Security is everybody’s business
The issue of whether people and organisations actually follow security procedures and rules is a complex one. It is perfectly possible to have a good security plan, complete with preventive rules and emergency procedures; you can place security high on the agenda at all big meetings, etc, but people may still not follow the organisation’s security rules.
This could seem incredible, given that human rights defenders are constantly under pressure and being threatened. But it happens.
If someone wants to know something about your work, they will not try to find out from the most careful person in the organisation. Rather, they will try to get close to someone who often gets drunk on Saturday nights. Similarly, if someone wants to give your organisation a fright, they probably will not assault a person who has taken all the necessary precautions. Rather, they will probably target someone who is usually quite careless about their own security. Similarly, it could be that a careful person is attacked because the careless person left the door open… The point is also that one person’s carelessness can place everyone at greater risk.
This is why security should be defined as an issue for the whole organisation, in addition to the individuals it involves. If only three out of 12 people follow the security rules, the whole organisation, including those who observe the rules, is put at risk. If the situation improves and nine people start following security procedures, the risk is reduced. But the risk would still be much smaller if all 12 people followed the rules.
Security is an issue
for the whole organisation,
as well as for
the individuals it involves.
Having a good security plan is meaningless unless it is being followed. Let’s be realistic: Many people do not follow the rules or procedures. This lack of compliance amounts to the difference between good intentions and real-life effectiveness. It is nevertheless easier to confront this problem than its possible consequences.