Good Governance And Accountability In Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) Management In Nigeria

By

Otive Igbuzor

Otive.Igbuzor@actionaid.org

otiveigbuzor@yahoo.co.uk

A PAPER RESENTED AT THE WORKSHOP ON GOOD GOVERNANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN NGO MANAGEMENT ORGANISED BY CIVIL LIBERTIES ORGANISATION (CLO) IN LAGOS ON 27^TH OCTOBER, 2009.

1.      INTRODUCTION

The role, visibility and influence of Non-Governmental Organisations have been increasing in the last two decades. The rising profile of NGOs has been further pushed by the ascendancy of neo-liberalism and the failure of the state to meet the needs, welfare and security of citizens. It is well established that civil society actors have a key role in reducing poverty and a particular importance and special potential to contribute to democratic development and increased respect for human rights in developing countries.[i] As the influence of NGOs grow, there is a greater public scrutiny and debate about the legitimacy and accountability of NGOs. Questions are being asked about the efficiency, organisational reliability and legitimacy of NGOs.[ii] In a country like Nigeria where there is high level of unemployment and corruption is widespread and pervasive, the issues of good governance and accountability in NGOs are very relevant.

In this paper, we examine the challenges of good governance and accountability in NGO management in Nigeria and propose self regulation as the way forward in addressing the challenges. But first, we explicate the concepts of NGO, good governance and accountability in NGO as well as the issues and mechanisms of NGO accountability and state of NGOs in Nigeria.

2.      CONCEPTUAL CLARIFICATIONS

a.      Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs)

The concept of civil society (including NGOs) has been variously described by scholars as imprecise, ambiguous, controversial, nebulous and one of the key words of this epoch.[iii] Some scholars have contended that the rise of civil society is associated with strategies of rolling back the state and has contributed to de-legitimising post-colonial nationalism and re-enforcing neo-liberal theories of the separation of State and society. This is probably why civil society assumed more significance with the end of the cold war in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Civil society plays very crucial roles. Many scholars have expounded on the roles of the civil society. According to Keane, civil society has two main functions: precautionary against the State-to balance, reconstruct and democratize it, and advocating, expansion  of liberty and equality in civil society itself.[iv] In a similar vein, it has been pointed out that increased role for civil society is seen as a way of assuring accountability through more efficient service delivery and of putting pressure on political rulers- thus creating “participation” and “empowerment” in terms of giving voice to people’s demand for influence and welfare.[v] According to Shils, the idea of civil society has three main components:

The first is a part of society comprising a complex of autonomous institutions-economic, religious, intellectual and political- distinguishable from the family, the clan, the locality and the State. The second is a part of society possessing a particular complex of relationships between itself and the State and a distinctive set of institutions which safeguard the separation of State and civil society and maintain effective ties between them. The third is a widespread pattern of refined civil manners.[vi]

In African countries, as a result of combination of a lot of factors, the State is increasingly  incapable of  maintaining law and order and providing for the welfare of citizens. As a result, great expectations are being placed on the civil society to promote participation, empowerment, transparency, accountability and good governance. As noted above, there is no agreement among scholars on the conceptualization of the term civil society. In this paper, we adopt Diamond’s conceptualization of civil society as “the realm of organized social life that is voluntary, self-generating, (largely) self-supporting, autonomous from the State”.[vii] . Civil society therefore encompasses professional organizations, town development unions, trade unions, ethnic organizations, student associations e.t.c. In this conceptualization, civil society include NGOs which are non-profit organizations formed by certain persons who have some vision and mission to pursue and elicit the support of others to pursue usually on specific issues such as environment, human rights, women’s rights, democracy, development, debt, children’s rights, rights of the disabled e.t.c. In this copnceptualisation, NGOs are a subset of civil society organizations. This is in tanden with the position of the UN which refers “the accreditation and participation of civil society, including NGOs.”[viii]

There are many ways by which NGO can be classified. First, NGOs can be classified based on their positioning on development issues. Civil society positioning is influenced by a lot of factors including ideological orientation of the founder and/ or leadership, knowledge and training. The positioning of civil society organizations with respect to development issues can be categorized into four groups: abolitionist, transformist, reformist and conformist.[ix] The Abolitionists argue that the structures and systems in place to deliver on development are illegitimate and constrain freedom and capacity of individuals to bring about development. They recommend the abolition of all structures including governmental structures, private companies, e.t.c. and replacing them with completely new structures. Many of these people will not participate in any government committee or commission because they believe that nothing positive will be achieved until the entire structure is abolished. The abolitionists will therefore not participate in any conference called by government. The Transformists are of the view that that there are fundamental problems with the structures and mechanisms in place to bring about development. They argue that the processes that emanate from the structures and mechanisms are oppressive and exclude the poor. They suggest a fundamental restructuring of the structures and mechanisms to deliver development. The transformists will not participate in a conference called by the government if the process of convocation is not participatory, democratic, open and transparent.

The Reformists see nothing fundamentally wrong with the structures and mechanism. They argue that the problem is with leadership and performance. They suggest that good leadership, discipline and proper management can bring about the desired development. The reformists will participate in any conference or committee set up by government no matter how illegitimate it is in the eyes of civil society. The reformists believe in entreism i.e. that they can go into government by whatever means (election or appointment) to bring about the desired changes. The Conformists see nothing wrong with the system. They just want to be part of the system. Their greatest argument is for the involvement of the civil society in governance and development projects. The conformists are always lobbying for positions in government. They are mostly opportunists.

 Secondly, NGOs can be classified into three models according to how they were formed and the membership i.e. traditional model, membership model and entrepreneurship model. In the traditional model, one person or a few people who have a particular vision employ other people as staff to actualize this vision.  Because of requirements of funding agency or to have credibility in the eyes of the public, a “Phantom Board” made up of a coterie of friends is appointed.  The board rarely meets and do not formulate policies or exercise any form of control in the running of the NGO.  The membership model is made up of members who have a shared vision and they volunteer their time, energy and resources to pursue the vision.  The officers of such NGOs are usually elected and they operate through democratic principles. Finally, in the entrepreneurial model, some people with vision and entrepreneurial skills employ staff that share in those vision to bring it to reality. Most of the ones in this model have functional boards.

Thirdly NGOs can be classified according to the motivation of the practitioners. There are those who are interested in transforming society and they see NGOs as avenues to accomplish this. There are also those who build their career as NGO workers. They therefore see NGO work as a career or profession just like any other career or profession. In addition, there are those who utilize civil society activism as a means of survival. They have no job and have no option but to hang on to NGO work as a means of survival. They are prepared to leave NGO work as soon as they get a better job. Finally, there are stooges who utilize NGOs to promote the interest of government (GONGOs) or individuals. Finally, there are quasi- government NGOs formed principally by wives of President, vice-President, Governors and Local Government Chairmen.

Fourthly, NGOs can be classified according to their approaches to development work. We can delineate at least four distinct approaches to development work. First there are NGOs who utilise  the welfare/service delivery approach. This approach seeks to provide short term relief to the poor and excluded or to people in emergency situations. This approach merely provides relief and does not look at the factors, structures and institutions that created the problem in the first instance. This approach provides temporary relief to the poor and excluded but will not lead to poverty eradication because it does not tackle the root causes of poverty. Secondly, there are NGOs who go beyond the provision of relief to build the capacity of communities to deal with situations in which they find themselves. For instance, the NGOs will seek to enable communities to improve their agricultural systems so as to deal with the problem of food shortage. Initially, this approach to development was largely externally driven. Thirdly, there are NGOs who utilise the participatory development approach. This approach to development improves on the development approach by giving room for the poor and excluded to participate in the definition of the problem as well as designing context specific responses to the problem. Finally, there are NGOs who utilise the rights based approach, a participatory development approach that recognizes the rights of the poor and excluded people as well as the duty of government to meet these rights. RBA recognizes that the poor and excluded people are entitled to fundamental human rights solely by reason of being human. These rights are not privileges. They are not depended on grace or benevolence of rulers. These rights are fundamental, inalienable, universal, interdependent and indivisible. 

• That the rights are fundamental means that they are basic for human existence.

• That the rights are inalienable  means that they are entitlements which can not be denied or taken away form an individual without an injury being done to the dignity of that person.

• That the rights are universal  means that they are recognized in every human society across regions of the world.

• That the rights are interdependent  means that the loss of one right is a denial of other rights, and the promotion, protection and fulfillment of human rights in one area support other human rights.

• That the rights are indivisible  means that they should be addressed as one body; whether they are civil, political, economic, social, cultural, solidarity or collective and respect for them is all encompassing.

The range of rights recognized by RBA can be categorized into:

·         civil and political rights e.g. right to life, personal liberty, fair hearing, freedom of movement etc

·         Social and economic rights e.g. right to education, health, work, housing e.t.c

·         Right to development

These rights have been documented and codified and draw principally from three main sources:

1.  International conventions, agreements and charters

2.  National Constitutions

3. National laws and other statutory enactments

The RBA is premised on the recognition that the rights of individuals impose obligations on the State. It is widely recognized that states have obligations in civil and political rights. But some people argue that there is less obligations in terms of social and economic rights. But we argue that there are three levels of obligations in matters of social and economic rights: obligations to respect, protect and fulfill. The obligation to respect requires states to refrain from interfering with social and economic rights e.g. refrain from forced eviction. The obligation to protect requires states to prevent violations by third parties e.g. ensure that private employers comply with labour standards. The obligation to fulfill requires states to take appropriate legislative, administrative, budgetary, judicial and other measures towards the full realization of such rights.  It is important to note that apart from the State, other duty bearers are necessary in every society for the enjoyment of rights. These include individuals, families, communities, NGOs, donor agencies, international community and the private sector. The role of NGOs  in RBA is to create awareness, educate in rights and obligations, build capacity of rights holders, organize and mobilize rights holders, advocate for pro-poor policies and provide alternatives. Whenever services are provided by NGOs, it should be to serve as entry points for the NGOs to perform the roles mentioned above more effectively.

It is apt to note that there is a culture that is required to deliver RBA including the need to act as facilitators, enablers or catalyst, empowering others, persistency, analysis and activism. RBA requires challenging of structures and powers of oppressive State officials and institutions as well as traditional systems with risks of possible arrest, intimidation and repression from the state and traditional structures. It therefore requires skills in mobilization, campaigning, advocacy, analysis, communication, research, networking and activism.

b.      Good Governance in NGOs

The literature on good governance is very rich. Good governance entails the respect for the rule of law, ensuring effective delivery of public goods and services, participation of all (men and women) in decision making process, institutional effectiveness and accountability.[x]  The issue of institutional effectiveness is very germane to developing countries and NGOs. As Ndulo has pointed out, institutional effectiveness Involves respect for the rule of law on the part of all actors; independence and capacity of all actors; mechanism for self regulation and external oversight; transparency and accountability of oversight bodies and mechanism for active participation in decision making; the extent and degree of decentralised structures and decision making; gender representation in all spheres of decision making; and effective delivery mechanism and capacity.[xi] In NGO management, good governance will entail having effective board that is managed professionally with policy and oversight functions over management, an empowered management that utilises good management practices that empowers staff with authority and responsibility; good and functioning systems and processes including financial procedures, personnel policy, fund raising policy, procurement policy and conflict of interest policy and have mechanisms of accountability including internal and external audit; and complaints and grievance mechanism.

c.       NGO Accountability

Various scholars have defined NGO accountability in various ways. To Hari Srinivas, accountability for an NGO essentially means empowered and responsible staff and managers who have authority and responsibility for decision making, can improve delivery of NGO’s aims and objectives and can improve management of human and financial resources. But for Danilo Songco, there are three dimensions of accountability in relation to NGOs namely transparency, legitimacy and performance. According to Lisa Jordan, accountability is the obligation to report one’s activities to a set of legitimate authorities.[xii] According to her, NGOs have three types of accountability. The first is the effectiveness of NGOs as a social service delivery agent in terms of the quality and quantity of services delivered. The second is the independence and reliability of organisational structures of NGOs including composition of boards, financial accounting, management structures, compensation policies, personnel policies etc. The third are legitimacy issues in terms of the representative status of NGos, the relationship to the community served and the value base of the NGOs.

3.      ISSUES IN NGO ACCOUNTABILITY

The public debate about accountability of NGOs gained currency in recent time when The Economist posed the now famous question: Who guards the guardians? and wrote:

The increasing clout of NGOs, respectable and not so respectable, raises an important question: who elected Oxfam, or, for that matter, the League for a Revolutionary Communist International?  Bodies such as these are, to varying degrees, extorting admissions of fault from law-abiding companies and changes in policy from democratically elected governments. They may claim to be acting in the interests of the people — but then so do the objects of their criticism, governments and the despised international institutions.  In the West, governments and their agencies are, in the end, accountable to voters.  Who holds the activists accountable?

Several issues have been raised concerning the accountability of NGOs. It has been argued that NGOs constituted an unelected few activists who weild a lot of influence setting standards, influencing policies and proposing solutions to public problems. NGos have also been accused of carrying out functions which are traditionally meant to be performed by the state. Futhermore, it has been pointed out that the size and scale of operations of NGOs is becoming bigger rivalling governments and government agencies yet without accountability to the public. For instance, the Nature Conservancy operates a $3 billion budget in 30 countries.[xiii] In addition, there has been issues with the salary of senior officials. In Netherlands, journalists made a n issue of the salary of a senior NGO official who commanded more money than the Prime Minister.[xiv] Finally, there is also the issue of mismanagement of funds, conflict of interests, lack of transparency and sheer corruption.

It must be emphasized that despite these accountability issues being raised, NGOs as a sector enjoy high levels of public trust in many countries higher than corporations, churches and government.[xv] As Kumi Naidoo has pointed out, “some high profile scandals involving non-profit organisations have attracted public attention and done serious damage to the overall credibility of civil society groups.”[xvi] The challenges faced by two leading NGOs in Nigeria in recent times, the Committee for the Defence of Human Rights and Civil Liberties Organisation are a typical example. For countries that are universally known to be very corrupt, the issue of financial accountability is key. In one study, over 100 Philippine organisations were asked about their finances and only 10 percent responded.[xvii]

4.      MECHANISM FOR NGO ACCOUNTABILITY

In order to ensure NGO accountability, several mechanisms have evolved. These include operational capacity of the staff, management structure, performance measurements, accounting practices and legal obligations.

Similarly, several tools have been created to improve accountability including annual reports, financial accounts, performance assessments, quarterly reports, independent evaluations, audits, oversight boards, conflict of interest policies, complaints and grievance mechanisms etc.

It has been documented that different types of NGOs rely on different mechanisms of accountability.[xviii] Membership NGOs are principally accountable to members and rely on election, reform and dues as accountability mechanism. On the other hand, non-membership organisations are principally accountable to donors and use performance assessments, laws and self-regulation as principal accountability mechanisms. Netwroks and coalitions are expected to be accountable to organisational members. However, some organisations such as ActionAid International practice both vertical accountability to donors and downward accountability to the communities with whom she works.

Kumi Naidoo has identified four mechanisms of accountability of NGOs[xix]:

a.      Self regulation mechanism such as voluntary (or certified) compliance with code of ethics of conduct. National NGO networks in a dozen countries have undergone thorough participatory processes to articulate the standards expected of NGOs, ranging from  transparent governance structures to hiring practices and communications policies. The idea behind such self-regulation mechanisms is that the sector itself should be actively engaged in promoting a certain set of values and norms as part of maintaining a public reputation for professionalism and high ethical behaviour. One of the main criticisms levelled at self-regulation approaches is the ‘non-enforceability’ of such mechanisms; however certain models, such as the one adopted in the Philippines, involve a certification process whereby teams of evaluators are empowered to grant or revoke certification to CSOs.

b.       Governing boards, comprised of individuals external to the organisation, that are selected by and operate according to clearly defined and transparent procedures. The specific tasks of governing boards vary, but they are generally intended to act as guardians of the interests of the organisation’s membership or constituency, while also ensuring that the organisation operates in a way that is in compliance with both statutory obligations and in accordance with its own mission and values.

c.       Standards for disclosure and public reporting, are determined in some countries by national legislation, but are adopted by CSOs in other contexts on a voluntary basis. Vehicles such as annual reports, organisational or project evaluations, strategic plans based on external assessments, and regular communications (newsletters, updates, briefs) can provide channels for public access to information about the organisation’s work, financial status, governance structure and operational impact.

d.       Consultative and participatory mechanisms, that allow for the meaningful involvement of diverse constituencies (including beneficiaries) in the organisation’s work, from project planning to evaluations. There are also two critical ‘built-in’ accountability mechanisms that bear mentioning

5.      STATE OF NGOs IN NIGERIA

As noted above, the role of NGOs in society is amplified by the ascendancy of neo-liberalism which has rolled back the state and the inability of the government to deliver services especially to the poor and excluded. But we as have argued elsewhere,  civil society is not meant to take over the role of the state but to promote active citizen involvement or everyday democracy and the effectiveness of the state.[xx] The World Alliance for Citizen Participation, CIVICUS aptly captures the role of civil society in its three major objectives of promoting civic existence, civic expression and civic engagement, CIVICUS popular three E’s.[xxi] Promoting civic existence involves defending people’s fundamental rights to organize and act collectively towards the public good. Promoting civic expression entails strengthening the capacities of civil society organizations to freely amplify the voices of ordinary people and promoting civic engagement requires fostering interaction between citizens, their associations and other institutions to ensure that public institutions reflect the will of the people and are accountable to them. In our study of civil society in Nigeria under the auspices of the Civil Society Index (CSI) developed by CIVICUS, we discovered that the structure and environment dimensions of civil society in Nigeria are less developed than the values and impact dimensions.[xxii]

6.      CHALLENGES OF GOOD GOVERNANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN NGO MANAGEMENT IN NIGERIA

There is no doubt that NGOs are a political force in Nigeria. They were the major and consistent force that opposed military rule which led the former military ruler, Gen. Ibrahim B. Babangida and the military institution to step aside in 199...They have continued to be the voice of the voiceless especially because of the emasculation of political opposition and weakening of the labour movement. According to Gary Johns, in some regards, NGOs have become the official opposition in many societies. [xxiii]This is true to a very large extent in Nigeria. The challenges in NGO management in Nigeria include the following:

·        Problem of Conformist NGOs

·        Problem of Phantom Boards

·        Board that operate in unprofessional manner or beclouded by conflict of interest

·        Careerism in the NGO sector

·        Problem of GONGOs

·        Lack of institutionalisation  or Personalisation of the NGO

7.      TOWARDS A CODE OF COMMON PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS

The issues of NGO accountability are real all over the world. It is amazing that NGOs who are in the forefront of advocacy for good governance, accountability, workers rights, decent work are sometimes perpetrators of what they advocate against. In our view, there are only two options available-regulation by government or self-regulation. There are differing views on the extent to which government should regulate NGOs. In a country like Nigeria where politics and governance is still dominated by an irresponsible and rascally political elite, government regulation of NGOs will be suicidal. In the 1970s in India, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi passed a law to track funds going to NGOs critical of it. The only real option open to NGOs is self regulation.

There are examples of self-regulation initiatives that we can learn from. In Nigeria, in the early 2000s, Transparency International in Nigeria prepared a code of conduct for NGOs in Nigeria. But the adoption by NGOs was very poor and the process fizzled out. In the Philippines, the caucus of Development of NGO networks (CODE-NGO) established a code of conduct for Development NGOs in 1991. The code was signed by over one thousand NGOs. In 1998, the Philippine Council for NGO Certification was established by seven of the biggest NGO coalitions and the certification was recognised by government.

In 2002, eleven INGOs namely ActionAid International, Amnesty International, CIVICUS World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Consumers International, Greenpeace International, Oxfam International, the International Save the Children Alliance, Survival International, International Federation Terre des Hommes, Transparency International and World YWCA adopted the International Non-Governmental Organisation Charter (See attached). The charter sets out core values and operating principles for International NGOs including good governance, transparency and accountability, good management practices and ethical fundraising.

8.      CONCLUSION AND THE WAY FORWARD

The role, visibility and influence of Non-Governmental Organisations have been increasing in the last two decades.  This rise has been helped by neo-liberalism and the failure of the state to deliver services effectively to citizens. Meanwhile, as the influence grows, there is a greater public scrutiny, debate and attack on NGOs about the issues of good governance, legitimacy and accountability. In a country like Nigeria where there is widespread corruption, the issues take on a more important dimension. However, over the years, mechanisms for NGO accountability and tools to ensure accountability have been developed. Unfortunately, many NGOs have ignored, failed to use or are incapable of using these mechanisms and tools. This has brought about a lot of challenges in the management of NGOs especially in Nigeria. We argue that only two options are available: regulation by government or self regulation. Given the political history of Nigeria and the nature and character of the state, the only real option open for NGOs in Nigeria is self- regulation. Therefore concerted efforts must be made to put a mechanism of regulation in place with the participation of major networks and coalitions in the country such as CFCR, TMG, ACE, ERN, CSACEFA, CISHAN, NEPWHAN, CISCOPE, ZCC, Pro-Poor Governance Network, NCWS. We are convinced that this is the way to go. There is no doubt in our mind that such a move will have positive fall out not only for the NGO sector but for the entire society.

ENDNOTES

International Head of Campaigns

ActionAid International

2^nd Floor, NAIC House,

Plot 590 Cadastral zone,

Abuja, Nigeria.