures are in place, such as videotaping training sessions for future use, and building the capacity of justice official trainees to continue to pass on their skills and knowledge to their colleagues. 7 To this end, the Contractor should employ a strategy of identifying and supporting the capacity building of trainees who show interest and promise in replicating trainings themselves. The sub-sections below provide further guidance: 4.4.1 Training Content The feasibility study identified some basic topics focused on local legal issues for the training. These include land redistribution, drug cultivation and trafficking, human trafficking, youth justice and violence against women and children. The Curriculum Advisory Group will further guide the design of the curriculum. The Coordinating Committee has emphasized the need for inclusion of content on legal and professional ethics and integrity. Other skills such as dialogue and public engagement should also be incorporated. The content of the training should be developed in such a way as to highlight rule of law principles, including respect for human rights standards, an independent and impartial judiciary, legal empowerment, gender equality and access to justice. The content, methodology, and structure of the curriculum design will be finalized by the Contractor by the end of the first month of the contract, in consultation with the Curriculum Advisory Group. UNDP s Chief Technical Advisor on Rule of Law will serve as a member on the Curriculum Advisory Group. The proposed curriculum should also be consulted on by any local advisory board 7 For example, UNDP notes the success of an earlier training seminar in Nay Pyi Taw, which was subsequently replicated spontaneously by attendees upon return to their offices. 10

established by the Coordinating Committee. 4.4.2 Duration, Form and Structure The actual training of beneficiaries will be conducted over a period of three months, following two months of preparatory time, commencing in July 2014. Therefore, curriculum development must be completed and approved by the end of the first month. Training of national trainers will occur in month two, prior to the opening of the centres. The feasibility study records differences of opinion as to whether civil society representatives could be trained together with public officials. Many state officials were willing to be trained in a mixed group with members of the public, although some community groups indicated they would prefer to have some separate training first on basic legal awareness. Different approaches could be piloted to test these concerns. The study also found that it is likely not feasible to pull the small number of township level justice officials out of their work commitments for weeks of training at a time. Rather, initial consultations revealed that shorter periods of intensive training, part time training, or a combination of both, would be possible for government officials. The Contractor should ensure that a curriculum is developed that could possibly combine full time intensive study for officials (such as one week per month) with other courses offered on a part time basis either after hours or at weekends. During the weeks where officials are only attending part-time, the centres could still be fully utilized with the training of community representatives or private lawyers, bringing all groups together periodically for certain topics or activities. This would ensure maximum use of the centres resources, broadening their reach, while minimizing disruption to existing institutions. Each centre could also pilot different training configurations. 11

The Contractor should employ international best practices in capacity development methodology, such as through interactive learning techniques and practical skills-based training, as well as ensuring gender sensitivity in all aspects of the training. The methodology should also be tailored to the specificities of Myanmar s context, including provision of materials and teaching in Myanmar language and other relevant considerations. All training materials/handouts are to be provided in Myanmar language. UNDP shall provide guidance with a list of existing resource and training materials, indicating Myanmar language translation availability. Recognizing the varying contexts and legal issues specific to Mandalay and Lashio respectively, although the curriculum design will feature core common elements, it will also reflect emphasis on differing contextual issues in each location. The Contractor will teach the curriculum incorporating a training of trainers approach with an emphasis on capacity development of national trainers and mentoring by international trainers. 4.5 Human Resources Including Trainers In close coordination with UNDP, the Contractor is responsible for providing the following human resources within months 1-2 in accordance with this ToR. Recruitment of national staff and trainers is the responsibility of the Contractor and should be conducted via an open and competitive process, based on clearly identified criteria, as noted below. 4.5.1 International Trainers The Contractor will hire a small team of no more than five international trainers. One will be a team leader who will also function as the training coordinator for both centres with a view to ensuring that there is coordination and sharing of information between the two centres at all times. The team leader/coordinator should be available at all times for a period of at least six months (including the period of evaluation). The team leader may be based in either Mandalay or Lashio, at the discretion of the Contractor, but 12

is expected to spend time working with the centres in both locations. The remaining international trainers will be placed in the two centres and should commence work at the start of the second month, when training of national trainers will begin. The Contractor may choose to utilize additional international trainers from other organizations, on an in-kind or pro bono basis, for specific topics or activities. UNDP might also have specialized trainers available at times. The Contractor has final responsibility for arranging all necessary travel and visas for international trainers. UNDP shall support this effort and the Ministry of National Planning and Economic Development has committed to help ensure timely provision of visas for all people involved in the rule of law centres project. The Contractor will communicate directly with that Ministry around visa issues. 4.5.2 National Trainers The Contractor will hire and train at least six national trainers, three each for the two centres. UNDP shall provide guidance with a suggested list of potential candidates, identified during UNDP s rule of law programme activities to date. Criteria for recruiting national trainers shall include: demonstrated experience in delivering rule of law or related training; and familiarity with the Myanmar legal system and/or local justice issues. All trainers will be available for one month of preparation and training (during month two), and three months of training delivery. The Contractor should take steps to ensure the motivation and incentive of the national trainers beyond the pilot phase to promote the sustainability of the project. These steps should include ensuring the availability of the trainers for any extended operation of the centres. It could also include ongoing support and mentoring to the national trainers by the international trainers following completion of the pilot phase, and supporting networking to source 13

opportunities for national trainers to contribute training on an ongoing basis for civil society and government institutions. 4.5.3 National Staff In close coordination with UNDP, the Contractor will be expected to hire two centre managers and two administrative assistants, one for each centre for a period of four months, commencing in month two of the contract. UNDP shall provide guidance with a suggested list of potential candidates for the position of centre managers, identified during UNDP s rule of law programme activities to date. Criteria for recruiting centre managers shall include: technical skills and experience in management and demonstrated experience in responding to the needs of different target groups. A suggested number of four interpreters (two for each of the centres) will also be hired (some of which will need to be hired for the entire contract period). It will also be the responsibility of the Contractor to ensure that the compound is secured, clean and that there is transportation available (e.g. to hire security guards, a driver and a cleaner for each centre). 4.5.4 Local Advisory Board The Contractor is expected to liaise with, report to and collaborate with any local advisory board established by the Coordinating Committee for each of the centres. Proposed terms of reference for the local advisory boards are attached at Annex 2. The attached terms of reference indicate that the local advisory board would be responsible for overseeing the planning of activities and programs at the centres, to ensure that the perspectives of all different stakeholders are taken into account. This will involve monthly meetings to monitor and review each centre s progress against its workplan, and suggest any improvements to the Contractor. The centre manager is therefore responsible for submitting monthly reports to the local advisory board to provide updates on the progress of the centre s work. 14

4.6 IT, Office and Other Equipment The IT, office and other relevant equipment, as detailed in the Financial Proposal Form (at section 7 of the RFP), will be provided in kind by USAID, which will arrange for delivery of the equipment. It will be the responsibility of the Contractor to maintain and repair this equipment, as required, during the duration of the contract. This includes arranging for insurance coverage for the equipment as necessary. However, USAID will provide manufacturer warranties and service agreements for general maintenance. 4.7 Efficiency, Impact and Coordination in Implementation The centres are encouraged to use pro-bono services and seek integration with other existing UNDP programmes. UNDP shall provide guidance with a list of such resources and shall support effective communication lines with organisations that are involved in implementing rule of law related work. The Contractor should seek to maximize efficiency and impact of the activities with other efforts to promote rule of law and access to justice in Myanmar. The Contractor is expected to work closely with UNDP and other stakeholders in Myanmar and elsewhere, and to encourage probono services and supply of equipment and other resources from various development partners, international law universities, law firms and NGOs. The Contractor is also expected to ensure that training materials and skills developed during the pilots are produced in ways that could subsequently be integrated into programmes in law schools (including clinical legal education), institutional training programmes and private legal professional development (including lawyers and paralegals), as well as other UNDP programming on community dialogue and collaborative leadership between local authorities and civil society on justice and governance concerns. This will include ensuring that training sessions are videotaped to be shared for future use, an important sustainability measure. 15

4.8 Media Relations In consultation with UNDP, which shall provide guidance with a suggested media strategy, the Contractor is expected to liaise with local media and ensure that they report on the rule of law and access to justice issues dealt with by the rule of centres including the training and awareness campaigns. 16

4.9 Summary of Key Tasks and Responsible Actors Task Responsible Actor 1. Identify and secure appropriate venues for each Centre, carry out all necessary repairs and upgrades 2. Secure and deliver IT, office and other equipment 3. Develop an M&E strategy and conduct a baseline study V. Expected Deliverables and Timelines Coordinating Committee/Government of Myanmar (in consultation with UNDP) USAID UNDP 4. Develop a media strategy UNDP 5. Recruit and hire key personnel (international trainers, national trainers and national staff) 6. Organize Opening Ceremony for each Centre 7. Identify proposed beneficiaries of the training program 8. Develop project design and workplan 9. Develop and finalize training curricula, including methodology and content 10. Develop training times and schedules 11. Implement M&E strategy designed by UNDP 12. Conduct training of national trainers 13. Conduct training of target beneficiaries for 3 months 14. Conduct post-training assessment of beneficiaries 15. Prepare monthly reports on progress, challenges, and lessons learned during training 16. Prepare final report by 8 December 2014 17. Commission independent evaluation of pilot phase Contractor (with guidance from UNDP and Local Advisory Board) Contractor (with guidance on invitee list from UNDP) Contractor (with guidance from UNDP and Local Advisory Board) Contractor Contractor (in consultation with Curriculum Advisory Group and UNDP) Contractor (with guidance from UNDP) Contractor Contractor Contractor Contractor Contractor Contractor Coordinating Committee The Contractor is expected to achieve the following deliverables 17

within the following timelines. Beginning in July 2014, the first two months will be preparatory months prior to the planned opening of the centres on 1 September 2014, and the next three months will involve the actual implementation of the training programme including the public outreach components, followed by one final month for analysis and wrap up during December 2014. During this final month, the Contractor will be required to cooperate with an independent evaluation of the pilots, to assess the success of the programme. The Contractor will also produce a final report, which must be completed and submitted to UNDP by 8 December 2014. The final report will provide its own assessment of the programme including the lessons learned and develop recommendations and considerations for replicating and upscaling the rule of law centres across the country. 5.1 Within the first two months of the contract: Prepare, in consultation with UNDP, a workplan for implementing the rule of law centres including o Completion of the curriculum, based on the guidance of the Curriculum Advisory Group and incorporating findings from the UNDP baseline study, which includes the training design, content and methodology, with an emphasis on a training of trainers approach, to be completed within the first month Hire the required human resources in consultation with UNDP Identify, in consultation with UNDP, the non-official trainees including lawyers, university law professors/lecturers, and community representatives Deliver training to national trainers during month two and mentor national trainers, as required Ensure that the centre is ready for rolling out trainings Implement the M&E strategy developed by UNDP 5.2 Within month three and month five: Conduct pre-training assessment of identified trainees 18

Commence trainings of target beneficiaries as per the project design for a period of three months, including o 3 weeks intensive training for justice officials over a period of three months, o 3 weeks intensive training for community representatives o Part-time training for officials and community representatives o Joint trainings/sessions for officials and community representatives Identify and conduct targeted training of promising and interested trainers from amongst the target beneficiaries Support the target beneficiaries in developing a public information/awareness strategy on relevant topics and in conducting public outreach forums Conduct post-training assessment of trainees Prepare monthly reports on progress, challenges, and lessons learned, for discussion with UNDP and the Coordinating Committee (including through any local advisory board) 5.3 In the sixth month: Reduce human resources, as the centres will be closed during this final month. Remaining staff will include the team leader and centre manangers only Submit a final report to UNDP by 8 December 2014 with lessons learned and ideas for replication and upscaling of rule of law centres across the country Cooperate with the independent evaluation commissioned by the Coordinating Committee 5.4 In subsequent months: It is anticipated that continuation, replication and/or upscaling of the rule of law centres after the pilot phase might be the course of action advised by the Coordination Committee, if an independent post-pilot evaluation has proven that the project is effective in meeting its objectives. If UNDP is asked to play a role in that, the Contractor may be requested to continue its involvement. This part of the work is called Phase 2 (see more information below in section X). 19

VI. Governance Structures The Contractor will be supervised by UNDP s Rule of Law Programme Specialist, and work in close coordination with UNDP s Rule of Law Officers in Mandalay and Lashio/Taunggyi. In addition, the Contractor will work closely and report as needed to the Coordinating Committee, including through any local advisory board that may be established for each centre. The Pilot Rule of Law Centre working arrangements is attached at Annex 5. VII. Reporting, Mid-course Corrections and Monitoring Arrangements 7.1 In addition to the reports and documents listed out in the deliverables, UNDP can seek periodic reports from the Contractor on specific issues arising out of the implementation of the rule of law centres. 7.2 Implementation of a pilot may necessitate mid-course corrections. Any such corrections after the signing of the contract will require prior approval of UNDP. 7.3 An independent evaluation shall be commissioned by the Coordinating Committee after the conclusion of the pilot activiites. The Contractor is expected to provide all the required information, whether documentary, financial or otherwise, as requested by UNDP and/or any independent evaluator. VIII. Subcontracting The Contractor is encouraged to sub-contract or engage in other ways with other organizations, particularly where this would permit taking advantage of the best expertise in Myanmar and internationally. IX. Selection Criteria 20

The Contractor must have (except for point 9.5): 9.1 Demonstrated experience of a minimum of 7 years in project implementation, management, and monitoring; 9.2 Out of those 7 demonstrated years of experience, at least 5 years should be in implementing training programmes on human rightsbased rule of law and access to justice or related issues; 9.3 Demonstrated knowledge of Myanmar s rule of law development context and/or demonstrated contacts with relevant local organizations; 9.4 Demonstrated experience of implementing projects over the value of USD 1,000,000 cumulatively in the last three years, with at least one contract valued at USD 500,000 or more; 9.5 Demonstrated experience of in conducting rule of law and/or related legal training in Myanmar is a significant asset. X. Duration of the Contract The duration of the contract for Phase 1 is six months, with a possible extension of another four months for Phase 2 (three months implementation and one month reporting). The second phase of the project could involve continuation of the trainings (possibly with new trainees), and it could also involve ongoing mentoring of national trainers and/or expansion of the group of national trainers. XI. Contracting and Fund Disbursement UNDP may consider disbursing the funds in the proportions described below, after it is satisfied that the Contractor has completed the following steps: a) 15% upon submission and acceptance of the workplan and curriculum, to be developed in consultation with the Curriculum Advisory Group, by UNDP, by the end of month one; 21

b) 20% upon mobilization of key personnel, including international trainers, national trainers and national staff, at the start of month two; c) 20% upon opening the pilot centres, including having successfully conducted an opening ceremony in each location and having completed one month of training of the national trainers; d) 25% upon submission of a training report no later than 15 October 2014 (mid-way) that includes lessons learned; e) 20% upon submission of the final report no later than 8 December 2014. 22

Annex 1 Terms of Reference of the Coordinating Committee TERMS OF REFERENCE COORDINATING COMMITTEE FOR PILOT RULE OF LAW CENTRES Background 1. In late 2013, under the auspices of the Pyithu Hluttaw Rule of Law and Tranquility Committee, a group of representatives from the Parliament, Executive and Judiciary met to consider a proposal for regional Rule of Law Centres to help fill the gap in knowledge and skills of existing legal professionals in Myanmar. 2. The group commissioned the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) to conduct a feasibility study on the proposal. The study recommended that two pilot centres should proceed, and that they should combine training on rule of law and local justice issues, together with public awareness, to help bridge the gap between institutions and the community they should serve. 3. The group accepted the recommendations and UNDP agreed to implement two pilot centres in Lashio, Shan State, and Mandalay, Mandalay Region, for an initial round of three months of activities to be completed before the end of 2014. 4. In order to ensure sufficient coordination and to integrate the pilot centres into Myanmar s existing institutional structures, the group requested the Speaker of Parliament to create a formal structure to facilitate the implementation. Purpose 1. A Coordinating Committee ( the Committee ) shall be established to facilitate and monitor the establishment of two pilot Rule of Law Centres, with a view to determining the value of a nation-wide programme of Rule of Law Centres to help improve the rule of law in Myanmar and contribute to the democratic reform agenda. 2. The Committee shall adopt the decisions made prior to its establishment, as described in paragraphs 1-4 above. Composition 3. The Committee shall be composed of the following persons: 23

a. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Chair of the Pyithu Hluttaw Rule of Law and Tranquility Committee. b. U Win Myint, Secretary of the Pyithu Hluttaw Rule of Law and Tranquility Committee c. U Kyaw San, Director General, Union Attorney-General s Office d. U Sein Than, Director General, Office of the Supreme Court of the Union e. U Tin Myint, Deputy Director General, General Administration Department f. Police Brigadier General U Win Naing Tun,, Myanmar Police Force g. Dr Wah Wah Maung, Deputy Director General, Foreign Economic Relations Department, Ministry of National Planning and Economic Development h. Daw Myat Myat So, member of Pyithu Hluttaw Commission for Assessment of Legal Affairs and Special Issues i. Toily Kurbanov, UNDP Country Director (in an ex officio nonvoting capacity, which may be designated as necessary to a UNDP representative) j. A representative of the Embassy of Japan (in an ex officio nonvoting capacity) k. A representative of the Embassy of Australia (in an ex officio nonvoting capacity) l. A representative of USAID (in an ex officio non-voting capacity) m. A representative of DFID (in an ex officio non-voting capacity) Term 4. The Committee shall be chaired by the Chair of the Parliamentary Rule of Law and Tranquility Committee. 5. Decisions of the Committee shall be made by majority vote, and shall be recorded in minutes prepared by the Committee after each meeting, and subsequently adopted by the Committee. 6. The Chair shall have a casting vote. 7. The Committee shall function until the completion of the activities within its mandate, which should be no later than 31 March 2015. Roles and Responsibilities 8. The Committee s roles and responsibilities shall be: a. To facilitate coordination among relevant actors supporting the centres; b. Maintain quality standards of the activities of the centres; 24

c. To make recommendations to the UNDP Rule of Law Output Board on improvements in the implementation of the centres; d. To ensure that sufficient financial resources are provided to enable the pilot centres to complete their activities efficiently and effectively; e. To create a local advisory board for each pilot centre i. Adopt Terms of References for the local advisory boards; ii. The Committee may decide to invite the Chair of each local advisory board to attend Committee meetings; f. To commission an independent evaluation of the pilot centres which would take place after the pilot period of activity, based on the baseline established at the outset of the pilots; g. To make recommendations on any future roll out of the centres. 25

Annex 2 Terms of Reference of the Local Advisory Boards TERMS OF REFERENCE LOCAL ADVISORY BOARDS FOR PILOT RULE OF LAW CENTRES PURPOSE 1. For each of the pilot Rule of Law Centres established in Lashio and Mandalay by the Coordinating Committee, and implemented with the assistance of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), there shall be an interim local advisory board ( the Board ). 2. One (1) Board should be created in Lashio and one (1) in Mandalay. 3. The purpose of each Board shall be to provide the overall management and oversight of the Rule of Law Centres in their respective locations. COMPOSITION & TERMS OF SERVICE 4. The Boards shall be representative of the legal profession and local justice system, and of the community they serve. The Board will be composed of eleven (11) voting members, of whom at least four (4) shall be women, and one (1) non-voting member from UNDP. 5. Members of the Board shall include: a. Four (4) Justice System Representatives, one (1) to be appointed from each of the following institutions: i. State/Regional Advocate-General s Office (AGO) ii. Chief Justice s Office (CJO) iii. Myanmar Police Force (MPF) iv. General Administration Department (GAD) b. Two (2) Representatives selected by the Committee from the list of legal practitioners maintained by the AGO for legal aid purposes i.e., two (2) qualified lawyers practicing in each area. c. Community Representatives, comprised of two (2) of local civil society leaders and three (3) members of parliament. One member of parliament should be from the State/Regional Hluttaw, one from the Amyotha and one from the Pyithu Hluttaw. d. One (1) representative from UNDP. 26

SELECTION AND APPOINTMENT 6. The nominated representatives of the government institutions should be proposed by their institutions. 7. The nominated representatives of the private legal profession shall be compiled by a sub-committee. 8. Nominations for Community Representatives shall be submitted by UNDP to the Coordinating Committee pursuant to a public call for nominations. 9. The Coordinating Committee shall select two Community Representatives based on the following criteria: a. Familiarity and/or experience with local justice issues; b. Familiarity and/or experience with management and good administration practices; c. Demonstrated professionalism, integrity and commitment to public service; d. No conflict of interest in relation to activities of the Centre; e. Resident in Mandalay/Lashio. 10. The Coordinating Committee shall ensure that the overall composition of the Board reflects the ethnic diversity of the community which the Centre is established to serve. 11. The Board shall elect a Chair from among those members who are representatives of the legal profession, community and parliament. 12. Decision of the board shall be taken by majority vote. The Chair shall have a casting vote. SCOPE OF WORK, FUNCTIONS & RESPONSIBILITIES 13. The Board shall be an independent body with responsibility for overseeing the Rule of Law Centres to ensure that in its work the perspectives of all different stakeholders are taken into account. However, the day-to-day operational management of the Centre will be the responsibility of its staff, in particular the Centre Manager, in accordance with UNDP rules and procedures. 14. The Board shall carry out the following functions and responsibilities: a. Oversee the planning of activities and programs. b. Meet monthly to: i. review the Centre s progress against its workplan, based on monthly reports from the Centre Manager; ii. suggest any improvements to the implementing partners. 27

c. At the conclusion of the pilot period, the Board shall prepare and submit a report to the Coordinating Committee on the overall achievements of the Centre, and any lessons learned that may be relevant to a decision as to whether to continue Rule of Law Centres. 28

Annex 3 UNDP Preliminary Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy 1. Identifying Indicators The impact of the training on rule of law and justice outcomes would not be expected to be immediately measurable during the pilot period. But intermediate indicators of impacts could compare against baseline assessments at the start of the training and focus on post-training improvements in knowledge, skills and attitudes of the learners. Such indicators might address: Increased confidence in their own legal knowledge, skills and values Improved understanding of ethical responsibilities Increased knowledge of legal rights and remedies Increased confidence that they are potential leaders and agents of change for rule of law development Improved understanding of respective roles of others in the justice chain Enlarged networks that they can contact for guidance and assistance Increased sensitivity to different needs of women and men, girls and boys, and of different ethnic/minority groups, and how to address these differences in practice Increased skills in communication, negotiation, dialogue, public awareness raising and creating action plans Other intermediate indicators that are measurable during the timeframe of the pilots could focus on whether learners have concrete plans to improve their work. Learners could have assignments combined with their training that creates evaluative records, such as: Journals of what they are learning and how they will use it Concrete written plans on how they will use what they are learning Establishment of contact networks of learners (and trainers) such as a Facebook network, for on-going communications post-training In addition, certain institutional changes that affect the incentive and ability of learners to apply their training can provide intermediate indicators of improved justice outcomes that are also measurable by the end of the pilots. Such indicators might address: Professional advancement opportunities for state actors successfully completing the training Institutionalized process to solicit and support appropriate innovation suggestions proposed by learners Enrolment of lawyers in legal aid networks with specific commitment of future time to pro bono case work The involvement of community representatives in the Rule of Law Centers seeks to impact on strengthening public trust in the justice system and improved 29

public information and dialogue on rule of law issues. Indicators in these areas could seek to measure attitudinal and behavioral changes in the broader communities served, related to: Community members familiarity with sources of information on their justice concerns, and their familiarity with relevant processes and law-related institutions Community members' reported willingness or confidence to raise a given problem (land dispute, violence, corruption) to different legal actors (lawyer, police, courts, administrators/committees) Community members' actual decisions to seek legal assistance or legal remedies where they are available Ratings of justice users on satisfaction with resolution of their cases, and whether a complainant would turn to the justice system again in similar circumstances. Whether the public understands rules better and whether they follow them, in relation to common justice complaints and concerns Public ratings of the level and effectiveness of relevant government information that is shared with them Gap between government perceptions of and public ratings related to the level and effectiveness of relevant government information that is shared with the public (where joint training, information raising and dialogue efforts should help to close the gap) Justice user experience related to requests for bribes Public perceptions ratings of the effectiveness of anti-corruption measures Gap between government perceptions of and public ratings related to effectiveness of anti-corruption measures (where joint training, information raising and dialogue efforts should help to close the gap) For all of these indicators, measuring differences among different members of the community is needed to assess differences in impacts on different groups, including men/women, different ethnic/minority groups, those living in extreme poverty, and so on. 2. Laying the groundwork for measuring longer-term impacts During the pilots, cooperation with justice actors to establish of systems for collection and analysis of data to measure longer term impact on justice outcomes for people could also be piloted, and followed up during later points in any Phase II programme roll-out. For example, such data could track objective measures such the number of cases filed on specific topics (such as sexual or domestic violence) as a gauge of complainants confidence in whether they expect to encounter a helpful legal response. It could also track measures of the quality of the process employed by judges and law officers in such cases (such as, in cases of sexual or domestic violence, protections of victim confidentiality and shields from inappropriate victim-blaming lines of questioning), and of the outcomes and judicial remedies that resulted, including the speed of delivering outcomes and the subsequent enforcement of remedies. If possible, the data collection should be 30