Once your risk assessment has been done, you need to look at the results. As it is impossible to measure the “amount” of risk you are facing, you need to establish an understanding of what the level of risk is.

Different defenders and organisations may perceive different levels of risk. What is unacceptable for some defenders can be acceptable for others, even within the same organisation. Rather than discussing what “must” be done or whether you are prepared for going ahead with it, people’s different thresholds of risk must

New protection manual for human rights defenders be addressed: you must find a commonly acceptable threshold for all members of the group.

That said, there are different ways of dealing with risk:

• You can accept the risk as it stands, because you feel able to live with it

• You can reduce the risk, by working on threats, vulnerabilities and capacities
• You can share the risk, by undertaking joint actions with other defenders to make potential threats to one defender or organisation less effective

• You can choose to defer the risk, by changing your activities or changing approach to reduce potential threats

• You can escape risk by reducing or stopping your activities (in some cases, it might imply going into exile)

• You can ignore the risk, by turning a blind eye to it. Needless to say, that it is not the best option.

Bear in mind that the level of risk is usually different for each of the organizations and individuals involved in a human rights case, and that attackers usually tend to hit in the weakest parts.

For example:

Let’s look at a case of a peasant killed by a landowner’s private army. Maybe several organizations and individuals are involved, such as a group of lawyers from the close-by capital city, a local peasant union and three witnesses (peasants who live in a nearby village). It is key to assess the different levels of risk of each of these stakeholders in order to plan properly for the security of each.

Summary

When it comes to security, defenders do not start from zero. They all have devised ways to handle risks and threats. The contrary might imply that they are not around anymore and/or have left their work. Defenders have at least devised ad hoc deterrence strategies and tac- tics. Some might also have devised a deterrence global strategy. Whatever the strategies, they need to respond to at least the follow- ing criteria: responsiveness, adaptability, sustainability, effectiveness and reversibility. A risk assessment must be carried out in order to establish whether it is “acceptable”. Otherwise, the defender may reduce, share, differ, escape the risk.