As all of us know within our context - Africa, West Africa - women do not participate in these kinds of discussions and meetings like the constitutional review. So it became necessary that we reached out to women and created space where, amongst themselves, they could dialogue and come up with issues that affected them.

And when we did that, we came up with issues like child marriage; representation in the three branches of government - making it a constitutional guarantee; making sure credits are delivered to women in terms of business; and the issues of rural women, access to to natural resources.

So those issues came up and then the women became free enough to speak in bigger meetings like the constitutional conference - because we already had their views, their ownership - we had their views so their voices were stronger and they felt more confident to participate in the meetings.

I talked about the culture when when we got in the bigger meetings, they became shy in the meetings, they were going sit at the back, we had to call them up, and then tradition came into play: when the man is speaking you you have to keep quiet and the men - sadly in terms of the delegation - the men spoke more than the women because the community chose the delegations, so there were more men than women.

But we were able to conscientize them and we encouraged them to lobby their delegates so some issues came forth, especially women’s participation in the legislature because the current constitution is just even [not gender sensitive], it just says “a person”, but we were able to get the conference to take note that the issues of women cannot be generalized they have to be special, it has to be highlighted.

So we got that conference to agree, as one of the points going forward, to present the president for onward presentation to the legislature, that there must be constitutional guarantees for seats for women in the legislature. And that went forward to President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and she subsequently forwarded it to the legislature, and that has been where it is stuck - at the legislature.

Even on December 8th 2020, we had a referendum; that particular issue was not on the ballot of referendum. Why? Because the legislature in the Liberian Senate consists of 30 seats, there's only one woman. In the House of Representatives consisting of 73 seats, there are only eight women. Our constitution says that for an issue to go on the referendum ballot, two thirds of both Houses have to approve it.

So clearly you see why no issue only for women got on the ballot. 

We went all over the country, interviewing and having town halls, and mixed town hall meetings, and special meetings and everybody agrees, but when you come to the issue of power, the men will not give up power easily.

The men will not do that. They stand up and say the women must fight for power.

And they use our former president, Madam Ellen Johnson Sirleaf as an example, they say to us that “if she can make it, go through the rigors of politics and become President of the Republic of Liberia, then the women can make it - We will not create anything easy for the women, the women will have to fight.”

And that’s where we are.

We are now in a transitional period after having three decades of dictatorship, in which time women - and all citizens and specifically women - had suffered a lot of insecurity, violence, and atrocities. And now we are in the transitional period but still we are struggling because still there are peace agreements in process.

Our economic situation is very difficult, still we have a lot of political disagreements, a lot of things and this is, I think, typical for many experiences of transitional periods. 

The first experience with the 1325 NAP was in 2014, under the dictatorship. The development of the NAP was really led by the government. But unfortunately the consultation - which was done by the government - did not really reflect the real situation, they tried really to present a very flowery situation under their rule. 

The NAP was ultimately endorsed by the women of the government - even by some of the women activists in the opposition unfortunately - but it was refused by the government, specifically the Islamist politicians, and it was never endorsed.

I think that [the government] were not genuine in really tackling women, peace and security and it was about pleasing the international community. So until that government was ousted, there has not been implementation, or formal implementation for women, peace and security in agreements. 

That gives us a very important lesson - to what extent the state is a state for human rights - which shows its seriousness for women, peace and security.

The transitional government has initiated the development of a new NAP, and it was endorsed last March. 

In this NAP, I think that we have shortcomings in the analysis of the context of the transitional period.

One concern with the concept is that it has never mentioned that the security sector took part in the atrocities during the revolution - or even before it. In the objectives they say security sector reform, without analyzing what the security sector has done. And this is a real shortcoming.

Another example: there are objectives for women’s representation and inclusion. But it is not really very clear how women are actually going to participate equally in the peace processes. And this is really a problem because our participation now is really at a very serious situation.

Another issue is that the NAP doe not promote the agency of women.

The NAP reflects women as victims and it focuses on protecting women from gender-based violence. Women are victims. 

This is really very serious and therefore I think that as women we have to work and we have the opportunity through the NAP. Because of the diversity of the regions in Sudan there should be regional plans or State plans. And this is where we will have our opportunities. 

We need really in the analysis of the context of the regions or of the States, we need to look for a more broad definition of security - human security - and we need to think about a wider, a broader definition for peace. We need to have peace, not only peace by ending the conflict, but peace in the private space as well as in the public space for women.

We need to have an accountability framework. Accountability for equality, for transformation of the patriarchal structure.

Unless it addresses the patriarchal structure and unless it looks for transformation of the institutions - specifically the security sector institutions - we are not going to get very far.

But we are very optimistic because we are organized, despite that we have our differences but still we are somewhat organized. And that is what we have been doing even in the transition period, we are pushing all the time, and saying: 

“Hey, men! We are there and you have to take care, you have to pay attention. We are there and we are going to participate” 

And we have succeeded, not very much, but I am sure we are going to succeed.

What I want to do is share my experiences and the experiences for the women. Mali has of course been involved in a social and political conflict, which led to an armed conflict.

It was a conflict between the government and two armed groups in the north, and that was the opportunity for our contribution to peace. There was a peace agreement in 2012, and then there was the peace and reconciliation agreement. There was a whole process in which of course we women wished to be involved.

I personally was involved in trying to facilitate that peace agreement. We tried to rally women so that we could make a positive contribution to peace.

We wanted to ensure that we were involved nationwide. We were part of a team that led to the signing of that peace and reconciliation agreement in 2015 - the Algiers Agreement. There were huge obstacles that we had overcome. Most men were not happy to see us involved, there was a lot of opposition to us being part of the process.

In the different processes that I was involved in together with other women activists, I did what I could to try and facilitate that process. We tried to rally men and women so that we could all make our contribution to peace. 

At the time they did not want us, the warring sides did not want women to be at the negotiation table.

At the signing of the peace and reconciliation agreement in 2015, I was the only woman who sat at that table to negotiate. During the process, we had to deal with huge challenges and obstacles; this was a majority male forum and the men were extremely hostile to us. They did not want us to include certain crimes in the peace agreement - such as violence and the recruitment of women and children. We did not want there to be any impunity or amnesty for those people who had committed crimes against humanity and serious crimes against men, women, children - and girls in particular.

Another obstacle was that the signing parties did not want women to be involved in the monitoring mechanisms following on from the agreement. We were part of a committee and subcommittee only to monitor the agreement. 

My experience then was one in which I was the only woman to be part of that mediation team - we need to have men and women.

After each negotiating route in Algiers, we were able to consult with women to bring in their response and rally the women behind what we were doing. We were always in touch with women so that we could further the process. We used peace partners both nationally internationally and set up a platform for women together with the UN and the Women for Africa Foundation.

They helped us, they advised us, and trained us in mediation, thanks in part to the president of the Foundation Maria Theresa - she personally brought a training team to Mali to help us.

We also wanted to try and maintain the claims that we are making by women, we want to continue to be involved in the peace process. We have said that we demand to be part of further processes. 

I work as director for Sudan Relief and Rehabilitation Agency (SRRA), in the humanitarian wing overseeing and monitoring all the humanitarian response in the conflict areas of Blue Nile and South Kordofan, which are known as the ‘Two Areas’.

As a humanitarian office, we took part in the peace process that took place in Juba in the last year right from the first stage. We focus on humanitarian issues in terms of security, health, security situations within IDP camps in the conflict areas of Blue Nile and South Kordofan, Nuba Mountains. 

As a result of the efforts of the armed movement and Sudan transitional government, we managed to reach the humanitarian agreement and cessation of hostilities on December 17th. In that agreement, most of the humanitarian agencies gained access to the conflict areas to respond to the humanitarian needs of IDPs who had been cut off from the humanitarian assistance since 2011. 

The Juba peace agreement has discussed very important issues. These include governance, power and land sharing issues, the relation between state and religion, IDPs, reviewing farmers and herders issues. It also discussed transitional justice for IDPs and refugees, who were subjected to human rights violations, and environmental issues. 

I think the most important issue discussed and obtained in this agreement is women’s participation in the public sphere. Women are guaranteed 40 percent representation in all institutions. We think that this is a move which could enable women to be empowered politically, economically and socially.

This is a remarkable achievement - not just for women in conflict areas, but also for Sudanese women in general. Also the most important achievement of this agreement is the self-autonomy for the two areas of Blue Nile and South Kordofan. We are multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-religious, so it’s important to have power to legislate locally. 

In addition to that achievement, we got 40 percent of our local resources to be used locally to bridge the gap in terms of development. This share will be implemented for ten years. 

There are so many challenges that we see, like lack of resources, IDPs and refugees. Now, they are very happy to return to their homes and villages.

There are so many challenges but we think we have the political will to overcome all this challenges and I think together, we can do it.

What problems do we have in Colombia to implement our peace agreement? In so far as the implementation, there are some serious obstacles for the political participation of women. That's one problem.

We have a patriarchal culture that does not allow further participation of women. We have structural racism as well in Colombia, and serious problems in regard to equal distribution of land.

On the political participation of women, in the peace agreement there are no opportunities stated for the equal political participation of women. In other words, there can be no legislation as defined in the peace agreement for women's lives to be made better, particularly when we look at the women in the outlying regions.

There are some huge difficulties for us as women to be able to be part of the mobilization. There is a lot of violence against women activists and human rights leaders.

This patriarchal culture that exists in Colombia excludes women from this major peace agreement. There are 122 gender measures in it and that is why it became one of the top peace agreements in the sense of the human rights measures and the measures on women. But the government does not see it as a public policy that can actually in practice improve the lives of vulnerable groups, such as women. 

The government sees it as simply an obligation that they have. And that means that the actual participation of women is not effective. Because the government does not think that letting women participate is a political option for them, so that there are 51 measures in the peace processes that are being divided up - fragmented, in other words. It's not being done end-to-end in a compensative fashion, everything is done in piecemeal fashion, and that means that women do not find it easy to participate, particularly women in the regions, local women. 

Grassroots women feel they are excluded, they are not able to do anything on a political level to improve things for themselves, they cannot benefit from any of the productive projects following on from the peace agreement. Now, the implementation has not been fully achieved. Those nurseries, childcare facilities, have not been built. These women are working in agriculture, in the fields, they cannot have the childcare facilities so they cannot have equality.

There is also supposed to be comprehensive rural reform measures under the agreement. But there has been no creation of agricultural authorities that can actually mediate in any disputes over land and the ownership of land. 

To help women, we need to have a multi-purpose land register with a gender perspective to be able to share out properly, or to make sure there is some sort of land fund. 

We need to have a roadmap that can assure our participation. We need to have a lot of training and mainstreaming of the gender perspectives to ensure there is childcare available and ensure that women can be part of this peace agreement.

On the political participation side, we need to have a statute that will state that women can have full participation in the peace process and in politics. We need to have a gender perspective in the budget - gender budgeting - so that the right reforms can take place to ensure that there is a gender perspective in any citizenship laws and policies and reforms in our country.

Those points that were more effective were those rules and regulations in which women had more involvement. When we're talking about what has been done in the past in our country, we need to strengthen the mechanisms for women to participate so they they can continue to contribute to the implementation of the gender perspective and the peace agreement.

The government and the state need to set up a plan to speed up the implementation of those gender measures and to invest in women, because this will all mean that peace will be more long lasting and sustainable - there's no peace without women.

This is a greeting of love for our colleagues in Latin America and everywhere. Women are women, our causes one, our concern is one, our system is one, and our safety is one and our goal is one, which is to liberate woman from all forms of discrimination and for women to live in dignity as she is worth it.

As I speak it is the second anniversary of the revolution, the woman of Sudan have participated in the long history of the revolution, and actually created the change in the revolution. 

I salute all women all around the world and of course the Sudanese women in the IDP and refugee camps and those who were subject to rape and sexual violence. 

I was one of those who participated in the Juba negotiation, I was selected by the party I belong to and I was a main participant in these negotiations. 

The political incubator in Sudan was liberty and change, which includes all of the main parties in Sudan that form the Sundanese political organization and also the other professional associations. 

The most important thing I’ve learned is that we Sudanese, we need each other, because we are separated from each other and isolated. 

The second point as a person - and I consider myself to have had a humbling experience - I learned the skill or the the art of negotiation and its mechanisms, and I've also a learned a great deal from participants about political manoeuvring, about the difference between revolution and politics, and what we need there and here as a woman.

I also learned that we as women, we are a strength but we are an ignored strength. We need to organize ourselves and to know our strengths and to build upon them. 

The most important thing for me in this process was that we as women were the minority - we only represented five percent out of the total people and the remaining were all men - so when we sat during the meetings we saw how the woman’s cause is completely absent, and even if it is mentioned, it is mentioned only for political consumption, or only as political points but not addressed as a national cause.

We need to work on genderizing the peace agreement. I believe that we were able to achieve a number of things. Number one: on the level of the authority, we were able to increase the right to women’s participation on all levels of political authority - whether it is on the federal level, whether it is in the executive office, or the executive councils, or the legislative council, so we were able to establish 40 percent representation in all of the commissions and all the other structures.

Secondly: through what we achieved in this agreement the most important thing is that peace addresses the root causes of Sudan’s problem, which is represented in the lack of justice, and we understood that as long as there's injustice, women are disproportionately affected by it. 

So therefore the responsibility that falls on our shoulders as women is to make it a transfer, or to translate this element from working on a piece of paper to being able to ensure that women are a beneficiary of this agreement. 

As we speak the LPDF - the Libyan Political Dialogue Forum - is still going on, actually we just finished the meeting and jumping to this meeting from the meeting we had early here today.

I think what's important - and I've been participating in political dialogues in Libya since 2013 - and throughout my experience this seven years, in dialogue and UN-led peace processes - it's important to stress as many others were stressing today the importance of the qualitative representation of women and what they bring to the table and the principles they hold the perspective, the design of the process all these things matter a lot.  

Ever since 2013 [discussion] was all about power sharing and this model of peace resolution was advocated by international organizations, including the UN, [presented as] how to end the the conflict in our country and we’ve seen over and over how this model has yielded fragile peace, and it has not addressed the root causes.

Especially with the wake of Covid-19 and the collapse of the health systems in our countries, and with the rising corruption, lack of liquidity, all these issues - the violations of economic and social rights of Libyans and particularly marginalized groups in societies, it was alarming to all those who are on the table, specifically the woman to say that no, we needed to see a shift of paradigm, we don't want power sharing anymore unless what you mean is power sharing with people and not among politically elites.

We've seen this in Lebanon, in Iraq, Mozambique in Africa, in many countries, so it's not very promising, it's not promising at all - I am trying to be diplomatic!

The design of the process is another issue, not seeing serious or clear measures of accountability, transparency, guaranteeing accountability and transparency was also alarming for us. So we raised our concerns.

There were serious allegations and that has already been made public so I'm not sharing anything new, there were women who came forward and testified to the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General of the UN.

The critical mass of women in the peace process have collaborated with civil society organizations to push to open a case, the UN and the Attorney General opened an investigation into these serious allegations of bribery.

So I think these things a matter a lot and it's still going on, and show that the presence of women is not only because we want to have a share in future governments - though, yes that's important - but how the process is designed, how are we going to to establish and maintain qualities of accountability, legitimacy, transparency in the institutions, including the Libyan Political Dialogue Forum now leading the peace process and will be leading the the coming transition until we have elections next year.

So our attempts to make sure that the UN reply and enforce regulative and normative measures so that this institution is more resilient, preventing complete institutional collapse is important.

I think the participation of woman was more like that of trying to spoil the efforts of spoilers of the political process. We were making sure that the parties who are gaining from the status quo and the corruption do not maintain their current situation, making sure that the process is not rigged so we can make sure that the outcome is not a flawed and that people buy in to the process.

Many called our efforts disruptive, but I think this is important. Dissent is important, so when we talk about women's participation we don't want to join the “old men's club”: those who are corrupt, who don't have democratic rules and measures of accountability and transparency. We don't want to join that club, we want to force them to change the rules of the game.

I would conclude by saying that our role in these peace processes - by exposing corruption and refusing to abide by their model of power sharing among corrupt political elites - is basically that we are not there to get a slice of the cake, but rather that we are there to change the whole recipe.