top of page
Angola-HR-Abuses-Orpe.jpg

Liberating the Captive and Protecting the Vulnerable: Strengthening Justice, Equity, and Social Cohesion

7b59569e-44c9-4137-906c-57fa04cd44f1.png
DIAGRAM-lIBERATE THE cAPTIVE.png

Investing in Justice and Dignity

Across autocratically driven contexts, including Africa, vulnerable populations, particularly detainees, political prisoners, and marginalized groups face heightened risks of arbitrary detention, prolonged pre-trial incarceration, ill-treatment, and denial of due process. While legal frameworks may formally recognize fundamental rights, gaps in implementation, oversight, and professional capacity frequently result in systemic abuses.

​

OHRA proposes the “Liberate and Protect the Vulnerable” program to strengthen the protection of fundamental rights through legal empowerment, institutional capacity-building, detention oversight, and accountability mechanisms, grounded in international human rights law and national criminal procedure guarantees.

​

The program focuses on preventing abuse rather than reacting to violations, equipping justice sector actors with the skills and tools required to enforce safeguards, while ensuring detainees and marginalized populations have access to effective remedies. The initiative aligns with EU Human Rights & Democracy priorities, UN treaty body recommendations, and SDG 16.

The Need We Are Called to Address

In many African nations and similar autocratic contexts:

  • Preventive detention is frequently overused, with limited judicial scrutiny.

  • Access to legal counsel is delayed or ineffective, particularly for indigent or politically sensitive detainees.

  • Allegations of torture and ill-treatment persist in detention facilities.

  • Habeas corpus and judicial review mechanisms are underutilized or inconsistently applied.

  • Legal professionals lack specialized training in adversarial safeguards, exclusion of illegally obtained evidence, and rights-based detention oversight.

​

These challenges undermine public trust in justice institutions, weaken rule of law, and expose vulnerable populations to prolonged suffering. Without targeted intervention, these systemic weaknesses risk entrenching cycles of abuse and impunity.

Program Goal and Objectives

Overall Goal

To protect vulnerable populations from human rights abuses by strengthening the application of due process guarantees, detention oversight, and accountability mechanisms in autocratically driven contexts.

​

Specific Objectives

  1. Enhance protection of detainees and political prisoners through effective application of criminal procedure safeguards.

  2. Strengthen the capacity of judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and monitors to prevent arbitrary detention and ill-treatment.

  3. Improve access to justice and legal remedies for marginalized and at-risk populations.

  4. Institutionalize detention oversight and accountability mechanisms consistent with international standards.

Impact Pathway

If justice sector actors are equipped with the legal knowledge, ethical standards, and practical tools required to enforce procedural safeguards, and if detention conditions are subject to regular, independent oversight, and if vulnerable populations have access to effective legal remedies, then arbitrary detention, torture, and procedural abuses will decrease, leading to improved compliance with national law and international human rights obligations, and ultimately contributing to strengthened rule of law, protection of civic space, and human dignity.

Logic Model

Overall Goal

  • To protect vulnerable populations from human rights abuses by strengthening the application of due process guarantees, detention oversight, and accountability mechanisms in autocratically driven contexts.

Inputs

  • International and national human rights legal experts

  • OHRA doctrinal frameworks on due process and detention safeguards

  • Partnerships with judiciaries, bar associations, NHRIs, CSOs, and faith-based actors

  • Monitoring and documentation tools (detention checklists, habeas templates, case-tracking systems)

  • Training curricula grounded in international human rights law and criminal procedure guarantees

  • Funding and donor support

  • Access to detention facilities and justice institutions (formal or negotiated)

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​​​

4. Short- to Medium-Term Outcomes

  • Increased judicial scrutiny of preventive detention

  • Improved application of habeas corpus and pre-trial review

  • Reduced tolerance for torture and ill-treatment in detention

  • Enhanced professional competence in adversarial safeguards

  • Increased access to legal remedies for vulnerable populations

  • Improved transparency and accountability in detention facilities

Activities

  • Legal Capacity Building

    • Train judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and legal aid providers on:

      • Habeas corpus and judicial review

      • Limits on preventive detention

      • Exclusion of illegally obtained evidence

      • Prohibition of torture and ill-treatment

  • Detention Oversight

    • Establish or strengthen independent detention monitoring mechanisms

    • Conduct regular, documented detention visits

  • Legal Empowerment & Remedies

    • Provide legal assistance to detainees and at-risk populations

    • Support strategic litigation and emergency remedies

  • Accountability & Institutional Reform

    • Develop SOPs for rights-based detention oversight

    • Support integration of safeguards into judicial and prosecutorial practice

  • Awareness & Advocacy

    • Disseminate rights-based guidance aligned with UN and regional standards

5. Long-Term Outcomes / Impact

  • Reduction in arbitrary detention and prolonged pre-trial incarceration

  • Decrease in torture and ill-treatment in detention settings

  • Strengthened compliance with national law and international human rights obligations

  • Restored public trust in justice institutions

  • Strengthened rule of law, civic space, and protection of human dignity

​

​

​

Outputs

  • Number of justice sector actors trained and certified

  • Detention oversight mechanisms operationalized

  • Detention visits conducted and reports issued

  • Legal aid cases supported (habeas petitions, pre-trial reviews, torture claims)

  • SOPs, guidelines, and checklists adopted by institutions

  • Policy briefs aligned with UN treaty body recommendations

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

6. Theory of Change

If justice sector actors are equipped with the legal knowledge, ethical standards, and practical tools to enforce procedural safeguards;
and if detention conditions are subject to regular, independent oversight;
and if vulnerable populations have access to effective legal remedies;
then arbitrary detention, torture, and procedural abuses will decrease, leading to improved compliance with international human rights law, strengthened rule of law, and protection of human dignity.

7. Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E)

Key Indicators

  • % reduction in unlawful preventive detention cases

  • Number of habeas corpus petitions filed and granted

  • Frequency and quality of detention oversight reports

  • Compliance rate with detention SOPs

  • Participant knowledge gains (pre/post training assessments)

Data Sources

  • Court records and detention registers

  • Monitoring visit reports

  • Legal aid case files

  • Surveys and institutional self-assessments

Evaluation

  • Baseline and endline assessments

  • Periodic external evaluations aligned with EU/UN reporting standards

​8. Sustainability Strategy

  • Institutionalization of training within judicial and bar institutions

  • Transfer of oversight tools to national actors and NHRIs

  • Development of local trainers and monitors (training-of-trainers)

  • Policy uptake through SOPs and judicial practice notes

  • Long-term partnerships with domestic institutions

9. Risks and Assumptions

Key Risks

  • Political resistance to oversight and accountability

  • Restricted access to detention facilities

  • Retaliation risks for monitors or beneficiaries

Mitigation Measures

  • Incremental engagement and confidence-building with institutions

  • Strategic use of international standards and treaty obligations

  • Confidential reporting mechanisms and protection protocols

Core Assumptions

  • Minimum institutional openness to capacity-building

  • Continued relevance of international human rights commitments

  • Donor support for preventive, systems-oriented reform

​Alignment

  • SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

  • EU Human Rights & Democracy Action Plan

  • UN CAT, ICCPR, and regional human rights mechanisms

bottom of page