The
Role of Civil Society Organizations in Promoting Good Governance
Being
a Paper Presented At a One -Day Government/Civil Society Interactive Session
Organized By:
The
Office of the Senior Special Assistant to the Governor of Bayelsa State on
Civil Society on Thursday, 2nd August 2012 @ the Banquet Hall,
Government House, Yenagoa, Bayelsa @ Time: 4.00pm to 6.00pm
Only by participating in the common
intelligence and sharing in the common purpose as it works for the common good
can individual human beings realize their true individualities and become truly
free -------John Dewey, Liberalism and Social Action
Introduction:
Since the dawn of participatory democracy, the rights of
citizens such as the freedoms of expression and of association are seen as
sacrosanct. Often these rights are written in a constitution or other public
documents. When people freely exercise these rights by volunteering to forward
a valued cause, or by protesting a government policy, they do so as part of
civil society. This lends credence to the assertion of Abbie Hoffman who said
many years ago that: ‘Democracy is not
something you believe in or a place to hang your hat, but it's something you
do. You participate. If you stop doing it, democracy crumbles”
A significant problem in most
developing countries is over-centralization of decision making and the lack of
stakeholders involvement that permit patronage of powerful special interests
and high levels of corruption. Scholars are agreed that lack of stakeholder
buy-in attenuates the policy process, decreases efficiency and this in-turn
affects economic growth. This is where civil society can play a major role by
contributing to greater transparency and accountability
Civil society is a "space" whose function is to
mediate between the individual and the State While there may not be a clear cut
definition of civil society, development scholars more or less agree that it
comprises institutions such as religious organizations, labour unions,
charities, community groups, nonprofits, and the media. In advanced and virile
democratic systems these institutions supplement formal processes such as
voting and help citizens shape the culture, politics, and economies of their
nation.
On February 14th 2012, Hon. Henry Seriake
Dickson was sworn in as Governor of Bayelsa State. On assumption of office, he
pledged to operate an open government – with transparency and accountability as
beacons of leadership. One of the challenges this administration has had to
grapple with is the opaque process of governmental transactions. The
administration met an empty
treasury, a bloated wage bill and an inexplicable debt burden. This prompted
the setting up of the 11-man Bayelsa State Financial Review Committee with a
mandate to look into the finances of the State.
It was also revealed that most of the loans obtained by the previous
administration were dead-weight loans, which were used in a frivolous manner
and not for the execution of development projects. In spite of massive
misappropriation of public funds, a huge debt burden of N207billion was left
behind. Vouchers were inundated with “Ghost Names” wage bill was bloated
and it was corruption incorporated. To turn the tide in favour of an
accountability and transparency, government had to take steps to promote a
transparent regime.
One of such steps was the initiation of the Bayelsa
State Transparency Bill 2012, which was passed into law. The
purpose of the Law is to make it obligatory for all tiers of government (State
and LGAs) to publicly declare to Bayelsans, all revenues that accrue to them as
well as a summary of expenditures. Since then government has been consistent in
discussing its policies and finances publicly with her citizens, the organized
civil society and the media. This push for transparency has placed a burden on
the third-tier of government to do monthly transparency briefing. All political
office holders are also enjoined to do so. Governor Henry Seriake Dickson
underscored the importance of a transparency when he said:
On transparency, we believe that it is the
right of the people of the state, to know what funds accrue to the coffers of
the state and the various local government councils and how they are utilized.
This is the only way to secure the trust and confidence of the people in whom
sovereignty lies. I have directed all local government chairmen to comply with
this paradigm shift on the issue of transparency, probity and accountability,
to reflect the new Bayelsa we are building”.
The Restoration administration has
entrenched transparency, accountability and service to abolish the
business-as-usual scenario which had hitherto characterized the MDAs. The
underpinning philosophy is to ensure that sustainable development is premised
on strong institutions, which will constitute the locomotive for sound policies
and programmes delivery. Whether defined as Dicksonomics or Seriakenomics,
the underlying principle is to ensure that policies and programs are
implemented without hiccups and with huge direct and spill-over benefits on the
people.
From Aristotle to John Locke and from Tocqueville to
Lincoln, participatory democracy has been a feature of human society since
classical times. Participatory democracy
creates opportunities for all members of a population to make meaningful
contributions to decision-making, and seeks to broaden the range of people who
have access to such opportunities. Across time and space, it is believed that effectively
increasing the range of participation makes for better efficiency and
effectiveness in government and by extension solidifies legitimacy.
Being a former Attorney General of Bayelsa State and a
law maker at the highest level of government, Governor HSD assumed office with
a clear goal of increasing peoples participation in the decision making process
of government. It was for this reason that the Governor established the office
of Senior Special Assistant on Civil Society, ostensibly to provide avenues for
government–Civil Society interaction. Such interactions are avenues for
political power holders to clarify policy issues and programme direction to
involve all segments of society along the road to change.
It is the desire to operate an open government that has made this interactive
session between government and civil society possible.
What are
civil society organizations?
“Civil
society is
a sphere of social interaction between the household (family) and the state which is manifested in the norms
of community cooperative, structures of voluntary association and networks of
public communication … norms are values of trust, reciprocity, tolerance and inclusion, which
are critical to cooperation and community problem solving. Structure of association refers
to the full range of informal and formal organizations through which citizens pursue common
interests” (Veneklasen, 1994). Civil society is composed of autonomous
associations which develop a dense, diverse and pluralistic network. As it
develops, civil society will consist of a range of local groups, specialized organizations and
linkages between them to amplify the corrective voices of civil society as
a partner in governance and the market” (Connor, 1999).
CSOs are formed by people who
have common needs, interests and values like tolerance, inclusion, cooperation
and equality; and development through a fundamentally endogenous and autonomous
process which cannot easily be controlled from outside.
Civil society has been widely
recognized as an essential ‘third’ sector. Its strength can have a positive
influence on the state and the market. Civil society is therefore seen as an
increasingly important agent for promoting good governance like transparency,
effectiveness, openness, responsiveness and accountability. Civil society can
further and improve good governance, first, by policy analysis and advocacy; second, by regulation and monitoring of state performance and the action and
behavior of public officials; third, by
building social capital and enabling citizens to identify and articulate their
values, beliefs, civic norms and democratic practices; fourth, by mobilizing particular constituencies, particularly the
vulnerable and marginalized sections of masses, to participate more fully in
politics and public affairs; and fifth, by development work to improve the wellbeing of their own and other
communities.
Underscoring the importance of civil society,
Thomas Jefferson asserted:
I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the
society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough
to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to
take it from them, but inform their discretion."
From the above assertion, ultimate power resides with the
people-the civil society. In measured doses, they control the exercise of that
power through constructive engagements with political power holders. In most
cases critical policy decisions are better fashioned out when they are
subjected to the crucible of civil society debates and criticism. Thus the
power exercised by the electorate via the ballot box; the criticism to which public
policies are subjected, the debates carried out by NGOs, CSOs and faith-based
organizations verge on political legitimacy.
CSOs: From Modern to Post-Modernism
The concept of civil society (a sphere regulated by the civil code) has been changing over time. Hegel believes that civil
society is the realm of economic relationships as they exist in the modern
industrial capitalist society. Viewed from this perspective, civil society had
emerged at the particular period of capitalism and served its interests:
individual rights and private property. For Hegel, civil society manifested
contradictory forces. Being the realm of capitalist interests, there is a possibility
of conflicts and inequalities within it. Hegel’s contention is that the
inequalities inherent in capitalism made it imperative for people to establish
relations to ensure society is efficiently run.
For Marx, civil society was the ‘base’ where productive forces and
social relations were taking place, whereas political society was the 'superstructure. Like Hegel, Karl Marx
establishes a link between capitalism and civil society. Marx posits that the
political society – the superstructure represents the interests of the
bourgeoisie, the dominant class under capitalism. Karl Marx deviated a bit from
Hegel when he visualized that the state cannot be a neutral problem solver, but
a defender of the interest of the bourgeoisie.
Antonio Gramsci
(Edwards 2004:10) in
his view did not consider civil society as coterminous with the socio-economic
base of the state. Rather, Gramsci located civil society in the political
superstructure. He espoused the crucial role of civil society as the
contributor of the cultural and ideological capital required for the survival
of the hegemony of capitalism. Gramsci therefore viewed civil society as the
site for problem-solving. Such roles according to Neo-liberal thinkers include
defending people against the state and the market and in asserting the
democratic will to influence the state. In addition, Neo-liberal thinkers
consider civil society as a site for struggle to subvert authoritarian regimes.
Within the context of a democratic society, civil society constitutes a strong
pillar as a defender of rights, protector of liberties, and all paraphernalia
of good governance.
Post-modern thinkers after the collapse of the Soviet
Union, hold the view that the concept of civil society is a neo-liberal ideology
legitimizing development of the third sector as a substitute for the welfare state.
The Washington Consensus of the 1990s, which involved
conditioned loans by the World Bank and IMF to debt-laden developing states,
also created pressures for states in poorer countries to shrink. Since then,
greater emphasis on “civil society” as a panacea, replacing the state's service
provision and social care though not the magic bullet as some social reformers
may want us to believe.
By the end of the 1990s civil society was seen less as a
panacea amid the growth of the anti-globalization movement and the transition of many
countries to democracy; instead, civil society was increasingly called on to
justify its legitimacy and democratic credentials. This led to the creation by
the UN of a high level panel on civil society. With the emergence of
nongovernmental organizations and the New Social Movements (NSMs) on a global scale in the
1990’s, civil society became a platform for strategic action to construct ‘an
alternative social and world order. Thus, civil society has become even more
prominent with the resurgence of democracy in Africa, Asia and Latin America.
There have been very healthy arguments about the relevance or otherwise
of CSO’s
CSOs are also important in
creating what is increasingly referred to as ‘social capital’. “Social capital
is… the web of associations, networks and norms (such as trust and tolerance) that
enable people to cooperate with one another for the common good. Like economic
and human capital, social capital is a productive asset that accumulates with
use… the institutional arrangements and values which make up social capital
constitute the foundation for good governance, economic prosperity and healthy societies”
(Vaneklasen, 1994).
Arguments and
Merits of CSOs
A UK based CSO; mySociety builds websites that
give people simple, tangible benefits in the civic and community aspects of
their lives and teaches the public and voluntary sectors, through
demonstration, how to use the internet most efficiently to improve lives
•
Work to persuade government that releasing data
is ultimately beneficial, not costly
•
Find a champion who will hope promote your cause
within government
•
Demonstrate the value that can be unlocked from
the data that has been released
•
If you can’t get what you want, try and use what
you have – e.g. Kenyan Hansard PDFs
Build simple, effective tools that deliver
tangible
•
Focus on simple approaches that deliver benefits
– build use confidence by seeing positive results from their actions
•
If good solutions already exist – government or
non-government, don’t try to replicate
•
If a channel exists already, use it – don’t
necessarily ask for permission
Over the years there have been
arguments in favour of CSOs. The dominant view is that CSOs are perceived as
more flexible, participatory and responsive to local needs of the poor. There
is the belief that State policies are typically urban based, delivering to
politically favored areas (Lehmann, 1990).
CSOs can potentially foster and support grassroots
organizations to become more numerous, sizable, resourceful, and self-reliant.
Also, grassroots contacts enable CSOs to provide critical information on
potential crisis and thus contribute to early warning systems.
There is the cost effective argument. Typically, CSOs
require less financial inputs than government agencies and therefore are more
cost effective, an attribute that is important in financially constrained third
world countries.
CSOs can be more resourceful and innovative as they
involve local communities in the identification and resolution of development
problems which are more cost effective, more sustainable, and more compatible with
community values and norms.
Over and above these direct development roles, CSOs also
have a very important advocacy role to play in promoting effective governance.
CSOs, can potentially contribute to local economic
development and respond to the growing challenge of poverty in a number of
ways. CSOs can improve the local business investment climate; encourage new
enterprises and livelihood programmes. Very committed CSOs can also deliver
social services, provide training and capacity building programmes; and
contribute to relief and rehabilitation in times of disaster.
CSOs and
Nexus with Good Governance
Perhaps, the most conspicuous role played by CSOs is in
the area articulating citizens' interests and demands is an important function
performed by Civil Society Organizations, CSOs. The importance of CSO’s can
better be appreciated when state policies and the programs of government
agencies do not take account sufficiently of needs of the poor or of some other
vulnerable sections. CSOs bridge the gap by way of representing the interest of
the people. CSO’s also engage in defending the rights of the down-trodden
especially groups that suffer extreme social exclusion.
CSOs that are virile are capable of
articulating the interests and demands of is a key function served by almost
every civil society organization. While political scientists have traditionally
ascribed the function of interest articulation to political parties, such
parties are not always strong in developing countries, and even where they are
strong, they do not always represent the interests of the poor.
CSOs
play the critical role in mobilizing social capital. Social capital is a
resource that any community possesses to some level and it can help in
resolving multiple problems of a collective nature. Like any other resource,
however, social capital also needs to be activated and it needs to be combined
with other kinds of resources, including physical, financial and human
resources. CSOs can improve the accountability profile of governments.
Accountability has three
dimensions: financial accountability implies
an obligation of the persons handling resources, public offices or any other
position of trust to report on the intended and actual use of the resources. Political
accountability implies regular and open
methods of sanctioning or rewarding those who hold positions of public trust
through a system of checks and balances. Administrative accountability
implies system of control internal to the government including civil service
standards and incentives, ethical codes and administrative reviews UN (1996)
At the level of society, there is
need to promote communication between citizens based groups and community
members. The level and periodicity of such interactions between CSOs and
communities need to be strengthened. CSOs need also to build capacity for monitoring how local operators of donor programmes
utilize donor fund. Wanting to know how local operators of donor projects
and foundations spend their funds and how well the projects are run is both
reasonable and necessary, because local operators of donor projects may divert
from the original goals of the donor.
Through the free flow of
information, which is clear and accessible, civil society groups, particularly
a vibrant press, can serve as a monitoring mechanism to ensure that government.
Policies are carried out in a manner intended and thereby significantly
contribute to good governance.
The level of community participation in development
projects and programmes increases Community participation is now generally seen
as providing several major benefits to project and programme managers,
especially in times of budget distress and structural adjustment. First, it can
lead to increased mobilization of financial and non-financial resources
(labour, material, information). Second, it can make for greater effectiveness
in planning and implementation of development initiatives, by adapting them to
local circumstances. Third, it can help to improve the maintenance of assets
and infrastructure through local resource contribution and management. Fourth,
community participation can contribute to local experience in providing local
services, and hence stimulate the development of other forms of local
institutions. This is another area CSOs have a role to play. Synergy between
government and CSOs is capable of enhancing accountability and more equitable
distribution of benefits.
Challenges
facing CSOs in Nigeria
In Nigeria, CSOs face numerous challenges. The most
pronounced among such problems is the allegation that civil society
organizations often lack competent
administrators and technicians, or financial and material resources. In intermediary
NGOs, with often unclear structures of accountability, their anchorage in local
society and their legitimacy can vary greatly hence they are subject to abuses.
Many CSOs
and NGOs are highly dependent on foreign aid, which often reinforces their already weak systems of
accountability to those for whose benefit they ostensibly exist. From the modus
operandi of most CSOs in Nigeria, it is obvious that a great many of them are small, localized, and uncoordinated
hence they can hardly key into State and national development policies. With a
very weak organizational structure and porous financial base, most CSOs find it
difficult to engage in effective advocacy work.
In Nigeria, because
of our languid road to democracy and most
civil society organizations are distrustful of their governments and their
policies. This tendency has been exacerbated by the history of grassroots
interaction with governments, which is filled with broken promises,
indifference, corruption, and clientelism. It is not surprising therefore
that some CSOs are cynical and even reluctant to deal with governments. Again,
when such NGOs tend to go it alone, they lack the capacity to achieve their
goals. This is due largely to the fact that they can hardly create an
environment. However a critical advantage that CSOs
usually have over state-sponsored organizations concerns their ability to tap, effectively and legitimately, into societies'
reservoirs of social capital.
Another challenge is that Clear
lines of relationship between civil society and the state is yet to be
established in many developing countries; the pattern of relationship is
constantly in a flux (cooperative, conflictual, integrative or even nonexistent),
depending on the context and issues involved. Many governments in the
developing world are yet to come to terms with the role CSOs should play.
Equally CSOs still need to learn how well to apply themselves to government
issues. Both sides need more education on the art and practice of participatory
governance.
Some CSOs have an undeniable role to play in
modern democracy but because of their confrontational posturing, public office
holders find it difficult to dialogue with them. The panacea should be that
CSOs should accept that partnership is a more useful tool in their dealings
with government. Indeed unlearning absolutism and militarism and learning
cooperation and consultation are the major challenges in this regard
Good politics is not necessarily good
economics; legislators and civil society advance interests of their
constituents, which may be too narrowly focused and short-sighted to reflect
the overall national interest. Thus their participation in the budget debate
skews choices away from what is best for the country. It is the executive’s
mandate to produce the budgets; active participation by CSOs and the
legislature may cause unnecessary delay without necessarily improving the
budget process.
Conclusion & Recommendations:
From
the dry, arid desert in Northern Nigeria to the blood stained creeks of the
Niger Delta, the loud chorus of poverty, hunger and deprivation seems to rent
the sky. That explains why 52ears after
independence, the ILO and World Bank were comfortable to report that two-third
or 86 percent of the 160 million populations live below the poverty line, and
less than 50 percent of Nigerians has access to safe water and health
facilities. The literacy index is generally deteriorating and efforts to
improve the situation are undermined by poverty.
In
the realm of good governance, Nigeria has a lot to do to re-engineer her
electoral system. Our politics is bereft
of sound value-orientation and ideological underpinning. That is why some civil
society organizations engage in criminal silence in spite of the large scale
corruption pervading the land. Akinkugbe (2003) rightly
observed that:
In the four decades of Nigeria’s political
independence, we have witnessed a steady decline in values, quality of
governance, commitment and the integrity of our environment. Our society has
become negatively permissive and much passes for norm today that would have
caused a raising of eyebrows in yonder years”.
In 2005, both ActionAid and DevNet independently applied to implement
the Civil Society Index in Nigeria
and subsequently decided to collectively undertake the project. The main
objective of the CSI is to assess the state of civil society in Nigeria in
order to enhance the strength and sustainability of civil society and to
strengthen civil society’s contribution to positive social change. An important
outcome of the CSI process was generating and sharing useful and relevant
knowledge on the state of civil society as well as increasing the capacity and
commitment of civil society stakeholders towards the strengthening of civil
society..
Monitoring
and Oversight: CSOs
should not be exempted from monitoring
and traditional oversight. The registration requirements of CSOs should
have renewal provisions that demand evidence of positive results produced and
audited statements of accounts
As a veritable step towards
building sustainable cooperation and partnership between government and civil
society groups in the country is a key requirement in this regard. To promote
government/CSOs partnership, access to
information on both sides should be guaranteed by law. For now, this will be
facilitated by the Freedom of Information Act in existence. It is not
enough to demand that government be open to citizens based groups,
non-governmental organizations should also be ready to account for funds
received from donors. This will promote mutual trust and reciprocity.
In Kenya MZALENDO means “Keeping an eye on the Kenyan
Parliament”
The platform makes it possible for people to access to
information on Bills, motions, hansard, attendance records with a view to condemning
the entrenched culture of apathy towards politics. Mzalendo is the only free Parliamentary Monitoring
Site in Sub-Saharan Africa.
CSOs in Nigeria can borrow from such examples.
IT is recommended that given the
need for a local funding base for civil society activities in Nigeria, the
right to access to public funding for charitable purposes should be guaranteed
by law. Such public funding should however be established within a politically
neutral administrative framework, with well-defined criteria and procedures for
accessing it.
There is a need for a
well-structured institutional arrangement for partnership between civil society
organizations, government and MDAs. Such arrangements should make it easy for
CSOs and other citizens-based groups to partner with government in policy
formulation, implementation and monitoring with the ultimate goal of promoting
transparency and accountability.
In Nigeria, there are very visible areas of contention in the polity.
There is the knotty challenge of revenue allocation among the three tiers of
government verging on the operation of an equitable fiscal federalism Issues of
Federal Character concerning federal character in key government appointments
and distribution of federal projects. Year back, our leadership promised to
entrench a just, egalitarian and equitable society. Now, good governance as
expressed in popular participation, in decision-making, transparency and
accountability in the management of fiscal resources is at its embryonic stage.
We need committed, vehement and well structured advocacy on these areas. One of
such urgent areas is the achievement of the MDGs and specifically poverty
alleviation.
I have not given up on Nigeria (maybe you
have given up). The challenges we face as a nation are the litmus test of our
collective resolve to live together. Invariably, as we walk on the thorny path
to nationhood, though at a snail speed, I am confident that the centripetal
forces are beginning to overwhelm those forces that threaten to tear us apart. We
shall remain united, resolved and committed to solve our common problems with
even greater vigour. When CSOs work in synergy with government to protect human
rights, strengthen government
institutions, alleviate poverty, combat corruption and promote an open
government, the benefits will far outweigh the sacrifices.
I thank you for
your kind attention.
Idumange John
Beck, U.,
2004, “Analysis of Global Inequality: From National to Cosmopolitan
Perspective”, the Centre for the Study of Global Governance, LSE.
Development
Goals, Dakar, 2003. “We the People”, 2004, “A Call to Action for the UN
Millennium Declaration”,
Human
Development Report (1993), United Nations Development Program, United Nations.
5/
Declaration and Programme of Action of the World Summit for Social Development,
Draft Declaration, art. 26, par. o.
World Development
Report, 2004: Making Services Work for Poor People, The World Bank.
Covey, J.G., 1994, “Accountability and Effectiveness of NGO
Policy Alliances”, IDR Reports, Volume 11, Number 8.
Paul, J.A., 2000, “NGOs and Global Policy-Making”, Global Policy
Forum. Rondinelli, D.A. and Cheema, G.S., 2003, “Reinventing Government for the
Twenty- First Century: State Capacity in a Globalizing Society”, published by
Kumarian Press, Inc.
Kerena,
M., 2000, “Community Based Targeting Mechanisms for Social Safety Net”,
Department of Economics, Williamstown, MA and Institute for Economic
Development, Boston University. Connor, 1999
“The
Role of Civil Society in Local Governance and Poverty Alleviation: Concepts, Realities
and Experience”, Discussion paper for the Regional Workshop on Promoting
Effective Participation of Civil Society in Local Governance and Poverty
Alleviation in the Nigeria
