|
Aquiline
Tarimo, S.J.
Introduction Scholars from different fields claim that the realization of human rights and democratic ideals depends on the dynamics of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs).1 On the grassroots level, these organizations promote the cause for the common good through participation, creativity, and mutual responsibility among groups of different interests. On the national level, they articulate a mechanism that defines the relationship between State and civil society and safeguards the separation between them. Different forms of state-authority and political ideologies, however, tend to undermine the role of NGOs in the process of promoting human rights and democracy. 2 In the context of Africa, there is no doubt that the post-colonial administration has failed to stimulate social integration and economic growth. This situation is clearly reflected by the socio-political disorder and poverty found in many countries. The absence of grassroots support "made it impossible for political parties to become mass-based and to survive; that has made democratic rights and liberties tenuous; and that has made it possible for military [leaders] and political opportunists to hijack political power, repress the people, loot the national treasuries",3 and perpetuate conditions of underdevelopment. In search for a solution, many scholars suggest that it is appropriate to bypass the structure of state by promoting ideals of civil society and by empowering local NGOs. As a response there has been a proliferation of NGOs in recent years following the introduction of privatization and multiparty politics. The aim of introducing private organizations was that they could succeed where the more political and generally larger public sector have not succeeded in assisting the poor. Despite the massive proliferation of these organizations, it is appropriate to examine their contribution. This examination is imperative because those weaknesses that have eroded the structure of the State such as corruption, dishonesty, lawlessness, authoritarianism, exploitation of the poor, and lack of commitment could also penetrate these organizations. It is within this context that this discussion explores the possibility of strengthening the role of NGOs as an appropriate method of promoting human rights and democracy in contemporary Africa. This discussion brings into focus four points: first, the dream of civil society; second, the role of NGOs; third, the distinctiveness and contribution of Church-related organizations; and fourth, the future of local NGOs. The Dream of Civil Society Apart from formal institutions of learning, political parties, and parliament, citizens are able to form organizations to express felt identities and to articulate group interests. Such a possibility of expanding spheres of justice4 and democracy supports the claim that "the State is not the whole of the society, but is one actor in the society. Other institutions — notably the family, the Church, educational, economic, and cultural enterprises — are [also] important actors in the society. They do not exist or act by sufferance of the State. Rather these spheres have their own peculiar sovereignty which must be respected by the State".5 A pluralistic society needs different voluntary organizations to communicate the diversity of interests and ensure that there are different ways of participating fully in the process of decision-making. These organizations, small or large, choose their own aims and reach them in their own ways. Though limited, they play an important role in the life of the people. They have power to influence public policy, transform the conscience of society, and help their members to have a feeling of belonging and of social integration. Through the dynamism of this structure, group members are trained to study the problems that affect them, propose concrete solutions, and find ways of implementing decisions made together. All these possibilities, however, can be realized when the existing socio-political organization provides room for civil society. In a nutshell, the idea of civil society figures prominently in debates that concern pluralism and democracy. "Though writers differ on its details, most agree in describing civil society as an arena of friendships, clubs, churches, unions, cooperatives, business associations, and other voluntary organizations that mediate the vast expense of social life between household and State".6 The sphere of organizations acts as a place where citizens learn habits of free assembly, participation, dialogue, and empowerment of grassroots communities. This structure maintains the delicate balance between private interests and public good. According to David Hollenbach, voluntary organizations: are the soil[s] in which the seeds of human solidarity grow. Communities of solidarity are not private but public. Especially when they are small or intermediate size they enable persons to come together in ways that can be experienced locally. The bonds of communal solidarity formed in them enable people to act together, empowering them to shape some of the contours of public life and its larger social institutions such as State and economy. Voluntary collaboration can create values that no individual, no matter how industrious, no matter how wily, could produce alone. In the civic community, associations proliferate, membership overlap, and participation spills into multiple arenas of community life.7 Sometimes we forget that what sustains such collaboration in the civic community is not the legal framework but moral bonds. Civil society is formed by various organizations outside the structure of State. It refers to the small social groups that come together in order to organize politically. These organizations could be cultural, professional, religious, social, economic, recreational, or political. In different ways the idea of civil society is basically developed to encounter State totalitarianism and anarchy. The most common view of civil society is that it refers to those organizations that are capable both of representing the country’s various groups and countering the State’s hegemonic ambitions. As a result, it is commonly assumed that the political reform of the continent may depend on the extent to which civil society is able to counteract the stultifying weight of the oppressive State. It is often argued that the most vibrant and innovative sections of society are those linked with Non-Government Organizations (or NGOs), associations of active citizens speaking for ordinary people and small-scale but dynamic business groups. 8 The point to keep in mind here, as stated earlier, is that in a democratic society the government does not pretend to be the master of everything. The government rather serves the social body animated by the activity of NGOs. If those organizations that energize civil society are weak or absent, the institutions of democratic governance will lack the social base they need to function effectively. As such civil society is the primary locus in which human solidarity is realized. Its strength is essential for the success of any government attempting to abide by democratic principles. While following the same framework of argument, Robert Putnam concludes that an effective democratic government depends on civic virtue and the vigorous bonds of civil society that promote it.9 It follows therefore that the issue of promoting human rights and democracy demands a significant commitment to active civic participation by citizens. This commitment is necessary for sustaining an effective social life. Putnam describes this commitment as the "networks and trust that enable participants [in society] to act together more effectively to pursue shared objectives".10 Civil society is thus situated within the complex web of human relationships and communities that include families, kinship groupings, voluntary organizations of varying purposes, mutual aid societies, trade unions, labour unions, farmers’ cooperatives, student unions, religious groups, and so forth. With all this, we can conclude that a well-developed structure of civil society with a plurality of independent political tendencies can encourage the project of promoting human rights and democracy from the grassroots level. Let us now turn to the role of NGOs. The Role of Non-Governmental Organizations The African political systems have failed to acknowledge the fact that if associational life and public discourse are all controlled by the State, people’s power of creativity, participation, search for alternatives, and reflection on the day-to-day questions of life will be impoverished. As far as Africa is concerned, what happened is that the intermediate associations formed after independence appeared to be over-politicized. Some of them could not dissociate themselves from the manipulative mechanisms advocated by party politics. Consequently, their ability to challenge the repressive mechanisms of the State disappeared. Most governments treated leaders of associations as their agents. Through this system most governments found ways to reward those associations that conformed to them and harass those that attempted to assert their autonomy or threaten governments’ monopoly on socioeconomic and political power. By looking at the history of socio-political organization in Africa, we recognize that a few years after independence the most known NGOs were forced to be under the control of a one-party system. Several arguments were brought forward to justify such a dramatic change. Political leaders claimed that the one-party system was the best way of preventing the formation of ethnic politics and enhance national unity. But in reality this approach encouraged authoritarianism. In view of monopolizing power, the administration of the one-party system took hold of youth movements, trade unions, labour unions, and cooperatives. In Tanzania, for example, the government and the party controlled practically everything.11 Influential cooperatives such as Kilimanjaro Native Cooperative Union (KNCU) and Bukoba Cooperative Union (BCU), among many others, were nationalized. Associations such as Women Associations, Parents Associations, Youth Organizations, and Labour Unions were firmly controlled by the ruling party to the extent that they became like party affiliates.12 Consequently, the aforementioned associations became a means of maintaining the status quo. It is therefore clear that the suppression of associations was a typical decision inspired by an excessive love of power by political leaders and their urge to neutralize all sources of influence that could contest their decisions and interests.13 Because of the oppressive nature of some African governments, it could be appropriate to override the role of the State by engaging in collective action so as to find alternative strategies of survival within local and small organizations. Organizations are able to bypass formal institutions and bureaucracies that dehumanize people. They educate people through organizational dynamics at the grassroots level. Such a relative limitation of the power of the State opens up considerable room for civil society. The structure of civil society, however, can be effective if we scrutinize carefully the orientation that we have to adopt in every particular setting. Particular contexts and cultures test those propositions that have been presented in theory. It entails further analysis of any theory proposed with regard to its "utility and applicability in particular country situations and challenges to the realization of civil society’s potential both as an analytical tool and as a key to constructive change on the ground".14 This approach encourages people: to develop their capacity to participate effectively in debates on economic policy and development issues; promote education and literary-skill learning to enhance popular participation; shake off lethargy and traditional beliefs that are impediments to development especially those that denigrate or undermine the status of the [poor]; change public attitudes and integrate them into the main stream of development; [and] create networks and collaborative relationships among their organizations. 15 NGOs play the role of shaping social relationships by enhancing political participation, transforming public conscience, and mobilizing people at the grassroots level.16 They are able to overcome the monopoly of political parties by influencing national politics and improve the quality of public life in different ways. In the context of Africa, the idea of strengthening this structure would be one step toward the process of solving socio-political problems. Apart from overcoming totalitarianism, organizations can transform social structures by making people go beyond the crisis-oriented approach that dominates socioeconomic and political organization. People-oriented organizations challenge those who are constantly struggling for power within political parties. For instance, many leaders spend most of their time fighting to stay at the top or to get to the top of a political party. Apparently some political parties "have no system of checks and balances to offset the love of power of the leaders who are often locked in a private internal power struggle, while going on with the liberation struggle itself".17 Organizations provide an approach that "allows every citizen to press his [or her] views and interests in the public forum and unite with others"18 in advocating those policies that could defend the democratic process and the well-being of the poor. This approach is useful because very often people become mere spectators and feel powerless and disgusted with the multiparty system that can easily lead to endless and sterile debates.19 An organizational framework creates checks and balances that serve to guarantee that the excessive love of power is constantly challenged and controlled. Without such a control, a few individuals can easily reduce political parties, parliament, and the State into a little private kingdom of their own.20 Since the struggle for political power has become a barrier to participation21 and most governments do not represent national interests, new ways of promoting human rights and democracy must be sought. As an alternative, NGOs can play the role of challenging bureaucracies and the monopoly of political power concentrated in the hands of a few people. Instead of allowing the State to dictate everything, organizations act as guardians of people’s opinion, encourage participation, and stimulate new ideas. The process of developing this awareness is effective because those involved are helped to expand their horizon and concern themselves more with people-centred and action-oriented approaches. These approaches are appropriate because the realization of human rights does not depend entirely on the government, political parties, and national constitutions that legally guarantee in writing the protection of citizens’ rights. The realization of human rights and democratic ideals depends on how people make them a part of their everyday life. Participation, as championed by organizations, establishes mutual recognition of those claims that take into account socio-historical conditions of life. This procedure enhances an agreement that expresses the common will and cooperation of participants. Needs and capabilities are interpreted in the light of cultural values and shared traditions. In this process, human goals are established through the process of mutual discourse. That is to say, participation reflects operations of moral judgment and expresses a common agreement based on mutual recognition. Agreements attained through participation are more effective because people are practically involved and conceive the transition from one stage to another as a reflective form of learning that postulates a change of attitude toward the other.22 The act of learning in this process enhances mutual exchange of ideas, deliberative powers, and commitment. What we have seen so far are the general characteristics and goals of NGOs. With regard to this general overview, critics would argue that the distinctiveness of Church-related organizations is not reflected in it. The following section attempts therefore to demonstrate their distinctiveness in the effort of promoting human rights and democracy. The Distinctiveness and Contribution of Church-Related Organizations As far as the formation of the citizen is concerned, the Catholic Church23 recognizes the significance of developing practical structures to help the Church fulfill its mission. The Church is an effective instrument for raising social consciousness and maintaining a socially active presence. There is no doubt that the Church has been active in the work of conscientization and mobilization of the poor. This approach appears to be motivated by the fact that the Church is called to be more involved in concrete issues of social life. The Church is convinced that if socially responsive groups represent it, it can initiate practical steps in addressing social questions. In this approach, the Church draws its guidelines from the Catholic social teaching in search for appropriate method(s) to motivate Christians towards influencing and transforming social structures. In view of promoting social change, this approach encourages Christians to actualize their gifts by appealing to Christian values and commitment in approaching socio-political and economic issues. It is possible that secular organizations may be inclined to defend the interests of particular groups, but religious organizations are expected to be more inclusive in promoting human rights and democracy. This is possible because the Church-related organizations attempt to maintain a convincingly unbiased position in the way they address social questions.24 These organizations do not "take political positions because their legitimacy is derived from a reputation for non-partisanship".25 It should also be noted that Church-related organizations have the potential to exercise influence on the reporting procedure about the human rights situation in a given context and on particular issues. Sometimes they play the role of an alternative information supplier about the human rights situation in a particular context.26 Charged with the defence and promotion of the common good, they play the role of lobbying and educating the masses from the grassroots level. Their role is not directly political. Rather, they play the role of promoting basic social values and creating a framework for genuine dialogue. Having presented the role and specificity of the Church-related organizations, it is also instructive to examine challenges facing them. In this regard we begin by asking ourselves these questions: What is the identity of the Church-related NGOs? How are Church-related organizations different from secular organizations? We can answer this question by reminding ourselves that the Church does not proclaim a distinctive secular role or stand against particular parties or persons. The purpose of the Church is to establish the reign of God. As such, the Church is a living sign of the kingdom of God on earth. The works of the Church serve human dignity and basic human rights in the family of persons. According to the Second Vatican Council, the Church stands for the person in the community of persons for the common good. By positioning itself outside partisan politics the Church-related organizations address freely those matters found in the socio-political order, cultural sphere, and economic life by raising questions pertaining to moral values. These organizations have the duty to address social problems in a clear way, that is, from the perspective of the common good rather than from the perspective of a political party or a government. Therefore, the challenge for the Church-related organizations as pointed out by the United States Catholic Bishops "is to be principled without being ideological, to be political without being partisan, to be civil without being soft, to be involved without being used".27 Through the principle of subsidiarity, the Church advocates: the dignity and the social nature of the human person, the rights of the family, the need for intermediate associations, and a limited state with the positive function of seeking the common good.... Just as it is gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish by their own initiative and industry and give it to the community, so also it is an injustice and at the same time a grave evil and disturbance of right order to assign a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate organizations can do.28 This principle ensures that there is a sharing of social responsibilities at all levels. Since the Church-related organizations are informed by the Catholic social teaching under the inspiration of Christian faith, their commitment becomes specific. That is to say they approach social questions with a difference arising from Christian values. This framework of guidelines provides identity and orientation in establishing a comprehensive system of leadership. With various organizations competing with the Church-related organizations in the same field, there is a need for us to ask ourselves the following questions:29 First, what is the difference in vision, in strategy, and in commitment between the projects of the Church-related organizations with secular organizations? Second, do many criticisms directed at secular organizations not apply also, to some extent, to the Church-related organizations? Third, how do Church-related programmes and projects benefit the poor? Fourth, if the misuse of funds within NGOs is the same as it is within the State, then, where is the credibility of NGOs? These questions demand each NGO to examine itself thoroughly. In answering these questions we have to admit that the challenge for the Church today is how to act in concrete situations. We can fail to be attentive to human experiences, separate earthly life from spiritual life, and fail to make use of our rational capacity appropriately. What we have to bear in mind is that transformation of social structures requires a change of many things including our attitudes. This means in order to bring about a change in socioeconomic and political structures, members of society must share certain values. Publicly held values such as honesty, hard work, and commitment give way to a democratic process. Just as it is necessary to recognize our moral failure, so it is also necessary to experience the grace of redemption in history. In such an influence of history, NGOs are in fact agents of social change. It is from this perspective that organizations cooperate with God’s grace of redemption in history. This understanding brings us to the point of asserting that changes in social structures demand transformation of the human conscience, both individually and communally. One of the most important moments in this process is when we acknowledge, with honesty, our own weaknesses. This is possible when human consciousness becomes open to the experience of conversion. The power of conversion reveals God’s love and empowers our conscience to encounter injustice. Without this orientation, citizens will lack patriotic motivation and self-sacrifice. The Church teaches that our direct involvement in the effort of transforming social structures must be understood as a process of establishing the kingdom of God of which its goal is to transform all dimensions of human life. As such the approach of the Church in evangelization stresses the importance of maintaining a balance between different dimensions of human life. If we emphasize one dimension and neglect others a severe imbalance may result. For instance, an imbalanced emphasis on development projects by Church-related organizations tends at times to undermine certain goals of the Church at the level of faith development. Therefore, Church-related organizations are called to maintain a balance between the ministry of spiritual formation and development projects. Thus far we can conclude that NGOs participate in the effort of building a just society. Another point of concern, however, is how to ensure that the existing NGOs are given room to grow. This concern brings us to the point of thinking about the future of the local NGOs. The Future of Local Non-Governmental Organizations NGOs do not drop from the sky like rain. They have to be constructed, tended, safeguarded, and transmitted from one generation to another. Their preservation is necessary because there is no effective way of promoting human development in Africa if NGOs are not strengthened. The appearance of multiparty elections in recent years should not distract people from continuing to search for concrete ways in which the issues of human rights and democracy can be promoted. Multiparty elections, in themselves, do not guarantee democracy or economic prosperity. A multiparty system is only a means to democracy. 30 "The process of building self-managed associations evolves from the direct struggles of the people". 31 Associations cannot be imported from abroad as foreign aid. They have to emerge from people’s effort of ordering socio-political forces, commitment of the grassroots communities in creating common grounds for participation, and maintaining checks and balances of power. The point to keep in mind here is that the challenge of development, justice, and peace rests in the first instance with the people themselves. Consequently there is a need to reconstruct socioeconomic and political structures informed by the experiences, aspirations, and day-to-day struggles of the people concerned. 32 Apart from articulating values advocated by NGOs, it is also appropriate to point out their weaknesses. What I want to do here is to show that a small number of NGOs, through their dishonesty, can tarnish the image of local NGOs. As a result, there is a need to carry out an evaluation of their activities. First, in the process of carrying out this evaluation, Wolfgang Shonecke argues that: As donors became aware of the colossal corruption crippling government projects, they tended to channel more and more development money through the private sector. There is no doubt that much good has been done through NGOs, often in situations of extreme need. But NGOs have increasingly come under fire, and some maintain that, with the best of intentions, they, at times, do more harm than good. With the availability of funds in the private sector, NGOs multiplied, not always for the purest of motives, however. When ministers and civil servants were no longer able to easily get their 10% (or more) kickback on government projects, they started their private NGOs to be where the money flowed. For many intellectuals who found themselves unemployed or in a hard spot, to start an NGO became a way to make a living. And, today, they have learnt how this new "industry" works: they know exactly which project is most likely to stir the interest of a sponsor, what the donors want to hear and how to make money flow. [Unfortunately], where money flows, corruption grows.33 Second, very often, the money given for NGOs goes into administration instead of funding projects that touch the lives of the poor. According to Patrick Chabal and Jean-Paschal Daloz, the resources channeled through NGOs are for the most part used in the same ways and for the same patrimonial or clientelist purposes. Furthermore, NGO-linked networks are inevitably intertwined with those emanating from the State. [This is what makes] even State officials try to forge new ties with the local level NGOs because of the funds.... Indeed, the current situation is having the perverse effect of encouraging some African politicians cynically to exploit the image of Africa as a helpless and miserable continent in order to prompt the involvement of NGOs, from which funding and assistance are expected.... African leaders and elites, both in the Church and in society, have often shamelessly abused donor money for personal gain instead of community needs. 34 Third, the artificial character of some NGOs can undermine the role of NGOs in Africa. This situation is created by the fact that some NGOs, under the influence of the foreign donors, have frequently imposed foreign programmes and ideas without respect for the culture of the local communities. The weakness of these NGOs is that they work under the framework of imported theories and ideologies of development without further analysis about their relevancy to the African context. This situation has also oriented some international NGOs towards destroying the local economy and local institutions by creating artificial structures that propagate false hope among the poor who tend to think that donors will do everything for their economic life and eventually propagate the mentality of dependency. Fourth, it is true that NGOs are charged with the responsibility of defending and promoting the cause of the common good within the public sphere. Nevertheless, some organizations, whether idealistic or spiritually motivated, can also participate in those activities that promote religious fundamentalism and ethnocentrism. Therefore, registration of NGOs deserves closer attention. Fifth, there is a misuse of funds in some NGOs. This practice is apparently reinforced by the attitude of irresponsibility and dishonesty. As an example it would be useful here to point out that some NGOs have already created a "class of people who manage to live nicely just by moving from one workshop to another and pocket the sitting allowance".35 In order to preserve the integrity of local NGOs the following points must be observed. First, there is a need for those involved in development work through NGOs to evaluate frequently their commitment and honesty. This initiative could become a reality if we take seriously the challenge of self-evaluation, self-criticism, and accountability. Second, it is morally required to point out fake programmes and dishonest people involved in running NGOs. This initiative must include the effort of finding out if the money given to NGOs benefits the poor. Note that some NGOs spend an excessive proportion of their budget on furnishing their members with sophisticated and expensive equipment. All these are done while leaving very little for development projects which justify the existence and the purpose of the NGO in the first place. This weakness provides room for critics who tend to argue that "the explosion in the number of NGOs is not a reflection of the flowering of civil society. [Rather, it is an] evidence of the adaptation by African political actors to the changing complexion of the international aid agenda". 36 Third, for the sake of social conscience, NGOs are spiritually required to adopt the moral point of view in all their activities. This orientation is important because it motivates moral commitments to the works of the NGOs which are the at the service of society at large. Those involved should be more concerned with the development of the moral quality within the concentric circles of moral experience in which people discuss how to improve moral integrity. Guidance for right decision-making and for the establishment of ethically sound policies is essential for the well-being of NGOs. Without this guidance, NGOs could be reduced to business enterprises and a source of wealth and power. Conclusion This discussion demonstrated that NGOs play the role of promoting human rights and democracy by focusing on the local community through which they effectively facilitate development as their primary objective. They do so by encouraging the poor to participate in development projects. People are attracted by NGOs because of their good governance, honesty, transparency, and accountability introduced to the local communities and the learning opportunities involved. This kind of motivation and leadership, in the long run, promotes the interests of the poor and influences public policies. In addition to that the discussion reminded us that NGOs must be more localized in order to understand African cultures, and listen to the needs and aspirations of the poor who are striving to improve their lives. Both local and foreign NGOs, despite their weaknesses as we have seen, have indeed done a good job in building a democratic environment for the future. They have shown that the role of the NGOs is to supplement governments and not to replace them. This is done by not allowing the State to dominate political life. The State must only play a major role where it is relevant. The truth is that we cannot develop Africa unless all citizens of the continent are given room to exercise their talents and abilities to the maximum. In order to achieve this goal, however, Africans must be serious, believe in themselves, and stop believing that foreigners will do everything for them. In conclusion, we can say that the NGOs’ activities promote human rights and democracy because their approach empowers the poor not only to champion their rights but practice them with responsibility, exercise their talents and capacity, challenge the political decisions that affect their lives, identify problems that affect them, and participate fully in the processes of decision-making. Notes: * His address: Hekima College, Jesuit School of Theology, Catholic University of Eastern Africa, P. O. Box 21215, Nairobi, Kenya. E-mail: hekima@iconnect.co.ke; Fax (254-2) 570972. 1.See, for example, Laurie S. Wiseberg, "Human Rights and Nongovernmental Organizations", in Richard Pierre Claude and Burns H. Weston, eds., Human Rights in the World Community: Issues and Action (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992), 372-83. 2. In this discussion I propose to use the terms "organization" and "association" interchangeably. 3. Julius O. Ihonvbere, Economic Crisis, Civil Society, and Democratization: The Case of Zambia (Asmara: Africa World Press, 1996), 270-71. 4. Michael Walzer, Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality (New York: Basic Books, 1983), Chapters 1, 2, 12, 13. 5. Richard John Neuhaus, The Naked Public Square (Michigan: William Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1984), 90. 6. Concerning different understanding of civil society, see Robert W. Hefner, "Civil Society: Cultural Possibility of a Modern Ideal", Society 35/3 (March-April, 1998): 16-27; Patrick Chabal and Jean-Pascal Daloz, African Issues: Disorder as Political Instrument (Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1999), 17-30. 7. David Hollenbach, S.J., "Contexts of the Political Role of Religion: Civil Society and Culture", San Diego Law Review 30/4 (Fall, 1993): 877-901, at 883. 8. Patrick Chabal and Jean-Paschal Daloz, African Issues: Disorder as Political Instrument (Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1999), 18-19. 9. Robert Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1993), 182-83. 10. Robert Putnam, "Turning In, Turning Out: The Strange Disappearance of Social Capital in America", Political Science and Politics 28/4 (December, 1995): 664-65. 11. Bernard Joinet, Step By Step Towards Democracy (Nairobi: St Paul Publications, 1997), 20. 12. This subject is properly examined by Nakazael Tenga and Chris Maina Peter, "Rights to Organize as Mother of All Rights: The Experience of Women in Tanzania", The Journal of Modern African Studies 34/1 (March, 1996): 122-43; Aili Mari Tripp, "Local Organizations, Participation, and the State in Urban Tanzania", in Goran Hyden and Michael Bratton, eds., Governance and Politics in Africa (Colorado: Lynne Rienner, 1992), 221-42; Tade Akin Aina, "State and Civil Society: Politics, Government, and Social Organization", in Carole Rekodi, ed., The Urban Challenge in Africa (New York: The United Nations University Press, 1997), 432-34. 13. Joinet, Step By Step Towards Democracy, 19. 14. John W. Haberson, "Civil Society and Political Renaissance in Africa", in John W. Harberson, Donald Rothchild, and Naomi Chazan, eds., Civil Society and the State in Africa (Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1994), 27. 15. Ihonvbere, Economic Crisis, Civil Society, and Democratization, 277. See also Jacob Sangsore, "The Co-operative Credit Union Movement in North-Western Ghana", Fraser Taylor D. R. and Fiona Mackenzie, eds., Development From Within: Survival in Rural Africa (New York: Routledge, Chapman, and Hall Inc., 1992), 82-101. 16. For more details, see Ihonvbere, Economic Crisis, Civil Society, and Democratization: The Case of Zambia , 270-91; Patrick Chabal, ed., Political Domination in Africa: Reflections on the Limit of Power (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 9-42. 17. Joinet, Step by Step Towards Democracy, 24. 18. Alan Gewirth, Human Rights: Essays on Justification and Applications (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1982), 321. 19. Ibid., 45. 20. Ibid., 43. 21. Wole Soyinka, The Open Sore of a Continent: A Personal Narrative of the Nigerian Crisis (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996). 22. This insight is fully developed by Jürgen Habermas, Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1991). 23. Note that the sense in which I intend to use the term "Church" in this discussion is limited to the Roman Catholic Church. 24. Joinet, Step by Step Towards Democracy, 48-68. 25. Michael Bratton and Nicholas van de Walle, Democratic Experiments in Africa (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 254. 26. For example, the United Nations Committee Against Torture, the Committee of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women rely on the information provided by NGOs. 27. Cited in "What is the Church’s Role in Politics Today?" The Catholic Voice (14 October 1996): 3. 28. Charles E. Curran, "Subsidiarity", in James F. Childress and John Macquarrie, eds., The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Ethics (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1986). 29. Wolfgang Shonecke, "NGOs Making Business With People’s Poverty", New People 72 (May-June, 2001): 4-6, at 6. 30. This point is also argued in Aquiline Tarimo, S.J., "Cancellation of the African Debt Will Not Change Anything", SEDOS Bulletin 33/2 (February, 2001): 35-41, at 40. 31. Ihonvbere, Economic Crisis, Civil Society, and Democratization: The Case of Zambia , 171. 32. Ibid. 33. In formulating the questions found in this paragraph I am indebted to Shonecke, "NGOs Making Business With People’s Poverty", 4. 34. Chabal, African Issues: Disorder as a Political Instrument , 24. 35. Shonecke, "NGOs Making Business With People’s Poverty", 5. 36. Chabal, African Issues: Disorder as a Political Instrument , 23.
Ref.: Text from the Author. October 2001.
|