WUNRN
International Service for Human Rights
http://www.ishr.ch/news/turning-tide-against-wave-civil-society-repression
WUNRN adds to the list of NGO restrictions as on funding, even actual existence: women’s health and reproductive rights, education of women not favored by extremists, women’s freedom of movement, fair treatment of widows, anti-trafficking programs, child and forced marriage, harmful traditional practices, women’s and girls’ sexuality rights, women’s legal defense, women’s right to land, inheritance rights for women, indigenous women discrimination, women in media, rights of incarcerated women, violence and abuse of women and girls in conflict- in all of life! WUNRN notes also the limiting of space, voice, advocacy for many NGO’s in venues as at the UN and in public policy deliberations.
TURNING THE TIDE AGAINST THE WAVE OF CIVIL SOCIETY/NGO REPRESSION
Julie Broome - Director of Programmes with
the Sigrid Rausing Trust
Iva Dobichina - Programme Manager with the Open Society Foundations Human
Rights Initiative
05.06.2015
- A serious growing struggle around the world exists to restrict civic
space. Civil society is in some ways repressed, and in most places restrictive
provisions are enacted into law. The backlash against civil society has taken
many forms:
*Activists have been named as anti-government forces or agents
of foreign influence and interests
*Anti-money laundering, anti-terrorism and anti-extremism laws
have been applied disproportionally to restrict space for alternative opinions
*Registration procedures for NGOs have been made more
cumbersome, monitored, enforced
* Foreign funding has been limited or restricted, thus
threatening the programming and actual existence of many NGO’s
* New legal provisions have been put into place limiting
expression, assembly, and the right to freedom of information.
According to ICNL, since 2012 over 100 laws
restricting registration, foreign funding, and freedom of assembly have been
passed or proposed in every region, targeting not just democracy and human
rights organizations, but humanitarian and other development NGOs as well. The
pushback is taking place not only in authoritarian countries, but also in
democracies. Each government has its own reasons for restricting civil society,
but there are common threads. In countries like Russia and Azerbaijan,
governments’ fears of their own largely disenfranchised publics in the wake of
the Arab Spring, and the Euromaidan protests are clearly a major factor. In
some developing countries, meanwhile, governments have cracked down on civil
society, or allowed corporations to do so, in order to protect lucrative
business deals from scrutiny by environmental, accountability, land or economic
rights NGOs. And, governments are cracking down on civil society as they see
other governments doing so successfully, copying laws and practices they see
being implemented elsewhere (including in the western democracies as part of
the so-called War on Terror), encouraged in many cases by the lack of domestic
or international pushback these repressive measures have occasioned.
In many places around the world it is now
easier to open a business than to start an NGO. While the private sector has
increased its role in governance at both the national and global levels, and
foreign investment is considered to be beneficial, foreign aid is seen with a
more skeptical eye. States are happily outsourcing basic services to private
interests, diluting accountability as a consequence, but at the same time they
are suspicious of civil society organizations working on environmental issues
as in South East Asia or the Amazon, demanding accountability and providing
support systems for mothers who have lost their sons in the Russian military,
or working on women rights issues in Latin America. Many donors are concerned
about the threat to their grantees who represent alternative voices or are on
the frontlines of the struggles for fair development and human rights. This
challenge used to be limited to organizations working on the most controversial
issues such as elections, accountability for grave abuses and torture and
mistreatment in prison systems, but a wide variety of organizations are now
affected.
Civil society remains an important check on
state (and sometimes corporate) power and has an important role to play in a
healthy democratic society. Though a certain level of regulation is both
necessary and desirable, we are concerned about the excesses to which states
have been driving. To date donors have largely been reactive to the
specific challenges their own grantees are facing but have failed to address
the broader trend towards restricting civil society. There is a growing
need to develop stronger narratives about the important role of CSOs that go
beyond traditional human rights rhetoric in order to address some of the legitimate
concerns of aid receiving governments. Foundations and other private
philanthropies should work together to publicly promote the right of civil
society organizations to seek and receive funding including from international
sources. We also need to take what Carothers calls a ‘whole-of-government
approach’ when dealing with aid-providing governments. It is no longer
enough to engage just foreign ministries. Government agencies dealing with
trade, the banking sector, etc, should also be involved in the debates around
space for civil society because in many cases restrictions to civil society are
enacted under the guise of compliance with standards set by global financial
institutions. We need to speak across sectors and identify common interests and
allies if we are to protect the space for civil society to function
effectively.