|
The second meeting of the Documentation
Affinity Group took place in Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro at the
Humanitarian Law Center from June 20 – 24, 2005.
[1]
One main goal
of this meeting was to address issues of information management as it
affects each member of the affinity group. While the meeting itself
spanned a broad range of issues including expert presentations on oral
history, archiving, digitization, and exhumations, this report largely
focuses on those presentations related to information management
systems as they relate to the members of the affinity group. A second
topic discussed was the “useful products” that each member will
produce as a part of the overall project.
The meeting
was a productive exchange of technical information as well as
strategic advice among similarly situated groups working on
documentation. The group was particularly animated by discussions of
information management and technical questions related to database
management and dealing with large numbers of documents.
Our modus
operandi has been to hold the meetings at the offices of one of the
core members of the affinity group, thus this meeting was held at the
Humanitarian Law Center.
Information Management:
In an attempt
to streamline the conversation during the roundtable discussion (where
each organization presented their information system to the group), it
was agreed that an important distinction needed to be made regarding
data. In this discussion, data means any material that is the source
of information. Data is unstructured information, and
information is the basis on which we create knowledge.
Knowledge is the end product. Each group addressed the following
issues:
-
Structure
– the conceptual level determining what data is collected. How do we
acquire data? We take the data in and then take it through processes
to make it information. What is the universe of data that we are
seeking?
-
Classification schemes
– in order for the data structure to be of value we need to classify
it. The guidelines for devising a scheme need to be flexible. The
classification scheme needs to be expandable and also collapsible.
-
Input
interface and interfaces
– input interface and interfaces help determine productivity and
quality. This affects efficiency, and the users (input people) can
get a return on their time.
-
Configuration of database
files that each organization has in their organization.
-
The end
purpose
– how the information is best used and for what goals.
Use and Process
In an effort
to learn more about various information systems and what would be most
useful for each documentation center, Patrick Ball highlighted the
ways in which data collection helps people learn about the past
statistically, enabling us to describe patterns and determine if some
arguments are more likely than others. Since technology can help
people understand what is in their data on a statistical level, it is
important to find the right technology for each documentation center.
When
collecting data, the process should have 3 properties – validity,
precision and reliability. For the affinity group, it is and will
continue to be a challenge to make sure that databases represent what
the sources say. The database should represent both the source but
also our judgment about the source. These two things should be kept
separate. Every statistic needs to be traceable as to why one thinks
is true. The database has to express this reality on its own.
Statistics
are strengthening truth telling and changing the panorama of political
options, so getting the analysis right can have huge social and
political impact.
Outcome
What will
benefit the various members of the affinity group are customizable
tools for analysis of their data with an extreme degree of
flexibility. While the process of getting data from the collection
stage to the analysis stage is complex, if the tools themselves are
specific to the data and organization, the approaches used by the
various documentation groups can be similar. While documentation
centers in the affinity group are distinctive, they have a similar
goal – to get the proper use of the data. Instead of leaving the
affinity group meeting with one system for all groups, it is clear
that customization for each organization could be extremely useful.
Regional Experts
The
Humanitarian Law Center invited regional experts on documentation to
the meeting. This proved fruitful in that the affinity group was not
only able to meet with members of the local organization but also
representatives from across the region to see how they link their work
with HLC in Belgrade. Particularly impressive was Safer Hukara and
Milan Gacanovic’s presentation on the creation of the HLC database in
Sarajevo. This is an extraordinarily complex and well-arranged
database of victims, cases, and events of the war in Bosnia. It is
arranged by names of individuals (sometimes a person is classified in
various ways, i.e. can be both a victim and a perpetrator). Patrick
Ball considers it one of the best databases he has seen, and indeed we
were very impressed by it.
Marijana Toma’s work on Oral History is relevant in every
documentation center that was present and we hope to include her
expertise and experience in future affinity group meetings. In
particular, Marijana focused on the great care she puts into oral
history. She begins by putting together a historical file about a
person. Then she has a preliminary interview with them, in which she
takes minimal notes but informally explains what she is doing and gets
to know them a bit. Then she returns to her files and historical
research about the person and/or event. Finally, after preparing for
hours, she meets with the person for a formal, structured interview
(although she does not necessarily follow her notes), which she
records. The she insists on typing the transcripts because she wants
to make sure she gets every nuance. Only then is a file established.
Anna Svenson
and Sergey Glushakov from the Open Society Institute in Budapest
discussed archiving and digitization respectively, lending an
important perspective on the global role these organizations have in
documentation. A website Anna Svenson mentioned as extremely useful is
http://www.its-arolsen.org which is the International Tracing Service.
Amor Masovic’s discussed his role in exhumations throughout the region
where he heads the commission to find the missing. This offered
important cross reference work for Fredy Peccerelli doing exhumations
in Guatemala who also has previous experience with exhumations in the
Balkan Region.
Useful Products
The USIP
proposal (HREIB, which is the lead on the project, has secured funding
through USIP) stipulates an allotment of money to organizations for
the creation of a “useful product”. Useful products can be projects
that each organization is working on that the rest of the group could
benefit from. Out of the group presentations on their own information
systems, suggestions were made as to what might best serve each
organization to work on as their useful product:
ICTJ
Suggestion:
ICTJ could create a database of human rights related organizations
that are working on documentation. The database should be set up so
that organizations can update it with activities that they are working
on. This database could serve as a directory but also can become the
source of a newsletter on activities and information related to
documentation and memorializing. There can be criteria in order to be
a part of the database. The database would clarify the assertion that
there are many groups doing similar work. A direct listing would allow
us to clarify at what stage these groups are at.
FAFG
To better
exploit The Guatemalan Forensic Anthropology Foundation’s resources,
it was suggested that they seek funding to digitize all the paperwork
they are storing in drawers and turn it into a database that is
queryable. All the forms that are filled out and have been filled
should be digitized. A protocol can be instituted where documents get
digitized on a routine basis. Without inputting all data, one can
still digitize everything that gets written. Step two would be to have
the material analyzed by a social scientist and determine what needs
to go beyond digitization to yield something of further value. Other
than the humanitarian value FAFG offers, they created a snapshot of a
certain social reality that is of extreme value on many levels. In
drawers, it isn’t being exploited to its full advantage. It can be
useful to systematically digitize the documents.
HREIB
Methods for
fieldwork would be a useful tool at this stage in the organization’s
development. The challenge is not so much technical at this point as
it is a human challenge to create bonds between faction groups which
will foster communication and access to documents. It is important to
focus on how to systematically gain a critical mass of data. An
organization is at the preparatory stage until enough information is
amassed and decisions are made on the tools to better exploit the
data. At this point it is important to focus on procedures, not
systems. Systematization, translation and distillation into manageable
components would be useful.
HLC
What would be
useful to assess is whether the information system at HLC is being
used at an optimal level. Does it satisfy its purpose and is the
output satisfying the standards set for it? Does the interface make
the HLC database more or less efficient? Is the interface geared
towards the user or the designer? If one is inputting lots of data
then the interface might be difficult to navigate. Suggestions were
made regarding a simplification of the interface and having it on one
screen. In system design one can distinguish between the
classification scheme (which needs to be elaborate) and the interface
(which needs to be as simple as possible). The classification scheme
does not need to be reflected in the interface. Once a group gets the
programming capacity they can structure these themselves. Only
individual organizations can create an interface that is suitable for
them. A useful product might be spending time learning how to program
our individual databases.
DC-Cam
With the
amount of documents DC-Cam has, it is important to digitize
everything. It will provide venues for analysis that are difficult to
do with microfiche. With technology, one can search the massive
documents, and parse them into different categories. It might be
useful to apply for a grant to digitizing the collection. The
possibilities of merging DC-Cam’s 3 databases would be tremendous.
There is also value in creating a systematic database for photos, and
up to 5,000 photos can be put on a cdrom. One project could be
creating the possibilities for an online visual navigation of the
Khmer Rouge Period.
IMF
IMF needs to anticipate all problems and document them. Since IMF’s
collection is scattered, it is difficult to always follow procedure.
Procedures need to be simple yet comprehensive. A useful product would
be to focus on creating procedures that can work under varied
circumstances.
All
organizations could benefit from Patrick Ball’s offer to train members
of the affinity group to fix the interfaces on the databases. The
$5,000 allocated in the grant can go towards that. The group can also
apply for a larger grant for that particular purpose.
Critical Reflection
There were
aspects of the meeting that were not a complete success. An original
goal of the affinity group was to have consistency in the
participants. An alteration of the participants representing each
documentation center seemed to affect the fluidity of the meeting in
Belgrade,
and it took a while to get back into the groove. One way to work
around this in the future is to communicate the goals of the meeting
thoroughly to all participants before the meeting. The idea to bring
an information specialist proved extremely useful, and bringing
specialists should be considered whenever possible. We should also
consider bringing outside organizations to the next meeting (if they
can cover their own expenses).
We should
take steps to make sure that people think of the group as an arena for
asking difficult questions, raising and debating the challenges they
are facing, and discussing best practices.
Funding and Future
The idea of
the Documentation Affinity Group originated from discussions between
ICTJ, IMF, and DC-CAM in Budapest in January 2004. The first meeting
was supported by the ICTJ’s “alliances/networking” program, funded by
the Canadian International development Agency (CIDA).
Through a
series of discussions before the Cambodia meeting, HREIB submitted a
proposal to USIP to get funding for two more meetings of the
Documentation Affinity group. The proposal identified an output with
input from all organizations. This could either be a manual or set of
guidelines for documentation. Other outputs might include useful
products decided upon by each participating organization which were
discussed at length in the meeting in Belgrade.
Funds left
over from the OSI grant (to DC-CAM) for the first meeting of the
Documentation Affinity Group held in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, and the
CIDA grant (to ICTJ) were used for the second Documentation Affinity
group meeting. This enables the Affinity group to use the forthcoming
USIP funds for meetings in November and the spring in Kurdistan and
Guatemala (respectively)
Kurdistan/Jordan Meeting:
Discussions
are presently taking place between HREIB and USIP (the meetings funder),
related to the location of the next meeting. Other members have also
been consulted, and a meeting was recently held in Washington DC,
hosted by IMF. Logistical implications have arisen and the groups are
addressing issues of security, budget, the importance of proximity to
local sites of memorialization and documentation, and the various
political implications of who will be invited and who is “hosting” the
meeting.
Ideally the
group would like the third meeting of the affinity group to be in
Suleymaniyah, Kurdistan from November 13 -18th. Organizing
the meeting properly will be important as well as all decisions
related to hosts and partnership with local Iraqi organizations. At
this stage the IMF is creating a list of organizations they think
should be invited and then those names will be passed along to a group
of experts working in Iraq in an effort to get their opinions on the
work those particular groups are doing. IMF is also doing a mapping
project of people working on documentation in Iraq. The results of
that project will also help in deciding who should participate in the
meeting.
IMF suggests a 6 days meeting broken into three 2 day segments:
-
Affinity
Group alone with International Experts
-
International Group plus Iraqi participants
-
Iraqi
participants alone
Since we have
only budgeted for 5 days, this will have to be taken into account when
we decide on the number of participants, and the location. The IMF and
HREIB are taking the lead on substantive planning for this meeting.
Guatemala and Bellagio
The fourth
meeting of the group, hosted by FAFG, will be in Guatemala around
February 25th, incorporating parts of the meeting with a
public forum in Guatemala as February 25th is National
Victim’s Day. Ideally one day would be spent at the FAFG office in
Guatemala City, and then the group would go to Antigua to continue the
meeting and visit an exhumation site. We would like to include a
variety of local organizations in the meeting, particularly mental
health organizations.
The final
meeting will ideally be held at the Rockefeller Conference Center in
Bellagio, Italy. Louis Bickford and Rebecca Lichtenfeld have written a
proposal to the Rockefeller Foundation to request a final meeting of
the affinity group at Bellagio. The goal of the meeting will be to
write up the final documents and reflect on the successes and failures
and future of the affinity group. This will hopefully take place in
late summer/early fall of 2006.
HlcIndexOut:
019-070-1
Beograd 2.
jun 2005.
II Meeting
Documentation Affinity Group
Belgrade,
21-24 June 2005.
Monday, June
20. 2005
Participants
arrival, checking in at the «Metropol» hotel
20:00
Dinner
Tuesday, June 21.
10:00 -11:00
Introduction of Humanitarian Law Center and the Transitional Justice
Program: Nataša Kandić, executive director, Predrag Dejanović, Justice
and Responsibility program coordinator, Marijana Toma, Telling the
Truth program coordinator and Stana Tadić Documentation protection (
Archiving and data base) project coordinator.
11.00 - 11.30
Rebecca Lichtenfeld, Patrick Pierce, Louis Bickford
Brief intoduction to overall project and disscussion about Guidelines
Manual
11.30 - 12.00
Break
12:00-13:00
Safer Hukara (Research documentation center, Bosnia and Herzegovina),
Milan Gačanović, (Humanitarian Law Center)
HLC
Data base introduction
Introduction of the Research and Documentation center Data base
13:00-13:30
Sergey Glushakov (Open Society Archive, Hungary)
Digitalizing video documentation.
13:30 -15:00
Lunch
15:30 -18:00 Roundtable on databases (with coffee break includeed)
Chair and introduction: Hassan Mneimneh (Iraq Memorial foundation,
Iraq)
Hassan Mneimneh (Iraq Memorial Foundation, Iraq)
IMF
data base introduction
Sampeou Ros (Documentation Center of Cambodia, Cambodia)
DC
CAM data base introduction
Fredy Peccerelli (Guatemalan Forensic Anthropology Foundation,
Guatemala), data base presentation
Khin Maung Shwe, Patrick Pierce ( Human Rights Education Institute of
Burma, Thailand), HREIB data base presentation
Nadir Kohzad, ((Afghanistan
Independent Human Rights Commission, Afghanistan)
Sergey Glushakov (Open Society Archive, Hungary)
Information systems. System protection and documentation safety.
Wednesday, June 22.
10:00 -11:30
Patrick Ball ( Benetech Initiative, USA)
Analysis and statistic reports based on the data base.
Summary of presented data base.
11:30 -12.00
Coffe break
12:00 -13:00
Discussion of Patrick Ball`s
presentation
13:00 -14:30
Lunch
14:30 -16:30
Fredy Peccerelli ( Guatemalan Forensic Antropology Foundation,
Guatemala), Amor Mašović (State Commission for missing persons and
escavation of mass graves, BiH)
Uncovering of mass graves and
body remains
identification as part of serving the justice process for the victims.
Anna Svenson
(Open Society Archive, Hungary)
Documentation
protection as an instrument of facing the past
Louis
Bickford (International Center for Transitional Justice, USA)
International
institutions, transitional justice, and documentary collection
16:30-17:00
Coffee break
17:00-18:00
Marijana Toma
(Humanitarian Law Center)
Oral History
Thursday,
June 23.
10:00-10:45
Louis
Bickford (International Center for Transitional Justice, USA)
Presentation
of memorials and documents
10:45-11:30
Discussion
11:30-12:00
Coffee break
12:00-13:00
Summary of
meeting. Next steps
Patrick
Pierce (Human Rights Education Institute of Burma, Thailand), Rebecca
Lichtenfeld (International Center for Transitional Justice, USA)
The next
meeting and logistical details
13:00-15:30
Lunch
17.00 - 18.00
Photo exhibit
Srebrenica
18:00-21:00
City tour by
bus
21. 00-22. 30
City tour by
boat
22:30
Dinner
Participant List
Documentation Affinity Group Meeting
June 20 -24, 2005
Humanitarian Law Center
Belgrade
Louis Bickford International Center for Transitional Justice
20 Exchange Place Floor 33
NY, NY 10005
917 438 9324
lbickford@ictj.org
Sampeou Ros Documentation Center of Cambodia (DC-Cam)
P.O. Box 1110, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Tel: (855) 23 211 875
Fax: (855) 23 210 358
dccam@online.com.kh
Rebecca Lichtenfeld International Center for Transitional
Justice
20 Exchange Place Floor 33
NY, NY 10005
Tel: 917 438 9307
rlichtenfeld@ictj.org
Stana Tadic
Humanitarian Law Center
Makenzijeva 67
11110
Belgrade
Serbia and Montenegro
Tel/Fax: +381-11-344-43-48
Tel/Fax: +381-11-344-34-23
archive@hlc.org.yu
Hassan Mneimneh Iraq Memory Foundation
Tel:
202-460-4510
hmeimneh@iraqmemory.org
Patrick Pierce Human Rights Education Institute
of Burma
P.O. Box 37
Chiang Mai University
Chiang Mai 50202
Thailand
pjp@pobox.com
Fredy Peccerelli Guatemalan Forensic Anthropology Foundation
Avenida Simeon Cantas 10-64
Zona 2
Guatemala City, Guatemala 01002
Tel: 502 5514 3129
fredy.peccerelli@fafg.org
Khin Maung Shwe Human Rights Education Institute of Burma
P.O. Box 37
Chiang Mai University
Chiang Mai 50202
Thailand
googooez@yahoo.com
* Patrick
Ball, Information Management Specialist, Benetech Initiative
* Milan
Gacanovic, Researcher and analyst, Humanitarian Law Center
* Sergey
Glushakov, Information Technology Specialist, Open Society Archives in
Budapest
* Safer
Hukara, Sarajevo, Information Technology Specialist, Sarajevo
*Amor Masovic,
Director of the State Commission for Missing Persons and Excavations
of Mass Graves, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
* Muhamed
Mujkic, Chief of the Video and DVD archive, State Commission for
Missing Persons and Excavations of Mass Graves,
Sarajevo,
Bosnia and Herzegovina
* Anna
Svenson, Chief Archivist, Open Society Archives in Budapest
* Marijana
Toma, Program Coordinator,
Humanitarian
Law Center,
Belgrade
* Kenan
Zahirovic - IT Specialist, Research and Documentation Center,
Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
* present at
this meeting only
|
