KEY OUTPUTS BY CONSORTIUM MEMBERS In documenting the impacts of COVID-19 on stateless communities and sharing the experiences gained through the projects that they developed in response, Consortium members also produced a wide array of materials. Here is a selection: MONTENEGRO Video: “Stories of the Invisible” and report on “Roma with Unregulated Legal Status in the Time of Pandemic COVID-19”. NEPAL Podcast on “The State of Statelessness” (available in Nepali). BANGLADESH Beneficiary Interview. INDIA Video: “Assam Detention During the Pandemic” and report on “Marginalised and Impoverished in Assam”. MALAYSIA Official Communication from the UN Working Group on Discrimination Against Women and Girls to the Government in Malaysia – the result of the official complaint submitted by Family Frontiers to the UN Working Group on genderdiscriminatory citizenship law. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC Report on “COVID-19 Impacts on Haitian Migrants and their Descendants on the Southern Border of the Dominican Republic“. LEBANON Report on “Supporting Stateless Maktoum to Obtain the COVID-19 Vaccination”. KUWAIT Report on “Nothing But a Pen and a Word: Voices from the stateless Bidoon community in Kuwait during the COVID-19 pandemic” also available in Arabic here. PAKISTAN Report on “The Impact of COVID-19 on Stateless Communities in Pakistan”. KENYA Blog article on “Kibos Land Evictions – The History of Nubians in Kibos”. NORTH MACEDONIA Video: CESF Project from North Macedonia CENTRAL ASIA Report on “The Status of Stateless Persons in Central Asia during the COVID-19 Pandemic” (available in Russian). RESILIENCE AGAINST THE ODDS The work of the CESF was carried out in very challenging and at times dangerous contexts, with many Consortium members being exposed to real risks. Despite taking available precautions, several Consortium members themselves contracted COVID-19 as a result of exposure through their work, or had to adapt their plans due to serious community outbreaks and related lockdowns. Many others faced risks that were not directly related to COVID-19, but which further complicated their operations. The following are all examples of different challenges and risks faced: • • • • • • • Two Consortium members endured targeted hate speech campaigns, both online and offline, due to their activism on women’s rights and against racism respectively. Two Consortium members faced police intimidation because of their work to protect minorities and refugees, and in particular, for exposing arbitrary arrests, detentions and efforts to deport stateless people. One community supported by a Consortium member endured state-sponsored evictions and the destruction of their property, while another was targeted in a similar manner, by thugs who acted with impunity. One Consortium member had its office vandalised and damaged, in reprisal to its human rights work. One Consortium member was personally targeted by local gangs and had to go into hiding, for the role they played in assisting community members to report gang violence and intimidation. Several Consortium members had to find ways around increasingly repressive state legislation, aimed at cracking down on civil society space and making it more difficult for NGOs and community groups to operate independently. One Consortium member went into hiding due to the breakout of war, and another had to adapt plans due to a military coup. Many of these experiences are illustrative of the types of risks that citizenship rights activists and stateless communities can be exposed to. The challenge presented by COVID-19 is layered on top of existing ones. There has been no respite or ‘amnesty’ to deal with COVID-19 before returning to the everyday problems people face. This, as with anymeaningful response must be cognisant of the bigger picture – the histories of injustice and exclusion, the everyday violence, the intergenerational disadvantage and discrimination that contextualise and shape the lived experience of the stateless and those whose nationality is at risk. Piecemeal ‘solutions’ which do not address the underlying problems, or only address part of them, may make for good headlines, but will not have a lasting impact. This is also why the Consortium approach was so important. The solidarity and support that Consortium members received when they were facing their own emergencies and crises, helped them get through them. In some instances, ISI was also able to directly intervene, to organise safe houses or emergency funding for Consortium members at risk. The CESF strengthened the financial resilience of all its members at a crucial time, when groups were facing significant funding challenges even as their communities depended on them for more support. CESF Funding was a lifeline for many NGOs and community groups, whose very survival was at risk, due to the difficult funding climate they faced. 17