By Jonathas Azevedo
In 2023, Rede Comuá carried out a review and systematization of its Protection and Security Program [1], which brought a set of learnings for the technical team and its members. In this article, my objective is to share with you, the reader, some of the reflections that this process provoked in us. But first, it is worth a brief presentation of the Program.
About the Safety and Security Program
Created in 2019, the Rede Comuá Protection and Security Program arose from the interest of member organizations in jointly thinking about strategies to resist a context marked by the resurgence of attacks against civil society and the restriction of civic space promoted by the government far-right party then elected and openly against civil society.
In 2020, within the scope of the Capacity Building Program, a Community of Practices dedicated to Protection and Security was established by the Network, where members gathered around training activities, exchanges of experiences and other activities that provided them with tools and references for the development or improvement of its protection and security strategies, processes and protocols. With support from Porticus, activities were also carried out with external partners, such as the School of Activism and the Mattos Filho and VMCA offices, on topics such as comprehensive care, the General Data Protection Law (LGPD) and Legal Security.
In 2021, the Program was integrated into the recently created Incidence Program, assuming its strategic role in the Network's agenda. As Renata Saavedra highlights in the systematization report:
The Network started from the premise that the development and promotion of the Program would help ensure the protection of member organizations and, therefore, the perpetuation of their actions. Thus, the results achieved contributed not only to the security and safeguarding of Network members and their target audiences, but also to mapping the scenario of security problems faced by Brazilian CSOs which, in that context, were under strong public and governmental attack. .
In the same period, resources were mobilized for six member organizations of the Network, within the scope of the Strategic Support Program, so that they could carry out projects for the development of actions and products in the area of protection and security. Between them:
Three member organizations made adjustments to administrative and management processes based on the LGPD;
A member organization developed training activities to guarantee a digitally secure institutional environment, preventing vulnerability to possible attacks;
A member organization performed an audit and reviewed draft contracts;
A member organization developed a self-care fund and held dialogue circles and campaigns on the topic with staff.
Other Program numbers, until 2022, also include:
7 training webinars;
1 face-to-face meeting;
98 people participated in the activities, with an average of 11 organizations and 23 people present per meeting;
6 Network member organizations financially supported;
R$79,900.00 invested in strategic support for Comuá members.
In addition to numbers and products, the member organizations also shared another series of learnings that they built throughout the support received, such as: establishing team engagement and time optimization processes; improvement of team training and awareness processes; adjustment of data sharing processes; construction of infrastructure for data storage; improvement of internal management processes; support for mobilizing resources and strengthening relationships with financiers; protection against cyber attacks.
Such experiences and numbers denote that, although with a relatively small donation to member organizations, it was possible to trigger transformative processes in organizations with regard to protection and security. It caught our attention, however, that we also heard that “it was the first time that the organization received resources for this type of initiative”, that is, the protection and security of organizations, understood here in a broader sense – legal, mental, physical, digital and with a more comprehensive look at organizational health and, in particular, that of teams.
The cartoon above, by artist Ciano Bu, makes up a series of illustrations present in this PonteAponte publication and also served as input for our reflections on the Protection and Security Program
Such testimonies led us to a series of reflections within the Network, especially in relation to what this type of report tells us about philanthropy: after all, whoever looks at the protection and security of our civil society organizations and funds and foundations of the field of socio-environmental justice?
Where is the funding for the safety and security of civil society organizations?
There is growing pressure in the field of philanthropy for a donation of resources that is free, flexible, multi-annual and operational – without strings attached or items exclusively dedicated to activities and based on projects. In other words, resources for the so-called “institutional strengthening”.
Such efforts are commendable (and urgent!). And donors, national and international, must continue to promote such practices. After all, one cannot talk about strong institutions while continuing to subject them to financing logics that trap them in the so-called “starvation cycle”[2] (starvation cycle, in Portuguese), forcing them to be constantly in search of financing and meeting the expectations and demands of its donors instead of focusing on promoting real social transformation.
In this logic of philanthropy, when not used to maintain the organizations' physical spaces (rent, accounts, etc.), institutional strengthening, even though it is an unstamped resource, is commonly dedicated to structuring administrative and financial areas, human resources, fundraising, audits and certifications... In other words, the adaptation of these organizations to a certain logic of what it means to be “strengthened”, consolidating certain structures, processes and procedures that would qualify them to receive, perhaps, more resources from new donors. Implement new projects. Measure results. Accountability. Carry out an audit. Restart the cycle.
This logic, however, seems to ignore factors such as the context briefly mentioned at the beginning of this text. In the case of Brazil, we are talking about the most violent country for environmental activists[3]. Which murders an LGBTQIA+ person every 32 hours[4]. Which breaks records for feminicide, with a woman killed every six hours[5]. That promotes CPIs against civil society organizations and social movements, criminalizing them and reinforcing a narrative of distrust and discredit to the contributions of these groups' struggles to the entire nation[6]. We are talking about a country in which far-right groups proliferate on social media and in public spaces, including schools, orchestrating attacks against activists, journalists, other civil society actors and the population in general, disseminating hate speech and fake news. We are still the country with the highest prevalence of anxiety and depression in the world, with talk of a new pandemic – now mental health[7].
Why, then, in a context like this are we not prioritizing the protection and security of civil society organizations and donor organizations, especially independent philanthropy, which are on the front line of this fight? How can we talk about “institutionally strengthened” organizations if their teams are sick and overworked? If the people who build these organizations often have their rights and existence denied?
The experience of Rede Comuá with its Protection and Security Program has shown that there is, indeed, more that philanthropy can do in these fields, stimulating debate and intentionally promoting the mobilization of resources to ultimately guarantee life of activists, human rights defenders and teams from civil society organizations and their security in the most diverse senses – physical, digital, legal, mental… The challenges, contextual and organizational, are still many. Therefore, it is essential and urgent to look at the development and institutional strengthening of organizations beyond their adaptations to processes or creation of departments. We need living organizations with the resources, networks and capabilities necessary to promote the protection and security of their teams, partners and communities in all their integrity, centering humanity and guaranteeing access to rights in this movement.
1 – Special thanks to Renata Saavedra who supported the Rede Comuá technical team in this systematization.
2 – To learn more, I recommend reading the article in the Stanford Social Innovation Review by the authors, Ann Goggins Gregory and Don Howards.
3 – Second report by Global Witness, available here.
4 – Data from 2022, from the Dossier of Deaths and Violence against LGBTI+ in Brazil – available here.
5 – Data from the Violence Monitor and the Brazilian Public Security Forum – more information available here.
6 – At the time of writing this text, a CPI against the Landless Rural Workers Movement (MST) is underway, while a new CPI for NGOs is also in the process of being implemented.
7 – More information available here.
