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.
No comments:
Post a Comment