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 [2]
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, they 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”. [3]
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. [4]
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.[5]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 [6]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 onpolitical legitimacy.
CSOs: From Modern to Post-Modernism
The concept of civil society (a sphere regulated by the civilcode) has been changing over time. Hegel [7]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.[8]
AntonioGramsci (Edwards 2004:10)[9]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. [10]
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)[11]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). [12]
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) [13]
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. [14]
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. [15]
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)[16]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..[17]
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 [18]
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. [19]
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. Mzalendois the only free Parliamentary Monitoring Site in Sub-Saharan Africa[20]. 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.[21]
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.[22]
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.[23]
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
[email protected]