Final Technical Reportacpfish2-eu.org/uploads/projects/id242/FTR_new.pdf · Final Technical Report ELABORATION OF A MANUAL ON REGIONAL BEST PRACTICES FOR EVIDENCE GATHERING AND DELIVERY

"Strengthening Fisheries Management in ACP

Countries"

Project Funded by the European Union.

“This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of Agrotec and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.”

“The content of this document does not necessarily reflect the views of the concerned governments.”

Final Technical Report

ELABORATION OF A MANUAL ON REGIONAL BEST PRACTICES FOR

EVIDENCE GATHERING AND DELIVERY OF TRAINING TO MCS

PRACTITIONERS IN DJIBOUTI, ERITREA, KENYA, SOMALIA, SUDAN, AND

TANZANIA

Project ref. N° EA-2.2-B10

Region: East Africa

Country: Djibouti, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, and Tanzania

Date: 8 November 2013

Assignment by:

P J Snijman, KE 1: Senior Fisheries Legal Specialist /Team Leader

J D Kotze, KE 2: MCS Specialist

Management Consultants in Rural Development & Environment

Project Funded by the European Union A project implemented by Agrotec p. 1

Contents

1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................. 7

2 APPROACH TO THE ASSIGNMENT (METHODOLOGY) ....................... 9

2.1 General approach .................................................................................................... 9

2.2 Phases ....................................................................................................................... 9 2.2.1. Phase One ....................................................................................................... 9

2.2.2. Phase 2 ......................................................................................................... 10

2.2.3. Finalisation ................................................................................................... 11

3 COMMENTS ON TERMS OF REFERENCE .............................................. 12

3.1 Purpose and results ....................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Risks and assumptions affecting the execution of the contract .......................... 14

4 ORGANISATION AND METHODOLOGY ................................................. 14

4.1 Delivery of Terms of Reference .................................................................................. 15 4.2 Conduct and details of the assignment including visibility activities ................ 17

4.2.1 Administration, facilities and finance ............................................................................ 17 4.2.2. Consultations ........................................................................................................................... 17 4.2.3. Courtesy visits to the EU Delegations ........................................................................... 17 4.2.4. Visibility ..................................................................................................................................... 18 4.2.5 Output........................................................................................................................................... 18

5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................... 19


LIST OF ANNEXES

Annexe 1 Terms of Reference ………….……………………………………………20

Annexe 2 Work Plan ……….………………………………………………………35

Annexe 3 Itinerary, Institutions and Individuals Consulted …….………………….. 42

Annexe 4 Inception Report1 ….…………………………………………………….50

Annexe 5 List of Reports and Documents Consulted ……………………………..104

Annexe 6 Photographs of project, key activities and events to illustrate field

activities and achieved results …………………………………………..106

Annexe 6.1 Photographs (taken during the theoretical and practical training, 30

September- 4 October 2013) …………………………………………….107

Annexe 6.2 List of Participants and Summary of Evaluation Results ……………….114

Annexe 6.3 Certificate of Attendance ………………………………………………..122

Annexe 6.4 Closing Programme, 4 October 2013 ……………………………………124

Annexe 6.5 Information Note/ Press Release …………………………………………126

Annexe 6.6 Banner ……………………………………………………………………129

Annexe 7 Technical Outputs ……………………………………………………….129

Annexe 7.1 Review and Assessment Consolidated Table ……………………………130

Annexe 7.2 Training Needs Analysis Consolidated Table ……………………………141

Annexe 7.3 Manual on Regional Best Practices in Evidence Gathering for MCS

practitioners ………………………………………………………………147

Annexe 7.4 PowerPoint Presentations ………………………………………………..254

Annexe 8 Post Training Evaluation Questionnaire …………………………………444

1 No comments were made on the Draft Inception Report and it was accepted as the Final Inception

Report.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Consultant would like to thank:

Mr Koane Mindjimba, Regional Manager of the ACP Fish II Programme Regional

Facilitation Unit for Eastern Africa (RFU-EA), for his excellent guidance and

support, as well as personal visit during the delivery of the course.

The three members of the Technical Team (TT) for their assistance, especially in

perusing the first draft of the Manual and providing feedback: Mr Julius P. Mairi

(Principal Fisheries Officer, MLDF, Tanzania); Mr Simtoe Ambakisye (Centre

Director, MFDC, Tanzania); and Mr Gerard Domingue (Compliance Coordinator,

IOTC Secretariat).

All the Focal Points in the respective countries, as well as the officials interviewed,

for the administrative arrangements, welcoming the Key Experts (KEs) and the time

and effort in assisting with the gathering of information. A special thank you to Mrs

Nadia Kroom, Director of Fisheries, Sudan for the effort to arrange for a counter visa

on entry for the Team Leader (TL).

The personnel at MFDC for good organisation and excellent support during the

Regional Training Workshop (RTW) at MFDC.

Mr Yahya Mgawe, CEO, FETA and the Honourable Benedict Ole Nangoro (MP),

Deputy Minister of Livestock and Fisheries Development, for accommodating the

training in Tanzania and conducting the closing of the RTW.

Mr Charles Byarugaba (Principal Fisheries Economist, Fisheries Development

Division and focal point in the host country, Tanzania) and Captain Ernest Bupamba

(Principal Skipper, MLDF, Tanzania) for their assistance with the organisation and

the welcoming of participants.

Lastly, and very importantly, to the participants: Thank you for the attention,

interaction, debates and positive and constructive feedback. It was a pleasure and

privilege to have shared this experience with you.


ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ACP African, Caribbean, and Pacific (Group of States)

CEO Chief Executive Officer

COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa

DFTR Draft Final Technical Report

DSFA Deep Sea Fishing Authority

EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone

EA Eastern Africa

EAC East African Community

ESA-IO Eastern-Southern Africa and Indian Ocean (Programme)

EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone

FA Fisheries Administration

FDD Fisheries Development Division (Tanzania)

FETA Fisheries Education and Training Agency (Tanzania)

FTR Final Technical Report

GDP Gross Domestic Product

IGAD Intergovernmental Authority on Development

IOTC Indian Ocean Tuna Commission

IUU Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (fishing)

KE Key Expert

LTA Lake Tanganyika Authority

LVFO Lake Victoria Fisheries Organisation

MCS Monitoring, Control and Surveillance

MFDC Mbegani Fisheries Development Centre

MLDF Ministry of Livestock Development and Fisheries (Tanzania)

MP Member of Parliament

REC Regional Economic Community

RFB Regional Fishery Body

RFU Regional Facilitation Unit (ACP Fish II)

RTW Regional Training Workshop

SADC Southern African Development Community

SOP Standard Operating Procedure

SWIOFC Southwest Indian Fisheries Commission

TL Team Leader

TO Technical Offer

ToR Terms of Reference

TNA Training Needs Assessment

TT Technical Team


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Eastern Africa (EA) region for the purposes of the implementation of the ACP Fish II

Programme, operating through the Regional Facilitation Unit (RFU) in Kampala, Uganda is

made up of Fisheries Administrations (FAs) in Burundi, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya,

Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda. The six coastal countries in

the region (namely Djibouti, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, and Tanzania) are the subjects

of this assignment.2

A common characteristic across the region is that these countries are all plagued at differing

levels by Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing and trade. Other characteristics

include weaknesses or absence of an effective Monitoring, Control and Surveillance (MCS)

system in place, failure of prosecutions resulting from the poor quality or low levels of skills

in collecting evidence, and barriers to developing MCS regionally. To assist in overcoming

these weaknesses this assignment provided technical assistance and support at the request of

the beneficiary FAs in Djibouti, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan and Tanzania through the

elaboration of a manual on regional best practices for evidence gathering and delivery of

training to MCS practitioners. The rationale of the assignment was therefore to build the

capacity of MCS practitioners for gathering evidence to prosecute individuals and

organisations that contravene existing national fisheries legislation.

The main output of the assignment was the production of a Manual on Regional Best

Practices in Evidence Gathering for MCS Practitioners in the region, and a training workshop

for participants from the participating countries based on the contents of the Manual. The

Terms of Reference (ToR) required the assignment to be conducted in two phases. The first

phase included an analytical review and assessment of the current MCS operations at national

and regional levels to analyse the various strengths, weaknesses or gaps, opportunities and

threats in that regard. The undertaking of a Training Needs Assessment (TNA) related to

evidence gathering was the second important step during this phase. The Key Experts (KEs)

conducted background research to familiarise themselves with the position in the various

countries and conducted in-country visits to Tanzania, Kenya, Sudan, Eritrea and Djibouti,

during which personal consultations took place with various officials involved in the MCS

process.

The KEs commenced with the drafting of the Manual early in the process, as much of the

content relies on international best practice and principles. The drafting process was however

influenced by the results of the Review and Assessment, as well as the TNA and adapted to

the particular environment that fisheries inspectors in the region have to deal with. In

addition, comments by the established Technical Team (TT) and feedback after the pilot

training session were taken into consideration.

The second phase involved the organisation and facilitation of the Regional Training

Workshop (RTW) for the nominated MCS practitioners from the six participating countries,

which was conducted at the Mbegani Fisheries Development Centre (MFDC) in Tanzania

from 30 September to 4 October 2013. Copies of the Manual in loose file format in both

English and French were printed before the Workshop and handed to participants at the

inception of the workshop. Presentations were carried out via PowerPoint and the Workshop

2 This paragraph from the ToR.


culminated in a practical scenario where the attendees had to apply all aspects learnt during

the course. The evaluation of the course by the participants indicated an overwhelmingly

positive response, with 86% of participants describing their overall impression of the course

as very good, and 14% describing it as good. The Manual is currently being printed in a

bound version in both English and French, and copies of the Manual will be distributed to the

participating countries via the Focal Points.

During the initial briefings some additions and clarifications were agreed on, none of which

required any change to the ToR. The most significant of these were that the proposed contents

of the Manual were broadened and the subject matter broken down in more detail.

The ToR sets out various risks and assumptions, none of which posed any threat to the

execution of the assignment. All the key activities set out in the ToR were achieved in full.

Administratively, there were no major challenges, and all the necessary support and facilities

were provided to the KEs throughout their stay in Tanzania, during the respective in-country

visits as well as during the RTW.

The certificates were handed over to the participants and the RTW was officially closed on

Friday 4 October 2013 by Mr Yahya Mgawe, CEO, FETA and the Honourable Benedict Ole

Nangoro (MP), Deputy Minister of Livestock and Fisheries Development in Tanzania. An

information note serving as a press release was finalised and distributed. Banners were

designed and printed for the RTW, and were prominently displayed throughout the

Workshop.

It is recommended that the Manual be utilised as the basis material to present similar courses

to fisheries inspectors in the participating countries, but it can also be used to present similar

courses to fisheries inspectors in other ACP countries. Additionally, it was noted that

Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) on evidence gathering is mostly absent in the

participating countries, and it is recommended that this deficiency be addressed.


1 BACKGROUND

The Eastern Africa (EA) region for the purposes of the implementation of the ACP Fish II

Programme, operating through the Regional Facilitation Unit (RFU) in Kampala, Uganda is

made up of Fisheries Administrations (FAs) in Burundi, Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya,

Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda3. These countries are members

of a variety of Regional Fishery Bodies (RFBs) including the Lake Victoria Fisheries

Organisation (LVFO), the Lake Tanganyika Authority (LTA), the Indian Ocean Tuna

Commission (IOTC), and the Southwest Indian Fisheries Commission (SWIOFC), as well as

Regional Economic Communities (RECs) including the Common Market for Eastern and

Southern Africa (COMESA), the East African Community (EAC), the Intergovernmental

Authority on Development (IGAD), and the Southern African Development Community

(SADC). Most of these countries are also signatories to international instruments for the

conservation and management of their fishery resources.4

The six coastal countries in the region (namely Djibouti, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, and

Tanzania) are the subjects of this assignment. Poverty is still widespread in the region, and

these countries are all classified in the low human development group. The region is endowed

with numerous water bodies including lakes (such as Lake Victoria), rivers, swamps and

other wetlands, and a coastline along the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean of

approximately 8,406 km long and an Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ) of about

1.46 million km2, all of which support significant fishery resources.

The total region’s fish landings (inland and marine fisheries, as well as aquaculture) in 2009

were estimated at about 582,660 tonnes, with 326,020 tonnes in Tanzania (accounting for

56% of the total), followed by Kenya (156,785 tonnes or 26.9%), Sudan (64,550 tonnes or

11.1%), Somalia (18,000 tonnes or 3.1%), Eritrea (over 16,000 tonnes or 2.7%), and Djibouti

(1,300 tonnes or 0.2%). The bulk (almost 85%) of these landings originates from freshwater

sources with only the remaining 15% from the vast marine areas controlled by the region.

Most of the inland fisheries now show many signs of being overfished whereas offshore, EEZ

resources are widely believed to still have room for expansion under sustainable management

and law enforcement systems.

Fisheries in these countries play a crucial role in their respective economies ― contributing

0.4% in Sudan, 0.5% in Kenya, 1.3% in Tanzania, and 3% in Djibouti of their GDP annually,

according to various estimates ― in terms of tax and export revenues and food security,

whilst underpinning the livelihoods of over 3 million people, a major proportion of which

originates from Lake Victoria’s resources.

A common characteristic across the region is that these countries are all plagued at differing

levels by IUU fishing and trade. Other characteristics include weaknesses or absence of an

effective MCS system in place, failure of prosecutions resulting from the poor quality or low

3 This section is an edited version of the assignment Terms of Reference.

4 Including: the 1993 FAO Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management

Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas (Compliance Agreement); the 1995 FAO Code of Conduct for

Responsible Fisheries; the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention

on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of

Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (UN Fish Stocks Agreement, UNFSA) of

20 September 1995; the 2009 UN Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal,

Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (Port State Measures Agreement, PSMA).


levels of skills in collecting evidence, and barriers to developing MCS regionally. To

overcome these weaknesses it is essential that adequate and cost-effective MCS systems and

procedures be put in place and function well both nationally and regionally.

This assignment provided technical assistance and support at the request of the beneficiary

FAs in Djibouti, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, and Tanzania through the elaboration of a

Manual on regional best practices for evidence gathering and delivery of training to MCS

practitioners.

The purpose of the assignment was therefore to build the capacity of MCS practitioners for

gathering evidence to prosecute individuals and organisations that contravene existing

national fisheries legislation.


2 APPROACH TO THE ASSIGNMENT (METHODOLOGY)

2.1 General approach

The purpose of the assignment was to build the capacity of MCS practitioners from the six

participating countries for gathering and handling evidence with a view to tackling IUU

fishing in the region. The assignment drew on related programmes and projects, and

communication in this regard took place early in the process. In addition, a Review and

Assessment Analysis and a Training Needs Analysis were required to inform the process.

The main output of the assignment was the production of a Manual on Regional Best

Practices in Evidence Gathering for MCS Practitioners in the region, and a training workshop

for participants from the participating countries based on the contents of the Manual.

The ToR required the assignment to be conducted in two phases, as set out in more detail

below.

2.2 Phases

2.2.1. Phase One

The first phase included an analytical Review and Assessment of the current MCS operations

at national and regional levels. The objective was to analyse the various strengths,

weaknesses or gaps, opportunities and threats in that regard. The focus of the assessment was

the effectiveness of the evidence gathering procedures leading to the prosecution process,

which includes preparing a case for court.

To assist in this process a review and assessment table was developed, a copy of which was

attached to the Inception Report5. The purpose of this review and assessment was to provide

the necessary legal and factual background to enable the KEs to draft a manual that will be

applicable to the situation in the individual countries as well as the region.

The undertaking of a Training Needs Assessment (TNA) related to evidence gathering was

the second important step during this phase. A questionnaire was prepared to assist in

assessing the situation, a copy of which was attached to the Inception Report6.

Both the table and questionnaire were forwarded to the respective Focal Points prior to the in-

country visits to allow the officials to be interviewed to prepare for the consultations. The

table used to do the review and assessment was also converted into a questionnaire so as to

assist with the remote consultations with the Somalian representatives. As the visit to Sudan

had to be postponed to the first week of September 2013, remote consultation with Sudan also

took place prior to the in-country visit in an effort not to delay the process of preparing a first

draft of the Manual.

5 Annexe 3 to the Inception Report, which is attached as Annexe 4 to this Report.

6 Annexe 4 to the Inception Report, which is attached as Annexe 4 to this Report.


The KEs conducted background research to familiarise themselves with the position in the

various countries and to assist in obtaining as much information as possible prior to the in-

country visits7. The research however mainly provided background information, as the detail

required by the KEs was not covered in any detail in any of these reports.

The composition of the Technical Team (TT) was agreed on during the initial briefing in Dar

es Salaam, and it consisted of the following three members:

Mr Julius P. Mairi, Principal Fisheries Officer, MLDF.

Mr Simtoe Ambakisye, Centre Director, MFDC, or a suitable person nominated by

him.

Mr Gerard Domingue, Compliance Coordinator, IOTC Secretariat, or a suitable

person nominated by the IOTC Executive Secretary.

During the in-country visits personal consultations took place with various officials involved

in the MCS process, and much reliance was placed on the information so provided. This

information was used to complete the Review and Assessment as well as the Training Needs

Assessment Questionnaire. The results of the research and consultations were consolidated in

a table format8.

It was envisaged that ideally the KEs would have joined officials during inspections and

investigations during the in-country visits to obtain a proper grasp of the challenges facing

such officials, but this was impractical due to time constraints and lack of opportunity. Both

KEs however had previous experience with operational training in the region, both in the

marine and freshwater environment.

The KEs commenced with the drafting of the Manual early in the process, as much of the

content relies on international best practice and principles. The drafting process was however

influenced by the results of the Review and Assessment, as well as the Training Needs

Assessment and adapted to the particular environment that fisheries inspectors in the region

have to deal with. In addition, comments by the TT and feedback after the pilot training

session were taken into consideration.

2.2.2. Phase 2

The second phase involved the organisation and facilitation of the Regional Training

Workshop (RTW) for the nominated MCS practitioners from the six participating countries.

The ToR calls for 13 participants including 2 from each of the six participating countries plus

1 representative from IOTC Secretariat. It was already noted in the Inception Report that the

number was increased to 15 participants, so as to provide for an official from the Deep Sea

Fishing Authority (DSFA) and the Zanzibar Fisheries Department to also attend.

During the inception it was confirmed that the proposal in the ToR and Technical Offer (TO)

to utilise the Mbegani Fisheries Development Centre (MFDC) in Bagamoyo, Tanzania as the

venue should be accepted.

A basic approach to the presentation of the course was already proposed in the TO, and the

training was presented accordingly. Copies of the Manual in loose file format in both English

7 A list of reports and documents consulted is attached as Annexe 5 to this Report.

8 The results of the Review and Assessment are given as Annexe 7.1 to this Report, and the results of

the Training Needs Assessment are presented as Annexe 7.2 to this Report.


and French were printed before the workshop and handed to participants at the inception of

the workshop. Presentations were carried out via PowerPoint, which presentations were also

made available to the participants. Practical examples were utilised throughout and the

workshop culminated in a practical scenario where the participants had to apply all aspects

learnt during the course. This exercise also served as a post course assessment tool.

The participants evaluated the course on the final day and the results were overwhelmingly

positive, with 86% of participants describing their overall impression of the course as very

good, and 14% describing it as good.9

2.2.3. Finalisation

The Manual is currently being printed in a bound version in both English and French, and

copies of the Manual will be distributed to the participating countries via the Focal Points.

Ultimately, the Manual must continue to serve as sourcebook for participants to use and to

pass on their increased knowledge and skills to their colleagues. While the Manual is aimed at

fisheries officers and inspectors, it will be equally valuable for other MCS practitioners

involved in the detection and investigation of fisheries offences, such as members of the

police, coast guard and navy.

The requirement in par 4.1.1 of the ToR10

of a monitoring and evaluation system for

measuring the performance of participants and their administrations after the training was

met. However, due to the required time lapse before such an evaluation will serve any

purpose, the evaluation cannot realistically be done within the time limits set for the

execution of the assignment. This should ideally be done a few months after the training, and

a questionnaire to accommodate this was developed.11

9 The summary of the evaluation results is attached as Annexe 6.2 to this Report.

10 Par 4.1.1 in the ToR.

11 See Annexe 8 to this Report.


3 COMMENTS ON TERMS OF REFERENCE

3.1 Purpose and results

In general, the Consultant found the ToR to be clear and concise, with a clear purpose and

expected results. The main results, as set out in Par 2.3 of the ToR, to be achieved are:

Producing a Manual on Regional Best Practices for Evidence Gathering; and Providing training to thirteen nominated MCS practitioners from the six participating

countries in MCS Regional Best Practices in Evidence Gathering and basic

investigation techniques for 5 days.

The Consultant agreed with the approach that the standards for gathering of evidence should

be determined by the standards required for criminal prosecution. While some incidents and

investigations also lead to a form of civil or administrative penalty, a higher degree of care is

required when gathering evidence for the purposes of prosecution, and in light of the fact that

the outcome of an investigation is not always known from the outset, this is the correct

approach to follow. In addition, while the participating countries have different legal regimes,

the principles and practice of the gathering of evidence is largely based on international best

practice.

During the initial briefings of 17 July and 3 August 2013 some additions and clarifications

were agreed on, none of which required any change to the ToR. The most significant of these

were as follows:

It was noted that the ToR do not mention either the DSFA or the Fisheries

Department of Zanzibar, and the importance of involving these two entities was

agreed on, given the separate fisheries legislation of Mainland Tanzania and

Zanzibar, and that of the DSFA, applying to the United Republic of Tanzania. It was

decided to include both of these institutions in the study, and invite their

representatives to the training session, therefore increasing the number of participants

from thirteen to fifteen, allowing for one participant from each institution. It was

remarked that failure to do so, will result in the exclusion of two of the fisheries

departments in the region.

With regard to Phase I, it was agreed that the topics the module would cover do not

constitute an imposition or limitation on the Consultant. Some further additions were

already proposed in the TO and further elaborated on below.

It was stressed that the Manual must build upon and elaborate on the class notes

drafted for the harmonised MCS training modules and methodology for the region

under the Implementation of a Regional Fisheries Strategy for the Eastern-Southern

Africa and Indian Ocean (ESA-IO) Programme (SmartFish Programme).

The contents of the requirement in Par 4.1.1 of the ToR that the Consultant will also

“develop a monitoring and evaluation system for measuring the performance of

participants and their Administration or Organisation as well as the system itself in

achieving the set objectives and targets after the training (in particular by defining the

respective functions of the Administration or Organisation in that regard)” after the

training, was also discussed during the initial briefings. It was agreed that this should

be done via a follow-up questionnaire a month or two after the training.


It was agreed that the pilot training session would take place on Thursday 22 August

in Dar es Salaam, and that it will be attended by a group of experienced MCS

officials, with the necessary experience and background to provide constructive

comments and feedback to the expert.

The ToR listed the following tentative topics to be covered:

securing scenes of fisheries infringements;

conducting investigations;

gathering evidence;

preparation of case files;

handling of witnesses; and

presenting evidence in courts.

During the inception phase, it was accepted that the above subject topics can be further added

to, and in some cases broken down to more detailed sub-headings, and that the Manual will

cover the following:

The law governing the admissibility and weight of Evidence;

The law governing the powers of fisheries inspectors to gather evidence and do

investigations;

Planning of search and seizure operations/investigations, including a general plan

where circumstances do not allow for additional planning;

Assembling a team and the advantages of multi-agency teams;

Equipment required for gathering of evidence and conducting investigations;

The use of notebooks;

Using informants;

Basic surveillance with the focus on observation posts;

Securing the scene of fisheries infringements and basic crime scene management;

Safety considerations at a crime scene;

Handling of suspects and the public at crime scenes;

Arrests;

Interviewing and interrogation of suspects;

Gathering of evidence (including real objects, samples, photographic evidence,

documentary evidence and electronically or computer generated evidence);

Securing the chain of evidence;

Analysis/identification/testing of seized evidence where required;

Interviewing of witnesses;

Taking statements of witnesses;

Conducting follow-up investigations including basic search and seizure;

Preparation of case files/dockets;

Liaising with the prosecution authority;

Preparing for court;

Presenting of evidence in court; and

Testifying in court.


During the drafting process all of the above subject topics were indeed included in the

Manual, with the one exception that safety considerations was not covered as a separate

subject, but rather given attention throughout where applicable, including during the practical

component.

3.2 Risks and assumptions affecting the execution of the contract

The ToR sets out various risks and assumptions.12

There was, based on previous experience in

the region, no fear that the target groups would not be prepared to allocate hours, support the

implementation of the project, and to provide access to relevant data and information. As far

as the security situation was concerned, there were no immediate fears regarding the situation

in Somalia. Purely from a logistical point of view, the unrest in Egypt was noted as a concern

during the inception, as the KE2 needed to travel via Egypt to Eritrea.

None of these risks materialised and the unexpected event of the disastrous fire at the Jomo

Kenyatta International Airport in Nairobi caused a delay of a few hours for the TL, but this

did not affect the execution of the mission.

While the visa application requirements to visit Eritrea and Sudan13

are somewhat taxing,

visits to both these countries did take place without any problems. The stringent travel

controls in Eritrea did however negatively affect the mission- the representatives from Eritrea

indicated that due to the requirement for an exit visa, and the time this process requires, they

would not be able to attend the RTW. A postponement of the Workshop would have

jeopardised the achievement of the time schedule. Acceptance of the invitation by all other

participating countries, with travel arrangements already in place, further made it undesirable,

and virtually impossible, to postpone the Workshop. The decision was made, and

implemented, to fill the two available positions with additional participants of the other

participating countries.14

Some difficulty with entry into Tanzania was foreseen, but both KEs as well as a

representative of the Tanzanian MFDL were present at the Julius Nyerere International

Airport in Dar es Salaam to assist participants on arrival, and safe for some frustrating delays,

all participants were granted entry.

A French interpreter was appointed to interpret during the RTW, but the KEs were unable to

peruse the original legislation of Sudan and Djibouti15

. This however did not cause any

problems as most of the information was obtained via the personal consultations during the

in-country visit 4 ORGANISATION AND METHODOLOGY

12

See Par 3 of the ToR. 13

The visa requirement for Sudan was partly responsible for a delay in the visit, but the Focal Point in

Sudan managed to arrange for a counter-visa on entry. The Key Experts wish to express their gratitude

to Mrs Nadia Kroom for her effort in this regard. 14

From Kenya and Tanzania, as no entry visas would be required. 15

The Sudan legislation is in Arabic, and the Djibouti legislation in French.


4.1 Delivery of Terms of Reference

NO. KEY ACTIVITIES FROM THE

TOR16

ACHIEVEMENT

PHASE 1 (INCEPTION PHASE) 1 Hold initial briefing with the ACP Fish II,

the FDD and the established TT to review

and agree on the purpose of the assignment

and the proposed structure of the study and

methodology

Achieved

See Annexe 3 (Itinerary, Institutions

and Individuals Consulted) for

details.

2 Carry out documentary review and prepare

detailed methodology, calendar and work

plan for the conduct of the assessment of

existing evidence gathering systems and

procedures in the region (at national and

regional levels)

Achieved

See Annexe 2 (Work Plan)

See Annexe 4 (Inception Report) for

proposed methodology

See Annexe 5 (List of Reports and

Documents Consulted)

3 Conduct an analytical review and

assessment of existing MCS systems and

procedures through country visits — in

addition to the place of posting, missions to

two countries each for KE1 and KE2

Achieved



details.

See Annexe 7.1 (Review and

Assessment Consolidated Table)

4 In collaboration with the TT, undertake a

Training Needs Assessment (TNA) of the

Target Group stakeholders

Achieved

See Annexe 7.2 (Training Needs

Assessment Consolidated Table)

5 Develop and pilot test and refine MCS

Training Modules for evidence gathering

Achieved



details

PHASE 2 (IMPLEMENTATION PHASE) 6 In collaboration with the TT, convene a

Regional Training Workshop (RTW) at the

Mbegani Fisheries Development Centre

(MFDC) in Mbegani, Tanzania

Achieved

RTW held at MFDC from 30

September to 4 October 2013

7 Deliver and evaluate the Regional Training

in MCS Best Practices for Evidence

Gathering and Basic Investigation

Techniques (including evaluation) — the

training will be delivered in English and

interpreted in French (for Djiboutian

participants)

Achieved

See Annexe 7.4 (PowerPoint

Presentations)

See Annexe 6.2 (List of Participants

and Summary of Evaluation Results)

16

Taken from Paragraph 4.2 in the ToR.



NO. KEY ACTIVITIES FROM THE

TOR17

ACHIEVEMENT

8 Develop an implementation, monitoring

and evaluation of the proposed system to

measure the performance of participants

and their organisation as well as the system

after the training

Achieved

See Annexe 8 (Post Training

Evaluation Questionnaire

9 Revise and finalise the draft Manual on

Regional Best Practices for Evidence

Gathering taking comments and inputs

received at the RTW into account.

Achieved

See Annexe 7.3 (Manual on

Regional Best Practices in Evidence

Gathering for MCS Practitioners).

4.2 Conduct and details of the assignment

4.2.1 Administration, facilities and finance

Administration: Administratively, there were no major challenges, except for the minor

challenges mentioned in Paragraph 3.2 above. Prior to the arrival of the participants, a

training programme as well as an information note on travel and accommodation

arrangements were distributed to the participants.

Facilities: The KEs were provided with the necessary facilities throughout their stay in

Tanzania, as well as during the respective in-country visits. Intermittent internet access and

regular power failures in Eritrea did limit speedy communication during the visit of the KE2,

but this did not have any effect on the execution of the mission.

The facilities at the training venue at MFDC were good, and all the necessary equipment and

stationary were provided. Power supply was sometimes interrupted, but a back-up generator

was on standby. A faulty air conditioner was speedily replaced.

Finance: The Consultant provided the TL with the necessary funds to take sufficient cash for

all payments of expenses and per diems. All outcomes were achieved and paid for.

4.2.2. Consultations

The KEs were able to meet and consult with the relevant MCS participants during the in-

country visits. The only limitations were that Somalia was excluded from these visits, and that

due to the decentralised structure in Sudan consultations were limited to management

personnel. Additional consultations with the coast guard in Djibouti proved very fruitful.

4.2.3. Courtesy visits to the EU Delegations

The KEs attempted visits to the various EU Delegations, as is required by the ACP Fish II

Guidelines for Inception Briefings, with a fairly high rate of success.18

Their interest and

support is appreciated.

17

Taken from Paragraph 4.2 in the ToR.


4.2.4.Visibility

Mr Hosea G. Mbilinyi, Director, FDD, was invited to formally open the RTW and seen the

nature of the training which did not involve any public participation, it was decided to delay

the release of an information note to the press until after the opening, to be able to report on

that as well. Unfortunately Mr Mbilinyi was not available on the first day of the Workshop

due to a meeting with the Permanent Secretary. However, both Mr Yahya Mgawe, CEO,

FETA and the Honourable Benedict Ole Nangoro (MP), Deputy Minister of Livestock and

Fisheries Development, were available to hand over the certificates to the participants and for

the closing of the training workshop on Friday 4 October 2013, and the press release was

delayed to be able to report on this. An information note in a press release style was finalised

soon afterwards and distributed via the focal point in Tanzania, as well as to the CEO of

FETA and the Director of MFDC. At the date of writing, no press coverage has been

confirmed yet.

Banners were designed and printed for the RTW, and were prominently displayed throughout

the Workshop.

4.2.5 Outputs

The main outputs have been the drafting and publication of the Manual on Regional Best

Practices in Evidence Gathering for MCS Practitioners in the region, and a RTW for

participants from the participating countries based on the contents of the Manual.

The contents of the Manual were broadened and the subject matter broken down in more

detail as discussed above. The Manual has also been translated into French and used during

the workshop (in file format), as well as formally published and distributed to the

participating countries afterwards. The overwhelmingly positive response during the

evaluation of the training workshop by the participants, as well as the compliments received

on the Manual, is highly appreciated.

18

See the details in Annexe 3 (Itinerary, Institutions and Individuals Consulted).


5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The main outputs were fully achieved as set out above. Though the Manual and RTW

focussed on the requirements for the region, the content is largely based on international best

practice and focuses on the practical application of the principles of evidence gathering. As

such it can also be used for training in other ACP countries and regions.

Due to the nature of the subject matter, and the approach followed, the Manual will not easily

become outdated, and can be used for training for years to come.

Also based on the feedback from participants, it is highly recommended that:

The Manual can be utilised as the basis material to present similar courses to fisheries

inspectors in the participating countries; this can be presented by the participants,

with the aid of the Manual, in their respective countries19

.

In the absence of sufficiently experienced officials to present such additional courses

in-country, the assistance of external consultants should be obtained.

The Manual can be utilised as the basis material to present similar courses to fisheries

inspectors in other ACP countries.

In addition, based on the results of the Review and Analysis, it is further recommended that:

the fisheries legislation in some of the participating countries, as far as powers of

fisheries inspectors, creation of offences and penalties and evidentiary provisions

(such as those dealing with VMS evidence) are concerned, is in need of an update –

notably the legislation in Sudan and Somalia20

.

Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) on evidence gathering is mostly absent in the

participating countries, and this deficiency needs to be addressed.

19

The PowerPoint presentations were provided to the participants and can be utilised in the

presentation of such training. 20

Sudan specifically requested such assistance. This remark would also to some degree apply to

Eritrea, but a current ACP Fish II Programme “Technical support to the fisheries administration in

Eritrea to review and update the Fisheries Proclamation 104/1998 EA-1.2-B2A-REL” has resulted in

proposed amendments to the Eritrean legislation, which amendments also cover these aspects.


ANNEXES