Gender and Education for All THE LEAP TO EQUALITY

Chapter - Rights, equality and Education for All

Donwload this chapter in PDF

Time-bound targets A further way in which the Dakar goals and the MDGs differ from state commitments under human rights legislation is that they include time-bound targets. This is useful in a number of ways. First, it softens the judgement of ‘being in default’ which is implied for those countries where some human rights targets have not yet been achieved. By introducing a dynamic dimension, it shifts attention from whether or not human rights are being violated, towards consideration of how they will be met over a discrete period of years. This allows space for planning and implementation and for the notion that what really counts is making progress towards the goals, rather than whether or not particular countries are currently in default of their obligations. Second, it facilitates a potentially more inclusive process. Although those states that have not met their reporting obligations under the conventions are most likely to be recalcitrant in other ways, those furthest from guaranteeing human rights to their peoples are likely to be those which have not ratified the Conventions in the first place. In recognition of this, the Dakar goals are potentially able to facilitate dialogue with all governments, irrespective of whether they are signatories to CRC or CEDAW. Third, time-bound targets make the process of goal achievement more tangible and they facilitate more explicit monitoring of progress. As this report demonstrates, it is thereby possible to anticipate how well regions and countries are doing, and to indicate priorities for national or international action in support of their efforts. A related, but important advantage of such an approach is the extent to which international as well as national agents can be held to account. The international community has consistently indicated that no country with a credible plan for achieving EFA will be prevented from implementing it owing to a lack of resources (UNESCO, 2000f). Accordingly the actions of aid agencies in providing resources can be judged in comparison with what is required, in ways that would be difficult if there were no notion of a target date for achieving the goals. In this sense, time-bound targets allow their responsibility to be more explicitly shared between developing and more developed countries, than would otherwise be allowed by a dependence only on the human rights legislative instruments. In summary, the Dakar goals reflect the substance of government education commitments contained in four core human rights treaties, introduced by the United Nations over the years 1976 to 1990, which have subsequently been ratified by the great majority of the world’s governments. The main purpose of supplementing these legally-binding commitments with the goals established in the Dakar Framework, and in the MDGs, is to provide a means whereby political messages and legal commitments – at least at international level – can become mutually reinforcing. While the two MDG education goals are fairly narrowly couched, in comparison with international legal commitments, the Dakar goals go well beyond those set out in the human rights treaties: they establish a more ambitious agenda. Both these sets of goals are time-bound, which brings a number of advantages for planning, for resource mobilization and for monitoring.