Get real time updates directly on you device, subscribe now.
Ideas behind the much debated NGOs and Charities proclamation
Bereket Gebru
As any other democratic constitution would do, our constitution protects human and political rights. Since human rights are rights granted to people just because they are human, anyone living in Ethiopia, regardless of their nationality, has their human rights respected. However, political rights are rights only citizens use to decide upon the political conditions of their country on their own. As the right to organize is one of the rights citizens need to determine the fate of their country on their own, the political right of organization is respected for all citizens through the constitution.
Even though non-Ethiopians do not have the right to organize, the government can allow them to organize with some limits in place when it deems their organization protects the interests of Ethiopia. Such a right would be applicable only when the government deems its necessity. That means it is not an outright right. Therefore, any foreign organizations organized under the will of the government can be abolished at any time by the will of the government. Such organizations cannot sue the government for infringing their constitutional right as their organization does not arise from the constitution.
The constitutional right of Ethiopians to organize entails their rights to organize themselves freely. Therefore, an Ethiopian organization is one led only by Ethiopians, one only Ethiopians can be members of and one that operates with the money of Ethiopians only. An organization of Ethiopians which operates with foreign money is an organization that operates for foreigners. That is the reason behind the banning of acceptance of money and material resources from foreign sources by political parties and politicians in the developed world.
The draft proclamation on charitable organizations and associations correctly stipulates these principles. It clearly states that Ethiopians can organize themselves in any legal way they want to promote legal objectives. It further states that Ethiopian organizations are those Ethiopians organized and those that operate with the money of Ethiopians. On the other hand, the draft proclamation creates room for such organizations to receive foreign assistance through such things as trainings. Instead of banning foreign monetary assistance of any sort, the draft proclamation gives the chance for such organizations to draw up to 10% of their operational budget. The rest should be from Ethiopian sources.
Allowing the organizations to have up to 10% of their operational budget from foreign sources could incite an argument that it breaches the original principle. However, 90% Ethiopian operation budget leaves no room for doubting that they are Ethiopian organizations. The proclamation stipulates that Ethiopian organizations organized in such a way can even organize around political issues.
The draft proclamation recognizes that the organization and operation of non-Ethiopians can be beneficial to the country. There is an understanding that foreign funded organizations especially in the sectors of economic and social development and environmental protection can complement our development efforts. As their organization is based on governmental will assuming societal benefits, the government has the right to ban them when it deems them unnecessary. During such a circumstance, the draft proclamation denotes, the foreign organizations can not go to court. In addition, the proclamation clearly states that such foreign organizations operating in Ethiopia can in no way participate in politics.
In a way that clearly differentiates charity organizations with public associations, the draft proclamation allows charity organizations operated by foreigners to organize and operate in Ethiopia while stipulating that public associations can only be organized and operated by Ethiopians and their money.
There are two fundamental causes for allowing the operation of foreign operated and organized charity organizations in Ethiopia. The first reason is that our country is so poor that it needs foreign assistance. That comes in the form of foreign aid and debt. Though the government strives to access these financial resources, the demand always seems to be much more than what can be attained. Therefore, NGOs that can access foreign aid and spend the money on development projects complement the government’s effort to avert the existing condition. The other reason is that such NGOs can also help introduce development enhancing experiences and work systems.
In general, there are irreconcilable differences between our developmental government and NGOs. Institutions and organizations that operate with foreign money in the form of policy rent (promoting the policy of foreigners in exchange for funds) can not be free from rent. Aid tied policy rent threats also apply to aid provided to the government by foreign forces. Though neo-liberalism uses NGOs to weaken and replace government, the presence of a developmental government makes sure such things do not happen. Under a strong developmental government, NGOs fill gaps that have not been covered by the government.
There are two ways that ensure money from foreign sources can be more advantageous than posing a threat. The first is ensuring that money from foreign sources does not get used in the political realm and stays in developmental endeavors. The second is that the money should be used to speed up development. If there arises a condition in which the money somehow winds up not supporting development and in the hands of rent seekers, it will be used to form networks of rent seekers.
Cognizant of these facts, the government came up with a draft proclamation that allows foreign organized and operated charity organizations to stay active in Ethiopia as long as they do not interfere in the politics of the country, do not allocate more than 30% of their budget to administrative expenses, have accounts that are regularly audited, report their annual audits and performance to the government and do not participate in illegal activities.
The proclamation also stipulates that public associations can only be organized and run by Ethiopians as long as they have leaders chosen by members, hold regular conferences between members, allow members to decide on basic policies and directive of conduct, allow all citizens who fulfill the criteria set to be members and generally adopt a democratic internal procedure.
Those who oppose the proclamation claim that as long as an organization is organized and operated by Ethiopians, it does not matter if it gets more than 10% of its budget elsewhere. These people argue that public associations can not be organized and strengthened widely if that is not the case. Others also claim that it would be advantageous if the amount they could collect from foreign sources could be raised to 50%.
As discussed earlier, the fact that an organization is run and organized by Ethiopians does not stop the organization from becoming foreign if the money is provided by foreigners. Public associations have as much political role in our country as political parties. Therefore, they should be free of foreign money and influence as any other political actor. As to the argument that banning the associations from using foreign money would weaken them, one should keep in mind that associations are established to protect the rights and interests of members. These associations do not have other projects to run apart from organizing and mobilizing members to struggle. That is not beyond the capacity of members. Besides, any local or foreign force that wants to help specific social groups like women or the youth can establish charity organizations. However, associations should not use the name of these groups to collect money from foreign sources, tie members through various benefits and form a rent seekers’ network. Claiming that Ethiopians can not organize and operate associations on their own is saying that since Ethiopians are poor, they can not achieve democracy. The claim that the amount they receive from outside should be increased is also not feasible. In principle, the amount they receive from outside sources should have been zero. However, the 10% is allowed to still support experience sharing activities, especially during foreign trips.
Those who oppose the principle that foreign and foreign funded organizations should not interfere in political issues claim that anyone who fights for rights should do so in any country. On the other hand there is another argument that charity work and fighting for rights are inseparable.
The first argument that anyone can go to any country and fight for rights is not applicable in any country. Any foreigner can live in a country as long as the government gives them permission. Whenever the government feels like the person’s presence in the country is not beneficial, it can label them undesirable aliens and deport them. As political rights in our country, the same as elsewhere, are granted by the constitution for citizens, foreigners cannot participate in our political activity or fight for rights.
Those who claim that fighting for rights and charity work are inseparable cite various examples to help their case. For instance, “our effort to feed hungry children cannot have a lasting solution unless we also work for the respect of children’s rights.” They may also say “our effort to fight HIV/AIDS would not be fruitful if it is not related to the equality of women.” Therefore, they ask to be allowed to participate in their work related questions of rights.
It is right that the anti-HIV/AIDS campaign should be supplemented by women’s equality rights for it to bear success. However, one big question is if it should be a single body that has to execute both the health and rights sides of the work. Both works should have been our responsibility in the first place. However, as the fight against HIV calls for big expenses while the country does not still have enough of it, we have called on foreign powers to assist us in this field of social development. On the other side, as we can carry out the task of fighting for the equality of women’s rights, foreign or foreign funded organizations can not insist on executing this task as well.
