Economic Commission for Africa Commission économique pour

l'Afrique P.O. Box 3001,

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

P. O. Box 1423, Accra – Ghana.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL For undertaking in-country national governance assessment on the theme: Elections and the Management of diversity in Africa, and monitoring trends on good governance in Africa using the designed research instruments and methodology by the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) in conjunction with the UNDP.

I. BRIEF PROJECT BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT In 1999 the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) commenced the project on: “Monitoring and Assessing the Progress towards Good Governance in Africa”. The main objective of the project is to track the progress African countries are making on good governance, as governance constitutes the cornerstone of economic progress and development in Africa. The three major outputs of the project are: The African Governance Report (AGR), the AGR National Country Reports and the AGR Country Profiles. The African Governance Report (AGR) assesses and monitors the progress African countries are making on governance, identify capacity gaps in governance institutions, and makes policy recommendations on how to improve governance on the continent. In particular, the 2011 edition seeks to assess the progress African countries are making in using elections as a tool for enhanced management of diversity in Africa.

II. APPLICATION Interested institutions should submit five sets of proposal documents. Each copy must be in a separate and sealed envelope and the five envelopes should then be enclosed in one sealed envelope/package. The five separate envelopes, including the master envelope/package, must each be clearly marked with the name and address of the proposer and be addressed as follows:

AGR III RFP, Deputy Country Director (Operations), UNDP (Room 6), Ring Road East Accra Box 1423 Accra It is the exclusive responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the sealed envelope/package reaches the above address by 14; 00 HRS GMT 15TH October 2010 (Please pick the detailed solicitation Document from the Security Post (Reception) of the UNDP Office, Ring Road East, near the Ghana Fire Service Headquarters, or visit the UNDP Ghana website: http://www.undp-gha.org).

2

Economic Commission for Africa UNITED NATIONS Commission économique pour l'Afrique DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME P.O. Box 3001, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Telephone: (REVISE) Request for Proposal For undertaking in-country national governance assessment on the theme: Elections and the Management of diversity in Africa, and monitoring trends on good governance in Africa using the designed research instruments and methodology by the ECA in conjunction with the UNDP. RFP. No. GPAD-UNECA and UNDP Date: 29th September 2010 Dear Sir/Madam, 1. The Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (herein referred to as the UN) hereby solicit your institution's proposal for undertaking an in-country national governance assessment on the theme: Elections and the Management of Diversity in Africa and monitoring trends on good governance in Africa using a three-part research instrument designed by ECA in conjunction with the UNDP. 2. The request for proposal (RFP) consists of this letter of transmittal, receipt acknowledgement, and the following Appendices: Appendix A: Monitoring Progress Towards Good Governance and the AGRIII

Theme: Elections and the Management of Diversity in Africa: Background information

Appendix B: Methodology and Research Instruments and Tasks to be Performed

Appendix C Qualification Criteria and Points Award System Appendix D: Information on proposing institutions and Financial offer Appendix E: United Nations General Conditions for Contractors. 3. Please note that this document is a RFP and not an invitation to bid. You should also note that the terms set forth in this RFP and your proposal may form a part of any contract should the UN accept your proposal, and that the contract will require compliance with all statements and representations made in the proposal. Should your acknowledgement of

3

receipt of the RFP indicate intention to submit a Proposal, please ensure that your proposal includes the required information in Appendix D. 4. It is anticipated that any contract or contracts entered into as a result of the RFP will be only for as long as it is absolutely necessary for the full execution of the contract. It will, however, not be longer than five months from the agreed date of commencement thereof. Please also note that any contract award resulting from this request shall be subject to the conditions contained in the attached United Nations General Conditions for Contracts (Appendix E). 5. The RFP does not commit the UN to award a contract or to pay any costs incurred in the preparation or submission of proposals, or costs incurred in making necessary preliminary studies for the preparation thereof, or to procure or contract for services or supplies. The UN reserves the right to reject any or all proposals received in response to the RFP and to negotiate with any of the proposers or other institutions in any manner deemed to be in the best interest of the UN. The UN also reserves the right to negotiate and award separate or multiple contracts for the elements covered by this RFP in any combination it may deem appropriate, in its sole discretion. 6. This RFP contains no contractual offer of any kind; any proposal submitted will be regarded as an offer by the proposer and not as an acceptance by the proposer of any offer by the UN. No contractual relationship will exist except pursuant to written contract document signed by the authorized officials of the Project Proprietors. 7. Proposers must provide all requisite information under this RFP and clearly and concisely respond to all points set out in this RFP. Any proposal which does not fully and comprehensively address this RFP will be rejected. However, unnecessarily elaborate brochures and other presentations beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal are not encouraged. 8. United Nations Financial Regulations and Rules preclude advance payments or payments by Letters of Credit. Where prevailing commercial practice does not provide for advance payment, provisions for advance payments or payments by Letter of Credit in a Proposal will be prejudicial to its evaluation by the UN. The normal terms of payment of the UN are 30 days (or similarly discounted payment terms if offered by Proposer) upon satisfactory delivery of products or completion of services and acceptance thereof by the United Nations. Proposers must therefore, clearly specify in their proposal the payment terms being offered. 9. This RFP, any part thereof, and all copies thereof must be returned to the Project Proprietors with your proposal or any other response. It is communicated to, and received by, each addressee thereof on the understanding and condition that it is confidential and propriety to the Project Proprietors, and contains privileged information, a part of which may be copyrighted. Neither the Instrument nor any part thereof nor any information concerning them nor any other parts of this document may be copied, exhibited, or furnished to others without the prior written consent of the Project Proprietors. As recipients of this document, you will be bound by the contents of this paragraph whether or not your institution submits a proposal or responds in any other way to this REP.

4

10. The UN reserves the right to modify or exclude any consideration, information of requirement contained in this RFP, and to add new considerations, information or requirements to any stage of the procurement process, include during negotiations with proposers.

11. Proposals, in English language must be submitted in FIVE (5) COPIES (hard copies) (AND ALSO A SOFT COPY EITHER IN FLASH DISK OR CD), including all appendices and annexes, and must include the following:

(a) The date of the proposal;

(b) Signature, name, title, telephone and facsimile number of the authorized representative of the institution submitting the proposal including the institutions mailing address:

(c) Terms of payment, including prompt payment discounts, if any;

(d) All other information required in this RFP including the Appendices attached hereto.

12. The five sets of proposal documents copies must each be in a separate and sealed envelope and the five envelopes should then be enclosed in one sealed envelope/package. The five separate envelopes and the master envelope/package must each be clearly marked with the name and address of the proposer and be addressed as follows: AGR III RFP, Deputy Country Director (Operations), UNDP (Room 6), Ring Road East Accra Box 1423 Accra 13. It is the exclusive responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the sealed envelope/package reaches the aboveaddressby14:00GMT.on , 15th October 2010 14. Proposals may be rejected if they are:

a) not properly marked or addressed as required in paragraph 12 above ; or, b) transmitted by facsimile; or, c) unsolicited; or, d) not received by the addressee prior to the official opening time; or' e) not otherwise in compliance with the instructions contained in this request for

proposal. 15. Delivery to any other UN office location, such as the Mail Room or the Security Desk, or marked, by name, for the attention of any individual, will be at the risk of the proposer and will not constitute timely delivery if it does not reach the Bids Officer in time. No excuses or extenuating circumstances will be accepted. Written proof of receipt will not

5

be given unless a postal/courier service receipt or other form of receipt is presented for signature by the addressee. 16. Alternative offers will not be accepted unless specifically requested. Non-compliance with this condition may jeopardise consideration of any proposal submitted. 17. All proposals will be reviewed and evaluated by the UN in accordance with the provisions of the UN financial Rules and Regulations as well as the consideration, information and requirement contained in this RFP. The evaluation procedure will consist of a formal, substantive and financial assessment of the proposals received. Price is an important factor; however, it is not the only consideration in evaluating responses to an RFP. Detailed evaluation leading to a final selection or award may take several days. 18. Resources for this project are limited and any proposal with an overpriced cost, taking into consideration local cost conditions, will automatically be excluded from consideration. This financial constraint is inclusive of all cost components as may be contained under Appendix D to this RFP. 19. Your proposal shall remain valid and open for acceptance for a period of at least Sixty (60) accurate days from the closing date of 15th October 2010, indicated above for receipt of proposals. Please indicate in your proposal that it will remain valid for this period. 20. Following submission of the proposal and final evaluation, the Project Proprietors will have the right to retain unsuccessful proposals. It is the proposer's responsibility to identify any information of a confidential or proprietary nature contained in its proposals, so that it may be handled accordingly. However, the UN cannot guarantee confidentiality. 21. Proposing and selected institutions must have the capacity of field researchers to collect the factual data and to garner secondary sources to complete the quantitative element of the research instrument. The UN attaches great importance to the accuracy and validity of data collected by the contracting institutions. It is also imperative that contracted institutions should complement and, if necessary, supplement their findings with information already available from previous studies or surveys in this area on the country. 22. Each contracted institution is expected to develop its own modus operandi, mainly logistical, taking into account the political, social and institutional peculiarities of that country. However, the presentation of the report is to follow a structure that will be released to the selected institutions when they come to the briefing workshop to be organised after the selection of the institutions for the study at any location on the continent to be determined by the Project Proprietors. In this regard, each contracted institution will be notified of the dates of the workshop. 23. The meantime, each proposing institution is required to deeply examine the research instruments for the study, note any technical and implementation problems they envisage and suggest ways of how such problems may be overcome. 24. The contract procurement and supervision of the national country report of the AGR III shall be undertaken by the UNDP Country Office on behalf of the UN. The UN shall offer the UNDP Country Office technical backstopping in facilitating the process.

6

25. For any additional information or queries regarding the project or Request for Proposals please contact, in writing:

Senior Peace and Governance Advisor, AGR III Ghana Focal Point, UNDP, P. O. Box 1423 Accra, Ghana

Tel.: 233-302-773890-6 (Ext. 173) Fax: 233-302-773899

Email: clever.nyathi@undp.org Or

Mr. Said Adejumobi, AGR Coordinator, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA), P.O.Box. 2005, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Tel: 251- 912200066. Email: sadejumobi@uneca.org

26. You are kindly requested to return, by fax, the attached acknowledgement letter advising whether your institution intends to submit a proposal. Please note that the research instruments and methodology is an abridged version of it (the questionnaire for the Expert Panel Survey and the Focused Group Discussion-FGD) are not included yet. The full version will only be forwarded to those institutions that are finally selected and contracted to carry out the assignment in each country. Please also note that whether you intend to submit your proposal or not, all appendixes as now issued to you, must be returned to Project Proprietors in compliance with the requirement at paragraph 9 above. 27. The Guide Manual will be issued at a workshop to be convened for institutions that have been selected for contracting with UN for this assignment. Yours faithfully,

7

Denise E. Findley

Deputy Country Director (Operations)

8

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Date:……………. Dear Sir, Request for Proposal Ref. No. GPAD-ECA/UNDP/ AGR III We the undersigned, acknowledge receipt of your Request For Proposal dated …………………2010 and , hereby confirm that: [ ] we intend [ ] we do not intend to submit a proposal to the UN by deadline 14;00 GMT on Friday 15th October, 2010. [ ] we intend [ ] we do not intend (Please tick whichever is appropriate) to attend the opening of proposals ceremony on Friday, 15th October .2010 Name of authorized Representative:

Signature:

Title:

Name and address of proposing institution:

Telephone:

Facsimile:

E-mail:

Please return immediately via fax to: Deputy Country Director (Operations) UNDP, ----------------------------------- ------------------------------------ ------------------------------------

9

Appendix A THE PROJECT ON MONITORING PROGRESS TOWARDS GOOD GOVERNANCE IN AFRICA I. Background and Context In 1999, the ECA began a project on: “Monitoring and Assessing the Progress towards Good Governance in Africa”. The main objective of the project is to track the progress African countries are making on good governance, as governance constitutes the cornerstone of economic progress and development in Africa. The three major outputs of the project are: The African Governance Report (AGR), the AGR National Country Reports and the AGR Country Profiles. The African Governance Report (AGR) assesses and monitors the progress African countries are making on governance, identify capacity gaps in governance institutions, and makes policy recommendations on how to improve governance on the continent. The report adopts a unique methodology, which combines three research instruments (i) expert opinion, (ii) national households’ surveys and (iii) a desk research. These research instruments are being revised to better fit the newly adopted approach to the production of the Report. The new methodology will include (i) Expert Panel Survey (ii) Focused Group Discussions (FGD) and (iii) desk research. The first edition of the report published in 2005 covered 27 African countries, and the second 35 (published by Oxford Press for ECA). ECA adopts a decentralized approach in preparing the report in which independent national research institutions are commissioned to do the national country reports. In order to ensure inclusiveness and broad consultation, the national research institutions are to establish steering committees for the project in their respective countries composed of different stakeholders and to convene two workshops-the methodology and validation workshops in which different stakeholders are brought along both in terms of the essence and processes of the project and result from it. The AGR is a synthesis from the country reports. The report is the most comprehensive study on governance in Africa. Amongst other things, the report has become a tool of policy dialogue, a reference material for scholars, policy makers and civil society organizations and a veritable instrument for identifying good practices across countries. Also, the report constitutes the background material used in the APRM process in many countries. The previous editions of the Report address a wide spectrum of governance-related issues, namely political governance; economic governance and public financial management; private sector development and corporate governance; institutional checks and balances; effectiveness and accountability of the executive, human rights and the rule of law; corruption in Africa; and institutional capacity building in governance. The AGR project fulfils five inter-related goals. These are:

(i) Provides a status review on the state of governance in Africa; (ii) Contributes to setting the agenda and advocating for good governance; (iii) Advances African-generated knowledge on governance; (iv) Articulates key policy measures and interventions necessary for improving

governance in Africa;

10

(v) Facilitates the development of the capacity of national institutions on governance analysis and research.

PARTNERSHIP WITH THE UNDP AND A THEMATIC APPROACH After the production of the first two editions of the report (AGR I and II), there was a rigorous review of the entire AGR project, with broad consultations with experts, stakeholders and partner institutions. A project review workshop was held in July 2009. Subsequently, two decisions were taken on the AGR project. First is to partner with the UNDP in the production of the AGR especially in the production of the national country reports, and second, to adopt a thematic approach in the production of the report. Besides the thematic approach to the biennial AGR report, there would be a general report produced every six years to monitor at a general level, the progress African countries are making on governance. The partnership between the ECA and UNDP on the AGR reinforces the age-long relationship between the two institutions on governance. UNDP and ECA have long worked together on the African Governance Forum (AGF) and the AGR process is to feed into subsequent AGFs. The partnership on the AGR provides a win-win situation for both ECA and UNDP on the project. It would facilitate better knowledge production, governance dialogue, policy engagement and outreach on the findings of the report at the regional, sub-regional and country levels. All the national country reports of the AGR would be published and widely disseminated and also the AGR synthesis report. AGR III: Elections and the Management of Diversity in Africa In choosing a theme for the next AGR, the UN was guided by three considerations. These were; the findings of AGR I and AGR II; the cross-cutting issues identified by the APRM in the reviews done so far, and general pressing issues on the continent. Four issues stand out quite clearly. These are; elections and diversity management, corruption, gender and constitutionalism. After exhaustive deliberations and consultations, it was decided that the next edition of the AGR (AGR III) should be on: “Elections and the Management of Diversity in Africa”. Elections and Diversity Management in Africa: Issues and Challenges The process of democratization in Africa which began about two decades ago has seen the collapse of authoritarian and one party regimes and the ascendance of elections as a means of political succession and change and instrument for political legitimation in Africa. In the decade, 1996-2006, 44 elections were conducted in sub-Saharan Africa, and between 2005 and 2007, 26 presidential and 28 parliamentary elections were held on the continent (UNECA, 2009: 17). Ordinarily, elections should provide a basis of promoting national consensus, aggregation of popular will and means of managing the diversity of plural societies. However, in Africa, elections have in some countries, been conflict triggers, and ethnically explosive processes. In Kenya, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Uganda, and Ethiopia, to mention just a few, elections have

11

triggered serious political conflicts, ethnic divisiveness and the polarization of society. Rather than bringing people together, elections have torn people apart. Based on this noticeable, but worrying trend on the continent, the next AGR is dedicated to the issue of elections and the management of diversity in Africa. Key issues to be raised and critically analyzed include:

(i) What is the linkage, both conceptually and in practice, between elections and the management of diversity?

(ii) How did the democratization process, in terms of the legal and structural framework which emerged, address the problem of political pluralism and diversity management in Africa?

(iii) How has the structure and process of elections including the organization of political parties impacted on diversity management in Africa?

(iv) How does the nature of the electoral system affect diversity management in Africa?

(v) What are the trends, and different experiences of African countries on elections and diversity management?

(vi) Why do elections constitute conflict triggers and accelerators in Africa enmeshed in identity and diversity mobilization?

(vii) What is the role of the political elite in building electoral and political consensus and the impact of this on diversity management?

(viii) What are the best practices prevalent on the continent? (ix) How can elections be a tool of diversity management in Africa, rather than a

violent implosive mechanism? These are some of the issues to be addressed by the research that would be commissioned. II. Rationale and Objectives of the AGR III Project

a) Overall objective

The overall objective of the project is to monitor the progress of African states towards Good Governance. In particular, the 2011 edition seeks to assess the progress African countries are making in using elections as a tool for better management of diversity in Africa. In order to accomplish the above, it has become necessary (i) to conduct an assessment of the political architecture, of the state and of how diverse the society is; (ii) to analyse the history and contemporary trends and practices on elections and diversity management in Africa; (iii) to evaluate the recent democratisation processes vis-à-vis electoral management; (iv) to conduct an analysis of the issues of competitive elections, diversity and conflicts; (v) to underscore the relevance of political and constitutional reforms; and (vi) and to address the issue of electoral reform in Africa. The following are the objectives of the study:

1. To analyse the linkage between elections, diversity management and the promotion of democratic progress in Africa;

2. To analyse the trends, problems, challenges and prospects in the interface between elections and diversity management;

12

3. To explore how the problem of electoral conflicts/violence can be attenuated in Africa and promote effective election adjudication mechanisms including alternative conflict resolution mechanisms;

4. To undertake a review of the structure, processes and conduct of elections in order to make for free, fair, credible, and transparent elections in Africa;

5. To propose key policy recommendations and reforms that will ensure that elections constitute a viable mechanism for managing social pluralism and political diversity while retaining the core principle and ideal of democratic elections of reflecting the wishes and aspirations of the people.

The structure of the country report and the issues to be covered in the report are below: Structure of Country Report Chapter Chapter Title

Executive Summary

I Context: History & Political Economy II State & Society: Structure & Process of Governance

III The Dynamics of Competitive Party Politics

IV The Dynamics of Electoral Governance

V Elections, Diversity and Political Violence

VI Economics of Elections

VII Constitutional, Political and Electoral Reform VIII Elections & Managing Diversity: Policy Options & Way Forward

1. Executive Summary Summary of the argument and findings of each chapter of the country report. Chapter 1: Context: History and Political Economy

(a) Social composition of the state and its diversities (ethnic, racial, religious, regional and state building project)

(b) Brief outline and analysis of important features of the country’s constitutional,

economic and political history and development since colonial rule, with emphasis on interface of colonial rule with pre-colonial political and socioeconomic structures.

(c) The nature of the political heritage of colonial rule: character and structure of the

emergent postcolonial state and the conjunctural forces and factors affecting its developmental trajectories: i) the inheritance elite and successor regime; ii) party politics and political culture—the failure of democratic politics and descent into authoritarian rule: one-party rule, personal rule, and military rule; iii) the configuration of ethnic and other diversities and their interface with institutions in

13

state and society; iv) the character and structures of civil society; and v) the external African and the extra-African globalizing factors in the development of the postcolonial state.

(d) The unfolding contradictions the postcolonial state for state and society, especially

regarding the economy, elections and political succession, and the management of ethnic and other diversities.

Chapter II: State and Society: Structure and Process of Governance

(a) Major cultural, economic and political institutions of current governmental process of the country.

(b) Forms and types of state structures: their dynamics and implications for patterns of political competition: federal or unitary; presidential or parliamentary; hybrids of federal/unitary, and presidential/parliamentary.

(c) Rules of political succession: how compacted, ongoing debate over them, and how linked to issues surrounding electoral governance.

(d) The character, structure and process of the interface between state, society, economy and politics: the extent of the country’s plural or homogenous tapestry, including the interface between ethnicity, language, religion, gender and other diversities and the country’s economy, politics and social relations.

(e) Implications of diversity/homogeneity for the emergence of “sub-national” identities, in the form of ethno-regional identities, religious, linguistic or gender “sub-national identities and their representations in state, society and economy.

(f) Linkages between political elite and the “masses”: role of political parties and other associational forms in the construction and the political mobilization of these “sub-national” identities for political and related political processes in state, economy and society.

(g) The character and structure (differentiation) of the country’s civil society: engagement of the civil society in politics and the governance process

(h) The role of the state in mediating political competition and in the distribution and allocation of public resources and social surplus: how does it do this, or is it an instrument or condition of domination by, for example, competing ethnic groups?

(i) The character of the state: i) traditional governance institutions (ii) extent of centralization; iii) pressures for political federalism, devolution or decentralization, if any, and their sources: ethnic groups, political parties, civil society organizations and other associational groups; African and extra-African interests; iv) the citizenship question in a plural state: common versus fractured citizenship, i.e. competing claims of individual rights and for ethnic group rights, and marginalized group rights (women, youth, physically challenged); v) constitutional provision or conventional arrangements for power-sharing, if any, for attenuating/managing the diversity question. .

Chapter III: The Dynamics of Competitive Party Politics a) Nature, character and functions of political parties and statutory provisions for

competitive politics and formation/registration of political parties, and the regulations of their activities: implications for their type, objectives, membership and territorial

14

(national, “sub-national” or parochial spread). Is there provision for independent candidates to run for elective public political offices?

b) Material, socio-cultural and legal/constitutional and political factors (domestic and external) affecting or influencing party formation, party organizational, and party competitive process.

c) Status and role of opposition parties d) Electoral behaviour: cause or effect (reflection or consequence of) localization of

party strength?—the ethnic and other diversity basis/pattern of party support and electoral strength

e) Internal democracy in parties and party primaries f) Nature of political campaigns by political parties and issue of diversity (do parties use

ethnic, racial or religious symbols or sentiments at political campaigns? etc) g) Relationship between form and type of government (federal/unitary,

presidential/parliament, and their hybrids) and development and dynamics of competitive party politics.

h) Party politics and formation of cabinets: cabinet formation as mechanism for managing diversity through power-sharing arrangements;

i) Electoral system and competitive politics: implications for i) party competition; ii) aggravating or attenuating ethnic and other diversities; and iii) allocation of statutory electoral quotas for ethnic and other minority groups.

Chapter IV: The Dynamics of Electoral Governance (a) The structure, provisions and regulations (statutory and conventional) governing and

regulating electoral governance in the country. (b) Electoral governance issues, revolving around:

(i) EMBS: their formation, powers, membership and independence: diversity considerations in constituting them (ethnic, gender, regional, professional, party etc.) their scope, functions and powers: their organizational structure, relationship with political parties, etc).

(ii) The electoral system: (What is the nature of the electoral system adopted? Is it

inclusive and representative of the diverse groups and interests in the country? Is it considered to be fair and credible? How do political parties view the electoral system etc)

(iii) Electoral Law: Nature of the electoral law and its major provisions on the

management of elections. How fair and credible is it? Does it accommodate the interests and aspirations of the diverse interests of the people in the country? Is it considered to be credible?

(iv) Constituency delimitation (how are constituencies delimited for elections? which

organization undertakes it? what rules guide it? what politics underlie the process? how do political parties and the citizens view the process- as fair or partisan? etc).

(v) Voter registration exercise (How is voter registration exercise conducted-manual,

electronic, etc? is it perceived to be fair and credible? How is the distribution and display of voters’ register for claims and objections organized?. What is the general

15

percentage of registered voters to the voting population? Is there any politics which underlies the process? Is there national consensus on it? etc)

(vi) Voter education (role of the EMBs, civil society organizations, is the voter education

process regarded as adequate? etc) (vii) Organization of the election: security and distribution of sensitive election materials;

regulation of party political activities, like internal nomination process, party financing and audit of electoral expenditures, campaign and equal/equitable media access; recruitment, deployment and discipline of electoral officials on polling day; display of candidates’ names for verification and objection; modality for collating, declaring and announcing results; voting modality; ballot design; display of information about location of pooling stations (do voters vote where they register?) location and distance of polling stations; number of polling stations; are polling stations make shift, temporary or permanent structures; ballot box design; preventing/constraining abuse of the power of incumbency.

(viii) Role of domestic and international observer and monitoring teams. (ix) Election dispute adjudication mechanisms. (x) Mutual impact of electoral governance and diversity on each other and its

consequences for competitive party politics and the governmental process. (xi) Environment of Electoral Governance: constraining and enabling. Chapter V: Elections, Diversity and Political Violence Trends, patterns and causes of political conflicts and election-related violence: - National diversity, parties and electoral competition - Integrity of elections- fairness, transparency and credibility of elections - Neutrality or partisanship of election management authorities - Conflicts and contestations in the electoral process - Intra-party political violence (party primaries and violence etc) - Inter-party electoral competition and violence and the politics of diversity - Trends in political and electoral violence- ethnic, racial or communal based- pre and post elections violence. Chapter VI: Chapter V: Economics of Elections

- Funding of Elections (how does the country fund its elections-internal and external sources and the proportion of each source and the implications of this for autonomy of elections, electoral design and processes; regional engagement or assistance in election financing etc );

- Election Resources and Political competition - Financing party establishments and campaigns: (How do political parties finance their

party establishments, activities and processes including political campaigns) - Class and group resource inequalities and the implications for election financing

16

- Cost-Benefit Analysis of electoral system.

Chapter VII: Constitutional, Political and Electoral Reforms: Constitutional and Political Reforms:

- Political succession and term limits - relationship between executive, legislature and judiciary (considerations of separation

of powers) - party system, party structure and intra-party democracy - civil liberties, human rights and the rule of law including freedom of the media and

freedom of information law - Access to justice - Political affirmative action policies for marginalized groups and interests in the

political process. Electoral Reforms: - Reforms of the EMBs- powers, functions, capacity and autonomy; selection of the members of the electoral management body, relationship with the executive, financing of the electoral commission, its neutrality in the electoral process. etc. - Reforms of the electoral law and electoral system: Are the current electoral law and system adequate and credible? Which electoral law and electoral system will make for better inclusion, representation, better diversity management and at the same time guarantee the democratic character of elections as being free, fair and transparent? - Improving election adjudication mechanisms for preventing election-related violence including alterative dispute resolution mechanisms - Access to electoral resources including the media - Role of security forces and their non-partisanship in the electoral process - Civic and voter education and the role of the civil society in it. Chapter VIII: Elections and Managing Diversity: Policy Options & Way Forward

17

Appendix B (i): Methodology and Research Instruments The AGR III methodology which is focused on a thematic approach, while also monitoring

trends on good governance in Africa, deviates slightly from the previous AGRs which used

three research instruments for data gathering. These were expert panel opinion (C1),

Household Survey (C2) and Desk Research (C3). The methodology for AGR III will combine

three instruments as methods for data gathering. These are: Expert Opinion Survey, Focused

Group Discussion (FGD) and Desk Research- the three instruments complement each other

and are used to draw both hard data and the perceptions on the people on the key issues of

analysis in the report.

Expert Opinion Survey: The aim of the expert panel opinion survey is to collect expert opinion on different issues of

elections and the management of diversity in the country and also capture general trends on

governance in Africa. The respondents will represent a cross section of society, those who are

believed to be knowledgeable and have experiences of electoral governance and management

issues of the country and governance generally. The target groups, for expert panel, are

enlightened citizens/nationals with certain characteristics, which include all experts from

wider community and relevant stakeholders.

To draw samples of experts to accommodate wide characteristics as indicated below, it

requires a relatively large number of experts. It has been suggested that numbering about 120

- 150 experts will be taken from a pool of the target groups. Since selection of experts will be

on purposive approach, the responsible research institutions should follow a systematic

procedure to make sure that all the required characteristics are taken into account. Some of

the expert sample may include academics, members of political parties, professional groups,

CSOs, policy makers, media workers, bureaucrats, police service, election management

bodies, judiciary, parliament and the executive, enlightened citizen-voters etc.

In every country it is common understanding that the largest collection of experts will be in

the capital city of the country. However, research institutions should make efforts to capture

expert opinion from the capital city of the country as well as participants in other major cities

18

of sub-regional states. This approach will enable the study to have comprehensive picture on

the views of elections and the management of diversity of informed respondents through out

the country.

The Experts’ Characteristics: The following characteristics will be used for selecting members of the panel: (i) Age (ii)

Social status (iii) Education, field of training and occupation, (iv) interest in the nation's

affairs (v) Relationship with political parties and the government, (vi) relationship with or

familiarity with elections, electoral processes, and diversity management (vii) Citizenship /

Nationality (viii) Ethnic, gender, religious, and sub-regional representation.

In view of the demanding nature of selected indicators for the theme and the need to enhance

the reliability and credibility of the responses, the Expert Panel will be carefully drawn so

that the responses will have a desirable level of stability and accuracy. The use of a poorly

selected panel may lead to unstable or biased responses. In addition, since there is a need to

produce data of fairly comparable quality in the various project countries, the standardization

of the characteristics of the panel members will also contribute towards that end as well.

In summary, it is a must that the experts’ characteristics such as age, educational level,

ethnicity, gender, and relationship with political parties, elections, electoral processes and

governance generally, should be balanced.

A structured questionnaire will be prepared to collect data from the experts’ panel. A mini-

workshop for filling up the questionnaire will be organized for the panel of experts. All the

selected experts will be invited for the workshop and will be briefed about the purpose of the

project and the instrument used to collect their opinion. Follow-up mechanisms using

interviewers will be used to collect the required data in the event some experts fail to appear

in the workshop.

The instrument has two parts: Part one deals with a set of specific questions directly related to

the selected theme, which is elections and the management of diversity. Part two involves a

very limited number of general questions (24 questions) derived from all key components of

governance treated previous AGR studies. These general questions are to help in establishing

certain key indicators that could be used to assess the overall political and socio-economic

19

trends in monitoring the progress on good governance in Africa. They are prepared by

selecting representative questions from C1 instrument used in AGR II.

Focused Group Discussion (FGD) Focused group discussion will be used as one of the instruments for collecting data about

how the participants feel about elections and the management of diversity. The difference

between the targets of the FDGs and the Expert Panel is that the experts are individual

participants chosen on the basis of set criteria. The FGD participants represent relevant sector

groups, limited to approximately 8-12 people carefully selected participants, and are

homogenous in composition with members sharing similar background and experiences. A

session generally lasts one to two hours, although in some cases it can be longer.

The coordinators of the country reports should consider the following groups as targets for

participation in the focused group discussions:

• Women groups • Youth groups • Political party members • Community based organizations working in the field of governance • informal sector operators

The topics of discussion (questions) directly related to the theme is prepared, accommodating

important issues of elections and the management of diversity.

• Focused group discussions are conducted to discuss the selected topics in group sessions.

Participants discuss issues of elections and the management of diversity, insights, and

experiences among themselves. During the discussion any group member is free to comment,

criticize, or elaborate on the views expressed by others. The free discussions in the focused

group method generate fresh ideas and insights because the participants stimulate each other

and provide supporting evidences. During the discussion, participants have the potential to

argue strongly in favor or against the given topic and convince each other and consequently

produce a consensus result.

In addition, in the process of discussion, participants can indicate available documents to

support their views and arguments. These documents, if they are identified, could be used for

20

desk research. Moreover, each issue of the elections and the management of diversity under

investigation may need explanations and descriptions for its success or failure or any other

related problems. The discussions can also provide reasons for the why and how questions

that may help to strengthen the report, which are the missing ingredients from structured

questionnaires.

The moderator, who is highly trained and experienced in this kind of work, introduces the

selected topics, keeps the discussion going using subtle probing techniques, and tries to

prevent a few participants from dominating the discussions.

When used appropriately, focus groups can be extremely effective in generating meaningful

information about different actor attitudes toward a variety of different topics in elections and

the management of diversity.

Desk-based research Desk-based research is employed to collect factual information and hard data to supplement

and complement information collected from the expert panel perceptions and national

household surveys to enrich the report to be produced at the country and continental levels.

The desk based research will extract information from secondary and primary sources like

government documents and gazettes, electoral management bodies, available documentation

from political parties and civil society organizations, publications at the local, national and

regional levels, text books, journals, newspapers, magazines, and periodicals, and other

relevant sources. The data collected will be carefully analyzed especially for the qualitative

part of the report and used to supplement the survey from the expert panel and focused group

discussions in preparing the national country reports.

21

Appendix B (ii) Tasks to be performed The full details of the tasks to be performed are included in the Guide Manual to be issued to the selected proposers only. However, the tasks to be performed fall into the following categories:

Data collection using the three Parts of the instrument

• The Expert Panel Survey - a selection of prominent, knowledgeable and experienced nationals for their informed assessment on matters relating to elections and the management of diversity on the dimensions covered by the relevant questionnaire.

• For the Focused Group Discussions (FGDs), the five indicative groups to be

focused upon are: Women groups; youth groups; political party members; community based organizations working in the field of governance; and informal sector groups. The purpose of such a careful selection is to ensure that the discussion captures a balanced and diversified range of views while being legitimate and effectively informed.

• Research based findings to be carried out by the collaborating institution using the

desk research. The purpose of the desk research is to capture all the available secondary data and materials on the subject-matter relevant to a detailed and rigorous analysis of the theme based on the outline of the national country report indicated above.

Data processing

This will include data processing and analysis: data entry, editing and scoring, analysis, processing and assessment for reliability (especially concerning the Expert Panel Survey and the Focused Group Discussions)

National ownership and commitment It is essential to ensure legitimacy for, and ownership of, the monitoring process within countries. To aid ownership, collaborating institutions should endeavour to include key stakeholders in the process and to establish national steering committees, including representatives of governments, civil society, business, and religious organisations, to name only a few. In-country workshops for the project may provide the basis for creating these committees.

Establishment of a Steering Committee The collaborating institution is required to establish a National Steering Committee comprising the various influential groups in the country to play an advisory role, to facilitate popularisation of the project and securing its support as needs may arise.

22

Pre-launch workshop ECA, in conjunction with UNDP, will organise a pre-launch workshop for all selected institutions to ensure that the requirements of this project are understood the same way by all. This will avoid lengthy correspondence explaining points in these documents. The dates of this workshop will be announced by ECA in conjunction with UNDP and it will take place in Addis Ababa.

Official launch at the national level The collaborating institution is required to officially launch the project within the country. At the launch, the Project Proprietors (ECA and UNDP) and the collaborating institution will explain the project and its purpose and answer any questions that may arise. Representatives of all stakeholders are to attend. In this regard, representatives of civil society: business, the youth, women, the disabled, religious; the civil service, the judiciary, law enforcement cadres, and the press (public and private), etc. constitute some of the groups that should be invited to attend. It is important that this launch be as simple as possible to avoid excessive expenditure.

Stakeholders’ Workshop (at the end)

National ownership of the final report is essential as it constitutes an important component of its credibility. In this regard, the collaborating institution is required to convene a stakeholders’ workshop at which the draft project report will be discussed fully before the final report is submitted for inclusion in continent wide report (AGR III).

Reports to the UN (ECA and UNDP) This outlines the various issues that must be included in the periodic reports to the Project Proprietors (ECA and UNDP) according to an agreed Work Plan, the generic form of which will be supplied by Project Proprietors.

Duration All the activities to be carried out under the project from an agreed commencement date to the submission of the final report are to be completed within a period not exceeding five months.

23

Appendix C: QUALIFICATION CRITERIA 1. In order to implement the project, the UN through the UNDP Country Offices has to contract, in each country, a national research institution selected on a within-country competitive basis. Indeed, the UNDP country offices have to ascertain the existence of the requisite capacity for the execution of this project at the national level by ensuring that research institutions with relative capacity exist to compete for carrying out the national country report. This has become necessary because:

(i) the assessments are country-specific and will take cognisance of, the

population, institutional and political characteristics of that country which are unique to itself.

(ii studies of a similar type may have been carried out in some of the African

countries while none have so far be done in others. Consequently, the amount of country literature available to supplement and help clarify the requirements of the present exercise varies widely from one country to another. In other words, some of the countries have additional literature to consult while other countries will have to start almost from scratch:

(iii) African countries vary in many respects: geographical area, ethnic

composition of the population, level of literacy, stage of infrastructural development like roads and other forms of communications labour costs (for interview teams), etc. These variations must be taken into account. Each competing institution will, thus, have to develop its own internal logistical plans to ensure that account is taken of these considerations which are unique to each country:

(iv) Available institutional capacity varies from one country to another.

(v) Commencement dates will ideally be the same in all countries. However,

completion periods may differ from country to country. This notwithstanding, the appointed collaborating institution may be required to reduce its completion period if it is considered by the UN that the period proposed will not permit timely compilation of the Africa-wide report, the issue date of which is time-restricted.

(vi) The levels of the cost of proposals are likely to follow country lines -thereby

making sense of intra-country competition.

(vii) Localisation of contracting institutions ensures lower costs. On the other hand, engagement of external contractors -even if they have local collaborators -is a certain recipe for higher costs which may be beyond the resources available under the project.

24

(viii) This project marks, or establishes, the start of an activity that is intended to continue, at the country-level, long after the project itself is over. To that extent the aim of the project is to have institutions that can continuously have dialogue with stakeholders on progress in governance in Africa. Apart from the possibility of higher costs, international institutions cannot do this without raising local suspicion, albeit unjustified, as to the purposes the exercises would serve.

(ix) The whole issue of governance involves the question of ownership -in this

case, local ownership using in-country institutions enhances achievement of this aspect.

(x) The quality of the outcome of the research exercise is expected to be very high

for the reasons that many African national research institutions -from among which collaborating institutions will be selected under this RFP, have not only the requisite capacity to do this work, but that many of them have long profiles of studies conducted in this and many other areas for themselves, the World Bank, IMF, UNDP as well as for other organisations at the regional and international levels.

2. Proposing institutions from which one institution per country will be contracted must,

therefore, be:

• African and country-based;

• Registered and operating within the country and ready and able to continue with future monitoring of, and reporting on, the state of governance in that country on a periodic basis; and

• from among institutions whose capacity has been vetted by UNDP offices in each

country; 3. Limitation of participation to African research institutions in each country is justified

by the fact that:

• involvement of institutions outside Africa is very costly;

results reached by non-African research institutions, even if correct, will be taken by African governments with suspicion as to the purpose to which they will be put and the important elements of local ownership and trust can only be guaranteed through engaging national research institutions, some of which have ready access to different stakeholders including government officials and vast experience in the domain.

4. Qualifying institutions will be those that demonstrate superiority in:

(i) the quality and soundness of their technical and financial proposals;

(ii) a high level research personnel and research processing and analysis capacity;

(iii) prior experience in research and methodology in areas related to governance;

25

(iv) adequacy of a proven track record in the timely delivery of quality research

outputs; and

(vi) ability to network with institutions when additional inputs become necessary to carry out the research.

5. Preliminary examination The Purchaser will examine the Proposals to determine whether they are complete, whether any computational

efforts have been made, whether the documents have been properly signed, and whether the Proposals are

generally in order.

Arithmetical errors will be rectified on the following basis: If there is a discrepancy between the unit price and the

total price that is obtained by multiplying the unit price and quantity, the unit price shall prevail and the total price

shall be corrected. If the Offeror does not accept the correction of errors, its Proposal will be rejected. If there is a

discrepancy between words and figures the amount in words will prevail.

Prior to the detailed evaluation, the Purchaser will determine the substantial responsiveness of each Proposal to the

Request for Proposals (RFP). For purposes of these Clauses, a substantially responsive Proposal is one which

conforms to all the terms and conditions of the RFP without material deviations. The Purchaser’s determination of

Proposal’s responsiveness is based on the contents of the Proposal itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence.

A Proposal determined as not substantially responsive will be rejected by the Purchaser and may not subsequently be made responsive by the Offeror by correction of the non-conformity.

6. Evaluation and comparison of proposals

A two-stage procedure is utilised in evaluating the proposals, with evaluation of the technical proposal being completed prior to any price proposal being opened and compared. The price proposal of the Proposals will be opened only for submissions that passed the minimum technical score of 70% of the obtainable score of 1000 points in the evaluation of the technical proposals. The technical proposal is evaluated on the basis of its responsiveness to the Term of Reference (TOR). In the Second Stage, the price proposal of all contractors, who have attained minimum 70% score in the technical evaluation, will be compared. The contractor will be awarded to the Contractor offering the lowest price.

26

Technical Evaluation Criteria Summary of Technical Proposal Evaluation Forms

Score Weight Points Obtainable

Company / Other Entity A B C D E

1. Expertise of Firm / Organisation submitting Proposal

30%

300

2.

Proposed Work Plan and Approach

50%

500

3.

Personnel

20%

200

Total

1000

Evaluation forms for technical proposals follow on the next two pages.

The obtainable number of points specified for each evaluation criterion indicates the relative significance or weight

of the item in the overall evaluation process. The Technical Proposal Evaluation Forms are:

Form 1: Expertise of Firm / Organisation Submitting Proposal Form 2: Proposed Work Plan and Approach Form 3: Personnel Note: The score weights and points obtainable in the evaluation sheet are tentative and should be changed depending on the need or major attributes of technical proposal.

Technical Proposal Evaluation Form 1

Points obtainable

Company / Other Entity A B C D E

Expertise of firm / organisation submitting proposal 1.1 Reputation of Organisation and Staff (Competence /

Reliability) 40

1.2 Litigation and Arbitration history 15

1.3 General Organisational Capability which is likely to affect implementation (i.e. loose consortium, holding company or one firm, size of the firm / organisation, strength of project management support e.g. project financing capacity and project management controls)

35

1.4 Extent to which any work would be subcontracted (subcontracting carries additional risks which may affect project implementation, but properly done it offers a chance to access specialised skills.

15

1.5 Quality assurance procedures, warranty

25

1.6 Relevance of: - Specialised Knowledge - Experience on Similar Programme / Projects - Experience on Projects in the Region Work for UNDP/ major multilateral/ or bilateral programmes

110

240

27

Technical Proposal Evaluation Form 2

Points Obtainable

Company / Other Entity A B C D E

Proposed Work Plan and Approach 2.1 To what degree does the Offeror understand the

task? 30

2.2 Have the important aspects of the task been addressed in sufficient detail?

25

2.3 Are the different components of the project adequately weighted relative to one another?

20

2.4 Is the proposal based on a survey of the project environment and was this data input properly used in the preparation of the proposal?

55

2.5 Is the conceptual framework adopted appropriate for the task?

65

2.6 Is the scope of task well defined and does it correspond to the TOR?

120

2.7 Is the presentation clear and is the sequence of activities and the planning logical, realistic and promise efficient implementation to the project?

85

400 Technical Proposal Evaluation Form 3

Points Obtainable

Company / Other Entity A B C D E

3.1

Task Manager

80

Sub-Score General Qualification

65

Suitability for the Project - International Experience 10 - Training Experience 10 - Professional Experience in the area of specialisation

35

- Knowledge of the region 10 - Language Qualifications 15 80

3.2

Senior Expert

60

Sub-Score General Qualification

50

Suitability for the Project - International Experience 5 - Training Experience 5 - Professional Experience in the area of specialisation

35

- Knowledge of the region 5 - Language Qualifications 10 60

3.3

Junior Expert

20

28

Sub-Score General Qualification

15

Suitability for the Project - International Experience 5 - Training Experience 0 - Professional Experience in the area of specialisation

10

- Knowledge of the region 0 - Language Qualification 5 20

Total Part 3 160 E. Award of Contract 7. Award criteria, award of contract The procuring UNDP entity reserves the right to accept or reject any Proposal, and to annul the solicitation

process

a nd reject all Proposals at any time prior to award of contract, without thereby incurring any liability to the affected

Offeror or any obligation to inform the affected Offeror or Offerors of the grounds for the Purchaser’s action

Prior to expiration of the period of proposal validity, the procuring UNDP entity will award the contract to the qualified Offeror whose Proposal after being evaluated is considered to be the most responsive to the needs of the organisation and activity concerned.

29

Appendix D INFORMATION ON PROPOSING INSTITUTION, RESEARCH TEAM AND FINANCIAL OFFER Please provide the information requested below: The institution 1. Legal name under which the institution is registered:

• Name • Mailing address • Telephone number(s): • Fax No(s): • E-mail address: • Background information: • Date of commencement of operations: • Line of research emphasis:

2. Professional research experience of the institution during the past five years,

including, names and addresses of funding agencies/clients and list of publications/reports issued during the last two years.

3. Current research strength (in-house and with external collaborators):

• In-house • With external collaborators • Data collection and analysis capacity (statistical software brands and versions

thereof). Proposal 4. The proposal document should contain detailed information on how the institution

will carry out the contracted assignment. In particular, the institution must provide:

• A Work Plan indicating, for each step of the study, the work months required; • A list of the professional staff and any external experts who will be involved in

the preparation of the study; • The terms and conditions of the offer, if any (see paragraph 8 of the transmittal

letter); • A current CV of each of the key members who will constitute the research team

for this project; and • A budget showing the total cost of the entire assignment. The budget should

clearly, and in separate entries, include:

ü The cost of an in-country launch of the project; ü The cost of data collection, analysis and report-writing; and

30

ü The cost of an in-country stakeholders’ workshop convened to discuss the draft report before its submission to the UN in its final form.

5. Declaration and financial proposal

We have examined the requirements of the RFP and offer as follows: (a) The cost of the project up to the production of the final report:

US$:________________

(b) Time required to complete the study, prepare and submit the report:

Three months (90 days)

(c) This offer is valid for _____________days from the closing date of this RFP; and (d) We:

§ Accept United Nations payment terms *, or § Do not accept United Nations payment terms and propose as follows* (Please delete whichever is inappropriate) …..………………………………………………………………………………………. ………………………………………………………………………………………….

Proposer (Name of Institution) ………………………………………………………. Name, title and signature of person authorized to sign this proposal)

Address: Telephone: Fax: E-mail:

NOTE: Please immediately notify ECA of changes to any of your telephone, fax or e-mail addresses in order to ensure unimpeded communication.

31

Appendix E United Nations General Conditions for Contracts 1. Legal status

The Collaborating Institution shall be considered as having the legal status of an independent contractor vis-à-vis the United Nations. The Collaborating Institution’s personnel and sub-contractors shall not be considered in any respect as being the employees or agents of the United Nations.

2. Source of instructions

The Collaborating Institution shall neither seek nor accept instructions from any authority external to the United Nations in connection with the performance of its services under this Contract. The Collaborating Institution shall refrain from any action, which may adversely affect the United Nations and shall fulfil its commitments with the fullest regard for the interests of the United Nations.

3. Contractor’s responsibility for employees

The Collaborating Institution shall be responsible for the professional and technical competence of its employees and will select, for work under this Contract, reliable individuals who will perform effectively in the implementation of the Contract, respect the local customs and conform to a high standard of moral and ethical conduct.

4. Assignment

The Collaborating Institution shall not assign, transfer, pledge or make other disposition of this Contract or any part thereof or of any of the Collaborating Institution’s rights, claims or obligations under this Contract except with the prior written authorization of the United Nations.

5. Sub-contracting

In the event the Collaborating Institution requires the services of sub-contractors, the Collaborating Institution shall obtain the prior written approval and clearance of the United Nations for all sub-contractors. The approval of the United Nations of sub-contractor shall not relieve the Collaborating Institution of any of its obligations under this Contract. The terms of sub-contract shall be subject to and in conformity with the provisions of this Contract.

6. Officials not to benefit

The Collaborating Institution warrants that no official of the United Nations has been or shall be admitted by the Collaborating Institution to any direct or indirect benefit arising from this Contract or the award thereof. The Collaborating Institution agrees that breach of this provision is a breach of an essential term of this Contract.

32

7. Workmen’s compensation and other Insurance

(a) The Collaborating Institution shall provide and thereafter maintain all appropriate workmen’s compensation and liability insurance to cover its employees and any claims for death, bodily injury or damage to property arising from the execution of this Contract. The Collaborating Institution represents that the liability insurance includes sub-contractors.

(b) The Collaborating Institution shall not permit any lien, attachment or other

encumbrance by any person to remain on file in any public office or on file with the United Nations against any monies due or to become due for any work done or materials furnished under this Contract, or by reason of any other claim or demand against the Collaborating Institution.

8. Title to equipment

Title to any equipment and supplies which may be furnished by the United Nations shall rest with the United Nations and any such equipment shall be returned to the United Nations at the conclusion of this Contract or when no longer needed by the Collaborating Institution. Such equipment when returned to the United Nations shall be in the same condition as when delivered to the Collaborating Institution subject to normal wear and tear.

9. Use of name, emblem or official seal of the United Nations

The collaborating Institution shall not advertise or otherwise make public the fact that it is a contractor with the United Nations. Also the collaborating institution shall, in no other manner whatsoever, use the name, emblem or official seal of the United Nations or any abbreviation of the name United Nations in connection with its business or otherwise.

10. Confidential nature of documents

(a) All maps, drawings, photographs, mosaics, plans, reports, recommendations, estimates, documents and all other data compiled or received by the Collaborating Institution under this Contract shall be the property of the United Nations, shall be treated as confidential and shall be delivered only to the UN authorized officials on completion of work under this Contract.

(b) The Collaborating Institution may not communicate at any time to any other

person, Government or authority external to the United Nations, any information known to it by reason of its association with the united Nations which has not been made public except with the authorization of the United Nations; nor shall the Collaborating Institution at any time use such information to private advantage. These obligations do not lapse upon termination of this Contract with the United Nations.

11. Force majeure, other changes in conditions

33

(a) In the event of an insurgence or as soon as possible after the occurrence of any cause constituting force majeure. The Collaborating Institution shall give notice and full particulars in writing to the United Nations of such occurrence or change if the Collaborating Institution is thereby rendered unable, wholly or in part, to perform its obligations and meet its responsibilities under this contract. The Collaborating Institution shall also notify the United Nations of any other changes in conditions or the occurrence of any event, which interferes or threatens to interfere with its performance of the Contract. On receipt of the notice required under this Article, the United Nations shall take such action as, in its sole discretion, it considers to be appropriate or necessary in the circumstances. This may include the granting to the Collaborating Institution of a reasonable extension of time in which to perform its obligations under the Contract.

(b) If the Collaborating Institution is rendered permanently unable, wholly, or in

part, by reason of force majeure to perform its obligations and meet its responsibilities under this Contract, the United Nations, shall have the right to suspend or terminate this Contract on the same terms and conditions as are provided for in Article 14, “Termination”, except that the period of notice shall be seven (7) days instead of sixty (60) days.

(c) Force majeure as used in this Article means act of God, war (whether declared

or not), invasion, revolution, insurrection or other acts of a similar nature or force.

12. Termination

Either party may for valid cause terminate this Contract, in whole or in part, upon thirty, (30) days notice to the other. In the event of any termination no payment shall be due from the Untied Nations to the Collaborating Institution except for work and services satisfactorily performed in conformity with the express terms of this Contract.

13. Confidential information

Neither the Collaborating Institution nor its employees shall disclose to a person or organisation, in any manner or form, during the contract period or after its expiration, any privileged or confidential information of the United Nations.

14. Bankruptcy

Should the Collaborating Institution be adjudged bankrupt, or should the Collaborating Institution make a general assignment for the benefit of its creditors, or should a receiver be appointed on account of the Collaborating Institution’s insolvency, the United Nations may, without prejudice to any other right or remedy it may have under the terms of these conditions, terminate forthwith the contractual agreement made with the Collaborating Institution.

15. Inconsistencies in schedule

34

In the event there should be a conflict in the provisions of the Contract and any annexes and schedules attached hereto, the provisions of the Contract shall prevail.

16. Observance of the law

The Collaborating Institution shall comply with all laws, ordinances, rules and regulations bearing on the performance of its obligation under the terms of the Contract.

17. Amendments

Pursuant to the Financial Regulations and Rules of the UN, only the Purchase and Transportation Service at New York possess the authority to agree on behalf of the UN to pay and modification of, or change in, the contract to a waiver of any of its provisions, or to any additional contractual relationship of any kind with the Collaborating Institution. Accordingly, it is agreed that no modification of, or change in the contract or waiver of any of its provisions or additional contractual relationship with the Collaborating Institution shall be valid and enforceable against the UN unless approved in writing by the Chief of the Purchase and Transportation Service.

18. Funding

In the event, through no action initiated by the UN, its legislative body does not appropriate funds for the continuation of this Contract for any fiscal year after the first fiscal year, the UN may, at the beginning of the fiscal year for which its legislative body does not appropriate funds and upon sixty, (60) days prior written notice to the Collaborating Institution, give notice to the Collaborating Institution of cancellation of the Contract stating the failure of the legislative body to appropriate the necessary funds as the reason for cancellation and the notice shall be accompanied by payment of all amounts then due to the Collaborating Institution under this Contract.

19. Arbitration – for vendors in the USA

Any controversy or claim arising out of or in connection with the Contract or any breach thereof, shall, unless it is settled amicable by direct mutual negotiations, be referred to arbitration with the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules then obtaining. Such arbitration shall be conducted under the auspices of the American Arbitration Authority (AAA) which shall also serve as the appointing Authority under the Rules. The parties shall be bound by any arbitration award rendered as a result of such arbitration as the final adjudication of any such controversy or claim.

20. Arbitration – for vendors outside the USA

Any controversy or claim arising out of, or in connection with the Contract of any breach thereof, shall, unless it is settled amicably by direct negotiations, be referred to arbitration with the UNCITAL Arbitration Rules then obtaining. Such arbitration shall be conducted under the auspices of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) which shall also serve as the Appointing Authority under the Rules. The Parties shall be bound by the arbitration award rendered in accordance with such arbitration as the final adjudication of any such controversy or claim.

35

21 Privileges and immunities

Nothing in or relating to this Contract shall be deemed a waiver, express, implied, of any of the privileges and immunities of the United Nations, including its subsidiary organs.

22. Tax exemption

(a) Section 7 of the Convention on the privileges and immunities of the United Nations provides inter-alia that the United Nations, including its subsidiary organs, is exempt from all direct taxes and is exempt from customs duties in respect of articles imported or exported for its official use. Accordingly, the Collaborating Institution authorises the United Nations to deduct from the Collaborating Institution’s invoice any amount representing such taxes or duties charged by the Collaborating Institution to the United Nations. In the event any taxing authority refuses to recognise the United Nations exemption from such taxes, the Collaborating Institution shall immediately consult with the United Nations to determine a mutually acceptable procedure.

(b) The Collaborating Institution shall be wholly responsible for the payment,

where payable, of all customs and other import duties, harbour and port dues, wharfage, landing, pilotage and any other dues that are in force during the time of the execution of this Contract.