EXECUTIVE BRIEF
THE DIAGNOSIS OF BIRTH REGISTRIES IN EL SALVADOR, GUATEMALA, HAITI, HONDURAS, NICARAGUA AND THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC


Español

 PRECEDENTS:

In 1998, UNICEF denounced in its publication "The Progress of the Nations" the fact that in the Americas, every year, over a million children suffer the violation of their most elemental right, the right to a name and to a nationality, due to the fact that their birth is not registered.

This was not a new or unknown problem, but it was not even a priority in the agenda for children in the region.

Since then, a process of joint measures was initiated between Plan International and the Inter American Children's Institute at the political and at the technical level, in order to find concrete solutions to this problem affecting millions of children in the Americas.

The IIN, as a specialized organization of the OAS, worked on this issue from 1964 to 1990, trying to sensitize governments, train personnel at the civil registries, perfect the data collection instruments and foster changes in the laws.

For its part, Plan International, as an international non-government organization, through community based projects, gathered successful experiences in the 90's in countries such as Indonesia, Nepal, India and Philippines.

At the political level, the problem of the under-registration of births was included in the declarations and plans of action of important international meetings such as the V Ministerial Meeting on Children and Social Policies (Kingston, Jamaica, 2000) the II Spanish-American Conference of Ministers and High Authorities responsible for children and adolescents (Panama, 2000) the X Spanish-American Summit of Chiefs of State and Government (Panama, 2000) and the III Summit of the Americas (Quebec, Canada, 2001)

At the technical level, through an agreement signed in 2001 between the IIN and Plan International, it was decided to conduct a diagnosis on the situation of low birth registrations in El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic.

METHODOLOGY

The countries were selected both qualitatively, according to the evidence gathered by the Statistical Division of the United Nations on the existence of the problem and quantitatively depending on the availability of resources that Plan and the IIN could assign to this endeavor.

The main goal of the diagnosis was to provide reliable information in order to develop an innovative and sustainable proposal, based on a comprehensive view, that would incorporate and coordinate the main actors responsible for the materialization of birth registries: fathers, mothers, family, community, health and education service providers (both government and non-government) people in charge of the civil registries, etc.

The specific goals of the diagnosis were:

  1. To gather available information in each country on geographical areas (departmental level, municipal level, etc.) that show high incidence of low birth registrations.
  2. To obtain a general diagnosis of the system of civil registry in each country (norms, legislation in force, organization of the system, administrative infrastructure, management, main problems affecting the system, etc.)
  3. To identify and survey the main organizations of civil society (church, NGOs, etc) that provide social services (education, health, etc.)

    4. in those areas identified as having a high incidence of low birth registrations.

  4. Through interviews, to gather the opinion of important people on the problem of low birth registration. These are people who, because of their work, experience or knowledge, can provide reliable information and direct the analysis in areas lacking other sources of information. They include government employees involved in civil registry (registrars, directors of statistical offices, health directors, representatives of the judicial power) as well as representatives of the civil society (NGOs, church, etc.) providing social services for the population.

In order to fulfill these objectives, an adviser was selected in each country and provided with a Methodological Guide with four thematic blocks of information to survey and analyze: a) socio-demographic data, b) the system of civil registry, c) the organizations of civil society and d) interviews with key people related in one way or another to the problem of birth registrations.

To facilitate the diagnosis, a number of socio-demographic indicators was selected. These indicators are highly relevant in detecting inequalities and demands for services: distribution of the population by age and sex, births, infant mortality rate, fertility rate, maternal mortality rate, literacy rate and data on migration.

These indicators were included because the low birth registrations are not the only factor to be taken into account to focus the future actions of the project.

This is based on the fact that it was previous awareness of the difficulties in obtaining information and, even when information was obtained, of its suspicious validity and precision.

In order to address these concerns, the socio-demographic indicators were relevant to either replace or complement the information on the low birth registrations.

Also the method of interviews with key people was chosen as a qualitative approximation to the topic and as a way to substitute to a certain degree the lack of quantitative information.

Where there is information on geographical regions with a high index of fertility, infant mortality and illiteracy, there is a high probability that the problem of the low birth registrations will also be present.

This happens because the Civil Registry is a social institution (with juridical and statistical functions) and therefore is not isolated from the other basic services provided by the country. In the majority of cases where there is a deficit in health and education services (reflected in high indexes of infant mortality and illiteracy) there is also a deficit in the services of civil registry.

The work of the advisers in compiling and developing information was done between August 2001 and February 2002.

The diagnostic stage culminated with a workshop held in Guatemala on the 3rd and 4th of April 2002, where each adviser presented the results of his/her investigation and where there was an exchange of ideas for a possible solution to be presented by the IIN

CONCLUSIONS:

  1. Each year, in the countries studied, over 200,000 children have their rights to a name and to a nationality violated.
    2.

    COUNTRY

    %OF LOW REGISTRA-TION

    YEAR

    ESTIMATED BIRTHS

    CHILDREN NOT REGISTERED

    El SALVADOR

    9,8

    2000

    168200

    16485

    HAITÍ

    30,3

    2000

    286000

    86658

    HONDURAS

    20,0

    2000

    187600

    37520

    NICARAGUA

    16,8

    2000

    174000

    29232

    GUATEMALA

    5,0

    2000

    399.000

    19950

    REP.DOMINICANA

    9,3

    2000

    197000

    18321
             

    TOTAL

    		    

    208166

    Source: Developed from National Reports and other sources.

The diversity in the quality of the sources of information, the methods and criteria used to make the estimates (there are at least nine methods to estimate the low birth registrations) render it impossible to make international comparisons. Even caution should be used in accepting national results.

For those countries where there is more than one estimate of the low birth registrations due to the sources and methods used, the most conservative figure was reported.
  1. In spite of the fact that we cannot make international comparisons, the information shows a great disparity of levels of difficulty among the different countries. The case of Haiti is one of the more critical ones, with a deficit of at least 158 registration offices and lack of registration forms in the existing ones. If we add to this other well rooted cultural traits, we see why the majority of the population does not register births. In other cases such as El Salvador, the difficulties could be solved in great part with a campaign of information and conscience forming through the media.
  2. The levels of low registration also show great variations within the national territories, with the added problem that these differences become masked when entering national averages. The inaccessibility of certain geographical zones, the different levels of reach and development of the basic public services in certain departments or municipalities due to the different local resources available, make the level of low registration show variations of over 50%.
  3. In spite of the lack of accuracy in the estimation of the levels of under registration, there exists an overwhelming consent on the existence of the problem. Authorities involved in civil registries, health and education as well as members of organizations of civil society and other organizations related one way or another to birth registries, are well aware of the existence of the problem and consider it to be of a large magnitude.
  4. The problem of low birth registrations depends on a multiplicity of factors related to availability of services as well as economic, social and cultural problems of the population. So the possible solutions should have a comprehensive reach. Even if all the offices of civil registry had all the necessary resources the problem would still persist. Even if all the population would try to register births, the problem would persist because of deficiencies in the service. Somewhere between these two points is where solutions must be found.
  5. The higher indexes of under registration are mainly concentrated in remote urban areas, in the context of extreme poverty, in the absence of basic health and education services and where there is a large indigenous population. Still the problem is also present in urban zones, specially among culturally, economically and socially marginalized communities.
  6. The services of the civil registry are still of low quality in spite of the advances of the last ten years. The lack of budgeted resources is a historically recurrent obstacle. To this must be added the organizational structure of the Civil Registry, subject to a double dependency (such as technical dependency of an electoral court and budgetary dependency of a municipality), the insufficiency of offices to insure complete coverage, inequalities in the remuneration of local registrars (against the principle of equal pay for equal job), high rotation of personnel due to political appointments, little training and short number of hours open to the public. These are not new causes. The First Latin American Diagnosis of Civil Registries of 1980 already warned of those difficulties. But we cannot ignore that the armed conflicts in Nicaragua, Guatemala and El Salvador, as well as several natural disasters, have had a very negative effect in the expansion and development of civil registry systems. This was due to destruction of offices and their archives, fear of the population to register, etc.
  7. For the last twenty years, the juridical framework of the systems of civil registry is being updated. There are still numerous anachronisms and legal vacuums as well as coexistence of contradictory laws in aspects such as payment of fines and procedures for late registration. It does not seem to be the best strategy to promote great legal reforms in order to improve birth registries.
  8. There exist an important infrastructure based on the Church, non government organizations and some state services, for the care of populations in situation of social exclusion. The Church, especially, and non government organizations render efficient and effective services to those populations based on the knowledge of and proximity to the recipients and on the high ethical and moral principles that inspire their work. These activities, done through a great number of volunteers, give them a position of leadership and provide legitimacy to their work. Because of this, the Church and non government organizations are in the best position to play a coordinating role between the parents, responsible for registering their children, and the civil registry system.
  9. The functions of the civil registrars cannot be replaced by any person or organization. This is the common opinion of almost all the key people interviewed from governments and civil society. Still they consider that the organizations of civil society can play an invaluable role of support to the civil registrars so that births would be registered. This support can take, among others, the form of awareness campaigns towards responsible parenting as well as facilitating the transportation of parents to the Offices of Civil Registry and the transportation of Registrars to remote areas of difficult access.
  10. A very important factor to improve the situation is the strengthening of the inter-institutional relationship among the different players involved directly or indirectly with birth registries. There is a favorable climate to initiate work in that direction in view of the agreement of opinions among the people interviewed. Independently of the sector where they work, they share a common view of the problem of low birth registrations. This provides a good foundation for coordinated actions.
  11. The availability today of modern technology in computers and communications at a reasonable cost, can provide important support to the registration of births, specially from places of difficult access.
  12. GEOGRAPHICAL ZONES OF POSSIBLE INTERVENTION:

In the National Reports can be found a detailed account of the indicators and other information that led us to select certain geographical zones as needing priority intervention in the next phase of the project. Here we will only mention them.

For all the countries, the zones with high levels of under registration were detected by departments. In cases where the information was more explicit, they were detected at the municipal level. This makes it necessary for the future to obtain some complementary information of a more detailed nature for the areas identified at the departmental level, but this requires a previous evaluation to see if the cost involved justifies doing it.
  1. GUATEMALA - Department of Totonicapán, Sololá, Alta Verapaz, Chimaltenango, Huehuetenango.
  2. EL SALVADOR - Departments of San Salvador, La Unión, San Vicente, Chalatenango, La Libertad, Ahuachapán.
  3. HAITI – Department of Centro, Nor-oeste y Nor-este.
  4. HONDURAS - Department of El Paraíso - Municipality of Texiguat , Department of Gracias a Dios - all the municipalities, Department of Intibucá - municipalities of Dolores, San Marcos de la Sierra, Yamaranguila and San Francisco de Opalaca , Department of Lempira - municipalities of Gualcince, Piraera, San Andrés, San Manuel Colohete and Santa Cruz , Department of Olancho - municipalities of Esquipulas del Norte and Yocón.
  5. NICARAGUA – Región Pacífico- municipalities of El Viejo, Puerto Morazán, El Realejo, El Jicaral, Tipitapa, Villa Carlos Fonseca, Mateare and Nindiri, Región Centro Norte – municipalities of Jalapa, Cuá-Bocay, Rio Blanco, Tuma-La Dalia, El Almendro, San Miguelito and Nueva Guinea, Región Atlántico – municipalities of Puerto Cabezas, Siuna, Waslala, El Ayote and Paiwa.
  6. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC – Provinces of Barahona, Pedernales, Bahoruco, Elías Peña, Independencia , San Pedro Macorís, La Altagracia and Duarte.