2.3 APRM Outputs, Lessons Learned human rights treaties, as well as non-binding documents such as the Grand Bay (Mauritius) Declaration and Plan of Action for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (1999) and best practices and codes adopted by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The questions are grouped under four broad thematic headings (based on but expanded from the initial three in the 2002 Declaration): democracy and good political governance; economic governance and management; corporate governance; and socioeconomic development. and 59. The work of the national and continental APRM institutions results in three important documents. (a) The first is a country self-assessment report by the country concerned using the APRM questionnaire. The process of developing the self-assessment report is required to be a highly participatory “national dialogue” about the challenges the country faces, managed by the national governing council rather than controlled by the Government. In practice, the record in relation to participation has been mixed, but positive overall.13 The Panel Member assigned to the country and representatives of the APR Secretariat visit early during the preparation of the self-assessment to oversee the process and assist in its implementation (the “country support mission”). Once the draft report is completed, it is “validated” at a series of meetings with different stakeholder groups, where presentations are made about the findings and recommendations and comments are solicited. 57. The questionnaire has been the subject of a fair amount of criticism, e.g. that it covers too many issues, has a confusing structure, its questions often overlap, and is unmanageable both for governments and for civil society organisations seeking to respond to it. However, on closer scrutiny, it is much more conceptually rigorous and comprehensive in its lines of inquiry around governance than the original documents. 58. In order to operationalise the APRM, several institutions have been established at country level in accordance with APRM “country guidelines”. Although these have varied somewhat in form, they include: (a) a national APRM focal point, ideally at ministerial level or in the office of the presidency and reporting directly to the Head of State; (b) a national commission or national governing council, responsible for overseeing the national process and signing off of the documents produced, which should be diverse and representative of a wide range of interest groups and should be autonomous from Government (though not all countries have fully respected this rule); (c) a national APRM secretariat to provide administrative and technical support to the national commission or governing council, ideally established outside of Government and with an independent budget; and (d) technical research institutions with the responsibility to administer the APRM questionnaire and carry out background research.12 (b) Based on the self-assessment report, each country prepares a draft National Programme of Action (NPoA) to address the problems identified; this is the second and equally important document at national level. Both documents are then submitted to the continental APRM Secretariat. (c) On the basis of this documentation and separate expert inputs, including issues papers as well as information collected during a “country review mission”, the continental APRM Secretariat coordinates the drafting of a separate “country review report” – the third and equally important document – and comments on the NPoA. The APRM Secretariat is assisted in this work by technical partners, including the African Development Bank, the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), which supply information and also participate in the country review missions. 13 12 Achievements See African Peer Review Mechanism: Annual Report 2006 (APRM Secretariat, 2007). –10– See the guidelines for civil society and national focal points available on the website of the South African Institute of International Affairs (www.saiia.org.za) and the evaluations of the APRM processes available on the AfriMAP website (www.afrimap.org).