Back to Index

Changing political spaces of civil society organisations
ACT Alliance
February 25, 2011

Download this document
- Acrobat PDF version (1.79MB)
If you do not have the free Acrobat reader on your computer, download it from the Adobe website by clicking here.

Executive summary

After the decade of the 1990s - frequently quoted as decade of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) due to the rapid growth of Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and CSOs in many countries - members of ACT Alliance now report increasing problems with shrinking political space for non-state actors. Thus, ACT Alliance has produced a policy paper analysing the phenomena - based on 14 country case studies - which indicate that the political space available for CSOs to freely operating are increasingly thwarted by government policies and actions. CSOs are hindered in various ways: through counter-terrorism measures, war on terror, the securitisation of aid as well as repressive governance in authoritarian states. Such actions comprise negative labelling and propaganda, administrative restrictions, direct prosecution or physical harassment and intimidation.

The studies have been done by partners from ACT Alliance in the following countries: Brazil, Colombia, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Malawi, Paraguay, Peru and Zimbabwe. The policy paper further considers findings from United Nations mechanisms on human rights - eg UN Treaty Bodies or safeguards for human rights defenders - as well as indices on governance, democracy status, and implementation of human rights provided by Freedom House Ranking, Bertelsmann Transformation Index and CIVICUS' Civil Society Index as well as the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness of March 2005 and the Accra Agenda for Action of September 2008. The latter ones speak, for example, of an 'inclusive partnership' relating to CSOs, research institutes, media and private sector in shaping development policies.

The policy paper indicates the term 'criminalisation' which comprises on one hand a political strategy in a political conflict which is based on a normative judgement abusing the criminal justice system for political purposes. On the other hand, it is used as stigmatisation in order to discredit a CSO by an attribute which the society perceives as harmful. Stigmatisation often precedes criminalisation. Members of CSOs and NGOs face arrests and criminal proceedings for charges of forming criminal gangs, obstructing public roads, inciting crime, creating civil disobedience or threatening the State security, public safety or the protection of health or morals.

'Shrinking political space' is presented as the diminishing possibilities of CSOs and NGOs to undertake a wide range of public actions with different phenomena in different contexts, such as authoritarian states, hybrid or relatively developed democracies, or war zones. In most of the countries, CSOs and NGOs have to register their presence, have their funding approved or routed through the government, and provide the government with information about staff members, projects, and donors. Such procedures can easily turn into a nasty burden. The examples are also showing that the kind of measure chosen by governments depends for example on the capacity of NGOs and CSOs to negotiate with the state. So, it is important to distinguish different actors and impacts on the organisations.

The country case studies call for a careful systematisation of findings. The studies do not show a global uniform trend to criminalise active and critical civil society actors. However, there is only a thin line between criminalisation and administrative/legal hurdles or prevention of financial support. Administrative and/or legislative regulation in an increasingly significant number of countries is impacting negatively on the freedom and effective work of civil society actors. Such changes can be also observed in states with different background conditions, eg both in authoritarian states as well as in formal democracies. In summary, the studies show there is evidence to suggest that the political, legal and operational space for NGOs and CSOs has been shrinking in the recent years and that the recognition of the role of NGOs and CSOs by states has rather decreased then improved. Additionally, administrative or legislative endeavours in a number of countries are impacting on the freedom and effective work of civil society actors eg by NGO framework laws which are increasingly aimed at stifling NGOs. The same studies also reveal successful protest or resistance towards such intentions relying frequently on internal as well as on external (international) advocacy and support.

The conclusions and recommendations relate to human rights as one major platform for protection with real impact on the ground. One recommendation is to conduct training on the subject - in so-called 'paralegal training' on basic human rights and other appropriate legal standards. Strong links should be established with pertinent UN Special Procedures and UN Treaty Bodies as well as to regional institutions such as the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, or the Council of Europe. It is further recommended to approach open-minded government staff in order to discuss cases of NGO infringement with the law as well as violations of human rights and the free performance of CSOs. In a similar way, the Accra Agenda for Action also provides tools for making CSOs and NGOs recognised as development actors as well as transparency and accountability being a must for any government action.

Finally, church or faith-based organisations with their high level of credibility in society should engage in a process of dialogue and cooperation with governments in order to enable real policy dialogues and to develop legal frameworks and mechanisms that provide for freedom of association, access to information, the right of citizens to organise and participate in national and international decision-making processes and to maintain a free and open media. In addition, donors should contribute to developing accountability concepts and practices in developing countries by strengthening national accountability mechanisms based on human rights standards as well as generating institutional and coordination capacities among CSOs and NGOs.

In parallel, there is the need to pursue a new international development architecture that is inclusive, rights-based and democratic. This framework should specifically emphasise the recognition of CSOs as full members in the formal structures of a new development architecture, along with governments and other stakeholders. It should further generate a rights based international standard-setting system and focus on human rights, the centrality of poverty reduction, gender equality, social justice, decent work and environmental sustainability. It should be the duty of all states to respect, protect and fulfil human rights obligations, including women's rights, and this requires that governments create the conditions necessary for all to be able to fully exercise and progressively realise these rights.

Download full document

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP