Building the Bridge Between Security and Human Rights
Andy Thompson talks with Chris Goodwin-Hudson, Founding Partner and Director of Watchman, about training in Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights born from extensive international experience of working in highly challenging environments alongside large multinational projects that impact on local community’s wellbeing and way of life.
How do you characterize Watchman?
Watchman’s strapline is “Where security meets social responsibility”, and our specific commitment is to act as bridge between security and human rights. The increasing societal commitment to duty of care, epitomized by the global focus on ESG and associated stewardship codes, make this a growth industry at the moment.
What is the origin of the company?
Typically, like a lot of people in the security industry, my background was originally military. Whilst serving in the army I completed a post grad in social anthropology assessing the effect of the extractive industry on indigenous groups in Latin America – this sparked an interest in the community aspects of business and the potential for security fall out. I started my civilian career working for a U.S. Investment Bank as part of their in-house security function. After that, I switched to an Islamic NGO which had a very different approach to physical risk, specifically around “acceptance strategy” which in simple terms uses community goodwill as a means of protection.
These two experiences, initially with Goldman Sachs and then the Aga Khan Development Network, set off the thinking that if one could manage the risk concerns of profit driven commercial organizations with community-based security – a really valuable outcome could be found in which both sides prospered.
VPSHR Students Female park wardens, Central Africa.
Who do you work with?
Our preferred clients are those that deliver “impact projects” – i.e. projects that cause disruption to the local population through “involuntary resettlement,” agricultural upheaval or significant interference to established livelihoods and the surrounding landscape. Clients can vary from precious gemstone miners (Colombia), to transnational energy projects (Balkans) to conservation (Central Africa). The common thread is friction between the client and its host community, often caused by the poor handling of security. Security can be anything from armed private contractors, to police and military or even neighbouring villagers paid to guard a site or facility during dark hours.
Many of these arrangements lack meaningful training and it manifests in misconduct and poor treatment of the local community. When a project or organization loses the goodwill and ‘buy in’ of its host population, its long-term viability is called into question.
This led us inevitably to the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights – an internationally recognized soft instrument of law aimed at strengthening security delivery through a more socially responsible approach
Applying cold British Military logic to the existing syllabus we distilled it to fit low literacy training audiences such as conscript soldiers and gate guards. The aim was to ensure that when confronted by situations that impact upon Human Rights unsupervised soldiers or guards could make the right call based on immersive and practical training. By the same token we wanted to impart some of the best practice around “values and standards” that military service instils. This means specific investment in the management and command elements of a security team, training them in the moral dimension to leadership.
The training that we provide is designed to enhance professional conduct but also to increase students’ ethical understanding and behaviour.
How do you define the need you are meeting?
There is a growing sense of social conscience across the marketplace. Security has traditionally been viewed as a necessary evil fraught with risk. A reality worsened by the presence of poorly controlled private military contractors and rogue operators. Watchman seeks to reverse that negative image and turn security providers, both public and private, into a positive – capable of improving a project’s standing and success across the spectrum. A guard force committed to Human Rights best practice actively seeks to uphold the Rule of Law, supports host communities and rebalances febrile local dynamics.
Security is more often than not the first line of interaction that a company presents to the outside world. A project holds significant liability if that security is armed with an AK47, pepper spray or a simple baton. Without training and correct investment, lethal and less lethal equipment in the hands of low skilled, poorly motivated security providers presents a very real risk.
The basic need we meet is to convert that risk into an advantage.
How do you approach the delivery of the training you provide?
The Voluntary Principles “curriculum” is broadly fixed, but any training package should be built upon a rigorous needs analysis. Instructing a heavily armed private security contract in rural Central America, where you may have aggressive cartel activity and uncooperative law enforcement will differ markedly from the more benign context of an EU member state hosting a gas pipeline construction across an agricultural zone rich with cultural heritage. In the latter case activist civil society deployed sophisticated resistance techniques designed to force public and private security officials into telegenic mistakes. To create appropriate training material you need to bring to bear a level of common sense. If your students have been pulled off counter insurgency operations in Southern Africa for a two-hour VPs course, the training has to be high impact and engaging.
Our training courses last anything from three weeks down to three hours. The most condensed version that I’ve ever offered was undertaken remotely to a team of senior leadership for a MENA based Oil and Gas corporation. I think I gave a 45-minute taster over a zoom call. Obviously, the longer it is, the more detail you can inject and the more valuable it becomes. Crucially, for the instruction to really bed in you need an enduring relationship that allows for continuation training and meaningful monitoring and evaluation incl. Training of Trainers (ToT).
They were created in 2000 by a team of government players, human rights lawyers, and ex-military personnel who grasped the intricacies of Use of Force (UoF). They were built on an awareness that security, in whatever form, represents the potential for serious breakdown in community relations and Human Rights violations.
They started in response to mistakes made in frontier territories where companies allowed public security forces to use their equipment, machinery, and infrastructure (such as accommodation and storage facilities) only for those assets to be misused. Bulldozers supposedly borrowed for constructing defensive features were used to dig mass graves, warehouses intended for accommodation turned into illegal detention centres where suspects were allegedly tortured etc. The VPs were established to insulate all sides from these kinds of risks and improve the capabilities of host nation private and public security.
If you remember nothing else about the VPs, they are a tool that generates a level of understanding in security forces about Human Rights through a commitment to positive community engagement. The end product, of socially responsible security, can be really powerful.
We have been busier in the last four months with our VPSHR offering, despite Covid, than we were in the previous four years. Typically, from my experience, Voluntary Principles training and implementation has been the preserve of NGOs. There are commercial institutions that do it, but they tend to be quite rare.
Effective VPSHR training is difficult to deliver particularly when it comes to host nation law enforcement or military. It can only be offered at their request and so there is a fair amount of deft diplomacy required to get to the start line – you have to manage the tacit inference that their Human Rights approach needs remedy. It’s easier with private security for whom the training is often a contract requirement.
Training teams need to blend a number of characteristics; the nuanced social understanding of an NGO, a soldier’s grasp of Use of Force and clear instruction ability. When it comes to UoF training you need ex-military or police instructors whose previous experience validates their teaching – this is particularly the case when it comes to discussions around lethal force. So, we fuse commercial sector finesse, with best in class military and NGO backgrounds.
How have you adapted to shifting working environments and market trends?
Thanks to Covid, we have been forced to deliver a lot of our courses remotely, or at least developed courses that can be delivered remotely if restrictions prevent us from travelling. As a result, we’ve used videography to a huge degree and that means that we’ve developed a series of film clips that encapsulate typical security and human rights-based problems: gender-based violence and harassment, protest scenarios and escalation of force, extortion at check points, shoot-no shoot decisions etc. Consequently, we can deliver Voluntary Principles training to remote audiences with relative ease – the format is user friendly in the same way that you and I are speaking on a zoom call – all the local instructor has to do is press play on a video link.
Language issues are overcome by using subtitles and voice overs which ensure that the key messages hit home. You simply translate the text and narration in advance and graft it on to the videos. As the scenario unfolds you press pause at the appropriate moment and ask, “What is going wrong now in terms of values and standards, of human rights, of proportionate use of force?”.
Inevitably immersive, interactive video training is more effective than text heavy ppt. Video is a powerful training agent.
Private Security VPSHR Video Training – Managing Organized Crime
What is the outcome of the training in terms of delivery to a standard and a resulting “qualification” or measurement of success?
We break down our training into three separate modules:
- “Human Rights” – e.g. freedom from torture, freedom from discrimination based on ethnicity, gender, religion, freedom of movement, freedom to peaceful assembly, and so on. We look at the typical touch points between security and human rights and where violations can take place. Then we show them examples of human rights violations at the hands of unprofessional security officials.
- We then look at “Values and Standards”: for example, non-payment of bribes; extorting local community members as they pass through a checkpoint; the expectation of certain codes of behaviour when you are on and off duty; the role of leadership, the responsibility of officers or shift supervisors to lead by example…
- And finally, “Use of force:” This module deals with proportionality and the application of force using standard models such as the force continuum. Much depends on the equipment in use: hand cuffs, batons, pepper spray all the way through to AK 47 assault rifles.
To your question “How do you then measure this to a standard?”: the Voluntary Principles are not a standard, they are a “soft instrument of law” that offer a set of acceptable baseline criteria for delivering socially responsible security. Committed clients run with our “monitoring and evaluation” phase after the initial training. That’s where you see the real value added. The extent of VPSHR traction can be monitored by the project’s social engagement teams via ongoing community consultation and feedback from the grievance mechanism. E.g. Reports from local villagers who comment that “checkpoint commanders are far more courteous now or that the search regime has become more professional and discreet.”
There are other ways in which you can tell that the training has been embedded which include assessment of a project’s internal governance. E.g. internal investigations into UoF incidents and follow up training by trained trainers.
Inevitably you are working in highly complex environments. What do you find frustrating relative to delivering VPs training?
One of the frustrations endemic to a lot of the countries in which we work is the failure to adequately invest in the Human Rights of the security forces we are called on to train. The emphasis is always on the host communities which, although appropriate, is rarely balanced with the very real needs of the soldiers, guards, and police themselves.
In real terms this looks like park rangers up against a vicious poacher threat but, on account of equipment deficiencies, forced to patrol in flip flops, mine site gendarmes who haven’t been paid for two months, conscript counter insurgent troops fed a meal every other day and so on. The most pressing example of this problem was working with Latino security guards whose patrol routes and check point locations were passed by law enforcement ‘colleagues’ to a team of local sicarios in the pay of the regional narco boss…the subsequent spate of close quarter killings and brutal murders failed to result in a single official inquiry. That kind of backdrop to security delivery is stark…not surprisingly it contributes to chronic morale issues. With these kinds of failings, the odds of mistakes around Use of Force or community interface increase dramatically.
Security professionals have Human Rights and those include correctly functioning weapon systems, slings and ammunition – marksmanship training that is fit for purpose and proper uniform. You get the picture…
Public Security VPSHR Video Training: Human Rights and Use of Force
When we first started, it would often be fairly short, sharp requests: “could you come out to Iraq and deliver three, four days training for our private security contractors, and we’ll try get the local police command to sit in on the first couple of lessons …” Now people understand that meaningful change is achieved through a three to four phase training package, based on a well-considered needs analysis, tailored instruction incl. Training of Trainers (ToT), monitoring and evaluation, with quarterly health check visits…
Training of trainers is a real growth market for us because companies want to institutionalize the knowledge. We are now being asked to create the sequel to those videos I mentioned – more sophisticated, and complex vignettes that really challenge the junior leaders to work out “what would we do in this situation?” It’s pushing our own creative abilities to come up with impactful material.
My business colleague is a military reservist, which means that we use his reservist colleagues as the actors for our training serials. That allows us to use people that are essentially soldiers – well drilled, presentable and who get the aim of our filming. They also know how to hold weapons or rifles convincingly.
We have a training facility in which we assemble basic VCPs using booms, cones and sand bagged bunkers to ensure a degree of realism. We then bring in “extras” – wives, kids, neighbours to play ‘civpop’. You can create an angry mob or an insurgent team with relative ease. So, on a fairly low budget and with all the advantages of modern tech we create compelling, plausible generic VPSHR scenarios that are easily applicable, whether you are in Guatemala, the Congo or Albania – their real value is that they can be delivered remotely via a desktop in London.
In response to the original question – if training isn’t memorable, its ineffective. To measure the long-term success of training, at least in part, it has to be dynamic and exciting such that a tired gate guard remembers the key messages when she’s confronted with a violent protest at the site entrance. VPSHR in video format allows this
How do you address the issue of diversity?
Good question – this is a fundamental. If you’re in the business of engaging and reassuring a project’s surrounding community that security forces are on their side – their composition needs to reflect that community. Think in terms of ethno-religious dynamics, and particularly gender.
On certain projects we’ve encountered pronounced GBVH problems – sexual violence on a grim scale but… by balancing male majority security teams with correctly trained women rapid positive change can be achieved.
Tribal hierarchies can occasionally lead to certain groups struggling to promote beyond unskilled posts or ascend to management positions. Think sub-Saharan Africa or indigenous communities in Central America. Within private security teams this can lead to real rancour and a drop in operational effectiveness. It can play out within village level bias where one settlement will receive preferential treatment over its neighbours. Certainly in South America, within the Andean context, this can drive inter-village hostility and destabilize an already brittle social balance.
You have to dismantle these issues using clear logic – the VPSHR include an holistic risk assessment process that takes into account diversity related themes and applies intelligent mitigation.
We mentioned that VP Training is not something you just turn up and deliver and walk away: the impact is monitored over time. Are you able to witness the results of your work?
It slightly depends. If you’re out there for a while, a two-to-three-week package, we always try and ensure that we see some of the people we trained very early on at the end. Do the students remember our strap lines? We hammer home “Good neighbours equal good security.” If they shout that line out at you when you pass them at an access control point….well that’s a small win.
We hand out laminated smart cards attached to a lanyard, to be carried on the person… They outline colour coded threat actions linked to proportionate actions and response… They sustain an awareness of the training keep after we’ve left.
In the case of proving success – it takes a long time hence my point about reliance on community engagement/social performance teams monitoring the training impact via stakeholder governance and grievance mechanisms. The data needs monitoring over a protracted timescale.
The easiest way to measure success is by a drop in Human Rights related complaints but that is generally a long-term assessment. Particular care needs to be taken in correct investigation of UoF incidents and an evaluation of related disciplinary action.
A crucial component of VPSHR training is that force can and should be used but in the only in the correct circumstance.
Public Security VPSHR Video Training – Escalation of Force
Where and how have you got your training approach wrong?
Easy to answer that! Failure to pitch the training to low literacy audiences – the result was unrealistic volumes of information…Imagine a conscript infantryman – knackered, hungry, unpaid and who has just seen a mate killed in action – the last thing he wants to be doing is looking at a text heavy ppt slide delivered by a foreigner…
Simplicity, picture heavy and local host nation partners are the key. That latter category includes high grade interpreters.
What advice do you have for companies seeking a provider of VPSHR training?
Get input from experts on the course delivery. UoF trainers need to have proven experience in high octane environments to be credible – ex military and armed police are ideal. Human Rights instructors need to know how these rights apply to ground level security operations…former NGO/advocacy players make a huge difference and
Keep checking your presentations with the client during the preparatory phase – they get the target audience better than you.
Training, to use the old adage, is 50 percent information, 50 percent inspiration. Instructors need to believe in that. In our case, the last training we delivered a few weeks ago was in a tent in the middle of the African bush – the students needed to be leaving that tent energized and excited about putting into practice what w
The final point is to extend the training to other functions beyond security – social, legal and wider management…
Who has impressed you as a training instructor?
I would point you immediately to a guy called Angus Warren, of Warren Business Consulting. Angus, I think, used to run the in-house training function at BP. He left to set up what was originally an Oil & Gas training consultancy but, as time has unfolded, reinvented himself constantly to ensure that his offering tracked market needs.
The secret to his success is an almost obsessive level of rigour about every single slide, every video clip – his team have developed a fine grain criteria around the percentage of text to pictures and images, even down to the construct of individual slides.
We have worked together on a number of projects, but he understands the way in which audiences think depending on seniority and responsibility. Time is taken to think through even the basics from the physical setting of each course all the way through to coffee breaks – frequency and length etc.
Angus Warren is someone I would point people to for the full spectrum of training: leadership in business, financial crime, career navigation and ESG.
Training in such complex issues can be intense – what lighter moments have there been for you?
I was in the Congolese rainforest training a group of park wardens on the VPs. You can imagine in a very humid tropical environment like that, there are localized rain showers. I could see that I was being rained on, but the students were not, and yet they were only about five or ten meters away from me. I looked up in the tree and saw a gang of baboons using the branch as a urinal! I was right underneath them and I was just hosed with monkey piss! You have to laugh….
Chris can be reached at Cgh@watchman.co.Uk or visit the Watchman website