---

Workshop on the Role of CSOs in Deepening Regional Integration

---

 

The Workshop under the theme of The Role of CSOs in Deepening Regional Integration was held in Addis Ababa on 20^th - 21^st October 2003. The Workshop was organized by the DPMF under a project of Ford Foundation’s Special Initiative for Africa (SIA), which through an earlier workshop mandated the DPMF to develop a program for mobilizing Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and research institutions to “promote regional cooperation for democratic governance”.

 

The main objectives of the program to be developed were:

 

a)      To monitor the status of and promote – through advocacy – democratic governance in the EAC and SADC sub-regions;

b)      To monitor, advocate and support the implementation of NEPAD’s African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM);

c)      To monitor the implementation of the protocols and treaties of the three main Regional Economic Communities (RECs), namely, EAC, SADC, and ECOWAS, especially in terms of their effectiveness and democratic content at both the national and sub-regional level.

 

To develop the program, DPMF organized a two-day Workshop of CSOs and Research Institutes identified as potential participants in the implementation of the program.

 

Prof Abdalla Bujra, Executive Director of DPMF, made an opening statement in which he briefed participants about the objectives of the workshop. He emphasized the need to deepen the process of integration not only in economic terms but also politically, by promoting democratic governance. Critical to this project is the role of civil society in deepening political integration through monitoring and advocacy activities.

 

The primary aims of the workshop are to work out strategies for advocacy and monitoring, to develop a program of activities, to identify CSOs with potential roles in implementing the program, and to prepare a detailed schedule of activities.

 

He cited the following as possible entry points for civil society interventions in regional integration:

 

1.       Forging an alliance within the sub-regions to take up governance and integration issues that go beyond national boundaries;

2.       Identifying the treaties and protocols that have been signed but not implemented by states and Secretariats and finding ways and means of exerting pressure to ensure their full implementation;

3.       Monitoring and providing support for realizing the APRM process at the national level.

 

In an attempt to provoke thought and provide possible suggestions on how to address the issues at hand, DPMF solicited papers from experts in selected organizations in the three sub-regions, i.e., EAC, SADC, and ECOWAS. Accordingly the following three papers were presented and deliberated upon at the workshop:

 

1. Note on SADC and EAC Protocols and the Role of Civil Society Organization in Their Implementation, by Matemu Wa Mundangu;

 

2.       Research and Advocacy for Democratic Governance within ECOWAS, by Adebayo Ninalowo;

 

3.       Civil Society Organizations and Democratization in the Context of Regional Integration in Africa, by Kayode Soremekun;

 

Presentation and Discussion of Paper by Mr Matemu Wa Mundangu

 

In his paper, Mr Matemu Wa Mundangu, an Independent Consultant at the UNECA, identified 15 SADC protocols and outlined the status of their ratification and signing by member states as of March 2001. He noted that the only protocol to have been ratified by all states is the one on Immunities and Privileges. According to the presenter, the level of ratification and signing of the protocols by SADC states is as follows (table 1).

 

Table 1: Ratification and signing of SADC protocols

             

           

Mr Matemu Wa Mundangu noted that the process of ratification in SADC member states is slow and uneven. Possible reasons for this include uneven levels of commitment, for example Zambia and Seychelles are members of other RECs such as COMESA; recent membership in SADC, for example DR Congo; civil war, for example in DR.Congo and Angola.

Mr Matemu Wa Mundangu identified the following SADC protocols as being of a potential interest for Civil Society Organizations:

 

1.       Combating Illicit Drugs

2.       Education and Training

3.       Health

4.       Trade, and

5.       Legal Affairs (not yet ratified).

 

Regarding the East African Community (EAC), Mr Matemu Wa Mundangu observed that the Community countries, namely, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, have a longer history of living together and cooperation than their counterparts in SADC. The high level of cooperation and integration existing between these countries prior to the revitalization of the EAC in 1993 explains why there have been few protocols signed so far among the 16 protocols he identified. Unlike in other RECs, in the case of the EAC, the protocols are prepared as the needs arise and are not contained in the Treaty from the outset.  EAC prepares its protocols on a gradual basis, when the situation is ripe, i.e., when negotiations are well advanced and a substantive agreement has been reached among Partner States. The expected result would be that EAC protocols have a better chance of being implemented rapidly. The presenter also noted that the EAC Treaty expressly assigns a strategic and dynamic role to the Civil Society. He identified the potential role of CSOs in two areas of EAC Protocols: one dealing with Social Sectors, Immigration and Labour Policies and the other dealing with Enhancing the Role of Women, Private Sector and Civil Society.

 

Following the presentation, participants made comments and raised pertinent issues relating to the role of CSOs in deepening regional integration. During the discussions, the following approaches were suggested as steps for civil society organizations to address the challenges:

1. Identify issues and challenges that concern the CSOs;
2. Identify CSOs which can have an active role in the process of advocacy and monitoring of implementation of the protocols, and form alliances to deal with the challenges identified;
3. Find space to participate in the integration processes of the RECs.

 

The participants cited the following pointers as a guide towards civil society engagement:

1. The importance of assessing the relationship between civil society organizations and national governments to determine what kind of environment exists between the two, e.g., hostile or friendly;
2. Is civil society aware of their national role and capabilities? CSOs must be educated about what is taking place on the ground;
3. Do CSOs have the capacity to adequately respond or intervene to particular situations? What is the level of their development? This has implications on their capacity and levels of their implementation. Have CSOs been provided with the space and the ways and means to participate?

4.       If all the above do exist, thus rendering the environment a positive one, can CSOs effectively operationalise the apparent space/policy framework provided and, in the event it does not exist, can they create it?

 

Presentation and Discussion of Paper by Prof. Adebayo Ninalowo

 

Prof. Ninalowo began his presentation by acknowledging the need to shift from the economic paradigm to the political paradigm in reference to regional integration due to the fact that the nature and scope of issues such as human rights abuse, conflicts, development challenges, HIV/AIDS, etc. are best addressed within a political paradigm.

 

In his paper, Prof. Ninalowo presented background information relating to the establishment of ECOWAS, which was established as a means of regional integration, with a view to achieving economic benefits in an increasingly expanding global economy. But such problems as political instability, socio-economic crisis, poor or lack of observance of the rule of law or anarchy, among others have posed as hindrance to potential gains of regional integration. The presenter went on to address the aims and objectives of ECOWAS based on its (ECOWAS’) revised treaty.

 

Prof. Ninalowo outlined a comprehensive list of parameters for monitoring and advocacy of democratic governance in regional integration some of which include:

1)      Socio-economic and political empowerment;

2)      Various quasi autonomous groups and institutions, i.e., civil rights associations, women’s associations, professional groups, etc.;

3)      Separation of powers;

4)      Gender empowerment;

5)      Transparency and accountability;

6)      Harmonization of national with regional interests;

7)      Involvement of non-state actors;

8)      The role of autonomous mass media;

9)      A forum for resolution of conflict

 

According to Prof Ninalowo, the mode of sensitization of actors would essentially consist of a series of interactive fora with the public, civil society organizations and state authorities, including press conferences, organizing symposia and similar media of dissemination of ideas.

The two papers presented predominately interrogated the role and intervention points for CSOs within the regional set up as well as the role of research institutions and how these can complement the CSOs. The prime question that evolved out of the discussions was whether CSOs should solely be restricted to research on protocols and treaties, or whether their ambit should be expanded? Participants concluded that:

 

• Whilst research institutions will mainly focus on undertaking research in the areas of policy framework, CSOs role should be supportive and complementary, mainly engaging in advocacy and lobbying based on the research findings;

 

• Research institutions should provide the contextual framework and additional support should CSOs require that support, i.e., basic profile, capacity in research, etc.

 

It was observed during the discussions that the legal process required for ratification of protocols tended to prolonged and complicated and this acted as a constraint to implementing the protocols. Also implementation tended to be subordinate to national priorities. The EAC was learning from past experience and it now regards civil society as a driving force in implementation of protocols. Nevertheless, given the unsettled nature of boundary demarcation between some countries, the issue of who is an East African requires a satisfactory answer.

 

Likewise the SADC treaty has provisions for accommodating the role of CSOs in development and governance. There is a clear desire to bring in all CSOs under the umbrella of SADC.  The CSOs are provided an observer role in SADC, but they don’t appear to know how to exploit this window of opportunity.

 

As far as CSOs are concerned, one must note that there are differences in the level of their growth across the different regions. However, the trans-national nature of some CSOs allows for coalition-forming to influence policy at the sub-regional level. Priorities can be set by CSOs regarding the issues and challenges they want to focus on. This need not coincide with the priorities of national governments or even sub-regional organizations.

 

Following the discussions on issues related to the presentations, the participants identified the following six categories of challenges to democratic governance and the deepening of regional integration:

 

1. Human Rights

·         Freedom of Speech/Expression/Association and Movement

·         Citizenship/Identity

 

2. Democratic Governance

·         Transparency/Accountability

·         Popular Participation

• Devolution of Power
• Pluralism/Elections
• Ombudsman

 

3.       Gender

·         Political Participation of Women, Empowerment, Property Rights

 

4.       Social Cultural Justice

·         Access to Basic Rights, Health, Education

·         Minority Rights

 

5.       Peace and Security

·         Conflict Management and Resolution

·         Internally Displaced People and Refugees

·         Sub-Regional Conflict Resolution Mechanisms

 

6.       Environment

·         Environmental Protection

·         Energy Policies

·         Mining and Construction

·         Vegetation.

 

Based on the challenges listed, participants formulated the criteria to be used to select the sub-regional and national CSOs with potential to engage in activities aimed at addressing the above six category of challenges. The criteria include:

 

1)      Capacity – autonomy, track records (image/credibility), network, organization, accessibility;

2)      Governance;

3)      Mandate/Mission;

4)      Linkages to the State and the media.

 

Based on the criteria set, the participants drew a broad list of CSOs with potential and actual roles, and then narrowed this down to a manageable size using the annexed  matrix.

 

Presentation and Discussion of Paper by Prof. Kayode Soremekun

 

In his paper, titled “Civil Society Organizations and Democratization in the Context of Regional Integration in Africa”, Prof Kayode broadly provided the context of issues surrounding democracy and the impact of regional integration. The presenter began his by asking: Can we really speak in a meaningful way on the issues of governance and democratization in the context of regional integration? He said that this question was posed in light of the fact that the democracy that appears to be taking root in Africa is still at a very nascent stage. Moreover, the state of integration on the continent is also of a fledgling nature.

 

Prof Kayode appealed for caution on the assumptions of a one-to-one relationship between integration on one hand and the twin values of governance and democratization on the other. He contended that this assumption could well turn out to be misplaced. If values of governance and democracy are to thrive in the various sub-regions and indeed in the entire African continent, more than casual attention should be paid to the dynamics happening in the various polarities which constitute the kernel of the regional blocs on the continent, namely, EAC, ECOWAS and SADC.

 

CSOs must be flexible and pragmatic in their attempts to deepen democracy and governance in the continent. Furthermore, CSOs also need to be responsive and understanding of global dynamics as they attempt to address the challenges.

 

Prof. Kayode provided the following list of antidotes for social formation, which should also apply to CSOs:

a)      In countries ruled by dictatorships, CSOs might wish to focus on human rights and promoting the free flow of information, which is the most relevant and feasible kind of activities in closed systems;

b)      In semi-authoritarian countries, the CSOs should focus on defending the political space available to independent and positive social forces like other CSOs, the church and the media;

c)      Efforts should be made to empower civil society and in the process link it more closely to democratic political groups and parties, thereby developing a more united opposition, as a counter-weight to the dominant state;

d)      In emerging democracies, the emphasis should be on fighting corruption, monitoring the performance of public officials and making government accountable to the society and strengthening the rule of law;

e)      In war-torn and post conflict societies, the CSOs should focus on curbing violence, fostering reconciliation and building a culture of tolerance and respect for pluralism and minority rights;

f)       In countries with large Moslem populations, CSOs should focus on promoting women’s rights and liberal ideas that seek to stake out a common ground between and among Islam, the modern concepts of pluralism, citizenship and democracy

 

The presenter added that beyond all this, there is also the compelling need on the part of the CSOs to change their mindsets and orientation. At present, most of the CSOs are nationally based and do not transcend their national boundaries. What is required therefore is a conscious search for common problems and issues across boundaries, such that similarly minded CSOs can jointly address such problems. According to Prof. Kayode, it is not enough for the CSOs to acquire a regional orientation. The donor community must also begin to assume this kind of position.

 

Prof. Kayode concluded his presentation by stressing the need for the various CSOs across the continent to strengthen their capacity to network with a view to forging a deeper sense of common purpose along regional lines and domains. One practical way in which CSOs can link up with one another, with a view to coming to terms with how to locate other CSOs and their activities, is to tap, legitimately into the resources of an evolving and novel body.

 

After the discussions on Prof Kayode’s presentation, the next day’s workshop deliberation focused on presentations by three discussants on the following topics:

 

1.      Networking Arrangements among Organizations Operating in the Areas of Democratic Governance, APRM and RECs, by Prof. Kayoed and Mr Kibara;

 

2.      CSO Advocacy Strategies for Full Implementation of REC Treaties and Protocols,by Prof Masai and Prof. Ninalowo;

 

3. CSO Advocacy Strategies for Implementation of NEPAD’s APRM, by Prof. Mohiddin.

 

Networking Arrangements among Organizations Operating in the Areas of Democratic Governance, APRM and RECs

 

Prof Kayode began the discussion by defining Networking as the forging of loose alliances and linkages in order to achieve common objectives and aspirations and to learn from each other’s experience in administration, fundraising, programming, agenda-setting. He went on to stress how vital it is for NGOs to collaborate and pinpointed the complexity of networking arising from:

 

1)      Rivalry between NGOs struggling for resources, especially funds;

2)      Personal chemistry of CSO leaders; lack of vision, foresight and maturity.

 

Furthermore, the presenter noted that CSOs tend to have a narrow focus hindering them from networking; hence, it is essential for CSOs to embark on self-education to understand the inner dynamics of APRM.

 

Mr. Kibara began his presentation by identifying the practical stages of networking, namely:

 

1. Stakeholders’ identification – the capacity levels of organizational interaction in terms of who is doing what. This involves identifying stakeholders taking into account spheres of influence, access to policy makers, theoretical understanding, public image and track record, outreach level with the general public, grassroots, opinion makers,
2. Resource mapping – to understand the resources available to the network in terms of personnel, infrastructure and contact; factors to be considered here include: existing petty rivalries and jealousies, poor understanding of available resources, etc.;
3. Creation of network infrastructure – this involves identifying and sharing of roles and responsibilities, identifying lead organizations to coordinate the network, and creating a database for information sharing. The lead organization can be an existing organization or a dynamic secretariat that grows with need.
4. Program development – the network must strengthen itself through guided principles of equity to ensure that each member feels relevant and needed. Thus:

·         Intervention points must be mapped out clearly and the demarcation of roles should be based on capacity and added value, not necessarily representation;

·         A clear identification of the issues and what the network is capable of achieving;

·         Clarification of the activities that would be jointly or individually executed;

·         Thought must be placed more towards creating synergy.

5. Creation of database – necessary to facilitate information sharing;

 

The presenter indicated that once the parameters noted above are met the rest of the process becomes administrative.

 

The discussion by the participants that followed the presentations centered on the following issues:

1)      Personal relations facilitate networking; hence, how do you go about interacting with governments and the media? How do you go about the business of advocacy?

2)      Commitment from persons involved assists in achieving desired goals;

3)      There is a need for continued advocacy and lobbying until the job is complete;

4)      The dilemma currently being faced by African States is the lack of support that is received; hence that is why many governments from developing countries seek donor aid from the North. If African governments were forthcoming there would be no need to depend on the North for emancipation. If properly used, then the parameters of bureaucracy noted above will become auspicious.

5)      CSOs that can act as lead organizations and set the guidelines for the networking and interventions must first be identified. Therefore, there is a need for setting a strategy and for making a stakeholder analysis: Call the lead organizations, identify CSOs on the ground, set the agenda and convene a meeting. The agenda set can be linked to the pertinent actors: for example, on governance, there is a provision to address the EAC Assembly; on legal issues, public interest litigation  can be addressed to the courts; for wider outreach and dissemination, the EAC media outputs and TV station can be brought in.

 

CSO Advocacy Strategies for Implementation of NEPAD’s APRM

 

Prof. Mohiddin noted in his presentation that in general terms, NEPAD is an African quest for development. He went on to add that the APRM provides that the development process should be an all-inclusive one with wide national consultations to reach consensus on certain guidelines. The role of government, he noted, is to provide leadership but not to control the process. In the debate on NEPAD/APRM, there are two positions: one claiming that NEPAD/APRM process must be an African owned initiative and the other that it is a globalisation of domestic African needs and aspirations.

 

The discussant indicated that what is needed is to demystify the notion of governance, democracy and ownership.

• Governance implies certain conditions and needs to be interpreted to mean how power is used and managed, and accountability in decision-making. How power is utilized is contingent upon our principles, values, cultures, traditions and developing institutions. This is a process that takes place in any environment;
• Democracy refers to how we participate effectively in decisions that affect our lives;
• Ownership refers to taking ownership of your own country’s governance, which involves principles and their manifestations.

 

According to Prof Mohiddin, the role of civil society in the development process should be:

1)      Partnership within and outside the continent to enhance capacity and make a powerful impact in terms of policy influence;

2)      Shadow reporting is effective if those participating in the public policy process are interested. These involve persons interested in public affairs who can put pressure, which is what is currently lacking.

 

Prof Mohiddin concluded his presentation by indicating that most of the time we look at CSOs though Western lenses. Most European CSOs are not based on African values; hence, the need for CSOs to be people-driven, not donor-supplied.

 

CSO Advocacy Strategies for Full Implementation of REC Treaties and Protocols

 

Prof Masai began his presentation by asking the following questions:

1)      Why cant Africans take Africa seriously?

2)      Why cant Africa’s leaders take Africa’s people seriously?

 

The discussant noted that RECs were established in an ad hoc manner. The people were not consulted during the formation of these RECs. As a result it is crucial for CSOs to understand the constraints and challenges of REC protocols as well as the implementation strategy. The research conducted needs to be participatory, involving members of target groups, which will lead to feedback.

 

Prof. Masai noted that at present the pace of the regional integration process is not developing, which highlights a problem. He went on further to list 3 key approaches that can be used to fast-track regional integration, which are as follows:

1)      Methodological approach – this includes the thorough understanding of treaties and protocols, their totality;

2)      Constructive Engagements between CSOs – this includes targeting national ministries, coordinating Secretariat assemblies both regional and national, business community organizations, policy researchers, and other stakeholders;

3)      What should be done – this involves the following:

·      Short term training;

·      Setting up accurate documentation centers;

·      Promoting sensitization workshops and public lectures;

·      Using space in the print media;

·      Lobbying for specific integration issues;

·      Organizing policy briefs ;

·      Offering a forum for consultative meeting on protocols, brainstorming session among stakeholders;

·      Promoting creation of coalitions.

 

Therefore, CSOs can play a crucial role by insisting on a role in the APRM process. They should:

 

• Insist on having verifiable indicators for the review process;
• Participate in the country process on the express mandate of the APRM and monitor and influence who is involved, how the selection process is carried out, follow up on the process, etc.;
• Establish partnerships within the continent and outside to draw on the Public Policy Community with relevant expertise and capacity to influence policy makers.

 

Research institutions should play a supportive role to provide expertise to global meetings as well as provide short-term training on key decision makers about the protocols.

 

CSO Advocacy Strategies in Influencing Regional Agendas

 

Under this topic it was noted that CSOs must participate in the negotiations on the regional protocols in order to support government teams who are often ill prepared and lack sufficient knowledge on issues.

 

It should also be realized that the effective nature of CSO boils down to its (CSOs) constructive engagement with governments. This entails the ability to rationalize and make a case in favor of integration as well as the facilitation of a broad-based societal dialogue that involves all stakeholders in active dialogue. The self-education of CSOs in an attempt to comprehend all factors that affect the Treaty and its implementation is also pertinent.

 

The populace must be sensitized in regard to regional instruments available to them through talk shows, brainstorming sessions, media special features, etc. CSOs must be critical, persuasive and people-driven.

 

Radio and newspapers are there to make money. To use the media to create awareness, the content of the material should create public interest. The following should therefore be noted in advocacy through the media:

• Going directly to the media with NGO language does not work; simplicity is essential. There should be an angle to make it interesting.
• It is better to include representatives from the media to provide advice on communication, media identification and media relations;
• There is need to define the agenda and a program of action so that the public knows what exactly you are communicating;
• Calling press conferences as a way of using the media and calling them to cover the meetings is one means of outreach.

 

The Way Forward

 

The aim of networking is to address the six challenges identified earlier which cross-cut national boundaries. Lead organizations need to take up the challenge to:

1. Ask who is working on what? Contact by e-mail the potential network members, check their interests, undertake stakeholder analysis, determine their capacity and the commitment of their leaders, and ensure personal engagement by talking to the CSOs on a one-to-one basis;
2. Create a forum such as this workshop;
3. Undertake resource mapping: who is willing to join the network?
4. After forming the network, contact the EAC and SADC Secretariats;
5. Communicate with the larger CSO community and draw a common program of action or plan – prioritize areas of focus;
6. For advocacy work, write an article as an opinion maker on the issue to be advocated; organize a public demonstration; exploit regional platforms available such as the SADC CSO national chapters, and forge links with SADC/EAC Secretariats and the ECOWAS Parliament;
7. For APRM Monitoring: find out whether the country has agreed to be reviewed, whether there is a Memorandum of Understanding or a country paper, or a national review process in place. The network can monitor at what stage the review process is found and check if all stakeholders are involved in the review process, whether the review steps are flawed and if so to voice the network’s objection to this. If the review process is on the right track, the network should provide support for its successful completion. The network must make itself known regardless of whether it has been selected by the government or not.

 

All in all, it is envisaged that the task of promoting democratic governance can be carried out through a collaborative network of research institutes and CSOs – the former doing research and the latter using the results to mobilize other CSOs and to advocate the intensification of democratic governance across national boundaries.

 

The workshop concluded with participants agreeing on the need for CSOs to play their part in pressurizing policy makers and influence the implementation process of the RECs’ Treaties and Protocols as well as to monitor and support the APRM process. In this context, the DPMF Secretariat pledged to make its website available for disseminating information by the network until it develops its own website.

 

The participants agreed to identify research institutes and lead CSOs who could be brought on board to coordinate the sub-regions and hold another meeting at least by January, or as soon as each sub-region gets its act together. With this the workshop came to an end.