Report of the Symposium

Pre-ADF Symposium: Civil Society and Governance

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
10 October 2004

I. Attendance

1. The symposium on Civil Society and Governance was held on 10 October 2004 at ECA, Africa Hall in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. The potential for CSOs contribution to African development is rapidly increasing. In this respect, the ADF IV provided an opportunity to help set an agenda for the enhanced participation of civil society in governance and development towards the achievement of that potential. The pre-ADF "Symposium on Civil Society and Governance" aimed at catalyzing an Africa-wide discussion on issues of civil society and governance, and the contribution of civil society to good governance in Africa. Given the prestige of the ADF and its capacity to set an agenda for policymakers, the main objective of the Symposium was to provide added opportunity to underscore the mutual importance of civil society in governance, and contribute to developing practical policy recommendations to the Heads of State and Government Forum at ADF IV for greater inclusion of CSOs.

2. The symposium was attended by participants representing CSOs from the following countries: Cote d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Guinea, Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania, Sierra Leone, Sudan, and Togo. The following organizations also participated: The Commission of the African Union (AU), the Christian Relief and Development Association (CRDA), Inter-Africa Committee, and the Partnership Africa Canada (PAC). The list of participants is attached in annex.

II. Account of Proceedings

A. Election of Officers and Adoption of the Agenda (Agenda item 2)

3. The meeting elected Mr. Felix Mosha as a Chair person and Ms. Iyesha Josiah, as a Rapporteur. The meeting decided to deliberate on all agenda items in the plenary session and adopted the following Agenda:

(i) Keynote address

(ii) Election of Officers and Adoption of the Agenda

(iii) General Discussions

(iv) Thematic discussions:

1.- Civil society and public policy formulation;

2.- Civil society and transparency and information;

3.- Civil society and enhance delivery of public services;

4.- Civil society, social justice, rights and the rule of law.

(v) Adoption of the Report and Closure of the symposium

B. Keynote Address (Agenda Item 1)

4. Mr. Kebede Asrat, Executive Director, Christian Relief and Development Association (CRDA) delivered a keynote address to participants. In his keynote address to the meting, Mr. Kebede indicated that popular participation as a development concept gained increased recognition in Africa in the early nineties. At that stage, communities were viewed as contributing to and supporting a development program but not as being instrumental in determining its content or direction. This is manifested in the lack of progress towards eradicating poverty on the continent. This has forced development researchers and parishioners to re-examine the appropriateness and limitations of development models prescribed to alleviate poverty. The exclusion and marginalization of poor people both from broader societal participation and from direct involvement in development initiatives has been identified as one of the many impediments for the success of development models to address poverty, particularly in Africa.

5. Mr. Kebede also pointed out that in Africa, the move toward conceptualizing participation in the broader developmental context started with the declaration of African Charter for Popular Participation in Development and Transformation (Arusha, 1990). The Charter pointed out that popular participation need to be viewed both as a means and as an end. As an instrument of development, popular participation provides the driving force for collective commitment for the determination of people-based development processes and willingness by the people to undertake sacrifices and expend their social energies for its execution. As an end in itself, popular participation is the fundamental right of the people to fully and effectively participate in the determination of the decisions, which affect their lives at all levels and at all times.

6. He further pointed out that the mere fact that civil society organizations are working at grassroots level places them in a suitable position to closely attend to the day-to-day life of the people. However, he regretted the fact that most civil society organizations are fragmented and tend to capitalize on their differences rather than on their similarities and this situation makes them weak when working with government. He also pointed out the issues of financial constraints, which make most civil organizations to fight among themselves. He then called upon on CSOs to rationalize their activities seek areas of complementarities.

7. In conclusion, Mr. Kebede reminded participants that the symposium was to discuss and debate on ways and means to strengthen civil society participation in the process of formulation, implementation and evaluation of public policies at national and local levels, based on the core values of dialogue, negotiation and partnership. In this regard, he called upon the participants for their active participation in the deliberations of the meeting, which were crucial to achieve the intended objective of the symposium.

8. Following the keynote speech, the chairperson summarized and highlighted key issues of participation and development. Defining civil society organizations was thought to difficult.However, civil society organizations were defined as the sector that is non-political, non-profit making and which is non governmental and functions for the benefit of the people.

9. The Chairperson reminded the participants of the various declarations and statements made by African Heads of State and Government, which called for active participation of civil society organizations in the socio-economic and political life of African countries.

10. The chairperson emphasised the need to enrich the context by referring to major decisions made by governments across the board in respect of civil society popular participation through various protocols and agreements signed by African Heads of State affirming the need for CSOs participation in cultural, political and economic activities of countries. The following include a number of such documents;

The Harare 1990 Declaration From Heads of State-Called for the involvement of CSOs in development. Articles 90 and 91 of the African Development Charter and the African Economic Community Charter 1991, called for the involvement of NGOs, the development of mechanisms for consultations and community work to mobilise and conduct consultations. The Grand Bay Declaration in 1999 in Maputo and the Sirte Declaration in Libya in 1999. All the above recognized the important role of CSOs. Finally, the Constitutive Act of the African Union adopted in Togo in 2000 and the June 2001 Meeting of CSOs in Addis Ababa were good instruments which invited African governments to fully engage Civil Society as essential stakeholders to achieve a common African vision of development and seeking inclusion in ADFIV. Therefore, what the civil society community is now asking is that leaders put to practice what they had committed themselves to at the various international conventions.

11. Participants noted the challenges faced by the African Civil Society Organizations that limits their participation in development. Participants pointed out the fact that both governments and CSOs are always looking to the same donors for resources. The fact that they are competing for the same resources has created mutual suspicion and distrust and donors were not helping to solve this situation, rather they tend to give the impression that CSOs manage resources better than governments. Participants further observed that it is essential for governments to view CSOs as partners and not as competitors fighting for the same resources. They noted that CSOs could efficiently utilize their resources if they meet the needs of people and complement where governments do not have the capacity to deliver certain services.

12. Participants acknowledged growing CSO capacities to influence the emergence of government budget that are pro-poor, woman and child rights in Uganda, South A frica and Namibia. Important gains have been made in influencing and monitoring the impact of PRSPs and World Bank and International Monetary Fund policies and loans on pro-poor people in several countries. CSOs have played important roles in conflict prevention and peace building (Mano River Union and Great Lakes regions), civic education (Zambia and Namibia), women political representation( Rwanda and Mali), protecting the rights of people with Aids( Botswana and South Africa) and shaping regional policy(SADC and ECOWAS). Further, CSOs have built capacities at micro levels to generate greater public accountability in local government by supporting the establishment of community structures such as health and water committees, parents associations among others. It is on the basis of these experiences that CSOs can play a supportive role in areas of good governance.

C. Thematic discussions (Agenda item 4)

Thematic Session 1: Civil society and public policy formulation

13. In his introductory remarks the Chairperson pointed out that wealthy and socially dominant groups, using their resources and social status, frequently exercise considerable influence over public policy, whether directly or by supporting intermediary organizations that effectively represent their interests. Conversely, the comparatively poor and socially disadvantaged sectors of the population often have virtually no chance of influencing public policy and resource allocations. Institutional innovations such as decentralization of decision-making are often advocated for as mechanisms doing something to redress this imbalance and promoting more widespread popular involvement, though the level of genuinety to do so is a topic of continuing debate.

14. He invited participants to reflect on the following issues: Under what socio-economic and political conditions can grassroots mobilization be effective in influencing public policy? What kinds of strategy appear to be most effective in promoting high rates of civic engagement in national policy formulation? What kinds of institution are conducive to achieve higher rates of political participation? For instance, is decentralization always, or normally, or only sometimes conducive?

15. In the discussions that followed, participants deliberated on major problems related to policy formulation. They took stock of the operations of the CSOs themselves and noted that: a) policy formulation was influenced by particular dominant groups, e.g.: business communities, to the exclusion of the ordinary citizens; b) a problem of mutual suspicion between government and CSOs demonstrated by the perception that CSOs spend more on overheads than in programs; c) a problem in competing for funding particularly from abroad between government and CSOs; d) some CSOs have credibility problem for example, they themselves are not accountable and secondly they are not internally democratic; e) no networking among CSOs, they are very protective of their operational turf; f) many CSOs are working for their own survival rather than for the effective delivery of services to their constituency. This undermines their credibility.

16. On the basis of the above observations the meeting recommended the following:

CSOs should:

• be accountable with respect to their sources of funding to both their community they represent, donors and government.

• attempt to be self sufficient as possible to enhance their credibility by being transparent and accountable.

• must adhere to democratic principles within themselves

• create awareness among people around issues.

• present their arguments based on facts rather than sentiment.

• NGOs could greatly benefit and be more effective through better awareness of national laws and regional and continental treaties, programmes or initiatives.

• network to promote mutual interest and add value to the work of influencing policy makers.

• communicate development information using the media

Governments must:

• accept CSOs as entities for interaction and involve them in the policy formulation process in a proactive manner e.g. the PRSP approach.

• develop friendly media environment through policy.

• engage CSOs and the private sector in promoting good governance.

• take into account the views of CSOs.

Thematic Session 2: Civil society and transparency and information

17. The Chairperson highlight the fact that energetic CSOs can often have an impact on the quality of governance by increasing the availability of information about the implementation and monitoring of government policy. Cases will differ, however, and there is a need for reflection upon past and recent experiences in order to determine when and how civil society activities most decisively promote transparency and information dissemination about the functioning of the legislative process, public expenditure allocations, the implementation of approved policy and programmes, and so forth.

18. He called upon participants to consider such questions as: What types of information and dissemination activities pursued by civic organizations can help to further transparency and accountability? What are the best ways for civil society groups to strengthen government commitment to implement recommendations of special inquiries, relevant legislation and programmes? How can citizens work most effectively to stem the misappropriation of resources by bureaucrats and local elites, and to bring about the indictment of public officials involved in malfeasance? What determines the effectiveness of public advocacy and campaigning designed to increase governmental commitment to probity and responsiveness across the board?

19. In the discussions that followed, the meeting observed that CSOs could enhance governance by increasing availability of information about the implementation and monitoring of governance policy.

20. Following the above deliberations, the meeting recommended as follows:

CSOs should:

• agitate and facilitate the dissemination of auditor's reports, especially to local governments.

• call upon multinational companies involved in extractive industries to publish what they paid to governments as part of promoting transparency in revenue and budget processes.

• simplify the legislation for effective public consumption.

• take into account how the information is communicated to the stakeholders. In this regard, method and language use should be the one accessible to the majority of the population, for example radio communication could be more effective to dominantly illiterate communities.

• be engaged in monitoring and whistle blowing corruption in public and private offices are encouraged to adopt their own codes of conduct.

• take note of their governments international, continental and regional obligations as signed in transparency and anti- corruption protocols and work to develop better standards of practice.

• NGO involvement in setting of special commissions and inquiries and disseminate results accordingly.

• establish media including private radio stations.

Government must:

• see corruption not just as a moral issue but an economic issue and must be made public as such.

• establish a reservoir of information, elaborate and interpret accordingly.

• facilitate the establishment of independent media, including private radio stations.

• decriminalize anti-corruption and watchdog activities.

Thematic Session 3: Civil society and enhanced delivery of public services

21. CSOs recognize they have some difficulties in enhancing public service delivery

In his remarks the Chairperson pointed out that the quality of public services and the effectiveness of public expenditure are among the chief criteria of good governance. Some familiar proposals about the possible role of civil society in enhancing States' performance in these respects concern the following:

• Public-private partnerships in which CSOs work closely with state institutions in the design and delivery of services, and the monitoring of their quality and coverage;

• CSOs' mobilizing funds among client groups and other sources; and

• CSOs' directly delivering services themselves. The most desirable outcome might be a kind of synergy, in which state institutions acquire greater legitimacy and improve their performance by developing responsive working relationships with civil society, and thereby drawing on reservoirs of social capital. However, this sort of flourishing partnership between the State and civil society may require specific institutional and political conditions, which are not easily replicable.

22. He raised the following thought-provoking questions:

• What is the nature of the policy environment and how conducive are these to the activities of civil society?

• How to strengthen the effectiveness of the various types of institutional innovations designed to foster complementarities?

• What types of leadership and forms of commitment among public officials and civic organizations can contribute to mutual trust and a pre-disposition towards partnership?

• How can cooperative relationships and alliance building between CSOs and sympathetic bureaucrats contribute to improving the quality of public services, and the effectiveness with which they are delivered?

23. After these remarks, the pparticipants noted that the quality of public services and the effectiveness of public expenditure are among the chief criteria for good governance. The meeting felt that CSOs can assist governments in enhancing their performance in this area.

24. The meeting recommended that:

CSOs should:

• create partnership with local governments to ensure efficiency and effectiveness of social service delivery. This also helps fill institutional and human capacity needs of local governments.

• inform the public about social services available to them.

• decentralize themselves to reach the maximum rural target groups to enhance public service delivery.

Government must:

• provide detailed breakdown of the national budget at local/district level, this would help CSOs to better advocate for fairness and equity in resource allocation, as well as monitoring and evaluation of social services.

• work in partnership with CSOs for purpose of overseeing and monitoring the effective delivery of social services.

Thematic Session 4: Civil society, social justice, rights and the rule of law

25. Under this topic, the Chairperson observed that in both developed and developing countries an active civil society is essential for the combating of injustice. In some countries, violations of citizens' rights and widespread lapses from the rule of law will be a central problem; in others, the focus might instead be the failure of the law itself to respect human rights and social justice. Regardless of the injustice, the potential of civil society to reduce it must never be discounted.

26. He called upon the participants to reflect on such questions as:

• What are the conditions under which advocacy by specialist human rights organizations, whether in pressing for the implementation of existing laws, or for fresh legal initiatives and institutional reforms, is most likely to improve the functioning and accountability of state policing and security organs?

• How can civil society organizations best be enabled to shelter individuals threatened by repressive states and to arrange for the defence of their rights through official legal processes?

• How can concern sections of civil society best address instances of inadequacy in the existing law, or low capacity of the courts and the legal profession to ensure its implementation?

• How can they best deal with political obstacles to efforts to resist injustice, or with a social environment that likewise tends to impede such efforts?

27. In addressing these issues, participants made a clear differentiation between national and international laws and questioned the influence of CSOs in the process of law making.

28. They also recognized the historical monopoly exercised by the government in our countries and how CSOs could break this monopoly. It was observed that CSOs need to point out the inadequacy of the implementation of the law that has passed by the government.

29. With respect to NGO, participants were of the opinion that they could also play a significant role in social justice, however, due to lack of capacity that role cannot be fully played. Government, therefore, need to create an enabling environment to facilitate NGOs participation in social justice, thereby providing adequate training at the grassroots level for people to understand issues of social justice and the rule of law.

30. Participants also indicated that governments should adopt affirmative action and should make every effort to implementation all the conventions/protocols that they have signed. CSOs need to point out the protocol that government have signed but have not implemented. In addition, CSOs should point out the major elements of the constitution that are not supportive of the human rights such as rights of women.

31. The meeting recommended that:

CSOs should:

• renew their commitment as a mechanism to hold government accountable.

• NGO participation in legislation that partain to them.

Government must:

• create an enabling environment for CSOs to play a role in protecting human rights.

• accept CSOs to play a role in the governance process and recognize the importance of CSOs as actor/partner in development.

• not consider CSOs as an opposition party and should not hinder their activities.

• facilitate the establishment of a forum for dialogue with CSOs.

• develop internal peer review mechanisms in terms of economic and political governance and include CSOs in such peer reviews.

• building capacity of the anti-corruption commission, ombudsman and the judiciary. This being central to harmony and security.

D. Way Forward (Agenda Item 5)

32. The meeting underlined the importance of partnership between the CSOs and government and indicated that CSOs should approach government and seek for appropriate information for their decision and policy making.

33. The meeting, further felt that the role of CSOs in the APRM process was not adequate, as such it was suggested that CSOs should have a define and clear role in the Mechanism. The meeting also called upon all governments to sign the APRM.

34. The meeting also felt that the offices of ombudsman and the anticorruption commission are not fully equipped in terms of staff and equipment. In this respect the meeting recommended that governments should reinforce those offices and ensure that CSOs are represented in both the ombudsman and the anticorruption offices for greater transparency.

35. Governments to ratify all protocols they have signed, including that on women.

E. Adoption of the report and closure of the symposium (Agenda item 5)

36. Participants deliberated extensively on the draft report and adopted it after some observations, which has been incorporated in this final version. The meeting agreed to make the report available to other CSOs attending the ADF IV, but could not attend the symposium.

37. In his closing remarks to the symposium, the Chairperson highlighted some important issues that had emerged from the deliberations including the need for CSOs to speak with one voice on issues of their concern, the need to strengthen their management capacities and the need for governments to consider CSOs as partners in development. The Chairperson then declared the symposium closed.