Dear AMP Review Secretariat and ADB BCRC members,
As per the Consultations timetable shared in the Stakeholder Engagement Plan in the ADB AM Review website, NGO Forum on ADB is deeply concerned over the county selections for the external stakeholder’s consultations. For the AM review to evaluate the mechanism it is expected that the consultation should investigate and learn from civil society and borrowers in countries where cases have been filed. There is no justification for holding consultations in Washington, Milan, or Tokyo considering ADB does not have a single investment or case in any of those developed host countries. ADB AM has had various cases in Pakistan (the highest number of complaints filed as per the registry), Cambodia, Nepal, Laos, Vietnam, Myanmar, Samoa, and Bangladesh; it is shocking to see that not one of those countries has been considered for this consultation process. It also needs to be explicitly pointed out that the entire Mekong region has been ignored in this review plan.
We urge the ADB to redesign the stakeholder engagement plan and include the above-mentioned countries so that civil society and affected communities who have used the ADBs AM can share their insight and experience in the crafting of the new policy. Furthermore, the NGO Forum on ADB is deeply concerned with the limited time frame for the W paper circulation in this AM review. We urge the ADB to ensure that a minimum of 120 days of public disclosure is retained for the ADB AM W paper for comments. The current time frame of 12 weeks with key countries missing from the SEP clearly illustrates a lack of genuine stakeholder engagement for this upcoming ABD review.
We urge the ADB to include the countries cited above and increase the W paper commenting period to 120 days in order for this AM review to truly be inclusive and effective. We look forward to your urgent positive response in this regard.
Best,
Rayyan Hassan
Executive Director
NGO Forum on ADB
Comments