When states are unable to provide adequate security, provision often comes instead from local non-state bodies, private security companies and criminal groups. This paper examines the current status of state and non-state/local justice and security networks in fragile states. Donors can improve security and justice delivery by strengthening both state and non-state security providers, and fostering legislation that clarifies the state/non-state relationship.
Since fragile states are often unable to provide adequate justice and security, its delivery is frequently privatised. Individuals within security institutions, private security companies and criminal groups provide security when the state cannot. Because of the political sensitivity of justice and security and their often tenuous legitimacy, fragile states may be unwilling to permit or recognise other actors’ delivery of security.
Non-state security providers are patronised in part because their service delivery is compatible with cultural norms, legacies and local languages. The donor community has concluded that these security networks are often more effective, accountable, efficient, legitimate and accessible security providers than the fragile state.
The donor community and fragile states face the following challenges in reconciling state and non-state delivery of security services:
- Post-colonial states, whether they like it or not, derive their legitimacy from how they integrate non-state networks into a multi-layered service delivery structure.
- Despite the many ways the state can ‘contract out’ justice and security, its ability to do so is limited. Effective contracting out of services requires the state to have an established and detailed justice and security strategy.
- Donors need to determine how they can support non-state security delivery and which non-state actors or networks are appropriate for support. The ability of donors to support non-state networks is limited, but achievable, if conducted appropriately.
- Donors may need to modify their funding mechanisms in order to channel money through local non-governmental organisations to non-state/local justice and security networks.
- The hybrid method of public/private partnerships as an alternative to contracting out delivery of security services can contribute to long-term state building and improve short-term security delivery.
Donor support for improved security and justice depends on the realisation that non-state security providers are a vital component of current security and justice service delivery in post-colonial states. Donors can pursue the following avenues to integrate non-state providers into the state system and contribute to state-building:
- Strengthen service delivery by both state and non-state providers;
- Foster legislation that clarifies the relationship between state and non-state providers;
- Support mechanisms by which local security network decisions can be appealed; and
- Assist in building performance measurement systems within state institutions which can evolve into policy and planning units.
