1. Running litigation surgeries
Susie Talbot, INTERIGHTS

2. Overview What are litigation surgeries? What happens in practice?
Initial preparation
Steps to take pre-litigation surgery
Running the litigation surgery
Evaluation and follow up

3. What are litigation surgeries?
Practical workshop on key human rights issues
Multiple aims:
Identify and provide substantive support to cases
Build capacity
Create/strengthen networks and relationships
Focused seminar (2-3 days) where participants – mainly lawyers – are able to present a case – or cases – they are working on to fellow participants and experts and have a productive discussion about the case
The surgeries focus on:
identifying human rights problems that arise in a particular situation
framing of violations and formulation of human rights arguments
Considering appropriate remedies – that we want to ask for and that might give rise to an effective solution to the identified problem
The surgeries also provide an in-depth understanding of strategic litigation and litigation options and practice before regional and international human rights bodies
IR examples (we get a lot of our cases from LS) – and OSF focus – human rights in patient care
Multiple aims:
Identify and provide support to cases that could be pursued before domestic, regional or international mechanisms
Build capacity of key human rights actors – generally lawyers – who are in a position to apply legal expertise and run cases in their regions
Create a training methodology that enables participants to create and run training courses based on their existing knowledge of the region and area of work
Adaptable format – participants can choose from content and methods presented to them, and adapt to their individual/regional/cultural needs

4. Initial preparation Deciding on a focus area
Call for participants (and case studies)
Selecting participants
(Finances and logistics)
Choose focus area – for fellows, will be human rights in patient care (or narrow aspect within that topic)
Example IR call for participants – important to ask for case information at that time (twofold purpose – (1) to choose participants with relevant cases for discussion and to take forward (2) to focus people’s minds on the topic)
Selection – through formal process using publicised criteria
10-12 participants (plus IR staff and experts)
Target people who already have a high level of awareness
Focus on lawyers (with some exceptions) – similar levels of knowledge (unless for specific reason, e.g. IR collective complaints sharing of knowledge and past experience)
Process not a single event – make them aware that responsibility continues after returning to their home regions – ask for participants with ability to and willingness to pursue the case after the surgery
Achieve a balance by selecting on basis of diversity (geographical – different regions plus rural/urban, ethnic, age, gender balance)
Assess through written applications and a face-to-face/telephone interview
As far as possible, assess prior knowledge/expectations; assess whether candidates hold: inter-personal skills; flexibility; comfort with interactive approach; language skills
Example IR interview questions

5. Steps before the litigation surgery
Review case studies
Prepare presentations and decide on litigation surgery format
Prepare reader
Case studies – we look at:
Key rights engaged and how a legal case could be framed in practice
Relevant supporting international and comparative law – legal standards, statements by UN treaty-monitoring bodies, special rapporteurs and EU human rights bodies, case law
Short-term and long-term strategy
Wider advocacy issues
Presentations/format
Choose flexible training module to adapt as needed
Reader – set of materials
IR example
Flash drive
To use during and after training

6. Running the litigation surgery
2-3 days
Training modules
Case study presentation and discussion
Desired outcomes:
Litigation strategy
Wider advocacy strategy
Plan for moving forward
Training modules
Start with general training – strategic litigation, international and regional standards
Then case studies
Note that people have various preferences as to how they learn best – try to use a variety of methods to stimulate learning and hold attention of participants – especially over 3 days
Role-playing
Case studies
Break out groups
All group discussions
Individual coaching/one-on-ones
Avoid too much lecture style
Encourage participation from everyone
Cross-cutting issues relevant to a number of or perhaps all of the case studies (e.g. discrimination issues, right to remedy etc)

7. Moving forward after the litigation surgery
Plan for moving forward
Evaluation of event
Effective follow up
Plan for moving forward:
Brainstorming and discussion about strategies, future collaboration/partnerships
Which NGOs, individuals and networks should we be in touch with both in terms of litigation and also complementary activities such as lobbying/mobilisation?
Which issues do you think would benefit from litigation, and which do you think do not lend themselves to litigation and may even be counterproductive?
What standards need further development through litigation?
How can we help each other overcome existing constraints to litigation?
What factors are likely to influence the degree of use that has been made/will be made of the strategies discussed?
Evaluation
During the training – give time for questions and check participants have understood the presentations and case discussion
After the LS – questionnaire about how they found the process
Long-term quality control, e.g. through ongoing relationships – visits, telephone calls, s etc
Effective follow up:
Already said it’s a process, not a one-off event
Being clear about your role and ongoing support you can offer
Follow up communication

8. Questions and discussion
Conclusion – major differences to a normal training event:
Focused discussion on case studies – with the purpose of being able to develop case strategy and work together to take those cases forward
Discussion of how to make those cases strategic and how they might fit within a wider advocacy strategy
Process not a one-off event