Bunia, April 10, 2026 — The second day of the workshops organized in Bunia and Isiro by ACEDH–FDAPID, with support from Open Society, was not about observations. It was about results, trade-offs, and aligning priorities. At the closing, participants left not only better trained, but equipped with a structured framework of actions to be deployed in a context where defending natural resources remains a high-risk activity.
“We have just spent two consecutive days strengthening the capacities of actors engaged in environmental protection and land rights,” summarized Maître Olivier Ndoole. Beyond the numbers—more than thirty defenders from sectors including fisheries, biodiversity, and natural resource management—it was the diversity of profiles and territories represented that shaped the closing discussions. Participants from remote areas of Ituri helped refocus priorities on realities often absent from public policies.
The main outcome of the final day lies in the formalization of a set of operational recommendations, structured around three pillars: strengthening capacities over time, organizing the protection of defenders, and improving their ability to act in the field.
First, participants emphasized the need to intensify and localize training efforts. The challenge is no longer simply to train, but to target critical sectors where tensions are highest. Artisanal and industrial gold and diamond mining in Ituri, dynamics around Lake Albert, and pressures on conservation areas such as the Okapi Wildlife Reserve were identified as priority zones. The idea of a continuous cycle of specialized training, tailored to each sector, was endorsed.
Next, discussions led to a key proposal: the development of a provincial strategy for the protection of defenders. This strategy would be built on a clear threefold approach—advocacy, monitoring, and reporting—to systematically document violations and ensure follow-up. Participants stressed the need to move beyond reactive approaches toward anticipatory strategies capable of identifying risks before they escalate.
In the same vein, the establishment of local mechanisms for legal assistance was identified as an immediate priority. The goal is to bring the law closer to communities, particularly in rural areas where defenders—especially fishermen—often operate without support. Mechanisms combining legal aid, mediation, and judicial recourse were considered to address the diversity of conflicts, whether related to land, the environment, or resource exploitation.
One of the most debated outcomes concerned the structuring of the actors themselves. Participants proposed creating a dynamic of interconnection among existing mechanisms to break the isolation of defenders. This “holistic” approach, as described by some speakers, aims to better coordinate initiatives, share information, and build a collective response to threats.
Within this framework, the idea of a dedicated task force emerged. Its mission would be to lead strategic advocacy, support legal and institutional reforms, and monitor ongoing public policies. Particular attention would be given to legislative developments and emerging frameworks to ensure they reflect realities on the ground.
Another notable advancement was the recognition of specific vulnerabilities. Discussions highlighted the need to develop tailored mechanisms for women defenders and rural actors. The establishment of a legal and judicial mentorship system was proposed to strengthen their ability to navigate often complex and hostile environments.
Participants also opened a strategic discussion on alliances. Engagements are planned with judicial actors, public institutions, and companies operating in extractive sectors. The objective is not only to denounce abuses, but to involve these stakeholders in a shared responsibility approach, encouraging them to contribute to the effective protection of defenders.
Finally, the issue of tools crystallized part of the debates. While the workshops helped strengthen skills in the use of technologies, a gap remains between know-how and actual access to equipment. A clear recommendation was made for technical and financial partners to support defenders with appropriate tools. Without this, their capacity to collect, process, and disseminate information—central to advocacy strategies—will remain limited. At the close, one conclusion stands out: the workshops succeeded in transforming diffuse concerns into a structured roadmap. Yet its implementation will depend on factors that go beyond training—political will, resource mobilization, and the ability of stakeholders to sustain collective momentum. In a context where pressure on natural resources continues to intensify, the outcomes from Bunia and Isiro outline an attempt to reorganize the local response. Whether this framework will withstand realities on the ground remains to be seen.
By Kilalopress